Dinesh Sharma Vs The State bank of India

2026:HHC:25847

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 4748 2024
Decided on: 01.07.2026
Sh. Dinesh Sharma and others …….Petitioners
Versus
The State Bank of India and others … Respondents
*Coram*
*Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.* Whether approved for reporting?¹ *Yes*
_____________________________________________________ For the petitioners : Mr. Adarsh K. Vashista, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Arvind Sharma, Advocate.
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge ( Oral)

¶4

By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have inter

¶5

alia prayed for the following relief:-

¶6

“a. That a writ in the nature of mandamus may kindly be issued directing the Respondents to count the services rendered by the Petitioners on contract basis prior to their regularization as qualifying service for the purpose of pension, in the interest of justice.”

¶7

Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the petitioners before this Court were appointed on contract basis pursuant to a drive undertaken by the respondent-Bank for the engagement of specialized officers as Officer-Marketing and Recovery (Rural) on contract basis. Appointment letters issued in the month of April, 2008, are appended with the writ petition as Annexure P-2 (colly.). In terms of said appointment letters, the

¶8

1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶9

2

¶10

2026:HHC:25847

¶11

petitioners were offered appointment in the respondent-Bank as Officer-Marketing and Recovery (Rural) on contract basis, for a period of two years from 15^th April, 2008 to 14^th April, 2010. The appointment was offered on the terms and conditions mentioned therein, for a period of two years, which was not to confer any right upon the petitioners to get permanently absorbed in the Bank’s service. It was also mentioned in the terms and conditions that contractual appointment may be renewed on completion of the contract period of two years, depending on the performance and suitability. It was specifically mentioned in the terms and conditions that the incumbents shall not be entitled to become members of the State Bank of India Employees Provident Fund/Pension Fund.

¶12

The petitioners accepted the terms and conditions and were appointed on contract basis on the strength of said appointment letters.

¶13

Thereafter, in terms of Annexure P-3, communication dated 29^th July, 2010, the petitioners were informed that the Bank had decided to offer the petitioners appointment as Rural Marketing and Recovery Officers in Specialist Cadre JMGS-1 and if they were interested in accepting the offer, they may return a duplicate copy of the said letter, duly signed not later than 02.08.2010 and report to the Regional Manager, Regional Business Officer, R-II, Shimla, on 02.08.2010 for instructions. It was also mentioned in the said communication that in case the petitioners accepted the offer of

¶14

3

¶15

2026:HHC:25847

¶16

permanent absorption, then their engagement on contract basis shall stand terminated w.e.f. 31.07.2010. It was specifically mentioned in this appointment letter that the appointee shall be governed by the State Bank of India Officers’ Service Rules, 1992, except for pension and upon joining the service, the appointee may be entitled to Defined Contributory Pension Scheme or New Pension Scheme or such other pension scheme which may be applicable at the time when the appointment of the petitioners will become effective or at a future date.

¶17

The petitioners accepted the said offer of permanent absorption and thereafter, they were permanently absorbed against the positions mentioned in Annexure P-3 and they continue to serve the respondent–Bank on regular basis since then. In the interregnum, the petitioners have also gained promotions as the Court stands informed.

¶18

Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the respondent-Bank issued Annexure P-4, communication dated 6^th December, 2010 and it was mentioned in the same that as the Government of India had made it mandatory that w.e.f. 01.01.2004, all new recruits to the Central Government Service shall be governed by the provisions of Defined Contribution Pension Scheme (DCPS)/New Pension Scheme (NPS) and further as per Industry level settlement and Joint Note dated 27.04.2010, in Banks (other than State Bank of India), all employees/Officers, who join the services on

