2026:JHHC:10986 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 4730 of 2025 -- Ajay Kumar Singh, aged about 61 years, S/o Late Sri Nandlal Singh, R/o -Flat No. 401, Balajee Apartment, Heaven River View, Road No. 5, Hari Om Nagar, PO & PS Adityapur, Jamshedpur, District Seraikela-Kharsawan, Jharkhand ......Petitioner Versus 1. Punjab National Bank, through its Branch Manager, having its office at SSI Adityapur, Near Akashwani Chowk, PO & PS Adityapur, Jamshedpur, District Seraikela-Kharsawan, Jharkhand 2. Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank, having its Head Office at 7, Bhikaji Cama Place, PO & PS Chanakyapuri, New Delhi ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shailesh Poddar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate -- 08/09.04.2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for the following reliefs: a. Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ and/or Order directing the Respondent to reverse the debit of pension amount of Rs. 15,69,561/- from the savings bank account of the Petitioner, bearing number 3046000200200849, that was appropriated towards the settlement of outstanding housing loan of the Petitioner, along with 18% interest from the date of such debit i.e., 25.01.2024 till the date of actual payment. b. Issue appropriate writ of mandamus, or order, direction to the respondent granting a compensation of amount Rs. 5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakh Only) to the Petitioner for causing mental agony. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was working in the office of Punjab National Bank, Adityapur Branch and had taken a housing loan of Rs. 58,50,000/- in 2026:JHHC:10986 2 the year 2022 after executing several documents, wherein there was one clause that the Bank before recovering the amount will issue a demand letter. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the moment petitioner retired in the year 2023, the Bank on the basis of an undertaking recovered Rs. 35 Lakhs and odd from total balance amount which directly affected the petitioner in view of the fact that the said Rs. 35 Lakhs and odd were from his pension and gratuity. Learned counsel further submits that there is a settled proposition of law that pension and gratuity cannot be attached as it is the personal property of the employee and also the basic object of gratuity and pension is that the employee will take the fruits after his retirement; as such, the action of the Bank in recovering Rs. 35 Lakhs and odd is bad in law. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents relies upon its counter affidavit dated 16.10.2025 and also upon Annexures 4,5 & 6 of the writ application. 6. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it transpires that the petitioner was an Ex-Manager, who retired from the Bank's service on 31.12.2023. His retirement dues with Bank was Rs. 35,69,561.00 (Gratuity Rs.20,00,000.00 + Pension Commutation amount-Rs.15,69,561.00); whereas his outstanding housing loan dues towards Bank was more 2026:JHHC:10986 3 than Rs. 93 Lakhs as on 15.01.2024: For brevity, the same is extracted from the Counter Affidavit of the Bank. LOAN/DUES TYPE ACCOUNT NO. AMOUNT DUE INTEREST DEBIT UPTO REMARKS HOUSING 067010LH00000011 303421.00 31/12/2023 Principal Rs. 255361.00 & Interest Rs. 48060.00 HOUSING 67 067010LH00000039 5666884.00 31/12/2023 Principal Rs. 5353057.00 & Interest Rs.313827.00 HOUSING 67 067010LH00000048 1473258.00 31/12/2023 Principal Rs. 1435710.00 & Interest Rs.37548.00 HOUSING 67022500LH00000557 1574344.00 31/12/2023 Principal Rs. 747786.00 & Interest Rs.826558.00 HOUSING 67 022500LH00000618 290328.00 31/12/2023 Principal Rs. 172339.00 & Interest Rs.117989.00 Total 93,08,235.00 7. From the Counter Affidavit of the Respondent Bank, it appears that pension of the petitioner has been calculated as Re.45,000.00 approx. per month and his loan instalments deduction from salary was Rs. 61,474.00 as per his monthly salary slip at the time of his retirement. As such, the pension calculated was less than his loan deduction from salary. 