Central Administrative Tribunal
Rathindra bhattacharjee vs BSNL on 4 November 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD Order Sheet Item no.: 8 M.A./5870/2026 (ALLAHABAD) [ CONDONATION OF DELAY ] In Diary No.: 7855/2026 EPF TO GPF Court No.: 3 No of Adjournment: Order Dated: 04/11/2026 RATHINDRA BHATTACHARJEE Vs BSNL
For Applicant(s) Advocate : Ms. Anju Pandey For Respondent(s) Advocate : Shri Arvind Singh Order of The Tribunal Ms. Anju Pandey, learned counsel appears and submitted that her name has not been shown in the cause list. Shri Arvind Singh, learned counsel appears and submitted that this case has been allotted to him. Registry is directed to print the name of Ms. Anju Pandey, along with Mithilesh Kumar Gupta, as a counsel for the applicant and Shri Arvind Singh, as a counsel for the respondents in place of Shri D S Shukla, in the future cause list. Learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Anju Pandey, submitted that the applicant is seeking the benefit of Rule 37-A of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, for the purpose of being covered under the said Pension Rules. It is further submitted that the applicant is still in service and was initially appointed in the Department of Telecommunications. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to the benefits admissible under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Learned counsel further submitted that the pay of the applicant was fixed in terms of the order dated 29.01.2002, and the respondents had been making deductions towards the General Provident Fund (GPF) until July 2015. However, to the applicant's surprise, instead of continuing the GPF deductions, the respondents started making deductions towards the Employees' Provident Fund (EPF). It is, therefore, contended that the applicant is entitled to continued deductions towards GPF in accordance with Rule 37-A of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. Matter requires consideration. Respondents are directed to file their reply to the delay condonation application as well as to the original application, within a period of four weeks. List this case on 12.01.2027.
Ms Manju Pandey Member (A) Rajnish Kumar Rai Member (J) Vivek Rawat ( )