1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs: -

a) That impugned order dated 15.05.2018 (A-1) be quashed and set aside, being illegal and arbitrary.

b) That respondents be directed to grant the applicant benefit of order of Hon'ble Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Tribunal at Ernakulum in O.A No. 180/00020/2015 tilted Sheeba B & Another Vs UOI & Ors dated 15.02.2016(Annexure A-2), and he be included in the Old Pension Scheme i.e. CCS (Pension) Rules. Respondents be further directed to collect necessary subscription under the General Provident Fund Rules.

c) That this Hon'ble Tribunal may also pass any other order for the grant of relief to the applicant which it may deem fit in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

d) That cost of the application may also be awarded in favour of the applicant.

2. The facts of the case as averred by the applicant in his pleadings, are as follows: -

a) The applicant, Mohd. Shabir, has filed the present Original Application challenging order dated 15.05.2018 whereby his claim for continuation under the General Provident Fund/Old Pension Scheme was rejected. His case, as set up in the O.A., is that the Department of Telecommunications, J&K Circle, had issued an advertisement/circular dated 26.07.2000 for filling up vacancies of Regular Mazdoor. According to him, the vacancies had arisen and the recruitment process had commenced prior to the corporatization of the telecom services and creation of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited with effect from 01.10.2000. The applicant claims that he had applied pursuant to the said advertisement before incorporation of BSNL and was thereafter appointed as Regular Mazdoor vide order dated 01.02.2001. He joined service and continued to work under the respondents. He was later promoted as Phone Mechanic with effect from 01.03.2015.

b) It is the further case of the applicant that at the time of his initial appointment he was treated as governed by the General Provident Fund scheme applicable to employees of the Department of Telecommunications and deductions towards GPF were regularly made from his salary. According to him, sometime after February, 2010, the respondents, without notice to him and without obtaining his consent, shifted him from the GPF scheme to the EPF scheme. The applicant alleges that such action was arbitrary, violative of principles of natural justice and detrimental to his service and retiral benefits. His specific grievance is that since the recruitment process had originated under the Department of Telecommunications before formation of BSNL, he ought to have been continued under the old pension regime and the respondents could not deprive him of that benefit merely because the appointment order came to be issued after 01.10.2000.

c) The applicant has also pleaded discrimination by asserting that one Smt. Mehnaz, who according to him is junior and was appointed in the year 2003, is still being extended the benefit of GPF, whereas the same benefit has been withdrawn from him. On coming to know of the said position, the applicant claims to have submitted various representations and also served a legal notice dated 07.02.2017. Since no decision was taken, he earlier approached this Tribunal in O.A. No. 1119/2017, which was disposed of on 18.01.2018 with a direction to the competent authority to pass a speaking order on his demand notice. Thereafter, respondent authorities passed the impugned order dated 15.05.2018 rejecting his claim, which has led to the filing of the present O.A.

d) On these averments, the applicant contends that he is entitled to the benefit of the old pension scheme/CCS (Pension) Rules and GPF on the principle that the vacancies and recruitment process had originated before formation of BSNL and, therefore, the rules in force on the date of advertisement or occurrence of vacancy ought to govern his case