Telangana High Court
P.R.Chandrahasa vs C.M. Pension Dept United Bank Of India2 on 28 January, 2022
Author: P. Madhavi Devi
Bench: P. Madhavi Devi
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION NO.11669 OF 2002
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the order vide Ref.No.Staff pension/SPF 23607/70/02 dt.22.04.2002 issued by the 1st respondent as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and to quash the same.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner joined the services of the 3rd respondent on 15.12.1983 as sub-staff and was continuing in service till he opted for VRS Scheme offered by the bank. One of the conditions of the VRS Scheme is that the employee should have completed 15 years of service or attained the age of 40 years. Since the petitioner had put in a service of 17 years and 3 months, he submitted an application for VRS on 05.01.2001 which was accepted by the 3rd respondent and the petitioner was relieved from service vide Ref.No.Hyde/personal/992/2001 dt.14.03.2001. Thereafter, the petitioner was not conferred with benefits of pension. Hence, the petitioner made several representations to the 3rd respondent. The petitioner received a letter of the 3rd respondent dt.22.04.2002 stating that the petitioner has served the bank for 17 years and 3 months; that he was not eligible for pensionary benefits as per the amended Regulation 28 of United Bank of India (Employees') Pension W.P.No.11669 of 2002 2 Regulations, 1995 because he had taken leave of 825 days without pay. Assailing such communication, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri N.Parameswara Reddy, submitted that the petitioner has put in more than 17 years of service in the respondent bank and Para 6 and Clause (ii) thereof of the VRS Scheme says that the benefit of pension will be granted as per the United Bank of India (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995. He submitted that Regulation 14 of the said Regulations stipulates that an employee who completed a minimum of ten years of service becomes eligible for pension. He submitted that the length of service, which is eligible for an employee for pension on superannuation, should also be considered as eligible for the purpose of pension on VRS. He submitted that the length of service of 17 years and 3 months has been considered by the respondents while granting gratuity and other emoluments to the petitioner and it is only for the payment of pension that the 3rd respondent has taken such a stand. Therefore, he sought a direction for payment of pension to the petitioner with all consequential reliefs.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent bank, on the other hand, supported the impugned order and submitted that the petitioner was paid ex gratia and gratuity in accordance with the VRS Scheme, but as regards the pension, it was governed by the Pension Regulations of W.P.No.11669 of 2002 3 the Bank and since he did not have the qualifying service, he was not granted pension. He relied upon the amended provision of Regulation 28 of the Regulations which stipulates that an employee has to put in a minimum of 15 years in terms of any scheme that may be framed for such pension by the Board with the approval of the Government.
5. Having regard to the rival contentions and the material on record, this Court finds that the respondent bank has issued a Voluntary Retirement Scheme known as VRS Scheme dt.23.12.2000. Under the said Scheme, the employees who are eligible to seek VRS have to meet the eligibility criteria on the date of application, i.e., they have completed 15 years of service or attained 40 years of age. The petitioner has made an application for voluntary retirement on 05.01.2001 and the competent authority, i.e., the Committee constituted for the said purpose has accepted the same on 03.03.2001 and the same was communicated to the petitioner on 14.03.2001. It is case of the petitioner that on 13.03.2001 he had made an application for withdrawal of the said VRS application and however, the same was not accepted. This Court observes that as the Committee had already accepted the VRS application of the petitioner on 03.03.2001, the letter of withdrawal by the petitioner could not have been accepted thereafter.
6. As regards the pensionary benefits, the VRS Scheme prescribes that the employee who seeks retirement under the VRS Scheme is W.P.No.11669 of 2002 4 eligible for pension as per the United Bank of India (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995. This Court has gone through the said Regulations and finds that Regulation 14 refers to Qualifying Service and it reads as under:
"14. Qualifying Service - Subject to the other conditions contained in these regulations, an employee who has rendered a minimum of ten years of service in the Bank on the date of his retirement or the date on which he is deemed to have retired shall qualify for pension."
