SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(Raj) 2076

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Veerendr Singh Siradhana, J.
Jaswant Singh Parakh - Appellant
Versus
Bank of Baroda and Ors. - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16826 of 2012.
Decided On : 14-12-2015

Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Sunil Samdaria, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Rupin Kala, Advocate.

Resignation from service does not amount to voluntary retirement unless it is accepted by the appointing authority.

Headnote:

The petitioner, who had served the respondent-Bank since 1945 to 1967 at Ajmer, and declined to continue in the service with the respondent-Bank for he was transferred to Indore as well as in view of all the correspondence with reference to his claim for ex-gratia relief a part of cause of action did arise in the District of Ajmer, and therefore, this Court has the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, who had served the respondent-Bank since 1945 to 1967 at Ajmer, and declined to continue in the service with the respondent-Bank for he was transferred to Indore as well as in view of all the correspondence with reference to his claim for ex-gratia relief a part of cause of action did arise in the District of Ajmer, and therefore, this Court has the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition.

Finding of the Court:

The petitioner, who had served the respondent-Bank since 1945 to 1967 at Ajmer, and declined to continue in the service with the respondent-Bank for he was transferred to Indore as well as in view of all the correspondence with reference to his claim for ex-gratia relief a part of cause of action did arise in the District of Ajmer, and therefore, this Court has the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to receive ex-gratia relief under circular dated 22nd December, 1998; Whether the petitioner's resignation from the service amounts to voluntary retirement; Whether the petitioner is entitled to pensionary benefits under the Bank of Baroda (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to receive ex-gratia relief under circular dated 22nd December, 1998, as he had resigned from the service and was not eligible for pensionary benefits under the Bank of Baroda (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995. The court further held that the petitioner's resignation from the service did not amount to voluntary retirement, as it was not accepted by the appointing authority.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.

JUDGMENT

1. - Aggrieved of the denial by the respondent-Bank of his entitlement to receive ex-gratia relief under circular dated 22nd December, 1998; the petitioner has instituted the present writ petition praying for the following relief(s):-

"(i) To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 7.5.2012.

(ii) To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction holding that petitioner entitled is entitled to receive exgratia relief along with all it's arrears with interest @ 18% p.a.

(iii) To issue an appropriate writ/order/direction directing the respondents to grant all other reliefs to the petitioner which are admissible to retired employees of the Respondent Bank.

(iv) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of petitioner.

(v) Award cost of petition."

2. Briefly, the indispensable skeletal material facts necessary for appreciation of the controversy raised needs to be first noticed. The petitioner on 8th September, 1945 joined the erstwhile Hind Bank Ltd., which later on merged in the Bank of Baroda and his services stood transferred to Bank of Baroda. While working on the post of 'Agent' (Branch Head) at Main Branch Ajmer, the petitioner was transferred to Sitla Mata Bazaar Branch of Bank of Baroda, Indore as 'Accountant' vide order dated 11th September, 1967. In response to his representation for cancellation/reconsideration of his transfer from Ajmer Branch to Sitla Mata Bazaar Branch of Bank of Baroda, Indore; he was informed by the respondent-Bank, vide communication dated 19th October, 1967, to the effect that his request could not be acceded to and was directed to report at the transferred station i.e. Sitla Mata Bazaar Branch of Bank of Baroda, Indore. The petitioner was not desirous to serve at the transferred station at Indore, and therefore, decided to retire from the bank services and submitted his 'resignation' claiming all leaves (privilege and other leaves due prior to retirement) and also requested for grant of terminal benefits including double provident fund vide communication dated 3rd November, 1967. The request for retirement-cum-resignation was accepted by the respondent-Bank vide communication dated 13th November, 1967; with effect from 11th November, 1967.

3. It is pleaded case of the petitioner that prior to his resignation-cum-retirement, he had rendered more than 23 years of unblemished service. The respondent-Bank vide circular dated 26th November, 1998, allowed the ex-gratia relief to all the employees, who retired on or before 31st December, 1985, having rendered at least 20 years of continuous service prior to their superannuation and were not getting any pensionary benefits from the Bank. However, the ex-gratia relief was not made admissible to - (a) those who were dismissed/removed from service and (b) those who 'resigned' from service. Since the petitioner resigned from the service, he was declined the ex-gratia relief of which he is aggrieved of.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Sunil Samdaria, reiterating the pleaded facts and grounds of the writ application, emphatically argued that vide communication dated 26th November, 1998; the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs (Banking Division), advised all the Nationalised Banks for grant of ex-gratia relief to all such employees who had retired from the bank on or before 31st December, 1985; and had rendered 20 years of service before such retirement and who are not getting any pensionary benefit from the Bank. The respondent-Bank pursuant to the communication dated 26th November, 1998; issued a circular on 22nd December, 1998, granting the ex-gratia relief to all pre-1986 retirees, but declined the request of the petitioner on the premise that the petitioner 'resigned' from the services of the Bank, and therefore, he is not entitled to ex-gratia relief as conte



















































































































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top