-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2953 OF 2003 Ratnaji S. Desai and others ... Petitioners versus The Punjab National Bank and others ... Respondents Mr. S.M. Dharap, instructed by Smt. Anjali N. Helekar, for the petitioners. Ms. Pallavi Dedhia, instructed by M/s. Sanjay Udeshi & Company, for the respondents. CORAM: P.B. MAJMUDAR & R.M. SAVANT, JJ. DATE: JULY 08, 2009. P.C. This petition is filed by a group of 26 employees of the Punjab National Bank in their individual capacity and petitioner No. 27, a Union of retired employees. The main grievance of the petitioners is that even though they have completed the qualifying service of more than 20 years, the benefit of Regulation 29 (5) of the Punjab National Bank (Employees) Pension Regulation, 1995 have not been extended to the employees on the ground that they having accepted the voluntary retirement, they are not entitled to the said benefit. Learned counsel for the petitioners have placed reliance of the Supreme Court in the case of Bank of India and another vs. K. Mohandas & Ors. [2009 (4) Scale 576]. -2- 2. In our view, it is not in dispute that petitioner Nos. 1 to 26 have completed 20 years of service at the relevant time when they opted for voluntary retirement. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court, the employees who had completed 20 years of qualifying service and were pension optees and offered voluntary retirement under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme and whose offers were accepted by the Bank 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. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that some Banks have filed review petitions before the Supreme Court against the decision of Bank of India (supra). However, we make it clear that in case the aforesaid judgment is reviewed by the Supreme Court,naturally the employees may not get the benefit. However, as the law stands as on today in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Bank of India (supra), petitioner Nos. 1 to 26 are entitled to get the said benefit. We order accordingly. 4. It is clarified that this order shall be confined to the concerned petitioners i.e. Petitioner Nos. 1 to 26 and not petitioner No. 27. 5. The concerned petitioners are entitled to the benefit of five years under Regulation 29 (5) of the Regulations, 1995. Whatever benefits -3- the petitioners are entitled to, the same shall be paid to them within three months from today. However, the petitioners shall not be entitled to interest on such amount. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. P. B. MAJMUDAR, J. R.M. SAVANT, J. -4-