2009/07/22
22-07-2009 /COURT CASE /PERSONAL UP GRADATION /FR .22 .1(A ) 1
The chandi gadh contempt court case posted to 12th August2009. Our Association seriously trying (pursuing) for One time meassure personal up gradation/ Implimentation of FR 22. 1 (a) 1 for all OFFICIATING Jto's . Our Association Thanks to all who are suporting /pursuing our ishue ........In any Department There are some promotion channel for department candidates,As per experince /qualification as per Relevent Reqruitment Rules.In the case of Our cader ie MASTHRI/MECHANIC/TECHNICIAN/TELECOM TECHNICAL ASISTANT ,Entry qualification 8th to diploma.Now many of the DE,s...SDE's are promoted from Tech/TTA They are giving their services to the departmen. It does't mean that they are not capable for that post ,Some of our cader members distaping/ Scutling our promotion eventho they will not get benifited due to this hudels, the bOYS For getting their parents ,What you want you can demand but dont say that you are not capable or not eligible or not qualifide. Dont forget that THAJ MAHAL built By SHAJAHAN (SHAJAHAN NE TAJMAHAL KO BANVAYA HAI BANAYE NAHI MIND) Even in th resent inter duced CDR /CLARITY Interduced in hyderabad andhra pradesh Telecom mechanic/Jto's (o) are doing excelent job inthe new technology ,,,Udan/ Vijay.ect .The tamilnadu member and coordinators met some important leaders/representatives on21/07/2009 at CHANNI. Today imprtant members met for ONE TIME MEASSURE PERSONAL UP GRADITION /////22/07/2009 AT NEW DELHI AT 15.30. hrs.Once again This association Thanks to all well wishers of JTO(O)Association BSNL INDIA.........N.KABEERDAS
2009/07/16
16-07-2009
ONE OF THE CAT JUDGEMENT IN FAVOUR OF US FROM EARNAKULAM
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
T.A. NO. 11/2008
Wednesday, this the 27th day of May, 2009.
C OR A M :
HON'BLE MR. GEORGE PARACKEN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MRS. K. NOORJEHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
P.V. Babu
Telecom Technical Assistant
RLV Exchange, Alappuzha. ..Applicant
By Advocates Mr. G. Sasidharan Chempazhanthiyil &
Mr Vishnu S. Champazhanthiyil
Vs.
1 The Chief General Manager
BSNL, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram.
2 The Director General
Telecom Department
New Delhi.
3 The Chairman
BSNL
New Delhi.
4 Union of India represented by
the Secretary to Government
Ministry of Communications,
New Delhi.
5 N.J. Peethambaran
Telecom Technical Assistant
Telephone Exchange,
Pallikathode, Kottayam .. Respondents.
By Advocate Mr. Mathews K Philip, for R 1-3
Advocate Mr. TCG Swamy for R-5
The Application having been heard on 29.4.2009 the Tribunal delivered
the following :
O R D E R
HON'BLE MRS. K. NOORJEHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
This application is filed by the applicant aggrieved by the action
of the respondents in filling up the vacancies of JTO during 2003-04 under
the old 1996 Recruitment Rules.
2. The short facts are as follows. The applicant belonging to S.C
community was appointed as Technician under the 1st respondent w.e.f.
25.1.1993, promoted as Telecom Technical Assistant w.e.f. 28.9.1996.
All the promotion quota vacancies of JTO before 31.8.1999 were filled up in
accordance with the old Rules except vacancies reserved for SC/ST. As
per the JTO Recruitment Rules 1999, which came into effect w.e.f.
31.8.1999, 50% promotion quota is filled up (i) 35% through screening
test from specified categories possessing Degree of Engineering or in
Science with Physics and Chemistry or Diploma in certain subjects in
Engineering with 10 years regular service in a Group-C post and (ii) 15%
through competitive examination from candidates other than
PI/AEA/WO/TA /TTA/Sr. TOA with plus two and Diploma in Engineering on
specified subjects. In order to fill up the backlog vacancies remaining in
the 35% quota, a screening test was conducted on 30.4.2000. Even
though there was no vacancy for general category candidates in 35% quota
upto 31.8.1999, the 1st respondent permitted general category candidates
to appear in the qualifying test. The 5th respondent is one of the candidates
who qualified in the qualifying test conducted on 30.4.2000. It is
apprehended that the respondents are going to depute the candidates who
qualified under the 35% departmetnal quota (Ext. P-11) for training which
will cause irreparable injury to the applicant and others like him. The
applicant filed this Application on the grounds that there was no vacancy
notified under the general category, the examination on 30.4.2000 was
conducted without inviting application from general category candidates,
the general category candidates who qualified in the test conducted on
31.4.2000 are not eligible to appear in the test for want of educational
qualifications and the applicant and other similarly situated persons have a
right to participate in the examination. Hence he filed this O.A. for a
declaration that the candidates who qualified in the 35% qualifying quota of
1996 Recruitment Rules are not eligible to be appointed to the JTO
vacancies of 2003-04, to conduct a fresh examination under the
appropriate Recruitment Rules and to comply with the reservation rules
before filling up the vacancies.
