EASTERN NEWS * DECEMBER 2015 ISSUE

TO READ, CLICK HERE

ADV N PRADEEPKUMAR

 PART-1

Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India in its Landmark Judgment in D.S. Nakara and others V. Union of India,” which is the Present law of the Land on all Pension related Matters”, examined in depth Various Pension Schemes and the Objects and Goals of any Pension Scheme and also “Subjected Article 14 of the Constitution of India to intense and close examination”, and “after Intensive and Extensive Examination of Article 14 of the Constitution Of India”, by Referring to Various Judgments of Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India rendered in the past, Laid down the Principles, as to ,” How much the Quantum / Quantity Pension should be” and as to what factors should taken into account, “ before fixing the Pension amount”. I may add, at this stage, that this Judgment of the Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India in DS Nakara and others V. Union of India, is by a 5 Judge Constitution Bench of Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India, headed by the then Chief Justice, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Y.V. Chandrachud and the Judgment was drafted and delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.A. Desai, a Most Prolific Judge of Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India.

TO READ MORE, CLICK HERE

ADV N PRADEEPKUMAR

Mr.C.H.Mahadevan Is Right When He Says In His Response To My Article, Entitled—
“LIC Pensioners Are A Blessed Lot”, “When Compared With / To The Reserve Bank Pensioners” “And Pensioners Of The Public Sector Banks”-Part-II—

That, RBI Pensioners Are Better Off Than LIC And PSB Pensioners In Respect Of The Specific Matters, Clearly Listed By Him, Like--

1.Minimum Pension Rs.3500/-
2.Full Pension With 20 Years’ Service
3. Family Pension To The Extent Of 30% Of The Last Drawn Pay
4.Pension At 50% Of The Last 10 Months’ Average Basic Or 50% Of The Last Pay Drawn, Whichever Is More Beneficial To The Employee/ The Pensioner.

I Am Also Aware Of This Position For The R.B.I .Pensioners. But, For The Purpose Of My Article, I Have Taken In to account, The Actual Rules / Regulations As Existing At The Time When They Were Framed “And Not As Amended Subsequently”.

That Is Why, The Difference Between My Views And Opinions And Mr.Mahadevan’s Views And Opinions Occurred. If We Take The Amendments Made To The Reserve Bank Pension Regulations, Into Account,, As Has / Had Been Done By Mr.Mahadevan, He Is Absolutely And Completely Right And Correct, When He Says That The RBI Pensioners Are Better Off Than The Pensioners Of The LIC And The Public Sector Banks.  
Please click below.

Comments

30 Nov 15, 07:55 AM

subbu: JM Aboobucker Sir ! Possibly we pensioners, during our days, sat on our seats only for half a day, adjourning the day's work to the next date. We get what we deserve.

ADV N PRADEEPKUMAR

A Few Months’ / Days’ Back, A Brief Article / Write-Up Of Mine Was Published In LIC Pensioners’ Chronicle--

“As To The Directive Of Hon’ble The Supreme Court Of India To Employers / Ex-Employers In India To Provide “That Much Quantum Of Pension TO THEIR PENSIONERS” ”As Would Enable Them To Lead A Decent Standard Of Life” “And At A Standard Equivalent To The Pre-Retirement Level” Etc..Etc..

Please click below.

2nd December - another half-day?

29 Nov 15, 10:47 PM

JM Aboobucker: As usual whenever our case hearing comes up, the court sits only for half a day leading to further adjourn-ment due to paucity of time. 

Now it is understood that on 2nd our Court is likely sit for half a day only.

CH MAHADEVAN

JM ABOOBUCKER

"MR. NIDHESH GUPTA PRESENT IN COURT ALL THE TIME"

SC Judgment on "No recovery of excess payment from employees"-CA no 10527/2014

I attach CLICK HERE the judgment on the above subject further to my mail relating to the Madras HC  stay order dt 15/10/2015 reported in yesterday's "the Hindu'.

Greetings.
C H Mahadevan

ADV N.PRADEEPKUMAR

Now, I Come To The Point Of Explaining-

As To How This “Inclusive Definition” Of “The State” In Article 12 Of The Constitution Of India, “Applies To Rule 56 Of LIC Employees’ Pension Rules, 1995”.

