RADHEYA SHYAM MITTAL Vs. UCO BANK AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by denial of pensionary benefits after his voluntary retirement.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for petitioner submits that application to seek voluntary retirement was made somewhere in the year 1995. It was accepted in the year 1998 with retrospective effect. The petitioner had already completed 24 years of service by the aforesaid time. He was thus entitled to the pensionary benefits. The qualifying service is only of 10 years as per UCO Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995 (in short "Regulations, 1995"). The petitioner has been yet denied the benefit on erroneous premises that he was required to complete 20 years of service to become eligible for pensionary benefits. The aforesaid is in violation of Regulation 14 of the Regulations, 1995.

(3.) I have considered the rival submissions made by the parties and perused the record.