Mr G.N Sridharan in his circular has mentioned that the Delhi HC judgment dt 30th January 2013 relates to removal of DR anomaly only. It is true that the writ petition filed by the Federation related to removal of DR anomaly only. But the operative part of the Delhi HC judgment reads as follows. (Please click at the end of the article to read the relevant portion of Delhi High Court judgment.)

It has to be remembered that the judgment in effect is an order for LIC to implement the Jaipur HC bench order dt 12/1/2010 'in rem' as the SLP Nos 29956-957 filed by LIC against the dismissal of Review Petition were dismissed by the Supreme Court. It has also to be remembered that there were a few post-July 1997 pensioners also who were petitioners in the Jaipur case and the writ petitions were allowed without any distinction between pre Aug 1997 and post July 1997 pensioners.The cut-off date was mentioned in the Jaipur order only to make the point that there cannot be different bases of DR between the pensioners retired before and after the cut-off date.

The basic order was for LIC to implement the Board resolution dt 24/11/2001.The secret letter dt 31/12/2001 by the then ED(P) to the Joint Secretary (Insurance) had clearly brought forth the import of the Board Resolution, viz merging the DR as at 1/8/1997 into the basic pension and applying 0.23% of the merged basic pension per slab for the purpose of calculating post Aug 1997 DR and the resultant gross pension in future. This clearly means that the Board Resolution covers both removal of DR anomaly and upgradation of pension as at 1/8/1997 for pre -Aug 1997 pensioners and by logical extension of that principle such merger of DR with basic pension and upgradation should happen for post July 1997 retirees as well.

Viewing from this angle, it would appear that the Delhi HC order has given to the Federation more than it asked for by its judgment dt 30th January, 2013.This is my personal view. Readers are welcome to come to their own conclusions on the issue.

With greetings,
C H Mahadevan 

PLEASE CLICK BELOW TO READ JUDGMENT EXCERPTS.

FEDERATION OF RETD LIC CLASS I OFFICERS ASSOCIATIONS

President: SK Kapahi                                                                               Gen Secy’s Office: 7/4 II Cross St

Gen Secy:  GN Sridharan                                                                        Karpagam Gardens,Chennai-60002
                                                                                                                     30^th Oct 2013 :

                        Camp New DelhI

TO All Units/Members

Delhi order

• By its modified order dated 17/10/2013 in SLP No. 17726/2013, Supreme Court has specifically directed that there shall be ‘NO STAY’ of the Division Bench order of Delhi HC passed in WP 184/2007. In view of this, our advocate has sent a notice today to LIC demanding implementation of the said order in regard to DR Anomaly issue affecting pre 1/8/1997 retirees.
• The question on what further steps should be taken (as we cannot expect any immediate response on their own) was discussed with our advocate and senior counsel. During the discussion, alternative measures open to us like approaching the SC again were also considered. We have clearly put forth to our counsel that contempt action which will only give a handle to LIC/Govt to delay compliance should be avoided. We have decided to wait for LIC’s response if any and decide on our appropriate action as expeditiously as possible, latest by the time we meet at the GC Meeting on 2^nd December 2013.

A noteworthy meeting

• In keeping with our declared policy of not solely relying on court cases, I had sought and obtained an appointment with Shri R.K. Takru, Secretary (Financial Services), Ministry of Finance who is the top-most officer of the Banking and Insurance and is also a key member on LIC Board. I accordingly met him, along with Shri Amirtlal (our VP at Delhi) on 29/10/2013 (yesterday).

• We raised the two major issues of (1) DR Anomaly on account of denial of 100% neutralisation to a section of pensioners and (2) upgradation of pension, the Secretary (FS) who gave me a patient hearing.

