SCOPE OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS IN SC

RECENT EFFORTS OF LIC/GOI FOR FILING SEPARATE SLPs AGANIST CHANDIGARH, JAIPUR AND DELHI VERDICTS WITHOUT IMPLEMENTING CLEAR ORDER  OF DB OF RAJASTHAN HC REVEALS  ANTI-PENSIONER ATTITUDE FOR DELAYING THE LEGAL BENEFITS TO LIC PENSIONERS.  

How do u know ?

WHILE ARGUING AGAINST THESE SLPs IN SC, OUR LD COUNSEL MAY NOTE THE FOLLOWING SC JUDGEMENT WHICH CAUTIONS ABUSE OF ART 136 AND LIC'S RECENT EFFORT IS THE GLARING EXAMPLE OF SUCH ABUSE.

Please click below to read more.

At Supreme Court, SLP filed by LIC remains incomplete; no attempt from LIC side to mend defects.

I am hesitant to repeatedly write on this subject but I am compelled to as normally the SLP applicant will be eager to get the SLP No.so that the proceedings start expeditiously but LIC is not interested and have filed a defective SLP deliberately as it is the common procedure to submit an affidavit asserting that the deponent is well aware of the facts of the case etc. This elementary requirement is known to every advocate of any level practicing in SC. and it is not that the LIC advocates are not aware. They have filed the SLP for records only it appears. The course open to us is:

1.Approach the SC Registry to prepare a note to the bench that gave them an opportunity to file a fresh appeal about the defect not being rectified for nearly 3 weeks.

2.When the SLP hearing, if starts, plead that the LIC has not come to file the fresh SLP with clean hands and hence the delay appealed for condonation must not be granted.

When the stock market was down & out FIIs dumped 1120 crores worth of shares and the LIC picked them up to save embarrassment to UOI but the same LIC is not coming forward to save its own dying pensioners. .What travesty of truth.

T SAMPATH IYENGAR, BANGALORE

.

AT JAIPUR HC, LIC SAYS CHAIRMAN & MD ARE NEW - PLEADED FOR MORE TIME - COURT ALLOWED 10 DAYS TO LIC.

DEAR ALL,

MINE IS FREEDOM AFTER MIDNIGHT, WHAT TO DO. SILENT SOLDIERS DEFENDING PENSIONERS TO THE HILT & YEARNING TO STRIVE FOR FINAL VICTORY.

WELL, TODAY THO JAIPUR HC TOOK UP OUR CASE LATE, HON JUDGE SRI CHAUHAN WAS DIRECTING QUERIES TO BOTH COUNSELS ALTERNATELY WHEN COUNSEL FOR LIC WANTED TO GET TIME FOR REPLY, OUR COUNSEL Dr ABHINAV SHARMA PROTESTED SAYING, ALL ALONG ENOUGH TIME WAS GRANTED TO LIC, BUT AGAIN & AGAIN, FOR FRIVOLOUS REASONS,THEY BIDE TIME ADVERSELY AFFECTING PENSIONERS ALL THROUGH SEVERAL SITTINGS.

HON JUDGE ASKED LIC COUNSEL, WHEN HE SAID CHAIRMAN & MD ARE NEW & THEY NEED TIME TO GO THRO. OUR COUNSEL POINTED OUT SEVERAL REPLIES WERE ALREADY GIVEN BY TOP MGT & BASIC FACTS CANNOT CHANGE & SO WE MUST NOT GRANT TIME FOR THEM ANY MORE.

HON JUDGE ASKED OUR COUNSEL WHETHER WE WANT ANY PUNISHMENT ONLY TO BE GRANTED TO CONTEMNORS.TO WHICH OUR COUNSEL SAID, NOT IN THE LEAST, UR HONOUR, WE WANT ONLY THE CENTRAL POINT OF VERDICT IN JAIPUR HC GRANTING TWIN BENEFITS & THAT KERNEL OF A SALUTARY JUDGEMENT MUST BE MADE OPERATIONAL BY LIC WITHOUT ANY FURTHER DELAY.

ULTIMATELY WHEN LIC COUNSEL PLEADED FOR SOME TIME ATLEAST. HON JUDGE REMINDED HIM THAT HEREAFTER THEY SHD ENDEAVOUR TO COMPLETE THEIR ACTION TOWARDS FINAL END & NOT PROLONG. LIC COUNSEL AGREED & NOTICE PERIOD PLUS 1 WEEK IN ALL ABOUT 10 DAYS WAS GRANTED BY HON JUDGE. SO, IT LOOKS TO BE A POSITIVE, FORWARD-LOOKING VERDICT ONLY.

