Dear friends,

CPI for July 2013 was a high jump to 235. CPI for August 2013  galloped to 237.  For September 2013, CPI stood at 238. Employees got eligibility for 48 slabs of DA. CPI for Oct 2013 shot up again to 241. Latest, for November 2013, CPI(IW)2001 rises to 243.

Assuming 244 for December 2013, for pensioners, DR slabs  can be 48+34 = 82 slabs

If December CPI climbs to 245, DR slabs can be 48+36 = 84 slabs.

This is not a New Year gift but only  a New Year announcement 

Final & correct DR slabs will be announced on 31st  January 2014, when actual CPI Dec 2013 will be known.

Greetings for a Happy & Healthy, Peaceful & Prosperous New Year

May the Hours & the Days & the Weeks unite in making the New Year 2014 especially Bright & Brilliant.

R.B. KISHORE

VP, AIRIEF

HERE'S SHAPE OF ARGUMENTS TO COME FROM LIC IN CONTEMPT CASE...

SHRI H.K. AGGARWAL SOUGHT INFORMATION REGARDING 

NON COMPLIANCE OF ORDERS OF SINGLE JUDGE JAIPUR UNDER R.T.I. 

LIC'S REPLY ADDRESSED TO ONE APPLICANT SHRI RK BAJAJ 
IS REPRODUCED BELOW.

IT IS CLEAR THAT LIC WILL CONTINUE TO INVOKE ALL ITS POWERS TO FURTHER COMPLICATE THE MATTER UNDER LEGAL UMBRELLA WITHOUT MAKING ANY PAYMENT TO THE BENEFICIARIES - i.e. PENSIONERS.

HAPPY NEW YEAR 2014.

SP SOOD 

The suggestion of Shri C H Mahadevan that pensioners' associations also should be invited to press their charter of demands along with employees' unions during the forthcoming wage talks will be welcomed by all pensioners.

I fully endorse his views. Associations should take initiative and right steps in this direction in the interest of pensioners. Will they do it?

A V Subbaraman Coimbatore Division

Mr. Mahadevan has brought to the knowledge of Chronicle readers useful information on the captioned subject and I thank him for the same. However who will enlighten the judges who hear our cases and give the judgments to realise the fond hope of  

Mr. Mahadevan?  Of course our counsels should do this to din this concept into the minds of the judges and for this purpose I wish Shri Asthanaji should do the needful.

J.M. Aboobucker

SHRI K. VAIDYALINGAM IS NO MORE...

I am sorry to report that our beloved retired colleague, Mr K.Vaidyalingam, ZM (Selection Scale), South Zone (Retd) passed away on 23rd December, 2013. I talked over phone with Mrs Vaidyalingam this morning to express my condolences. I was informed that he he has been ailing for some time from liver problem. He was hospitalized on 9th inst and breathed his last on 23rd inst after an unsuccessful treatment.


Mr Vaidyalingam was my RM(Mktg) when I was ZM, South Central Zone during 1998-2001 and with his dedicated involvement and team mobilization, the Zone could scale new heights.
We will all be missing a dear colleague in our journey of our retired lives. May his soul rest in eternal peace.

CH MAHADEVAN

***

The Annual General Coucil  meeting of Retired Insurance Employees Association (RIEA) Thrissur Division was held at Indian Medical Association Hall Thrissur on 28th December2013 Saturday chaired by Shri TC Vijayan (Ernakulam) VP All India LIC Employees  Federation(AILICEF), Shri B Angurajan   Organising 

Secretary (AIRIEF) Madurai and Shr A V Subbaraman, Coimbatore Division  were special invitees. Shri  B Angurajan spoke about union's organisational matters and the steps taken by Federation for the pensioners' interest. 

Shr A V Subbaraman detailed the latest development in the Jaipur HC judgement culminating in the contempt of court petition scheduled to be heard on 3rd Jan 2014.  After election of office bearers for the year 2014, the meeting concluded. 

DEAR ALL,

The news item that appeared in the "The Hindu"  is reproduced below:

Although the laws of United States may be different from those of India, one principle that has been brought out clearly in the California Court ruling is that the interests of pensioners are more

sacrosanct than those of working employees. This is quite plausible considering that pensioners constitute a weaker section of senior citizens with no bargaining power or options of job-hopping to greener pastures like in-service employees and vulnerability to adverse effects of ageing and serious ailments. The ruling places an implied emphasis on safeguarding social security for pensioners. 

