Sudhakaran vs Shri. Neeraj Mittal
2026 Latest Caselaw 923 Ker

Kerala High Court

Sudhakaran vs Shri. Neeraj Mittal on 31 January, 2026

OP (CAT) NO. 2 OF 2026




                                                1
                                                                              2026:KER:8337


                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                            PRESENT

                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI

                                                &

                         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. V. BALAKRISHNAN

                  SATURDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 11TH MAGHA, 1947

                                      OP (CAT) NO. 2 OF 2026

           AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17.11.2025 IN CP NO.10 OF 2025 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE

TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER DATED 16.12.2025 IN MA NO.1132 OF 2025

                   OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH


PETITIONER/S:

       1        SUDHAKARAN
                AGED 74 YEARS
                S/O LATE SHRI. V.BHANU RETIRED DEPUTY. GENERAL MANAGER BHARAT SANCHAR
                NIGAM LIMITED O/O CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER TELECOM, BSNL, KERALA TELECOM
                CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- RESIDING AT: AVANI, POOVANPARA, ALEMCODE
                P.O, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695102

       2        ARUNAN KAMALASANAN
                AGED 73 YEARS
                S/O LATE SHRI. KAMALASANAN RETIRED ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER BHARAT
                SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED O/O CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER TELECOM BSNL, KERALA
                TELECOM CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- R/O: KARTHIKA, CHERUKUNNAM PALLI
                ROAD, REGUNATHAPURAM, VARKALA P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN -
                695033


                BY ADV SHRI.S. SADASIVAN


RESPONDENT/S:

       1        SHRI. NEERAJ MITTAL
 OP (CAT) NO. 2 OF 2026




                                              2
                                                                            2026:KER:8337


                SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOM SANCHAR
                BHAVAN, NO.20, ASOKA ROAD, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001

       2        SHRI. V. SRINIVAS
                SECRETARY (PENSION), DEPARTMENT OF PENSION & PENSIONER'S WELFARE,
                GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, NORTH BLOCK NEW DELHI, PIN -
                110001

       3        SHRI. MUHAMAD SHABAZ ALI
                THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF COMMUNICATION ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT OF
                TELECOM SANCHAR BHAVAN, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001

       4        RANGANATH SHYAM.A
                CONTROLLER OF COMMUNICATION ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT OF TELECOM, DOOR
                SANCHAR BHAVAN PMG JN. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033

       5        SHRI. ROBERT J. RAVI
                CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED CORPORATE
                OFFICE, BHARAT SANCHAR BHAVAN, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001

       6        SHRI. B. SUNIL KUMAR
                CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER TELECOM, BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, KERALA
                TELECOM CIRCLE, BSNL BHAVAN MG JN., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 69503



OTHER PRESENT:

                SRI T V VINU CGC; SRI ALFRED WINSTON SC BSNL


       THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP (CAT) NO. 2 OF 2026




                                        3
                                                                   2026:KER:8337



                                    JUDGMENT

Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.

The present Original Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution

of India assails the order dated 17.11.2025 passed in Contempt Petition

(Civil) No. 180/10/2025 in O.A. No.180/00593/2024 by the Central

Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, whereby the contempt

petition has been closed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners had filed an

Original Application seeking a direction to the respondents to restore

full pension by stopping the recovery of pension commutation on

completion of 11 years instead of 15 years, thereby challenging Rule 10-

A of the CCS (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981. The Tribunal, vide its

order dated 12.11.2024, granted interim stay against further recovery of

the commuted portion of pension until the next date of hearing. The

respondents, however, failed to comply with the interim stay order and

continued to recover the amount, which amounted to disobedience of OP (CAT) NO. 2 OF 2026

2026:KER:8337

the Tribunal's order dated 12.11.2024. Being aggrieved, the petitioners

filed Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 10/2025, alleging non-compliance of

the interim order. Vide the impugned order, the learned Tribunal closed

the contempt petition and also vacated the interim stay. Aggrieved by

the same, the present Original Petition has been filed.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that the

Tribunal could not have vacated the stay in contempt jurisdiction since

the stay order was granted in the Original Application. In support of his

contention, he has relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Amit

Kumar Das - Joint Secretary v. Shrimati Huthee Singh Tagore Charitable

Trust1, wherein the Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and

remanded the matter to the High Court for proceedings on the contempt

petition. The learned Counsel further submitted that the Tribunal could

not have vacated the interim order suo motu in a contempt petition.