I MAY MENTION THIS IS WHAT I LISTENED ATTENTIVELY TO SRI ASTHANA ON PHONE LATE EVENING. NORMALLY IN COURT MATTERS, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO EXACTLY REPRODUCE THE HAPPENINGS.YET I MADE THIS ATTEMPT IN GOOD FAITH AS I NORMALLY DO, PERCEPTIONS MAY SLIGHTLY DIFFER BUT THE QUINTESSENCE REMAINS RIGHT.

GREETINGS, RBKISHORE, VP,AIRIEF 

Advocate for 'record' only !

“An Advocate on Record, whom the litigant has never 

briefed or engaged, has lent his signature for a petty amount”

The Supreme Court has censured Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Advocate on Record (AoR), for lending his name in filing petitions but not appearing in most of the cases.

A Bench of Justices B.S. Chauhan and S.A. Bobde had issued a show-cause notice to Mr. Goyal asking why his licence as an AoR should not be put under suspension/cancelled “as he never appears in the court and in spite of our request, he refused to come. His conduct amounts to interfering with the administration of justice and results in multiplicity of proceedings.” In his reply, Mr. Goyal tendered an absolute and unconditional apology and gave an undertaking that he would not repeat such a mistake. Disposing of the matter, the Bench said: “The AoR gave many reasons for not appearing in the court but none of them has impressed us and none of them is worth mentioning herein.”

LIC buys Rs.1120 crores of equity shares off-loaded by FIIs

Rupee suffered worst fall in two decades slipping below 68 against the Dollar creating a knee jerk reaction in the stock market when FIIs dumped shares worth RS. 1120 crores and LIC stepped to buy those shares to bale out the Government from a financial mess. 

just a doubt !

A good Samaritan in deed but when it comes to pay a legitimate and lawful dues to their aging, ailing and fast dwindling  pensioners a different standard is adopted. 

Will LIC set right its own house and be a good Samaritan to its own family who slogged to bring the institution to this level of glory and reputation and once described by the Finance Minister as NAVARATHNA among the PSUs.

R.K.VISWANATHAN

Demand for implementation of Delhi HC judgment

As follow up of our letter dt.14th Aug 2013 our Advocate has served a

Notice on LIC demanding immediate implementation of the order of the

Delhi High court. 

GN Sridharan Gen.Secy,

Secy Fedn of Retd.LIC Class1
officers'Assns.

All India status for 'Chronicle' !

Immensely pleased for selecting  LIC PENSIONERS CHRONICLE  as the new blog name for the erstwhile popular  LIC Pensioners Calicut. 

• This assumes an  all India status in the comity of  LIC Pensioners. Thank  you very much  and looking forward for  a leading  role  in reporting OUR MATTERS. 

With warm regards,

C.L.Janakiram (Hyderabad)

* letter dated 8th August 2013.

Dear Mr Gangadharan 

The new  name selected is very appropriate and apt.  I am one  of the silent  readers of   the blog and  let me wish you all the best in your dedicated efforts.

Regards 

R Srinivasan

THE CHANGE OF NAME IS SO NICE.

THANK U.  THE PENSIONERS FRATERNITY WILL REMEMBER YOU  FOR YEARS TO COME

SINCERE REGARDS

AK GOSWAMI

Chandigarh meeting

             Monthly meeting  of LIC (Retd.) Officers Association will be held at Hotel Classic at 11 AM on Sunday FIRST SEPTEMBER.  

Circular issued for the meeting states: "Today we, the pensioners are in a dilemma – on the one hand we recall with pride our 30/40 years long dedicated service to the Institution, on the other hand we are faced with a situation, rightly put forth by Sh. R.B.Kishore, VP, AIRIEF – “why LIC is denying justice to pensioners despite  3 victories in Rajasthan HC,Single Bench,Div.Bench & Review...