• In regard to the first one, we highlighted the following: Three High Courts have held that it is discriminatory to adopt different basis of DR for pensioners and the Supreme Court has ordered that there shall be ‘NO STAY’ on these. We therefore pleaded that the Delhi HC order should be implemented as prayed for by our Federation in WP 184/2007 for the following reasons among others:- (a) The Delhi HC order relates to the DR issue only without mixing up other issues, (b) the beneficiaries (Pre-1997 retirees) are all in advanced age range of 75-85, and their grievance merits to be addressed by the Govt with its commitment to senior citizens, (c) the order is specifically made to operate ‘in rem’ and (d) as the Sec 48 of LIC Act is not stayed or struck down by any court so far, notification of 100% neutralisation immediately is not a predicament. 

• We referred to the Govt action in filing appeals, the Secretary frankly expressed that when some orders adverse to the Govt are passed by judiciary, the policy is to take up the matter with the higher court but he made it clear that if there is real merit in any point, the matter will be considered.   

• As regards the second issue of upgradaion, we pointed out that a large section of LIC pensioners eagerly expect revision in n terms of the Judgement of Rajasthathan HC in WP 6676/1998 & 654/2007. As the matter is lying as Civil Appeals in SC and it is not known when a finality will come about, while it is undeniable fact that our pensions have remained static for over two decades, our Federation has taken a practical stand that there should be an immediate grant of ad hoc payment till the scheme of revision is based on court verdicts or otherwise. We stressed the need for ending the prevailing disparities of ghastly order.

• The Secretary (FS) was frank in his expressions. I could visualise a helpful approach on his part unlike a few earlier meetings.  He passed instructions in our presence to his Department to refer the matter to the Chairman immediately and get back to him.

• We hope LIC would respond favourably. We shall follow up the matter with the management level, and intimate progress to the members promptly.

With Greetings to ALL for a HAPPY DIWALI,

(GN Sridharan)

GEN SECRETARY

WAIT WITH PATIENCE

Jaipur High Court has granted 4 weeks time as sought by LIC for compliance - what exactly is not clear in the absence of detailed report/order of the court--may be LIC has been directed to furnish compliance to Court on 29 November, 2013 on the judgment dated 12-01-2010 or may be more to it. Will someone in the know of details of court proceedings/order kindly enlighten for benefit of all ?

GOI/LIC and the honourable Courts (should) know that pensioners, by and large (with few exceptions) in their eighties +, eighties and seventies have lived /have been living in very low/low dignity compared to recently retired pensioners in the midst of similar conditions of high /higher - sky rocketing inflation. The demands, among others, of 100% neutralization of dearness relief to those who have been denied and equitable updation of pension to all are neither unreasonable or nor unjust.

All pensioners irrespective of their affiliation to their respective union/association know what Shri Asthanaji and others are engaged in the legal battle for more than ten years. The beneficiaries are not just the old guys, the old retirees, the future retirees too to receive the benefit. All Pensioners may continue to be steadfastly assertive / supportive to the leaders and wait with patience.

 

On behalf of and as told by SN, a 1992 pensioner

 

A LETTER TO THE EDITOR

The Editor,

Pensioners Chronicle,

Calicut.

 Dear sir,

                      Reg: News items in Pensioners Chronicle

Your Pensioners Chronicle is good in circulating the pensioners’ news

wherever we are.  You deserve all the appreciation on my behalf and on

behalf of all the pensioners.

The LIC will always try to delay more or less try to avoid what is legitimately

due to the pensioners. More over there are some federations/ associations

trying to dissuade the pensioners in their attempt to persue the genuine

grievances particularly the updating of their pension. In our opinion Shri K M L

Asthana and his Federation are fighting against the Management in the legal  

battle against LIC.

Despite the fast communication system some times there

may be delay in communication. Secondly, the Court 

website is not able to give up-to-date information. In these 

circumstances Shri V C JAIN has given information last 

night (29th evening) for the benefit of the pensioners.

All of us have crossed 60 and most of us crossed 70 and also 80 years of age

if we cannot have patience who else can have it.

I find you are a matured Journalist couple with it you had enough experience

with the happenings in LIC from the date of your appointment. So, I hope
and trust that wisdom do prevail in publishing the news.

