AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rajesh Bindal, J.—The petitioner, who retired from State Bank of Patiala, has impugned the order dated 23.3.2012 (Annexure P-1), whereby his pension has been reduced on account of his conviction by the Court of Special Judge, Patiala, vide judgment dated 5.8.2011 under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Learned Counsel for the petitioner sought to argue that even after conviction, in terms of the rules applicable the bank was required to pass a speaking order.
However, the contention is misconceived considering the fact that in the impugned order dated 23.3.2012, passed by the competent authority, it has specifically been mentioned that pension is being reduced on account of conviction of the petitioner in a corruption case. Regulations 43 and 44 of the State Bank of Patiala Employees'' Pension Regulations 1995 have been referred to, under which the power has been exercised.
Considering the aforesaid facts, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.