3. Per contra, the respondents submitted that though the notification
for the screening test was issued on 10.11.1998 as per the 1996
Recruitment Rules, but due to some administrative reasons it was
postponed thrice and finally held on 30.4.2000. They submitted that the
vacancies upto 31.8.1999 were only notified and 41 vacancies for SC, 25
vacancies for ST were reserved. However, OC candidates were also
permitted to appear for the test on the condition that their selectiion will be
provisional and subject to availability of vacancies arising on the outcome
of the decision of various pending court cases. Out of the 621 candidates
qualified, 20 belonged to SC and none to ST. All the 20 SC qualified
candidates were promoted as JTO after training. As a number of posts
remained unfilled due to non-availability of sufficient number of qualified
hands and that large number of qualified candidates were in queue
waiting for their turn for training and posting, the BSNL took an
administrative decision to divert each year 500 vacant posts of JTOs from
direct recruitment quota upto 31.8.1999 to 35% departmental quota on all
India basis. All these posts were sanctioned exclusively for giving
promotion to the qualified candidates in the screening test held on
30.4.2000. The applicant appeared for the screening test held on
30.4.2000 but could not qualify. He along with other failed candidates
filed WA NO. 17292/03 before the High Court to review the results
applying relaxed standard which is still pending. There was no qualified
SC/ST candidate waiting for appointment and that the vacancies
earmarked for SC/ST are still lying vacant.
4 The applicant filed rejoinder reiterating that the new Rules came
into force w.e.f. 1.9.1999 and that the diversion of vacancies is against the
Recruitment Rules. The applicant submitted that filling up of the diverted
vacancies of 2003-04 with those not having the minimum educational
qualification without conducting fresh examination is violative of Articles 14
and 16 of the Constitution.
5 We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and
gone through the pleadings carefully.
6 The thrust of the argument of the learned counsel of the applicant
is that, had the examination held on 30.4.2000 was conducted in
accordance with the new Recruitment Rules of 1999, the reservation rules
are followed and had the applicant and similarly situated candidates been
given another opportunity to appear in the examination, the applicant
would have got a chance of qualifying the screening test.
7 The sum and substance of the argument of the learned counsel of
the respondents is that the notification was published on 10.11.1998 for the
vacancies from 1995 to 1998 before the new Recruitment Rules 1999
came into force but the examination could be held only on 30.4.2000
because of administrative reasons and that 21 SC and 25 ST posts are
lying vacant for want of qualified candidates, the applicant participated in
the screening test held on 30.4.2000 but did not qualify and that as large
number of qualified hands are remaining in queue waiting for their turn for
training the BSNL took a policy decision to divert each year 500 posts per
year for three years from direct recruitment quota vacancies to 35%
departmetnal quota on all India basis.
8. We notice that the question of diversion of direct recruitment
quota vacancies to 35% promotion quota has been challenged in various
courts/tribunals and that all the appointments have been made
provisionally subject to the outcome of decisions of the cases. It is also
brought to our notice that employees who are otherwise eligible to be
considered for promotion in the 15% promotion quota available to
departmental competitive examination quota have challenged the decision
of the BSNL to make available the entire diverted vacancies to one set of
departmental candidates only ie. 35% promotion quota, as arbitrary and
violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Writ Petition No.
1956/2006 which was filed with a prayer to consider the petitioners for the
vacancies which had arisen after 31.8.1999 under the 15% departmental
competitive examination quota was disposed of by the High Court of Kerala
in February, 2008 directing the respondents to consider the case of the
petitioners therein against the vacancies which had arisen subsequent to
31.8.1999 in accordance with law and in accordance with Rules which were
prevailing on the date of occurrence of the vacancies. During argument,
the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in view of the
decision of the High Court of Haryana and Punjab in CWP No. 5608/2007
the BSNL re-considered the matter and decided to do away with diversion
of vacancies under the 50% direct recruitment quota to 35% promotion
quota and the direct recruitment quota posts already stood re-diverted to
direct recruitment quota and that as a special measure decided to adjust
those officials who have already been promoted against the above said
diverted posts in supernumerary posts and would be kept as a separate
group and will not be a part of the regular sanctioned strength of JTOs.
Therefore, promotional aspects of those officials who are eligible for
consideration under the Recruitment Rules of JTO 2001 are not diminished
in any manner. The whole matter is now pending before the Apex Court
in SLP.
9. In this view of the matter, we record the submission of the learned
counsel for the respondents at the bar that as things stand now, the
challenge against filling up of vacancies diverted from direct recruitment
quota will not survive. The promotional aspects of those officials who are
eligible for consideration under the new Recruitment Rules will not be
affected adversely. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of
the view that nothing survives in this application. Accordingly we close
the TA. No costs.
