SALIENT FEATURES OF
THE JAIPUR SJB ORDER DATED 12/1/2010 AND
ITS MAJOR IMPLICATIONS
·
W.P. No.
6676/1998 was filed by Mr Asthana at
Jaipur HC Bench when there was no revision of wages for LIC employees due from 1/8/1997.The petition
was only to remove the DR anomaly
that arose out of the Appendix IV
of LIC Pension Rules, 1995 which
specified slabs which were at
variance with the slabs for in-service
employees resulting in reduced DR for
pensioners on account of unequal DR neutralization..
·
This
petition preceded the settlement of wage revision w.e.f 1/8/1997 notified in 2000 and was much before the LIC Board Resolution dated
24/11/2001.The Board decided in its Resolution
that (1) the proposal made by the Federation of rectifying
the DR anomaly from 1/11/1993 should be
given effect to and (2) the DR should be merged
with Basic Pension at 1740 points of AICPI( as at 1/8/1997) and Pension
should be upgraded with 11.25% weightage
as was done for in-service employees.
·
As far as
the concept of upgradation of pension
with weightage was concerned, by
implication, this principle would have
to be adopted in future wage
revisions also, but which did not arise
immediately at that point of time.( The wage revision w.e.f 1/8/2002 was notified only in 2005).
·
From
1/8/1997 onwards, 100% DR neutralization was effected for both in-service
employees and pensioners with uniform pattern of DR for both categories.
·
Mr
Asthana along with other petitioners, filed another writ petition 654/2007
after the above developments .In this petition it was pointed out before the
Court that there was disparity in pensions whereby later retirees (after wage
revision dates) in lower cadres were paid more pension than higher cadre
officers who retired before wage revisions. A case was thus made out for
revision of pensions with every wage revision for existing pensioners also. The
landmark judgment of the Supreme Court in D.S.Nakra vs Union of India and other
judgments relevant for revision
of pensions were extensively quoted by
the petitioners.
·
Five out
of the 27 writ petitioners were those who retired between 1/8/1997 and
31/7/2002.
·
In its
order dated 12/1/2010, the Single Judge Bench of Jaipur, headed by Justice Bhandari
allowed both the petitions, i.e (1) the petition No 6676/1998
praying for removal of DR anomaly and unequal neutralization( referred to as
lack of 100% neutralization) of DR from 1/11/1993 and (2) the other petition No
654/2007 praying for revision of pension whenever wage revisions are effected
for in service employees.
·
The
operative parts of the order are as follows:
Ø
“The Respondent Corporation is directed to
take a decision for implementation of the resolution dated 24.11.2001 passed by
the Board”.
This means that the DR anomaly from 1/11/1993
existing for pre-August 1997 retirees should be removed and pension should be upgraded
by merging DR on 1/8/1997 with appropriate weightage .
Ø
“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”.
What this means:
Here the Court
has taken note of the
change in pattern of the DR calculation
ensuring parity between
in-service employees and pensioners with 100% DR neutralization that has been
adopted in the wage revisions effective
from 1/8/1997 onwards. This is covered in the Board Resolution when it talks
about giving effect to the proposal from 1/11/1993.
Ø “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”.
What this means:
By this, the Court has clearly focused on the prayer in
WP No 654/2007 for revision of pension for existing pensioners whenever wage
revisions for in-service employees take place. As a corollary, not only all the
Pre-August 1997 retirees, but also the post-July 1997 retirees should get the
benefit of revision of pension arising
out of wage revisions taking place after
their dates of retirements.
Although the LIC Board Resolution dt 24/11/2001, by implication, is inclusive
of merger of DR with Basic
Pension on every wage revision date with suitable weightage , the last sentence
of the operative portion of the Jaipur Single Judge Bench Order dt 12/1/2010 over-rules any scope for
restrictive interpretation of the Board Resolution.
Finally another point to be borne in mind is that
the “weightage” mentioned in the Board Resolution is obviously intended to ensure that when merger of DR with Basic Pension and upgradation is
effected , the revised pension should increase in tandem with the increase that is secured in Basic Pay by in-service employees on wage revision. Such
parity can be achieved only by stage –to-stage revision.