# R. K. BANSAL vs BANK OF BARODA AND ORS.

Court: Delhi High Court
Date: 2026-05-12
Citation: W.P.(C)-683/2020 2026:DHC:4378
Petitioner: R. K. BANSAL
Respondent: BANK OF BARODA AND ORS.

[Official PDF on Delhi High Court website](https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/SVN12052026CW6832020_153050.pdf)

## Judgment text (excerpt)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 12th May, 2026. W.P.(C) 683/2020 R. K. BANSAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Mohammad Sajid, Advocate. versus BANK OF BARODA AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Arun Aggarwal, Mr. Lovelesh Kukreja, Mrs. Kajal Ashok Mishra, Advocates for R-1. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA JUDGMENT SANJEEV NARULA, J. (Oral): 1. R.K. Bansal, the Petitioner, served the erstwhile Dena Bank and, when he reached superannuation on 31st March, 2017, held the post of Deputy General Manager. A disciplinary proceeding, initiated shortly before his retirement, was continued thereafter and culminated in the order dated 12th February, 2018, by which the Bank imposed upon him the penalty of compulsory retirement, to operate from the date of superannuation. The Petitioner states that he has challenged that penalty in separate proceedings. The present writ petition only assails the order dated 20th December, 2019, whereby the Petitioner was informed that his pension had been reduced in accordance with Regulation 33 of the Dena Bank (Employees’) Pension Regulations, 1995. The question that arises is whether the Bank could 2. On 17th March, 2017, a

https://niyam.ai/judgements/high-court/2026/may/r-k-bansal-vs-bank-of-baroda-and-ors