Shri A.S. Ramanathan's latest
"Random thoughts on Management of Our Pension Case"
( LIC PC 18-07-2015 ) is an enlightening
exhortative essay in three parts.
Majority of pensioners would agree with him not to waste time, money and energy by filing 'contempt of petition' against the LIC for not respecting the Supreme Court's order of 07-05-2015. The petitioners numbering 40 plus may on their own act and prevail upon their learned counsellors to act in the larger interest of 40000 plus pensioners (including 40 plus petitioners and members of an Association numbering about 'x' number) languishing for long time for updating of pension and among them, a few thousand pre August, 1997 pensioners, awaiting to get full neutralisation in DR and updating of pension. Getting or not getting 20% of the 'amount' deposited in the court, as 'interim relief' by 'Few' within the stipulated date is of not that vital. It would have been surely vital : all- important had the 'order' been clear and unambiguous 'For all pensioners'.
The number of contempt of court cases both at High courts and the Supreme Court are reportedly increasing by leaps and bounds mainly because of wilful disobedience. It is needless to add that large number of people/organisations do not respect or learn to respect the decisions of judiciary. Madras High Court judges recently observed that unless some officials are punished, things would not change for better.
Justice Markandey Katju writes in his blog 'Satyam Bruyat' (10-02-2015) : A basic defect in law of contempt of court in India is uncertain. It is settled in law that the contempt jurisdiction is discretionary jurisdiction. In other words, a judge is not bound to take action even if contempt of court has indeed been committed. He adds,' Personally, in my 20 years' career as a judge, I dismissed, perhaps, 99% of contempt petitions saying that I was not inclined to take any action.'
Supreme Court of India last week dismissed a clutch of (14 ) contempt of court petitions regarding wage revision as 'redundant'. It was for two reasons : the petitions were filed late and the disobedience of Court Order as alleged by the petitioners - non implementation of the recommendations of the Wage Boards for journalists and non journalists was being looked into as per the Court's Order dated 28-04-2015.
The Contempt of Court cases filed by Shri KML Asthanaji in the Supreme Court and Rajasthan High Court were treated as withdrawn ....although Shri Asthanaji had not (reportedly) pleaded for withdrawal. He has been affirmative on his saying. There may be more to somebody or to something than meets the eye. Instead of keeping the matter in abeyance, we may let that matter to rest permanently.
SN ( a 1992 pensioner )
( From Sources )
SN ( a 1992 pensioner )
( From Sources )