ARIKARAVULA SANYASI RAJU versus THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, VISAKHAPATNAM (A.P.) AND ORS.

ARIKARAVULA SANYASI RAJU versus THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, VISAKHAPATNAM (A.P.) AND ORS.

Removal from service for misconduct does not entitle a bank employee to pension under Rules 22(i)(b) or (c); neither incapacitation nor voluntary retirement is applicable. Article 14 does not justify repeating an error relating to pension eligibility.

Parties
Appellant: Arikara Vula Sanyasi Raju; Respondents: The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Visakhapatnam (A.P.) and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
18 November 1996
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Appeal No. 203/96
Outcome
Appeal disposed of; no costs; High Court judgment confirmed.
Legal Topics
Bank Employees' Pension, Removal for Misconduct, Pension Eligibility, Constitutional Equality
Service Law Bank Employees' Pension Removal for Misconduct Pension Eligibility Constitutional Equality

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Arikara Vula Sanyasi Raju

Appellant

The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Visakhapatnam (A.P.) and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Appeal No. 203/96

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether removal from service for misconduct entitles a bank employee to pension under Rule 22 of State Bank of India Employees' Pension Fund Rules
  2. 2 Whether Article 14 of Constitution applies if another similarly situated employee was earlier allowed pension after removal for misconduct

Ratio Decidendi

Removal from service for misconduct does not entitle a bank employee to pension under Rules 22(i)(b) or (c); neither incapacitation nor voluntary retirement is applicable. Article 14 does not justify repeating an error relating to pension eligibility.

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed of; no costs; High Court judgment confirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal disposed of
  • No costs