An employee who is given mandatory retirement in contravention of the law and then reinstated will be eligible to receive full pay and other benefits for the time they were out of work, according to a division bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
This verdict followed the Bank of India's (BOI) appeal of a single-judge decision that mandated the bank reimburse an employee for the time he was unemployed owing to mandatory retirement.
Narmada Prasad Chaudhary, who began working for the Bank of India in July 1974, is at issue in this case. He was prematurely retired from his job by the bank in January 2002. In the High Court, Chaudhary contested the ruling and prevailed.
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's verdict after the bank appealed the decision there. Chaudhary was consequently given his position back in September 2009.
However, the bank failed to factor in the more than seven years he was unemployed as a result of the mandatory retirement when determining his post-retirement compensation.
The computation of his pay and retirement benefits was impacted by this omission.
Chaudhary then filed an appeal with the High Court once more. A one-judge panel decided in his favor in this matter, directing the bank to reimburse him for his lost income, perks from his promotion, and other obligations during his leave of absence.
This verdict was contested by the bank management, and a division bench heard the case. Chief Justice SK Kait and Justice Vivek Jain led the division bench, which affirmed the ruling of the lower court.
During Chaudhary's forced retirement, they mandated that the Bank of India give him his full salary, benefits from his promotion, and other entitlements. Additionally, the bank was ordered by the court to pay him 8% interest on the amount owing.
No comments:
Post a Comment