Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Implications of Chandigarh Order

Chandigarh High Court order dated 14-12-2015 differs from the S.C. order dated 04-12-2015. May be that the lower court has not taken cognisance of higher court's decision for the reasons mentioned below :

There were arguments. The judge went through all the old records including his own judgement dated 09-11-2012 and has asked LIC to furnish an affidavit explaining as to how Rs.33.67 lakhs deposited in the court is considered as the entire dues payable to the petitioners. Probably, the judge must have felt that it would not meet the end of justice, if 20% of amount of (apparently) a wrong computation is paid to the petitioners.
It is difficult to know how the stalwarts at LIC would save their face. At the same time, it may not be difficult for LIC to furnish an affidavit. The amount in question viz.Rs.33.67 lakhs arrived at on some data, is "right" according to them. The amount worked out by LIC is much less than Rs.93.47 lakhs worked out in respect of pensioner -petitioners numbering 31 by Shri. MSM, Shri CHM and Co,

It would be possible to verify the authenticity and counter LIC only when complete computation data of the amount of Rs.33.67 lakhs is submitted by LIC to the court.

No doubt that the S.C. in its order 17-10-2012 had ordered LIC to deposit the amount due to the pensioners, to the Writ Petitioners at the Jaipur H.C. Registry. The S.C. ordered recently on 07-05-2015 to pay 20% of the amount deposited in the H.C. Registries (or even when not deposited) to the respondent - employees (pensioners) as an ad interim measure. Shri KML Asthanaji and other petitioners of Jaipur excepting a few got 20%. Shri GN Sridharanji went in search of his members and enabled them to get 20%. Here, it is not just to the Writ Petitioners at Delhi H.C.

It is alright if the case at the S.C. is decided in one or two or more sittings without adjournments. All the pensioners are affected parties. The disparity in pension drawn by the employees retirees of different dates and retired in different scales of pay of Pre 1997, Aug. 1997, 2002, 2007 and 2012 is alarming. The employees retired before 1997, having served the institution, during its formation years, for 35 to 40 years are languishing, many unable to live a life with dignity, as they are getting near to half or less than half the pension drawn by the employees retired in the last few years. Cost of living is not different, no less for those retired in 90s.

If the case coming up on 20-01-2016 at the S.C. is adjourned for more than fifteen days, for any reason, all the case Managers- all the Advocates, IN UNISON, may request the Hon. Judges to order LIC to pay minimum amount as ad interim measure, to all the pensioners and family pensioners for some reasons mentioned above and for other reasons.

The relief may be on the basis of cadre in which the employee has retired and numbers of years as pensioner or number of years as pensioner and as family pensioner. [ A, B ,C or ..i.e.minimum relief as interim as per post retired x completed number of years since retirement as pensioner or total number of years as family pensioner plus that of employee / spouse ]. There may be better suggestions with some other readers of PC. They may like to share their views. No wishful thinking here, the facts, the past experiences speak for themselves.

Incidentally, it may not be out of place to invite kind attention of senior leaders, Shri RBK and Shri GNS, who were very serious in regard to the meagre pension given to family pensioners. There is hardly any progress or no progress at all during the last two years. The leaders may kindly do something for the good of the family pensioners.