The termination order invoking clause 41(a) of the Nedungadi Bank Officers' Service Rules was found to be arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The rejection of the employee's application for voluntary retirement was justified due to failure to complete the requisite qualifying service of 20 years.

Ashok Bhushan, J.

These two Writ Appeals have been filed against the same judgment dated 2.3.2013 in O.P.No.39132 of 2002. The parties in these appeals shall be described as referred to in the Original Petition. Both the parties being aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Single Judge, have come up in these two Writ Appeals. Brief facts which emerged from the pleadings of the parties are:

2. The petitioner entered into the service of the first respondent Nedungadi Bank as a clerk on 17.5.1982. The petitioner was promoted as officer in the year 1999. The petitioner was on leave on loss of pay from 18.4.2000 till 29.3.2001. The petitioner went on maternity leave on 16.7.2001. The petitioner did not rejoin duty after the maternity leave and again took leave on loss of pay till 19.1.2002. The petitioner sent leave application dated 20.1.2002. Exhibit P1 communication dated 11.3.2002 was sent to the petitioner by the Bank stating that the Bank is not in a position to grant further extraordinary leave as the petitioner has already been sanctioned 486 days extraordinary leave on medical ground. The petitioner was instructed to report for duty immediately, failing which the Bank will be constrained to take appropriate action. The petitioner was informed that the period of absence will be treated as unauthorised absence. The petitioner, as per Exhibit P2 dated 9.4.2002, again requested for grant of leave to enable to recoup from the ailment. On 9.5.2002 by Exhibit P3 the Bank communicated to the petitioner that extraordinary leave cannot be sanctioned as informed earlier. The petitioner was advised to report for duty, failing which it shall be treated as misconduct and the matter be proceeded accordingly. The petitioner on 17.6.2002 by Exhibit P4 further prayed that she may be granted leave till 31.7.2002 by which date the petitioner is ready to resume duty. On 26.6.2002 by Exhibit P5 a memo was issued by the disciplinary authority informing the petitioner that the Bank infer that the petitioner do not desire to continue her employment in the Bank and she was asked to explain as to why her absence should not be construed as deserting employment. The petitioner was asked to submit explanation within 15 days. After receipt of Exhibit P5 memo, the petitioner wrote to the Deputy General Manager on 6.7.2002 informing that she hopes to join duty in the third week of July. Again a request was made for grant of extraordinary leave. On 22.7.2002 the petitioner sent another letter informing that due to certain problems she was forced to apply for voluntary retirement from service and she requested to permit her to retire under the voluntary retirement scheme, so that she could get eligible pension and other retirement benefits. The petitioner again informed the Bank as per Exhibit P8 letter that her request for voluntary retirement be considered. She also informed that she was at Doha, Qatar. The Bank, by Exhibit P9 letter dated 18.9.2002 informed that the petitioner having not attained the requisite qualifying service for opting for voluntary retirement, under the pension regulations her request cannot be considered. The Bank by letter dated 7.11.2002, exercising power given under Clause 41(a) of the Nedungadi Bank Ltd. Officers' Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), terminated the services of the petitioner providing that the petitioner may collect the three months pay in lieu of notice from the Senior Manager, Palakkad main branch. The petitioner, after coming to know about the termination order, submitted an application to review the order dated 7.11.2002 and permit her to rejoin duty. The petitioner thereafter filed O.P.No.39132 of 2002 praying for the following reliefs:

"i) To issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records leading to Exhibits P9 and P10 and quash the same.

ii) To issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent to pass appropriate orders posting this pe