Dated 27th May, 2009
K. NOORJEHAN GEORGE PARACKEN
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
T.A. NO. 11/2008
Wednesday, this the 27th day of May, 2009.
C OR A M :
HON'BLE MR. GEORGE PARACKEN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MRS. K. NOORJEHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
P.V. Babu
Telecom Technical Assistant
RLV Exchange, Alappuzha. ..Applicant
By Advocates Mr. G. Sasidharan Chempazhanthiyil &
Mr Vishnu S. Champazhanthiyil
Vs.
1 The Chief General Manager
BSNL, Kerala Circle,
Thiruvananthapuram.
2 The Director General
Telecom Department
New Delhi.
3 The Chairman
BSNL
New Delhi.
4 Union of India represented by
the Secretary to Government
Ministry of Communications,
New Delhi.
5 N.J. Peethambaran
Telecom Technical Assistant
Telephone Exchange,
Pallikathode, Kottayam .. Respondents.
By Advocate Mr. Mathews K Philip, for R 1-3
Advocate Mr. TCG Swamy for R-5
The Application having been heard on 29.4.2009 the Tribunal delivered
the following :
O R D E R
HON'BLE MRS. K. NOORJEHAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
This application is filed by the applicant aggrieved by the action
of the respondents in filling up the vacancies of JTO during 2003-04 under
the old 1996 Recruitment Rules.
2. The short facts are as follows. The applicant belonging to S.C
community was appointed as Technician under the 1st respondent w.e.f.
25.1.1993, promoted as Telecom Technical Assistant w.e.f. 28.9.1996.
All the promotion quota vacancies of JTO before 31.8.1999 were filled up in
accordance with the old Rules except vacancies reserved for SC/ST. As
per the JTO Recruitment Rules 1999, which came into effect w.e.f.
31.8.1999, 50% promotion quota is filled up (i) 35% through screening
test from specified categories possessing Degree of Engineering or in
Science with Physics and Chemistry or Diploma in certain subjects in
Engineering with 10 years regular service in a Group-C post and (ii) 15%
through competitive examination from candidates other than
PI/AEA/WO/TA /TTA/Sr. TOA with plus two and Diploma in Engineering on
specified subjects. In order to fill up the backlog vacancies remaining in
the 35% quota, a screening test was conducted on 30.4.2000. Even
though there was no vacancy for general category candidates in 35% quota
upto 31.8.1999, the 1st respondent permitted general category candidates
to appear in the qualifying test. The 5th respondent is one of the candidates
who qualified in the qualifying test conducted on 30.4.2000. It is
apprehended that the respondents are going to depute the candidates who
qualified under the 35% departmetnal quota (Ext. P-11) for training which
will cause irreparable injury to the applicant and others like him. The
applicant filed this Application on the grounds that there was no vacancy
notified under the general category, the examination on 30.4.2000 was
conducted without inviting application from general category candidates,
the general category candidates who qualified in the test conducted on
31.4.2000 are not eligible to appear in the test for want of educational
qualifications and the applicant and other similarly situated persons have a
right to participate in the examination. Hence he filed this O.A. for a
declaration that the candidates who qualified in the 35% qualifying quota of
1996 Recruitment Rules are not eligible to be appointed to the JTO
vacancies of 2003-04, to conduct a fresh examination under the
appropriate Recruitment Rules and to comply with the reservation rules
before filling up the vacancies.
3. Per contra, the respondents submitted that though the notification
for the screening test was issued on 10.11.1998 as per the 1996
Recruitment Rules, but due to some administrative reasons it was
postponed thrice and finally held on 30.4.2000. They submitted that the
vacancies upto 31.8.1999 were only notified and 41 vacancies for SC, 25
vacancies for ST were reserved. However, OC candidates were also
permitted to appear for the test on the condition that their selectiion will be
provisional and subject to availability of vacancies arising on the outcome
of the decision of various pending court cases. Out of the 621 candidates
qualified, 20 belonged to SC and none to ST. All the 20 SC qualified
candidates were promoted as JTO after training. As a number of posts
remained unfilled due to non-availability of sufficient number of qualified
hands and that large number of qualified candidates were in queue
waiting for their turn for training and posting, the BSNL took an
administrative decision to divert each year 500 vacant posts of JTOs from
direct recruitment quota upto 31.8.1999 to 35% departmental quota on all
India basis. All these posts were sanctioned exclusively for giving
promotion to the qualified candidates in the screening test held on
30.4.2000. The applicant appeared for the screening test held on
30.4.2000 but could not qualify. He along with other failed candidates
filed WA NO. 17292/03 before the High Court to review the results
applying relaxed standard which is still pending. There was no qualified
SC/ST candidate waiting for appointment and that the vacancies
earmarked for SC/ST are still lying vacant.
