High Court · 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTSpecial Original JurisdictionThursday, the Twentieth day of March Two Thousand and Twenty FivePRESENTThe HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMEDWP(MD). No.19666 of 2021M. Sethumani ... Petitioner Vs 1 The Regional Manager, Regional Office, Union Bank of India, P.T.Rajan Road, Bibikulam, Madurai. 2 The Manager Union Bank of India, Town Hall Road Branch, Town Hall Road, Madurai. ... RespondentsPrayer :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writof Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records of the impugnedproceedings of the 1st respondent No.ROM/HR/414/2020-21 dated 16.07.2021quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to disburse the Pensionbenefits available to of petitioner's husband, Late S.Mani, Employee No. 031894, andpass such other further other order as this Honble Court.ORDER:- This Petition coming on for orders on this day and upon perusing thepetition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments ofM/s. P. Pethu Rajesh, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Mr. C. Karthick, Advocatefor the Respondents, this Court made the following order: https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis The co-ordinate bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 26.11.2024closed the present Writ Petition in the following terms:“7.Considering the rival submissions made, this writpetition is closed with a direction to the respondents to furnishthe bank statements along with the option opted by thepetitioner's husband, ie., Provident Fund scheme, to thepetitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receiptof a copy of this order. 8.There shall be no order as to costs.Since it is represented that the writ petition is filed throughlegal aid, list this writ petition in the first week of February, 2025,under the caption 'for reporting compliance'”2. This Court vide order dated 06.03.2025, passed the following order:“4. Today, when the matter is taken up, the learnedStanding Counsel for the respondents has filed a complianceaffidavit sworn by one T.K.Abijith, Regional Head, Union Bankof India, Regional Office, Madurai, in which no document hasbeen annexed as to whether the petitioner opted for familypension or Provident Fund scheme, as per the order passed bythis Court, dated 26.11.2024 and 20.02.2025. Even not a singlepaper has been annexed with this affidavit and even somepapers have been shown before this Court, it is not relevant tomake compliance of the order of this Court dated 26.11.2024 and20.02.2025. Thus, the compliance affidavit filed by T.K.Abijith istotally incomplete. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5. Accordingly, the person, who has filed the complianceaffidavit, namely, T.K.Abijith, Regional Head, Union Bank ofIndia, Regional Office, Madurai, is directed to appear before thisCourt in person along with the original records in respect of thepetitioner's husband regarding at the time when he entered intothe services and retired from the services. He shall also file anaffidavit as to whether the petitioner's husband, late.S.Mani hasopted for family pension or for other option and what amounthas been paid to him. That statement shall also be mentioned inthe affidavit. Let a copy of this order be issued to Mr.C.Karthick,learned Standing Counsel for the respondents for its necessarycompliance and information.6. Put up this case for orders on 13.03.2025 before theappropriate Bench.”3. This Court vide order dated 13.03.2025, passed the following order:“3.In compliance of the order dated 06.03.2025,Mr.T.K.Abijith, Regional Head, Union Bank of India, RegionalOffice, Madurai, is present in person before this Court today,but he had not brought the original records. He submits that theoriginal records are of the year 1974 and the same is available inCoimbatore Head Office. Thus, he prays further time to producethe original records before this Court. 4.This Court is taking a sympathetic view on the requestmade by Mr.T.K.Abijith, who is present before this Court.5.Accordingly, considering the request made byMr.T.K.Abijith, as a last opportunity, 7 days and no more time is https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis granted to him to make compliance of the order passed in W.P.(MD) No.19666 of 2021 dated 06.03.2025 and to produce theoriginal records before this Court without fail. In the meantime,Registry is directed to trace the counter affidavit filed by therespondents and place it before this Court on or before the nextdate fixed and the learned counsel for the petitioner is directedto file a rejoinder affidavit to the counter affidavit filed by therespondents, if any, within the same period. 6.Put up this case 'for orders' on 20.03.2025 before theappropriate Bench.”4. In compliance with the order passed by this Court dated 13.03.2025,Mr.T.K.Abijith, Regional Head, Union Bank of India, Regional Office, Madurai,appeared before this Court today and produced the original records pertaining tothe Petitioner's husband. He also filed a compliance affidavit, annexing theProvident Fund Settlement letter, application for Provident Fund Statement, andother statements of account relating to the Petitioner's husband. 