IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.651 of 2006 -------- 1. The Union Of India, through the Secretary, Department of Telecom, Sanchar Bhawan, New-Delhi 2. The Chief General Manager, Telecommunication, Bihar, Circle, Patna-1 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.(G) Telecom, Banka 7. S.D.O.(T), Bhagalpur 8. Sri Salamat Ansari, Ex-S.D.O.(P), Bhagalpur, C/O T.D.M., Bhagalpur. 9. Sri A.K.Jha, D.E.t(A&P), Office of the T.D.M.Bhagalpur 10. Sri S.K.Mishra, S.D.E (Admn), Office of the T.D.M. Bhagalpur 11. Sri Y.P.Singh, J.T.O.(Legal), Office of the T.D.M. Bhagalpur. …. .. Petitioners Versus 1. The Registrar,Central Administrative.Tribunal, Sri Krishnanagar, Patna. 2. Lalan Kumar Mishra, son of Shri Dinesh Kant Mishra, Resident of village Dudhichak, Post- Kasba Dudhichak, P.S.Moharama, District- Godda, Daily rated Mazdoor, under Telecome District Manager, Telecom, Bhagalpur …. Respondents ----------- For the petitioners : M/s J.P.Karn & Siddhartha Prasad, Advocates For the respondent no.2: Mr. Deepak Kumar Sinha, Advocate -------- P R E S E N T Hon'ble the Chief Justice & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kishore K. Mandal ------ Dated, the 16th October, 2008 During the course of arguments, the counsel for the respondent - 2 - no.2 conceded that Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) has not yet been notified under Section 14(2) of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 to be amenable to the jurisdiction of Central Administrative Tribunal. In view of this admitted position by the counsel for the respondent no.2, the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal becomes unsustainable. 2. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Shri Bhagirath Prasad & Anr. Vs. Hari Narayan Paswan & Ors, 2005(4) PLJR 53, has taken the view that BSNL, although is a government company, but not a government department, and since no notification has been issued under Section 14(2) of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, the Central Administrative Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain any dispute with regard to service matters of the BSNL. This is how the court considered the matter: “3. The officers of the BSNL who were arrayed as party has raised the sole objection that the BSNL has been created as a Corporation by the Government of India and it has come into existence since the 1st day of October, 2000 and it has an independent identity and is a government owned company as has been incorporated under the Companies Act with a view to take over the business of providing telecommunication service and operation which was being carried out by the Department of Telecommunication. BSNL having separate existence and has not been brought within the purview of Tribunal under section 14(2) of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), it is not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. ….. …… …… 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners raised the sole point that as the BSNL has not been notified as an authority by the Government to which the provisions of the Act will apply by issuance of the notification under section - 3 - 14(2) of the Act. The Tribunal has no power to issue any direction and when the Tribunal has no power to issue a direction to the BSNL which fact has been accepted by the Tribunal, it cannot in indirect way issue a direction to the BSNL through the agency of the Central Government. …… ……. 7. The Act has been enacted to provide for the adjudication or trial by Administrative Tribunals of disputes and complaints with respect to recruitment and conditions of service of persons as mentioned in the Act. Section 14 of the Act contains a provision with regard to jurisdiction, powers and authority of Tribunals and sub-section (2) of Section 14 empowers the Central Government to make the provisions of Sub-section (3) of Section 14 applicable to the other authorities with regard to matters enumerated therein. 8. Thus, under the provisions of the Act, if the local or any other authority is to be included as an authority for the purpose of applicability of the power of Tribunal to deal with the service matters the notification is required to be issued by the Central Government. The BSNL is a company registered under the Companies Act and it has its own existence. Though it is a Government Company but it is not a department of the government and as such the Act is not applicable in the case of BSNL. The notification under section 14(2) of the Act is a must for bringing it within the purviews of the tribunal for adjudication of matters as enumerated in sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the Act. It is an admitted fact that up-till-now, no notification has been issued under section 14(2) of the Act and accordingly, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain any dispute with regard to service matters of the BSNL.” 3. In view of the legal position noticed in the case of Bhagirath Prasad & Anr, the view of the Tribunal cannot be sustained and the order has to be set aside. 4. We, accordingly, make the rule absolute and set aside the order dated 27th January, 2005 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna. Resultantly O.A.No.142 of 2003 filed - 4 - by the respondent no.2 stands dismissed. The parties shall bear their own cost. 5. Needless to say that it is open to the respondent no.2 to pursue appropriate remedy before competent forum of jurisdiction, if available, for redressal of his grievance. R. M. Lodha, CJ Kishore K. Mandal, J. Sunil