With greetings,

Comradely yours,

L S R KRISHNA RAO

___________________

28th (12 PM) news that LIC asked for 4 weeks time, it was allowed, case adjourned to 29th Nov.2013 was given to you on 29th evening. Shri Rao is satisfied.  If all the pensioners are also satisfied, our ends are met. -Ed. 

LAUGHED OR LAUGHED IT AWAY ?

DEAR EDITOR

IT'S GOOD TO BE FUNNY ALSO.

I SIMPLY LAUGHED TO SEE 
CARTOONS ON WRONG 

DELIVERY. BUT PERSON'S  
SUGGESTION TO SEND A 

REPORTER TO JAIPUR IS WORTH CONSIDERING -

WHAT THOUGHT YOU HAVE 
GIVEN TO GET ON THE 

SPOT HOT NEWS FOR THE CHRONICLE.

REGARDS

HK Aggarwal.

CONCEIVED, FOLLOWED BY MISCARRIAGE (OF JUSTICE)

I  do not know Sir, whether it is a case of "over delivery" or "under delivery"

miscarriage ?

or miscarriage.  Some people even after reading Justice Bhandari's judgement of 12.1.2010 may still comment that there was no 'conception' ---- but in the ultimate analysis what will matter - under delivery or over delivery OR THE FINAL word on Justice Bhandari's judgement.   

My note also appeared on the Chronicle and after going through the same let us decide the advantage of "dancing in the rain"  A  great comedian has said "whenever I feel frustrated or the world around me lies shattered, I just go and walk in the rain so that no body could see my eyes 'full of tears'   This is the delivery system of justice as conceptualized by our courts, which we are learning the hard way.

 And it is difficult to reconcile......... hence all these sarcastic comments. 

regards
S.P.SOOD
__________________________
Shri Rajan writes about reporting court proceedings only. Discussion may be
continued confining to the point raised. - Ed.

LIC WANTED 4 WEEKS TIME; JAIPUR CASE ADJOURNED TO 29TH NOV.2013

FRIENDS,

                         

ON 28TH OCT. WE WERE IN UDAIPUR. 

OUR E.C.MEETING WAS ON 27TH WHICH WAS QUITE SUCCESSFUL. ONLY TO-DAY WE HAVE REACHED H.Q. WE HAD A LONG TALK WITH ASTHANA.   

L.I.C. WANTED 4 WEEKS' TIME AS THEY COULD NOT RECEIVE SUFFICIENT TIME FOR COMPLIANCE. THE DISCUSSIONS WERE FOR ABOUT 45 MINUTES.  WE SAID THAT SUFFICIENT TIME HAS BEEN GIVEN FOR COMPLIANCE.  BUT THE SR. ADVOCATE OF LIC ASSURED COMPLIANCE WITHIN THIS PERIOD. SO THE HON'BLE. JUSTICE SHRI CHOUHAN RELYING ON THEIR ASSURANCE GAVE TIME AND FIXED THE DATE 29TH NOV 2013.

                            

FRIENDS UP TILL NOW WE WERE DEPENDING ON THE JUDICIARY AND JUDICIARY DID NOT DISAPPOINT. WE HAD BEEN IN WIN WIN POSITION. SO THIS TIME ALSO PLEASE HAVE PATIENCE AND HAVE FULL CONFIDENCE IN JUDICIARY.    ONE THING MORE  --  WHAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE  LEFT  WITH US?

                              

THERE MAY BE SO MANY RUMOURS, BUT WE ARE TO THINK IN POSITIVE  SIDE. THE JUDGEMENT GIVEN BY JUSTICE BHANDARI  HAS NEVER BEEN CHALLENGED IN THE WHOLE PROCESS. TIME IS THE BIG FACTOR. 

WISH YOU ALL A HAPPY DIWALI AND MAY GODDESS LAKSHMI SHOWER WEALTH AND PROSPERITY  ON US.  GOOD WISHES FOR ALL.                  

YOURS FRIENDLY 

V.C.JAIN

GENERAL SECRETARY 

ALL INDIA RETIRED INSURANCE EMPLOYEES FEDERATION'

WRONG DELIVERY ?

I have a suggestion.... 

