Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Navin Kishore Prasad Sinha vs Punjab National Bank & Ors on 26 September, 2023
26.09.2023 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA DL-9 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION (PP) APPELLATE SIDE WPA 19805 of 2023 Navin Kishore Prasad Sinha Vs. Punjab National Bank & Ors.
Mr. K. B. S. Mahapatra, Mr. Panchanan Let ....for the petitioner.
Mr. R. N. Majumder, Mr. S. M. Obaidullah ....for PNB.
The petitioner's case is that he is eligible to opt for pension under the pension scheme of erstwhile United Bank of India (UBI) now merged with Punjab National Bank (PNB). Such scheme was circulated by a letter dated August 20, 2010. The petitioner made a prayer for transfer to Mumbai on August 8, 2007. Such prayer was turned down. Next, he made a prayer for voluntary retirement from service on September 19, 2007. Such prayer was also turned down by the bank. The petitioner underwent an operation. Since his prayer for voluntary retirement was turned down by a letter dated September 22, 2007, the petitioner submitted his resignation on September 24, 2007.
Mr. Mahapatra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner relies on a judgment dated June 17, 2020 passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench 2 of this Court in FMA 4412 of 2016 (United Bank of India vs. Sri Swapan Kumar Mullick & Ors.) to submit that even after resignation an employee may be considered to have voluntarily retired from service of the bank and may be eligible to opt for pension.
Mr. Majumder, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the bank-in-issue submits that the petitioner cannot rely on the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench since the facts of the present case do not tally with the facts in FMA 4412 of 2016. He submits that the circular applicable to the workmen of the bank is not applicable to the officers of the bank. Furthermore, the petitioner has also not rendered qualifying period of service to be eligible for pensionary benefits. Since the petitioner did not complete 30 years of qualifying service or did not cross the age of 55 years, he could not apply for voluntary retirement under UBI (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995 since he was not a pension optee. The request for voluntary retirement was, therefore, turned down by the Deputy General Manager (Personnel) on September 22, 2007.
Considering the submissions of the parties and the materials placed on record, this Court is of the view that justice will be sub-served by directing the Divisional Head, PNB or any other authority delegated 3 by him to file a Report-on-Affidavit explaining why the petitioner's resignation cannot be treated as voluntary retirement, for him to opt for pension under the 2010 Scheme.
Let such Report-on-Affidavit be filed by October 19, 2023.
Exception, if any, by November 28, 2023. Let the matter come up for further consideration under the same heading "For Orders" on December 6, 2023.
All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Hon'ble Court.
(Lapita Banerji, J.)