I was removed from a nationalized bank, but this removal did not disqualify me from future employment. It was also stated in the Disciplinary Authority's orders and the administrative orders that "the period of suspension will not count for qualifying service for pension purposes."
These orders were served to me on 05/12/2001. At that time, I was facing a CBI case in a CBI court on the same issues mentioned in the departmental chargesheet where the final orders were given by the DA and the management.
On 30th April 2010, I was acquitted by the CBI court. After waiting for three months from the date of the judgment, I represented to the bank management for the release of my pension. I kept reminding the bank's management, but neither the pension, gratuity, Group Insurance Scheme proceeds, nor the leave encashment was given to me. I have now represented to the CMD of the Bank, who has called for comments from the Zonal office. In turn, the ZO has called for comments from the regional office where I last served.
I was put on suspension from 30/03/1998 to 05/12/2001. I joined the bank on 21/08/1970. The concerned offices are stating that they do not possess any records or files of mine since the matter is 17/20 years old. I have all record copies, including the last drawn 10 months' particulars, etc.
My request is whether I am eligible for pension, gratuity, and other benefits mentioned above, and if so, whether it would be a full pension or a reduced amount. As I am considering going to court, please guide me at the earliest on what action I should take and how to proceed.
Thanks & Regards
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(1)
Amend(0)
1These orders were served to me on 05/12/2001. At that time, I was facing a CBI case in a CBI court on the same issues mentioned in the departmental chargesheet where the final orders were given by the DA and the management.
On 30th April 2010, I was acquitted by the CBI court. After waiting for three months from the date of the judgment, I represented to the bank management for the release of my pension. I kept reminding the bank's management, but neither the pension, gratuity, Group Insurance Scheme proceeds, nor the leave encashment was given to me. I have now represented to the CMD of the Bank, who has called for comments from the Zonal office. In turn, the ZO has called for comments from the regional office where I last served.
I was put on suspension from 30/03/1998 to 05/12/2001. I joined the bank on 21/08/1970. The concerned offices are stating that they do not possess any records or files of mine since the matter is 17/20 years old. I have all record copies, including the last drawn 10 months' particulars, etc.
My request is whether I am eligible for pension, gratuity, and other benefits mentioned above, and if so, whether it would be a full pension or a reduced amount. As I am considering going to court, please guide me at the earliest on what action I should take and how to proceed.
Thanks & Regards
From India, Hyderabad
Acknowledge(1)Amend(0)
Being aware of all the facts of your service, you can present your case before the appropriate authorities through a good labor lawyer in your area. As for the rest of your queries, I leave it to our elite members to share their views.
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Pension, Gratuity, and Other Terminal Benefits for Bank Employees
Pension, gratuity, and other terminal benefits for bank employees (nationalized and scheduled banks other than new generation banks) are as per the tripartite settlements made from time to time. Therefore, we are unable to comment on your case specifically. In your case, if the order of discharge was passed with a comment that you would be entitled to all terminal benefits, it should be deemed to be a discharge simpliciter. In such a situation, you will be entitled to gratuity and pension as per the LTS in force. Since you are not disqualified for future employment (with banks?) and by now the CBI has acquitted you, your case seems to be one without any stigma. In such a scenario, I don’t think that the management is right in holding the gratuity and pension.
The second thing is that the bank has not rejected the application for granting of gratuity and pension benefits. If rejected, it was done without giving the employee any opportunity to be heard or without invoking section 4(6)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, which says that gratuity shall be forfeited where the employee has been dismissed for an offense involving moral turpitude. Section 4(6)(a) provides for partial forfeiture to the extent of loss caused to the employer by the conduct of the employee. Still, there should be sufficient reasons for forfeiture of gratuity.
Case Reference: State Bank of Travancore Vs Asst. Labour Commissioner
In State Bank of Travancore Vs Asst. Labour Commissioner, the Kerala High Court had dismissed the petitioner’s plea that the employee was not entitled to gratuity since his services were terminated on charges of misconduct involving riotous and disorderly behavior. The Court had then examined that the punishment of dismissal was a discharge simpliciter with superannuation benefits and without disqualification from future employment. The court also observed that the order of forfeiture of gratuity was communicated to him after the employee submitted his request/application for grant of gratuity.
