Full Judgment Text
2026:BHC-AUG:7065-DB
1 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 1763 OF 2025
Sayyed Rashid Sayyed Noor
Age : 59 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : House No. 155, Chistiya Colony,
N-6,CIDCO, Aurangabad. … Petitioner
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8738 OF 2025
IN WP/1763/2025
Sayyed Rashid Sayyed Noor
Age : 58 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : House No. 155, Chistiya Colony,
N-6,CIDCO, Aurangabad. … Applicant
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1858 OF 2025
Rashid Sha Kabir Sha
Age : 59 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : House No. 447, At Demani,
Post Shekta, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. … Petitioner
1 of 11
2 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13883 OF 2025
IN WP/1858/2025
Rashid Sha Kabir Sha
Age : 59 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : House No. 447, At Demani,
Post Shekta, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. … Applicant
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1859 OF 2025
Karim Shah Mehboob Shah
Age : 62 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : Flat No. 5, Ekta Apartment,
Vidya Nagar, Satara Parisar,
Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. … Petitioner
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13882 OF 2025
IN WP/1859/2025
2 of 11
3 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
Karim Shah Mehboob Shah
Age : 62 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : Flat No. 5, Ekta Apartment,
Vidya Nagar, Satara Parisar,
Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. … Applicant
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
Mr. V. D. Sapkal, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Priyanka L. Kale & Mr.
Yash A. Jadhav i/b Mr. Majit Shaikh, Advocate for the
Petitioners/Applicants.
Mr. S. C. Arora, Advocate for Respondent.
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT AND
SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, JJ.
th
DATE : 09 FEBRUARY, 2026.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER KISHORE C. SANT, J.) :-
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard the parties for long time.
3. All these petitioners are the persons who joined the
respondent department in the year 1993 as Regular Mazdoor from
open category. The services of the petitioners came to be
confirmed as Telecom Mechanics. All the petitioners have applied
to get certificate of the caste as Chhaparband (VJ). In the year
3 of 11
4 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
2002, the department passed an order thereby permanently
absorbing the petitioners. Lateron, they were absorbed. At no
point of time the petitioners ever claimed to be persons belonging
to Scheduled Tribe. However, it is after getting the validity
certificate as belonging to Chhaparband caste, they merely
submitted the certificate in the department and requested to take
note of their caste in the service record. The petitioners have
applied for VRS scheme in 2020. While allowing their
applications under VRS scheme it was allowed with clause No. 3
which reads as under :
“3. Against the above mentioned officials/employees,
false/fake caste complaint is pending. As they have not
applied on line as on date for their caste certificate
verification, their retirement benefits are withheld till the
verification is done. This is as per instructions vide letter No.
1-15/2019 PAT (BSNL) (pt) dated 22.01.2020, vide point no.
4, issued by BSNL CO. New Delhi.”
4. Till accepting the voluntary retirement there was no dispute.
For the first time the department put the endorsement as per
clause No. 3. In the year 2024, the department started an inquiry
by issuing memorandum on 29.01.2024 under rule 61 (4) (2) (b)
(ii) of Rules of 2006 stating that the petitioners have mislead the
department and obtained the benefit as belonging to Scheduled
4 of 11
5 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
Tribe category. In the service record the entry was also taken
showing the petitioners belonging to Scheduled Tribe category.
Lateron action is taken and pensionary benefits are withheld. All
these petitioners have approached this Court by filing writ
petitions which subsequently came to be transferred to the Central
Administrative Department (C.A.T.) and given number as Transfer
Application Nos. 2, 3 and 4 of 2024. The learned C.A.T. dismissed
the applications by holding that, though the petitioners were
belonging to Chhaparband community, they obtained benefits as
belonging to Scheduled Tribe category. It is also observed that the
petitioners obtained promotion on the basis of belonging to
Scheduled Tribe category and rejected the applications. It is in
this view the petitioners have approached this Court by filing
these three petitions.
