SURESH SHUKLA Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) Petitioner wants quashing of the letter dated 20.12.2007, which has been communicated by the Assistant General Manager (PPG), State Bank of India, which is contained in Annexure-4. By virtue of this communication the petitioner has been told that in terms of the State Bank of India Pension Regulation Clause 22(i)(a) and 22(i)(d) only such employees can be granted pension who have completed 20 years of pensionable service and have completed 50 years of age or 10 years of pensionable service with 58 years of age. The petitioner's case was not found within the parameters of the Rule/Regulation, therefore, he has been denied the benefit of pension.

(3.) Petitioner was removed from service on 7.6.2000 after holding a departmental enquiry. Initial order came to be challenged before the High Court but the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ application holding that the writ was devoid of merit. However, in the said decision contained in Annexure-1 there is something to indicate that the petitioner was not to be disentitled the benefit of past service. An appeal was filed against the said decision of the learned Single Judge which was also dismissed, affirming the order of the learned Single Judge.