Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Narendra Kumar, joined Syndicate Bank as a Law Officer in 1979. He went on deputation to the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) as Secretary/Registrar from 1996 onwards, with extensions. In 2005, he applied for the post of Presiding Officer at DRT, Lucknow, after obtaining a No Objection Certificate from the bank. He was selected and appointed by the Ministry of Finance on 20.1.2006, with a copy to the bank. He was relieved from DRAT on 27.1.2006 and joined the new post on 30.1.2006 without reporting back to the bank. The bank, after a gap of almost eleven months, wrote to him on 15.12.2006 stating that his joining without consent was unauthorized and directed him to seek retirement. The appellant eventually resigned, and the bank accepted his voluntary retirement on 10.3.2008 but denied pensionary benefits, citing Clause 22(2) of the Syndicate Bank Employees Pension Regulations, 1995 (interruption in service) and Clause 29 (failure to give notice). The appellant filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court, which was dismissed on 31.3.2017. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, holding that the bank's actions were unjustified. The Court noted that the bank had issued a No Objection Certificate and was aware of the appointment; the appellant's joining the new post without reporting back did not constitute an interruption in service or willful abandonment. The Court set aside the impugned orders and directed the bank to grant pensionary benefits to the appellant within three months.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pension - Forfeiture of Service - Clause 22(2) of Syndicate Bank Employees Pension Regulations, 1995 - Interruption in service entails forfeiture of past service - The appellant, a bank employee on deputation, obtained No Objection Certificate from the bank, applied for and was selected as Presiding Officer of DRT, and joined the new post after being relieved from deputation without reporting back to the bank - The bank treated this as willful abandonment and denied pension - Held that the appellant's actions did not constitute an interruption in service as the bank had issued No Objection Certificate and the appointment was made with proper procedure; the denial of pension was unjustified (Paras 13-15). B) Service Law - Deputation - No Objection Certificate - Effect of No Objection Certificate on subsequent appointment - The bank issued a No Objection Certificate for the appellant's candidature for the post of Presiding Officer, DRT - The appellant was selected and appointed, and the bank was informed - The bank's subsequent claim that the appellant's joining without reporting back was unauthorized was inconsistent with its earlier consent - Held that the bank cannot approbate and reprobate; the No Objection Certificate and the appointment letter sent to the bank indicate consent (Paras 5, 14). C) Service Law - Pension - Willful Abandonment - Clause 29 of Syndicate Bank Employees Pension Regulations, 1995 - Requirement of notice for voluntary retirement - The appellant did not give notice of voluntary retirement before joining the new post - However, the bank later accepted his resignation/voluntary retirement - The period from 28.1.2006 was treated as unauthorized absence - Held that the appellant's conduct did not amount to willful abandonment as he acted in good faith with the bank's knowledge and consent; the denial of pension on this ground was unsustainable (Paras 7, 12, 15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant's failure to report back to the parent bank after being relieved from deputation and directly joining a new post as Presiding Officer of DRT constitutes an interruption in service warranting forfeiture of past service and denial of pensionary benefits under the Syndicate Bank Employees Pension Regulations, 1995
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned orders of the bank and the High Court, and directed the respondent Bank to grant pensionary benefits to the appellant within three months from the date of the judgment.
Law Points
- Forfeiture of past service under Clause 22(2) of Syndicate Bank Employees Pension Regulations
- 1995 requires interruption in service
- joining a new post with No Objection Certificate and without reporting back does not constitute interruption or willful abandonment
- pensionary benefits cannot be denied on such grounds