5. The learned senior advocate Mr. Sapkal for the petitioners
vehemently argued that, the petitioners were appointed from open
category. Only because they happened to be persons belonging to
Chhaparband community, they obtained validity certificate as
Chhaparband (VJ) category. Their applications made to
department would show that they had only prayed that entry be
5 of 11
6 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
taken in the service record without mentioning anything further
and be given any benefit. As a matter of act, they have not
derived any benefit as belonging to Scheduled Tribe or even V.J.
category. Only request was made to take entry in their name of
the caste in the service book. He further submits that, when no
benefit was obtained as belonging to Scheduled Tribe category,
there was no question of withholding pension on that count. The
action is totally illegal. The observation of the learned Members
of the C.A.T. that the petitioners received promotion is totally
against the record. He thus submits that the petitions need to be
allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment and order passed
by the learned Members of the C.A.T.
6. The learned advocate Mr. Arora for the respondent
vehemently opposes the petitions. He submits that, the caste was
mentioned as Scheduled Tribe on the basis of certificate submitted
by the petitioners. The entry was taken in the service book. The
entry is counter signed by the petitioners. This would clearly
indicate that the petitioners have deliberately claimed to be
belonging to Scheduled Tribe category when in fact they were not.
6 of 11
7 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
He thus submits that, the learned members of C.A.T. have rightly
observed that the petitioners have mislead the department and
therefore, the action is held to be valid by the learned C.A.T. No
interference is required in the present petitions.
7. The learned senior advocate for the petitioners relies upon
the judgment in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Through
its Chairman and M.D. & Others Vs. Sunil Baliram Suryawanshi in
Writ Petition No. 10021/2025. In the said case, BSNL had
challenged the order passed by the Central Administrative
Tribunal (C.A.T.), Mumbai. In the said case, the pensionary
benefits of the employee were withheld as he had failed to make
online application for caste certificate verification. The employee,
therefore, had approached the C.A.T. The C.A.T. allowed the
original application holding that no action could have been taken
without any departmental proceedings against the employee. The
employee retired on 31.01.2020. His retiral benefits were
withheld till the verification of caste certificate is completed. It is
held that, such was unauthorized and illegal condition. No rule
was pointed out framed by BSNL to withhold pensionary benefits
7 of 11
8 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
till verification of the caste certificate. It is against the said
judgment by the C.A.T., the BSNL had approached the High Court.
Paragraph No. 7 of the judgment of the High Court reads as
under :
“7. As regards question of jurisdiction of the Tribunal
constituting a Single Judge to entertain Original
Application is concerned, we may observe that this is just
a technical objection and in fact does not arise in the facts
of the case. Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
High Court exercises its jurisdiction in furtherance of
justice, equality and good conscience. This is in
furtherance of Principles of Justice and Equality that this
Writ Petition is not entertained on such technical breach.
This is a well settled principle in law that, writ Court shall
not entertain a petition where illegalities have been
perpetuated by entertaining such petition. Pension and
pensionary benefits of a government employee are not
bounty to them, rather are gratuitous rewards for
meritorious service rendered by government employee. In
“Dr. Hiralal V. State of Bihar and Others” (2020) 4 SCC
346 Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the pension
and pensionary benefits are akin to the right provided
under Article 300A of the Constitution of India and that
cannot be forfeited or withheld without due process in
law.”
8. In the present case, this Court finds that, no inquiry is held,
nor even proposed and the retiral benefits are withheld by
condition No. 3.
9. The learned senior advocate for the petitioners also relies
8 of 11
9 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
upon the judgment in the case of The Principal General Manager
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. in
Writ Petition No. 800/2026. This judgment is on the similar lines.
10. The learned senior advocate for the petitioners further relies
upon the judgment in the case of State of Jharkhand and others
Vs. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava and another, (2013) 12 SCC 210. In
the said case it is held that, the Government can withhold the
pension only when a finding is recorded either in departmental
inquiry or in judicial proceedings that the employee had
committed grave misconduct in discharge of his duty while in his
office.