4 The applicant filed rejoinder reiterating that the new Rules came
into force w.e.f. 1.9.1999 and that the diversion of vacancies is against the
Recruitment Rules. The applicant submitted that filling up of the diverted
vacancies of 2003-04 with those not having the minimum educational
qualification without conducting fresh examination is violative of Articles 14
and 16 of the Constitution.
5 We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and
gone through the pleadings carefully.
6 The thrust of the argument of the learned counsel of the applicant
is that, had the examination held on 30.4.2000 was conducted in
accordance with the new Recruitment Rules of 1999, the reservation rules
are followed and had the applicant and similarly situated candidates been
given another opportunity to appear in the examination, the applicant
would have got a chance of qualifying the screening test.
7 The sum and substance of the argument of the learned counsel of
the respondents is that the notification was published on 10.11.1998 for the
vacancies from 1995 to 1998 before the new Recruitment Rules 1999
came into force but the examination could be held only on 30.4.2000
because of administrative reasons and that 21 SC and 25 ST posts are
lying vacant for want of qualified candidates, the applicant participated in
the screening test held on 30.4.2000 but did not qualify and that as large
number of qualified hands are remaining in queue waiting for their turn for
training the BSNL took a policy decision to divert each year 500 posts per
year for three years from direct recruitment quota vacancies to 35%
departmetnal quota on all India basis.
8. We notice that the question of diversion of direct recruitment
quota vacancies to 35% promotion quota has been challenged in various
courts/tribunals and that all the appointments have been made
provisionally subject to the outcome of decisions of the cases. It is also
brought to our notice that employees who are otherwise eligible to be
considered for promotion in the 15% promotion quota available to
departmental competitive examination quota have challenged the decision
of the BSNL to make available the entire diverted vacancies to one set of
departmental candidates only ie. 35% promotion quota, as arbitrary and
violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Writ Petition No.
1956/2006 which was filed with a prayer to consider the petitioners for the
vacancies which had arisen after 31.8.1999 under the 15% departmental
competitive examination quota was disposed of by the High Court of Kerala
in February, 2008 directing the respondents to consider the case of the
petitioners therein against the vacancies which had arisen subsequent to
31.8.1999 in accordance with law and in accordance with Rules which were
prevailing on the date of occurrence of the vacancies. During argument,
the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that in view of the
decision of the High Court of Haryana and Punjab in CWP No. 5608/2007
the BSNL re-considered the matter and decided to do away with diversion
of vacancies under the 50% direct recruitment quota to 35% promotion
quota and the direct recruitment quota posts already stood re-diverted to
direct recruitment quota and that as a special measure decided to adjust
those officials who have already been promoted against the above said
diverted posts in supernumerary posts and would be kept as a separate
group and will not be a part of the regular sanctioned strength of JTOs.
Therefore, promotional aspects of those officials who are eligible for
consideration under the Recruitment Rules of JTO 2001 are not diminished
in any manner. The whole matter is now pending before the Apex Court
in SLP.
9. In this view of the matter, we record the submission of the learned
counsel for the respondents at the bar that as things stand now, the
challenge against filling up of vacancies diverted from direct recruitment
quota will not survive. The promotional aspects of those officials who are
eligible for consideration under the new Recruitment Rules will not be
affected adversely. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of
the view that nothing survives in this application. Accordingly we close
the TA. No costs.
Dated 27th May, 2009
K. NOORJEHAN GEORGE PARACKEN
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
2009/07/15
15-07-09(2)
We hope that The kerela court verdict i.e fixation of pay in 9850-14600 under FR 22 (1) a (1) without any restriction under FR (35) to officiating JTOs, on finding that the officials fulfill all the eligibility criteria for promotion as JTO as per relevant recruitment rule should be implemented to all over India and that our association will leave no stone unturned to make this possible.
The promotion policy in DOT/DTS/BSNL is as follows
Mechanic--->Technician--->TTA--->JTO.
The JTO(O) has always and will abide by the promotional avenue.We never went against the rules,the only thing is that we want our designation which is perfectly legal and true.The saddest part is that we had been promoted from TTA designation, but now they(SNATTA) have turned against us.In these circumstances they(TTA's) are forgetting their promotion policy as per service condition and are simply filing cases which do not yield anything and also do not benefit them.
The JTO(O) association BSNL India is very much grateful to all those who are supporting us.
The Karnataka State convention will be held in Bengaluru shortly.
The West Bengal State convention will be held in Kolkata shortly.
The Tamil NAdu state convention will be held in Chennnai/Coimbatore/Madurai shortly.
The promotion policy in DOT/DTS/BSNL is as follows
Mechanic--->Technician--->TTA--->JTO.
The JTO(O) has always and will abide by the promotional avenue.We never went against the rules,the only thing is that we want our designation which is perfectly legal and true.The saddest part is that we had been promoted from TTA designation, but now they(SNATTA) have turned against us.In these circumstances they(TTA's) are forgetting their promotion policy as per service condition and are simply filing cases which do not yield anything and also do not benefit them.
