LOKESH KUMAR GUPTA vs Department of Telecommunication on 19 October 2026

ORDER

Per: Ms. Ranjana Shahi, Member (J)

This is the second round of litigation. Aggrieved with the transfer order dated 06.08.2026 (Annexure A-1), the applicant had approached this Bench of the Tribunal vide OA No.748/2026 and the same had been disposed of vide order dated 13.08.2026 (Annexure A-7), with a direction to the respondents to treat his OA as a representation and decide the same by passing a detailed speaking order. Pursuant to the said direction, the respondents passed a speaking order on 25.09.2026 and rejected the same. Hence, the present OA.

2. Although, the applicant has taken certain grounds but the learned counsel for the applicant has mainly pressed and argued the ground that the applicant has been transferred to a Category IV Business area, which is to be headed by an officer of General Manager level, whereas, the applicant is presently posted in Category – I business area and this is not just a transfer but amounts to a reversion.

3. To buttress his contention, learned counsel has drawn our attention to Annexure A-11, a communication dated 27.08.2020, whereby the consolidation in business area, categories and structures of BAs, rationalization of work flow, etc., has been communicated to all CGMs, BSNL. Through this communication, the learned counsel for the applicant has tried to

KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA

3 OA No.839/2026

make out a case that the applicant, who is presently working in Category – I i.e. a very large BA (business area), which is to be headed by PGM (Principal General Manager)-Level Officer, is being transferred to Category - IV i.e. a small BA, which is to be headed by an officer of the Senior GM / GM level. As such, transferring the applicant from a Category - I business area to a Category IV business area is, in fact, a reversion. This ground is based on the claim that the applicant is the Principal General Manager.

4. Another related ground, also based on the assumption that the applicant is the Principal General Manager, is that, as per the approval of the Hon’ble Minister for communications in the meeting chaired by him on 09.04.2026 (Annexure A-9), “posting of senior executives at the level above General Manager should be done on the basis of panels recommended by an HR Management Committee to CMD, BSNL for various key functional posts / categories of posts”. The said committee shall consist of the Director in-charge of HR matters, the senior most among the remaining Directors (other than CMD) and one Government nominee Director”.

5. The respondents, in their reply, have stated that the policy regarding posting of senior executives above GM level on the basis of panels recommended by the HR Management Committee is directed towards fostering development of BSNL’s internal cadre. The HR management committee has been constituted for giving its recommendation for posting of senior

KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA

4 OA No.839/2026

executives at the level above GM for various key functional posts/categories of posts.

6. The applicant was re-designated as PGM in BSNL in order to maintain parity with the absorbed ITS officers of BSNL. The order for re-designation specifically mentioned that there will be no change in substantive status of the officers. The substantive grade of the applicant is Senior Administrative Grade (SAG) equivalent to GM. Further, BSNL is facing acute shortage of executives at GM / Sr. GM / PGM levels, therefore, the available officers at these levels are being posted to head the BAs as per the administrative requirements and in overall interest of the company.

7. They further stated that subsequent to the order dated 13.08.2026 passed by this Bench of the Tribunal there was restructuring in the Ministry of Communications. The Digital Communications Commission was dissolved vide Gazette Notification dated 19.09.2026, consequent to which the post of Member (Services) ceased to exist. The impugned Speaking Order dated 25.09.2026 was passed with the approval of competent authority dealing with the subject after due examination of all grounds. The order is a detailed, reasoned and speaking order and does not suffer from any lack of jurisdiction. Technical objections regarding the designation of the signing authority, without demonstrating any prejudice or non-application of mind, cannot invalidate a reasoned order passed in compliance with judicial directions.

KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA

5 OA No.839/2026

8. Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the pleadings, materials and documents placed on record.