¶19

4

¶20

2026:HHC:25847

¶21

or after 01.04.2010 shall be governed by the provisions of DCPS/NPS, therefore, in this connection, the Central Board of the Bank, has decided that all categories of officers (including full time /part time Medical Officers) and employees (Clerical and subordinate including security guards), who join/ joined the Bank in permanent scale (including part time) on or after 1^st August, 2010, shall be offered the benefits of DCPS/NPS in lieu of existing defined benefit pension scheme, pending formulation of detailed Scheme. Learned Counsel for the petitioners argued that in light of the fact that in the present case, the petitioners were already working on contract basis before their services were regularized, they have to be treated as officers who were in service of the Bank before 01.08.2010 and therefore, they have to be excluded from communication dated 6^th December, 2010 or alternatively communication dated 6^th December, 2010, has to be read as excluding the petitioners by treating them to be entitled to the old pension scheme which was in vogue in the bank when the petitioners joined the bank on contract basis. Learned Counsel also referred to Annexure P-5, which is an office memorandum issued by the Department of Pension and PW, Government of India, to substantiate the case of the petitioners. No other point was urged. 7. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondentBank submitted that the petition was not maintainable at all for more than one reason. He submitted that in the present case, it is

¶22

5

¶23

2026:HHC:25847

¶24

not as if the services of the petitioners were regularized against the post, upon which they were appointed on contract basis. By referring to Annexure P-3, learned Counsel submitted that the petitioners were offered permanent absorption in terms of Annexure P-3 against the post of Rural Marketing and Recovery Officers on terms and conditions mentioned therein and the petitioners accepted the said offer of the bank, without any protest, on the terms and conditions mentioned therein. He submitted that the petitioners were permanently appointed as Rural Marketing and Recovery Officers w.e.f. 02.08.2010. He further submitted that in terms of Annexure P-3, it was categorically made clear that upon their appointment as such, the petitioners will be entitled to DCPS or NPS or such other pension scheme as may be applicable at the time when their appointment will become effective or at a future date, which condition was also accepted by the petitioners, without any protest of any kind. With regard to the contractual appointment, learned Counsel submitted that the letter Annexure P-2 (colly.), in terms whereof, the petitioners were offered appointment on contract basis, categorically mentioned that on account of their appointment on contract basis, the petitioners were not entitled to become a member of the State Bank of India Employees Provident Fund/Pension Fund and they also accepted this term and condition without any protest. Learned Counsel further submitted that communication Annexure P-4 came into existence in the year 2010

¶25

6

¶26

2026:HHC:25847

¶27

and the same was not assailed by the petitioners within some reasonable time thereafter and there is no challenge to the same even in the present writ petition. Learned Counsel also submitted that the prayers otherwise made in the writ petition are hit by delay and laches as the petitioners are raising an issue which attained finality as far back as in the year 2010, by way of present petition which was filed in the present 2024. Learned Counsel, by referring to the stand taken by the respondents in the reply submitted that the petitioners were initially appointed in the year 2008 on contract basis, subject to conditions including clause 4, which clearly stipulated that the services of the petitioners on contract basis shall be governed by Management Trainees/Executives Service and Conduct Rules, 2004 and said conditions were duly accepted by the petitioners. Learned Counsel further submitted that at the time when the petitioners were permanently absorbed, terms and conditions on the basis of which the same was done, were duly mentioned in Annexure P-3 and even as far as Annexure P-4 is concerned, the Central Board of the State Bank has taken a conscious decision that the officers and employees, who join/joined the Bank on or after 01.08.2010, will not be entitled to become members of the existing SBI Pension Fund, i.e. old pension scheme. Learned Counsel also submitted that herein it is not the case of the petitioners that in terms of Annexure P-4, dated 06.12.2010, a right which stood conferred upon the petitioners, was taken away. He

¶28

7

¶29

2026:HHC:25847

¶30

submitted that Annexure P-3 clearly mentioned DCPS/NPS and Annexure P-4 dated 06.12.2010, also ratifies said position only. With regard to the reliance placed by learned Counsel for the petitioners on Annexure P-5, learned Counsel for the respondent-Bank submitted that Annexure P-5 was not an office memorandum issued by the Bank but it was an office memorandum issued by the Department of Pension and PW, Government of India, relatable to the Central Government Employees. He submitted that there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the same was also subsequently adopted by the Bank and therefore, as per learned Counsel, reliance placed thereupon by the petitioners, was totally misconceived. Accordingly, he prayed that as there is no merit in the present petition, the same deserves to be dismissed with costs.

