RB KISHORE, VP, AIRIEF

BASIC, FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES AND POSTULATES - A RUNNING COMMENTARY OF SALIENT & SAGACIOUS ARGUMENTS FOR REBUTTAL OF UOI AFFIDAVIT, DISMISSAL OF SLP 29956 & 29957 OF 2011 AND TO CLINCH VICTORY IN SC AND JAIPUR HC. 

(Continued from earlier Post No.2)

PART II

II) 1) UOI no ground to intervene.  

i) We have Supreme Court judgement of 3/6/10 categorically stating that Statutory Bodies created under law by Govt hold independent position & decision making & Superior authority cannot & must not intervene & even if they do so, that authorities dictat shall not prevail or hold good.

            “Therefore, the law on the question can be summarized to the effect that no higher authority in the hierarchy or an  Appellate or Revisional authority can exercise the powers of the Statutory authority nor the superior authority can mortgage its wisdom and direct the statutory authority to act in a particular manner. If the appellate or revisional authority takes upon itself the task of the statutory authority and passes an order, it remain unenforceable for the reason that it cannot be termed to be in order passed under the Act”         

             ii) It is, therefore, abundantly clear from the above that when once after all due considerations & circumstances etc, the  Pension Rules, 1995, as a Complete Code by itself, was promulgated by LIC with Govt Notification, all pros & cons are cleared & the course of Pension Rules, 1995  must run  without any interference by Higher Authority or UOI. Here LIC is the Statutory Authority & UOI is the Revisional Authority.

              Therefore the  Corporation is bound to implement the decision it has taken in its meeting held on 24.11.2001 with DR rectification for pre-8/97 pensioners & pension upgradation open at that point of time with merger of Revised DR with Basic Pension & so on consecutively for CPI 600, 1148, 1740

             It is settled law as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in catena

of judgments that in the functioning of Boards of Statutory Authority, the State, its authorities, Ministers and Politicians have no say.

            iii) The Hon'ble Kerala HC observed “the status of the Corporation (KSWC) as a jurist person, as a body corporate with a common seal and its existence would be scuttled and subservient to the dictates of the Govt as if the Corporation is a department in the Govt. This is

plainly impermissible ”

2)i) Differential & discriminatory violates Article 14,16 & 21 of Constitution

Miniclassification  is wrong.

Pensioners are treated as Class V

TO READ MORE, PLEASE CLICK BELOW.

 ii) Indifference & silence to pensioners demands indicate such a shabby, miserly pension to the pensioners  & it is ridiculous that Basic Pension continues  UNCHANGED for 20 long years, when revision of pension takes  place  automatically to Govt pensioner, CGovt, SGovt  & RAILWAYS  as  ordained in  IV, V, VI PC pronouncements.

Denial of  relief  to insurance pensioners is clearly arbitrary and discriminatory   Static, unchangeable basic pension is unthinkable. We have already outlined subsisting Regular Pension wide cleavage & difference in relation to CG RP& added CG FP itself is higher than LIC RP.LIC Basic FP ranges, after death of RPensioner for Asst to ED PRE-8/1992,PRE-8/1997.PRE-8/2002, & PRE-8/2007 to a WOEFUL, PITTANCE  of Rs572—1050, 1100—2100,1349—3450 & 2048—5260 plus DR. CG BASIC FP is a whopping Rs21000+DR. LIC pensioners have high tolerance levels. Such monstrous differences & perversities can be set right only by a Sane Judiciary. Regular Pension upgradation assumes importance in this context.

iii) More than 12 years, money, labour, energy, inconveniences, delay, adjournments, court rules & procedures, adverse health, sacrifices, are being silently borne by pensioners, activists straining to maximum even in adversity. We shed tears for those who died in thousands all these years. Who has to bear the wrath & curse of such families, certainly LIC & UOI who never exhibited dynamism & public relations to resolve their customer constituents of which pensioners also form a significant part. Lack of money power, lung power, muscle power, political power, must be compensated & addressed by only by High Courts & Supreme Court.

Facts are clear as crystal, reason & logic of demands are powerful, no one can deny discrimination, decades have rolled by, none to wipe the tears, demands are modest & legitimate, Court victories are galore & successive, one after another, Goliath never awakens. Sad & sickening.

JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED

JUSTICE DENIED IS JUSTICE BURIED

Where there is truth there is victory. As the saying goes, 'the boat of truth may rock but it will never sink.' When you are truthful, you might temporarily experience dissatisfaction, but you will ultimately attain victory.

3) Pronouncements are clear.SC Nakara judgement proclaims  that by introducing an arbitrary eligibility criteria,for being eligible for the liberalised pension scheme & thereby dividing a homogeneous class, --violates Article 14 & is unconstitutional.

“ Pension is neither a bounty nor a matter of grace depending on the sweet will of the employer. It is not an ex gratia payment, but it is a deferred wage for the past services rendered by him.... Pension is their statutory,inalienable & legally enforceable right.It has been earned by the sweat of their brow. As such it should be fixed, revised, modified & changed in ways, not entirely dissimilar to the salaries granted to serving employees.”

