ADITI GAUR Vs. GENERAL MANAGER UCO BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a 70 years old woman, who was working as a Grade II officer in the respondent no.1/bank, and had taken voluntary retirement from the same on 30/10/1998, has approached this Court being aggrieved by the Bank's refusal to extend pensionary benefits to her.

(2.) The petitioner joined the respondent/bank as a probationary officer in 1977 and left the services on 30/10/1998 after taking voluntary retirement, which was duly accepted on 26/10/1998. While she was in service, the respondent, on 29/9/1995, issued a circular which gave an option to the employees to opt for pension scheme as promulgated by the bank. This option was accepted by about 48% of bank's employees but the petitioner, like many others, did not opt for pension and consequently, upon her voluntary retirement, she was not entitled to any pension under this scheme. Citation No.2022/DHC/005130

(3.) On 20/8/2010, many years after the petitioner had retired, based on an industry settlement arrived at between the employees' unions and the Indian Banks Association, the respondents issued another circular giving another opportunity to the employees and their families, who were in service at any time before 29/9/1995, to opt for pension. This offer was also open to employees who had retired under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2000.