" Despite these victories, justice eludes us. It is apparent  LIC wants to prolong the legal battle. They have the luxury of spending huge amounts to engage battery of eminent lawyers  who advise LIC how to circumvent Court Orders.  Their tactics are to exhaust poor pensioners’ patience so that they start asking “for how long should we continue to contribute to the LEGAL FUND”. Friends, a soldier fights on the front till the last drop of his blood. We have so far won our case all through so why should we be impatient. Let us take OATH on the Anniversary Day of LIC that as we served the Organization  with full devotion; similarly, we will not allow paucity of funds to hamper legal battle come what may.  

• In the special meeting held on 15^th Aug., Sh.I.P. Puri, Jt. Secretary, AIRIEF has given a call for contribution of Rs.2000/- each. Spontaneously, members present in the meeting paid it and now our similar request is to ALL THE PENSIONERS. 

" We are in touch with the members of Panchkula Unit & met at the residence of Sh.S.N.Chhabra.  It has been decided to form a joint committee with Sh. I.P.Puri as Co-ordinator. It will seek further legal advice re: implications of 19^th Aug, orders of the SC because LIC’s SLP has now been reduced to Civil Appeal while appeal for stay was rejected.

" Your participation in the meeting and your liberal contribution to the LEGAL FUND shall be appreciated. It is in our interest to defend the victories registered so far. "

SP SOOD, LIC (RETD) OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, CHANDIGARH                                                                                                      

RK Viswanathan

• Of late the news that went viral is the thinking of getting all the court cases pending in different courts transferred to the Supreme Court so that in one stroke the judgment could be got. 
• Now that the Jaipur DB case has reached a final stage where the order of the SC is awaited  with the hope that  the condonation is not granted any attempt at this stage to get the other court cases transferred to SC would be a retrograde step knowing full well that the wheels of the judiciary is  grinding slow and the SC already saddled with too many cases could only delay the process. 
• Asthana should leave no stone unturned and should  go on full throttle to torpedo any move for condonation and God forbid if he succeeds, it once for all settles the issue.

UOI SLP AGAINST PRE2006 PENSIONERS

DISMISSED BY SUPREME COURT

The supreme court has dismissed the SLP (civil) 23055/2013 filed by union of India against Delhi high court judgement in pre-2006 pensioners case in WP 1535/2012 upholding the CAT PB judgement& Delhi high court judgement.The above SLP came up for hearing on 29/07/2013 & the apex court dismissed the SLP on the same day.Pensioners will now get arrears w.e.f.01/01/2006 if their revised pension was fixed at less than 50% percent of the minimum of the pay in the pay band including grade pay thereon in the revised scale corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner has retired.

                       JUDGEMENT 

     UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
                                        O R D E R

We are not inclined to interfere with

the order  passed  by the High  Court.

Consequently, the special leave petitions

are dismissed.  However, the petitioners

are at liberty to raise all points before

the Tribunal as and when the appeal,

including the contempt petition is

preferred.

LET US EXPECT OUR VICTORY VERY SOON... BASUDEB DAS

Deeply disappointed by delays...

My dear Sir,

I admire your prompt efforts to put things in the proper perspective !

Needless to say, that the majority of pensioners are aware of all the facts of

the issues and how they have been viewed by the various judicial fora before

whom they have come up so far. They are deeply disappointed and vexed by

the orchestrated delays, but are convinced that the enlightened LIC Board

would not have erred in taking its 24-11-2001 Resolution, without considering 

the merits of the issues involved !

As I have suggested earlier, WHY MALIGN ? LET US ALlGN for the common

cause, as the avowed intention of everyone is to work for the benefit of the

aged pensioners, who have been waiting for an early relief with bated breath !

With best regards, A. Balasubramanya 

Different interpretations !

I have read the comments of Mr G N Sridharan in the blog dt 24^th Aug 2013.

In regard to point no. 1, while it is conceded that the letter dt 14 th August 2013 of the Federation is  in follow up of the Delhi High Court judgment of 30th January 2013, the moment the same has been linked to the outcome of the SLP filed by LIC, the same has got dissolved  into the SLP just dismissed and any attempt to segregate the issue of DR neutralisation & upgradation of pension for pre-August 1997 retirees  to the exclusion of  the  issue of  omnibus resolution of  anomalies in pension  in terms of removal of DR anomaly and upgradation of pension for all pre-August 2007 retirees cannot be  fair to the complete fraternity of pensioners. 