Before Coming To This Part Of The Matter, I Would Like To Reproduce The Text Of Rule 56 Of LIC Employees’ Pension Rules, 1995 And It Reads As Under:

Please click below.

M SREENIVASA MURTY

How ‘Final’ is the final hearing on 2 Dec? 

 (Beware of Compulsive Liars on the loose)

When I read a report in another Blog that the Court on 24 Nov had adjourned the case to 2 Dec 2015 at the request of the Solicitor General of India, I too was happy like many others, going by the report, to note that while agreeing for the adjournment request, the Court directed that:

“It is last time that LIC is being accommodated and the case will be taken up at number one on 2^nd Dec. There will be no adjournment whether any of the parties come or not’’.

The Post also said

‘’It will be decided since 2^nd December Wednesday such other miscellaneous cases will be listed (I could not understand anything from this) and there is every likelihood that the case will be decided on that day. God Bless us’’.

The Post further stated:

‘’Mr Nidhesh Gupta was in the Court for all the time today and will be certainly present on 2^nd December. I will be going on 30^th November and will discuss the case de-novo with other developments and their implications’’

Believing what I read to be a first-hand report and a true one, I started preparing myself for the 2^nd Dec hearing accordingly. Later a certain Sr Advocate, whom I was talking to, dismissed the remarks/observations attributed to the Bench, as someone’s figment of imagination. He added: ‘on the other hand, I will be surprised if a heavy matter like yours will be taken up just before the vacation. Wait for 2016’’. (The Supreme Court is closed from 17 Dec 2015 to 3 Jan 2016 for Christmas/New Year vacation). 

I suffered a jolt. And was disappointed too. I was not comfortable to hear what I heard. Especially in view of what was reported to have been said by the Judge. Then I thought it fit to check for myself what actually transpired in the court before the Bench rose on 24^th Nov. I called Ms Renuka Sahu, Mr Jay Savla’s associate. She confirmed she was personally present in the Court as per my earlier request. I asked her ‘what happened? She said; ‘’SGI showed up before the Bench broke for lunch and requested for adjournment as he has some personal inconvenience on 26th.  Bench agreed to post on 2 Dec.’ I asked her if there was any reluctance on the part of the Bench to adjourn and whether there were any comments like: “It is last time that LIC is being accommodated……..etc. Her response was: ‘Oh No. There was none of it’.  I suffered a jolt for a second time. This being what I heard from the Advocate present in the Court and not my own first hand version, I cannot claim it to be the ’gospel truth’.

Then on my request, a common friend contacted an important functionary of AIRIEF who was believed to be present in the Court on 24 Nov for confirmation of other specific details posted. It was learnt that Mr Nidhesh Gupta was not present in the Court. (Like Mr jay Savla was also not). Only Mr R K Singh was present.

I suffered a jolt for the third time.  Again, I cannot claim it to be the ’gospel truth’ as it is not my first-hand information. If anybody is interested, they may make their own enquiries.

My concern now is whether or not the Final adjournment to 2 Dec is indeed ‘FINAL’. Let us hope it is so notwithstanding the observations and stiff comments attributed to the Bench, being possibly ‘made up’. If Mr Nidhesh Gupta was really not present, I hope AIRIEF shall not get poorer by parting with the Sr Counsel Appearance Fee at least for 24^th Nov.

I concede though, it is their ‘business’ and their fund-raisers’ problem.

As far as I am concerned, the Chandigarh Petitioners & the Hyderabad Association are both fully geared up for 2 Dec. We have nothing to discuss de-novo with our Counsel except integrate contents from the 7^th Pay Commission Recommendations.

Hope and pray for the entire LIC Pensioner community. 
   
PS: Referring to Mr M V Venugopalan’s Post in the PC today, captioned ‘Endless Waiting’, I have something to report which may be of some comfort to him and all others who share his frustration leading to righteous indignation.

