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.
SOME SAY IT IS A GRIM BATTLE, SOME FIGURE IT AS ‘FIGHT TO FINISH’,SOME SAY THIS WILL BE THE LAST OBSTACLE TO BE CLEARED TO GAIN PENSIONERS' SO-CALLED MISSION OF PENSION UPGRADATION WITH FULL DR FOR ALL — A REAL KURUKSHETRA BATTLE.
i) a) Delayed reaction from Government to sabotage our case and cause. Union of India (UOI) was represented by their Counsel during SJ Jaipur HC submissions. UOI COUNSEL HAS ACCEPTED THAT MATTERS OF PUBLIC POLICY ONLY NEED UOI APPROVAL. AFTER DETAILED, THOROUGH, PROLONGED DELIBERATIONS AND DISCUSSION ONLY, PENSION RULES, 1995 came into being. And so, any other aspect within such Rules promulgated, LIC can take decisions and then proceeded to finally announce verdict of pension revision substituting scales of pay after wage revision. Even after Notices were issued to UOI, they never went in for Appeal. GoI was not a party to any Appeals or Reviews either in the Rajasthan High Court or the Supreme Court. We should take a strong plea that the Affidavit submitted by the GoI must be rejected and not even allowed to be argued at all.
Fight to the finish is required. DB Judges, Allahabad questioned LIC Counsel in earlier years sitting in May, 2011, when LIC Counsel accepted LIC is prepared for pension revision and full DR. Earlier, in Jaipur case, when DB Judges asked LIC Counsel, why delay for 10/11 years, are they happy with thousands of pensioners death, LIC Counsel admitted 'Sorry'.
Jaipur DB judges asked and confirmed after LIC Counsel's positive reply (no withdrawal of LIC Board Resolution), the eminent Judges told, you can’t withdraw, we will not allow you to withdraw, it is now common property of Rajasthan HC. WHEN SUCH IS THE CASE, UOI wants to put the clock back. IS IT NOT RELEVANT, PENSIONERS? UOI SHOULD NOT EXHIBIT DISREGARD.
b) We should adopt all means, strategies, clever interpretation, forceful depiction, pathetic conditions of pensioners, majority above 70 yrs with ailment and diseases, PORTRAYED, LIC and UOI jointly killing the mind and mood of pensioners, with dilatory tactics, delay, flimsy grounds, especially in an egalitarian society and a democracy, respect to Elders and Sr Citizens and such noble values always upheld, whereas UOI always wants to establish its supremacy, unwanted interference in working of institutions, ESPECIALLY CREDIBLE, CREDITABLE and UNIQUE and NOTEWORTHY institutions of reputation and goodwill - LIC, strange and shocking!
c) When all promises are kept, when LIC has donned such a powerful and instrumental role in nation's economy, helped Govt to stabilise stock markets, lend tremendous assistance by way of Social Security for Aam Admi, inclusive growth and above all such a sterling contribution to Govt 5Yr Plans, Peoples Money for Peoples Welfare, in almost all sectors of people and society and nation development, and when Pensioners for long yrs 35 and more have done yeoman service and built foundation, erected fine superstructure, ably galvanised with Reorganisation in the 80s MADE THE INSTITUTION BEAR INTENSE COMPETITION WITH CONFIDENCE AND COURAGE, SUCH a Paltry pension, shame on the institution for no fault of pensioners. GOVT REGULAR PENSION IS FAR FAR HIGHER FOR COMPARATIVE CADRES. Many are not aware that even Govt Family Pension is higher than LIC Regular pension, even with all these facts, figures, reason and logic, public tribute standing, and unqualified praise from FM and PM, it is disturbing that Pensioners should be treated so bad, UNWEPT, UNHONOURED & UNSUNG
2) I have gone through in full the Under Secretary,UOI Affidavit for Allahabad case as also now in SC. I give telegraphic reply and suggestions or my ideas to strengthen the Reply or Rejoinder to Under Secretary, UOI affidavit and submission .
A) i) DR: SURPRISING NOW THEY SAY CANT BE GIVEN TO PRE-8/97 PENSIONERS , AS IT WAS A PACKAGE DEAL & UNDERSTANDING with Unions etc
Our Reply: MOU dt 14/1/1994 CLEARLY SAYS 'SAME DR FOR PENSIONERS, AS SAME DA FOR EMPLOYEES’.
