Manoj Kumar v. Uco Bank And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CWP-28378-2025 Date of Decision : 27.10.2025 MANOJ KUMAR ....PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

UCO BANK AND ANOTHER ....RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

Present:

Mr. Naveen Sheokand, Advocate for the petitioner. SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J. (ORAL) 1.

The present writ petition has been preferred under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for premature retirement by keeping in view his present health condition, under Regulation No.32 of the UCO Bank (Employees Pension Regulations, 1998 or any other applicable regulation along with all the retirement benefits on medical grounds, with further prayer to direct the respondents to decide legal notice of the petitioner dated 12.08.2025 (Annexure P-8).

2.

Notice of motion.

3.

Mr. Nonish Kumar, Advocate for the respondent-UCO Bank, having been served with an advance copy of petition, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-UCO Bank and submits that legal notice dated 12.08.2025 (Annexure P-8) has already been decided by a speaking order. A copy of the same is stated to have been conveyed to the petitioner. 4.

In the light of the above, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission for withdrawal of the present petition with liberty to challenge the said speaking order, if need be. 5.

Prayer is accepted.

6.

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. (SANDEEP MOUDGIL) JUDGE 27.10.2025 NainaRajput Whether speaking /reasoned?

Yes / No Whether Reportable?

Yes / No NAINA KATHIAT 2025.10.28 10:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document