In last two years, since I have taken VRS, we have exposed on number of occasions exposed the nexus between IBA, Bank Management and Union Leaders and  their Anti-Banker Stands.  Sometimes, it appears that they are hell bent upon denying even the rightful dues to the bankers.   They appear to get a vicarious pleasure in filing court cases, going in appeal to High Courts, Supreme Courts and then review petition etc so that the poor banker who has dared to challenge them are ruined not only financially but also health wise. 

However, it is tribute and salute to our senior bankers, who proved a much bigger match to IBA / Bank Management, inspite of their advanced age and poor financial positions.   The recent developments show that IBA, Bank Management and to large extent even union leaders need to feel ashamed for their attitude towards bankers – specially the retired and senior citizens (bankers). 

I am sure, some bankers may feel offended owing to my harsh words.   I am sorry for such harsh words, but when I see all around injustice, I am not able to stop myself in using harsh words (of course, I try my best not to use any unparliamentarily language). 

The recent developments show as to how IBA and Bank Management had done everything in their power to deny pension to retired bankers.   What all these people are demanding is their due share and to live a dignified and honorable life after retirement.    I feel angry when I see that these are the same people who in their career have done all sorts of wrong to please their bosses in the government so that they are offered a plum post even after retirement so as to enjoy the lavish life style.   You have to merely search around you, and you will find that retired CMDs of banks heading / working in IBA, CVC and other PS organizations.  They have got all these postings after retirement and as a gesture for their support to their bosses during their tenure in banks.   This means, they were planning for retirement jobs even during their service.   On the other hand, honest bankers who were pressurized or shunted during service, and ultimately forced to take VRS / Resign, are being witch hunted even after their retirement.   Their families suffered during their service and now even after retirement they are being denied pension on one pretext or the other.

I am sure most of my colleagues will agree with my sentiments and  our retired colleagues will share the names of those CMDs / EDs who have taken jobs in PS organizations after retirement,  as I do not have the full list of such people.    The worst part is that even our union leaders, who are in much better position to know all these details, keep silent and do not quote such instances and fight for poor retired bankers who or their families are suffering.

I feel this is high time to expose such double standards.   As a ray of hope, Courts have come to the rescue of retired bankers.   Last week, we have informed our readers that decisions of Supreme Court and Karnataka High Courts have forced the Chairman of Vijaya Bank to appear before Court in person and give undertaking that 22 employees of Vijaya Bank, who have been denied pension option for years, will be paid pension in 4 weeks time.   I feel this was the biggest slap on the face of the Vijaya Bank management.  I received few calls, who were asking as to why the legal cost be not recovered from CMD who allowed such litigation to continue and why the beneficiaries of the judgement are not paid interest and damages for this delay in payment of pension.   I feel morally bankers who were denied pension are correct.

Once again, today I have received the details from Mr R K Pathak, of another case.  I am giving the details of this case below (as sent by Mr Pathak), as this is a case where the retired banker actually died during the period when SLP was pending in Supreme Court and the case has been fought by his widow.   It is difficult for me to imagine as to how Bank decided to continue to fight against a widow whose husband gave his prime life time in the service of the bank.  Heartless people.   I appeal to all unions to take up this issue in right earnest and ensure that IBA issues guidelines so that all officers and workmen across banking industry are offered 2^nd Pension option irrespective of the mode of their exit from service.

Dear Members,

I am reproducing herewith the events & role of the Bank, how they by taking advantage of its own wrong in denying pension to its employee, who served for 40 years & voluntarily retired in June 1986.

1) Mr. D. Malleswara Rao, joined the services f Andhra Bank in 1946 & served for 40 years & on account of illness he requested for voluntary retirement & accordingly Bank allowed him to retire & all terminal benefits were paid to him.

2) On 3-5-1994, he submitted an application to come under the pension scheme. Again, another application was made to the Zonal Office on 4-7-1994 exercising option for payment of pension as per the scheme contemplated under the Regulations. The Bank addressed a letter dated 2-8-1994 stating that his request for joining Bank's Pension Scheme is not acceptable, as he is not eligible for pension benefit, since his resignation was accepted by the Bank and was relieved on 30-6-1986. According to the petitioner, he never submitted any resignation letter to the Bank and he submitted an application to permit him to retire voluntarily. He never intended to resign the post. He gave letters to Bank on 27/09/1994,09/01/1995 and again on 22/01/1996.

