IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11.6.2009 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO W.A.No.3895 of 2003 and W.P.Nos.6751, 11127 & 22378 of 2001, 2413 & 2414 of 2004 1. Indian Bank rep. by its Chairperson and Managing Director 66, Rajaji Salai Chennai 600 001. 2. The General Manager (P&HR) Indian Bank, Head Office 66, Rajaji Salai Chennai 600 001. .. Petitioners in WA.3895/03 3. Indian Bank Voluntary Retiree's Welfare Association (Registered) Rep.by its President N.S.Rajan Old No.10 New No.19, Second Street Postal Colony, West Mambalam, Chennai-33 ...Petitioner in W.P.6751/01 S.S.Vasan .. Petitioner in W.P.11127/01 Punjab National Bank Retired Employees Association (Reg. No.18/01) Rep.by its Secretary, Flat No.14,Raja Apartments, Door No.15, Balakrishna Naicken Street, West Mamabalam, Chennai 600 033. .. Petitioner in W.P.22378/01 N.Srininvasan N.Sampath K.Srinivasan M.Ramasastrulu P.Padmanabhan P.K.Shantharam Mrs.Suseela Venkataraman V.K.Venugopal Mallikarjuna Rao .. Petitioners in W.P.2413/04 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ S.Krishnamoorthy V.R.Balasubramanian .. Petitioner in W.P.2414/04 Vs. 1. K.Radhakrishnan 2. Indian Bank Retiree's Association rep. by its General Secretary 110, Sunny Palace Himayat Nagar, Hyderabad 29. 3. All India Indian Bank Retirees' Association rep. by its General Secretary No.25, Second Line Beach Chennai 600 001. .. Respondents in WA.3895/03 (R2 & R3 are impleaded vide order dated 11.6.2009 in WAMP Nos.2599 of 2004 & 1741 of 2005 respectively) Union of India rep.by its Secretary (Banking Ministry of Finance, New Delhi. Indian Banks Association Rep.by its Secretary Stadium House, 6th Floor, Block 3 Veer Nariman Road,Mumbai 400 020. The Management of India Bank Rep.by its Chairman & Managing Director Central Office Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001 .. Respondents in W.P.6751/01 Punjab National Bank rep.by its Chairman & Managing Director Head Office. 7,Bhikhaiji Cama Place New Delhi-110 066. The General Manager(Personnel) Punjab National Bank Head Office 7,Bhikhaiji Cama Place New Delhi-110 066. The Zonal Manager Punjab National Bank Zonal Office: 160, Greams Road,Chennai 600 006 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ The Senior Regional Manager Punjab National Bank Regional Office 160, Greams Road,Chennai 600 006 ...Respondents 1 to 4 in W.P.11127/01 & W.P.22378/01 The Deputy General Manager(Personnel) Punjab National Bank, No.7, Bhikhaiji Cama Place New Delhi -110 066 ..Respondent 5 in W.P.22378/01 Indian Overseas Bank Rep.by The Chairman & Manging Director Indian Overseas Bank, Central Office, 762, Anna Salai,Chennai 600 002. The Competent Authority for Pension Regulations (General Manager) Indian Overseas Bank Central Office, 762, Anna Salai,Chennai 600 002. ...Respondents in W.P.2413/04 & 2414/04 Appeal against the order dated 6.10.2003 made in W.P.No.11383 of 2001 on the file of this Court. The follows writ petitions filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India. WP.11383/01: praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay monthly pension to the petitioner in accordance with Regulation 29 of the Indian bank Employees Pension Regulations 1995 at the rate which is on par with the rate of pension payable to the employees of the respondents who retire under normal VRS. WP.6751/01: Praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to pay pension commutation and other benefits to the employees retired under the Indian Bank Employees Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2000 by extending the benefit under Regulation 29 (5) of the Indian Bank (Employees)Pension Regulations 1995. WP.11127/01: Praying to issue a writ of declaration that the action of the respondents in denying to the petitioner the benefit of Regulation 29(5) of the PNB(Employees)Pension Regulation 1995, non payment of interest on belated payment of Gratuity and denial of the benefit of leave fare concession are all illegal,discriminatory, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India so far as petitioner concerned and consequently direct the respondents to extend all the benefits under Regulation 29(5) of PNB (Employees) Pension Regulation 1995 read with PNB Employees Voluntary https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Retirement Scheme 2000 dated.29.9.2000 based on which VRS application was made and accepted,grant the benefit of LFC to the petitioner,pay gratuity together with interest for the belated payment. WP.No.22378/01: Praying to issue a writ of declaration that the action of the 5th respondent in issuing a circular No.1765 dt.19.12.2000 thereby denying to the members of the petitioner whose names are given in the typed set of papers the benefit of Regulation 29(5) of the PNB(Employees)Pension Regulations 1995, denial of the benefit of Leave Fare Concession are all