UCO BANK GENERAL MANAGER vs RAJENDRA SHANKAR SHUKLA — C.A. No. 2693/2013

Case under Section IV. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010265912010

Filing Date

21-Aug-2010

Registration No

C.A. No. 2693/2013

Diary Number

26591/2010

Order Date

15-Feb-2018

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Neutral Citation

2018 INSC 145

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Last updated 06-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section IV

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.UCO BANK GENERAL MANAGER

    Adv. RAJESH SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RAJENDRA SHANKAR SHUKLA

    Adv. VIRESH B. SAHARYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Feb-2018

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 15-Feb-2018

    Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF

  4. 15-Feb-2018

    After Week/Month/Vacation

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Madan B. Lokur and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta

  5. 07-Feb-2018

    After Week/Month/Vacation

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Madan B. Lokur and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta

  6. 07-Nov-2017

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 05-Aug-2016

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  8. 05-Aug-2016

    Office Report - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 05-Aug-2016

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  10. 23-Nov-2015

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 21-Mar-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  12. 20-Mar-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 11-Mar-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  14. 19-Aug-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 15-Jul-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  16. 12-May-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  17. 15-Mar-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  18. 01-Oct-2010

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  19. 21-Aug-2010

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 2693/2013

  20. [ 2018 INSC 145 ]

    Judgement - of Main CaseView PDF

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: C.A. No. 002693/2013 On 15-02-2018, the Supreme Court dismissed UCO Bank's appeal against Rajendra Shankar Shukla. The Court held that UCO Bank could not impose dismissal as punishment on Shukla after his superannuation. The Court criticized the Bank for preferring the appeal despite prior Supreme Court decisions establishing clear legal precedent, and imposed costs of Rs. 1 lakh payable to Shukla within 4 weeks as compensation for his litigation expenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case