The JTO(O) association BSNL India is very much grateful to all those who are supporting us.
The Karnataka State convention will be held in Bengaluru shortly.
The West Bengal State convention will be held in Kolkata shortly.
The Tamil NAdu state convention will be held in Chennnai/Coimbatore/Madurai shortly.
15-07-2009
The JTO(O) association BSNL India is very much thankful to TEPU G.S and other representatives who met Hon'ble Minister of communication & IT Shri A.Raja.
Kerela court case complete details
COURT II– 15.07.09
1 DAILY CAUSE LIST
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
TO BE HEARD ON WE DNESDAY, THE 15
DAY OF JULY, 2009
th
FROM 10.45 A.M. TO 1.00 PM AND FROM 2.00 PM TO 5.00 PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
HON'BLE Ms.K. NOORJEHAN .. ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS
(Under Rule 106 (a) of C.A .T Rules of Practice 1993)
On behalf of the Bench
HON'BLE Mr.GEORGE PARACKEN .. JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
HON'BLE Ms. K. NOORJEHAN .. ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. OA 1311/99 V.K.Aravindakshan Mr.M.R.Hariraj
Vs.
M/o Agriculture & 3 ors. Mr.A.D.Raveendra Prasad,ACGSC
2. OA 167/08 A.P.Pushkarakshan Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
S.Railway & 3 ors. Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil
3. OA 205/08 K.Mohanan Mr.Sreekumar G.Chelur
Vs.
Director of Postal Services & Ors Mr.P.A.Aziz, ACGSC
4. OA 311/08 Jaya Kumar.R Mr.O.V.Radhakrishnan,Sr.
Vs. Mrs.K.Radhamani Amma
D/o Posts & 3 or s. Mr.George Joseph,ACGSC
5. OA 416/08 M.B.Sasidharan Nair Mr.M.P.Varkey
Vs
M/o Railways & ors Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimooottil
6. TA 69/08 Salim Babu P.K Mr.K.A.Manzoor Ali
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 3 ors. Mr.T.C.Krishna
4/4
COURT II– 15.07.09
2 DAILY CAUSE LIST
TA 84/08
7.
M.V.Salilakumar & 19 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 3 ors. Mr.Mathews K.Philip
with
8.. TA 85/08 Vamanan.C & 8 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
9 . TA 86/08 Jyothiprasadan & 11 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
10 . TA 87/08 Michel P.M & 10 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
11 . TA 88/08 A.Harikumaran Nair & 4 or s. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
12 . TA 89/08 S.Suseelan Pillai & 10 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 3 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
13 . TA 90/08 Sunil Kumar.V & 11 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
14 . TA 91/08 P.K.Antony & 31 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 3 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
15 . TA 92/08 Mohamm ed Abdurahiman Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
& 12 ors.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
16. TA 93/08 R.Rameswan & 16 ors. Mr.V.Sajithkumar
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
17 . TA 94/08 N.A.Aboobacker & 10 ors. Mr.P.Chandrasekhar
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
18 . TA 95/08 Paulin Medona.M & 14 ors. Mr.V.Sajith Kumar
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
19 . TA 96/08 A.V.Baby & 15 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
20 . TA 97/08 M.S.Vijayakumar an & 4 ors. Mr.P.Sreekumar
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4/4
COURT II– 15.07.09
3 DAILY CAUSE LIST
FRESH ADMISSION
1. OA 467/09 Samath Sahib Mr.G.Sukumara Menon
Vs
Medical reimbursmt
Administrator, UTL & anr.
2. OA 468/09 E.Vijaya Raghavan Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs
Pensionary Benefits
M/o Finance & ors
3. OA 470/09 C.Mani & 2 ors Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Absorption/C.L Vs
GM, S.Railway & ors
MA 555/09 (Joint Application)
FOR ADMISSION
4. OA 85/09 Kumari R Baby Mr.Rajeev Koyickal
Vs.
Leave
UOI r/by Secy.,M/o I&B & 3 or s. Mr.M.M.Saidu Muhammed, ACGSC
MA 556/09 (Accept Addl. Reply)
5. OA 220/09 K.Sasidharan Pillai Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs
Retirement gratuity
GM, S.W. Railway & ors Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimooottil
6. OA 336/09 T.V.Muralidharan Mr.T.C.Suresh Menon
Vs
Leave
Sr.DPO, S.Railway Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimooottil
FOR DISPOSAL
7. OA 10/09 Divyadas.P Mr.N.J.Johnson
Vs.
Comp.Appointment
B.S.N.L & anr. Mr.Sunil Jose
8. OA 67/09 Mohamm ed Shaffi S.H Mr.M.V.Thamban
Vs.
Transfer
L'dweep Admn. & 3 ors. Mr.S.Radhakrishnan (R1-3)
9. OA 81/09 N.P.Nair Mr.T.N.Sukumaran
Vs.