9. The applicant is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 06.08.2024, whereby, he has been transferred from Rajasthan Telecom Circle, Jaipur to Behrampur, Orissa. He claims that he is presently working as Principal General Manager in Category I, a very large business area to be headed by a PGM-level officer, and that his transfer to Category IV, a small business area to be headed by a Sr. GM / GM-level officer amounts to reversion. The respondents, on the other hand, have controverted this claim and stated that the applicant is a General Manager and not a Principal General Manager. They have further submitted that, as per the consolidation of business area and rationalization of work and delegated powers dated 27.08.2020 (Annexure A-11), relied upon by the applicant, Category IV is to be headed by a Sr. GM / GM- level officer and that the applicant, being a General Manager, has rightly been posted to a Category IV area. As such, the transfer does not amount to demotion / reversion.

10. Since the applicant’s entire case revolves around the main ground pressed and argued by the learned counsel for the applicant depends upon whether he is presently a Principal General Manager or a General Manager, we will examine whether the applicant is GM or PGM.

11. The learned counsel for the applicant has placed before us the memo dated 19.02.2024 to contend that the applicant was promoted to the post of Principal General Manager. We have

KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA

6 OA No.839/2026

perused the same, the said memo reproduced as under : “……..Shri Lokesh Kumar Gupta, an officer of ITS Group-A, (GM-BN-1), Staff No.20640, HR No.199603401 has been granted Non-Functional Upgradation in Higher Administrative Grade Level-15 of 7th CPC (Scale – 182000

– 224100) with effect from 01.01.2024.

xxxx

Up-gradation granted under these orders are purely non- function up-gradation personal to the officer and it does not bestow any right to the officer to claim promotion or deputation benefits based on non-functional up-gradation in such a manner.

The pay fixation on grant of non-functional up-gradation under these orders has been done as per the provision of FR 22(1)(a)(I). At the time of regular promotion to this grade, the pay need not be fixed for the officer who has been granted up-gradation.”

12. From the above, it is evident that the applicant was not promoted vide this memo but was only granted non-functional upgradation to the Higher Administrative Grade. It has been specifically stipulated in this memo that the upgradation granted vide this order is purely non-functional upgradation and does not confer or bestow any right on the officer to claim promotion or deputation benefits on the basis of such upgradation. It has further been stipulated in the order that “at the time of regular promotion to this grade, the pay need not be fixed for the officer who has been granted upgradation”.

13. Thus, this was merely a pay upgradation, categorically described as non-functional, and the officer did not acquire any right to claim promotion on the basis of such non-functional upgradation. The clear wording used “at the time of regular promotion to this grade”, establishes that the upgradation granted vide the order dated 19.02.2024 was not, by itself, a promotion but

KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA

7 OA No.839/2026

rather a non-functional upgradation to the higher grade. In other words, non-functional financial upgradation does not, by itself, amount to promotion. The learned counsel for the applicant has also placed before us the BSNL Recruitment Rules (Amendments) for the Management Service Rules (MSRRs) – Telecom Operations Stream, 2023, in support of his claim that the applicant was indeed a Principal General Manager and has cited paragraph No.6 of the Notes, which is reproduced below :- “6. CGM/PGM, GM, DGM level posts, to the extent mentioned in the cabinet approval shall be filled up in terms of Cabinet decision communicated vide DOT OM No.9-5(1)/2016-Estt. Dt. 03.08.2022. GM level posts will be filled from DOT SAG officers / DOT SAG - NF officers who have entered in the 17th year of service on 1st January of the year calculated from the year following the year of examination on the basis of which such officers were recruited in DoT. CGM / PGM level posts shall be filled up from regular ITS HAG and HAG NF level ITS officers deployed in BSNL who have entered in 27th year of service as on 1st January of the year calculated from the year following the year of examination on the basis of which such officers have been recruited in DOT.”

14. We have gone through the same. This nowhere establishes that the applicant was promoted to the post of Principal General Manager. In fact, it only establishes that the officers who have entered their 17th year of service as on 01st January of the year are eligible for promotion to CGM / PGM-level posts, to be filled up from regular ITS HAG and HAG NF level ITS Officers deployed in BSNL. Thus, the applicant might have been eligible to be promoted to the post of CGM / PGM but was not actually promoted to the post of Principal General Manager.