Can you send your legal correspondent to the Jaipur court to report court proceedings?

*20/05 
Cartoon "No news often means no good news" published at 7 PM.
SK Mazumder contacted VC Jain and sent news to  LIC Pensioners on 21st morning.

30/09 
On 30/9 supreme court proceedings were not fully reported - there was under-delivery.  

22/10 
Rajasthan High Court proceedings were reported in a totally distorted manner - there was over-delivery. 

28/10 
Court proceedings in the Rajasthan HC were again not reported to say whether the court met that day at all - there was no delivery at all. 

Is it all about learning to dance in the rain ?

learning to dance in rain !

RAJAN MANNADIAR, Pgt. 

_________________

* 20/5 cartoon since added.

LOOKING BACK

Dear Friends,

                              HAPPY DIWALI

Here, I would like  all retired employees, who are/have become beneficiaries as per the judgement dated 12.01.2010, to please go through WORD BY WORD the HISTORIC & REPORTABLE Judgement of HON'BLE Justice M N BHANDARI of the Rajasthan High court JAIPUR, which has been given due recognition by other HCs (Pb & Har & Delhi) and their verdicts are also based on the same AND the HON'ble Supreme court  in their order dated 30.9.13 said ‘’There shall be no stay of the directions given by the learned Single Judge vide Order dated 12.01.2010 passed in S.B.C.W.P. No 6676 of 1998 and connected matter’’. (pl note connected matter means SBCWP NO. 654 OF 2007).

PLEASE CLICK ON 'PAGES'
ON RIGHT-HAND SIDE
OF BLOG TO READ JAIPUR
SB JUDGMENT.

SH M SREENIVASAN HAD VERY EFFECTIVELY & EXHAUSTIVELY ELABORATED and CLARIFIED THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE VARIOUS JUDGEMENTS & CONVERTING LICs SLPs AS CIVIL APPEALS, IN HIS ARTICLE 'LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL' DATED 10.10.13.

While we all are upset and concerned with the inordinate delay in implementation of the judgement due to the inbuilt limitations of the legal system and by LIC due to its own unhelpful attitude and dubious intentions of FM/GOI, we have to have faith in the Judiciary, remain united and patiently wait for some (hopefully very short ) time more when we all get full justice. 

With best wishes  - H K Aggarwal.

WHILE WE DISCUSS OUR PROBLEMS, A FOREIGNER MR. BRANDAN DAVIES REGULARLY READS OUR POSTS...

WHAT COULD BE

HIS AREA OF INTEREST IN THE POSTS

PUBLISHED ?

... adjourned why, at whose instance..  details awaited.

THE CASE IS LISTED IN COURT NO.4 - IT IS THE ONLY CASE .

HOPE SUSTAINS HOPE - 

LETS PRAY FOR A FRUITFUL OUTCOME

- HK Aggarwal.

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT JAIPUR

OVER DELIVERY - A QUESTION AND ANSWER

A QUESTION

Dear All,

The following is what appeared in The LIC Pensioners Chronicle

today. Do we not expect the factual reporting from our leaders.

Will anyone now tell what transpired in the court on 22nd October, 2013?

They need to answer the following queries:-

(1) whether the Court ordered LIC to report compliance of 

Judgement dated 10/01/2010 up to 28th October , 2013 

OR

(2) whether the court gave time up to 28th October, 2013

 to LIC to file their objection for non compliance as 

reported in the LIC Pensioners Chronicle.

AND AN ANSWER...

Sir,

You being an enlightened and more knowledgeable person fully know
that these days High Court proceedings are transparent and any body can
approach the office of the Registrar HC and can get any information of a case,
or a certified copy of the orders, may be on payment of some nominal fee.

It is sad that any body should raise doubts on the person/leaders who have sacrificed
every thing for the common cause of pensioners for the last 15 yrs. You and me and for that matter 99% of the pensioners became interested in the case only after the favourable judgement dated 12.01.2010 of Justice Bhandari, Rajasthan HC, Jaipur.

