GOPAL PRASAD VARSHNEY Vs. BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Gopal Prasad Varshney was appointed on the post of Clerk in the respondent Bank on 23.01.1965 after giving age relaxation of two and half years in view of his additional qualification and retired from the post of Senior Manager on attaining age of superannuation on 31.07.1995. The pension scheme was introduced in the Banking Industry in November, 1993. The respondent Bank also framed its own employees pension regulation in 1993. The total service of the petitioner with the respondent Bank was 31 years, whereas for 100% pension 33 years service is required and for short of 2 years service, the petitioner wanted to take the benefit of Rule 26(c) of The Bank of Rajasthan Limited (Employees') Pension Rules, 1996 (for short 'the Rules of 1996') as prior to the service with the respondent Bank, the petitioner had served in the Rajasthan State Ware Housing Corporation for the period from 01.08.1959 to 09.01.1965. To this effect, the petitioner submitted his representations and the same were rejected by the respondent Bank as the Pension Rule 26 Second Proviso is not applicable in the case of the petitioner.

(2.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the reply given by the respondent bank vide letters dated 07.10.1996, 04.08.1997 and 06.06.2001, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition seeking writ, order or direction in the following manner:-

(3.) Preliminary objection was raised before the learned Single Judge by the respondent Bank that the respondent-Bank is not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India as held by this Court in the case of Arjun Singh Rajpurohit vs. Bank of Rajasthan & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1536/2002), decided on 11.05.2002, wherein the learned Single Judge was of the view that the Bank of Rajasthan being a private company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, is neither held to be a State, nor any instrumentality of the State.