As per case facts, petitioners, retired employees of the Bank, opted for and contributed to a statutory Pension Scheme introduced in 1989. The Bank later stopped pension payments citing financial ... constraints and retrospectively deleted the scheme via a 2014 amendment to circumvent previous High Court judgments. The petitioners, having retired post-amendment, were denied pensionary benefits. The question arose whether the petitioners can be denied retiral benefits from the Pension Scheme that was withdrawn prior to their retirement. Finally, the High Court ruled that the amendment cannot be given retrospective effect to deny statutory rights, affirming the scheme's statutory nature and existing precedents. All petitions were allowed, directing the Bank to release benefits within three months, with PF Act benefits to be set off, and imposed costs on the Bank for unwarranted litigation.