RENU SETHIYA Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of Regulation 22 and 31 (1st part) of the Punjab National Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995 (for brevity, 'the Regulations'), alleging discrimination, arbitrariness and being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. A further prayer for release of pensionary benefits of the Petitioner from 27.1.2007 till the date of dismissal on 27.1.2009 along with interest @ 18% per annum have also been prayed.

(2.) It is undisputed that the Petitioner was dismissed from service on 27.1.2007 (P-1) on various allegations, which have been levelled against her vide charge sheet dated 9.5.2006 (Mark 'A'). The order of dismissal dated 27.1.2007 shows that the Petitioner was given show cause notice but she did not avail the opportunities afforded by the Respondent Bank. Accordingly, she was dismissed from service.

(3.) Regulation 22 of the Regulations is subject matter of challenge in the present proceedings along with Regulation 31. The relevant extract of both the Regulations are set out hereunder, which reads thus: