Telangana State Co-operative Apex Bank Ltd vs T. Hemanth Kumar Yadav & Ors.

The present review petition is filed under Section 114 read with Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking review of Order dated 28.10.2024, passed in W.A.No.1048 of 2023, by which, this Court allowed the writ appeal and the Order dated 11.09.2023 in W.P.No.24441 of 2020, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court was set aside. It is further observed that unofficial respondents, who are retired and drawing pension in pursuance of old pension scheme i.e., persons who were on rolls as on 04.11.2011, would be entitled to enhancement of their pension by 1 ½ times.

Heard Sri V.Hari Haran, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri Rohit Pogula, learned Counsel for the petitioner on record and Sri N.Mohan Krishna, learned Counsel for respondents present.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner-cooperative Bank has decided to introduce a new pension scheme as per the recommendations of the Sub-Committee and accordingly, the Board passed a resolution on 15.09.2020 in Item No.49, which contains clause No.1 & clause No.2 and combined reading of both the clauses i.e., clause No.1 & 2, specifies that the additional pension of 1 ½ times would be applicable to the employees who are on rolls as on 01.04.2020, but not applicable to the employees retired prior to 01.04.2020 and are drawing pension under old pension scheme. He further submitted that this Court vide impugned Order has rightly set aside the Order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court and restored clause No.2 of Item No.49 of the resolution, however, erred in observing that the respondents who have retired prior to 01.04.2020 and are drawing pension as per old pension scheme are also entitled to additional pension of 1 ½ times, therefore, the Order dated 28.10.2024, is required to be reviewed.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that this Court has failed to appreciate the fact that the petitioner-Bank has arrived at the cutoff date for new pension scheme as 01.04.2020, as per the recommendation of the Sub-Committee. He further submitted that admittedly, respondents who are retired prior to 01.04.2020 and were covered under old pension scheme are not entitled to the additional pensionary benefits of 1 ½ times, therefore, prayed to allow the review and pass appropriate Orders.

Per contra, learned Counsel for respondents would submit that this Court has rightly passed the Order, since the additional pension scheme is applicable to the employees, who retired prior to 01.04.2020 as well as the employees, who retired after 01.04.2020. He further submitted that petitioner has failed to point out error apparent on the face of the record and therefore, review is liable to be dismissed, being devoid of any merit.

Admittedly, the petitioner-Bank has passed the resolution in Item No.49 dated 15.09.2020, basing on the recommendation of the Sub-Committee. The said resolution is divided into two clauses i.e., clause No.1 relates to employees who were on rolls as on 04.11.2011, however, retired prior to 01.04.2020 and clause No.2 relates to employees, who are on rolls as on 01.04.2020 and retired thereafter. Clause Nos.1 & 2 reads as under:-

A bare reading of above clauses indicates that the additional pension benefit was extended to the employees, who were on rolls as on 04.11.2011 and retired prior to 01.04.2020 and are receiving pension as per the old pension scheme. However, the cadre of employees as on 04.11.2011, shall be taken for the purpose of extending additional benefit, irrespective of present cadre or cadre at the time of retirement and the additional monthly pension payable to various cadres of employees was also specified in tabular form. Whereas, in the case of employees, who are on rolls on 01.04.2020 and retired thereafter, no such restriction has been imposed. Except above, the additional pension benefit of 1½ times is extended to both the categories of employees.

In the light of above, the contention of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that this Court has erred in observing that the respondents, who are drawing pension under old pension scheme are not entitled to additional pensionary benefits under new pension scheme is untenable and is liable to be rejected.

In considered opinion of this Court, the petitioner has failed to point out any error apparent on the face of the record, warranting interference of this Court to review the Order dated 28.10.2024.

However, it is made clear that the employees, who are on rolls as on 04.11.2011 and retired thereafter, including respondents herein are entitled to additional pensionary benefit of 1 ½ times, however, the cadre as on 04.11.2011, shall be considered for calculating and extending benefits indicated in clause No.1 of resolution in Item No.49.

Accordingly, review petition is disposed of.