The Board Resolution dt 24/11/2001 states inter alia,
”……………..Chairman pointed out that he has since
received a communication from Dr. S. Ram Khanna, Board Member, which refers to
his meeting with the Retirees Federation and requested examining the proposal
in detailed. The Note is in line with the demands made by the Federation,
viz., giving effect to the proposal from 1.11.1993 and upgradation by giving weightage
of 11.25% as in the case of in service employees. Chairman pointed out that
these have been considered before placing the matter to the Board and it was
felt that the same would increase the financial burden very substantially and
may be unaffordable for the Corporation…………………. ……….After some discussion the
Board approved the proposal and suggested that it should be implemented
prospectively and after obtaining Government approval.”
This only means that the import of the
Board Resolution was not only the merger of DR with Basic Pension at AICPI 1740
points on 1/8/1997, but also removal of
the anomaly in DR persisting from 1/11/1993 on account of the lack
of equitable neutralization compared with
that for in service employees with the slabs slashed by 50% for retirees vis-a-vis in-service employees.
Such anomaly was only rectified from
1/8/1997 with a uniform DA/DR formula
for both in-service employees and post-July 1997 retirees.
In addition,the phrase “ upgradation giving
weightage of 11.25% as in the case of
in-service employees” makes it crystal clear
that upgradation of pension had to be done on 1/8/1997 as wage revision was
done for in-service employees from
1/8/1997.Not only LIC has been conveniently and consistently forgetting the weightage aspect,but AIIPA also
seems to be glossing over this aspect while holding the view that the Board
Resolution did not envisage upgradation.No vested interests are unjustifiedly
harping on the Board Resolution signifying upgradation with weightage,but
it would appear that some vested
interests are bent upon blocking upgradation of pension despite the Board
Resolution.
For the above reason,
the amounts deposited by LIC in the
Rajasthan HC Registry and the Punjab & Haryana HC Registry were neither as
per the Board Resolution nor the impugned judgments. Even in the interim order
dt 17/10/2012 issued by the Apex Court in connection with the CCP then pending at Jaipur Bench, it was directed
by the Court that the petitioners had to be paid by LIC the benefits that they were entitled to from
the date of retirement within eight
weeks.This also proves that the Supreme Court recognized that pensioners were
the victims of anomalies right from the date of their retirement or 1/11/1993
whichever was later.
As regards the
implementation of the interim order dt 7/5/2015 of the Supreme Court, no doubt
LIC wrote to the Class I Retirees’ Federation asking for a list of its members
satisfying various conditions of membership on certain dates, but, thanks to
the SC order dated 7/9/2015 directing LIC to pay the interim relief within 2
weeks,LIC waived its own conditions and decided to pay to all the members whose
names were communicated by the Federation.( Of course it is learnt that about
one-third of the members may receive the interim relief late on account of discrepancies
in data base).
In the light of the above,
I wish and hope that the AIIPA which
claims to champion the cause of
insurance pensioners should unequivocally support upgradation of pension which has already been
clearly ordered by the Jaipur Bench and
Punjab & Haryana High Court judgments even if the Association does not want to join the legal fight.
Greetings.
C H Mahadevan