M. S. RAMESH, C. KUMARAPPAN
Union Bank of India, Rep. by its Deputy General Manager (Personnel) Mumbai – Appellant
Versus
Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.S.RAMESH, C.KUMARAPPAN, JJ.
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 09.02.2023 in WP.No.2022 of 2015.
For the sake of convenience, the appellant herein is referred to as 'the Bank', the first respondent as 'the Tribunal' and the second respondent as 'the employee'.
2. The employee, who joined the services of the Bank in the year 1961, had remained unauthorizedly absent from 21.11.1995 onwards. Quoting health reasons, the employee had submitted an application for voluntary retirement on 28.11.1995 under Clause 29 of the Union Bank of India (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'Pension Regulations'). On 13.09.1996, the Bank claims to have communicated to the employee that his request for voluntary retirement cannot be considered and had called upon him to report for work. Thereafter, the Bank had claimed that the employee had abandoned his service, since he had not reported for work continuously, which prompted him to raise an Industrial Dispute in I.D.No.37 of 2013, before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Chennai. ('the Tribunal'). By an Award dated 12.0
Canara Bank & others Vs. Debasis Das & others (2003) 4 SCC 557
Canara Bank Vs. V.K. Awasthy (2005) 6 SCC 321
S.P. Gupta Vs. Union of India AIR 1982 SC 149
P.K. Unni Vs. Nirmala Industries AIR 1990 SC 933
CIT Vs. Tara Agencies (2007) 6 SCC 429
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Narmada Bachao Andolan & another (2011) 7 SCC 639
Failure to communicate refusal of voluntary retirement application within three months results in deemed acceptance, upholding the Tribunal's award for retirement benefits.
(1) Application for voluntary retirement cannot be rejected de hors statutory regulations.(2) after voluntary retirement, there shall not be an employer-employee relationship and subsequent proceedin....
(1) Pension – Entitlement to get pension must be fulfilled by concerned employee.(2) Voluntary abandonment of service is distinct from voluntary retirement.
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....
Employees retiring on medical grounds are entitled to pension options under applicable circulars, provided they have completed the requisite service and did not voluntarily resign.
Voluntary retirement becomes effective if not refused by the authority within the notice period; subsequent disciplinary proceedings against a retiree are invalid.
Resignation under CCS Pension Rules Rule 26 forfeits past service, barring pensionary benefits to employee or family despite service rendered; distinct from voluntary retirement; no retrospective app....
Employees who opt for voluntary retirement under a scheme are bound by the terms of the scheme, which may exclude certain pension benefits.
A government servant must complete 20 years of qualifying service under Rule 48-A of the Pension Rules to be eligible for voluntary retirement, with unauthorized leaves excluded from service calculat....
In a case where the employee concerned does not have the 20 years of qualifying service in terms of Regulation 29(1), there is no question of arising any claim under Regulation 29(5).
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.