Choolanie vs People’s Bank and Others – sllr 2008 volume 2 page 093

In the case between SCHOOLANIE (Petitioner, an employee of People’s Bank) and PEOPLE’S BANK and Others (Respondents), the court addressed the issue of whether the Bank’s decision to retire the petitioner, who had a legitimate expectation of continued service extensions up to age 60 based on established past practice and internal circulars, violated fundamental rights under Article 12(1) of the Constitution. It was held that the Bank’s decision was arbitrary and procedurally unfair due to the failure to provide adequate reasons for denying an extension, thereby infringing upon the petitioner’s right to equal treatment. The decision reaffirmed the principle that administrative actions must be reasoned and consistent with legitimate expectations derived from previous conduct or policy. Establ