BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions are preferred against the common order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, in T.A.Nos.44, 46, 47,48 of 2008 and O.A.No. 100/2009. The petitioners in O.P.(CAT) Nos.20, 21 and 142/2010 and in W.P.(C) No.29029/2010 (hereinafter referred to as the official petitioners) are the respondents 2 and 3 in all the applications before the Tribunal. Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the party petitioner) in O.P.(CAT) No.319/2010 is the 1st applicant before

(2.) The party respondents entered the service of the erstwhile Telecom Department as the Hindi Translators on various dates. While so, the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (BSNL), the lst petitioner except in O.P.(CAT)No.319/2010 was constituted with effect from 1.10.2000. Consequently, the party respondents were absorbed into the service of the party petitioners. Some of the party respondents were even provisionally promoted while in the Telecom Department as Assistant Director Official Languages (AD(OL)) as early as on 15.5.1994. Whatever may be reasons known to the Department Heads, they were not regularised till the Constitution of the BSNL.Ext P6 in W.P.(C)No.29029/2010, the order of the Tribunal in O.A.No.5/98 would show that the petitioner in W.P.(C) 142/2010 approached the Tribunal, even before the constitution of BSNL seeking order for regularisation. The Department submitted that proposal relating to the revision of the Recruitment Rules for the post of AD(OL) was in progress for promulgation and once the matter was finalised, promotion would be effected in accordance with the rules. Recording that submission, the application was disposed with a direction to the Department Heads to complete the process of finalisation without undue delay. The 1st applicant in T.A.No.46/2008 after the constitution of the BSNL represented for regularisation of the adhoc service. By Ext.P5 reply dated 1.4.2002 it was informed that the Recruitment Rules for the post of AD(OL) was being finalised and that her request for regularisation would be considered as and when the rules were notified. However, nothing materialised. Later, the Recruitment Rules of AD(OL) were published on 24.12.2002. Ext.P7 in T.A.No.44/2008 is the copy of the Rules (hereinafter it is referred to as 'the Rules, 2002'). R. 10(iii) of the Rules, 2002 reads as follows:

(3.) The Tribunal below heard all petitions jointly. The only point that was argued and considered by the Tribunal is that whether the party respondents are entitled to regularisation / promotion as per the Rules, 2002 to the then existing vacancies. By the common order impugned, the Tribunal arrived at a finding that the party respondents are entitled to be regularised / promoted as AD(OL) as per the Rules, 2002 to all the vacancies existing while the Rules, 2002 were in force. Consequently, while allowing the T.As, the official petitioners were directed to regularise / promote the party respondents on regular basis. The claim of the party petitioner and other applicants in O. A.No. 100/2009 for appointment on the basis of LICE under the Rules, 2005 was declared applicable to the vacancies arisen after the promulgation of the Rules, 2005. Now these Writ Petitions. While W.P.(C) 29029/2010 is filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India, other petitions are under Art.227.