P.D. NANAIAH AND OTHERS Vs. VIJAYA BANK, A BODY CONSTITUTED UNDER THE BANKING COMPANIES (ACQUISITION AND TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS) ACT, 1980, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these writ petitions arise out of similar factual matrix, and raise identical legal issues. Therefore, they are being decided by this common order.

(2.) The facts of the case are being taken from P. D. Nanaiah and Others v. Vijaya Bank and Others W.P. Nos. 17234-267/2014. Although this case has a checkered history, it is imperative to narrate the same in order to understand the eventual legal issue which would arise in these set of writ petitions, namely in case an employee has completed the qualifying service, whether his/her resignation should be treated as voluntary retirement or not? Whether an employee who has resigned from the service, under different Bank Regulations, would be entitled to receive the benefit of pension, or not?

(3.) The petitioners joined the services of different banks (referred to as the "respondent Bank") between 1969 to 1985 either as officers, or clerks, or sub-staff. During the tenure of their service, dispute arose between the Bank employees and the Management of fifty-eight banks with regard to the introduction of pension scheme as a second retrial benefit in lieu of the Contributory Provident Fund. Eventually on 29.10.1993, a Settlement was reached between the Bank employees and the Managements of the fifty-eight banks. The said Settlement was to come into effect from 01.11.1993. According to Clause 5 of the said Settlement, those employees who have voluntarily retired after a qualifying service of twenty years would be entitled to receive proportionate pension.