The practice followed in India in terms of doling out more liberal benefits to the in-service employees vis-à-vis the pensioners is at complete variance with the principle enunciated in the ruling.

One thing that stands out arising out of this ruling is that financial unaffordability of the employer cannot be a valid ground for denying equitable pension to retirees by a public organization like LIC.Of course in case of LIC the question of financial unaffordability does not arise considering the financial indicators available in public domain.

Let us hope that Indian Courts also adopt such principles while considering cases involving pensioners for delivering justice.

With greetings,

C H Mahadevan 

AMUTHA SURABHIMM

CLICK LINK BELOW TO JOIN 'IMPLEMENT RAJASTHAN HC JUDGMENT' CAMPAIGN!

I just signed this petition -- will you join me?

A PETITION ADDRESSED TO 
Shri S.K.Roy,Chairman,L.I.C.of India,Central Office, 'Yogakshema', Nariman Point, Mumbai, 400021

To: LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA

The petition is really important and could use our help. 

Click below to find out more and sign:

http://www.avaaz.org/en/petition/LIFE_INSURANCE_CORPORATION_OF_INDIA_Implement_the_Rajasthaan_High_Court_Jaipur_Bench_Judgement/?kUlJDgb

Thanks so much.
________________________________

certain facts and figures

भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम  

भारतीय जीवन बीमा निगम  Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC)  headquartered in Mumbai  is the largest insurance company in India with an estimated asset value of 15,60,482 crore (US$240 billion). As of 2013 it had total life fund of Rs.14,33,103 crore with total value of policies sold of 368 lakh that year.

To read more, please click below.

Over the last few days, an advertisement placed by a body called 'Global Federation of Insurance Associations' has appeared in a number of publications. This advertisement is written in the form of an open letter to the Prime Minister, with copy to the finance, commerce and parliamentary affairs ministers. The letter is essentially an exhortation to get the amended insurance bill passed and talks almost entirely about the FDI that passing this bill will bring about and the signal it will send about India being 'open for business'.

That's all well and good, and there's also one bit about the insurance industries' customers, which goes "While the Indian market has witnessed tremendous growth, there remain high levels of underinsurance. The security a family or business achieves by insuring its most valuable assets helps supplement programmes already in place by the government to lift the living standards of the Indian people."

That's a noble thought indeed and is expressed in a manner that appears to be designed to push all the right buttons get FDI and make Indians secure. However, the basic premise here is that the insurance industry is in the business of providing insurance cover and the coming of foreign insurance companies has enhanced this activity. Is this premise correct? The unfortunate answer to that question is that no one seems to know, neither the Irda, nor the government. The sad part is that not only do they not know, they seem not to care that this measure is important.

Whenever the growth of the insurance industry is discussed, the measure used is the premiums paid by customers. This is true not only of the industry's own statements but also of media coverage and Irda's reports. The Irda also takes two metrics insurance penetration and insurance density as indicators of the 'potential and performance' of the industry. The former is the ratio of premiums paid to GDP and the latter is premiums paid per unit of population. Both are based on the implicit idea that higher premium is an achievement.

But premium payment is what the customer gives, not what he gets. These numbers are not indicative of the security the cover that is delivered. The reason that this industry exists is to deliver insurance. When a customer dies, how much money does his family get? How many customers have what amount of this cover? Premiums don't tell you that because they lump together everything that a customer pays, including what are basically his investments as well as commissions and other charges.

It's not a secret that the primary sales focus of insurance companies and agents is not insurance (in the sense of security and cover) but investment products. As such, to talk of premiums as a measure of achievement is disingenuous and for Irda to adopt such measures is disappointing.

One encouraging sign is that at long last, the scales have fallen from the government's eyes. In a recent interview with Bloomberg, financial services secretary Rajiv Takru was particularly harsh on the industry. He refused to show any sympathy for falling premiums and instead said that the industry needed to introspect and bring in corrective measures. Nowadays everyone has a ghastly insurance mis-selling story to tell and the one that Takru narrates is particularly egregious, involving an 85 year-old whose bank FDs were broken up and invested into 199 insurance policies!