• Practically speaking, LIC may be only too willing to agree to 100 % DR neutralisation and partial up gradation upto 1^st August 1997 and the LIC/UOI have been prolonging the litigation only because they are convinced that the implementation of Jaipur judgment will mandate LIC to upgrade the pensions with every wage revision from 1/8/1997 onwards.
• For the above reasons, there is no question of mixing up of issues as stated in (2) merely because we demand implementation of the Jaipur Order because the issues of DR neutralisation and upgradation for all pensioners have already been well integrated in the SLP just dismissed.
• It is not fair to perceive that those who have retired after 2002/2007 do not fathom the agony of old retirees. A deeper contemplation will bring to light the empathy and pain the newer retirees feel for the older pensioners. I have even in the course of my interaction with in-service officers (including SDMs-in-charge) of various cadres listened to their words of their recognition of the sufferings of the pensioners on account of the anomalies in pension.

I agree with Mr Sridharan when he states ” People have different interpretations for the same set of facts. It is a matter of mind-set. Time is not far away to tell who is right and who is wrong. An open debate may however be beneficial.” This is absolute for one and all.

With greetings,

C H Mahadevan

Let's stop 'blame game' !

I fully endorse views expressed by Sh.D. Krishanan. This is high time that all LIC Pensioners come on a single platform for larger welfare of whole community of all LIC Pensioners of the size of more than 43000. Let us stop criticising each other as well as blame game.

Our Leaders from all shades for retirees as well as workforce still in service must decide to have unified battle for Pension Upgradation and Full DA neutralisation to pre 01.08.1997 retirees. If all unions in Banking Industry with employees strength of more than ten lacs can come together to negotiate with IBA, then why not same thing in Life Insurance Industry.

We must forget our ego clashes and also forget our craving for taking credit of emerging as the only champion in this task of welfare of whole community.

BR MEHTA, PANCHKULA

Dear Shri Krishnan

Your presentation in blog

You are an younger pensioner, I am an old pensioner. I am a Sr Sr Citizen. 

Even after cataract intraocular microfoldable lens insertion, left eye was not satisfactory,so had to meet Surgeon & in all 5 hrs spent with dilation, checks & rechecks, passed on to Chief expert Surgeon & Retina expert,scan, injection as fluid accumulation with 3 types of eye drops & 3 types of pills. 

When such are the travails of pensioners, why should we throw mud at each other, why should we break the glass house, as ours/pensioners is weak & meek. From mud & clay, a beautiful pot emerges, ugliness is transformed to a beauty, finished product is superlative.  A gem cannot be polished without friction, a man cannot be perfected without trials.  In court matters, particularly, trials & testing time are more & natural. But it is not as though progress was so slow.  Even LIC SLP 29956 & 29957/2011, though baby of LIC, Asthana moved an application for early hearing & they were dismissed. We all singly & jointly weaved a web of magic, we worked hard, we invented, so to say, classic procedures & manuals of standing & a bedrock foundation was created called our Taj Mahal, LIC. It is a standing monument of memory of the sweat &blood of all employees & all pensioners who dreamed dreams & built visions. It is better to deserve without receiving than to receive without deserving. 

Here we pensioners richly deserve & so we must richly receive too. So, pension upgradation with successive wage revision is a must. Why should we settle for anything less ? NO, not at all, 3 victories in Rajasthan HC, SJ, DB & Review, 1 clarificatory order dt 17 oct 2012 by eminent SC Bench – pay retiral benefits from the date of eligibility, i.e. date of retirement, Punjab & Haryana HC of Chandigarh echoing & endorsing in full Jaipur HC judgement adding spice of 10 % interest for delay, Delhi HC again fully basing on Jaipur HC & going beyond mere Full DR, how on earth can anyone , even to his wildest enemy, say, all 12 Hon Judges erred & so pension revision cannot be given !! Utterly & butterly ridiculous.

Please click below to read more.

Updation of Pension, 100 % neutralization in dearness relief etc. in LIC, BANKS

Shri G N.Sridharan, the octogenarian leader of Officers’ Association of a great organisation of LIC, surely knows that GOI pensioners have been getting updation of pension along with revision of scales of pay since 1986. As per recommendations of V Central Pay Commission, the pension of pre and post 01-01-1996 pensioners/family pensioners was updated by GOI. 

Pension/family pension was fixed at 50% and 30 % respectively and on certain fitment norms in the revised V CPC pay scales relevant for the post held by the pensioner at the time of retirement/death. Dearness relief (D.R.) was granted with 100% neutralisation from 01-01-1996. All the the pensioners and family pensioners got arrears from 01-01-1996.

