WE ARE HAPPY TO PUBLISH aiipa's SECOND MOST IMPORTANT NOTE ON COURT CASES FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES. EARLIER NOTE CAN BE SEEN IN 'PAGES' ALONGSIDE.(CLICK HERE FOR AIIPA's EARLIER CIRCULAR ON THE SUBJECT...)
.
LIC PENSIONERS' ISSUES VIS-A-VIS COURT CASES
“ IF THE NUANCES OF THE CONTENTS OF THE NOTE AND RESOLUTION ARE DECIPHERED, ONE MAY UNDERSTAND THERE WAS NO MENTION OF UPGRADING EARLIER
BASIC PENSION TO CORRESPOND TO WAGE STRUCTURE AT 1740 POINTS AND THERE WAS A
SPECIFIC DECISION FOR IMPLEMENTATION AFTER GOVERNMENT NOTIFICATION. ”
THUS AVERRED THE CIRCULAR OF ALL INDIA INSURANCE PENSIONERS’
ASSOCIATION (AIIPA), ISSUED ON 7-9-2012 AFTER ITS CENTRAL COMMITTEE MEETING IN
JULY 2012 HELD AT NAGPUR; THE CIRULAR TALKED OF TWO ASPECTS OF THE LIC’S BOARD
NOTE AND RESOLUTION OF 24-11-2001, ONE THAT RELATED TO DEARNESS RELIEF
NEUTRALISATION AND THE OTHER RELATED TO THE METHODOLOGY OF IMPLEMENTATION.
Why the Circular was issued ?
THE ORGANISATION HAD TO COME OUT WITH SUCH A CIRCULAR AS
THERE WERE CONFUSING AND MISLEADING INTERPRETATIONS OF ONE PART OF THE LIC’S
NOTE AND BOARD RESOLUTION CONCERNING FULL NEUTRALISATION VIS-À-VIS UPDATION OF
PENSION.
IN THE CIRCULAR GIVING THE EXAMPLE OF HGA SCALE, THE
ORGANISATION ASSUMED NOTIONALLY FULL NEUTRALISATION IN DEARNESS RELIEF UPTO
1740 POINTS AND ON THE OTHER HAND, LIC HAD ASSUMED ONLY MERGER OF ACTUAL
DEARNESS RELIEF IN ITS TRUNCATED FORM PAYABLE - AS
MENTIONED IN ITS LEGAL DOCUMENTS. THUS,
THE CIRCULAR SHOWED HIGHER MODIFIED PENSION AS COMPARED TO THE MODIFIED PENSION
AS ARRIVED AT BY LIC.
THE PENSIONER/S HAD CLAIMED UPDATION OF PENSION FROM THE
DATE OF THEIR RETIREMENT ON THE PLEA THAT THE LIC BOARD RESOLUTION IMPLIED
UPDATION OF PENSION. THEY HAD ALSO BASED
THEIR CLAIM FOR DEPOSIT OF AMOUNT FOR UPDATION OF PENSION ON THE GROUND THAT
JAIPUR HIGH COURT SINGLE JUDGE BENCH ORDER OF JANUARY 2010 HAD ALLOWED BOTH THE
WRIT PETITIONS, ONE OF WHICH HAD PRAYED FOR UPDATION OF PENSION.
THEY HAD ALSO CLAIMED REMITTANCE OF DEPOSIT FOR UPDATION OF
PENSION ALSO ON THE PLEA THAT A LETTER FROM LIC DATED 31-8-2001 TO THE
GOVERNMENT, HAD CONTEMPLATED UPDATION OF PENSION BEFORE THE MATTER WAS PLACED
BEFORE THE BOARD. HOWEVER, THE LETTER
DATED 31-12-2001 AFTER THE BOARD RESOLUTION WRITTEN TO THE GOVERNMENT
SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT BOARD HAD APPROVED THE PROPOSAL AS PER THE NOTE PLACED
BEFORE IT.
LIC HAD FILED AN SLP AS THE ORDERS OF JAIPUR HIGH COURT UPTO
THE DISMISSAL OF ITS REVIEW PETITION HAD HELD THAT IT WAS NOT NECESSARY TO GET
THE APPROVAL OF THE GOVERNMENT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF ITS BOARD RESOLUTION OF
NOVEMBER 2001.
CONTEMPT PETITION.
A contempt petition in relation to one of the cases in
Jaipur High Court was pending when the SLP came up before the Supreme Court and
the apex court ordered stay of proceedings in the contempt petition subject to
LIC depositing the amount payable to the employees within a time frame and LIC
deposited certain amount in the Jaipur High Court.
Contesting the stand of LIC on the amount deposited, the petitioner
moved the Supreme Court with a contempt petition and claimed that LIC should
deposit the amount for all employees and not only for some of the petitioners
and for updation of pension and not merely only for Full Neutralisation.
However, the Contempt Petition was withdrawn and
simultaneously sought liberty to seek clarification of order of the Supreme
Court in November 2011. In their IAs,
they reiterated their stand on deposit of amount for all employees and for
updation of pension. In its order of
17-11-2012, the Supreme Court modified some portions of its earlier order and
ordered LIC to deposit the amount, only in respect of the petitioners from the
date of their eligibility for retiral benefits.
