JUDGMENT :

NEERAJ TIWARI, J.

1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Rai, learned counsel for petitioner and Ms. Vatsala, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 5 (respondent-Bank).

2. By way of present petition, petitioner is challenging the orders dated 13.10.2010 and 11.08.2014 passed by Deputy Regional Manager, Bank of India, Regional Office, Varanasi, by which, petitioner has been denied the pension and leave encashment as well as Para-3 of circular dated 24.08.2010.

3. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that petitioner was appointed on 13.08.1988 as Clerk-cum-Cashier under the respondent-Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘Bank’) at district Bhadohi, which is a nationalized bank and comes within the purview of Article 12 of Constitution of India. Petitioner was posted at different places and lastly, he was posted at district Jaunpur in October, 2001 where disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him. He was issued departmental charge sheet dated 05.01.2002, upon which, Inquiry Officer has submitted inquiry report dated 11.02.2002. The inquiry report was supplied to the petitioner alongwith show cause notice dated 14.06.2002. Petitioner has submitted reply to the show cause notice and ultimately, vide order dated 19.09.2002 passed by the Chief Manager/Disciplinary Authority, petitioner was punished imposing penalty of removal from service in terms of clause 6(b) of Memorandum of Settlement dated 10.04.2002 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Settlement 2002’). Against that order, petitioner has filed an appeal before the Zonal Manager, Varanasi Zone, Varanasi. The appeal so filed by the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 28.03.2003. Aggrieved by the orders dated 19.09.2002 and 28.03.2003, petitioner has filed Writ Petition No. 17841 of 2003 (Sahajanand Rai vs. Bank of India and Others) before this Court, which was also dismissed vide order dated 24.01.2007. Against that order, petitioner has filed Special Appeal No. 251 of 2007 (Sahajanand Rai vs. Bank of India and Others), which was also dismissed vide order dated 09.12.2009. Lastly, petitioner has filed Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 9596 of 2010, which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 09.04.2010 with liberty to the appellant to approach the High Court by way of a review petition. Subsequent thereto, petitioner has filed review petition seeking review of the Division Bench judgment dated 09.12.2009 passed in Special Appeal No. 251 of 2007. The review petition has been dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.07.2010. Against the aforesaid judgment, petitioner has again preferred Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 30627 of 2010, which has also been dismissed vide order dated 15.11.2010. He next submitted that as a consequence of aforesaid litigations, the penalty imposed upon the petitioner by order dated 19.09.2002 has attained finality.

4. He next submitted that vide impugned order, petitioner was removed from service in terms of Clause 6(b) Settlement, 2002, which provides removal from service with superannuation benefits i.e. Pension and/or Provident Fund and Gratuity etc. As petitioner was not paid pension, therefore, he has moved application under Right To Information Act, 2005, which was replied to the petitioner vide communication dated 26.12.2010 that the total amount due to the petitioner under the head of Provident Fund and Gratuity had been adjusted towards loans advanced to the petitioner from the said bank as also from Bank of India Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. He further submitted that on 27.04.2010, a Memorandum of Settlement (hereinafter referred to as ‘Settlement 2010’) has been arrived between the Indian Banks Association and the Workmen Association with regard to introducing Pension Scheme in the banking industry as a second retiral benefit in lieu of Contributory Provident Fund. Under the Settlement, 2010, an option was made available for opting for the