ASTHANA'S STRATEGY: READ ASTHANA'S STATEMENT DATED 9TH MAY 2015 published in Chronicle on the same date.

Saturday, May 9, 2015

SHRI KML ASTHANA has made available the following information. 

He adds "I have been giving detailed informations these two days on the mobile and phone."

Procedings on 7th a brief resume

"PLEASE SEE THE FOLLOWING STATMENT and beware of misleading

informations. kml asthana"

SHRI KML WRITES

I have been waiting for the copy of the order of the Hon’ble SC which was passed on 7/5/2015 in our case.  But since I have not seen the copy of the order, I am writing this note of the proceedings in short to apprise you of the said proceedings.  I have been giving detailed informations these two days on the mobile and phone.

 When the case was taken up the SC felt that looking to two other part-heard cases it will not be possible to take up and complete the hearing of our cases therefore, it was proposed to be shifted in the last week of September.  Then our Sr. Advocate Shri Nidhesh Gupta and Shri R.K. Singh protested the same that for the last year it is being adjourned for one reason or the other and many have passed already and with every due to dejectment some go away.  The youngest of the pensioners is aged about 78 years on average.  We have already won our cases more than five times from three High Court and twice from the SC still the litigation is going unwontedly.  In case the Court still fells to adjourn the same interim relief be granted more particularly when there is no stay on the judgment dated 8/8/2013 by the Court itself. 

On this the Court suggested to give 20% out of the arrears. LIC’s Advocate said that they have already deposited the arrears in the Courts, then the Court making it easy said that then 20% be immediately paid to the pensioners.  I immediately stated that this is wrong statement of LIC counsel. The said deposit was not acceptable to us otherwise we would have drawn the same then and there, that is not AT ALL acceptable, the deposit has not properly been made and is based deliberately on incorrect calculations that too for DA/DR only in violation of the directions of the SC while our main case is of upgradation of pension with every wage revision and further that amount is not for pensioners and not even of all the petitioners. 7 have been left out, whether they are not entitled to get the benefit of the same judgment when our writ petitioners were allowed without exception.

Then the Court enquired and expressed its displeasure on the wrong statement of LIC Advocate and after our Advocates gave out a short summary of our case, the Court corrected the order and asked for making 20% of the arrears to the pensioners as per the judgment of Jaipur High Court. The payment has been directed to be made within six weeks.

There was no one from the side of Chandigarh HC to say whether those petitioners are agreeable or not to lift the amount deposited there. It was only on our objection that the order was corrected.

Then the UOI Advocate rose up and said that they have also filed SLP on which our Sr. Advocate said that it is delayed by more than four years and the delay should not be condoned since UOI had always been a party in all the Courts. The Court after hearing directed for issue of notice within four weeks of the application for condonation of delay on me and the Petitioners of Jaipur HC writ.  After service we have to file our objections within six weeks and the UOI has to file its reply within two weeks thereafter, if so desired.

As per the deliberations of 7th the 20% of the arrears of difference of Basic Pension (including DR, of course) has to be made to all the pensioners within six weeks since the Court has already expressed more than once that whatever be the order it will apply to all and the judgment of Rajasthan High Court is for all, Chandigarh followed 100% copying and Delhi HC based on Jaipur judgment also directed to be in rem.

Besides this I may also inform that wrong notions are being spread for oblique motives by some over-intelligent persons that interest has been awarded by P&H HC on the arrears.  The judgment of that HC after reproducing the judgments of Jaipur judgments has said that whatever relief has been given by Jaipur HC the same will be applicable to that judgment and Jaipur HC has not granted any interest.

I have tried to give some informations of 7th which I could hear and also participate since I was standing with the arguing Advocates. Except Our Advocates no other Advocate had any occasion to speak. This payment will give us some respite in these hard days.

As per the little knowledge I feel that we should not hurry up for accepting the money when it comes to be paid unless calculations are given since as in the past there is every chance of LIC playing unfairly with us and if there be any lacuna the same may be informed to Shri S.S. Saxena, All India President AIRIEF and me.

Thanks,

KML Asthana