¶31

I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the pleadings as well as documents appended therewith.

¶32

It is a matter of record that herein the petitioners were initially engaged on contract basis in the year 2008 as OfficersMarketing and Rural Recovery. It was clearly mentioned in their appointment letters that their appointment in the bank shall be on contract basis for a period of two years and the same shall not confer any right upon them to get permanently absorbed in the bank. It was also clearly mentioned in the said appointment letter that the appointee shall not be entitled to become a member of the

¶33

8

¶34

2026:HHC:25847

¶35

State Bank of India Employees Provident Fund/Pension Fund. Further, it was also clearly mentioned in the said appointment letter that the service of the appointee in the Bank will be governed by the State Bank of India Management Trainees/Executives Service and Conduct Rules, 2004.

¶36

It is a matter of record that the petitioners initially joined on contract basis on the strength of the said appointment letters, terms and conditions mentioned wherein were accepted by them without any protest.

¶37

It is a matter of record that while the petitioners were serving the respondent-Bank on contract basis, in terms of Annexure P-3 (colly.), dated 29^th July, 2010, offer was made to them for their permanent absorption against the post of Rural Marketing and Recovery Officers Specialist Cadre in JMGS-I, on terms and conditions mentioned therein. Paras-2 and 5 of the said appointment offer are being quoted herein below:-

¶38

“2. You will be governed by State Bank of India Officers' Service Rules, 1992 (except for pension), a copy of which will be given to you upon your joining the service. Please note that you may be entitled to Defined Contributory Pension Scheme or new pension scheme or such other pension scheme as may be applicable at the time when your appointment becomes effective or at a future date. You will be required to sign a declaration of fidelity and secrecy at the time of joining. Your

¶39

9

¶40

2026:HHC:25847

¶41

salary will be in the pay scale of 14500-600/7-18700-700/220100-800/7-25700 and your basic pay will be Rs. 15,100/p.m. You will be untitled to other allowances viz, dearness allowances compensatory allowance, house rent allowance, medical facilities as per the rules of the Bank.

¶42

5. In case, you are interested in accepting the offer, please return the duplicate copy of this letter duly signed in token of acceptance not letter than 02.08.2010 and report to the Regional Manager, Regional Business Office, R-II, Shimla (H.P.) on 02.08.2010 for instructions. Please note that your appointment will be effective from the date you report for duty. Please also note that if you accept this offer of permanent appointment, your engagement on contract basis shall stand terminated w.e.f. 31.07.2010.”

¶43

Thus, in terms of appointment offer Annexure P-3, the petitioners were informed that upon joining the service, they will be entitled to Defined Contribution Pension Scheme or New Pension Scheme or such other pension scheme as may be applicable at the time when their appointment will become effective or at a future date. It was also clearly mentioned in the appointment letter that if these terms and conditions are acceptable to the petitioners, then in token of acceptance, they will return a duplicate copy of the letter, duly signed by them, not later than 02.08.2010 and report to the Regional Manager, Regional Business Officer, R-II, Shimla, on

10

2026:HHC:25847

02.08.2010.

A perusal of Annexure P-3 (colly.) demonstrates that all the petitioners had appended their signatures of acceptance on the terms and conditions mentioned therein in their respective appointment letters.

¶48

Thereafter, the petitioners were offered permanent appointment against the post of Rural Marketing and Recovery Officers w.e.f. 02.08.2010.

¶49

The above facts make one thing very clear that when the petitioners were initially offered appointment on contract basis, it was made clear to them that their appointment on contract basis will not confer any right of permanent absorption upon them and further appointment on contract basis shall also not entitle them to become members of the State Bank of India Employees Provident Fund/Pension Fund.

¶50

Further, when the petitioners were offered permanent appointment in terms of Annexure P-3, it was categorically held out to them that upon joining, they will be entitled to DCPS or NPS or such other pension scheme which may be applicable when their appointment will become effective or at a future date. Thus, the services of the petitioners, neither, when they were serving on contract basis nor after they were permanently absorbed, came under the ambit of the old pension scheme which was in vogue in the respondent-Bank at any stage.

