* CHRONICLE - PENSIONERS CONVERGE HERE, DISCUSS ISSUES OF THEIR CHOICE * CHRONICLE - WHERE EVEN THE CHAT COLUMN PRODUCES GREAT DISCUSSIONS * CHRONICLE - WHERE THE MUSIC IS RISING IN CRESCENDO !

               
                                   

Tuesday, June 16, 2015

M Sreenivasa Murty



A little warm up exercise, before I go in to the topic proper: I was very happy to read Sri M V Venugopalan’s three-part Post in the PC that came after his slightly longish sabbatical. It was refreshing indeed for the sheer flow of (his) thoughts.  Although he revisited several old & forgotten Posts in the PC with his critical references and has now additionally picked up new ones which he likes to see as one-upmanship, publicity overkill, ego trip etc., somehow, none of what he wrote (even if he was faulting my views/actions/opinions directly or obliquely) bother me at all.  Thanks perhaps to my daily dose of Vishen Lakhiani’s 6 Phase guided Meditation, OMVANA – Incidentally, I strongly recommend it to everybody if they are not already introduced to it.

Let me respond to some of MVV’s observations on our case proper and his evaluation of the initiatives I felt necessary and took. It is clear he has not taken kindly to my and Mr V Krishnan’s visit to Yogakshema to meet ED (P) & MD. He is welcome and is entitled to his opinion on the desirability and the effort-benefit analysis as he wishes to make about our visit. But has he not crossed the Lakshman Rekha when he tried to dub the visit as an unproductive hype and publicity overkill’?  In my view this is a typical instance of freelance opinion-circulation by those with less accountability. Having said so, I appeal to Mr MVV to keep his word – THINK OVER.

By the way, he is uncomfortable to anything said by others against GNS & KML but his standards are different when he chooses to go against me. Dear MVV, enjoy your freedom of expression but be fair to all if you can. I am OK with anything.   

MVV was damn right when he said LIC does not move one step forward without clearance from their bosses – the Department of Financial Services. (May be quite true about the modern LIC management but certainly NOT so when Mr V Krishnan was the PS to Chairman; Hope Mr MVV got my point right).

Then why did we visit? Not for cultivating any new relationships with anybody. Too late in the day, as ‘we are already on the wrong side of 70’, if I may quote MVV himself. If Mr MVV cared to peruse the memorandum I gave to ED (P) he would have been sufficiently enlightened on how we put LIC on Notice on interpreting the 7th May Order.  Luckily for me Mr MVV spared from his scrutiny, my meeting with the Director, DFS in Delhi and the letter I handed over to him personally. Or was it by oversight?

My meeting with ED (P) on 5th June gave me an opportunity to make a follow up call to him which I did on Monday morning. I asked him and he informed me that no decision is taken as yet, (on the method) for implementing the 7th May SC Order, but they are on the job.                   

I would consider my efforts highly fruitful if LIC approaches SC sooner than later (of course after securing the all-important nod from the DFS) for clarification on the correct import of the Order – on ‘pay whom’, ‘pay how much’ etc., Or approach SC for more time beyond six weeks.  In either case, we get an opportunity to tell the SC our views and concerns on what 20% is meant to be. When we get such an opportunity we have a good chance of convincing the Bench that LIC needs to distribute about Rs. 600 crores (@ Rs 1.5 lakhs per head on an average) being 20% of the total dues.  I may be pardoned for repeating this, 7th May Order therefore is a wonderful breakthrough and we should not fail to leverage it to our advantage. 

I am also not tired of repeating my strong belief and authentic opinion that the Order dated 7th May 2015 giving the interim directions has nothing to do with the issues in the main CAs or the new SLPs, contentious or otherwise OR with the likely final outcome of the cases before the Apex Court. The Order has to be seen in isolation and independent of anything else. Also, for its implementation, it does not distinguish among any of the THREE sets of Respondents in the CAs. All have equal say and claim on the benefits flowing from the Order, strictly in terms of what is stated therein (or how it may be clarified subsequently).  

By way of an update on the status of the interim directions, it is now clear to me that nothing of any significance is going to happen before 18th June, as far as individual petitioners/pensioners are concerned. At best some Application may be moved by LIC (either before or soon after the reopening of the Supreme Court) either seeking more time or better still for us – asking for clarification on ‘to whom’, ‘how much’ to pay? etc., If and when it happens accordingly, we have all the ammunition to be placed before the Bench to secure sensible clarifications on what the Order was meant to be.

On the other hand, if LIC makes some nominal payment to a few and claims to have complied with the Order, OR takes no action at all, we have no choice other than moving the Apex Court for contempt. The field then is open for all and there is no control on time element for anybody. All our efforts at the moment are directed towards alerting LIC against any wrong step and simultaneously plead with the Government not to let LIC do anything unfair and unjust.

I can never understand why a few people are not comfortable with what I am doing. But I have no ill will towards them. I will leave the topic there for now with an assurance to all that I am open to any constructive suggestions and course correction, in the interests of our fellow Pensioners.


M Sreenivasa Murty