K. Kannan, J. - (1.) All the writ petitions are at the instance of persons, who are retired officers from the Punjab National Bank. They claim that they have retired between 01.01.1986 to 31.10.2002. Their grievance is that there has been no updation of their pension in the manner that was contemplated at the time when pension scheme was introduced through Punjab National Bank (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995. This was pursuant to a settlement between the Bank employees and the Management on 29.10.1993. Originally as it was contemplated that the scheme was applicable to all employees, who had retired from 01.11.1993, but later through independent notification, it had been applied also to persons, who had retired from 01.01.1986 onwards. The petitioners have a grievance that the Regulations provided for the application of pension in the manner that the Reserve Bank of India and Civil Services Pension Rules provided, but in the scheme which had been introduced, it has not provided for periodical updation of the pension with reference to the increase in scales of pay coming through various Pay Commissions' recommendations. The talks of the Management with the Union representatives have not properly addressed the claims of persons, who had retired prior to the coming into force of the scheme with the result that amongst the class of pensioners, there are persons, who were drawing higher pension, although they had occupied lower posts to persons, who had retired before 1993. In some of the talks, it had transpired that the cost of servicing pension was sought to be raised from 18.2% to over 20% if the updation was required to be done, but it could not be accepted by the Union representatives.
(2.) The claim of the petitioners is resisted by the Union and the Bank Management, contending that the Reserve Bank of India's scheme or the Central Civil Service Pension Scheme could not be applied, since the Bank had an independent scheme which was introduced in the year 1995 and the Bank Regulations which provided through Regulation 56 that in case of a doubt, the Central Civil Services Rules or the Reserve Bank of India Pension Rules would apply was only to be taken when there existed some problem of interpretation. The respondents would claim that the settlement which had been effected in the year 1993 that gave rise to the regulation merely paved way for a negotiation for parties for creating a scheme that could take note of payment of pension, commutation of pension and updation on the lines that were in force in Reserve Bank of India and if the negotiations or talks did not yield to any specific provisions like the way the Reserve Bank of India Pension Regulations provided for, they cannot have any vested right to demand the pension regulations in the manner that they are applied either for the Reserve Bank of India's employees or for the civil servants.
(3.) The petitioners' claim to a right for seeking for updation of pension came in the wake of a rejection of the petitioners' plea through a cryptic order issued by the Government of India, Department of Economic Affairs that there was no scope for updation of post-01.11.1987 retirees from the Banks through its letter dated 04.01.2005. The impugned letter stated that since the Pension Scheme of the public sector Banks was passed on funding by the Banks, unlike the case of Government employees, there was no scope for parity. Yet another reason that had been proffered in its notice was that the pensioners were appropriately compensated over the period of years by the rise in the Consumer Price Index (for short, CPI) from time to time in the dearness allowance component of pay and hence, there was no case for updation of pension.;