2026:JHHC:10986 4 8. Further, in terms of Sanction Letter dated 28- 06-2023 of his housing loan duly acknowledged by petitioner and his spouse, he has given letter of authority dated 28-06-2023 (Annexures-2 & 3 of the writ petition) authorizing the Bank to utilize the amount of Provident Fund, Gratuity and all other dues payable to the employee when he ceases to be in the employment of the Bank towards adjustment of outstanding loan. Further, the petitioner has submitted letter being dated 23-06-2023 that his superannuation fund would be utilized for adjusting his outstanding loan. 9. It has been contended by Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner that he sent a letter dated 18-01-2024, vide his mail dated 18.01.2025 in which he has shown his other sources of income which are as follows: a. Rent from House Rs. 8,000.00 b. He planned for FD of Rs. 12,00,000.00, by which he expected to earn Rs. 8,690.00 approx. per month presuming rate of interest as 8.75%, c. Spouse income as IT return provided by him Rs. 27400=00.(approx.) However, the Branch did not accept his declaration as no proof/continuity of income was there. His terminal dues of Rs. 35,69,561=00 (Gratuity Rs. 20,00,000.00+Pension Commutation amount Rs. 15,69,561.00) was paid into his Savings A/c No. 3046000200849 on 19-01-2024. 2026:JHHC:10986 5 Subsequently, on the strength of his letter of authority dated 28-06-2023 and his undertaking dated 23- 06-2023, the said amount was transferred to the petitioner housing loan Account No. 067010LH000039 on 25-01-2024 with outstanding principal amount Rs.53,51,804.00 which reduced to Re. 17,82243.00 after adjustment and settled his terminal dues. Accordingly, EMI has been fixed as per the repayment capacity of the staff after retirement (Net take home should be 40% for Gross Income upto Rs. 50,000.00 in terms of HRDD Circular No. 886/2023). 10. As such, his Pension amount which has been duly sanctioned by Head Office along with Gratuity amount has been credited into the employee’s Savings A/C No. 3046000200849 on 19-01-2024 which was later on transferred to his housing loan A/c on 25-01-2024 as per his letter of authority dated 28-06-2023 and his undertaking dated 23-06-2023; as such, his Pension Commutation amount and also Gratuity amount has not been appropriated illegally as alleged. 11. Though, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that no demand letter was issued, but the stand of the Bank is acceptable to the extent that the moment the petitioner retired in the year 2023 the total loan amount was around Rs. 93 Lakhs and in order to secure the loan amount and not to harass the petitioner 2026:JHHC:10986 6 they have only recovered Rs. 35 Lakhs and odd, so that the balance amount could be realized by the petitioner. It is also relevant to mention here that the pension which was calculated as Rs. 45,000/- approx. per month and the loan instalment deduction from the salary was Rs. 61,474.00 as per the monthly salary slip at the time of his retirement; as such, the pension calculated was less than his loan deduction from salary and only due to all these reasons the Bank in the strength of undertaking, which is Annexure 6 of the writ application to the effect that “and whereas I agree and authorize the Bank to utilize the amount of Provident Fund and all other dues whatsoever, payable to me on my ceasing to be in the employment of the Bank or at the time of any payment of such P.F or other dues, towards payment of the amount due on the aforesaid loan”. The same undertaking was also given for the purpose of gratuity. 12. Though, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that a demand was not raised before realizing the part of retiral benefits; however this Court is of the considered view that the Bank has very rightly realized those amount because at the time of retirement the pension which was calculated was Rs. 45,000/- and the EMI on the date of retirement was of Rs. 61,474/- and as such by any stretch of imagination the petitioner could not have paid the instalment; thus, the commutation of pension and 2026:JHHC:10986 7 gratuity was realized rightly and regular pension after commutation is being paid to the petitioner. 13. I do not find any error in the action of the respondent; as such, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands dismissed. Pending I.A(s), if any, stands closed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 9th April, 2026 Jk Uploaded on 23/04/2026