Page 1 of 5. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK WP(C) No. 18407 of 2017 CNR No. ODHC010162302017 Judhistir Suna ..... Petitioner Mr. M.K. Khuntia, Advocate -versus- General Manager, UCO Bank & Ors. ..... Opposite Parties Mr. B.B. Swain, Advocate CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY ORDER 02.09.2026 Order No. 09 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Heard Mr. M.K. Khuntia, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. B.B. Swain, learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Parties. 3. Pursuant to order dtd.18.08.2026, learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Party-Bank fairly contended that relevant record with regard to sanction of pension in favour of the Petitioner is not available in the head office of the Opp. Party-Bank. 4. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia with the following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that the Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to admit the case, call for the records and after hearing both the parties pas the following reliefs: i) To direct the Opp. Parties to settle the pension of the petitioner as per UCO Bank Pension Regulation, 1995. ii) To direct the Opposite Parties to release the pensionary benefits of the petitioner with 18% interest; Page 2 of 5. ii) And pass such other order/orders as may be deemed fit and proper for the interest of justice. And for this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.” 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that pursuant to the notification issued by the Opp. Party-Bank under Annexure-3 on 20.08.2010, Petitioner made the application on 04.10.2010 under Annexure-4, expressing his willingness to deposit the required amount in terms of the stipulation contained in Para 3 of Annexure-3 which deals with the conditions for exercising option to get the benefit of pension within the time fixed therein. Para 3 of the condition for exercising the option and Para 3 of the timeline stipulated to make the application reads as follows:- “3) Employees described in category (3) above can opt for pension by an irrevocable option to be exercised as per the prescribed pro-forma (Annex-III) in five copies with the condition that they shall refund an amount equivalent to 156% of the amount received by them as Bank's Contribution to Provident Fund along with interest accrued thereon in favour of Trustees UCO Bank Employees Pension Fund within the stipulated time as agreed between the parties to the said Settlement/Joint Note. xxx xxx xxx 3) Employees as described in category (3) above can opt for Pension within sixty days from the date of this circular subject to their fulfillment of the stipulated conditions. However. Bank would advise them suitably the net amount refundable after setting off the amount of commutation etc. provided they intend to commute the admissible fraction of pension.” 5.1. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner contended that in terms of both the stipulations so reflected in Annxure-3 and quoted Page 3 of 5. hereinabove, Petitioner made the application within the stipulated time on 04.10.2010 under Annexure-4. The said application though was forwarded to the head office of the Opp. Party-Bank, but thereafter no decision was taken with due intimation to the Petitioner as to what amount Petitioner is required to deposit in order to get the benefit of pension. 5.2. It is contended that since Petitioner made the application within the time stipulated in Annexure-3 notification dtd.20.08.2010 and such application was duly forwarded to the head office, which is not disputed, Petitioner was never intimated to deposit the required amount in terms of Annexure-3. 5.3. It is also contended that in the counter affidavit so filed by the Opp. Party-Bank, it has been admitted that even though the option so submitted by the Petitioner on 04.10.2010 was forwarded to the head office on 12.03.2013 vide letter No. 13 dtd.18.02.2013, but no communication is available in the head office so far as claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of pension. Stand taken in Para 8 of the counter reads as follows:- “8) That, it is humbly submitted that though the petitioner submitted the option for pension in the branch as he has not adhere the condition of circular as mention above. However his option has been forwarded to Head Office on 12.03.2013 vide Letter BO/GOVAGA / GAD/33/2012-13 dtd. 18.02.2013, no communication available from the Head Office to the effect of the petitioner pension acceptance by Head Office.” 5.4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner accordingly contended that since Petitioner made the application within the Page 4 of 5. stipulated time period in terms of Annexure-3 and it is not disputed that such application missed somewhere in the head office after being forwarded by the branch on 18.02.2013, no fault can be found with the Petitioner in not depositing the required amount and getting the benefit of pension. Accordingly, it is contended that Opp. Party-Bank be directed to sanction the pension as due and admissible from the date of entitlement by accepting the deposit with due intimation in terms of Annexure-3 within a stipulated time period. It is also contended that Petitioner will make the deposit within a period of 2 (two) weeks from the date of receipt of the intimation. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the Opp. Party-Bank on the other hand contended that since the application forwarded to the head office on 18.02.2013 missed somewhere, no further action could be taken on the Petitioner’s claim. It is however contended that if Petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the amount in terms of Annexure-3, on due intimation, this Court can pass appropriate order. 7. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties and considering the submissions made, this Court finds that vide Annexure-3 notification dtd.20.08.2010, employees of the Bank were permitted to make the application to get the benefit of pension. As found, in terms of Annexure-3, Petitioner made the application on 04.10.2010 under Annexure-4. It is also not disputed that such application of the Petitioner was forwarded to the head office vide letter dtd.18.02.2013. But since thereafter the file got missing, no further action was taken on the Petitioner’s claim. Page 5 of 5. 7.1. Considering the submission made and since it is found that Petitioner has made the application in terms of Annexure-3 within the stipulated time period and because of missing of the relevant file, no action could be taken, this Court while disposing the writ petition, directs the Opp. Party-Bank to intimate the Petitioner with regard to the amount to be deposited by him in terms of Annexure-3 within a period of four (4) weeks hence. On such intimation being given, Petitioner is directed to make the deposit within a period of two (2) weeks thereof. 7.2. On such deposit of the amount, necessary action be taken to sanction and release the pension as due and admissible from the date of entitlement in favour of the Petitioner with release of all arrears within a period of 2 (two) months from the date of deposit of the amount by the Petitioner. 8. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. (BIRAJA PRASANNA SATAPATHY) Judge Sneha