It would be worth reading the full text of the above case because the issue raised before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act was not merely whether the terminated employee was entitled to gratuity or not but on the rate at which the amount of gratuity would be calculated. The gratuity rules of the bank stipulated for a higher rate rather than what is statutory as per the Act. That is why I suggested that you should refer to the terms and conditions pertaining to terminal benefits as per the settlement in force between your Union and the Management of your Bank.
For your reference, I have attached the above-mentioned case.
Regards,
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Pension, gratuity, and other terminal benefits for bank employees (nationalized and scheduled banks other than new generation banks) are as per the tripartite settlements made from time to time. Therefore, we are unable to comment on your case specifically. In your case, if the order of discharge was passed with a comment that you would be entitled to all terminal benefits, it should be deemed to be a discharge simpliciter. In such a situation, you will be entitled to gratuity and pension as per the LTS in force. Since you are not disqualified for future employment (with banks?) and by now the CBI has acquitted you, your case seems to be one without any stigma. In such a scenario, I don’t think that the management is right in holding the gratuity and pension.
The second thing is that the bank has not rejected the application for granting of gratuity and pension benefits. If rejected, it was done without giving the employee any opportunity to be heard or without invoking section 4(6)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, which says that gratuity shall be forfeited where the employee has been dismissed for an offense involving moral turpitude. Section 4(6)(a) provides for partial forfeiture to the extent of loss caused to the employer by the conduct of the employee. Still, there should be sufficient reasons for forfeiture of gratuity.
Case Reference: State Bank of Travancore Vs Asst. Labour Commissioner
In State Bank of Travancore Vs Asst. Labour Commissioner, the Kerala High Court had dismissed the petitioner’s plea that the employee was not entitled to gratuity since his services were terminated on charges of misconduct involving riotous and disorderly behavior. The Court had then examined that the punishment of dismissal was a discharge simpliciter with superannuation benefits and without disqualification from future employment. The court also observed that the order of forfeiture of gratuity was communicated to him after the employee submitted his request/application for grant of gratuity.
It would be worth reading the full text of the above case because the issue raised before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act was not merely whether the terminated employee was entitled to gratuity or not but on the rate at which the amount of gratuity would be calculated. The gratuity rules of the bank stipulated for a higher rate rather than what is statutory as per the Act. That is why I suggested that you should refer to the terms and conditions pertaining to terminal benefits as per the settlement in force between your Union and the Management of your Bank.
For your reference, I have attached the above-mentioned case.
Regards,
Madhu.T.K
From India, Kannur
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In your case, since the order of discharge did not disqualify you for future employment and mentioned entitlement to terminal benefits, it should be considered a discharge simpliciter. You are likely entitled to gratuity and pension as per the prevailing settlement. As the CBI has acquitted you, there seems to be no stigma attached to your case. The management withholding your benefits without a valid reason may not be legally justified.
Here are some steps you can consider:
- Review the terms and conditions related to terminal benefits in the settlement between your Union and the Bank's Management.
- Gather all relevant documents, including the orders of discharge and acquittal, to support your case.
- If the bank continues to withhold your benefits unjustly, consider seeking legal advice or approaching the appropriate labor authority.
It is important to ensure that your rights are upheld, especially if there is no valid reason for the delay in receiving your entitled benefits.
From India, Gurugram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Here are some steps you can consider:
- Review the terms and conditions related to terminal benefits in the settlement between your Union and the Bank's Management.
- Gather all relevant documents, including the orders of discharge and acquittal, to support your case.
- If the bank continues to withhold your benefits unjustly, consider seeking legal advice or approaching the appropriate labor authority.
It is important to ensure that your rights are upheld, especially if there is no valid reason for the delay in receiving your entitled benefits.
From India, Gurugram
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)CiteHR is an AI-augmented HR knowledge and collaboration platform, enabling HR professionals to solve real-world challenges, validate decisions, and stay ahead through collective intelligence and machine-enhanced guidance. Join Our Platform.
Employee Benefits.doc
Employee Benefits.zip