IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.8485 of 2009 Dineshwar Jha, S/o-Late Laliteshwar Jha, resident of Flat No.-404, Ram Ballabh Kunj, CDA Colony, North Shastri Nagar, P.S.-Shastri Nagar, District-Patna. -Petitioner. VERSUS 1. Central Bank of India through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Central Office, Chandramukhi Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai. 2. General Manager, Human Resource Development Department, Central Bank of India, Central Office, Chandramukhi Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai. 3. Zonal Manager, Central Bank of India, Zonal Office, 2nd Floor, Maurya Lok Complex, Patna. 4. Chief Manager, Central Bank of India, Zonal Office, 2nd Floor, Maurya Lok Complex, Patna. 5. Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Koshi Chowk, Saharsa, District-Saharsa. 6. Assistant Manager, Human Resource Development Department, Central Bank of India, Regional Office, Koshi Chowk, Saharsa, District-Saharsa. -Respondents. ----------- 02 23.07.2009 The petitioner was a Senior Branch Manager of Central Bank of India at Mumbai. Towards end of his career he sought transfer to his own State, which was accepted. Coming to home State for the first time after a very long time allegedly upset a lot of Senior Officers. In short span he was transferred from place to place and then forced to work under a junior officer. Rather than facing the humiliation he offered for seeking voluntary retirement. His application is Annexure-8 dated 27.09.2008. The grounds stated for seeking voluntary retirement is personal holding grounds. Bank went at a great length to scrutinize his work for fixing liability and there being no liability accepted. His voluntary retirement was granted and the same was communicated by letter dated 14.02.2009. Petitioner now challenges this order of acceptance of voluntary retirement on the ground that he was compelled 2 by circumstances mala fidely created to offer for voluntary retirement. In my view, that could have been there and this Court could have examined it provided that there was any indication of this in his letter of seeking voluntary retirement, there is none that was an offer which was accepted by the Bank. On acceptance the master servant relationship having been come to an end. The petitioner cannot ask for the same to be recalled. Considering the long service rendered by the petitioner in the Bank and petitioner seeking voluntary retirement, I am sure that the Bank would consider enough providing financial assistance for his medical treatment, which is the ground, on which he has sought voluntary retirement, if it is permissible. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.)