Wednesday, 03, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

S.C. Kaushik vs Punjab National Bank And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 5383 P&H

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 5383 P&H
Judgement Date : 11 March, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

S.C. Kaushik vs Punjab National Bank And Another on 11 March, 2024

                                                          Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:034043




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH

107                                    2024:PHHC:034043
                                       CWP No. 23284 of 2014
                                       Date of Decision:11.03.2024
S.C.Kaushik


                                                     ....Petitioner

                                       vs.

Punjab National Bank and another

                                                     ....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL


Present:     Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate
             for the petitioner

             Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate
             for the respondents

                          ***

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of

the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of charge sheet dated

16.07.2013 (Annexure P-1), order dated 04.03.2014 (Annexure P-3) and

appellate order dated 27.05.2014 (Annexure P-5). The petitioner is further

seeking direction to respondents to release his retiral benefits i.e. pension,

leave encashment and other benefits.

2. The petitioner was working with respondent-bank and he was

issued charge sheet dated 16.07.2013 alleging mis-conduct. The respondents

conducted departmental enquiry and held him guilty. He came to be

removed from service vide order dated 04.03.2014. The disciplinary

authority ordered to remove him from service with a rider that it shall not

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:034043

CWP No. 23284 of 2014 -2- 2024:PHHC:034043

disqualify him for future employment. The relevant extracts of the order

dated 04.03.2014 are reproduced below:-

"I have carefully gone through records of the case comprising charge sheet, enquiry report, reply of charged officer and all other relevant facts of the case and I am of the view that Shri Kaushik has committed serious lapses which have been proved in enquiry as admitted by him. However, it is a fact that no loss has been caused to the bank due to the acts on his part. It is also a fact that there was nothing adverse against him in past. However, he cannot be retained in the service of the bank in view of the lapses and acts committed by him which reflects on his integrity. I am of the view that the ends of justice will be met if the penalty of "Removal from service which shall not be a disqualification for future employment" in terms of Regulations 4 (i) of PNB Officer Employees (D&A) Regulations, 1977 is imposed upon Shri Kaushik. Further his period of suspension shall not be treated as a period spent on duty, for all purposes"

The petitioner unsuccessfully preferred appeal before the

appellate authority. The petitioner is seeking setting aside of orders passed

by respondent authorities as well as direction to respondent authorities to

grant him retiral benefits.

3. Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate, submits that in view of judgment

of Supreme Court in Bank of Baroda vs. S.K.Kool (D) through LRs and

another, 2014(2) SCC 715, the petitioner despite his removal from service

is entitled to pensionary benefits.

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:034043

CWP No. 23284 of 2014 -3- 2024:PHHC:034043

4. Mr. Aayush Gupta, Advocate, submits that petitioner in the

appeal did not seek retiral benefits and at this belated stage, without

approaching the bank, he is seeking retiral benefits. The petitioner is

supposed to approach the respondent-bank and without adjudication by

bank, this Court should refrain from adverting with the question of retiral

benefits.

5. Faced with this, Mr. Sanjiv Gupta asserts that petitioner without

assailing his removal from service would approach respondent-bank for

retiral benefits, however, respondent-bank may be directed to decide his

claim in a time bound manner.

6. In the wake of statement of both sides, the petition stands

disposed of with liberty to petitioner to approach respondent-bank for

release of his retiral benefits and other dues. If the petitioner files

representation, it would be decided within three months from the date of

application. The respondent-bank would take care of the aforesaid judgment

while deciding application of the petitioner.

(JAGMOHAN BANSAL) JUDGE 11.03.2024 paramjit

Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:034043

3 of 3

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter