Does Regulation 29 of the Indian Bank (Employees') Pension Regulations, 1995 apply to erstwhile employees who resigned the post?

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) Under assail is the writ order dated 07.11.2025 passed in W.P.No.18918 of 2025.

The writ petitioner is the appellant before this Court. The appellant joined in the respondent Indian Bank on 26.12.1977. He was promoted to the officer cadre. He resigned from services on 19.02.1995 after rendering 17 years 1 month and 24 days of service. It is not in dispute that the appellant had received the terminal benefits due to him on his resignation. As on the date of his resignation ie., 19.02.1995 there was no pension scheme in force. The 1995 scheme was notified on 29.09.2025. However, the benefit of the scheme was extended to the employees in service from 01.01.1986. The case of the appellant for grant of pension was rejected mainly on the ground that he had not rendered 20 years of qualifying service and he resigned the job and further, as on the date of his resignation, he was not in service.

Mr.Kalyanaraman appearing on behalf of the respondent Bank would strenuously contend that the Scheme came into force on 29.09.1995 and the appellant resigned his job on 19.02.1995. More so, he had not completed 20 years of qualifying service and thus, the employer has not considered his case for grant of pension under the 1995 Pension Scheme.

The appellant, who appeared as Party-in-Person would contend that he would squarely fall under the benefit of the Pension Scheme and the conditions stipulated therein. Therefore, his case ought to have been considered by the Indian Bank as well as by the Writ Court. The regulation of the year 1995 was not considered in its letter and spirit and dismissed the writ petition. Thus, the present appeal is to be considered.

The question that arises in the present case is, whether the appellant appearing in person is entitled for pension under the Indian Bank (Employees Pension Regulations), 1995 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Regulations’). Let us now examine the Scheme of pension as well as the conditions stipulated under the Regulations.

In the context of the Pension Regulations, it is relevant to consider the 12th Bipartite Settlement between the Bank and the Union dated 08.03.2024. Clause 37 of the Bipartite Settlement provides the option for resigned employees to join the Pension Scheme and the said Regulation reads as under: “37. Option for resigned employees to join Pension Scheme In terms of the Memorandum of Understanding arrived at between the parties vide MoU dated 7th November 2023, it is agreed, subject to approval by the Government, that employees who were in service of the Banks on or after 1-1- 1986 and had joined the Banks before 1-4-2010 and who have resigned from the service of the Bank on or before 26-04-2010 and who were otherwise eligible to join the pension scheme while in service will be given an option and opportunity to join the pension scheme on the following terms and conditions: 1. The following categories of former employees, who satisfy all the conditions stated in sub-clauses (a) to (c) herein below, would be eligible for exercising an option to join the Pension Scheme within ninety days of announcement of such option as one time measure only. a) Employees and officers who were in service of the Banks on or after 1-1-1986 and had joined the Bank on or before 1-4-2010 and who have resigned from the service of the Bank on or before 26-04-2010 and who were otherwise eligible to join the pension scheme while in service and b) who agree to refund to the Bank the entire Bank’s contribution to Provident Fund (along with accumulated interest thereon) received by them at the time of their resignation or later from the Bank, and c) who agree to execute an undertaking as per draft provided by the Bank. 2. All such eligible former employees as mentioned above and their surviving spouse or eligible family member shall be entitled for pension / family pension, if they exercise the option, subject to the following conditions a) That the pension will be paid prospectively from the month following the month in which the Bank receives the Bank’s contribution towards PF (along with accrued interest thereon) received by the former employee / former officer at the time of resignation or later. b) The commutation of pension will not be extended to them and they will not demand. c) Pension shall be computed as per the applicable provisions of the Pension Regulations, as applicable to relevant Bipartite Settlement / Joint Note in which he / she resigned. 3. The Associations / Unions of employees or former employees / former officers who have initiated any pending legal proceedings for and on behalf of the former employees/officers wherein the right of the former employees or former officers, who have resigned from the service of the Bank, to opt for pension is directly or indirectly one of the issues for consideration by the concerned Court or Authority, having jurisdiction and powers to adjudicate or take necessary steps to ensure that the right of the former employees / pension is no longer Res Integra in such proceeding and also agree not to initiate any proceedings concerning such right in future.”

