Digest Of Supreme Court Cases

As allegations of fraud committed by employee concerned on employer Bank were fully established, superannuation of employee concerned in the meantime is not relevant. Bank employees always hold position of trust where honesty and integrity are sine qua non and it would never be advisable to deal with such matters leniently. Dismissal restored. Para 10

Amendment having retrospective operation divesting employee of benefit already granted to him under existing Rules, violative of Arts. 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Employees who had opted for Pension Scheme had vested/accrued rights and any amendment to contrary made with retrospective effect taking away vested right accrued to employee under existing Rules was impermissible.

Held, since no financial loss was caused to bank, on the contrary decision to reduce loan amount was taken in bank’s interest, and fact that in appellant’s service span of 28 years, no allegations were made against him, punishment of removal for charges proved and misconduct established, is too harsh and disproportionate. Substitution of punishment

Though it is settled law that the Rules applicable in matters of determination of pension are those which are in force at the time of retirement, but, held, that does not mean that employer can depart from this principle arbitrarily and confer benefit of Rules in force at the time of appointment, for computation of

In this case appellants were promoted as Assistant Director (Official Language) on ad hoc/officiating basis during years 1993-95 and 2000. High Court by impugned judgment recalled judgment dt. 4-11-2011 and affirmed order of Tribunal directing promotion of appellants in accordance with the 2002 Rules on ground that in Mishri Lal, (2011) 14 SCC 739 it