IMPORTANT POINT
The resolution's stipulated date for eligibility lacked a rational nexus to the scheme's objective, violating Article 14 and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

ORDER :

Heard Mr. N. Mohan Krishna, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Mr. Rohith Pogula, the Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent.

2. This writ petition is filed to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus to declare the Clause 2 of item 49 of the resolution passed in 49th meeting of the Board of management of the 1st respondent Bank convened on 15.09.2020 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from the same being contrary to the settled law of the land and set aside the same and consequently declare that the petitioners are entitled for the benefit of additional pension/superannuation benefit conferred under Resolution 49 of the 49th meeting of the Board of Management of the Bank with all consequential benefits.

3. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows:

(a) The petitioners are retired from service, on various dates during the year 2015 onwards, in various positions, of the respondent bank and initially, they were employees of Andhra Pradesh State Co-operative Bank Ltd., and subsequently after bifurcation, they became the employees of the 1st respondent from 01.04.2015.

(b) Before bifurcation of the State, erstwhile bank had introduced a scheme called the APCOB Employees Performance Incentive cum Contributory Superannuation Benefit Scheme (EPICSBS). The said scheme had been evolved by way of Memorandum of Understanding dated 11.11.2011. The basic feature of the Memorandum of Understanding is to extend a defined superannuation benefit scheme to all the regular employees in order to provide an incentive to employees and other benefits.

(c) In pursuance of the said memorandum of understanding, a circular vide Ref.HRD/A/F.557, dated 23.11.2011 had been issued to all the staff members of the bank, wherein the monthly pre-defined Superannuation benefit was to be extended to those employees, who are on the rolls of the bank as on 04.11.2011 including the cadre they were holding as on the said date i.e. on 04.11.2011.

(d) Since all the petitioners herein retired after attaining the age of superannuation, and were well within the eligibility criteria and they were getting pension as prescribed in the schedule depending upon the post/designation. However, while extending the benefits on one hand to the cadre of employee on rolls as on 04.11.2011, on the other hand, at the same time negating the same by fixing a date to say that employees who are on rolls as on 01.04.2020 and covered under existing pension scheme is an arbitrary exercise of power on part of the 1st respondent Bank. Thus, the petitioners, who have retired prior to 01.04.2020 are deprived of the benefit of Additional pension benefit in breach of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Hence, this writ petition.

4. The counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, in particular, paras 11 to 15 read as under :

“11. It is submitted that, considering the said report, the Board of Management of the Bank vide Resolution No.49, dated 15.09.2020 and the General Body of the Bank vide Resolution No.8, dt.15.9.2020, resolved to provide additional pension/superannuation benefit to the employees who are already covered under the existing Scheme @ 1.5 (one-and-half) times of the defined pension that would be received by each employee on superannuation as per the existing scheme. It is submitted that, Board of Management and the General Body of the Bank had resolved that the cadre of the employee as on 4.11.2011, the date on which the existing pension/superannuation benefit is frozen, shall be taken for the purpose of extending the additional benefit, irrespective of the present cadre or cadre at the time of retirement. It is further resolved that, the additional pension/superannuation benefit, defined, would be received by employees of var