5. Mr.C.Karthick, learned counsel for the Respondents also submits that aperusal of the records clearly reveals that the Petitioner's husband had optedexclusively for the Provident Fund (PF) scheme and not the Pension scheme. 6. Upon perusal of the original records, it is observed that the Petitioner'shusband, who joined the Bank's service on 01.03.1974, retired from service on01.02.2009. He had submitted an Option Form on 09.01.2009. In Column 15 of theform, which explicitly asked about opting for pension, he clearly indicated 'No', https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis thereby opting out of the pension scheme. This application, filled by the Petitioner'shusband on 09.01.2009, formed the basis for the settlement of his entire payment bythe Respondents after his retirement. Relevantly, the tabular column at paragraphNo.6 of the compliance affidavit extracts the following information:DETAILS OF BENEFITS GIVEN TO Mr.MANI, ON HIS RETIREMENT Nature of benefitAmount (in Rs.)DatedTransferred to Accountof Mr.Mani1) PL ENCASHMENT232073.5209.01.20093351040209990042) GRATUITY350000.0002.02.20093351040209990043) PROVIDENT FUND805457.62i) Out of Rs.805457.62 he haddeposited Rs.2.00 Lakhs on04.02.2009 and same was closed byhim on 06.06.2009.ii) another Rs.2,00,000/- depositedon 04.02.2009 and the same wasclosed by him on 30.04.2009.iii) Rs.24440.00 was transferred byhim to M.Mahesh (son) EducationLoan Account.iv) Balance Rs.381017.62 wastransferred to his SB Account.04.02.200904.02.200904.02.200904.02.2009335103060765348335103060765349335106550000115335102070458499TOTAL1387531.14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

7. After perusal of paragraph No.7 of the affidavit, it is stated that thePetitioner's husband, an employee of the Respondent Bank, had opted for theProvident Fund scheme and not for Pension scheme. Upon his retirement, hereceived all the benefits as stated above, thereby confirming that he was not aparticipant in the Pension scheme. Had he opted for the pensionary scheme, hewould not have been eligible for the benefits under the PF (Provident Fund) scheme.The Provident Fund Statement clearly indicates that the Petitioner's husband wassolely an optee for the PF (Provident Fund) scheme, not the Pension scheme.Furthermore, the Provident Fund Settlement letter annexed to the complianceaffidavit provides the details regarding deceased employee's contributions, intereston employee contributions to Provident Fund, employer's contributions to theProvident Fund, and other relevant details.8. I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counselfor the Respondents and Mr. T.K. Abijith, Regional Head, Union Bank of India,Regional Office, Madurai, who is also present before this Court today and havethoroughly examined the original records, the compliance affidavit filed by theRespondents, the averments made in the Writ Petition, and other relevantdocuments. This Court is satisfied that the husband of the Petitioner had, in fact,opted for the Provident Fund (PF) scheme and not for the Pension scheme, asevident from the form filled up by him on 09.01.2009. Upon perusing all therecords, it is evident that the employee/the petitioner's husband joined duty on https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

01.03.1974 and retired from service on 31.01.2009. He received all his benefitsimmediately after retirement, as stated above. Notably, the deceased employeenever claimed any benefits under the "Pension Scheme" during his lifetime, as hehad already received all the benefits under the ''Provident Fund Scheme''. Thepetitioner's husband passed away on 24.12.2016. The present Writ Petition has beenfiled by the Petitioner in the year 2021, after her husband's demise, apparently withthe expectation of securing some monetary benefits from the Respondent Bank. 9. In view of the aforementioned findings, this Court accepts the submissionsmade by the learned counsel for the Respondents as well as Mr.T.K. Abijith,Regional Head, Union Bank of India, Regional Office, Madurai, who is presentbefore this Court today. Therefore, no further orders are required to be passed in thepresent Writ Petition. The present case is accordingly disposed of in view of theabove observations. The file shall be consigned to the records.Sd/-20/03/2025// True Copy // /03/2025Sub Assistant Registrar(CS- I/ II / III / IV) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TO1 The Regional Manager, Regional Office, Union Bank of India, P.T.Rajan Road, Bibikulam, Madurai.2 The Manager Union Bank of India, Town Hall Road Branch, Town Hall Road, Madurai.Copy to: The Section Officer, Writ Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai+ 1c.c. To P. Pethu Rajesh, Advocate SR.No.18816. ORDER DATED : 20/03/2025 ========================== ORDER ========================== WP(MD). No.19666 of 2021 Giving direction and etc. as stated within. MGJ(28.03.2025) 8P 5C Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17.07.2023