......our answer to all your banking needs


Follow AllBankingSolutions


    Follow allbanking on Twitter




Rajesh Goyal 


Ads by Google


I have been receiving number of emails requesting us to analysis the latest judgment of Karnataka HC relating to resigned bankers, and its implications for the bankers.  I promised that we will give our views on receipt of the copy of the judgment.   Now we have received the same.


I must admit that I do not have experience of a practicing lawyer, but with my LL.B degree from Delhi University and banking experience, alongwith keen interest in law matters, I feel ashamed that our banking colleagues (in this case Vijay Bank) connive with top management and IBA to deny certain benefits which should have undoubtedly been made available to bankers.   The role of union leaders too is under scanner owing to their silence on these issues and not becoming a party against the banks who are denying such benefits.


The case we are discussing today is a classical example where IBA and top management of banks have scant regard for people who had put their best years of life for the banks.   For the benefits of the affected resignee employees, who have been denied pension benefits, I am giving below the full details of this case in simple words.   We are also uploaded all the three judgments in this case,  so that affected persons can download these and read the full details:-


(a)   Let us first discuss the original writ petition :   Writ Petition by Sri C Narasimhappa and others Vs. Vijaya Bank (WP No 24158-24160/2011 and WP No 24162-24180/2011), the judgement for which was given on 18th April, 2012.  [The copy of the full judgement can be downloaded by Clicking Here].


In these Writ Petitions, the petitioners have prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash Clause 7 of Circular No 10191 of the Vijay Bank Circular, as Vijay Bank had rejected the options exercised by the petitioners on the ground that the petitioners who have resigned from service are not entitled for pension.


In the final order, High Court quashed the impugned clause No 7 of the circular no 10191 dated 7/9/2010 of Vijay Bank, and clearly ordered that the petitioners are entitled for pension as per the pension regulation of the Vijay Bank.   HC also ordered that Vijay Bank should calculate and extend the benefit of pension to the petitioners.



Ads by Google



(B) Law Division of the Vijay Bank, must have suggested that Bank can go in appeal so that if possible bankers can be denied the pension benefit to resignee or at least it can delay the same so that some of the old petitioners may die by the time a decision on appeal is given.  The role of UFBU and IBA is also a mystery.   Vijay Bank on its own would not have gone in appeal and must have the approval of IBA, and UFBU decided to keep silence and did not try to persuade IBA or Vijay Bank to not to go to appeal.   Finally, Vijay Bank filed an appeal (Writ Appeal No 2956-2977 /2012 ) and poor and old resignee bankers were left to fend for themselves and run from pillar to post and fight the case in HC. 


Inspite of the best lawyers at the disposal of Bank, it failed to convince High Court that it had any merits in the appeal, as their arguments were flawed and were against the laws of natural justice.


With the grace of God, HC heard the appeal early and rejected the appeal vide order dated 30th July, 2012.   [A copy of this HC order  dismissing the Appeal can be downloaded by clicking Here}. HC in its Order once again pointed out that as the original petitioners had already put in requisite number of years of service qualifying them to pensionary benefit in accordance with the modified pension scheme,  HC is impelled to hold them entitled to pensionary benefits.


HC ruled that on account of ‘manifold reasons, we find no error whatsoever in the impugned Order.  The Appeals were accordingly dismissed…’



PS : We have received an email from Mr RK Pathak updating that in between Vijay Bank has even approached Supreme Court through Special Leave Petition (SLP) - Civil 35402-35423 of 2012, which was later on withdrawn in view of the weak case and which appeared to be untenable.  Supreme Court allowed Vijay Bank to file Review Petition.   [Click here to (a) Download the copy of the Review Petition filed by Vijay Bank, wherein the details of the SLP in Supreme Court are mentioned.;  (b) Download the Status from SC website about the SLP]


(c)    In view of the dismissal of the Appeal, Vijay Bank should have introspected and taken to task those who advised that Bank to go for appeal, but it appears that due to narrow mindedness of HR Heads in Banks and to delay the matters further,  Vijay Bank once again decided to knock at the door of HC - This time for Review of the Order dismissing the appeal.


I think this decision of Vijay Bank was one of the biggest foolish steps, as any person with even little knowledge of law knows that such Review is admissible only if there are some errors apparent on the face of the record.   There are many judgements on this law point.   It appears either the people working in law Division of the Vijay Bank does not under the basics of Indian Law or they were so much pressurized by the top management / IBA that they could not resist the orders for filing the Review Petition.  


The HC judgement on this Review Petition has been delivered now on 25th October, 2013.   A reading of this judgement  is nothing less than an indictment of the people working in the Law Division of Vijay Bank.  The whole Law Division of Vijay Bank needs to feel ashamed that they were the part of the decision to go for Review Petition.   Frankly speaking it was not a Review Petition but a desperate attempt for Reconsideration of their view and delay the matters.  Interestingly, once again top management had made a scapegoat to lower functionaries in the Bank.   On reading the Order, I found that Vijay Bank was to be represented by General Manager (Personnel), but finally it was left to Senior Manager (Law) to defend the indefensible case.


In this judgment, HC while dismissing the Review Petition has clearly indicated that the ‘scope of review is very limited.  It is only the error apparent on the face of the record which can be reviewed’.


[To download the copy of the dismissal of Review Petition, Click Here]


The above clearly indicates the mentality of some of the bankers who are bent upon denying their fellow bankers, their rightful benefits.    The worst part is UFBU watches all such episodes from the sidelines.   This is a dangerous trend as it appears now bankers have to fend for themselves to get even the benefits they are entitled under the law.


I hope better senses will prevail in Vijay Bank, IBA and UFBU, and resignee bankers are offered the 2nd Pension option without any further delay.  Vijay Bank has been successful in delaying the matters by 19 months from the date of the first decision of HC (April 2012).  Only the affected persons can realize the mental agony they must have passed during these 19 months. 


I will like to apologies for any harsh words which I may have expressed as above, and may not be liked by some of the bankers who have been party to such attitude.  But truth must see the day light and should always prevail.


PS : Mr RK Pathak has also informed that in Contempt Petition, the next date of hearing is 22/11/2013 (Click Here to Download the Status Report)



You can give your feedback / comments about this Article.   Please give only relevant comments as irrelevant comments are waste of time for yourself and our other readers.



blog comments powered by Disqus