15. Merely drawing the pay of a higher post or even working against a higher post does not mean that a

KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA

8 OA No.839/2026

Government servants has actually been promoted to that higher post. In the present case, the respondents have categorically stated that the substantive grade of the applicant is Senior Administrative Grade (SAG), which is equivalent to GM. They have further stated that due to an acute shortage of officers at GM / Sr. GM / PGM levels, the available officers at these levels are being posted to head business areas as per administrative requirements, but this does not change their substantive status.

16. The order dated 15.10.2024 (Annexure A-12), relied upon by the applicant, vide which the applicant, along with a number of other officers, were posted / transferred to different Categories business area in Rajasthan Circle, also clearly stipulates that as under : “the following officers of ITS Group – A (Un-absorbed) are hereby re-designated as Principal General Manager (PGM) in order to maintain parity with the absorbed ITS officers of BSNL.

xxxx Consequent to this re-designation, there will no change in the posting, substantive status, pay and duties of the concerned officer, unless any change is ordered in any specific context.

The re-designation will be personal to the officer concerned. As such, no claim what so ever can be made by comparison on grounds of seniority, class, community, cadre, stream etc. Further, unless any specific provision is made in any specific context, no claim will lie on account of any of the provisions of FRSR in the context of pay scale, pay fixation, substantive status etc. as a result of re- designation ordered herein.”

17. The above reaffirms that the applicant, who was an ITS Group ‘A’ Officer (Un-absorbed), was only re-designated as Principal General Manager in order to maintain parity with the

KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA

9 OA No.839/2026

absorbed IPS Officers but with the specific conditions that such re-designation would not change substantive status of the concerned officer. So the main claim of the applicant that, by virtue of the impugned transfer order, he has been reverted, is totally misplaced.

18. Thus, the ground taken by the applicant that the posting of Senior Executive at a level above General Manager should be made on the basis of panels recommended by the HR Management Committee to CMD, BSNL which was not done in his case, also falls, because the discussion in the meeting dated 09.04.2026 (Annexure A-9) invoked by the applicant, reproduced in preceding paragraph No.4, relates to the posting of officers at a level “above General Manager”, whereas, the applicant was a General Manager and not above.

19. It is a well settled proposition of law that the Court should not ordinarily interfere with transfer / postings, as these fall within the domain of the administration of the concerned department, unless it is established that there is arbitrariness, violation of any provision or law or mala fides. In the present case, the applicant has failed to establish arbitrariness or violation of any provisions of law.

20. As to the allegations of mala fide made by the applicant, we are not convinced particularly his contention that he had applied for deputation on the basis of CVO (Joint Secretary Level), but his application was not forwarded to DoT, and that, after he submitted a representation on 29.07.2026 and, thereafter,

KHUSHBOO MITTAL GUPTA

10 OA No.839/2026

approached the DoT on 05.08.2026, the impugned transfer order was passed the very next day i.e. 06.08.2026. The respondents have stated in their reply that his application for deputation to the post of CVO (Joint Secretary) was forwarded by the Jaipur Office on 18.07.2026 and the same was forwarded to the DoT on the very same date on which the transfer order was passed i.e. 06.08.2026. Besides, the transfer order is a composite order covering as many as 33 officers of the level of PGM / GM across multiple circles, and applicant was only one of them. Thus, this ground raised by the applicant also falls.

21. In view of the foregoing discussion, we find that the applicant has failed to establish that the impugned transfer order amounts to reversion or that it was issued in violation of any provision of law or on account of mala fides. We, therefore, find no ground to interfere with the impugned transfer order. Accordingly, the present application is devoid of merit and is dismissed.

22. Pending MAs, if any, stand closed.

(Lok Ranjan) (Ranjana Shahi) Member (A) Member (J)

kmg*

KHUSHBOO