Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd vs Suresh Kumar Meena S/O Shri ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 406 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

              D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12652/2021

1.     Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Through Its Principal General
       Manager (Telecommunication) Sardar Patel Marg, C-
       Scheme, Jaipur - 302008.
2.     The General Manager Telecommunication, Office of GMTD,
       Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Jhunjhunu (Raj.) 333008.
                                                                 ----Petitioners
                                   Versus
Suresh Kumar Meena S/o Shri Bajrang Lal Meena, Aged About
52 Years, R/o Village And Post Khatehpura, Tehsil & District
Jhunjhunu (Raj.). Designation-Casual Driver, BSNL (Presently
the applicant is working on the post of Driver on casual basis in
the office of GMTD, BSNL, Jhunjhunu- 333008
                                                                ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tej Prakash Sharma, Advocate through VC

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR

Judgment / Order

18/01/2022

Heard on admission.

This petition under Article 227 of The Constitution of India

has been preferred by the petitioner-BSNL, aggrieved by the order

of the Tribunal, quashing order of reduction of pay on the

respondent-driver who has been working since 14.04.1985.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the

respondent is only a casual employee and irrespective of length of

service, the nature of the employment has not changed. He would

submit that the berift of the minimum of the pay scale could not

be extended to such casual employee in the absence of there

(2 of 2) [CW-12652/2021]

being specific Rules and Regulation entitling such employee to

minimum of the pay scale applicable to the driver.

We are not at all impressed by the submissions made by

learned counsel for the petitioner. To say the least, the petitioner

is a model employer and an instrumentality of the State yet

behaving worse than a private employer. Undeniably, the

respondent employee has remained engaged as a driver on

temporary basis with effect from 14.04.1985. His pay and

emoluments have been reduced without affording of any

opportunity of hearing by branding him as a casual employee.

Learned Tribunal, taking into consideration the long stretch of

employment of the respondent, which is more than 30 years and

further taking into consideration that no opportunity of hearing

was afforded before reducing employment, has set aside the

order. The order passed by the Tribunal does not suffer from any

error of jurisdiction or any patent legality or illegality.

We, therefore, are not inclined to interfere with the order of

the Tribunal in exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction under

Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

This petition is dismissed.

(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),J

Mohita /3

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)