SAPNA ROY Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case involves interpretation of Clause 7 of the bipartite settlement read with Regulation 19 of the Officers' Service Regulations of the respondent bank, existing at the material time. It appears that they were the product of a settlement between the bank and its employees. Under it the officers who retired voluntarily or who resigned, were dismissed, terminated from service or compulsorily retired were not eligible to exercise the pension option. Interpretation of these conditions of service has become necessary because of the following facts.

(2.) The appellant appointed as Hindi Officer of the bank on 2nd January, 1984. On 12th November, 2005 she was transferred to Siliguri.

(3.) She became afflicted with Cervical Spondylosis with multilevel disc degeneration of the lumbar spine. She also developed asthma. A qualified doctor attached to the bank's "staff cardiac clinic", on 6th February, 2007 certified that he agreed with the opinion of the M. R. Bangur, Government Hospital that the appellant was not in a condition to resume her normal duties. This was accepted by the bank which issued a memorandum on 28th April, 2007 acceding to the request of the appellant for premature retirement "due to total incapacity of work". She was paid an exgratia amount of Rs. 8 lakhs. She was relieved of all duties after the office hours of 30th April, 2007. On 27th April, 2010 communicated by a circular dated 27th August, 2010 the respondent bank granted another opportunity to the employees to exercise the option to join the pension scheme. The appellant applied accordingly on 27th October, 2010. The bank informed the appellant by a letter dated 5th July, 2011 that she was not eligible to exercise the option.