Instead of further spreading negative thoughts and views, positive persons like you
can help in keeping the environment healthy and calm and avoid controversies. Of course all have the right to be a part of healthy discussions without any malice.

I fully agree with Editor's (LIC Pensioners Chronicle) views "And all this for the ultimate good of our pensioners only."

Lets HAIL UNITY OF PENSIONERS and have full confidence in Sh Asthanaji and AIRIEF leadership.

With best wishes,
HK Aggarwal

SP SOOD, CHANDIGARH

It's all about
learning to dance in the rain.

Dear Editor,

So far discussion on LIC Chronicle has centered mainly around the implications of various Court Orders and resultant disappointment for those who were expecting instant results – may be their expectations sky rocketed after each pronouncement. Now thanks to ‘The Aggrieved Pensioner”, at least we can change the track of our discussion… and share his ‘long lasting agony’. Sh. H.K. Aggarwal says ‘let us be positive.’ Agreed. 

Court pronouncements ( from Jaipur HC to the Hon’ble SC right from 2010 till date ) so far have been like the “assurances held out by a beloved to her desperate lover. A couplet by legendary Poet Ghalib aptly describes our predicament::

koee mere dil se pooche terey teer-e-neemkash ko

ye khalish kahaan se hotee jo jigar ke paar hota

( Let someone ask me about your half-drawn arrow aimed at my heart, which though did not pierce through it, but has become the cause of tingling pain.)

Please click below to read more.

LIC'S COUNTER CANNOT CHANGE LAW

Dear Shri Aggarwal

Thanks for your timely and encouraging message which is needed very much at this hour of crisis. One thing is certain. LIC's filing counter cannot change law nor could it make the court verdicts in successive courts topsyturvy. No new law points can also figure in the counter. Let us be patient and leave this for Asthanaji to handle.

R.K.Viswanathan

ON EDITOR'S NOTES

Dear Mr Gangadharan,

Thank you. 

I feel you could have published the full text of 
whatever Mr G.N. Sridharan had sent to you instead of 
selectively publishing his comments.

If other visitors to the blog wanted to respond to his comments, 
there can always be a healthy debate so long as there is any 
 criticism of any of his writings only on issues and not personal . 

This way there can be objective perspectives 
emerging from such debates.

Kind regards.

C H Mahadevan

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR EDITORIAL NOTES

Thank you very much for your editorial notes. 

It reflects the sentiments of each and every 

LIC pensioner irrespective of his affiliation to 

one particular association.Keep up your spirits.

A V Subbaraman Coimbatore division.

EDITOR'S SAGACITY AND INTENT NEED NO ELABORATION

“Satya pareshaan ho sakataa hai, paraajit nahi “, V.C.Jain, GS, AIRIEF “..As a matter of routine, we seniors should try to take pleasure of silver lining to remain happy and healthy in life..” H.K.Aggarwal. There can be no better words of solace and comfort to heart, mind and body .

We, the citizens of India, are the ‘victims’ of our legal system. There is a Law of Limitation. There is no law of limitation for delivery of judgments.

Bhagawaanake mandirame der hai, andher nahi hai.

 Hamhare courtome der hi der hai, der hi der hai ,

andhera ka  bahut hi badha bogadha (tunnel )

paar karneka  par prakashaka kiran bahut bahut derake

baad dikhata hai .

Though the woods are deep and dark, Shri Asthanaji and others have full faith in their word of promise and outcome of their more than a decade old struggle.

 

The light has already been sighted. Let us await for few more weeks or months- (not years, no!) to rejoice the fruits of unendurable wait.

The sagacity and intent of the Editor, LIC Pensioners Chronicle need no elaboration.

Vaade vaade jaayate tatvabodhah.

(Through continuing dialogue alone does one arrive at the core truth).

Heart to heart talks- blow hot and blow cold - with malice to none do help .

The latest write-ups of S/Shri C.H.Mahadevan and H.K.Aggarwal on H.C. judgments and implication , post 22 October 2013 piece of information, are scholarly, educative,  and are piece de resistance , in particular to pre August 1997 pensioners.

