IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH WRIT APPEAL NO. 1272 OF 2024 (S-R)

BETWEEN:

1. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK A BODY CONSTITUTED UNDER THE BANKING COMPANIES (ACQUISITION AND TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS) ACT 1970 CIRCLE OFFICE,HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, NO.26-27, RAHEJA TOWERS, M G ROAD, BANGALORE 560001 REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER …APPELLANT D igitally signed by (BY SRI. KAVEESH SHARMA.M, ADVOCATE FOR VASANTHA SRI. PRADEEP S SAWKAR, ADVOCATE)

KUMARY B K Location: AND:

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA 1. P PRAKASH RAO S/O LATE P MALLAIAH SHETTY AGED ABOUT 69 YEARS, RETIRED ON VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT AS CHIEF MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ANANDANAGAR BRANCH, BANGALORE 560024 AND RESIDING AT NO.6, MARUTHI LAYOUT, 4^TH CROSS DASARAHALLI MAIN ROAD KEMPAPURA HEBBAL, BANGALORE 560024 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. P.S.RAJAGOPAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SMT. ASHWINI RAJAGOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1)

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 23/11/2023 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN WP NO.35819/2011 BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL AND CONSEQUENTLY DISMISS THE WRIT PETITION IN WP NO.35819/2011 WITH COSTS.

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

The present intra Court appeal has been filed impugning the judgment and order dated 23.11.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.35819/2011.

2. The parties are referred to as per their ranking before the writ Court, for the sake of convenience.

3. The learned Single Judge has set aside the order dated 02.09.2011 declining the request of the petitioner for voluntary retirement on expiry of three month w.e.f 04.06.2011. The learned Single Judge has also directed the respondent-Bank to grant all pensionary and all other consequential benefits to the petitioner with interest at 6% p.a.

within a period of two months from the date of the judgment.

4. The learned Single Judge while interpreting the relevant regulations i.e., the Punjab National Bank (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995, (for short, "the Pension Regulations") particularly Regulation No.29 has held that the decision on the application for voluntary retirement must be taken before the three-month period expires. In the present case, if the bank did not pass the order within three months from the date of the notice, there would be deemed acceptance of the voluntary resignation submitted by the petitioner. It has been further held that the General Manager (HR) would be the competent authority to accept the request for voluntary retirement. However, the order rejecting the application of the petitioner for voluntary retirement has been issued by the Chief General Manager and the Circle Head. The Chief General Manager and the Circle Head would not be competent authority for accepting the application for voluntary retirement of the petitioner who was working as a Chief Manager.

5. Except for these two grounds on which the writ petition has been allowed, we do not discern any other ground taken by the learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition.

6. The facts are not much in dispute in the present case. The petitioner was working as a Chief Manager of Punjab National Bank, Anand Nagar Branch, Bengaluru. He has submitted an application under Regulation-29 of the Pension Regulations for relieving him from service (voluntary retirement) after expiry of three months' w.e.f 04.06.2011.

The relevant part of the application reads as under "I am exercising the option for voluntary retirement under Regulation-29 of the PNB Employees' Pension Regulations, 1995. My notice be treated with effect from 04.06.2011 and I may be relieved after expiry of three months."

7. The Regulation-29 of the Pension Regulati