Central Administrative Tribunal
MASAN ALI vs BSNL on 6 November 2026
(Open Court)
Central Administrative Tribunal
Allahabad Bench, Allahabad
****
Original Application No.1281 of 2026
This the 06th Day of November, 2026.
HON’BLE MR. RAJNISH KUMAR RAI, MEMBER-J.
HON’BLE MS. MANJU PANDEY, MEMBER-A.
Masan Ali s/o Sri Hamid r/o Sankat Mochan Band Ki Gali Wasliganj District – Mirzapur U.P.
….Applicant.
By Advocate: Mr. S.K. Singh Vashisth.
Versus
1.
Union of India through the Secretary of Ministry of Telecommunication and IT Govt of India Sanchar Bhawan New Delhi 110001.
2.
The Chief General Manager, Telecom (East) CGMT, BSNL
Office of CGMT (E) BSNL UP Telecom Circle East Lucknow.
3.
The General Manager, Telecom District GMTD BSNL District Mirzapur (at Present Varanasi).
4.
The Account Officer (Cash) Office of GMTD (BSNL) Mirzapur.
…Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. D.S. Shukla/Mr. Arvind Singh.
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.
ORDER
By Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (Judicial) Mr. S.K. Singh Vashisth, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. D.S. Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No. 1, and Mr. Arvind Singh, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 4, are present and heard.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was initially engaged as a Casual Labourer in the year 1992 and was subsequently converted into a Full-Time Casual Labourer vide order/instruction dated 14.05.2001/26.06.2001. Thereafter, vide order dated 20.07.2006, the respondents regularized his services with effect from 01.10.2000 as Regular Mazdoor. However, his services were terminated vide order dated 06.09.2009, which was challenged by him before this Tribunal in OA No. 817 of 2009. This Tribunal, vide order dated 14.05.2015, set aside the termination order, which was subsequently upheld by the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 24.01.2023 and affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 17.09.2024. In compliance with the aforesaid judicial orders, the respondents issued an order dated 27.01.2025 and subsequently issued a revised pay fixation order dated 29.07.2026, granting the applicant the consequential monetary benefits up to the year 2025.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that despite regularization of the applicant’s services with effect from 01.10.2000 and his having rendered more than 26 years of service, the respondents have not extended the benefits of Assured Career Progression (ACP)/Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme to him, whereas similarly situated employees have been granted such benefits. He further submitted that the applicant submitted a representation dated 28.03.2026, followed by a reminder dated 08.04.2026, requesting the respondents to extend the admissible benefits of ACP/MACP along with consequential benefits; however, no decision has been taken by the respondents. Hence, the applicant has approached this Tribunal seeking a direction to the respondents to grant him the admissible benefits of ACP/MACP along with consequential benefits.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the competent authority to consider and decide his pending representations within a stipulated period.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that they have no objection if the aforesaid representations are considered and decided by the competent authority in accordance with law.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present Original Application is disposed of with a direction to the respondents/competent authority to consider and decide the applicant’s representation dated 28.03.2026, followed by the reminder dated 08.04.2026, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this Original Application stands disposed of at the admission stage. No order as to costs.
8. All pending Miscellaneous Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(Manju Pandey)
(Rajnish Kumar Rai) Member (A)
Member (J)
/Shakuntala/