If the Final hearing happens on 2 Dec 2015, as we hope to, it is fine. If it does not, for any reason, proactive steps are being taken by Hyderabad Association irrespective of how the other players ‘play’ (their games). The plan is to appraise the Bench on all that Mr MVV discussed in his Note as he was speaking the mind of every individual Pensioner, barring a handful of ‘leaders’ who are as insensitive to our Pensioner community as LIC & Govt combine, if not more.
M Sreenivasa Murty                          

CH MAHADEVAN

Comments

28 Nov 15, 11:42 AM

B Ganga Raju: Shri M V Venugopalan's post reflects the agony of all pensioners. Our case can be said to be of long " gestation" period. All said and done did the government of the day finally make up its mind to say yes or no to the matter of updation of pension along with each wage revision to LIC pensioners?  Or is the bench expected to make law for the government? 

"Intolerance" may hog the headlines but not delays in courts. And how many of our brothers remember the famous " contempt of Court" case against late Com. EMS Namboodiripad for saying that judiciary as part of the system shares the same class character? 

For me I would be satisfied if all our case managers appear with one face in this legal fight.  When the matter is dragged to Supreme Court by LIC/Government we have to necessarily bear with the agony of endless wait. 

Afterall our case is not going to decide the fate of ruling party or who should rule this country.  But let us not get worked up or emotionally charged feeling that the verdict would come once the hearing commences. Hearing also would consume time.  

28 Nov 15, 01:05 PM

JM Aboobucker: From the write up of Mr MSM it appears there is every possibility of the case coming up for hearing on 2-12-2015 may head for further adjournment beyond the Xmas vacation for SC. 

The powerful party to the case always appear to have its own way and wishes acquiesced by the court to the disadvantage of the weaker party to the case. 

Really we are in a very unenviable situation facing a mighty opponent.

Obituary

NG NAYAGAM

MV VENUGOPALAN

AS RAMANATHAN

"LIC PENSIONERS A BLESSED LOT"‏

Dear Mr Gangadharan,

Referring to the post with the above caption of Adv. N Pradeep Kumar, I attach a material culled out from a bankers' website, from which it can be easily understood how RBI Pensioners are better off CLICK HERE  than LIC and PSB pensioners in the following respects:

1.Minimum Pension Rs 3500/-
2.Full pension when the period of service exceeds 20 years.
3.Increase in family pension to 30% of last drawn pay
4.Pension at 50% of last 10 months' average emoluments or 50% last
drawn pay whichever is higher.

Mr NPK may find LIC Pension Rules 1995 a better one than PSBs & RBI's Rules. But the benefits implemented for LIC and PSBs are far short of those presently enjoyed by RBI Pensioners.

But our case managers may take a cue from Mr NPK's post and should make good use of the Residuary Provisions in LIC Pension Rules 1995, besides other strong points to win the cases in the Supreme Court. Actually the Residuary Provisions are already being implemented in respect of Chairman & Managing Directors of LIC (who are whole time officers of the Corporation governed by LIC Pension Rules 1995) as will be seen from the attached note entitled 'Pensionary Status of LIC Chairman & MDs'. CLICK HERE 

Greetings.
C H Mahadevan

ADV N. PRADEEPKUMAR

In My First Part Of This Article, I Reproduced The Pensionary Provisions Of Reserve Bank Of India Pension Regulations,1990 Applicable To The Reserve Bank Pensioners, Pensionary Provisions Of LIC Of India, Applicable To The Pensioners Of LIC Of India And The Pensionary Provisions Applicable To The Pensioners Of The Public Sector Banks, And Compared And Contrasted All Those Pensionary Provisions And Ultimately I Explained And Said That “The Pensionary Provisions Applicable To The Pensioners Of LIC Of India” “Are The Best Ones”, “Interpreted In Any Manner” And “Viewed From Any Angle”.


Please click below.

Our Case in Supreme Court

Since we, the LIC pensioners, had enough disappointment due to series of adjournments of our case in the Supreme Court time and again, let us hope that there will be NO MORE adjournments beyond 2nd December 2015, and case will come  to a logical end with the decision which it deserves, on that date.

Let us also hope that wisdom dawns on LIC to take necessary steps to end the on- going dispute to the great relief of all Concerned.

 It is hoped that our  Advocates also will strongly oppose any further adjournment of the case.

We have come to such a stage where instead of worrying about the outcome of the case, the worry is when the case will be taken up seriously for hearing and conclusion.

K.G.Ramachandra

'Last adjournment No.1'

26 Nov 15, 10:08 AM

Sreenivasamurty: My Dear Subbu's anguish (if I may borrow JMA's description), is fully justified. And Mr Editor, your Cartoon on the Final Adjournment No 1 is not mere zest, it is as much a prediction.