11. After hearing the parties, the only question is as to whether
at any point of time the petitioners have represented to be persons
belonging to Scheduled Tribe category. From the individual
application it is seen that, the applications were simply stating
that the applicants belong to Chhaparband caste without
mentioning the category. There is nothing to indicate that at any
point of time they misrepresented that, Chhaparband community
comes under Scheduled Tribe category. They also never
9 of 11
10 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
demanded any benefit as belong to any of the category even as VJ
category. There is no material produced before this Court to show
as to on what basis the learned members of C.A.T. have observed
that, there were promotions given to the petitioners as belonging
to Scheduled Tribe community. Earlier certificate shows that the
petitioners belong to Scheduled Tribe category, however, there is
no material produced even to show as to on what basis the said
observation is made. Therefore, this Court finds that, the
observation of the learned C.A.T. is without any material.
12. In the facts of present petition it is clearly seen that the
petitioners have never represented themselves to be belonging to
Scheduled Tribe category and claimed any benefit. As a matter of
fact, after submission of the caste validity certificate, there is no
promotion given to the petitioners at any point of time. No other
benefit is shown to have been given to them. It is only in Writ
Petition No. 1858/2025 it is shown that the petitioner was given
promotion as belonging to Scheduled Tribe. However, nothing is
shown that it is at the instance of the petitioner. The petitioner
cannot be held responsible for the inadvertent mistake/clerical
mistake committed by the department.
10 of 11
11 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
13. Thus, this Court finds that the impugned judgment and
order passed by the learned Members of the C.A.T. deserves to be
quashed and set aside.
14. The writ petitions stand allowed in terms of prayer clauses
(A) and (B). The impugned judgment and order passed by the
learned Members of the C.A.T. is quashed and set aside. The
action of withholding the pension of the petitioners is quashed
and set aside. The respondent is directed to pay all the retiral
benefits to the petitioners with interest if admissible under the
rules.
15. Needless to say that, the proceedings initiated against the
petitioners are quashed.
16. Rule is made absolute in above terms. The petitions stand
disposed off.
17. In view of disposal of writ petitions, nothing survives in the
civil applications and the same are also disposed off.
( SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.) ( KISHORE C. SANT, J. )
P.S.B.
11 of 11
1 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 1763 OF 2025
Sayyed Rashid Sayyed Noor
Age : 59 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : House No. 155, Chistiya Colony,
N-6,CIDCO, Aurangabad. … Petitioner
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8738 OF 2025
IN WP/1763/2025
Sayyed Rashid Sayyed Noor
Age : 58 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : House No. 155, Chistiya Colony,
N-6,CIDCO, Aurangabad. … Applicant
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1858 OF 2025
Rashid Sha Kabir Sha
Age : 59 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : House No. 447, At Demani,
Post Shekta, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. … Petitioner
1 of 11
2 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13883 OF 2025
IN WP/1858/2025
Rashid Sha Kabir Sha
Age : 59 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : House No. 447, At Demani,
Post Shekta, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. … Applicant
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1859 OF 2025
Karim Shah Mehboob Shah
Age : 62 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : Flat No. 5, Ekta Apartment,
Vidya Nagar, Satara Parisar,
Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. … Petitioner
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13882 OF 2025
IN WP/1859/2025
2 of 11
3 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
Karim Shah Mehboob Shah
Age : 62 years, Occu. : Retired,
R/o. : Flat No. 5, Ekta Apartment,
Vidya Nagar, Satara Parisar,
Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. … Applicant
VERSUS
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL)
Through its General Manager
Sanchar Sadan, N-5, CIDCO,
Aurangabad. … Respondent
Mr. V. D. Sapkal, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Priyanka L. Kale & Mr.
Yash A. Jadhav i/b Mr. Majit Shaikh, Advocate for the
Petitioners/Applicants.
Mr. S. C. Arora, Advocate for Respondent.
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT AND
SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, JJ.
th
DATE : 09 FEBRUARY, 2026.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER KISHORE C. SANT, J.) :-
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard the parties for long time.