¶51

11

¶52

2026:HHC:25847

¶53

In this backdrop, if one refers to Annexure P-4, a perusal thereof demonstrates that this was a communication issued by the Deputy Managing Director & Corporate Development Officer of the respondent Bank to all Branches/Offices/CC Establishments of State Bank of India, on the following subjects:-

¶54

“(1) INTRODUCTION OF DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PENSION SCHEME (DCPS)/ NEW PENSION SCHEME (NPS) FOR ALL CATEGORIES OF NEWLY RECRUITED OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES (INCLUDING PART TIME) W.E.F. 01.08.2010.

¶55

(2) AMENDMENT OF RULE 45 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA OFFICERS' SERVICE RULES, 1992.

¶56

(3) AMENDMENT OF UNIFORM TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE (UTCS) FOR PERMANENT FULL TIME/PART TIME MEDICAL OFFICERS.”

¶57

In this communication, the officers concerned were informed as under:-

¶58

“The Government of India has made it mandatory that with effect from 1.1.2004 all new recruits to the Central Government service shall be governed .1.2004 by the provisions of Defined Contribution Pension Scheme (DCPS) / New Pension Scheme (NPS). Further, as per the industry level Settlement and Joint Note dated 27.4.2010, in Banks (other than State Bank of India), all employees/officers who join the services on or after 1.4.2010 shall be governed by the provision of DCPS/NPS.

¶59

12

¶60

2026:HHC:25847

¶61

2. In this connection, the Central Board of the Bank, in its meeting held on 8^th November, 2010 has decided that all categories of officers (including full time/part time Medical officers) and employees (clerical and sub-ordinate including, security guards), who join/joined the Bank in permanent scale (including part-time) on or after 1st August 2010 shall be offered the benefits of DCPS/NPS in lieu of existing defined benefit pension scheme, pending formulation of detailed Scheme. As such, the other instructions in this regard are as under:

¶62

The above-mentioned officers/employees, who join/joined the Bank on or after 1st August 2010 will not be entitled to become members of existing SBI Pension Fund.

¶63

ii. Such officers/employees will, in addition to being eligible to DCPS/NPS, become members of SBI Provident Fund i.e. Contributory Provident Fund, subject to provisions contained

¶64

in SBI Employees' Provident Fund Rules. Further, Gratuity, as applicable, will continue to be available to the new recruits. iii. Till such time the detailed Scheme of DCPS/NPS is formulated, recovery of 10% of the Salary and Dearness Allowance will be made from the salary from the month such officers/employees join the Bank.

¶65

iv. The Bank, as employer, shall make matching contribution in regard to such officer/employee.

¶66

V. The definition of 'Salary' shall be same as taken for the purpose of computation of pension as per SBI Employees

¶67

13

¶68

2026:HHC:25847

¶69

Pension Fund Rules.

¶70

vi. The HRMS department of the Bank is advised to keep employee-wise records for recovery of contribution from the salary of such officers/employees and matching contribution by the Bank. The funds thus accumulated will be kept separately in Current Account so that the funds can be transferred to the appropriate agency once the Scheme is finalised. The amount will earn interest at the same rate as that of the Current Account of Provident Fund balance i.e. 8.5% at present. The interest amount will be passed on to the respective trustee, employee wise, once the Scheme is finalised.

¶71

3. Further, the Central Board has also approved amendments in the following Rules/Terms & Conditions:

¶72

i. State Bank of India Officers Service Rules 1992: The amended Rule 45 of SBI Officers Service Rules, with effect from 1.8.2010 is enclosed as Annexure-1

¶73

ii. Uniform Terms and Conditions of Service (UTCS) for Permanent Full time/Part time Medical Officers: Provisions as regards introduction of DCPS/NPS for all categories of Medical Officers joined/join Bank's service in permanent scale have been incorporated in UTCS, enclosed as AnnexureII.

