Employees who opt for voluntary retirement under a scheme are bound by the terms of the scheme, which may exclude certain pension benefits.

1. This Writ Appeal has been filed by the Officers of the State Bank of Travancore (for short, “the Bank”) who after accepting the voluntary retirement scheme under the State Bank of Travancore Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2001 (for short, “the 2001 Scheme”) raised a claim for addition of a period of five years in their length of service for the retrial benefits relying on Regulation 29(5) of the State Bank of Travancore (Employees' Pension) Regulations, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'Regulation, 1995').

2. Writ Petition filed by the appellants seeking the above benefit was dismissed by the learned Single Judge by his judgment / order dated 25/02/2014 in OP No. 30036 of 2002 against which this Writ Appeal has been filed.

3. Brief facts of the case are: The appellants were working as Officers holding different posts in the Bank at the time when the Bank floated the 2001 Scheme. The Scheme was opened to all permanent employees of the Bank who have put in 15 years of service or completed 40 years of age as on 31/01/2001. The 2001 Scheme enumerated various benefits including ex gratia payment and other benefits as detailed in the 2001 Scheme. The proforma application form was also part of the 2001 Scheme under which employees were required to submit their application seeking voluntary retirement. All the appellants applied for voluntary retirement under the 2001 Scheme which was accepted by the Bank. Consequently, they were relieved with effect from 31/03/2001. A notice was given by the appellants on 25/02/2002 claiming adding of 5 years to the pensionary service relying on Regulation 29(5) of the Regulations. The Bank vide its letter dated 28/02/2002 communicated that the appellants having been retired under the 2001 Scheme, they are not eligible to the benefit under Regulation 29(5). Original Petition No. 30062 of 2002 was filed by the appellants along with 33 other Writ Petitioners. The appellants in the Writ Petition prayed for the following reliefs:
(i) call for the records leading to the issuance of Exts. P3, P4 and similar reliefs given by the respondents and issue a writ of certiorari quashing the same.
(ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order of direction declaring that Clause 7(III) of Ext. P1 is ultra vires the State Bank of Travancore (Employees”) Pension Regulations, 1995 insofar as it states that “the benefit of increased qualifying service as provided under Regulation 29(5) of State Bank of Travancore Pension Regulations of 1995 will not be applicable to those who seek voluntary retirement under this Scheme”.
(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to extend the benefit of Regulation 29(5) of the State Bank of Travancore (Employees') Pension Regulations of 1995 and thereby permit the petitioners except petitioners 3, 20, 26, 27, 32, 38, 43, 45 and 48 to increase the qualifying service by a period not exceeding five years subject to the condition that the total qualifying service rendered does not in any case exceed thirty three years and it does not take the petitioners beyond the date of superannuation and direct the respondents to disburse the same with retrospective effect from the date of voluntary retirement.
(iv) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that the petitioners are entitled to be paid pension and other pensionary benefits including commuted value of pension b