Now that the government is of the view that all is not right (to put it mildly), it's time that everyone the Irda, the government as well as the media stop using premiums as a metric of whether the insurance industry is doing its job. That job is to provide cover and we must measure how many people are being covered, whether they are being covered adequately and how much are they paying for that cover. The rest of it the money collected as investments or other non-cover purposes must not confuse this core issue.

(By DHIRENDRA KUMAR, CEO, VALUE RESEARCH, Economic Times - 24/12/2013)

Ack: CH Mahadevan

DEAR ALL,

The Jaipur Single Judge Bench Order dated 12th Jan 2010 directs LIC as follows:

The respondent Corporation is directed to take a decision for implementation of the resolution dated 24.11.2001 passed by the Board.

When LIC decides to implement the Board Resolution (as otherwise they will be exposed to the charge of contempt of court), they should normally follow the principle of merger of DR with Basic Pension as at 1/8/1997 for pre August 1997 pensioners and upgradation of pension on that date by the weightage of 11.25% as was done for in service employees. It is believed that the rate of 11.25% is only an average and the actual weightage will vary according to the cadre and Basic Pension drawn by the retirees in the respective cadres.

The penultimate sentence in the Order states, 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. This would imply that while implementing the Board Resolution, parity in pension should also be maintained in each cadre. In other words, the decision taken in the Board Resolution should only be taken as an enabling one whereas the Corporation has to go a step further in ensuring parity in pension by stage to stage revision of pension. This in my opinion would require much more weightage than 11.25% which is to be taken as the threshold rate.

I have prepared a chart, as given below, indicating  the actual weightage required to be given on merger of DR with Basic Pension on 1/8/1997,1/8/2002 &1/8/2007 to ensure stage to stage revision of pension at the minimum, maximum and average scales of basic pension for your kind information.

It will be observed from the above that, barring at the lower cadres, much higher levels of weightage need to be adopted than 11.25% if disparity in pension is to be avoided in compliance with the the Jaipur Single Judge Bench Order dated 12/1/2010

With greetings.

C H Mahadevan

Sir,

This has reference to *your letter dated 16th December, 2013 addressed to me. It states, “It is observed that you have been issuing circulars to the members of AIIPA, direct” This is not true. It is not based on fact. You advised me to refrain from doing such things in future. The tone and tenor of your letter, the manner in which it was addressed and concluded – all these manifest the present corporate culture of AIIPA. 

The organization formed to safeguard the interests of members is turning bureaucratic. Refrain is the title of Sri Natarajan’s letter dated 10th June, 2013 to the management of LIC. He states “The resolution of the LIC Board in November, 2001 clearly indicates the mindset of the management for grant of uniform rate of D.A. relief both for the pre August 1997 and posts July, 1997 retirees.”


He sees only D.A. neutralization in the resolution and refuses to see the up gradation part. He demanded payment to pre-august 1997 retirees from 1st August 1997, and not from the date of their retirement as decreed by Supreme Court of India. Thus Natarajan does not fully champion the cause of even the pre-august 1997 retirees. He deliberately omitted representation for up gradation of pension of these retirees as also up gradation of pension for all. Sri Natarajan met the chairman on 22-1-2011, one day after the Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court up held the judgment of Justice Bhandari, dismissed the appeal of LIC on Justice Bhandari’s Judgment and ordered LIC to implement it. Did Sri Natarajan demand LIC management to implement the Judgment?    No, he only pleaded with the LIC management not to prolong the litigation; the implication of this suggestion was taken note of by the management. Instances of betrayal of the Pensioner’s cause by AIIPA and their covert cooperation with the LIC management are plenty.


All these actions of betrayal by leaders of AIIPA have been silently observed with forbearance by thousands of LIC pensioners all over the country. The slanderous messages of Sri Natarajan and his misrepresentations are being transmitted obediently and faithfully by lower rung of leadership of AIIPA and its cadres. That seems to be your concept of discipline. May I draw your attention to what is happening in Banks? Bank employees are on strike for two days, i.e. on 19th and 20th. It is for realization of their charter of demands and also demands of pensioners.

