Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 2671
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench: New Delhi O.A. No. 740/2025 MA No. 1067/2025 This the 17th day of March, 2025 Hon’ble Mr. R.N. Singh, Member (J)
Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap Member (A)
1. All India Telecom Executive & Engineers Association, Central Head Quarter (AITEEA)
B-193, old Seelampur, Delhi-1100095 Through its General Secretary Manoj Singh S/o Jagdish Singh Aged-44 years, R/o Type-5/02 BSNL Office Awas Vikas, Haldwani (UT)-263139
2. Ashish Kumar Karn S/o Shri Ashok Kumar Karn BSNL Office, Kidwai Bhawan …Applicants (By Advocate: Mr. A.N. Singh)
Versus
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Through Chairman cum Managing Director, BSNL, BSNL Bhawan, HC Mathur Lane Janpath, New Delhi 110011
2. Director (HR), BSNL Board BSNL, BSNL Bhawan, HC Mathur Lane Janpath, New Delhi 110011 …Respondents (By Advocate: None)
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon’ble Mr. R.N. Singh, Member (J)
O.A. No. 740/2025 & M.A. No. 1067/2025 By way of this O.A. the applicants have sought the following relief:
“(A) To pass appropriate directions to Respondent to resolve the pay loss, cropped due to anomalous pay fixation @19020/- for 2007-2008 batches to eliminate incremental loss accrued up to more than 10000/- per month, comparing to pre revised pay fixed 9850/- in scale (Rs 9850-250-14600).
(B) To pass appropriate directions to Respondent to resolve the said pay loss, on basis of principles laid down in landmark Judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of P. Savita & Ors. V. Union of India, 1985 (Supp.) SCC 94 & Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of Mr. Ibrahim Mollah V. Uol and Others, to avoid discrimination with the 2005 batch, thereby initial pay of 2007/2008 batch may be fixed Rs 22820/-(two stage lower to
2005 batch which were drawing basie 24210/- in year 2009)
(C) To direct the respondent for calling option from applicants to continue in pre-revised scale (9850-250 14600) and corresponding upgradation scales from date of appointment, to eliminate incremental & recurring loss, likely to be increased after implementation of 3rd PRC.
(D) Any other relief which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit in the circumstances of the case with consequential benefits.
(E) May pass Cost of litigation.”
2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that subsequent to filing of the OA, it has been realized that inadvertently the relief clause has not been drafted correctly. Accordingly, MA No.
1067/2025 has been filed.
3. Today, learned counsel for the applicants, under instructions, seeks permission to withdraw the captioned OA and the MA with liberty to the applicants to file a better OA.
4. Permission sought is granted. OA as well as the associated MAs stand dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid.
5. No order as to costs.
(Rajinder Kashyap) (R.N. Singh)
Member (A) Member (J)
/ks/