4)a) Board Resolution cannot be treated as a scrap of paper, it is a sacred Document containing solutions & seed for solution of pensioners problems & the demands are real & modest, genuine & legitimate.

b) Here is the important & crucial line in the Note prepared by EDP paving the way for the Board Resolution  “it may be mentioned that such a provision to upgrade the pension due to periodic revision in case of Central Govt employees is incorporated in the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, on the basis of which  LIC of India (Employees ) Pension Rules 1995 have been drafted.

c) Further, it is to be borne in mind that LIC itself ,in its SECRET letter dt 31/12/2001 to then Joint Secretary, MOF, Sri Ajit Sharan,  secured under RTI & 11/8/2003 to MOF/UOI state clearly “there is an urgent need to rationalize the DR structure available to different groups of pensioners in order to reduce the administrative inconvenience & also to see that different  generations of pensioners are protected by merging the pension to a suitable index. ”  This clinches the issue of successive pension revisions with every wage revision. It has a vital bearing on continued pension upgradation. It stretches & goes beyond Board Resolution to capture full & continuous pension revision at CPI 600, 1148, 1740, 2328, 2994.

It is also added “ Central Civil Services (Pension)Rules ,on which LIC  (Employees) Pension rules has been broadly designed, contains such an upgradation  formula corresponding to revisions effected for Central  Govt  Employees.” 

5) SJ Hon Justice Bhandari’s judgement dt 12/1/2010  was allowing both the writs 6696/1998 pertaining to Full DR & 654/2007exclusively on pension upgradation It also means that Hon SJ has gone through the submissions by both Counsels & quoting relevant portions & arguments came to definite conclusions and issues orders covering both the issues affecting pensioners.

Pension revision with successive wage revisions have been upheld conspicuously & unambiguously 

Jaipur Single judge Hon Bhandari in his order has observed as follows:

“Learned counsel for petitioners has further submitted that there exists anomaly even in regard to the revision of the pay scale. The benefit of revision in the pay scale from time to time was not extended to the pensioners. In view of aforesaid, even an officer retiring in the higher pay scale started getting less pension than to the employee retiring subsequently in lower pay scale. Aforesaid aspect was also considered along with the first issue, by the Board in its meeting held on 24.11.2001

Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court has held that, on the basis of date of retirement, there cannot be any discrimination between the Pensioners interse.  All pensioners are entitled to revision of pensions as and when pay scales are revised. The decision of the Board taken in its meeting dated 24/11/2001 but not implemented on account of misnomer of approval of the Central Government has been directed to be implemented with the above modifications.

6) While dismissing the appeal of LIC on 21/1/2011, the HC Division Bench of Jaipur observed as follows: ‘The Board of LIC, who is the appellant before us against the judgment of the learned Single Judge, had itself taken a decision to remove the disparities and the discrimination with regard to the payment of Dearness Allowance and pension to the retired employees under its Resolution of the Board dt. 24.11.2001, which was in public interest. It could not and should not have filed the present appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge as the learned Single Judge has provided an umbrella to the appellant for the implementation of the decision of the Board dt. 24.11.2001 on the categorical statement made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India and not assailed in appeal by the Union of India.”

7) There is an endless catena of crucial & landmark judgements in favour of pensioners at HC/SC levels. Judgements have sanctity, Judges cite several case laws & submissions by both parties & then only announce the Verdict.We have to respect them & not find fault.

One Rank One Pension for Armed forces, many State High Courts verdict in last 3 to 4 years, recent Madras HC verdict ,AIRIEF Chandigarh HC Verdict on Jaipur HC pattern,latest Delhi HC 2 Judge Bench asking Govt to pay for pre 1/2006 pensioners on par with post 1/2006 pensioners,not from 1/1/2012, within 2 months failing which 9% interest also has to be paid – all are pointers towards pensioners modest demands consolidation in the right direction of pension upgradation.

8) When it comes to Administrative Order, Statutory Provision ,Constitutional Rights or Provision, certainly Constitutional Rights overweigh & eclipse the earlier 2 & so supreme & have to be respected in letter & spirit. As a corollary, such aberrations & deficiencies have to be corrected & Equity restored .

9)i) SEC 48 is only to make rules & not to interfere in the working of the rules. CG cannot sit on judgement on every matter decided by LIC. Further, as UOI Counsel said in Single Judge hearing,there was nothing of public interest involved  beyond framing of Pension Rules,1995. 

ii) DB Jaipur 22,November,2010 in spite of DB asking UOI to implead, not done. This amounts to approval only.

iii) No amendment in the Pension Rules is required because there is no provision in the Pension Rules that pension will never be revised.

10)   i) Most important, Govt Pension Regulations do not provide  for revision of pension. Central Civil Services(Pension)Rules,1972 are statutory in character. But,  Govt has repeatedly gone ahead with pension revision & with it Railways, only  thro Administrative orders, without any amendment in its own Pension Regulations.                                                                         

ii) That did not preclude the Govt  from giving effect to V CPC & again VI CPC recommendations. VI Pay Commission also added value rightly, increased % of pension at ages 80, 85, 90, 95 & 100 years to the tune of 30, 40, 50, 60 & 100% , which we don't secure & that demonstrated empathy towards Elders. Older Govt  pensioners  had, therefore, an added  reason to rejoice. No different yardstick  should be there as dispensers of justice. Policymakers & Courts have to see Social security reality, growing needs of Elders & Sr Citizens in a Welfare State & uphold beneficial regime without  an iota of reluctance & enhance value & worth for those who gave sweat & toil for the rapid progress of the institution. 

(TO BE CONTINUED)