STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. NAVIN KUMAR SINHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant Bank and learned counsel for the writ petitioner respondent No.1.

(2.) The appellant Bank is aggrieved by the impugned Judgment dated 6.9.2016, passed by the Writ Court in W.P.(S) No.3446 of 2014, whereby the writ application filed by the respondent writ petitioner, challenging the punishment order dated 7.3.2012 of his dismissal from service of the appellant Bank, which was upheld up to the Reviewing Authority, has been allowed, setting aside the orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority, Appellate Authority and the Reviewing Authority.

(3.) Sans unnecessary details, the necessary facts of this case are that the writ petitioner initially entered in the service of the State Bank of India on 8.6.1973 as a Clerk Typist. He was given due promotions from time to time, and on completion of 30 years of service, he was made to superannuate in the year 2003, as per the State Bank of India Officers' (Determination of Terms and Conditions of Service) Order, 1979. Vide order dated 5.08.2003 issued by the competent authority, the writ petitioner was given the extension of service from 27.12.2003 to 1.10.2010, subject to the usual terms and conditions. It is the case of the appellant Bank that according to the applicable service rules, i.e. the State Bank of India Officers' Service Rules, 1992, as amended from time to time, the age of superannuation of the officers of the Bank was extended to 60 years, which admittedly the writ petitioner was going to complete on 30.10.2012, and according to the learned counsel for appellant Bank, the writ petitioner continued in service of the Bank, even after 1.10.2010, till the termination of his service on 7.3.2012.