¶74

4. Please arrange to advise all categories of concerned officers and employees. Further, please arrange to deliver a copy of this circular under acknowledgement to all categories

¶75

14

¶76

2026:HHC:25847

¶77

of officers (including full time/part time Medical officers) and employees who have joined the Bank in permanent scale (including part time) on or after 1st August 2010. A copy of their acknowledgement should be placed on record in their Service File.

¶78

5. Please arrange accordingly.”

¶79

Thus, in terms of this communication, on the basis of instructions of the Department of Pension and PW, Government of India, which became effective from 01.01.2004, the Central Board of the respondent Bank, in its meeting held on 8^th November, 2010, had decided that all categories of officers (including full time/part time Medical Officers) and employees as mentioned therein, who join/joined the Bank in permanent scale (including part time) on or after 01.08.2010, were to be mandatorily offered the benefits of DCPS/NPS in lieu of existing defined benefit pension scheme, pending formulation of detailed Scheme.

¶80

As the petitioners stood permanently absorbed against the post of Marketing and Recovery Officers, w.e.f. 02.08.2010, they obviously, in terms of Annexure P-4 and also in terms of the terms and conditions of their appointment letters Annexure P-3 (colly.), were to be governed by DCPS/NPS for the purpose of pensionary benefits.

¶81

After Annexure P-4 came into existence on 6^th of December, 2010, the petitioners made no attempt to assail the same

¶82

15

¶83

2026:HHC:25847

¶84

with regard to the cut-off-date mentioned therein of any kind, be it on account of the petitioners having joined the bank on an earlier date, though on contract basis.

¶85

Meaning thereby that they acquiescenced to the contents of Annexure P-4, dated 06.04.2010, as no challenge was made by any of the petitioners to the said circular.

¶86

After 14 years from the order of their permanent absorption, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, in which, the relief sought is that a mandamus be issued to the respondents to count the service rendered by them on contract basis prior to their regularization as qualifying service for the purpose of pension.

¶87

This Court is of the considered view that the petitioner cannot now assail e-Circular dated 06.12.2010 on the ground of delay and laches. Even in the present writ petition, there is no challenge to the e-Circular dated 06.12.2010. As far as the reliance placed on Annexure P-5 is concerned, the same is also totally misconceived for the reason that this office memorandum, which has been issued by the Government of India, has no relation or relevance with the issues raised by the petitioners in the writ petition because it is not the case of the petitioners that after the issuance of this office memorandum, the Central Board of the Bank took some subsequent decision, which conferred a fresh cause to the petitioners to approach the Court.

¶88

16

¶89

2026:HHC:25847

¶90

This Court again reiterates that the petitioners accepted their appointment on contract basis initially on the terms and conditions mentioned in their appointment letters without any protest. They accepted their absorption in the respondent-Bank on the terms and conditions, on which, absorption was offered to them without any protest. This demonstrates that now they are estopped from praying that the contract service rendered by them be counted for the purpose of pension for the reason that the petitioners by seeking this claim cannot directly or indirectly seek a mandamus from this Court that the actual appointment of the petitioners in the Bank should relate back to the date when they were appointed on contract basis. In fact, this is not even the prayer made in the writ

¶91

petition.

¶92

Accordingly, in light of above discussion, as obviously, no relief, as is being prayed for, can be granted to the petitioners because they are estopped from claiming any relief, not only on account of delay and laches but also on account of their acquiescence, upon accepting the terms and conditions, on which, their services were permanently absorbed vide Annexure P-3, without any protest etc., the present petition being devoid of merit, is dismissed. Though, the Court is inclined to impose heavy cost upon the petitioners but on the request of learned Counsel for the petitioners, the Court is refraining from imposing such cost.

¶93

The petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also

¶94

17

¶95

2026:HHC:25847

¶96

pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.

¶97

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge July 01, 2026 ( narender )

Dinesh Sharma v. The State bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Sharma v. The State bank of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kiran Bala Vs State of Hp and Others

Kamlesh Kumari Vs the State of Hp and Others

Anita Kumari Vs the State of Hp and Others

Manu Kaushal Vs State of Hp and Others

Rajesh Thakur Vs the Hrtc and Others

Rachit Vs the State of Hp and Others