Pensioners / family pensioners of RBI started getting 100% D.R. neutralisation from Feb.2005.  However, the pre1997/98 pensioners of LIC and banks continue to get D.R. on tapering basis. They have been denied  100% D.R. neutralisation, which is unconstitutional, unjust in law, to say the least.

All pensioners and family pensioners who were alive on 01.01.1996 and died subsequently, his/her legal heirs were eligible to apply for/got arrears retrospectively from 01.01.1996 to till the date of death of pensioner/family pensioner.

Shri Sridharan  is  right that GOI has not given point to point updation of pension or One Rank One Pension but  all the pensioners’ organisations of GOI are ‘fighting’ for OROP. The military personnel have been recently given relief/enhancement (not that sizable)  in pension and family pension ’naming’ it OROP.

The retired employees of central government had pension windfall with GOI implementation of VI CPC recommendations in August 2008. All pensioners, including family pensioners received arrears from 01-01-2006. Those 80, 85, 90, 95 and 100 years old got/get 20, 30, 40, 50 and 100 per cent more in basic pension/family pension and admissible dearness relief. Updating of pension and family pension in LIC and banks should be along with revision of scales of pay of serving employees as is the position obtaining in central govt.

As stated in para.1 above, the family pensioners of central govt. get 30% of pay and grade pay. But, there is discrimination in respect of LIC and bank family pensioners. They get negligible family pension with ceiling almost based on IV CPC.

Recently, the family pensioners of RBI, who were getting pension on tapering basis, started getting family pension at 30% of basic pay of the late employee/ pensioner from 12-01-2013. Family pension in LIC and banks should also be revised to 30% of the updated/revised basic pay of late employee/pensioner from the date of his/her demise.

- A pensioner.

I fully  agree with you (Views of Shri Basudev Das, Kolkata).  All of us should remain  highly obliged to Sri Gangadharan for providing a platform through LIC Pensioners Chronicle for ventilating our views.  It has helped all of us to come out of 'depression' and giving a feeling that all the ex LICians are together.

Now a days after opening the net, my first job is to see the LIC Pensioners chroinicle. I also fully agree with you that our collective wisdom will be of a great help.

He is doing a nice job by publishing  diverse views because this is unmasking the persons who are not real well wishers of retirees but only posing like that. Let us again collectively thank Sri Gangadharan for this.

Regards, AK GOSWAMI      

CAN 'CHRONICLE' BE THE FORUM?

Reference CH Mahadevan's comments that appeared in the blog. I thought I would not make comments on comments. Nevertheless I do it (I could not make it earlier as I was away and just returned).

• (1) My letter dated 14th to Chairman was in consonance of our organisation's decision, it is intended to be a follow up in respect of Delhi HC order which is exclusively for DR Anomaly, 
• (2) it would become ineffective and irrelevant if other issues are mixed up 
• (3) Other issues like revision require a separate set of strategic steps but not in the present form which I have said often, which I may not repeat, 
• (4) matter like Board Resolution and LIC letter to Government have been explained by me earlier which were understood by many and misunderstood by some for queer reasons. 

It is unfortunate and also paradoxical that some who had retired from top cadres with the advantage  of

revisions of 2002/2007 and consequent high pension do not fathom the deep sense of agony of old retirees.  

People have different interpretations for the same set of facts. It is a matter of mind-set. Time is not far away to tell who is right and who is wrong. An open debate may however be beneficial. 

Can 'Chronicle' be the forum? 

GN SRIDHARAN

CIRCULAR ISSUED BY RETIRED CLASS I OFFICERS ASSOCIATION DATED 15TH AUGUST 2013 IS REPRODUCED FOR RECORDS. Please click below to read more.

SLP ON PUNJAB & HARYANA HC JUDGMENT - CASE DETAILS

SLP (P&H HC) NUMBERED

According to the latest information received by me, the SLP in respect of
Punjab &Haryana HC, on admission by SC, has been numbered as Civil
Appeal No. 6995 of 2013. 

GNSridharan

POOR PENSIONERS GIVEN HOPES

Kudos to your ed comment that all should pool their wisdom in all matters which should include legal matters too. As far as comments on legal matters are concerned, all comments so far are factual, not fanciful.  It is a fact LIC filed a defective SLP as per information available on SC website. In fact I checked this evening to see if it is corrected. No it was not. 