May the LIC (more than 80% of people have faith in LIC despite many players-) continue to take care of health needs and welfare one and all.

Yogakshemam Vahamyaham.

Warm regards and best wishes to entire LIC Fraternity-young and old, serving and retired.

Bye. 

A pensioner.

WE EXPECT THE BLOG TO PLAY STILL MORE RESPONSIBLE ROLES

Dear Sir -  Your Editorial Note opens with these lines  "Our intention was to provoke Shri Aggarwal and others to come out with more details of Jaipur Contempt...."  somehow  it also indicates that the Pensioners Chronicle is more like a TV News Channel now..  We respect Shri G.N. Sridharan and we are also aware of  his views about the demand for "updation of pension" which is the main issue before the pensioners. Pensioners are sad not because of some over-reporting of Jaipur Case but because there are  members amongst us who do not miss any opportunity to mock at the legal case for updation of pension. We expect the blog to play a mor  positive role. 

With regards, S.P.SOOD

EDITOR'S NOTES

Our intention was to provoke Shri Aggarwal and others to come out with more details of Jaipur Contempt case when we published the news "from independent sources from Jaipur".

Shri Aggarwal did not deny our news item but speaks of taking  pleasure out of any silver lining and enjoy all positive moments
/news which we hear or read to remain healthy & happy in life.

Pensioners across the country are not only sad but appear to be sho....  One hundred percent journalistic instinct is moving spirit behind our action.  If we are doing a disservice to the pensioners, you may come bold and criticise us. We assure you all your criticism will find exposure through our columns. 

You have seen Shri GN Sridharan's remarks ".....I have seen comments in Chronicle in different facets. Healthy discussions are no doubt welcome, but these perhaps looked to be hilarious

at the painful transition that we are passing through, rather than

being informative and helpful, in our hour of need. Is it too

much to expect a cautious restraint in expressing

views at this point of time?"

You thought, perhaps, Shri GN Sridharan wrote a brief congratulatory message. In fact, it was the Editor's creation.  He (Editor) carved out a part of his message and published the same. Remember, 75% of the handout issued by Shri GN Sridharan on 22nd Oct. evening was edited (out). We refused to publish the rest of the message.  He was informed that only the above sentences "could be published".  He had complaints.  He wrote to the Editor: "Dear Shri PGG, I believe that you must have strong reason as to not insert my brief writing sent on 22nd (with a small add on, on 23rd). I also did not want to interrupt the spate of congratulatory flashes and momentary joy. However I am anxious that our friends are not disappointed and mislead in their trying hours..." 

Editor replied him: "Right or wrong, pensioners are in a particular mood, and going against this mood cannot be blog policy. I will be looked down upon (with contempt) if I do anything to spoil their mood."

Shri GN Sridharan's deliveries are sharp. Some times he creates more enemies than followers.  He is more misunderstood for his approach of "plucking the easier ones", but his nobility cannot be questioned. He is not a recent entry to the trade union work. He has only suffered in his life because of this work, never gained anything. 

* Despite this understanding to which many people may have objection, we have profusely edited his 'hand out' on 22nd October. Though there was nothing objectionable, we refused to publish the same as it did not meet with the 'mood' of people on that day.  

Here, we also assure you that any written material you send against him and his policies will be published as we have done all these days.

And that is our approach to Shri Asthana.  We have appreciated his services several times in our posts in the past, the last being our Editorial.  

To close these words, at 'LIC Pensioners Chronicle' our guns are always kept dry for swift action.  We repeat, that is our policy. Pensioners can come forward with any news and views, and we assure you, the same will be published to meet the ends of transparency and healthy discussion. 

And all this for the ultimate good of our pensioners only, 

as we, at the 'LIC Pensioners Chronicle', believe.

-Editor

* Added after publication of Notes.

TAKE PLEASURE IN THE SILVER LINING AND ENJOY ALL POSITIVE MOMENTS, SAYS HK AGGARWAL

Dear Editor,

All have the right to express their views - negative or positive and the editor has full authority to publish or not to publish.