3)However, he received a letter dated 2-3-1996 stating that his exit from the Bank is consequent upon his resignation and as per Clause 22, Chapter IV of Andhra Bank Employees Pension Rgulations, 1995 resignation, dismissal or termination of an employee from service of the Bank shall entail forfeiture of his entire past service and consequently shall not be eligible for pensionary benefits.

4) D.Malleswara Rao filed WP( 12564 of 1998)  against the high court of AP & verdict came to his favour in August 2005[ copy enclosed] & important points of the judgement are:-

             a) Whether there was a scheme or no scheme, when a person wants to retire on his own, it is called voluntary retirement. Simply because there was no scheme, it cannot be said that the petitioner has resigned from the post.

            b) An employee can seek voluntary retirement without any objection from the Management after rendering prescribed period of qualifying service. The request for voluntary retirement can be refused only when the rules or service conditions give such option to the employer. Admittedly, in the case on hand, no such rule or service condition is brought to the notice of the Court saying that there is a provision under the Regulations of the Bank, which gives option to the employer to reject such an application.

            c)For the aforementioned reasons, I am of the opinion that treating the petitioner as resigned from service is arbitrary and illegal. It must be deemed that the petitioner has been retired voluntarily. The application of the petitioner for payment of pension under the Regulations shall be considered, after asking the petitioner to fulfil the conditions and he shall be paid all the arrears there against, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Bank preferred to file Writ Appeal [1899 of 2005] against this judgement & which came to be decided on 30/08/2013 [ copy enclosed] by dismissing the writ Appeal filed by the Bank. In the process of Writ Appeal, the petitioner expired & her spouse was brought on record.

Bank again preferred to file SLP in Supreme Court & SLP was dismissed with following order on 29/11/2013.[ copy enclosed]

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

This petition is directed against order dated 30.08.2013 passed by the Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioners against the order of the learned Single Judge who allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent and declared that he is entitled to pension under the Pension Scheme introduced in 1995.

We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and carefully perused the record.

In our view, the concurrent conclusion recorded by the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court that the letter of voluntary retirement submitted by the respondent some time in 1986 could not have been treated as a letter of resignation is correct and the order under challenge does not call for interference under Article 136 of the Constitution.

The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.

Now this case belongs to voluntary retirement prior to 01/11/1993 { Settlement covers voluntary retirement between 01/11/1993 to 29/09/1995} where bank had not framed the scheme of voluntary retirement under OSR 1979/1982.

Further , it is admitted by IBA in its communication to DFS dated 06/08/2012 that there is no VRS scheme for Award Staff & it is truth that neither Bipartite nor Shastry Award {Service conditions of Award Staff} defines the word " Resignation" & still the 30 to 40 years of service of Award staff is fore-fitted merely they used the word " Resignation" ( that too at the advice of Management) at the time of their Exit from the banking Service.

Now, All UFBEU leaders are appealed ( Champions of Officers and Award Staff) to take care of Award staff where "VRS " Scheme is not framed & also of officers in Six Bank ( Vijaya Bank, Andhra Bank, Indian Bank, Punjab & Sind Bank & New Bank of India & one more Bank) where VRS scheme is not framed under OSR, & take up the issue with IBA.

Our colleagues who wish to read full details of the judgement and AIBOC circular can download the same from links given below :-

(a)   Writ Appeal 12564 of 1998 D. Malleswara Rao vs Andhra Bank And Anr. (Decision dated 22/08/2005) – Andhra High Court

(b)   Writ Appeal 1899 of 2005 (Decision dated 30.08.2013) – Andhra High Court at Hyderabad)

(c)    Special Leave of Appeal (Civil) No 35203/2013 in Supreme Court of India [Decision dated 29/11/2013

(d) Special Leave Petition in Supreme Court - Vijaya Bank Retirees

(e) AIBOC circular assuring that it will take up issue of covering resignees with IBA