Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/16844/2007 4/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16844 of 2007
=========================================================
BABUBHAI
NAGARDAS DAGLI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
ZONAL
MANAGER- PUNJAB NATIONALBANK & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MS
MEGHA JANI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR BD KARIA for Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE
SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 15/10/2008
ORAL ORDER
By
way of the present petition, petitioner has prayed for following
reliefs:-
?S(A)
that the Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a
writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order
or direction commanding the respondents
to
pay arrears of pension with interest at the rate of 12% per annum
from 30.06.1995,
to
continue to pay regular pension to the petitioner; and
to
pay salary to the petitioner from 01.07.1994 to 30.06.1995 with
interest at the rate of 12% per annum
(B) that
pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, the Hon’ble
Court be pleased to direct the respondents to pay pension to the
petitioner
(C) for
costs;
(D) for
such other and further as the circumstances may require.??
It
is the case of the petitioner that petitioner was appointed as
Dafatari with Punjab National Bank on 11.7.1953. On 1.11.1993,
petitioner gone on medical leave upto 30.6.1994. On 1.7.1994, he
resumed duty with medical certificate issued by Resident Medical
Officer, General Hospital, Surendranagar. However, he was not
allowed to join. Petitioner addressed letters to authority with a
request to allow him to join duty. Branch Manager replied him that
decision to that effect was pending with Regional Manager. Again
several correspondences made by the petitioner to take decision at
the earliest. On 30.6.1995 petitioner retired on attaining age of
superannuation. It is also the case of the petitioner that after
retirement he was paid gratuity and provident fund, but is still not
paid pension. He sent notice on 21.3.2007 to respondent authority to
pay him pension. Since, he did not get any reply he approached this
Court by way of filing this petition.
The
learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that it is a matter of
record that the petitioner reported for duties after sick leave.
However, though he was available for duty, he was not allowed to
discharge his duties. Nor the petitioner was paid salary for the
period he was not allowed to be joined on duty though he was willing
to do the work. The petitioner is deprived of pension which is
fundamental right of each employee.
Learned
counsel for the respondent has drawn the attention of the Court to
Para-4(iv) of affidavit-in-reply filed by respondent authority which
reads as under:-
?S4[IV]
The Present Division at Head Office of the Bank at New Delhi, vide
circlar No.1431 dated 27.6.1994 circulated the proposed Punjab
National Bank Employees Pension Scheme, 1993 and options were
called for from the employees. The petitioner exercised his option
on 29.9.1994. A copy of the form exercising the option for pension
by the petitioner, is annexed hereto and marked as ANNEXURE-R-4.
Thereafter, Personnel Division at Head Office of the Bank at New
Delhi, vide circular No.1520 dated 15.11.1995, circulated the
approved pension Scheme ?SPunjab National Bank Employees) Pension
Regulations 1995?? and called for options from the employees. As
per para 3(i)(d) of the said Regulations, the employees were
required to exercise the option in writing within 120 days from
the Notified dates to become member of the fund. As the petitioner
has exercised the option, the Competent Authority has agreed to
sanction pension in terms of provisions of PNB (Employees) Pension
Regulations, 1995.??
Heard
the learned advocates for both the sides. Having gone through the
record more particularly para-4(iv) of affidavit in reply filed by
respondent authority, it transpires that the petitioner has gone for
scheme of ?SPunjab National
Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations 1995 and, therefore, he is
entitled to pay pension as per that scheme only. However, if the
petitioners is not paid pension as above stated scheme, such payment
will be made to the petitioner within eight weeks on receipt of copy
of writ of this order.
In
view of the above, petition is partly allowed as regards question of
unpaid pension to the petitioner. For rest of the issues involved in
the petition, this Court is not entertaining the petition in view of
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in AIR
2007 SC 1330 in case of Shiv
Daas v. Union of India and Ors. since there is delay in
filing the petition.
(K.S.JHAVERI,
J.)
Amit/-
Top