illegal, discriminatory, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the respondents to extend all the benefits under Regulation 29(5) of PNB (Employees)Pension Regulations 1995 read with PNB Employees Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2000 dated.29.9.2000 based on which VRS application was made and accepted and grant the benefit of LFC to eligible members of the petitioner's association. WP.No.2413 & 2414/04: Praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to pay the petitioners revised amount of Basic Pension and the consequent difference in the amount of commutation of Pension resulting from the increase in qualifying service as laid down in sub regulation(5) of Regulation 29 of Indian Overseas Bank (Employees')Pension Regulations 1995, with interest at a rate to be determined by this Court. For Appellants : Mr.M.Vijayan For M/s. King & Patridge For Respondents : Mr.R.Viduthalai, S.C. For Mr.M.Rangarajulu & Mr.L.N.Pragasam W.P.No.6751/09: For Petitioner : Mr.R.Viduthalai, SC for Mr.M.Ramamoorthy For Respondents : Mr.M.Vijayan for M/s.King & Partridge for R2 & R3 Mr.D.Sreenivasan, SC, GSC for R1 W.P.No.11127/07 & W.P.NO.22378/01: For Petitioner : Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar for M/s.Row & Reddy For Respondents : Mr.S.Jayaraman https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ W.P.NO.2413 & 2414/04: For Petitioners : Mr.C.R.Chandrasekaran For Respondents : M/s.Rita Chandrasekaran for R1 & R2 J U D G M E N T (Delivered by S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA,J.) In all these cases, since common question of law is involved and covered by a decision of the Supreme Court, they have been heard together and disposed of by this common order. 2. The writ petitions have been filed by association of employees of different nationalised banks (Indian Bank, Punjab National Bank, Indian Overseas Bank) and individuals. Those employees of nationalised banks, who opted for voluntary retirement under Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2000 (hereinafter referred to as "VRS 2000"), having denied the benefit of Regulation 29(5) of the Punjab National Bank (Employees) Pension Regulation, 1995 or equivalent regulation, preferred these writ petitions with almost similar prayer to get the entire benefit of such Regulation. 3. Regulation 29 of PNB (Employees) Pension Regulation Scheme, 1995 relates to pension on voluntary retirement. Under Regulation 29 (5), the qualifying service of an employee retiring voluntarily shall be increased by a period not exceeding five years, subject to the condition that the total qualifying service rendered by such employee shall not, in any case, exceed thirty three years and it does not take him beyond the date of superannuation. Similar Regulation has been framed by other Banks. Therefore, in normal course, an employee, who is entitled to get pension on voluntary retirement, is entitled under Regulation 29(5) to get advantage of further period of five years in total, subject to the condition that the total qualifying service rendered does not exceed 33 years. 4. Pursuant to VRS 2000, a number of employees, including members of the petitioner-Association, applied for voluntary retirement and were granted benefit under that Scheme. However, they were denied the benefit of Regulation 29(5) or equivalent Regulation and thereby, those who had less than 33 years of qualifying service, five years period or maximum upto five years had not been counted in their service. 5. A number of writ petitions were filed before this Court and other High Courts by the employees of different nationalised Banks against their respective Bank for granting the benefit of additional five years of service under Regulation 29(5). This was opposed by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ all the Banks on the ground that Regulation 29 is applicable for those who obtain voluntary retirement under Regulation and not applicable to those who have sought for voluntary retirement under VRS 2000. Different High Courts passed contrary decisions. In certain cases, some of the High Courts, while held that those who obtain voluntary retirement under VRS 2000 are entitled to the benefit under Regulation 29(5) or equivalent Regulation, some other High Courts opined that such employees are not entitled to get the benefit under Regulation 29(5) or equivalent Regulation. 6. Against those judgments, when different Banks and individuals moved before the Supreme Court, all the cases were heard together. In Bank of India v. K.Mohandas [2009 (2) CTC 759], having noticed the rival contentions, the Supreme Court observed and held as follows: "We hold, as it must be, that the employees who had completed 20 years of service and were pension optees and offered voluntary retirement under VRS-2000 and whose offers were accepted by the Banks are entitled to addition of five years of notional service in calculating the length of service for the purposes of that Scheme as per Regulation 29(5) of the Pension Regulations, 1995. The contrary view expressed by some of the High Courts do not lay down the correct legal position." 