Regulation 17 refers to Counting of periods spent on leave and it reads as under:
"17. Counting of periods spent on leave - All leave during service in the Bank for which leave salary is payable shall count as qualifying service;
Provided that extraordinary leave on loss of pay shall not count as qualifying service except when the sanctioning authority has directed that such leave not exceeding twelve months during the entire service, may count as service for all purposes including pension."
Regulation 28 refers to Pension payable on superannuation and the Provisos thereunder refer to the retirement of an employee before attaining the age of superannuation but after rendering service for a minimum period of 15 years in terms of any scheme that may be framed for such pension by the Board with the approval of the Government. It reads as under:
"28. Superannuation Pension - Superannuation pension shall be granted to an employee who has retired on his attaining W.P.No.11669 of 2002 5 the age of superannuation specified in the Service Regulations or Settlements:
Provided that, with effect from 1st day of November, 2000, pension shall also be granted to an employee who opts to retire before attaining the age of superannuation, but after rendering service for a minimum period of 15 years in terms of any scheme that may be framed for such pension by the Board with the approval of the Government.
Provided further that employees who ceased to be in service on or after the 29th September, 1995 on account of voluntary retirement before attaining the age of superannuation but after rendering service for a minimum period of 15 years in accordance with the Scheme framed in this regard by the Board with the approval of the Government, shall be entitled to join the Pension Fund, subject to the compliance of the terms and conditions mentioned in the Scheme. (as per Pension (Amendment) Regulations, 2017)"
Clause (w) of Regulation 2 defines 'qualifying service' to mean service rendered while on duty or otherwise which shall be taken into account for the purpose of pension under these Regulations.
7. After going through these Regulations, it is clear that Regulation 17 would apply for counting the qualifying period of service and as per the Proviso to Regulation 17, the extraordinary leave on loss of pay shall not count as qualifying service except when the sanctioning authority has directed that such leave not exceeding twelve months during the entire service, may count as service for all purposes including pension. It appears that the sanctioning authority has not given any such direction in the case of the petitioner and therefore the period of 825 days of leave without pay has been W.P.No.11669 of 2002 6 excluded while counting the qualifying service for grant of pension in the case of the petitioner. As per the record, the petitioner was aged 50 years at the time of filing of this Writ Petition. Therefore, the petitioner's application must have been accepted under Clause (b) of Para 4 of the VRS Scheme, i.e., having attained 40 years of age. However, while counting the service for payment of ex gratia and gratuity, the relevant provisions have been given in the Scheme itself in Paras 5 and 6 thereof. While referring to the pension payable to an employee on accepting the VRS application, it is mentioned that pension including commuted value of pension shall be payable as per the United Bank of India (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995. Therefore, the employee's Pension Regulations would come into play for payment of pension and according to such Regulations, an employee would be eligible for pension under the VRS Scheme only if he is eligible for pension under the Regulations and therefore, the leave without pay would have to be excluded while counting the qualifying service for awarding pension to the petitioner. It is also noticed that Regulation 28 has been amended before introducing the VRS Scheme in December, 2000. Otherwise, a person would be eligible for pension on superannuation if he has put in a minimum of 10 years of service. In the case of the petitioner, it is seen that the petitioner had put in a service of 17 years 3 months at the time of his application, but it was accepted with effect from 14.03.2001. Therefore, his service has to be counted up to 14.03.2001 which is 17 W.P.No.11669 of 2002 7 years 5 months. As per Regulation 17, even if 825 days are excluded, the petitoner's service would be 15 years. The respondent organisation has taken the total service as 17 years 3 monthsly only. It has not counted the period of service up to 14.03.2001.
8. On verification, it is noticed that the total numbr of days between 15.12.1983 to 14.03.2001 (both days inclusive) are 6300 and if 825 days are excluded therefrom, the remaining days are 5475 days, which when converted to years is 15 years.
9. In view of these circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is eligible for pension as per Regulation 28 of the United Bank of India (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995 and the respondent bank is directed to pay the pension to the petitioner. The arrears of pension shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with interest @ 6% per annum.
10. The Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs.
11. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
___________________________ JUSTICE P. MADHAVI DEVI Date: 28.01.2022 Svv