The contempt petition in case of Repatriation of ITS officers from BSNL/MTNL filed by SNEA, AIBSNLEA and BSNLEU was heard on 18/11/2025 in the High Court of Delhi.
This contempt was filed in Year 2013, against non-implementation of judgement on subject matter and hearing in this contempt case is going on for last 12 years.
Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner wished to proceed with the contempt and was about to commence arguments, however, the Counsel appearing for Respondents submitted that they seek to rely upon the documents filed in CONT.(CAS) 243/2013 filed by ITS Officers, and further submitted that the said matter was the lead matter and it was refuted by our advocate.
The Hon’ble Bench observed that there is no distinction as to which matter was the lead matter. However, the Bench opined that it would not be appropriate to begin hearing arguments in the present matter and later face a situation where a party seeks to rely upon pleadings from a matter that has already been withdrawn.
Accordingly, the Honourable Bench directed that the e-file of the pleadings in CONT. (CAS) 243/2013 be tagged along with the present matter within two weeks.
Thereafter, Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that an amendment application, which is miscellaneous in nature, has been pending before the Hon’ble Court for a very long time and requested that it be allowed. The Bench prima facie opined that it may not be inclined to do so, as any amendment may insinuate a fresh cause of action, which may not be permissible in a matter pending since 2013.
Counsel for the Petitioner clarified that the amendment sought is limited to a change in the memo of parties and does not create any fresh cause of action, and submitted that he would satisfy the Hon’ble Court on this aspect when the matter is heard
No one appeared for the Petitioner which is a case filed by MTNL Senior Executives Association.
In CONT. CAS (C) 474/2019, Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that he wished to continue with the contempt petition. Ld. CGSC appearing for Respondent No. 2 submitted that the Petitioner has been sent on deputation to the Department of Revenue, and therefore the contempt petition is not maintainable against them.
Counsel for the Petitioner submitted in response that the contempt still survives, as deputation does not amount to compliance with the orders passed by this Hon’ble Court.
In view of the above the captioned matter has been adjourned to 20/01/2026 for further proceedings.