Subsequently, an amendment was effected to the Pension Scheme by Notification dated 14.10.2025. Clause (2) of the amendment made in Regulation 2 after Clause (w) the following clause was inserted. The said amendment reads as under: “(wa) ‘resigned former employee’ means an employee, who - (a) was in the services of the Bank on or after the 1 st January, 1986. (b) Joined the Bank before the 1st April 2010; (c) has resigned from the services of the Bank on or before the 26th April 2010; and (d) was otherwise eligible to join the pension scheme while in services of the Bank. 8.1. In Regulation 29 of the said Regulations, the following amendments are effected: “ (I) in sub-regulation (1), after the third proviso, the following proviso shall be inserted, namely:- “Provided also that a resigned former employee as defined in Clause (wa) of Regulation 2 and conforming to the conditions specified in sub-regulation (15) of regulation 3, shall also be entitled for pension provided he has completed such qualifying service.”

Let us now consider the facts of the present case. The appellant-in-person joined the bank on 26.12.1977 and resigned from service on 19.02.1995. He rendered 17 years of qualifying service. The arguments made on behalf of the respondent bank that 20 years of qualifying service are required for availing the Pension Scheme is incorrect in view of the fact that 20 years of qualifying service is required only for accepting the voluntary retirement application submitted by the employee. This is made clear under Regulation 29, which deals with Pension on voluntary retirement. An employee submitting voluntary retirement application is eligible for voluntary retirement only on completion of 20 years of qualifying service. Regulation 29 deals with pension on voluntary retirement and therefore the said clause would have no application in respect of the erstwhile employees, who resigned the post. In the present case, the appellant resigned from the post even before implementation of Pension Scheme, 1995 and he is not the employee relieved under the voluntary retirement scheme. This fact was admitted by the respondent bank in their counter.

The case of the appellant is to be considered under Regulation 14, which denotes qualifying service for grant of pension. Under the Pension Regulations, 1995, an employee who rendered minimum service in the bank is eligible. In the present case, the appellant completed 17 years of qualifying service and therefore he possessed the minimum qualifying service of ten years for availing the benefit of pension scheme of the year 1995. This position has been accepted between the bank and the employees union in 12th Bipartite Settlement dated 08.03.2024 under Clause 37(i)(a), (b) and (c) the conditions are stipulated to join the Pension Scheme. In the present case, the appellant was in service of the bank after 01.01.1986 and resigned from service before 26.04.2010, the cut-off date fixed in the Bipartite Settlement. He is otherwise eligible for pension under Regulation 14 of the Pension Scheme since he had completed 10 years of qualifying service, which is the eligibility criteria contemplated under Regulation 14 of the Scheme.

A reading of the amendment would also show that it was made in consonance with the Bipartite Settlement. Therefore, there is no impediment for the appellant to join the Pension Scheme. However, conditions (b) and (c) under Clause 37 (1) of the 12th Bipartite Settlement dated 08.03.2024 are to be complied with by the appellant. Accordingly, he must agree to refund to the bank the entire bank’s contribution to Provident Fund (along with accumulated interest thereon) received by him at the time of his resignation or later from the bank and he must execute an undertaking as per the draft provided by the Bank. On complying with those two conditions, the Bank is bound to permit the appellant to join the Pension Scheme of the year 1995 and all benefits contemplated under the Pension Scheme is to be extended to the appellant along with consequential monetary benefits. The respondent bank is directed to permit the appellant to join the Pension Scheme of the year 1995 ie., Indian Bank Employees Pension Regulations 1995 and grant all the pension benefits admissible under the said Regulations by following the procedures as contemplated under the Regulations. The said exercise is directed to be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Accordingly, the writ order impugned dated 07.11.2025 made in W.P.No.18918 of 2025 is set aside and the writ appeal is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.G.R.,J.) 23-09-2026