This is not happening in LIC.  Because the employee’s and Pensioner’s organizations do not have empathy towards pensioners cause. The lofty ideals and traditions of AIIEA, the tolerance of criticism, due consideration and accommodation of all view points, uncompromising fight to protect the interests of members are things of the past. I thank you, president! and Joint Secretary of AIIPA in enabling me to express my
Views.

 Yours friendly,

K K D HANUMANTHA RAO

Dated 20 12 2013

            (* Letter by Sri  R. Janardan, President, ICREA, Machilipatnam.)

GROSS MEDI-CLAIM PREMIUM AND PREMIUM PAYABLE AFTER SUBSIDY - 2014-15

(Ack. CH MAHADEVAN)

 

" I received a call from someone claiming that he was from my mobile Service provider and he asked me to shutdown my phone for 2 hours for 3G update to take place. As I was rushing for a meeting, I did not question, but just shut down my cell phone.

After 45 minutes I felt very suspicious since the caller did not even introduce his name.

I quickly turned on my cell phone and saw several missed calls from my family members and the others were from the number that had called me earlier –

I called my parents and I was shocked that they sounded very worried asking me whether I am safe. My parents told me that they had received a call from someone claiming that they had me with them and asking for money to let me free. The call was so real and my parents even heard 'my voice' crying out loud asking for help.

My father was at the bank waiting for next call to proceed for money transfer. I told my parents that I am safe and asked them to lodge a police report.

Right after that I received another call from the guy asking me to shutdown my cell phone for another 1 hour which I refused to do and hung up.

They kept calling my cell phone until the battery had run down. I myself lodged a police report and I was informed by the officer that there were many such scams reported. MOST of the cases reported that the victim had already transferred the money! And it is impossible to get back the money. Be careful as this kind of scam might happen to any of us! 

Those guys are so professional and very convincing during calls. If you are asked to
shut down your cell phone for updates by the service provider, ASK AROUND!

Your family or friends might receive the same call." 

Be Safe and Stay Alert! Please pass around to your family and friends. MUST SHARE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

People have been receiving calls from+375602605281, +37127913091or any number starting from +375, +371 number one ring & hang up. If you call back it's one of those Numbers that are charged 15-30$ & they can copy ur contact list in 3 sec & if u have bank or credit card details on your phone, they can copy that too. +375 is from Belarus From Afghanista. 371 is code for Lativa.

AMUTHA SURABHIMM

you without me... how will it be like the world so beautiful when I am not there gone to another where life cannot touch or see or feel me and you will still be there looking out for me waiting for me to show up at our usual times in the morning, noon and evening... your wait will go on hopefully and then one day you will be told that 'she' is no more meaning me will you be then shed a tear for me, warm sliding down your cheeks and feel me somewhere near you around you in you? ~amu

      

The Madras HC initiated contempt proceedings against State Home secretary and other concerned officials for failure to comply with its earlier order for the release of a life convict. The Divisional Bench directed the Registry to issue satisfactory notices to the concerned officials. Passing orders passed on a HC contempt petition filed by the mother seeking release of her son the Bench said despite the order passed by the court on November 13 the same has not been complied with by the respondent under the pretext that  the ADGP of prisons was awaiting orders from the Government and prayed for time. 

“Highly dissatisfied  with the conduct of the Respondent we are forced to issue contempt notice against the Home Secretary to pass appropriate order according to the Superintendent of prisons. It is needless to add that when an order is passed by the court as early as November 13 there is no justification on the part of the respondent police to await orders of the Government. The order of the court should be complied with in letter and spirit without any hesitation", the Bench said.

• It could be anybody’s conjecture that on 3-1-2014 Respondent LIC may come with a plea that the pension rules have to be amended and Gazetted before action to flow. If it were to be so SBI WP(C) 27929 OF 2003 comes to my mind wherein the judgment says that if SBI pending amendment to the pension rules decides to pay an adhoc payment that also to be uniformly applied to all the retired employees irrespective of cut off dates.

• That the judiciary is not subordinate to the Executive has so far been established in several cases and it is with this hope we withstood the annoying long legal battle and this is not the time for us to do a postmortem but have a little more patience  to enjoy the fruits of our victory.

