CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.14432 OF 2005 ( In the matter of an application under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.) ****** 1. The union of India, through the Secretary, Department of Telecom, Sanchar Bhawan, New-Delhi. 2. The C.G.M., Telecom, Bihar, Circle, Patna. 3. The T.D.M. Bhagalpur 4. D.E.T. (A &P), Office of the T.D.M. Bhagalpur. 5. The S.D.O.(P), Bhagalpur 6. S.D.E. Transmission Project, Bhagalpur. 7. The Assistant Engineer, Microwave Project, Varansi. 8. The Assistant Engineer, Microwave Project, Deoghar. 9. The Assistant Engineer, Microwave Project, Patna. 10. Sri. A.K.Jha, D.E.T.(A &P), Office of the T.D.M. Bhagalpur 11. Sri S.K.Mishra, S.D.E.(Admn), Office of the T.D.M.Bhagalpur 12. Sri Y.P. Singh, J.T.O.(Legal), Office of the T.D.M. Bhagalpur 13. Sri Salamat Ansari, Ex- S.D.O. (P), Bhagalpur, C/O T.D.M., Bhagalpur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. Md.Rizwan Ansari S/o late Md. Ali Ahmad, resident of Jabarchak, P.O. Tatarpur, Dist. Bhagalpur. 2. Md. Afque Ali Ahmad S/o of Late Md. Ali Ahmad, resident of Tatarpur, Sahadat Hussain Lane, P.O. Tatarpur, Dist. Bhagalpur. 3. Md. Zulfikar Ali S/o of Shaifuddin, resident of Mustafapur, Dist. Bhagalpur. 4. Md. Meraj Ali S/o of Asgar Ali, resident of Ishipur Barahat, P.S. Pitpainty, Dist. Bhagalpur. 5. Md. Istiaque Ali Ahmad S/o of Late Md. Ali Ahmad, resident of Tatarpur, Sahadat Hussain Lane, P.O. Tatarpur, Dist. Bhagalpur. 6. Awadhesh Kumar, S/o Shri Sricharan Choudhary resident of Upper road, Sultanganj, Dist. Bhagalpur. All are Ex- daily rated Mazdoor of the Department of Telecom, Bhagalpur ---Respondents ****** For the Petitioners : Jawahar Prasad Karn, Advocate. For the Respondents : D.N.Pandey, Advocate. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL 2 ****** S.K.Katriar & K.K.Mandal,J.J., This writ petition is directed against the order dated 27.01.2005, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, in O.A.No. 68 of 2003 (Mr. Rizwan Ansari and Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.),whereby respondent no.2 (Chief General Manager, Telecom, Bihar, Circle, Patna) before the Tribunal has been directed to refer the dispute to B.S.N.L. for reconsideration and necessary action within a reasonable period of time since all the liabilities and assets of the Department of Telecom has been shifted to BSNL. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. A major portion of the duties and functions of the Telecom Department were transferred to the Public Sector undertaking created by the Government of India and now known as „Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited‟ ( in short „B.S.N.L.‟ ). The original applicants before the Tribunal (six in number) preferred the original application for a direction to B.S.N.L. to consider the cases for regularization. On consideration of the matter, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that B.S.N.L. had not, till the date of the order, been notified to be within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal in terms of Section 14(2) of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. Before we deal with the issue we can be profitably reproduce paragraph no.6 of the order of the Tribunal:- “6. Therefore, in view of these observations, as already made by this court in O.A. No. 1002 of 2002, the Respondent No.2 is directed to refer the matter to BSNL for reconsideration and 3 necessary action within a reasonable period of time since all the liabilities and assets of the Department of Telecom has been shifted to BSNL.” It appears from a perusal of the order of the Tribunal that it was conscious of the legal position that B.S.N.L. had not been notified within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. It, therefore, intended to direct respondent no.1 (Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Telecom, Sanchar Bhawan, New Delhi) before it to refer the dispute to B.S.N.L. Law is well-settled that such a direction can be issued to the Government of India to refer the issue to a body which may or may not be “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Reference may be made to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in AIR 1984 SC 802. It requires to be clarified that respondent no.2 occurring in paragraph no.6 of the order of the Tribunal is typographical error for respondent no.1. We accordingly clarify that the Tribunal has directed respondent no.1 ( the Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Telecom, Sanchar Bhawan, New Delhi) to refer the dispute to B.S.N.L. for consideration. We must notice another aspect of the matter stated in I.A.No.2202 of 2006, filed by respondents herein, the original applicants before the Tribunal, stating therein that the dispute is under conciliation before the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Patna, as evidenced by the communication marked Annexures A & B. It goes without saying that the conciliation proceedings shall take its own course. It goes without saying that 4 the action of the authorities of B.S.N.L. shall abide the result of the conciliation proceedings. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of. Patna High Court, Dated the 15th April, 2010 Sym/NAFR (S.K.Katriar,J) ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)