Judgment : The petitioner, a 70-year-old pensioner, is facing all sorts of difficulties to get his monthly pension released and credited to his bank account. It appears, the petitioner was employed with the South Central Railways and after having rendered 28 years of service, opted for voluntary retirement with effect from 16.10.1991. The 3rd respondent Divisional Railway Manager (Broad Gauge), South Central Railways, Secunderabad, who is the competent authority to sanction the post-terminal benefits, including monthly pension, has sanctioned the same. The petitioner was also furnished Pension Payment Order bearing PPO No. 59022104367. To avoid hardships to the pensioners from going around the Pension Payment Offices, on monthly basis, direct credit scheme to the bank accounts of the pensioners is introduced. The pensioner is required to open a savings bank account with any of the nationalized/scheduled banks and furnish the number of the said account to the Pension Disbursement Officers, so that each month, the pension shall be credited by way of transfer to the said account thus, facilitating the pensioner to draw money as and when required by him. It appears, the petitioner has opened one such SB account with the Syndicate Bank at its Rail Nilayam Branch and to the said account, his monthly pension was credited right up to March 2012. A sum of Rs.10,400/-, representing the monthly pension payable to the petitioner, was last credited to the SB account on 03.04.2012, being the pension payable for the month of March 2012. Thereafter, on 20.04.2012, a sum of Rs.858/- was also credited to the said account towards arrears of Dearness Allowance. As of 20.04.2012, a sum of more than Rs.3.71 lacs was lying to the credit of the said account. However, all of a sudden and without putting the petitioner on notice, the Syndicate Bank has debited his SB account in a sum of Rs.2,60,131/- and remitted the same to the credit of the Financial Advisor and Chief Audit Officer (FA & CAO), South Central Railways, Secunderabad on 21.04.2012. The petitioner’s problems started from there onwards. He took up the matter with the bank. Except stating that he has not submitted the life certificate, which is so essentially needed for him to secure credit of the monthly pension, the 1st respondent bank has not helped the cause of the petitioner. The petitioner’s problems started from there onwards. He took up the matter with the bank. Except stating that he has not submitted the life certificate, which is so essentially needed for him to secure credit of the monthly pension, the 1st respondent bank has not helped the cause of the petitioner. Though the bank seems to have addressed the FA & CAO for retransmission of the amount of Rs.2,60,131/-, FA & CAO, South Central Railways has raised an objection that if a pensioner does not furnish the life certificate every year, disbursement of pension will be stopped automatically, but however, without noticing the fact that the petitioner has not submitted the life certificate, the bank has continued to draw and credit the monthly pension to the SB account of the petitioner each month. That is an error committed by the bank, is the opinion expressed by the FA & CAO. Learned counsel for the petitioner, quite vociferously, would submit that without furnishing the life certificate to the bank, the question of securing credit of the pension amount each month would not arise at all. Obviously, the 1st respondent Syndicate Bank has committed a grave error in not properly forwarding the life certificates made available by the petitioner to the FA & CAO each year. All because of the fault of the 1st respondent bank, the FA & CAO has resorted to an extreme step of securing recovery of money from the bank account of the writ petitioner without there being any authorization from him. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that this is a grossly unjust act on behalf of the Syndicate Bank in debiting his account in a huge sum of money all because the said money is available in his account. In substance, it is urged that without there being any authorization from the petitioner, the bank should not have retransmitted the said money to FA & CAO. I can see considerable amount of force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. There is a fiduciary relationship between a customer and a bank. The monies of the customer are kept lying with the bank out of trust. I can see considerable amount of force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. There is a fiduciary relationship between a customer and a bank. The monies of the customer are kept lying with the bank out of trust. Unless the banker has the necessary authority either, in writing, or inferentially, no amount could have been debited from the account of a customer, but however, one can be alive to the possibility of an error being committed in operations undertaken by the bankers. If, by mistake or an error, certain amounts have been credited to the account of a customer, the customer cannot be treated to be the true owner of the said money. He has also every responsibility to secure rectification of the error and for refund of the money erroneously credited to his account. Therefore, though the banker should have conducted its proceedings little more transparently by informing the customer true facts, but however, when there is an error in crediting the SB account of the writ petitioner of his monthly pension, without securing life certificates from him periodically, retransmission of the said money to the FA & CAO cannot be completely faulted. However, the Indian Railways cannot disown its obligation to pay pension to its servants so long as grant of monthly pension is regulated by a statutorily enforceable scheme. The moment monthly pension is sanctioned to a retired servant, its disbursement is hedged by two conditions: 1) the pensioner should be alive for him to legitimately claim and receive the pension each month; and 2) he should maintain good conduct all through. In the absence of any adverse material brought to the notice of the Pension Sanctioning Authority, about the improper conduct of a pensioner, there is no way the disbursement of the monthly pension to a pensioner can be withheld as long as he is alive. For the purpose of assuredly knowing that the pensioner is alive, as a safety measure, life certificates are obtained annually from the pensioners. Strange it might look that a person has to come forward and demonstrate that he is still alive to receive the pension, but however, I refrain to pronounce any opinion as to whether any better method could have been devised by the Pension Payment Authorities than insisting upon securing annually the life certificate from the pensioners. Strange it might look that a person has to come forward and demonstrate that he is still alive to receive the pension, but however, I refrain to pronounce any opinion as to whether any better method could have been devised by the Pension Payment Authorities than insisting upon securing annually the life certificate from the pensioners. It is time that the Pension Payment Authorities should fall back upon some other secure biometric mechanism by which a pensioner can furnish and update his biometric index periodically. That, perhaps, would obviate the need to furnish life certificates annually. Anyway, I am sure the Pension Payment Authorities will spare appropriate consideration in that regard. However, the problem of the writ petitioner is that his monthly pension has been stopped from being disbursed. The FA & CAO is insisting for revalidation of the monthly pension of the petitioner. For that purpose, the sanctioning authority alone can revalidate the Pension Payment Order. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to approach the Divisional Railway Manager (Broad Gauge), South Central Railways, Secunderabad and furnish him his latest bank account number and also a life certificate in the form prescribed, if any therefor. It goes without saying that if the petitioner could furnish such a certificate in the year 2014, it pre-supposes that he was alive right up to 2014. Therefore, the 3rd respondent Divisional Railway Manger (Broad Gauge), within a maximum period of seven days from the date of receipt of an Application from the writ petitioner for revalidation of his Pension Payment Order, he would do so by revalidating the same and within a maximum period of 15 days there from, the FA & CAO would not only release the monthly pension for the past period, for which it has been withheld, but would also continue to release it month after month. Further, as soon as the monthly Pension Payment Order is revalidated by the 3rd respondent, a photocopy of the same will be made available to the FA & CAO, South Central Railways and also to the Chief Manager of the bank where from the petitioner prefers to draw his pension from now on and also the Chief Manager of the bank which has debited his SB account and retransmitted the money, to secure the release of the said money. The bank will personally attend to that work by deputing one of its officers to the Office of the FA & CAO instead of asking the writ petitioner to attend to the said work as the bank has failed to put the petitioner on notice before debiting his account. With this, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the miscellaneous applications, if any pending in the Writ Petition shall also stand disposed of.