R.K.VISWANATHAN            

FOR THE FIRST TIME, A BANK CHAIRMAN OF PSB IS MADE TO 

APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT AS "ACCUSED" 

FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT...

Dear Members,

Finally Vijaya Bank Chairman, Mr. Upendra Kamat along with his TEAM appears before the KHC to submit his / Banks intentions to pay Pensions to the Petitioner Resignees ONLY within 4/6 weeks time. 

For the first time in the banking history, Chairman of the PSB is made to appear before the court as "Accused " only because of contempt petition filed by the Resignees.

In the *enclosed letter submitted in the Court, to understand correctly, reference of following date & missing link is must:-

1) KHC Single Judge Allows pension to Resignees on 18/04/2012 by quashing clause 7 of Vijaya Bank Circular date 07/09/2010 disallowing pension to Resignees.

2) Vijaya Bank Appeal dismissed by Division Bench on 30/07/2012.

3) Vijaya Bank files SLP in SC on 20/08/2012 but does not make SINCERE Efforts for listing & admission.

4) On 07/12/2012, Hon.justice Mukhopadhyay & Justice Swatantra Kumar hear argument of Advocate on Record & do not grant leave to the petition as prima-facie do not find merit in the case. Sensing fear of DISMISSAL, advocate on record requests for withdrawal of Petition with liberty to go in REVIEW before HC. NO REQUEST WAS MADE ON 07/12/2012 TO FILE FRESH SLP IF THEY DONOT GET RELIEF IN LOWER COURT. SC disposes SLP as withdrawn to file review.

5) Vijaya Bank resignees files Contempt Petition.

6) On 25/10/2013 KHC dismissed the Review Petition.

7) Resignee Files before Caveat 20/11/2013  in Supreme Court anticipating Move of Vijaya Bank to file SLP.

8) Vijaya Bank files SLP on 20/11/2013 with hope to get it admitted on 21/11/2013 with interim prayer for contempt petition which is scheduled on 22/11/2013.

9) Surprised to see caveat & could not succeed & request KHC to give time & KHC grants time till 06/12/2013.  

10) Master mind team of Vijaya Bank serves Notice of Petition to advocate of Respondents (resignees) on 25/11/2013.

11) Case gets listed on 09/12/2013.

12) Mastermind  manages to change it to 02/12/2012 by adding it to supplementary list on Friday i.e. 29/11/2013.

13) On 02/12/2013, the matter is listed before Justice Mukhopadhyay & Justice Gauwda at Sr.No.57.

14) Justice Mukhopadhyay was also on Board on 07/12/2012, when earlier dismissed First SLP of Vijaya Bank.

15) Vijaya Bank Senior counsel argues strongly for admission but,  senior counsel for respondent (Resignees) Senior Advocate Sushil Kumar Jain

(The one who argued the case of ShilKumar Jain Vs New India Insurance Company) & stated that SLP is not maintainable in view of the Decision of Hon justice Deepak Mishra & Justice Radhakrishnan dated 03/10/2012.

16) Entire scene changed & Vijaya Bank was put to defence. Advocate sought adjournment till January 17, but understanding ill motive ( Corem of Bench get changed in January) of putting the case before New judges, Court grants  date for 06/12/2013.

17) Dy. GM of Vijaya Bank ( Mr. S K Hegde ) moves to Delhi &  on 5th December 2013 files application wherein on oath states "  on 02/12/2012, the counsel for the Respondent , who was on caveat , has pointed out to the Hon'ble Bench that the present SLP filed by the Petitioner is not maintainable, as the law has been settled now that any SLP filed after withdrawing the earlier SLP without seeking permission to file SLP is not maintainable by virtue of the judgement reported in 2012(12) SC 378 titled Vinod Kapoor Vs State of Goa, which was delivered on 03/10/2012.At the time of withdrawing the SLP on 07/10/2012,   Petitioner was not aware about the said technicality".

18) Finally Bench Dismissed the SLP on 06/12/2012 by allowing law point open on the issue.

19)There after Bank Executive at Banglore moves  to KHC & gave letter to KHC  as attached.