It is true many pensioners are disappointed and some are even depressed. The remarks about the defective SLP should be seen against this background of disappointment. Situation is not that pessimistic because the Chandigarh & Jaipur judgments are not stayed and  SC has seen some merit in them. Now our efforts must be to see that all the SLPs against Jaipur, Chandigarh & Delhi High Court judgments are taken together by one bench and urge for immediate hearing. Asthana has already indicated that he will take all of them as his own and fight. My own feeling is that the matter would be resolved positively within around six months time. There is, therefore, no room for gloom, disappointment or depression.

T. SAMPATH IYENGAR

BANGALORE

POOR PENSIONERS GIVEN HOPES

Mr. V. Venkatachalam's concern for the poor pensioners is justifiable. The judicial process as we know is cumbersome. 

• HC Jaipur Divn Bench gave judgment in favour of pensioners. Did LIC honour the judgement? They went for review and lost. They filed SLP in SC and lost. 
• The Punjab and Haryana Divn Bench upheld Jaipur HC verdict. Instead of implementing, they filed SLP for stay of the judgement and again lost. 
• There is another SLP against Delhi HC judgement which is expected to be taken up on 19-09-2013.

So who is at fault?  Mr Venkatachalam must understand that we are not given false hopes. Definitely we will get our dues in the very near future.  God will bless us.

a v subbaraman coimbatore divn

POOR PENSIONERS GIVEN HOPES

LIC PENSIONERS CHRONICLE has published the expression of disappointments by Sri Venkatachalam V. Similar expressions by some others were also published by the CHRONICLE earlier. Reactions have also been published.

Accusations have been made against the pensioners who have expressed their disappointments.  The Editor has rightly pointed out that expressions are the manifestations of the general feeling of the pensioners.

It is requested to all concerned that we should refrain from accusing some of our senior pensioners as back biters and leg pullers.  We are respectful  to our seniors.

• Sri Venkatachalam and others, who are thinking similarly, are requested to bear with  Sri Asthana and people around him for some more time as there is no alternative avenue at our disposal.  Because of these people, we can now dream of pension revision.  The dream is almost on the verge of transformation to reality.
• Also there are people, in our community of pensioners, who are competent to offer legal opinion.  Many of them have rich experience in the field.

No more acrimony, no more accusations, no more ill feelings, no more disappointments should be carried by us. We should nurture strong belief of victory and be by the side of Sri Asthana.  

Subir Kumar Mazumder

THANKS TO CHRONICLE...

THANKS FROM CORE OF MY HEART TO PG GANGADHARAN, EDITOR.

YOUR TIMELY INTERFERENCE SET THE RIGHT PATH IN THIS CRUCIAL HOURS OF LEGAL BATTLE.

IT DOES NOT NEED  ANY ISO CERTIFICATION AS THE CHRONICLE HAS ALREADY BECOME A PLATFORM FOR ALL OUR PENSIONERS IN THE LENGTH AND BREADTH OF THE COUNTRY  ONLY BECAUSE OF ITS NEUTRALITY, FOCUS AND UPDATION. 

IF ALL WISDOM OF OURS,  WORKED IN DIFFERENT LEVELS DURING SERVICE, IS SYNERGISED FOR COMMON INTEREST, IT WILL BE NO LESS THAN WISDOM OF ANY SUCCESSFULL LAWYER OF THE COUNTRY. 

INSTEAD OF LEG PULLING AND BACK BITING BY SENIOR PENSIONERS  WHICH AT TIMES APPEARS  IN  CHRONICLE, LET US HELP ASTHANAJI TO SUCCEED IN THE LEGAL BATTLE, FOR EVERYONE OF US HAS MORAL OBLIGATION TO IT AS WE, GOOD,  BAD OR INDIFFERENT, ARE NO DOUBT BENEFICIARY OF THE LEGAL VICTORY.   ISN'T IT?

                                         BASUDEB DAS, KOLKATA

POOR PENSIONERS CONSTANTLY GIVEN HOPES...