LIC decided to work out amount payable to the eligible
petitioners from August 1, 1997 for cent percent neutralization in Dearness
Relief and accordingly remitted the amount in Jaipur High Court.
Aggrieved by this, the petitioner moved the Jaipur High
Court with his earlier contempt petition and contended that LIC had not
remitted the amount as per Supreme Court order.
The court observed that, if a situation as this existed, the petitioner
was to move the Supreme Court in the matter.
Contempt Petition taken to Supreme Court.
Interlocutory Application Nos. 7 and 8 were filed in the Supreme Court with prayer
inter alia for directions to Jaipur High Court for getting the Single Judge
Bench Order implemented and for the contempt petition to be heard by the same
judge who decided the case the first instance in January 2010.
When LIC was advised to file its reply by the Supreme Court,
LIC filed its counter. It contended that
the petitioner was claiming for more than what had been granted by the Single
Judge Bench of the Jaipur High Court and the LIC Board Resolution of November
2001 never intended for pension updation.
LIC also said amount payable to the eligible petitioners from August 1,
1997, has been calculated and that it has been done subject to their rights and
contentions raised in SLP filed in the Supreme Court.
When the matter came up before the apex court, the IAs were
dismissed and the Supreme Court gave the following order:
“… In our view,
no case is made out for issuing any further direction to the petitioner in the
matter of deposit of the amount in terms of the initial order passed by the
Court. The applications are accordingly
dismissed. ”
- The petitioner/s who has/have become respondents in the SLP filed by LIC in the Supreme Court, still go about informing the pensioners at large that the latest Supreme Court Order is in their favour and there is nothing to worry, though certain section of them feel that it has been a set back.
According to the petitioners, moves will be made to
implicate LIC in the contempt proceedings before Jaipur High Court and to get
the Single Judge Order implemented.
IN RETROSPECT.
- IN RETROSPECT, WE FEEL THE ISSUE OF FULL NEUTRALISATION IN DEARNESS RELIEF FOR PRE-AUGUST 1997 PENSIONERS AND INCREASE IN EX-GRATIA OF PRE-1986 PENSIONERS COULD HAVE BEEN CLINCHED WHEN THE MANAGEMENT OF LIC AND GOVERNMENT EXPRESSED FAVOURABLE INCLINATION AND THAT WAS NOT TO BE WITH THE AUTHORITIES HARDENING THEIR STAND IN THE AFTERMATH OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS.
The Order of the Single Judge Bench of Jaipur High Court
allowed both the writ petitions and passed the following:
“…In light of the discussion made above, both the writ
petitions are allowed. The respondent
Corporation is directed to take a decision for implementation of the resolution
dated 24-11-2001 passed by the Board.
The respondent Corporation cannot provide different criteria for grant
of Dearness Allowance to the existing pensioners based on cut off date, i.e.,
31-7-1997. The benefit arising out of
the directions above would, however, be considered by the respondent Corporation
so that every retired employee may get the same benefit. Costs made easy. “
As elaborately explained in our earlier circular, the Board
Resolution and note deal only with merger of Dearness Relief upto 1740 points
and not updation of pension to the wage structure at 1740 points.
The petitioners had been trying to establish that the LIC
Board Resolution implied pension updation by approaching the courts to force
LIC to deposit amount towards pension updation.
Initially, their refrain was deposit for all employees and with the
order of November 17, 2012, of the Supreme Court limiting the benefit to
petitioners, their first argument had fallen off.
The petitioners have been claiming for deposit of amount for
pension updation and towards this end, had been filing IAs and with the
dismissals of IAs, it is not clear whether their stand on deposit for pension
updation still holds good.
We now learn that another application has been filed in
Jaipur High Court under the contempt petition reiterating the stand that LIC
has not deposited amount as per Supreme Court Order. It has stated that the LIC Board Resolution
talks of giving weightage of 11.25% but LIC has only added the Dearness Relief
instead. LIC has not remitted the amount
within the time frame and hence automatically stay granted elapsed and LIC is
spending policyholders’ money against the national litigation policy and
contemnors have not cared to appear in the Court and the contempt petition is
under a particular writ seeking revision of pension and hence remittance only
for Dearness Relief neutralization is not a ground for stay as per Supreme
Court Order. The application seeks to
enforce the Single Judge Order and also to punish the officials for
non-compliance of the Court Order.
The Contempt Petition came up on 29-4-2013 in Jaipur High
Court and it is claimed, will come up on May 17, 2013. (Arguments heard on
20-5-2013 and HC, Jaipur has now issued Orders: " .... the present contempt petition before the High Court is to remain pending and are not to be proceeded with until the SLP (29956/2011 and 29957/2011) pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court are decided." - Ed.)
We have been refraining from reacting to the developments
lest we be misunderstood and the purpose of the circular is to trace happenings
after the Delhi Conference of AIIPA when a note was circulated and to give clear
picture of the present situation in order that pensioners fully grasp the
import and do not become vulnerable to misinformation campaign.
K. NATARAJAN
GENERAL SECRETARY