VIJAY KUMAR versus CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2025] 7 S.C.R. 523 · Decided: 15-07-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA · Disposal: Case Allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 7 S.C.R. 523 : 2025 INSC 848
Vijay Kumar 
v. 
Central Bank of India & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No. 9496 of 2025)
15 July 2025
[Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and  
Joymalya Bagchi,* JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
The High Court upheld reduction of one-third of the pension payable 
to the appellant under the Central Bank of India (Employees’) 
Pension Regulations, 1995.
Headnotes†
Central Bank of India (Employees’) Pension Regulations, 
1995 – Central Bank of India (Officers’) Service Regulations, 
1979 – Central Bank of India Officer Employees’ (Discipline and 
Appeal) Regulations, 1976 – Allegation against the appellant 
that he sanctioned loans without proper appraisal – Inquiry was 
initiated – Inquiry report held the appellant guilty – Consequent 
to which, appellant was compulsory retired by Deputy General 
Manager – Appellant submitted an appeal before Appellate 
Authority i.e., Field General Manager – During pendency 
of appeal, Field General Manager recommended award of  
two-third compulsory retirement pension – Later, appeal before 
the Appellate Authority was also dismissed – Appellant sought 
full retiral benefits before the High Court – The High Court 
upheld the decision of the Bank to reduce one-third of the 
pension payable to the appellant – Correctness:
Held: A plain reading of regulation 33 of the Pension Regulations 
would show award of pension less than full pension is to be done 
with prior consultation of the Board of Directors – Such prior 
consultation with the highest authority of the Bank i.e., Board of 
Directors must be understood as a valuable mandatory safeguard 
before an employee’s constitutional right to pension is curtailed – In 
these circumstances, a post facto approval cannot be a substitute 
of prior consultation with the Board before the decision is made – 
* Author
524
[2025] 7 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
The order of the Field General Manager reducing pension without 
prior consultation of Board of Directors and the order of the High 
Court is set aside – Thus, the Bank directed to take appropriate 
decision regarding reduction of pension after giving an opportunity 
of hearing to the appellant and with prior consultation of the Board. 
[Paras 21, 24]
Central Bank of India (Employees’) Pension Regulations, 
1995 – Regn.33 (1) and (2) must be read conjointly:
Held: Clause (1) and clause (2) of regulation 33 must be read 
conjointly and in all cases when the full pension admissible to a 
compulsorily retired employee under the regulations is reduced, a 
prior consultation with the Board is necessary. [Para 19]
Central Bank of India (Employees’) Pension Regulations, 1995 – 
Regn. 33 – Central Bank of India Officer Employees’ (Discipline 
and Appeal) Regulations, 1976 – Competent Authority:
Held: ‘Competent Authority’ is defined in both Discipline and Appeal 
Regulations and Pension Regulations as an authority appointed by 
the Board for the purpose of such regulations – In the Discipline 
and Appeal Regulations, it is further clarified Competent Authority 
must be superior to the delinquent and not an officer holding rank 
lower than scale IV officer – Clause 3(b) of Discipline and Appeal 
Regulations read with Schedule shows that an officer not below 
rank of Assistant General Manager and holding a rank higher 
than the disciplinary authority is the appellate authority under 
such regulation – A combined reading of the provisions in both 
the regulations would indicate a Field General Manager (holding 
a rank superior to disciplinary authority and higher than Assistant 
General Manager) is not only an authority superior to the disciplinary 
authority empowered to reduce pension under clause (1) but also 
the appellate authority under Discipline and Appeal Regulations 
who could exercise appellate powers to reduce pension under 
clause (2) of Pension Regulations. [Para 13]
Case Law Cited
Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh [1953] 1 SCR 
1188 : (1953) 2 SCC 111 – referred to.
Indian Administrative Service (S.C.S.) Association, U.P. & Ors. v. 
Union of India & Ors. [1992] Supp. 2 SCR 389 : (1993) Supp. 1 
SCC 730 – relied on.
[2025] 7 S.C.R. 
525
Vijay Kumar v. Central Bank of India & Ors.
List of Acts
Central Bank of India (Employees’) Pension Regulations, 1995; 
Central Bank of India (Officers’) Service Regulations, 1979; 
Central Bank of India Officer Employees’ (Discipline and Appeal) 
Regulations, 1976.
List of Keywords
Service Law; Pension; Reduction of pension; 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.