Back
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, JOYMALYA BAGCHI
Vijay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Central Bank of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Joymalya Bagchi, J.
1. Delay condoned. Leave granted.
2. Appeal is directed against judgment dated 22.04.2024 passed by the Patna High Court to the extent the Court upheld reduction of onethird of the pension payable to the appellant under the Central Bank of India (Employees’) Pension Regulations, 19951[Hereinafter, Pension Regulations.].
3. Appellant while working as Chief Manager, a scale IV officer in the respondent No.1bank was served with a Memorandum of Charge alleging that, during his tenure as Branch Manager, Dhanbad Branch he sanctioned loans in respect of 12 accounts, inter alia, without proper appraisal of income, non verification of KYC compliance, without postsanction inspection etc. exposing the bank to potential financial loss of huge amount.
4. A.K. Roy, Assistant General Manager (a scale V officer) was appointed as the Inquiry Authority (IA). During the inquiry, appellant attained superannuation on 30.11.2014 but the enquiry was continued under Regulation 20(3)(iii) of Central Bank of India (Officers’) Service Regulations, 19792[Hereinafter, Service Regulations]. He submitted inquiry report holding the appellant failed to discharge his duties with utmost
Pension is a constitutional right that cannot be reduced without prior consultation with the Board, as mandated by the relevant regulations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the reduction in pension should be considered by the authority imposing the penalty at the time of imposition, and failure to do so would amou....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