Here important point is that Judgement declared by Court become law of land under Article 141 of the Constitution of India & IGNORANCE OF LAW " as pleaded by Vijaya Bank Dy.G.M. is not considered by the BENCH & SLP Dismissed. 

 I have basic question always that will be in my mind is " when Vijaya Bank DGM, qualified Executive, who has at his disposal Team of Lawyer & Legal Department of the Bank can plead " Ignorance of Law " to get justice to the Bank & to do injustice to one   Mr.K Karriappa , a Peon respondent in the case  on presumption that Class Four employee, understands the difference between Resignation & Voluntary Retirement & when IBA admits that Awards staff doesnot have VRS scheme.

May God Save Vijaya Bank.

Thanks & Regards

Pathak R K

*no enclosure reproduced.
(Vijaya Bank source. Received thro' CH Mahadevan)

EVERY WEDNESDAY PENSIONERS MEET AT SAROJ (CHAUDHARY) BHAVAN, CALICUT

A view of pensioners attending the meeting.

Shri Sukumaran Punnassery, Gen. Secretary, AIIPA, 

Kozhikode Division 

addressing the meeting.

(Though Tuesday, they met today at 3 pm to celebrate Pensioners Day.)


Photos by Ed.

SK KOOL, CLERK, BANK OF BARODA, REMOVED FROM SERVICE WITH SUPERANNUATION BENEFITS - SUBSEQUENTLY APPLIED FOR LEAVE ENCASHMENT, PENSIONARY BENEFITS - BOTH DECLINED - KOOL WAS ADVISED TO APPLY FOR COMPASSIONATE ALLOWANCE AND NOT FULL PENSION - GOVT. REFERRED DISPUTE TO INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL.- TRIBUNAL UPHELD CONTENTION OF EX-EMPLOYEE - EMPLOYER'S WRIT PETITION DISMISSED BY HIGH COURT. - BANK OF BARODA APPROACHED SC - SC HELD SUPERANNUATION BENEFITS ARE PAYABLE TO LEGAL HEIRS OF EX-EMPLOYEE WHO HAD SINCE DECEASED.

Now read the full text of judgment (sent to us by CH Mahadevan).

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10956 OF 2013

(@SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 17054 OF 2009)

BANK OF BARODA …. APPELLANT

Versus

S.K. KOOL(D)THROUGH LRS.AND ANR. …. RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T

CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, J.

S.K. Kool, respondent no. 1 herein (since deceased), was working as a clerk with the
petitioner, Bank of Baroda and while working as such after a departmental inquiry, as a measure of punishment, visited with the penalty of ‘removal from service with superannuation benefits as would be due otherwise and without disqualification from future employment’. S.K. Kool, hereinafter referred to as ‘the employee’, made a request for leave encashment, which was declined by the petitioner Bank of Baroda, hereinafter referred to as ‘the employer’, on the ground that ‘where cessation of service takes place on account of employee’s resignation or his dismissal/ termination/ compulsory retirement from the Bank’s service, all leaves to his credit lapse.’
Click below to continue reading...

FLOATER COVER (LIMIT FOR FAMILY AS A WHOLE INSTEAD OF 

LIMIT FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL) BEING INTRODUCED.

It is learnt that LIC has decided comprehensively on (1) optional limits and (2) floater limits (family limits). Members have been expressing often on inadequate limits that were existing. It is our Federation to voice for the first time the concept of floater cover (that is, overall limits for the family as a whole instead of limits for each individual) in our Ernakulam GC Meeting two years ago. Since then, we have been demanding its introduction right from that time. 

We do hope the increased limits in different categories will be a great relief to us. According to our information the floater (family) cover limits range from 3 lacs onwards. The maximum optional cover is increased to 20 lacs. Subsidy on premium will continue to be available on basic limits as at present. The shape of implementation of the decision with regard to pensioners will be clear when the Central Office issues instructions. We will await details.

GN Sridharan,

General Secretary

Federation of Retired Class I Officers’ Associations

(selected by T. Sampath Iyengar)

POST 2 (CONCLUDING POST)

6)  What is the meaning of Appeal to  DB dismissed  &subsequent Dismissal of Review Petition? Still one entertains doubts about pension upgradation  and it passes ones comprehension.It is sheer distortion,they have limited view of the whole situation.