7. The other question fell for consideration was whether the concerned employees were entitled to interest on unpaid pension. Having heard the parties, the question was decided in negative against the employees, as evident from paragraph 55 and quoted hereunder: "Although it has been held by us that the subject employees are entitled to the weightage in terms of Regulation 29(5) of Pension Regulations, 1995, but we are satisfied that any award of interest on unpaid pension would not be in the interest of justice. It is so because different High Courts did not have unanimous judicial opinion on the issue. Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Division bench of the Kerala High Court upheld the contention of the employees with regard to the applicability of Regulation 29(5) to the optees who had completed 20 years of service while the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court and a single Judge of the Kerala High Court took exactly an opposite view. The stance of the Banks, although found not meritorious, cannot be said to be totally frivolous. We, accordingly, hold that the subject employees are not entitled to interest on unpaid pension." https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 8. So far as the present case of the petitioners is concerned, the question involved is being covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the Bank of India case (supra) and the same is also accepted by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union and different Banks. 9. In the facts and circumstances, while we hold that the members of petitioners and other employees, who have opted voluntary retirement pursuant to VRS 2000 from any of the respondent Bank and have completed 20 years of service and who are pension optees, are entitled to addition of five years of notional service in calculating the length of service for the purpose of the Scheme as per Regulation 29(5) of the Pension Regulation, 1995 or equivalent Regulation, subject to the condition that the total qualifying service rendered by such employee shall not, in any case, exceed thirty three years and it does not take him beyond the date of superannuation. 10. The respective Bank shall re-calculate within one month the pension payable to the concerned employees, including those who are members of the petitioner Association, members of the intervener association and other equivalent employees who obtained voluntary retirement under VRS 2000, and pay the benefits as per the aforesaid finding, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. The employees shall not be entitled to interest on unpaid pension. However, if the amount is not paid within the aforesaid period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, then, in such case, the employees can claim interest and the Bank shall pay such dues with interest at the rate of 8% from the date of this judgment till the amount is paid. The writ petitions are allowed. The writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, WAMP No.6350 of 2003 is dismissed and WPMP No.10469 of 2004 is closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar / True Copy / Sub.Asst Registrar kpl To. 1. The Chairperson and Managing Director, Indian Bank, 66, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The General Manager (P&HR) Indian Bank, Head Office 66, Rajaji Salai, Chennai 600 001. 3. The Secretary,(Banking Ministry of Finance) Union of India,New Delhi. 4. The Chairman & Managing Director, Punjab National Bank, Head Office, 7,Bhikhaiji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066. 5. The General Manager(Personnel) Punjab National Bank, Head Office, 7,Bhikhaiji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110 066. 6. The Zonal Manager, Punjab National Bank, 160,Greams Road, Chennai-6. 7. The Senior Regional Manager, Punjab National Bank, 160,Greams Road, Chennai-6. 8. The Deputy General Manager(Personnel) Punjab National Bank, No.7,Bhikhaiji Cama Place, New Delhi- 110 066. 9. The Chairman & Managing Director, Indian Overseas Bank, Central Office. 762,Anna Salai, Chennai-2. 10.The General Manager, The Competent Authority for Pension Regulations Indian Overseas Bank, Central Office. 762,Anna Salai, Chennai-2. + 2 cc to Mr.C.R.Chandrasekaran,Advocate,SR.22114,22115 + 1 cc to M/s.Row & Reddy,Advocate,SR.22498 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ + 2 cc to Mr.S.Jayaraman,Advocate,SR.22475,22476 + 2 cc to M/s.King & Patridge,Advocate,SR.22720,22721 + 1 cc to Mr.M.Ramamoorthi,Advocate,SR.22129 + 3 cc to Mr.M.Rangarajulu,Advocate,SR.22195 W.A.No.3895 of 2003 and W.P. Nos.6751, 11127 & 22378 of 2001, 2413 & 2414 of 2004. RSI(CO) EM/PMK/14.7.09 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/