CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH, HYDERABAD Date of Order:16.07.2025 CORAM:

HON’BLE MR.VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, MEMBER (ADMN.)

BETWEEN:

M. Vijaya Bhaskar, S/o. Late M. Madar, Aged about 74 years, Occ: Section Grade Junior Engineer (DOT), (Resignation for Permanent Absorption into ONGC), R/o. 8-3-720/15, Subashnagar Colony, Yellareddyguda, Srinagar Colony Post, Hyderabad-500073. ...Applicant ( By Advocate: Dr.A.Raghu Kumar)

AND

1. Union of India rep by its Secretary, Department of Telecommunications, 20, Ashoka Road, New Delhi.

2. The Principal Controller of Communication Accounts, Telecom Circle, Telangana, Kavadiguda, Hyderabad.

3. The Chairman cum Managing Director, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Bharat Sanchar Bhavan, Janpath, New Delhi.

4. The Chief General Manager, Telangana Telecom Circle, Door Sanchar Bhavan, Abids, Hyderabad.

5. The Principal General Manager, Hyderabad Telecom District, BSNL Bhavan, Adarshnagar, Hyderabad.

….Respondents (By Advocate: Mrs.K.Rajitha, Sr.PC for CG, and Mrs.P.Sarada, SC for BSNL)

ORAL ORDER PER HON’BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI , MEMBER (ADMN.)

By this OA, the applicant has made the following prayer:

“To declare the inaction of the respondents in restoration of full pension of the applicant as bad in law, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 300-A of the Constitution of India, and consequently declare that the applicant is entitled for restoration of full pension w.e.f., 01.12.2006 in terms of the DoP&PW OM F.No.4/34/2002-P&PW(D).Vol.II, dated 23.06.2017, along with arrears and interest @ 18% for the delayed payment from the date of his entitlement in the interest of justice, and be pleased to pass such other or orders as this Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. Heard Dr.A.Raghu Kumar, learned counsel for the Applicant, Mrs.K.Rajitha, learned standing counsel on behalf of Respondents 1 and 2, and Mrs.Manjula, proxy counsel, representing Mrs.P.Sarada, learned standing counsel for BSNL (R-3 to R-5).

3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant, while working as Selection Grade Junior Engineer, in the office of the Assistant Engineer Level-I, under the jurisdiction of the erstwhile General Manager, Telephones, Hyderabad, had sought selection to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer (Mech), in M/s Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC), a Public Sector Unit, under the Government of India, initially, on deputation basis, and, subsequently, on permanent absorption, by availing 100% commutation of pension and lumpsum payment in the year 1987. The applicant retired from the ONGC, on attaining the age of superannuation, in the capacity of Superintending Engineer (Mech), on 30.11.2006.

4. It is the contention of the applicant that, as per the judgment, dated 01.09.2016, of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Civil Appeal Nos.6048/2010 and 6371/2010, a Government servant, on absorption in a Public Sector Undertaking or an Autonomous Body, with the option to draw pro-rata gratuity and lump- sum amount, in lieu of pension, is entitled to restoration of full pension, after retirement, on superannuation, from the Public Sector Unit, subject to fulfilment of other conditions, for restoration of the commuted value of pension. 5. Mrs.Manjula, proxy counsel, representing Mrs.P.Sarada, learned counsel for BSNL, has pointed out that, in Para 5 of the reply statement of the Department of Telecommunications (DOT) (Respondents 1 and 2 herein), it is mentioned that the applicant had opted for 100% commutation on his permanent absorption in the ONGC, and had got lump sum amount of Rs.29,568/-, vide BSNL Sanction memo No.TAC/112/246/87-88/Com/228, dated 08.05.1988, being the commuted value of pension of Rs.160/-. She vehemently submits that the BSNL was formed only on 01.10.2000, and, therefore, the issue of sanction order by the BSNL, on 08.05.1988, does not arise, and it is an incorrect submission on the part of the DOT.

6. On the other hand, at Para 11 of t