But we have other problems to overcome.
Like thousands of others, I too was
watching with hope, the Prime Minister’s Independence Day address to the Nation
from the ramparts of the RED FORT.
From what all was heard, I fully
endorse the positive signal received, as perceived and relayed by the Pensioners’
Chronicle through the Scroll, that the PM’s reference to OROP gives us hope.
However, I wouldn’t go beyond at this stage.
I was wondering when the commitment
is so clear and categorical, what could be the insurmountable problem that is
delaying the implementation of the OROP policy. The so called nitty-gritty
cannot take indefinitely long time. Obviously there are serious issues involved
that need to be resolved by the Government. Chief of them could be the size of
the monetary burden. In this overall context, let us move and analyse our own
Pension up-gradation imbroglio.
Pension Revision, as we are demanding
in LIC, stands on a totally different
footing. I may also say Government’s decision to accept OROP in principle,
may not help us ipso facto, because it is as applied to ex-servicemen, at least
for now. Our demand is not only not accepted in principle by LIC or Government
but it is being stiffly resisted. So we need to work our way through
independent of OROP Clearance.
Our demand is under the microscopic
scrutiny of the judiciary at the highest level. The reasons in support of our
demand as well as the grounds on which it is being denied are too many and too
complicated. We cannot take it easy or be complacent.
The monetary part of the burden which
seems to be bothering the Government when it comes to implementing the OROP
decision may not pose a big problem for us in LIC. In my understanding our case
is very precariously positioned and hinges delicately on a principle of law. I
feel pretty comfortable when I recall that the law of the land against
discrimination is very well settled. When our case is juxtaposed on that sacred
principle that any arrangement resulting in discrimination shall not survive
judicial scrutiny, we win hands down. At the same breath, when I realize, we
are banking heavily on the Board Resolution, that we won in three High Courts
etc., we may be trading slippery paths.
When I was talking to an eminent
Senior Advocate sometime ago, to whom I was trying to explain that LIC Board
had already decided our matter and is now trying to renege, he asked me a sharp
question, ‘suppose your Board categorically decided against Pension Revision
citing whatever reasons it wants to, do you think you have no case? Will Law
allow discrimination which is a taboo under the Constitution? I think your case
is strong dehors your Board Resolution, it doesn’t depend upon
Government’s whims and you should pursue that line before the Apex Court.
I perceive our own internal
differences in the ‘approach’ to our case, are pretty harmful and detrimental
to our interests. If one of the parties in our cases (ostensibly pitted against
LIC & Govt) were to take a stand that he is not asking for Pension up-gradation
as he is sure he is not entitled to it,
what do you expect a baffled Bench to do? Tell him in the open Court, “Mr.GNS,
you don’t know your entitlement in pure law – I give you pension up-gradation
also, please accept it and oblige’’.
I am in search
of a solution to this tricky problem. Can you suggest any?
M Sreenivasa Murty