- (1.)This writ petition is filed by Sh. R.K. Jain who was an employee of the respondent-bank. The writ petition seeks the relief of release of leave encashment of 240 days in terms of Regulation 38 of Punjab National Bank (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979. It is not disputed that the petitioner was visited with the penalty of compulsory retirement as per the departmental proceedings conducted against him.
(2.)Counsel for the petitioner in support of the argument has placed reliance upon two judgments. First is the judgment of Division Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 1.2.2010 in LPA No.191/2006 titled as UCO Bank and Others Vs. Ashwani Kumar Sharma and the second is the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in CWP No.133/2001 titled as Arun Kumar Sood Vs. The Chairman & M.D. UCO Bank & Ors. decided on 21.10.2010. The judgment of learned Single Judge of Himachal Pradesh High Court simply reiterates the Division Bench judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of UCO Bank.
(3.)Counsel for the respondent-bank in defence places reliance upon the judgment of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Punjab National Bank Vs. Jyotirmay Roy in APO No.284/2012 with W.P. No.1562/2010 decided on 17.12.2012. This Division Bench judgment took different view than the view taken in the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in case of UCO Bank and the Division Bench of Calcutta High Court holds that leave encashment is not permissible under Regulation 38 when the retirement is a compulsory retirement and hence fall under the head of termination of services by the employer.