26 Nov 15, 06:25 PM

JM Aboobucker: Regarding the FINAL adjournment, your cartoon and the remarks of Mr MSM looks like an ominous portent. Let us pray for a speedy disposal of our case w/o further adjournments

None has the right to ask Aamir to leave India: Mamata

PTI

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee.

The West Bengal CM was addressing a gathering organised by prominent minority leader Siddiqullah Chowdhury at Shahid Minar grounds in Kolkata

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said here on Thursday that actor Aamir Khan is within his democratic rights to make any comments and no one has the right to ask him to leave the country.

“Aamir has made a wrong statement or is correct (that is not the issue). He is within his right to make the statement. His wife has said something and he has spoken about it. Now he is being asked to leave the country as if the country is theirs, the country is for all. None has a right to say that you leave the country, you go to Pakistan,” Ms. Banerjee said.
(the hindu)

Comments

25 Nov 15, 04:56 PM
subbu: Let Someone advise Lord Yama to adjourn and adjust the date of death suitably accordingly for all the pensioners as and when adjournments are made. We hope that at least there will be a single pensioner left in earth to hear the decision of this much awaited case. We know well that Lord Yama is more customer friendly .

25 Nov 15, 06:06 PM
JM Aboobucker: Mr Subbu sir, I share your anguish over the ad infinite adjournments at the behest of LIC. I also enjoyed your joke about the customer friendly Lord Yama.

Last adjournment !

VRS PENSION TO BANKMEN

Dear Editor,

On 7^th Nov. I wrote in CHAT-n-CHAT column as under:

“Seen the 'preface' of Adv. NPK.  A 'befitting' reply is awaited. NPK may include a line on 'it does not take him beyond the date of retirement'.  

I was waiting for the “befitting reply” from Adv. NPK, mainly because 2^nd para of his letter started with the proclamation that “The Entire Content Of The Message of Mr.T. Sudhakaran Is A Bundle Of Lies”. 

I was eager to know as to whether “the bundle of lies” was the contents quoted by me from his “Advice To All Bank Employees, Who Are On The Verge Of Retirement”, “As Solicited By Most Of Them” or “something else”.

The delay on his part is understandable, as he is busy with (in his own words) “Countless E-Mails And Phone Calls From Fellow Bank Pensioners On The Content Of Articles Under The Above Head, “Expressing Their Extreme Happiness On The Content Of Articles, Published IN / On LIC Pensioners Chronicle”, “Throughout The Length And Breadth Of India” .  

Still I thought I should gently remind him as to what are the ”lies bundled by me” in my  “epistle” so that I can clear my views and join his “Fellow Bank Pensioners (who) Have Been Sending The Extracts From (his) Articles Under The Above Head Published In LIC Pensioners’ Chronicle, “To Some Other Websites As Well”. I hope, NPK will give me an opportunity to do so.

regards, Sudhakaran

INCOME TAX: RK VISWANATHAN'S QUERY

INCOME TAX ON INTERIM RELIEF

Referring to the post of Mr R K Viswanathan,I do not think that the provisions of Sec 89 of I-T Act  will apply as the amount  paid by LIC is in the form of interim relief in compliance with the order of the Supreme Court. 

The amount does not constitute arrears of pension for the past periods in the strict sense of the term. 

It is premature to presume  their representing arrears of past pension when the pension amount has not been revised. 

The amount will just be treated as an additional  cash payment for the financial year and clubbed with the income of the year.

Perhaps if the final judgment goes in favour of the pensioners,when the arrears are paid  for identified past periods, it has to be ascertained whether the amount of interim relief already received  can  be deducted from the taxable income in  the financial year in which the arrears are paid.

In that event, Sec 89 benefit can be availed of for the  past financial years for the arrears paid in that year if the retiree  so desires.The views of our chartered accountant fellow pensioners will be welcome.

Greetings.

C H Mahadevan

Income tax

Income tax on DR arrears from 1-8-1997 till date of settlement

Those who have received 20 % of DR arrears in accordance with the court order would have received a letter from LIC stating that the payment made towards 20 % of DR arrears will form part of the earnings and shall qualify for Income tax review for the financial year 2015-2016.