Pension
UOI r/by G.M, Rly Electrification Mr.K.M.Anthru
& 2 ors.
4/4
COURT II– 15.07.09
4 DAILY CAUSE LIST
10.
OA 268/09 M.V.Damodaran Mr. C.S.G. Nair
(Transfer) Vs.
Mr.TPM Ibrahim Khan, SCGSC
Sr.Supdt.of P.Os & Ors
11. OA 343/09 K.K.P.Attakidavu Mr.Shafik M.A.
Vs
Transfer
CGMT, BSNL & ors Mr.T.C.Krishna
FOR HEARING
12. OA 291/08 K.Harichandran Mr.S.Radhakrishnan
Vs.
A.C.R.
G.M, S.Railway & 4 ors. Mr.K.M.Anthru
OA 505/08 C.Ravikumaran Nair Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
13.
Vs.
Absorption.C/Labour
S.Railway & 2 ors Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil
14.
.C.Govindaswamy
OA 593/08 V.Vasanthakumar & 2 ors. Mr.T
Vs.
Transfer
S.Railway & 3 ors. Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil
15. OA 611/08 C.P.Abdul Hassan Mr.P.Sanjay
C/Labour Vs
Administrator, UTL & ors Mr.S.Radhakrishanan
16. TA 34/08 A.Abdul Azeez Mr.PP Jnanasekharan
(
Vs
WPC 7348/05)
BSNL & Ors Mr.PMM Najeeb Khan
(Voluntary retirement)
17. TA 62/08 Clara Manual Mr.Jimmy George
Vs.
Gratuity
B.S.N.L & 4 ors. Mr.C.S.Ramanathan
TA 100/08 A.M.Mary Mr.A.G.Aditya Shenoy
18.
Vs.
Pension
B.S.N.L & 4 ors. Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimooottil
(WPC 6137/08)
19. TA 7/09 Ramesan Nair M/s.M.K.Damodaran & Gilbert
Vs
Retirement Benefits
(
CMD, Hindustan Latex Ltd. M/s Menon & Menon
OP 2791/01)
******
Section Officer
4/4
1 DAILY CAUSE LIST
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
TO BE HEARD ON WE DNESDAY, THE 15
DAY OF JULY, 2009
th
FROM 10.45 A.M. TO 1.00 PM AND FROM 2.00 PM TO 5.00 PM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
HON'BLE Ms.K. NOORJEHAN .. ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDERS
(Under Rule 106 (a) of C.A .T Rules of Practice 1993)
On behalf of the Bench
HON'BLE Mr.GEORGE PARACKEN .. JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
HON'BLE Ms. K. NOORJEHAN .. ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. OA 1311/99 V.K.Aravindakshan Mr.M.R.Hariraj
Vs.
M/o Agriculture & 3 ors. Mr.A.D.Raveendra Prasad,ACGSC
2. OA 167/08 A.P.Pushkarakshan Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
S.Railway & 3 ors. Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil
3. OA 205/08 K.Mohanan Mr.Sreekumar G.Chelur
Vs.
Director of Postal Services & Ors Mr.P.A.Aziz, ACGSC
4. OA 311/08 Jaya Kumar.R Mr.O.V.Radhakrishnan,Sr.
Vs. Mrs.K.Radhamani Amma
D/o Posts & 3 or s. Mr.George Joseph,ACGSC
5. OA 416/08 M.B.Sasidharan Nair Mr.M.P.Varkey
Vs
M/o Railways & ors Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimooottil
6. TA 69/08 Salim Babu P.K Mr.K.A.Manzoor Ali
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 3 ors. Mr.T.C.Krishna
4/4
COURT II– 15.07.09
2 DAILY CAUSE LIST
TA 84/08
7.
M.V.Salilakumar & 19 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 3 ors. Mr.Mathews K.Philip
with
8.. TA 85/08 Vamanan.C & 8 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
9 . TA 86/08 Jyothiprasadan & 11 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
10 . TA 87/08 Michel P.M & 10 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
11 . TA 88/08 A.Harikumaran Nair & 4 or s. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
12 . TA 89/08 S.Suseelan Pillai & 10 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 3 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
13 . TA 90/08 Sunil Kumar.V & 11 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
14 . TA 91/08 P.K.Antony & 31 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 3 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
15 . TA 92/08 Mohamm ed Abdurahiman Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
& 12 ors.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
16. TA 93/08 R.Rameswan & 16 ors. Mr.V.Sajithkumar
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
17 . TA 94/08 N.A.Aboobacker & 10 ors. Mr.P.Chandrasekhar
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
18 . TA 95/08 Paulin Medona.M & 14 ors. Mr.V.Sajith Kumar
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
19 . TA 96/08 A.V.Baby & 15 ors. Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
with
20 . TA 97/08 M.S.Vijayakumar an & 4 ors. Mr.P.Sreekumar
Vs.
