KRISHNA MURTHY K G Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was working in the second respondent-Canara Bank and retired on september 30, 1987. At that time there was no pension scheme in the bank. The pension scheme known as the Canara Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as "the Regulations" or "the Pension Scheme"), was introduced in the year 1995 and it came into force with effect from September 29, 1995 (notified date), the date on which it was published in the Official gazette. The relevant portions of clause III of the regulations relating to their application and eligibility, which are necessary for the disposal of this writ petition, are extracted hereunder:

(2.) THE last date for exercising the option under sub-clause (2) of clause IV was January 26, 1996, and since it was a national holiday, , option letters have been accepted till January 25, 1996. But, the petitioner did not submit the option letter within the stipulated period referred to above. The reason furnished by him is that he was not aware of the introduction of the pension scheme. It is further asserted that the petitioner made a representation on december 1, 1998 to consider his case for grant of pension under the above Regulations. The bank declined to accept the option letter of the petitioner, vide its letter at Annexure D, dated december 15, 1998, on the ground that he had not exercised the option within the stipulated period under the Regulations. Thereafter, several representations have been made in that regard to the respondents, the copies of which are produced along with the writ petition for perusal of this Court.

(3.) THE Government of India issued a circular dated April 28, 1999, authorising the banks to consider the cases of belated option letters at their end and on being satisfied, to refer such cases to the Government. However, the second respondent-bank refused the case of the petitioner by its letter at annexure MMM, dated December 1, 2000. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash annexure MMM and to strike down Regulation III (b) of the Regulations and to direct the respondents to grant the pensionary benefits.