Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Devanand s/o Galomal Nichwani, was a computer operator/clerk at Bank of Maharashtra, Jaripatka Branch, Nagpur. He opted for voluntary retirement and was relieved on 12.9.2008, receiving a pension of Rs.13,500 per month. On 26.11.2012, the Bank's Deputy General Manager (Inspection and Audit) informed him of serious charges: between 31.5.2004 and 26.5.2008, he allegedly opened five fictitious accounts and deposited 46 customer cheques, misappropriating Rs.96,43,599. The petitioner replied on 9.12.2012 refuting the allegations. However, the Bank blocked his pension account and ATM card without intimation, stopping pension from August 2012. After a notice dated 17.1.2013 failed to elicit a response, he filed this writ petition seeking restoration of pension and ATM card. During the proceedings, the Bank issued a chargesheet on 20.3.2014. The legal issue was whether the Bank could unilaterally block pension without following disciplinary proceedings or issuing a show cause notice. The petitioner argued that pension is a property right and cannot be withheld without due process. The Bank contended that it had initiated an inquiry and could stop pension pending investigation. The Court analyzed that pension is a valuable right and cannot be withheld arbitrarily. It held that the Bank must follow the prescribed disciplinary procedure before stopping pension. The Court directed the Bank to restore the pension and release arrears from August 2012, subject to the outcome of the disciplinary inquiry. The petition was disposed of with directions to continue the inquiry and release pension.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pension - Withholding of Pension - Bank of Maharashtra Pension Regulations - The petitioner, a retired bank employee, was accused of financial irregularities during service. The Bank blocked his pension without any show cause notice or disciplinary proceedings. The Court held that pension is a property right and cannot be withheld without following due process of law. The Bank was directed to restore the pension and release arrears, subject to the outcome of the disciplinary inquiry. (Paras 1-10) B) Service Law - Disciplinary Inquiry - Pending Inquiry - Bank of Maharashtra Pension Regulations - The Bank issued a chargesheet after the petition was filed. The Court held that the Bank could not stop pension without initiating proper disciplinary proceedings and giving the employee an opportunity of hearing. The Court directed the Bank to continue the inquiry and release pension in the meantime. (Paras 3-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent-Bank could unilaterally block the pension of the petitioner without following any disciplinary proceedings or issuing a show cause notice, pending inquiry into alleged financial irregularities.
Final Decision
The Court allowed the petition and directed the Bank to restore the pension and release arrears from August 2012, subject to the outcome of the disciplinary inquiry. The Bank was also directed to continue the inquiry and complete it expeditiously.
Law Points
- Pension cannot be withheld without following due process
- Right to pension is a property right
- Bank cannot unilaterally stop pension without show cause notice or disciplinary proceedings
