Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY
Goutam Chandra Dey @ Goutam Dey – Appellant
Versus
Punjab National Bank – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. disciplinary removal and relief seeking. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments on pension rights and consequences. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. contentions by the parties and decisions made. (Para 15 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 4. ratio on pension denial post removal. (Para 28 , 29 , 31 , 33 , 34) |
| 5. final order on writ petition. (Para 39 , 40 , 41) |
JUDGMENT :
ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY, J.
1. The petitioner through the instant writ petition expressing grievance assailed the disciplinary order dated 27.10.2014, the appellate order dated 25.03.2015 and the reviewing order dated 30.09.2015 whereby he was removed from service of the Punjab National Bank. Consequential relief is sought for grant of retiral benefits, including leave encashment and pension in terms of the Bipartite Settlement and the Bank Employees’ Pension Regulation, 1995.
2. The facts revealed the petitioner was appointed on 10.12.1984 as Manager- cum-Clerk-cum-Cashier in the respondent Bank, a Public Sector Undertaking, which by reason of majority Government shareholding constituted “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. His services were conf
Disciplinary removal does not forfeit pension entitlement due to regulatory amendments; dual punishment is against principles of fairness.
(1) Workman would be entitled to receive terminal benefits for the period of service he had rendered.(2) Punishment – Modified penalty as imposed by Appellate Authority will attain finality if it is ....
Exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India, as far as justiciability of order of penalty is concerned - Order of penalty so confirmed by appellate authority and prayers made in ....
Removal from service does not automatically forfeit pensionary benefits if the employee meets the qualifying service, emphasizing a harmonious interpretation of disciplinary and pension regulations.
The judgment established the distinction between resignation and voluntary retirement, upheld the disqualification of pensionary benefits in case of resignation, and emphasized that the petitioner kn....
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
