Employee challenged the bank's rejection of his application under the SBI-VRS Scheme on the ground of disciplinary proceedings. The court held that the scheme expressly listed disciplinary action as a ground for rejection, voluntary retirement is not a vested right, and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2024:RJ-JP:14128]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2186/2001
Satya Prakash Saxena son of Late Shri R.S. Saxena, aged about 59 years, Resident of 325, Vasundhara Colony, Tonk Road, Jaipur.
----Petitioner
Versus
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pradeep Asthana For Respondent(s) : Mr. Taran Gupta with Ms. Shivalika Srivastva Ms. Krati Gaur
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
20/03/2024
(2 of 3)
[2024:RJ-JP:14128]
[CW-2186/2001]
granted in favour of your humble answering respondents.”
both the sides and upon a further perusal of the record, the following pertinent facts emerge, as noted herein-under:-
[2024:RJ-JP:14128]
[CW-2186/2001]
(3 of 3)
(SAMEER JAIN),J
DEEPAK/19
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner was entitled to voluntary retirement under the SBI-VRS Scheme despite pending disciplinary action.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Board of Trustees Vs. T.S.N. Raju and Ors.Relied on¶52
(2006) 7 SCC 664 · Who else cites this
Satya Prakash Saxena
State Bank of India
The General Manager, State Bank of India
The Assistant General Manager, S.B.I.
Sameer Jain
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