3. All these petitioners are the persons who joined the
respondent department in the year 1993 as Regular Mazdoor from
open category. The services of the petitioners came to be
confirmed as Telecom Mechanics. All the petitioners have applied
to get certificate of the caste as Chhaparband (VJ). In the year
3 of 11
4 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
2002, the department passed an order thereby permanently
absorbing the petitioners. Lateron, they were absorbed. At no
point of time the petitioners ever claimed to be persons belonging
to Scheduled Tribe. However, it is after getting the validity
certificate as belonging to Chhaparband caste, they merely
submitted the certificate in the department and requested to take
note of their caste in the service record. The petitioners have
applied for VRS scheme in 2020. While allowing their
applications under VRS scheme it was allowed with clause No. 3
which reads as under :
“3. Against the above mentioned officials/employees,
false/fake caste complaint is pending. As they have not
applied on line as on date for their caste certificate
verification, their retirement benefits are withheld till the
verification is done. This is as per instructions vide letter No.
1-15/2019 PAT (BSNL) (pt) dated 22.01.2020, vide point no.
4, issued by BSNL CO. New Delhi.”
4. Till accepting the voluntary retirement there was no dispute.
For the first time the department put the endorsement as per
clause No. 3. In the year 2024, the department started an inquiry
by issuing memorandum on 29.01.2024 under rule 61 (4) (2) (b)
(ii) of Rules of 2006 stating that the petitioners have mislead the
department and obtained the benefit as belonging to Scheduled
4 of 11
5 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
Tribe category. In the service record the entry was also taken
showing the petitioners belonging to Scheduled Tribe category.
Lateron action is taken and pensionary benefits are withheld. All
these petitioners have approached this Court by filing writ
petitions which subsequently came to be transferred to the Central
Administrative Department (C.A.T.) and given number as Transfer
Application Nos. 2, 3 and 4 of 2024. The learned C.A.T. dismissed
the applications by holding that, though the petitioners were
belonging to Chhaparband community, they obtained benefits as
belonging to Scheduled Tribe category. It is also observed that the
petitioners obtained promotion on the basis of belonging to
Scheduled Tribe category and rejected the applications. It is in
this view the petitioners have approached this Court by filing
these three petitions.
5. The learned senior advocate Mr. Sapkal for the petitioners
vehemently argued that, the petitioners were appointed from open
category. Only because they happened to be persons belonging to
Chhaparband community, they obtained validity certificate as
Chhaparband (VJ) category. Their applications made to
department would show that they had only prayed that entry be
5 of 11
6 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
taken in the service record without mentioning anything further
and be given any benefit. As a matter of act, they have not
derived any benefit as belonging to Scheduled Tribe or even V.J.
category. Only request was made to take entry in their name of
the caste in the service book. He further submits that, when no
benefit was obtained as belonging to Scheduled Tribe category,
there was no question of withholding pension on that count. The
action is totally illegal. The observation of the learned Members
of the C.A.T. that the petitioners received promotion is totally
against the record. He thus submits that the petitions need to be
allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment and order passed
by the learned Members of the C.A.T.
6. The learned advocate Mr. Arora for the respondent
vehemently opposes the petitions. He submits that, the caste was
mentioned as Scheduled Tribe on the basis of certificate submitted
by the petitioners. The entry was taken in the service book. The
entry is counter signed by the petitioners. This would clearly
indicate that the petitioners have deliberately claimed to be
belonging to Scheduled Tribe category when in fact they were not.
6 of 11
7 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
He thus submits that, the learned members of C.A.T. have rightly
observed that the petitioners have mislead the department and
therefore, the action is held to be valid by the learned C.A.T. No
interference is required in the present petitions.
7. The learned senior advocate for the petitioners relies upon
the judgment in the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Through
its Chairman and M.D. & Others Vs. Sunil Baliram Suryawanshi in
Writ Petition No. 10021/2025. In the said case, BSNL had
challenged the order passed by the Central Administrative
Tribunal (C.A.T.), Mumbai. In the said case, the pensionary
benefits of the employee were withheld as he had failed to make
online application for caste certificate verification. The employee,
therefore, had approached the C.A.T. The C.A.T. allowed the
original application holding that no action could have been taken
without any departmental proceedings against the employee. The
employee retired on 31.01.2020. His retiral benefits were
withheld till the verification of caste certificate is completed. It is
held that, such was unauthorized and illegal condition. No rule
was pointed out framed by BSNL to withhold pensionary benefits
7 of 11
8 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
till verification of the caste certificate. It is against the said
judgment by the C.A.T., the BSNL had approached the High Court.