It is on record. When pensioners are not consulted, such lopsided, one-sided equation prevails which is detrimental to pensioners interests and welfare.There cannot and should not exist any restrictive process or provisions, nullifying better benefits, allowed for others but denied to the pensioners.
Theoretically, if talks take place between LIC and Pensioners Federations and some decisions are taken, proper benefits and outlay can be granted.
If it comes into conflict or reduces Employees benefit, then they feel aggrieved. They forget their elder brethren, who toiled and moiled and whose footsteps they have to follow, as classic traditions and healthy customer-centric practices are established and now being enhanced and enlarged, must also ensure same empathetic welfare benefits for the lesser fortunate seniors who are also customers demanding equal treatment and fighting for healthy issues, genuine and modest.
BANKERS HAVE SET A WONDERFUL EXAMPLE OF CONTINUED DISCUSSIONS WITH TRUST. TRUST DEFICIT MUST BE REMOVED IN LIC.
Many organizations, in fact, specifically earmark amounts to pensioners at the time of wage talks for equity and harmony and to establish and preserve integrity of relativity in pay and pension,which is vital.
EQUALITY of interests and no discrimination should be the ethical ground and principle. That is violated by RESTRICTIVE APPENDIX IV formula.
ii) Hon. Judge (Retd) VRKrishnaI yer, Beeshma Pitha of legal jurisprudence, 97-year youngagenarian, sent a letter dt 17 July 2010 to then FM Sri Pranab Mukherjee, after I took up the matter with him. In his inimitable language he thundered, after affirming ‘the pathetic condition of a class of people arbitrarily alienated from the beneficial stream of pensioners, it is a clear, distinct, blatant violation of Articles 14,16 & 21 of Constitution. He also added,’LIC pensioners are one integral group and cannot be divided into different classes. Date is an irrelevant factor when alteration in pension is made. ’What is discriminatory is arbitrary and what is arbitrary is unconstitutional’.
SC and HIGH COURTS never sacrifice the hallowed, time-tested principle of equality, equity and detest any trace of discrimination .
iii) When it comes to Administrative Order, Statutory Provision, Constitutional Rights or Provision, certainly Constitutional Rights overweigh and eclipse the earlier 2 and so Supreme and have to be respected in letter and spirit.
As a corollary, such aberrations and deficiencies have to be corrected and equity restored.
iv) SJ, Jaipur pointed out extreme anomalies of Peon getting more pension than pre-8/97 ED. LIC Counsel agreed that LIC is willing to offer pension revision, only waiting for Govt orders or advice.
HC should uphold such acceptance by the Institution in principle and categorically erase or reject any imposition by UOI one-sided, dictatorial, unethical, stubborn insistence, merely on technical and flimsy grounds, never taking a broad picture of reasonableness, more so dealing with Elders and Sr Citizens.
v) 11/12 yrs no decision on LIC Board Resolution, an August and responsible body of eminent people from different walks of life with 2 Sr Secretaries of MOF present, what more is needed.
Postponing a decision, that too for so long, as SJ observed, should be taken as direct or indirect acceptance of that Resolution only.
vi) Look at DR per slab difference Rs.0.93 to 11.50 for pre-8/97 now after 8/2007 wage revision rising to a whopping Rs 6.37 to Rs 29.25 from Asst to ED cadre. How can any sane court accept such a lackadaisical attitude of not helping pensioners to lead a NORMAL LIFE after such long decades of excellent service and in return such continued loss mounting and mounting only.
vii) Kerala HC ,Chandrasekar Menon T vs UOI & Ors : ‘the object of compensation and neutralization is completely defeated by payment of DR after reducing slab at all stages. DR at decreasing slab at all stages is unjust and unreasonable'.
viii) Manmohan C vs Kerala State Warehousing Corpn, MOF utterance that such grant of pension updation will lead to repercussions in PS Banks and elsewhere – ‘is nothing but a concocted bogey by Central Govt. Such a statement is unfounded and is nothing but meekness and has no constitutional or legal foundation'.
(To be continued)