MANAGING DIRECTOR AND EXECUTIVE OFFICER ICICI BANK LTD Vs. ADDITIONAL SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE AND COMPANY AFFAIRS NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitions were preferred by the contesting respondents for direction on the appellant, ICICI Bank (hereinafter referred to as the 'Bank') to pay pension according to the Pension Scheme in view of Rule 2 (ze), 2 (zea), 35 (i) and 35 (ii) of the Bank of Madura Employees Pension Regulations, 1995. THE writ petition was opposed by the appellant-Bank, apart from merit, on the ground of its maintainability against private bank. On similar question, against the same Bank, an unreported judgment in W.A. No,2245/02 dated 4th Jan., 2008, was referred, but learned single Judge having ignored the said judgment and having allowed the writ petitions, the present appeals have been preferred by the Bank.

(2.) THE contesting respondents/writ petitioners were employees in the Bank of Madura (hereinafter referred to as 'Madura Bank') and served for more than twenty years in various branches of the Madura Bank. THE said Madura Bank framed the Pension scheme in question on 8th Sept., 1994. THE respondent petitioners sought for voluntary retirement and after their retirement, the Madura Bank merged with ICICI Bank on 10th March, 2001. THE erstwhile employees of Madura Bank, who opted for pension under the scheme were paid pension, but the contesting respondents/writ petitioners having not opted for pension under the scheme, they were not provided with pension. THEy were provided with contributory provident fund.

(3.) IN the aforesaid background, it was contended on behalf of the appellant-Bank that even on merit the respondents/writ petitioners were not entitled for pension and learned senior counsel for the contesting respondents did not dispute the facts and provisions of law as noticed above.