TIME AND AGAIN WE ARE TOLD 'WE ARE IN THE DOOR STEP OF SUCCESS'  -  EVEN 8TH AUGUST ORDER OF SC HAILED AS GREAT SUCCESS  -  MISGUIDE CONTINUES STATING LIC'S APPEAL IS DEFECTIVE  -  "EVERYONE HAS ASSUMED THE ROLE OF LEGAL EXPERTS"  -  PENSIONERS ARE DYING  -  WRITES SHRI VENKATACHALAM SURVEYING THE PRESENT SCENARIO...

VENKATACHALAM V     venkatachalam v (venkat020540@gmail.com)  

                                               REPLY

SEEN YOUR CRITICISM IN THE CHRONICLE. WHAT ALTERNATE 

COURSE OF PATH YOU ARE HAVING FOR ACHIEVING THE LIC 

PENSIONERS OBJECTIVE FOR WHICH ASTANAJI IS STRUGGLING 

OVER A DECADE? 

WILL YOU PLEASE SUGGEST THAT? 

ELSE  WE RECOLLECT THE PROVERB THAT 

THE WORLD HAS NOT YET MADE A STATUE OF A CRITIC. 

                                     BASUDEB DAS            

(Shri Venkatachalam's words appear to represent the general mood of pensioners.  An average pensioner has his fears and prejudices...  SLP defective etc. is overplayed and the role of 'Chronicle' in this matter cannot be ignored.  'Chronicle' has dealt with this aspect in a lighter vein.  

As for Shri Venkatachalam's criticism that everyone has assumed the role of legal experts, it is our feeling that the pensioners should pool together their wisdom in all matters including legal aspects. This discussion should be continued for the general good of the pensioners and the court cases. -Ed.)

CH MAHADEVAN WRITES...

Mr. G N Sridharan, in his letter dt 14/8/2013 to Chairman, LIC has written as follows:

"We therefore once again call upon you to allow immediately 100%
neutralisation on DR with consequential upgradation of basic pension for those who had retired prior to 01.08.1997."

This gives one an impression that he is espousing the cause of only pre 1/8/1997 pensioners ignoring the fact that even some post-July-1997 pensioners are petitioners in the Jaipur case in respect of which LIC's SLPs have been dismissed.

If LIC literally complies with his request made in the letter, what are the implications for the nearly 50% of the pensioners, who are post-July 1997 retirees?  I wonder whether this position taken by him in his letter will be acceptable even to pre-August 1997 pensioners who have by now understood the full implications of getting paltry benefits that will be passed on to them by the so 

called 100% DR neutralisation and upgradation of pension only upto 1/8/1997!

Mr Sridharan ought to have written to LIC instead asking for benefits to be paid to all eligible pensioners in terms of the Single Judge Bench order dt 12/1/2010 of Jaipur Bench, clearly demanding upgradation benefits for all eligible pensioners/family pensioners including the effect of wage revision upto 1/8/2007 and also demanding adequate provision of outlay for the ensuing wage revision due on 1/8/2012.

I for one am constrained to believe that the position taken by Mr Sridharan in his letter as above does not enjoy the mandate of the majority of members of the Federation of Retired LIC Class I
Officers Associations.

C H Mahadevan

Cleveland(OHIO)-USA

SLP ON PUNJAB & HARYANA HC JUDGMENT - SC order dated 19-8-2013.

ITEM NO.13 COURT NO.2 SECTION IVB

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2013

CC 11603/2013

(From the judgement and order dated 09/11/2012 in CWP No.16346/2010

of The HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH)

LIFE INSURANCE CORP. OF INDIA & ORS. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

MADAN LAL GANDHI (D) THR. LR. & ORS. Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP,c/delay in refiling SLP and

office report)

Date: 19/08/2013 This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. GOPALA GOWDA

For Petitioner(s)

Mr. Ashok Panigrahi,Adv.

For Respondent(s)

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

Delay condoned.

Leave granted.

The prayer for interim relief is rejected.

(Parveen Kr.Chawla)

Court Master

(Phoolan Wati Arora)

Court Master

Kishore sab,

I read the up and down communications, of yours, GNS and the reply thereto. I would hasten to say that when we seem to be on the threshold to something big, as the SC Dismissal would indicate, why would we enter into such diatribe that may give away points to the opposition who may be actively looking at grounds for the fresh SLP?

Yes, I may appeal to all including my leader Sri GNS, not to wash internal linen in public, when by some method or the other, the SC might end up giving us more than a normal dream of a benefit. Yes, to the SC, now, when an SLP goes before it, the only things they can look at are errors in overlooking important rules or points of law, as I understand it. I may be wrong here. But the small 5% window open for SC to operate on an SLP, need not take into account Pension related practices in the world.