OP (CAT) NO. 2 OF 2026

2026:KER:8337

4. Per contra, the learned Central Government Counsel initially

opposed the petitioners' prayer; however, he submitted that the learned

Tribunal could have vacated the stay in the Original Application rather

than in the Contempt Petition. He further submitted that, in contempt

jurisdiction, the only question to be examined is whether the order has

been complied with and whether there is any willful disobedience on the

part of the respondents.

5. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the

records.

6. The Tribunal could not have vacated or reviewed the interim

order dated 12.11.2024, passed in O.A. No. 593/2024, suo motu on the

ground that interim orders granted in other Original Applications had

already been vacated. The respondents did not file any application to

vacate the interim order, nor did they oppose the extension of the same.

The Tribunal further held that its judicial constraints did not permit the

implementation of the interim order, as the peculiar situation was OP (CAT) NO. 2 OF 2026

2026:KER:8337

allegedly created by the respondents due to their deplorable lethargy in

getting the order vacated, which was purportedly misused by the

applicant. We are of the view that such a stance cannot be taken in a

contempt petition, particularly considering that the interim order was

granted in the Original Application and not in the contempt petition.

Accordingly, the impugned order cannot be allowed to stand and is

hereby quashed.

The Original Petition is allowed. The Tribunal is directed to rehear

the contempt petition and pass appropriate orders in accordance with

law.

Sd/-

SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI JUDGE

Sd/-

P. V. BALAKRISHNAN JUDGE jjj OP (CAT) NO. 2 OF 2026

2026:KER:8337

APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) NO. 2 OF 2026

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure:CP1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12.11.2024 PASSED BY THE LD.CAT ERNAKULAM BENCH AT ERNAKULAM IN O.A.NO.593/2024 STAYING THE RECOVERY OF COMMUTATION.

Annexure:CP2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ADVOCATE LETTER DATED 12.11.2024 SHOWING THE SERVICE OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER UPON THE RESPONDENTS. Annexure-CP3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.02.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN C.P.NO.8/2025 IN O.A.NO.593/2024. Annexure-CP4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. CCA/PB/PDA/01714/2023-24/1626 DATED 17.10.2024 ISSUED BY THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER(PDA) , O/O CONTROLLER OF COMMUNICATION ACCOUNTS , PUNJAB TELECOM CIRCLE, CHANDIGARGH Annexure- CP5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOPT O.M. FILE NO.28027/1/2016-ESTT. A-III DATED 16.03.2016 REGARDING GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTING COURT ORDER BY THE CONCERNED ADMINISTRATIVE DEPARTMENT UNDER GOI.

Annexure-R1 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 28.01.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN M.A.NO. 1094 /2024 IN O.A.NO.548/2024 IN THE CASE OF ' K.G.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI VS DEPARTMENT OF TELECOM Annexure-R2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.01.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO.82/2024 IN THE CASE OF ' K.G.BALAKRISHA PILLAI VS RANGANATH SHYAM AND ANR Annexure-R3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF DELHI IN 'FORUM OF RETIRED IPS OFFICERS VS UNION OF INDIA DATED 17.01.2019.

Annexure:R4 A TRUE COPY OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN W.P.(C ) NO.18613/2024 DATED 04.12.2024 WHERE ISSUES WERE SETTLED IN TERMS OF 'SHEELA DEVI CASE Annexure:R5 : A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT DATED 15.04.2019 IN SLP( C) NO.8852/2019 WHEREIN IT WAS DISMISSED . Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE IMPUGNED FINAL ORDER DATED 17.11.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE C.A.T. ERNAKULAM BENCH IN C.P. ( C) NO.10/2025 IN THE CASE OF ' SUDHAKARAN AND ANR VS SHRI.NEERAJ MITTAL Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE IMPUGNED RECALL ORDER DATED 16.12.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE C.A.T. ERNAKULAM BENCH IN MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.1132/2025 IN THE CASE OF ' SHRI.NEERAJ MITTAL VS B.SUDHAKARAN &ORS' Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF C.P.NO. 10/2025 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE OP (CAT) NO. 2 OF 2026

2026:KER:8337

THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH IN O.A.NO.593/2024 TOGETHER WITH ITS ANNEXURES CP1 TO CP5) IN THE CASE OF ' SUDHAKARAN AND ANR VS SHRI.NEERAJ MITTAL' Exhibit-P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 08-08-2025 FILED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 TOGETHER WITH ITS ANNEXURES R1 TO R5 IN C.P. NO. 10/2025.

Exhibit P5 MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.1132/2025 DATED 26.11.2025 IN C.P.NO.10/2025 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 TO RECALL THE ORDER DATED 17.11.2025 IMPOSING COST OF RS25000/- ON THE RESPONDENTS .