Our
Pension Cases in Supreme Court
20% Payment still in thin Air
IA filed on behalf of Chandigarh Petitioners -
An
Update
The IA
(No 6 of 2015 in CA No 6995 of 2013) filed in the Hon’ble Supreme Court on
behalf of the Chandigarh Petitioners is slated to come up for hearing before
Justice Dipak Misra’s Bench on 7 Sept
2015.
The chief
purpose of the IA is to invite the Supreme Court’s attention to how LIC defied
its 7 May Order and did not consider it necessary even to seek extension of
time from the Court for complying with the Order. It is hoped that the Supreme
Court would take serious note of the brazenness of LIC’s non-compliance
amounting to deliberate defiance and pass appropriate directions afresh.
It should
be clear to everybody by now that the six-week time limit stipulated by the
Supreme Court to make 20% payment was NOT taken seriously by LIC right from day
one. Not only the time limit, the Order to pay 20% itself was not to the liking
of LIC and it did not hesitate first to mislead the Apex Court on 7 May (that
it had already deposited in the Court, the amount payable under the Judgement),
but later took all the time it wanted, to apply to Jaipur & Chandigarh HCs
for withdrawal of the 20% of the amount deposited. And what it did in the case
of Delhi Petitioners is the height of its impetuousness when it could add,
modify and interpret the SC Order, as it chose to while taking a stand on who
are entitled to be paid under the Delhi Judgement.
Unfortunately, Mr GN
Sridharan, obliged LIC by furnishing the list of his members who according to
him are eligible to receive the 20% payment ordered by SC. It is not known
whether Sri GNS has also certified that the list he gave contains only names
who qualify the conditions stipulated by LIC. If he has not, for instance, if
he ignored the validity of membership clause on a certain date, as prescribed
by the Corporation, chances are that LIC will not honour the list, as it cannot
waive its own conditions.
On the other hand, if he furnished only such names
who are his valid members on each of the given dates, firstly he will be
dropping the names of several of his otherwise valid members and secondly his
claim that all pre-Aug 97 retirees are eligible for some benefit under the
Delhi Judgement, also stands negated as he would have voluntarily surrendered
the in rem relief granted by the Delhi HC. What LIC does for the Delhi
petitioners, is worth watching.
As of
now, no payment was made to Jaipur petitioners although LIC had a cake walk in
withdrawing Rs 3,92,727.60 through its application that had a safe passage,
thanks to Mr Krishna Murari Lal’s very original and very unique strategy.
When IA
No 6 of 2015 is taken up for consideration on 7 Sept 2015, one can expect LIC
to make all foul noises. How much support LIC receives from the Delhi &
Jaipur petitioners and with what wonderful reasoning, would probably unveil
some new hues of the concerned players.
In the
meantime, I am exploring options available to ensure that the benefits flowing
from the final Judgement will be applicable to the forty thousand plus
pensioners all over the country and not limited to the elite group of 1327. In
other words, let there be no orphaned
pensioners left behind while some leaders may merrily
disown their members as they are not accountable for any of their actions.
On that
mission, and its roadblocks, I wish to cover in my next post.
M
Sreenivasa Murty