Dear Shri Gangadharan,
What do the Pensioners expect at this juncture and why? I would answer the 'why' first.
1) We are at the threshold of receiving a FINAL decision from the highest Court.
2) All the games of 'denial' being indulged in by LIC so far will have to stop now.
3) Government has to make its stand known to the Apex Court and be prepared to take instructions, if it does not come forward with an acceptable solution.
4) Pensioners' representatives have a tremendous responsibility to ensure that their respective Counsel are fully and properly briefed and the latter present the best possible defense to protect our constitutional rights.
5) Lastly, if we fail now, we have to regret for the rest of our lives.
Let us recall what we are entitled to and what we are expecting.
1) There should be no discrimination/anomaly in the Dearness Relief formula applied to employees who retired on or before 31.07.1997 and those who retired later.
2) IMP: Removal of the Anomaly for pre-97 retirees should be complete ie., with up-gradation giving weightage of 11.25% (or as the case may be) as applied to revision of pay scales effective from 1.8.97.
3) Up gradation of pension corresponding to revision of pay scales effective from 1.8.2002, 1.8.2007 and the future pay revisions for in- service employees.
4) Finally the pension up-gradation to become effective retrospectively from 1.11.1993 or the date of retirement, as applicable and arrears to be paid with interest.
Let there be no confusion or doubt that what is expected as per 1 to 4 above, is no charity nor wishful. Who ever does not believe so (we have at least one big leader who is increasingly proving to be a prophet of doom) should at least refrain from playing the spoilsport.
On the question why all should meet, if the meeting really happens, it can never be a waste of time or money.
1) It helps in eliciting and discussing views of all on the points law (LIC Listed 10 of them) raised by LIC in support of its Appeals.
2) Anticipate the arguments of LIC Counsel and prepare strong defense
3) Discuss more difficult points of law cited by LIC and arrive at common stand avoiding any contradictions in our approach.
4) Discuss and evolve strategy on how to engage the Government counsel with advantage.
More than the items listed above the most critical area where prior discussions can help is to arrive at a consensus on how to answer questions that may flow from the Bench. We should be able to provide factual inputs to our counsel with no inconsistencies among us. Bench is likely to ask the counsel's opinion on issues like A) Effective date of up-gradation (with convincing justification) B) Financial implications of the pay out on account of retrospective revision C) Impact on other financial institutions D) Counsel's response to any other major issue that may have been raised by LIC/Government.
Ours is an unusual situation where legally speaking we have a very strong case, but as there are three different respondent groups, each group being represented by different counsel and the groups don't see eye to eye with one another. Very sad state of affairs.
MEETING CAN DO NO HARM - IT CAN HELP. THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO SCORE POINTS.
There are more sensitive points to be shared with great advantage which cannot be aired in public.
Thanks and regards,
M. Sreenivasa Murty