Oral Order

1. A coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Birendra Kumar Vs. The Dakshin Bihar Gramin Bank (earlier known as Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank) & Ors., reported in 2020(3) PLJR 480, upon examination of various provisions of Madhya Bihar Gramin Bank (Officers & Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Regulations') has opined that a person having been compulsorily retired by way of punishment before the effective date of the Regulations coming into force (i.e. 2nd November, 2018) shall not be entitled for pension under the provisions of the said Regulations. Paragraphs 11 and 12 of the decision in case of Birendra Kumar (supra) read thus :

"11. The petitioner has been awarded with a major punishment of compulsory retirement dated 19.10.2016 after a full-fledged enquiry proceedings, which till date has not been interfered with by any authority. The said order of punishment compulsorily retired the petitioner much prior to the "effective date" under Regulation 31 of the 2018 Regulations. The expression "effective date" mentioned in Regulation 31 of the 2018 Regulations has been defined in Regulation 2(1) (k) of the 2018 Regulations as being the 1st day of April, 2018 (01.04.2018).

12. It is not the petitioner's case that he has been visited with the compulsory retirement on or after the "effective date". Even, in terms of the 2018 Regulations, which are not applicable to the petitioner, the pension may arguably have been granted only if compulsory retirement by way of punishment was on or after the effective date. Facts are not so in the instant proceedings. The petitioner has been compulsorily retired much before the effective date, i.e., 01.04.2018. The 2018 Regulations are thus not applicable to the petitioner's claim. The petitioner's compulsory retirement is dated 19.10.2016."

2. Before concluding as hereinabove, this Court in case of Birendra Kumar (supra), has discussed various statutory provision under the Regulation, in paragraph 10, as under : -

"10. This Court would consider it useful to reproduce Regulations 2(1)(k), 20 and 31 of the 2018 Regulations. The same read as follows:

"2(1)(k) "effective date" means the 1st day of April, 2018;

20. Forfeiture of Service.-

(1) Resignation not amounting to voluntary retirement or dismissal or removal or termination of an employee from the service of the Bank shall entail for forfeiture of his entire past service and consequently shall not qualify for pension under these regulations.

(2) An interruption in the service of an employee entails forfeiture of his past service, except in the following cases, namely:-

(a) authorized leave of absence;

(b) suspension, where it is immediately followed by reinstatement, whether in the same or a different post, or where the employee dies or is permitted to retire or is retired under the provisions of the Service Regulations while under suspension.

" 31.Compulsory retirement pension-

An employee compulsorily retired from service as a penalty, on or after the effective date, in terms of the Service Regulations, may be granted by the authority higher than the authority competent to impose such penalty, pension at a rate not less than two-thirds and not more than full pension admissible to him on the date of his compulsory retirement, if otherwise he was entitled to such pension on superannuation, on that date: Provided that where the pension awarded under this regulation is less than the full pension admissible under these regulations, the Board of Directors shall be consulted before such order is passed. " (emphasis mine)

The same appears to contemplate grant of pension at the rates specified therein to an employee compulsorily retired from service as a penalty, on or after the "effective date" (01.04.2018). "

3. In a subsequent decision rendered by another coordinate Bench of this Court in case of Shrinath Upadhyay vs. Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Finance & Ors., reported in 2021(1) PLJR 273, the deci