ORDER :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. This writ petition is filed to issue an appropriate Writ order or direction more particularly, one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent bank and its authorities effecting deduction of 1/3rd pension from the petitioner’s pension amount as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, contrary to law and contrary to UCO Bank Officer Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations 1976 and UCO Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995 more particularly Regulation 33 of the same and consequently to direct the respondents to forthwith pay full pension to the petitioner without effecting any deductions with effect from the date of his retirement from service including of payment of all arrears and deducted pension with 12 % interest thereupon.

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

a) The petitioner joined in service as clerk on 21.11.1978 in the respondent Bank and promoted as JMG-I on 01.07.1986. The petitioner was promoted to the post of JMGII in the year 2000. While the petitioner was working at Rajahmundry in the cadre of Assistant Manager as Recovery Officer, in the year, 2002, the respondent bank introduced mega cash loans to various customers. As Recovery Officer, the petitioner had no power to sanction loans or capacity to make any decision to process the loan.

b) The petitioner was charged with 8 charges while he was working in the branch at Rajahmundry that he connived with six borrowers for obtaining UCO Mega cash scheme loans for wrongful gain and processed the loans without safeguarding the interests of the bank.

c) The petitioner submitted explanation on 09.09.2003 denying the charges. Inspite of the same, an enquiry was conducted and a report was submitted by the Enquiry Officer on 08.05.2004 imposing punishment of dismissal from service. The petitioner filed objections for the said enquiry proceedings, but the same was not considered.

d) Against the said enquiry report, the petitioner preferred appeal on 22.07.2004 before the 4th respondent. The appellate authority modified the punishment to compulsory retirement from service. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.13052 of 2007 and the same was allowed on 01.08.2008 to reinstate the petitioner with all consequential benefits.

e) Despite the directions in W.P.No.13052 of 2007, the respondents put the petitioner under suspension and conducted enquiry and the enquiry officer mechanically, without proper application of mind held that charges 1, 4, 5, 6 and 7 were proved and passed an order on 04.08.2009 imposing punishment of compulsory retirement.

f) Assailing the same, the petitioner filed W.P.No.20245 of 2009, and the said writ petition was dismissed on 30.01.2013. Against the same, the petitioner preferred W.A.No.1860 of 2013. The said appeal was allowed on 17.11.2014 setting aside the order of punishment dated 04.08.2009. The 4th respondent again passed punishment order dated 30.05.2015 once again holding that all the charges are proved.

g) Questioning the order dated 30.05.2015, the petitioner filed W.P.No.26776 of 2015. Pending the said writ petition, the respondents deducted 1/3rd pension without notice or enquiry. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed.

4. The counter filed by the 4th respondent, in brief, is as follows:

a) As per Regulation 33 of UCO Bank (Employees’) Pension Regulation, 1995 as amended,, the Competent Authority imposed the penalty as hereunder:

“An employee compulsorily retired from service as a penalty on or after 1st day of November, 1993 in terms of UCO Bank Officer Employees (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations, 1976 or awards/settlements may be granted by the authority higher than the authority competent to impose such penalty, pension at a rate not less than two thirds and not more than full pension admissible to him on the date of his compulsory retirement if otherwise he w