The other simple fact is that Central Govt. employees, through repeated Pay Commission awards, already enjoy upgradation in Pensions. I am told that the senior-most IAS Pensioner alive, housed in Nilgiris, at age 93 or so, is the one who draws the highest Pension. I don't think we should feel hesitant to ask for it, even if we are going to be the first ones to get it in this manner. So let us , in our fervour to defend our internal borders, not play into the hands of the opposition now desperately seeking to find some straw to clutch, to remain afloat in their stand.

As for GNS, I may clarify that his line of approach has been more 'practical' and perhaps less ambitious. He always thought of those pre-1997 retirees whose DA compensation principle has been less than fair. So his approach even on Court cases championed by the Pensioners' Federation, has remained with seeking what is very obviously anomalous. But I may mention here that, though GNS' aims for pensioners, were limited to getting equity and justice within the community of Pensioners primarily, he was never opposed to the idea of a larger benefit coming to Pensioners through court cases filed by others. Being a legal practitioner himself, he felt, honestly about some moves which he thought were tactical errors, and which, as he thought, resulted in delay in the SLP coming up. And being a person of his age and seniority, a bit of personal ego, did go with positions taken by him on matters. I think the Pensioners will remember the kind of leadership provided by him in our serving days, where he could get the automatic DA principle for officers too, which was a big worrying anomaly those days.

So, all I am trying to say is, that we may be different groups trying for the same 'moksha' thro' different paths. It is like the philosophical differences between Advaita and Dwaitha within the Hindu fold. This difference did not endanger the common interest of Hindus as a class anytime in history. We should only keep this in mind when we deal with differences between ourselves now. We are on the verge of something historical, if it happens thro' the SLP, and our variance of views within ourselves should never throw up an unseemly opportunity to the opponents to find a handle from our communications. Let us not forget that if we do get something big thro these efforts in courts, it will be a great day for all Pensioners for all future. Let's hope that the signs of success visible in the not too distant horizon will atleast see us as one bloc to receive the benefits in good grace with malice to none and good wishes to all. Let us not proceed further now on these less fruitful lines. 

Thanks,

D.Krishnan.

ALL INDIA RETIRED INSURANCE EMPLOYEES FEDERATION

writes to the Chairman

Fresh SLP filed by LIC not numbered yet !

The Supreme court website cites the defect of the SLP filed by LIC as the SLP is not supported by the required affidavit properly attested and identified.  Normally an SLP petitioner would be anxious to know the SLP No. and would visit the S.C. Registry and such defects are normally corrected within 2/3 days after filing the SLP.

It is a week and still LIC has not corrected this simple defect. The delay appears deliberate.  One purpose may be to await the outcome of today's Chandigarh High Court SLP where LIC reportedly sought stay of the judgment which is  not granted. Similarly Jaipur HC judgment is also not stayed by S.C.

Hope atleast now LIC will rectify the defect and pave way for quick disposal of the fresh SLP.

T. SAMPATH IYENGAR

BANGALORE

The other version - LIC's SLP against Punjab & Haryana HC judgment

THERE IS NO DIRECTION FOR ISSUE OF NOTICES, THIS IS THE NORMAL PROCESS, 

THE ORDER IS 'LEAVE GRANTED, STAY REJECTED'. 

NOW CHANDIGARH JUDGMENT IS WITHOUT ANY 

EMBARGO FOR ITS IMPLEMENTATION AND UNLESS 

THE LONG PROCESS OF SERVICE OF THE NOTICES 

AND THEIR REPLY BY THE PETITIONERS FROM 

CHANDIGARH WRIT IS OVER, NOTHING CAN BE DONE 

IN SC IN THAT SLP. 

THAT SLP WILL COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING NOT EARLIER THAN 7/8 YEARS. 

IN THE MEANWHILE THE JUDGMENT OF THE HIGH COURT 

WILL BE COMPLIED WITH.  THE DELHI HC WRIT WILL 

ALSO BE GOT COMPLIED WITH BY ME SINCE THAT 

HAS NOW BECOME MY WRIT.

ASTHANA

("There is no direction for issue of notices, this is the normal process."  Readers need not get confused. There is no order for issue of notices.  Nevertheless notices will be issued. -Ed.)