Paragraph No. 7 of the judgment of the High Court reads as
under :
“7. As regards question of jurisdiction of the Tribunal
constituting a Single Judge to entertain Original
Application is concerned, we may observe that this is just
a technical objection and in fact does not arise in the facts
of the case. Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
High Court exercises its jurisdiction in furtherance of
justice, equality and good conscience. This is in
furtherance of Principles of Justice and Equality that this
Writ Petition is not entertained on such technical breach.
This is a well settled principle in law that, writ Court shall
not entertain a petition where illegalities have been
perpetuated by entertaining such petition. Pension and
pensionary benefits of a government employee are not
bounty to them, rather are gratuitous rewards for
meritorious service rendered by government employee. In
“Dr. Hiralal V. State of Bihar and Others” (2020) 4 SCC
346 Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the pension
and pensionary benefits are akin to the right provided
under Article 300A of the Constitution of India and that
cannot be forfeited or withheld without due process in
law.”
8. In the present case, this Court finds that, no inquiry is held,
nor even proposed and the retiral benefits are withheld by
condition No. 3.
9. The learned senior advocate for the petitioners also relies
8 of 11
9 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
upon the judgment in the case of The Principal General Manager
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. in
Writ Petition No. 800/2026. This judgment is on the similar lines.
10. The learned senior advocate for the petitioners further relies
upon the judgment in the case of State of Jharkhand and others
Vs. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava and another, (2013) 12 SCC 210. In
the said case it is held that, the Government can withhold the
pension only when a finding is recorded either in departmental
inquiry or in judicial proceedings that the employee had
committed grave misconduct in discharge of his duty while in his
office.
11. After hearing the parties, the only question is as to whether
at any point of time the petitioners have represented to be persons
belonging to Scheduled Tribe category. From the individual
application it is seen that, the applications were simply stating
that the applicants belong to Chhaparband caste without
mentioning the category. There is nothing to indicate that at any
point of time they misrepresented that, Chhaparband community
comes under Scheduled Tribe category. They also never
9 of 11
10 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
demanded any benefit as belong to any of the category even as VJ
category. There is no material produced before this Court to show
as to on what basis the learned members of C.A.T. have observed
that, there were promotions given to the petitioners as belonging
to Scheduled Tribe community. Earlier certificate shows that the
petitioners belong to Scheduled Tribe category, however, there is
no material produced even to show as to on what basis the said
observation is made. Therefore, this Court finds that, the
observation of the learned C.A.T. is without any material.
12. In the facts of present petition it is clearly seen that the
petitioners have never represented themselves to be belonging to
Scheduled Tribe category and claimed any benefit. As a matter of
fact, after submission of the caste validity certificate, there is no
promotion given to the petitioners at any point of time. No other
benefit is shown to have been given to them. It is only in Writ
Petition No. 1858/2025 it is shown that the petitioner was given
promotion as belonging to Scheduled Tribe. However, nothing is
shown that it is at the instance of the petitioner. The petitioner
cannot be held responsible for the inadvertent mistake/clerical
mistake committed by the department.
10 of 11
11 915-wp 1763-2025.odt
13. Thus, this Court finds that the impugned judgment and
order passed by the learned Members of the C.A.T. deserves to be
quashed and set aside.
14. The writ petitions stand allowed in terms of prayer clauses
(A) and (B). The impugned judgment and order passed by the
learned Members of the C.A.T. is quashed and set aside. The
action of withholding the pension of the petitioners is quashed
and set aside. The respondent is directed to pay all the retiral
benefits to the petitioners with interest if admissible under the
rules.
15. Needless to say that, the proceedings initiated against the
petitioners are quashed.
16. Rule is made absolute in above terms. The petitions stand
disposed off.
17. In view of disposal of writ petitions, nothing survives in the
civil applications and the same are also disposed off.
( SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.) ( KISHORE C. SANT, J. )
P.S.B.
11 of 11