ORDER

Per: RANJANA SHAHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant praying for the following reliefs: -

“(i) That respondents may be directed to treat the applicant as continuing in service and grant him all consequential benefits including pay and allowances for the intervening periodi.e. from date of termination to the date of reinstatement, as if he were never subjected to termination and no adverse orders ever existed against him. (ii) That any other direction, or orders may be passed in favour of the applicant, which may be deemed just and proper under the facts and circumstances of this case in the interest of justice.

(iii). That the costs of this application may be awarded.”

2. The applicant, at the very outset, has stated that “In this OA no specific order is challenged. It is made for claiming due benefits of service as if the applicant were continuing in service and he were never terminated from service since he was a regular and permanent employee and his termination was in breach of mandatory rules inasmuch as no disciplinary proceedings were conducted and a permanent employee cannot be terminated on the basis of notice and the same has no legal existence. Such void proceedings / orders are not required to be got set aside by a court of law”.

3. It is the case of the applicant that he was initially engaged as Casual Mazdoor in the office of Telecom atAbu Road on 11.11.1982. On 01.10.1994, he was granted temporary status.

He claims that on20.03.2002, he was regularized by respondent no. 3, BSNL, on the post of Regular Mazdoor, as such, he became permanent employee of BSNL. He furtherstates that he was on duty on 19.04.2006 and had applied for half day Casual Leave, which was granted to him. He says that he had fallen ill and on08.07.2007, he came back to work and wanted to join the duty but was not allowed by the respondents. On01.09.2007 (Annexure A/5), he was served with a Notice under Rule 56 (1) of BSNL (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2006. Thereafter, the respondentshave terminated his services w.e.f. 01.11.2007 videtermination order dated 06.11.2007 (Annexure A/6).

4. The applicant further states that vide letter dated09.06.2010, he sent a notice for demand of justice to the authorities. The applicant claims that he was a permanent employee holding the post of Mazdoor on regular and substantive basis. As per Rule 56 (iii) (a) of the Rules, if a permanent employee is found guilty of misconduct or is found to be inefficient, his services are terminated only in accordance with the Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited. But the services of the applicant have been terminated without initiating any disciplinary proceedings against him inasmuch as no charge sheet was issued to him so question conducting any inquiry did not arise. Thus, his termination is void ab initio and has no legal existence and, therefore, violative of Articles 14 and 311 of the Constitution.

5. The applicant also states that he is entitled to grant of due benefits of service as if he were continuing in service as if his service were never terminated since the orders passed thereof against him is in breach of mandatory rules, having not been passed by after following the mandatory procedure established by law and the same has no legal existence being void. Such void and non-est proceedings/orders are not required to be got set aside by a court of law. The same are not being challenged in this OA. He is, thus, entitled to all the relief claimed in this OA without setting aside of such void orders.

6. In response to the same, the respondents have stated that the applicant was too casual towards his duties. He never discharged the work assigned to him by his controlling in-charge. For unauthorized absence from duties and for not discharging the duties, two separate charge-sheets were issued to the applica