CHIEF MANAGER, ALLAHABAD BANK Vs. SWARNLATA NARAYAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question that arises for consideration in this Letters Patent appeal is whether or not the expression "employees who retired" used in sub clause 7 of clause 3(the applicability clause) of the Allahabad Bank (Employees ') Pension Regulations, 1995 also includes such employees who took voluntary retirement prior to the first day of November, 1993. The answer to 4/1/2013 Page 214 Chief Manager, Allahabad Bank, Patna Versus Smt.Swarnlata Narayan the question, as it would be seen later in this judgment, hinges on the meaning assigned to the word 'retired ' in the Pension Regulations, 1995.

(2.) A learned Judge of this court, sitting singly, answered the question in the affirmative and accordingly allowed the writ petition filed by the sole respondent, set aside the decision of the Bank, the appellant, holding that she was not entitled to pensionary benefits and directed the Bank to extend to her the benefits of the scheme under the Pension Regulations, 1995.

(3.) IN the year 1990 when the husband of the writ petitioner took voluntary retirement from the service of the bank the Pension Regulations, 1995 were yet to come into existence and at that time the grant of voluntary retirement and payment of terminal benefits were governed by the provisions of the Allahabad Bank Officers ' Service Regulation, 1979. The husband of the writ petitioner was granted voluntary retirement under clause 19(1) of the Service Regulations, 1979 and on his retirement he was entitled to receive Provident Fund (under clause 45) and gratuity under clause 46 of the Service Regulations, 1979. In the Service Regulations, 1979 there was no provision for payment of pension.