PHOOL KUMARI RANI Vs. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD.THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR, BSNL, STATESMAN HOUSE, BARAKHAMBHA ROAD, NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the BSNL.

(2.) THE petitioner seeks a direction upon the respondent -authorities of the BSNL to consider and take final decision for her appointment on the post of Telecom Office Assistant in the cadre of Group -C on compassionate ground like similarly situated other candidates on the basis of the recommendation for the said post although on the option sought and exercised she was ap - Dointed on a Group -D post and joined therein. The petitioner applied for appointment on compassionate ground on 21.6.1999 after the death of her husband on 14.5.1999 while he was working in the Office of GMTD, Darbhanga. Her case for appointment on compassionate ground was considered and approved in the cadre of Group - C by letter dated 16.10.2000 (Annexure -1) issued by the Chief General Manager, Telecom, Bihar Circle, Patna like similarly situated many other candidates. Immediately thereafter by letter dated 19.10.2000 she was informed that there was no vacancy on Group -C post and she could opt for appointment on Group -D post instead. It was made clear in the said letter that willingness once exercised shall be final and she could not thereafter claim for appointment on any Group -C post on compassionate ground. The petitioner exercised her option and was appointed in the cadre of Group -D in the Department of Telecom Services on compassionate ground. The admitted position is that a large number of other persons whose cases had been recommended for appointment on Group -C post also exercised their options and they were also appointed on Group -D posts. Some of the candidates however, did not exercise the option and decided to wait until there was vacancy of Group -C posts. Some of those candidates have accordingly been appointed from July 2001. onwards. The petitioner did not raise any claim even at that stage but much latter she sent a legal notice dated 7.4.2006 to the authorities of the BSNL claiming absorption on Group -C post on the ground that similarly situated other persons have been appointed on Group - C post. In the letter dated 5.8.2006 (Annexure -9) issued by the Divisional Engineer (Administration), Office of the General Manager, Telecom, Darbhanga it was stated that she having exercised her option and appointed on Group -D post without waiting for vacancy in Group -C post, her option once given was final and therefore, there can be no change of Group -D to C post. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner has approached this Court.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the authorities of the BSNL had played fraud upon the petitioner and discriminated against her since there were backlog vacancies coming from the year 1996 which were available for appointment on Group -C post but deliberately within three days of approval of her appointment on compassionate ground on Grouo -C post she had been asked to file option for Group - D post and considering her desperate financial situation the petitioner had no option but to accept the appointment on Group -D post. It is submitted that the option was asked only for the purpose of benefiting certain other employees who were subsequently appointed in the year 2001 on those very vacancies which were already existing and thus the petitioner would be entitled to be treated at par with those employees who were given appointment on the said post. In support of the same the petitioner has filed various documents showing the creation of 85 posts for filling up by compassionate appointment in the year 1996.