B.S.N.L & 2 ors. Mr.Mathews K Philip
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4/4
COURT II– 15.07.09
3 DAILY CAUSE LIST
FRESH ADMISSION
1. OA 467/09 Samath Sahib Mr.G.Sukumara Menon
Vs
Medical reimbursmt
Administrator, UTL & anr.
2. OA 468/09 E.Vijaya Raghavan Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs
Pensionary Benefits
M/o Finance & ors
3. OA 470/09 C.Mani & 2 ors Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Absorption/C.L Vs
GM, S.Railway & ors
MA 555/09 (Joint Application)
FOR ADMISSION
4. OA 85/09 Kumari R Baby Mr.Rajeev Koyickal
Vs.
Leave
UOI r/by Secy.,M/o I&B & 3 or s. Mr.M.M.Saidu Muhammed, ACGSC
MA 556/09 (Accept Addl. Reply)
5. OA 220/09 K.Sasidharan Pillai Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
Vs
Retirement gratuity
GM, S.W. Railway & ors Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimooottil
6. OA 336/09 T.V.Muralidharan Mr.T.C.Suresh Menon
Vs
Leave
Sr.DPO, S.Railway Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimooottil
FOR DISPOSAL
7. OA 10/09 Divyadas.P Mr.N.J.Johnson
Vs.
Comp.Appointment
B.S.N.L & anr. Mr.Sunil Jose
8. OA 67/09 Mohamm ed Shaffi S.H Mr.M.V.Thamban
Vs.
Transfer
L'dweep Admn. & 3 ors. Mr.S.Radhakrishnan (R1-3)
9. OA 81/09 N.P.Nair Mr.T.N.Sukumaran
Vs.
Pension
UOI r/by G.M, Rly Electrification Mr.K.M.Anthru
& 2 ors.
4/4
COURT II– 15.07.09
4 DAILY CAUSE LIST
10.
OA 268/09 M.V.Damodaran Mr. C.S.G. Nair
(Transfer) Vs.
Mr.TPM Ibrahim Khan, SCGSC
Sr.Supdt.of P.Os & Ors
11. OA 343/09 K.K.P.Attakidavu Mr.Shafik M.A.
Vs
Transfer
CGMT, BSNL & ors Mr.T.C.Krishna
FOR HEARING
12. OA 291/08 K.Harichandran Mr.S.Radhakrishnan
Vs.
A.C.R.
G.M, S.Railway & 4 ors. Mr.K.M.Anthru
OA 505/08 C.Ravikumaran Nair Mr.T.C.Govindaswamy
13.
Vs.
Absorption.C/Labour
S.Railway & 2 ors Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil
14.
.C.Govindaswamy
OA 593/08 V.Vasanthakumar & 2 ors. Mr.T
Vs.
Transfer
S.Railway & 3 ors. Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil
15. OA 611/08 C.P.Abdul Hassan Mr.P.Sanjay
C/Labour Vs
Administrator, UTL & ors Mr.S.Radhakrishanan
16. TA 34/08 A.Abdul Azeez Mr.PP Jnanasekharan
(
Vs
WPC 7348/05)
BSNL & Ors Mr.PMM Najeeb Khan
(Voluntary retirement)
17. TA 62/08 Clara Manual Mr.Jimmy George
Vs.
Gratuity
B.S.N.L & 4 ors. Mr.C.S.Ramanathan
TA 100/08 A.M.Mary Mr.A.G.Aditya Shenoy
18.
Vs.
Pension
B.S.N.L & 4 ors. Mr.Thomas Mathew Nellimooottil
(WPC 6137/08)
19. TA 7/09 Ramesan Nair M/s.M.K.Damodaran & Gilbert
Vs
Retirement Benefits
(
CMD, Hindustan Latex Ltd. M/s Menon & Menon
OP 2791/01)
******
Section Officer
4/4
Second battle won by JTO(O)!!!!!
Hon. Courts in Kerala passes judgment after a series of its proceedings to grant fixation of pay in 9850-14600 under FR 22 (1) a (1) without any restriction under FR (35) to officiating JTOs, on finding that the officials fulfill all the eligibility criteria for promotion as JTO as per relevant recruitment rule.
History of the issue:
1)BSNL C.O. passes order to restrict the pay of officiating JTOs under FR (35) in 2005. Accordingly the pay which was fixed under FR 22 (1) .a.(1) in the pay scale of 9850-14600 was with drawn.
2)The above decision was challenged in 16 Nos of different Writ Petitions ( W.P ( C ):28349, 35263, 35439, 35481, 35498, 35501, 35663, 35667, 35668, 35724, 35725, 35726, 35903, 35917, 35938 of 2005 and W.P ( C ).67/2006 at Single Bench of Hon. High Court of Kerala in the year 2005 and 2006.
3)Hon. High Court passed order in 2006 to “ grant the fixation of pay in 9850-14600 under FR 22 (1) a (1) without any restriction under FR (35)”, on finding that the officials fulfill all the eligibility criteria for promotion as JTO as per relevant recruitment rule.
