(1.) BY this bunch of petitions the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as BSNL for short) has challenged the orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal allowing the Original Applications filed by about 21 employees of the company quashing the orders of their transfer basically on the ground of total lack of jurisdiction in the Tribunal in view of the provisions of section 14 of the Act.
(2.) FACTS giving rise to these petitions briefly stated are that : the Government of India took a policy decision of converting its department of Telecommunications into a limited Company and therefore established BSNL and transferred its employees hitherto before working in the department of Telecommunications to said BSNL with effect from 1-10-2000. From that day onwards the employees of the department of Telecommunications became employees of BSNL.
(3.) ON 26-11-2001 an order was passed by the Chief General Manager, Telecom, Maharashtra Circle, Mumbai transferring 21 employees from different districts to Goa Telecom Division. Some of the employees therefore filed application under section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 before the Bombay Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal challenging the order of transfer on the ground that it has been passed by BSNL and they not being employees of BSNL could not have been transferred by the company. The order was pleaded to be without jurisdiction and therefore non est. Atleast three of the employees have clearly stated in their original applications that they are on deputation to BSNL and have pleaded that they are within jurisdiction of the Tribunal and that though they are on deputation they have not been absorbed in BSNL and therefore continue to be civil servants. It is then pleaded that BSNL is a Corporation of which 100% investment is made by the Government and as such BSNL is nothing but a Government department and can be treated as fully controlled by the Government and its employees are Government servants. Most of the petitioners have challenged the order being mala fide and against the rules and regulations of the P and T Department.