But regarding anonymous views I suggest you to please do not give any credence as is the common practice. Accordingly without taking any cognizance of the anonymous views I prefer not to comment.

However I would like to add for the pleasure of all that as a matter of routine we seniors should try to take pleasure out of any silver lining and enjoy all positive moments/news which we hear or read to remain healthy & happy in life. We have the experience of living and facing all odds, pains of difficult times, and also lots of joy & ecstasy and know the ups and down of life. So why not to remain positive, and avoid negative approach which burn the blood that is a rare commodity at this age. Save it.

Wish again all the viewers a 

   VERY VERY HAPPY DIWALI

H K AGGARWAL

PS ALSO PLEASE REMEMBER: 

सत्य परेशान  हो सकता है,  पराजित नहीं                              

                              V.C.JAIN , GS  AIRIEF. 

THANKS

Dear Sir,

            
I thank  C H Mahadevan and H K Agarwal for their notes on the three H C judgements and their implications which have cleared the doubts in the minds of pensioners.

I also thank lic pensioners chronicle in posting the notes in the blog.

A V Subbaraman, Coimbatore Division

THAT'S A DISSERVICE TO THE PENSIONERS

Earnest enthusiasts in their all eagerness to share the ‘anticipated bonafide bonanza before the ensuing Diwali' broke the news on 22 Oct.2013 that the Rajasthan High court directed the LIC to report compliance by 28 October 2013. 

The subsequent item of news after two days on 25 Oct.2013 is altogether different – gruesome denial. This kind of ‘blunder ‘ (pardon for harsh word) has happened second time in less than three months. 

* It is advisable not to jump to conclusion based on some hearsay to abort prematurely. It is sad, to say the least, to rush to public/to LIC Pensioners Chronicle without confirming the authenticity of the citation/ information from few sources including from the original / reliable source emanating from the citadel of the court.  (emphasis ours. - Ed.)

Such unconfirmed hasty revelations /actions cause more harm than service unto the masses, resulting in overwhelming ecstasy - short lived and agony - long lasting among the rank and file of All India Retired LIC Employees.

An Aggrieved Pensioner. 

_________________________
* We share the sentiments of this pensioner.  It is painful indeed, we agree. No formal order has been issued by Rajasthan HC so far. Any clarification/ assertion from any source is welcome and will be prominently published. "An aggrieved Pensioner" had written earlier also on another issue to which Shri GN Sridharan had replied.  He has given his name and email id, but for his own reasons, he wants to remain anonymous. -Ed.

SAMADHAN

Dear Sir,

No.1

Congratulations because you are No. ONE 

to publish hot news to satisfy our curiosity to 

know about where we stand.It seems, LIC is 

getting more liberty every time.

The case at SC also remained unimplemented
till 30 Sept. Why the advocates & courts do 
not suggest for SAMADHAN (Compromise) 
as it normally does in so many other cases 
viz. the case Rajvi Parivar of Baroda etc. 

It seems there is no remedy of our long pending 

probleme inspite of great efforts of our leaders.

P B Acharya (Jamnagar)

NEXT HEARING 28TH OCTOBER 2013 IN JAIPUR HC

Date of query : 25/10/2013	Time : 9:23:30 PM
CCP'760' of 2010 - R	7396/2010
Petitioner :	KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASTHANA AND
Respondent:	T S VIJAYAN AND OTHERS
Petitioner Advocate:	ABHINAV SHARMA
Respondent Advocate:	MAHENDRA SINGH/A TYAGI
Class Code : 2401	Registered on : 21/8/2010
Bench : SB	Stage : FOR ADMISSION- NOTICE SERVED
DATE GIVEN BY: PESHI CLERK DATE
Date of Listing : 22/10/2013
Listed in court No. 4 on 28/10/2013

LIC TO FILE COUNTER BY THE MONTH END

We had been waiting for a formal order 
from Rajasthan High Court directing 
Life Insurance Corporation of India to 
implement the Single Bench order 
by 28th October 2013. It is not sure, 
if an order of this nature will be issued at all.