7)  Can one accept 1 part of verdict & ignore another ? That will invite still worse contempt & pulling down & casting aspersions on the majesty of the Courts.If it were only DR as being portrayed by you,where was the need & why did LIC  take frantic pains to file a mammoth 42-page SLP.LIC could have agreed simply & closed the case.Because they knew the verdict contained pension upgradation, they wanted to go hammer & tongs against the same .Hope you see through.

8) Instead of hailing Hon SJ Jaipur judgement dt 12/1/2010 as a milestone & a fresh breather to entire pensioner fraternity, one should not derisively talk about its limited appeal as though confining to single aspect of DR rectification. If one cannot side with the same,one must keep mum & not canvas against to score a point with miserly benefit of DR rectification & throwing to the winds the larger & broader full scale remedy of pension upgradation.

9) The Hon’ble Supreme Court has vide its judgment dated 8^th August, 2013 dismissed LIC’s two Special Leave Petition Nos. 29956 and 29957 of 2011

ii) The Proceedings dt 30 Sep,2013 SC Bench observed:

‘’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’’

Connected matter refers to 654/2007 on pension upgradation & Chandigarh HC & Delhi HC judgements . So, Hon SJ Jaipur HC verdict is an “ Order”, as mentioned by SC Bench itself.

10) It is Heavenly gratitude to them, nowadays, they don’t murmur of LIC liquidation if it is granted .More than adequate ratios & figures of yearly pension payments & a paltry % to total Employee & management expenses I narrated  could have silenced the critics.LIC itself never raised outlay issue.

11) Let it be understood that after complete reading umpteen times, in between the lines too, we gave brief of ‘likely’ benefits to pensioners. It was no hype or hoopla.We never took pensioners on any dreamrun but interpreting verdicts as they came along. If there is a crash,there justice & equity crash too, unfortunate scenario. Perhaps Unions also work out total outlay, proportion of benefit, monthly rise, perks & invisibles & then only address their constituency.Ultimate acceptance may fall short of expectations & earlier grandiose announcements.It is all in the game,In Court cases, it should be more pucca as ground is laid & orders are promulgated.So, we have not befooled any group of pensioners & earlier ,I did mention about many many worthwhile feedbacks for which I am deeply grateful to pensioners.They know what we are talking about.

12) SriCHMahadevan’s  several clarifications & scholarly dissertations quoting Hon Justice(Retd) TNCRangarajan &ED Retd SriRChandrasekaran who was ED then at the time of framing of Board Resolution,knowing  ins & outs of the same, which also has been faithfully reported by  him pinpoints to both/twin issues being addressed in LIC Board Resolution.

13) What is the Effective date for grant of DR in that BREAKTHROUGH news to arrive.As I pointed out poignantly with tears in my eyes, if it is prospective, if MOF/UOI wants to supplant Court Verdicts including SC blessings & pronounciations,is it not cowardice, is it not abject surrender, is it not failing & thwarting human dignity, we are not wisps of straw caught in a whirlpool of water, dear pensioners,we have to enjoy ALL OUR FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS enshrined in Constitution. DR 100%, same as DA for employees,must be allowed wef 1/8/1997,when downright discrimination arose & that Fitment of Pension by appropriate merger of Full DR with Basic Pension must be granted wef 1/12/2001 immediately following LIC Board Resolution dt 24/11/2001  Pensioners  have some life to breathe  & hopefully waiting for good expectations, in the twilight years of their lives & not to treat pensioners with a casual attitude bordering on carelessness, indifference & insensitivity , uncalled for in an egalitarian & democratic society. Courts have tremendous powers, they alone can be final arbiters & umpires when inequality & injustice are perpetrated by Bureaucrats & FM.That is why course of true justice never runs smooth & they try to impose impediments & try to thwart progress & delivery of justice.They cannot eternally try to do so,for there will be backlash for sure. “ LIC reigns, but the Ministry of Finance rules’.Passivity, prejudice & negativity can convert elixir into poison & that is what MOF tries to be capable of.