As per the IT ACT 1961 tax has to be paid on income earned irrespective of the year of receipt. However under SEC 89 any salary income received in lump sum that belongs to various years different from the year of receipt one can claim relief for the income so received. It is therefore imperative that LIC should give yearwise accrual of DR arrears when LIC settles the full 100 % DR arrears which we hope will be done before the current financial year ends and should it be delayed LIC should give year wise statement of the 20 % arrears of DR paid.

The respective associations should take up the matter with LIC.

R.K.VISWANATHAN

Comments

24 Nov 15, 03:50 PM R.K.ViSWANATHAN: In a theft case of two hens it took ten years for the court to pass the judgment. Are we not better when our case is coming on 2 DEC and we hope that all are available including the Solicitor General. Dear  Editor While being out of country I could  inform  and update our Panchkula Unit Members and a few other friends in  our LIC Pensioners Community regarding out come of supreme court proceedings in our case  today. My very special Thanks to  LIC PC  Regards  BR Mehta  Camp  Dubai

Comments

24 Nov 15, 02:26 PM

JM Aboobucker: Our case stands adjourned to 2-12-2015 Wednesday at the request of LIC advocate as Solicitor General is not available on 26-11-2015.

(Shri Murty had informed us over phone of these developments like non-availability of the Solicitor General on 26th Nov. and it was our editorial discretion that we published the main news of adjournment as breaking news which was more important for the blog at that point of time. Ed.)

OUR SC CASES ADJOURNED TO 2ND DECEMBER 2015

Our cases in Supreme Court.‏

BENCH IS HEARING MISC. CASES ONLY *** We are awaiting details about these developments *** Press 'refresh' button for latest news ***

DISPLAY BOARD

CLICK HERE FOR SC LIVE DISPLAY BOARD

CASE NO.8959-62 OF 2013

COURT NO.5 

Let's Wait And See!

CLICK HERE FOR SC DISPLAY BOARD

LIVE COMMENTARY TODAY WITH 25 MISC CASES BEFORE OURS AND THE COURT SITTING ONLY HALF-A-DAY?

24 Nov 15, 06:34 AM

SDSarma: Is there any live commentary of SC proceedings to-

day, Editorji?  Is there any chance of  hearing taking place to-

day?

MV VENUGOPALAN

CH MAHADEVAN

Arising out of legal compulsions following the renewed interim order dt 7/9/2015 by the Supreme Court,LIC hurriedly got some amounts credited to the bank accounts of some pre-August 1997 retirees before 30th September,but consciously and deliberately refrained from furnishing the calculation sheets in respect of the amounts credited.

Let us pause for a moment and imagine the implications that may emerge if LIC had provided the calculations.

It is very well known that the methodology followed by LIC would have been as follows:

1.Calculate the DR as at 1/8/1997 on the existing pension and merge it with the existing basic pension;

2.Take the resulting merged total as the revised basic pension as at 1/8/1997.

3.The DR per slab is calculated at 0.23% of the revised basic pension as at 1/8/1997.

4.Calculate the arrears by calculating the total of the revised basic pension and revised DR from 1/8/1997 to the date upto which the calculations are done and deducting the corresponding existing gross pension including existing DR upto the same date and credit 20% of the difference as the interim relief.

Issues arising out of the above methodology.

1.The revision of pension according to the above methodology is in fact upgradation of pension for pre- August 1997 retirees on 1/8/1997 without weightage of 11.25% extended to in-service employees on 1/8/1997 while revising wages.

2.The question that will next arise is why such upgradation was not worked out for post July 1997 retirees on 1/8/2002 and 1/8/2007 using the same methodology when this was required to be done in terms of the impugned judgments of Rajasthan and Punjab & Haryana High Courts which provided for upgradation of pension.(It has to be especially borne in mind that the SC order dt 7/5/2015 did not confine interim relief to only pre- August 1997 retirees).

3.Even for pre-August 1997 retirees,LIC failed to show consistency by extending the same methodology for further revision of pension on 1/8/2002 and 1/8/2007, instead freezing the revised pension at 1/8/1997 levels. 

4.Such anomalous and inconsistent approach of LIC has also resulted in anomaly in family pension getting reduced and necessitating recoveries when the aforesaid method is followed for family pensioners.