From independent sources from Jaipur close to

'LIC Pensioners Chronicle', we learn that the Court 

on 22nd October wanted to know from LIC what was the 

difficulty in implementing the judgement and granted 

the LIC counsel time till 28th October 2013 

to file a counter.

Let us wait for details.

RAJASTHAN HC ORDER - NOT YET ISSUED

SHRI CH MAHADEVAN HAS REVISED HIS NOTE TITLED "IMPLICATIONS OF THE VARIOUS COURT ORDERS FOCUSING ON JAIPUR SB ORDER DATED 12-1-2010." To read, Click here.

DEAR SH MAHADEVAN,

I HAVE GONE THRU YOUR WRITE up in the LIC PENSIONERS CHRONICLE titled "Implications of the various Court Orders focusing on Jaipur SB Order dt 12/01/2010" AND WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU AND APPRECIATE YOUR VISION TO CLARIFY THE IMPLICATIONS OF RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT ORDER DATED 12.01.2010.

HOWEVER I FIND THAT YOU HAVE MISSED (may be inadvertently) TO MENTION THE MOST IMPORTANT VERDICT OF THE PB&HARYANA HIGH COURT,CHANDIGARH DATED 9.11.2012 (* REPRODUCED BELOW) IN WHICH BOTH THE ISSUES HAVE BEEN CLEARLY SPELLED OUT AND THE COURT HAS ALLOWED 12% pa INTEREST ALSO AND THE SUPREME COURT DID NOT GRANT ANY RELIEF TO LIC IN THEIR ORDER DATED 19.8.2013 "The prayer for interim relief is rejected."

Accordingly I AM OF THE CONFIRMED VIEW THAT The benefit arising out of the directions above would ALSO be considered by the respondent Corporation so that every retired employee may get the same benefit BOTH OF UPGRADATION OF PENSION ON ACCOUNT OF VARIOUS GRADE REVISIONS AND REMOVAL OF DA ANOMOLY,WITH INTEREST OF 12%PA as directed by the HC.

WITH BEST WISHES AND REGARDS

HK Aggarwal

Please click below to read PB & Haryana HC judgment

Implications of the various Court Orders focusing on Jaipur SB Order dt 12/01/2010

Operative part of Jaipur Single judge Bench Order dt 12/1/2010:

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.

Meaning:

1. Board Resolution dt 24/11/2001 to be implemented:

“Executive Director (Personnel) introducing the subject mentioned that there was three different rates for different groups of pensioners at present depending on their dates of retirement, which cause considerable administrative inconvenience. Chairman pointed out that he has since received a communication from Dr. S. Ram Khanna, Board Member, which refers to his meeting with the Retirees Federation and requested examining the proposal in detailed. The Note is in line with the demands made by the Federation, viz., giving effect to the proposal from 1.11.1993 and upgradation by giving weightage of 11.25% as in the case of in service employees. Chairman pointed out that these have been considered before placing the matter to the Board and it was felt that the same would increase the financial burden very substantially and may be unaffordable for the corporation. Chairman pointed out that the implications of the proposal made have been actuarially determined at Rs.51.37 crores and the annual outlay be in the region of 6 to 8 crores. After some discussion the Board approved the proposal and suggested that it should be implemented prospectively and after obtaining Government approval.” (Underlining mine).

The Jaipur Bench held that approval of Central Government was not necessary.
Giving effect to the proposal from 1/11/1993 means applying DR formula for retirees as applicable for in-service employees and thereafter upgradation by giving weightage of 11.25% (then). As the wage revision effective from 1/8/1997 was the only one in existence as on 24/11/2001, by implication, upgradation will have to be extended following the same principles effective on 1/8/2002 and 1/8/2007 as well.

2.” Corporation cannot provide different criteria for grant of dearness allowance to the existing pensioners based on cut-off date i.e. 31.7.1997”.

This is also mentioned in the Board Resolution where the relevant portion is underlined (by me). This means that DR formula for retired employees and in-service employees will have to be the same which is not the case for pre August 1997 retirees. 

Please click below to read more.