14)i)  That we all are in IV PC mode, Basic Pension remaining static since 1/11/1993 does not irritate you?

ii) Employees apart from fabulous wage rise,which may be their birthright,PLLI,also Midday Meals Coupon,New allowances other than DR,HRA,CCA granted from 1/8/2007, Domiciliary benefits in Mediclaim,Preventive Health check up from 1/1/2013 –all these bonanza does not move you to help & boost pensioners morale &  enhance decent life & living?

iii)  CG FP is higher than LIC RP, you don’t care,let them get, why should we bother attitude, is it ?

iv) CG allowing value added pension, significant rise,after age  80/85/90/95/100 years  to 20/30/40/50/100 % ,you want to be a silent spectator !!

v) That LIC got waiver of PLLI benefits to employees in 3/2011 & also 3/2012 & allowed 4% PLLI costing heavily does not arouse your passion towards uncared pensioners,without an iota of empathy ? Already Unions have mounted pressure on LIC top management to consider favourably PLLI for 3/2013 too, though not qualified as per approved criteria

vi) I gave just a glimpse of Retirement benefits.Apart from PF, PL encashment & Gratuity,when we add the sizeable Commuted value & other eligible benefits,does it not strike one that the way by which pensioners can recoup justifiably is through pension upgradation .Pensioners also have a right to get due arrears when Court orders Institutions to pay arrears. Why should anyone grumble if Hon Punjab & Haryana, Chandigarh HC  agreeing in toto with the findings of the learned Judge Jaipur HC orders 12% interest?

15)i)  It will be suicidal to accept Prospective effective date for any judgement,moreso when we know when discrimination arose,guidelines in Oct 2012 by SC Bench etc.In ones anxiety to repel the ‘twin benefit’,one cannot deny some golden eggs for the pensioners too.

ii) So too, when all talk of pessimism was there that only the 27 petitioners will get benefit,when Delhi HC cleared the air with forthright orders  agreeing with Hon SJ Jaipur HC orders  & ‘in rem ’.thank God,silence is there as doubt is cleared .

iii)Though not direct, it must be mentioned that in the proceedings at Jaipur HC,when tempers were high about amount etc,LIC Counsel did say orally Rs 1250 cr app as outlay for the twin benfits.If it was DR only, 8 weeks were not required for calculation. 1 day or 1 week would have been sufficient.

16)  Friends, I was active in Federation of LIC Class I Officers’Associations right from the beginning of my career.I took keen interest in the affairs of Class I officers at Pune,Rajkot & Chennai.I was Treasurer at Pune,Joint secretary at Rajkot & I attended from Chennai the famous General Council Meeting at Patna & in a steamer, when many issues were debated, a tie for the post of General Secretary,when  S/Sri H.K.Nigam & N.N.Joshi were declared Joint(twin) General Secretaries !! I have contributed articles to HM  ‘Our Voice ‘,way back, reminiscences only.I was Western Zone Grievence Committee Member,when Sri G.H.Thakore was the ZM & later Executive Member too.14 years of stewardship as a loyal AIRIEFian,we have met,argued,prepared many charts novel too, Loss of Pension right in 1999,2000 & 2001 which became the bedrock to present ,portray & argue with many successive LIC Chairman,MD, EDP, Chief P, many  Board members, bapre heartless Secretaries MOF,Addl Secetaries,Joint Secretaries,somewhat amenable & cooperative Under Secretaries,preparing questions to raise in Parliament,met any number of MPs,MLAs,Cabinet Ministers,MOS & many other opinion leaders.It has been a pleasant & painful experience. Broken promises, unfulfilled aspirations create a broken heart but the caravan has to move on towards unchartered territories to reach pensioners final goal & mission.

17)  In many ways, we are like the buzzard, the bat, and the bumblebee.

We struggle about with all our problems and frustrations, never realizing that all we have to do is look up!

That's the answer, the escape route and the solution to any problem!

Just look up. (A picture shri Kishore had sent for insertion here did not reach us.-Ed.)

Sorrow looks back, Worry looks around, But faith looks up! 
Live simply, love generously , care deeply, speak kindly and trust in our Creator who loves us. We pensioners certainly have respect to Courts & Creator.

GREETINGS & PRAYERS ,MERRY CHRISTMAS & A HAPPY,HEALTHY, PEACEFUL, PLENTIFUL & PROSPEROUS NEW YEAR 2014.

(Concluded)