4)BSNL filed W.A on the above judgment at Division Bench of the same court in the year 2006 to quash the judgment.
5)Division Bench disposed the review in 2007 directing “to pass appropriate order by CMD after giving an opportunity of being heard on the objections filed by BSNL by the representatives of officiating JTOs as well as administration”.
6)CMD invited for personal hearing in 2007, Com.Michael.P.M and Com.Sebi Louis of Kerala circle attended the hearing by CMD at C.O New Delhi on 18th Sept 2007.
7)BSNL again passed order to re-fix the pay under FR (35) to Officiating JTOs in 2007.
8)The above decision again challenged in different Contempt Petitions in 2007 at Single Bench of Hon. High Court of Kerala. All these cases are later transferred to Hon. Central Administrative Tribunal, Kerala in 2008 in TA No:84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97 of 2008).
9)Hon. Central Administrative Tribunal, Kerala passed its judgment on 15-7-2009 allowing earlier judgment of High Court and directing for the fixation of pay in 9850-14600 under FR 22 (1) a (1) without any restriction under FR (35), on finding that the officials fulfill all the eligibility criteria for promotion as JTO as per relevant recruitment rule.
History of the issue:
1)BSNL C.O. passes order to restrict the pay of officiating JTOs under FR (35) in 2005. Accordingly the pay which was fixed under FR 22 (1) .a.(1) in the pay scale of 9850-14600 was with drawn.
2)The above decision was challenged in 16 Nos of different Writ Petitions ( W.P ( C ):28349, 35263, 35439, 35481, 35498, 35501, 35663, 35667, 35668, 35724, 35725, 35726, 35903, 35917, 35938 of 2005 and W.P ( C ).67/2006 at Single Bench of Hon. High Court of Kerala in the year 2005 and 2006.
3)Hon. High Court passed order in 2006 to “ grant the fixation of pay in 9850-14600 under FR 22 (1) a (1) without any restriction under FR (35)”, on finding that the officials fulfill all the eligibility criteria for promotion as JTO as per relevant recruitment rule.
4)BSNL filed W.A on the above judgment at Division Bench of the same court in the year 2006 to quash the judgment.
5)Division Bench disposed the review in 2007 directing “to pass appropriate order by CMD after giving an opportunity of being heard on the objections filed by BSNL by the representatives of officiating JTOs as well as administration”.
6)CMD invited for personal hearing in 2007, Com.Michael.P.M and Com.Sebi Louis of Kerala circle attended the hearing by CMD at C.O New Delhi on 18th Sept 2007.
7)BSNL again passed order to re-fix the pay under FR (35) to Officiating JTOs in 2007.
8)The above decision again challenged in different Contempt Petitions in 2007 at Single Bench of Hon. High Court of Kerala. All these cases are later transferred to Hon. Central Administrative Tribunal, Kerala in 2008 in TA No:84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97 of 2008).
9)Hon. Central Administrative Tribunal, Kerala passed its judgment on 15-7-2009 allowing earlier judgment of High Court and directing for the fixation of pay in 9850-14600 under FR 22 (1) a (1) without any restriction under FR (35), on finding that the officials fulfill all the eligibility criteria for promotion as JTO as per relevant recruitment rule.
2009/07/07
07-07-2009,New Delhi meeting
A delegation headed by Mr Kabeer Das met Hon'ble Minister of Communication Shri A.Raja.Mr Adam,Mr P.S.Chanda also took part in the meeting. The Hon'ble Minister of Communication A.Raja instructed to Shri R.K Chandolia(P.S to MOC) to immediately issue the orders to resolve our case i.e TTA's to JTO's promotion one time measure personal upgradation.
2009/07/01
01/07/2009
The CDR/Clarity project was launched successfully by BSNL in which our JTO(O) are also involved.Special thanks to Mr T.Radharaman JTO(O) who is one of the incharge for CDR clarity in HTD.We on behalf of JTO(O) congrates T.Radharaman.
The Tamil Nadu JTO(O) members Shri Manikandhan & others met Shri Venkat Raman Staffside leader national council discussed about our TTA's to JTO's promotion one time measure upgradation.Shri Raman responded positively.Shri Subburaman G.S TEPU also assured that our issue will be taken seriously as early as possible.
Shri Adam Tamil Nadu State Co-ordinator is vigorously pursuing our issue with Hon'ble MP of Tamil Nadu and our minister Tiru A.Raja
The Tamil Nadu JTO(O) members Shri Manikandhan & others met Shri Venkat Raman Staffside leader national council discussed about our TTA's to JTO's promotion one time measure upgradation.Shri Raman responded positively.Shri Subburaman G.S TEPU also assured that our issue will be taken seriously as early as possible.
Shri Adam Tamil Nadu State Co-ordinator is vigorously pursuing our issue with Hon'ble MP of Tamil Nadu and our minister Tiru A.Raja
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)