Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Kamgar Sangh vs Chief General Manager, Mtnl, Bombay and others

Petitioner is a Union of employees of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (MTNL). Members of the petitioner-Union were the employees of Department of Telecommunication (DOT) until the MTNL was constituted as from 1st April 1986. It appears that at some stage the employees working for the DOT were given option either to remain with the MTNL or otherwise. According to the petitioner 100% employees have exercised options to remain with the MTNL.

The present petition prays as the main relief that appropriate direction be issued to the MTNL to absorb their employees and regularise and treat them as employees of MTNL. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite MTNL came into being as from 1st April 1986 so far no regularisation of the staff taken over from the DOT has been done and thought a long time has elapsed no steps whatsoever have been taken and hence the earlier mentioned relief in the Petition.

At the threshold, and objection has been raised that this petition is not maintainable. It is urged that in the absence of specific order of absorption, the employees taken over continue to be Central Government staff and, therefore, petition ought to be filed before the Central Administrative Tribunal. Having regard to the provisions of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, the High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain this petition.

As against this objection of the respondents, Mr. Kochar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 14 of the Administrative Tribunal Act and contended that the Central Government has not issued any Notification so as to cover MTNL. He, therefore, says that jurisdiction of the High Court is not ousted in so far as the employees of MTNL are concerned. To butress his submission. Mr. Kochar relied upon a decision to the Supreme Court in the case of Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board & Ors. v. M. A. Hai Asami & Ors. reported in 1992 II CLR 98.

In our view, this decision of the Supreme Court does not help the petitioner. We have already indicated that the petitioner has itself prayed for an appropriate direction to absorb and regularise its employees once they were taken over by the MTNL. This being the position, in our view, until the of is made by the MTNL, the members of the petitioner-Union continue to remain as Central Government employees being the original employees of DOT and, therefore as per Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, the Central Administrative Tribunal shall have jurisdiction to entertain the grievance of the petitioner.

We may mention that actually at some stage M/s. National Union of Telecom Engineering Employees had filed a writ petition in this Court being Writ Petition No. 1040 of 1993. When this petition came up for admission on 8.6.1993 before a Division Bench, it appears that respondent therein raised a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability and the petitioner therein withdrew the petition. We are told across the bar that the aforementioned National Union of Telecom Engineering Employees thereafter instituted proceedings before the Central Administrative Tribunal which is pending and on behalf of the respondents a statement has been made that relief claimed in that petition is similar to the relief claimed in the present petition. Since one matter is pending before the Central Administrative Tribunal and the present petition was instituted in this Court we made and effort to know from the learned counsel appearing for the respondents whether in view of long delay in setting the matter of the employees MTNL is prepared to set out a dead-line for settling the matter once and for all so that the employees are not made to run from one forum to another. Fact remains that members of the petitioner-Union were taken over as from 1st of April 1986. We must mention with regret that the respondents were not prepared to commit that they will solve the problem of the employees without driving them to the Tribunal.

We make it clear that we have merely recorded the above statement as made on behalf of the respondents. If and when the petition-union makes an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, we recommend and hope that the Central Administrative Tribunal shall give due priority to such a petition and try to dispose of the same along with the petition filed by National Union of Telecom Engineering Employees as expeditiously as possible. For lack of jurisdiction, we do not entertain the present petition. Petition rejected.

Certified copy expedited.