If LIC had given calculation sheets in respect of interim relief paid by it,the Corporation would not only have got exposed for their inconsistency and inadequacy in payment,but also its case in the Civil Appeals before SC further weakened.So it can be safely presumed that LIC deposited the amounts in the bank accounts of pensioners only to escape being hauled up for contempt by the Supreme Court. It is another matter that more than 20000 pre- August 1997 retirees and family pensioners have been denied even this inadequate relief as they were not fortunate enough to be respondents in the Civil Appeals, not to speak of post July 1997 retirees and family pensioners.

The point that has to be kept in mind by the three case managers is that the need to expose the deliberate lapse on the part of LIC in the matter of payment of interim relief cannot be delinked from the forceful arguments for upgradation of pension.

It does not appear likely that either Mr K M L Asthana or the Class I Retiree's Federation will raise the issue of non- compliance of the interim order dt 7/5/2015 at the Supreme Court on the next hearing date.But I am sure that the Chandigarh petitioners will definitely raise it before the SC Bench when the opportunity arises.

Greetings.
C H Mahadevan

AIRIEF APPEAL

COMMENTS

22 Nov 15, 08:54 AM

justin n christian: 

Do not expect much from 7 cpc report.... as 6 cpc report was also having many employee friendly recommendations but when implemented the implementation circular has contradicted the report itself.. 

The 6 cpc anomalies r still not rectified and the litigated court orders r still not implemented by govt.  the recommendation of 7 cpc says the pension as fixed by 6 cpc will be multiplied by 2.57 as on 01/01/2016.

The irony is the pension of pre-2006 pensioners having less then 33 yrs of service is still not fixed....then how the 7 cpc report will be implemented??? just think licians.

Are there bright chances that 7 cpc report will be implemented in right spirit???

'BANK NEWS'

UNION BANK RETIRED EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION

Date: 21st November,'15

Group Medical Insurance Scheme floated by IBA-

Unilateral decision of the Insurance Com. to exclude certain benefits to retirees

-Protest Letters by UFBU and AIBOA to IBA

PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHMENT CONTAINING BOTH THE ABOVE LETTERS

CLICK HERE

Yours sincerely,

B.G.Raithatha,

General Secretary

ADV N PRADEEPKUMAR

PLEASE CLICK HERE

Parity in Pension between Pre and Post 7th CPC Retirees - Ref. Para No.10.1.53 to 10.1.71

The captioned matter has been dealt with in detail by the Commission in the Para Nos. of its Report given above.

In order to avoid any confusion or hardship to the beneficiaries (Pensioners) the Commission has  also given two worked out Examples as to how the Option 1 and 2 are to be applied to two different cases. In short it is a SPEAKING RECOMMENDATION giving no scope for different interpretations by different parties to the issue as happened in the SC Order for our IR of 20%.

Anticipating delay in collecting relevant data for computing the revised Pension under Option 1, the Commission has also recommended that initially Option 2 may be applied to all Pensioners and the resultant benefit be passed on to them post haste.  Later on wherever necessary Option 1 can be extended on the basis of necessary data collected in due course and the difference paid to them as arrears.

I have no words to express my appreciation of the Commission's Great Humanitarian and Egalitarian  Approach to the Pensioners lot.  How much sympathy and empathy they have shown in their dispensation to the pensioners issue?  Simply Hats off to them.

The  Commission has dealt with the CG Pension subject by retracing the history of CPC right from CPC 1 to CPC 6.   Upto 3rd CPC, the past Commissions' view were  that there was no need to revise the Pension of Past Retirees.  This unjustified and illogical policy was thrown to dust by the 4th CPC and they made a small beginning  to ameliorate the hardships faced by the CG Pensioners with the galloping inflation in the country. This step was further improved by the 5th CPC and followed by the 6th CPC which has gone to the extent of giving quantum jump in the Pension to the very senior pensioners of 80 plus.  These rational thinking of the 4th, 5th and 6th CPC and the recent sanction of OROP to the Veterans  by the GOI have paved the way for the 7th CPC to recommend  the perfection in the Upgradation of pension almost on stage to stage basis to the CG Pensioners.

It is heartening to know from the newspapers that GOI is going to accept the 7th CPC recommendations in toto.   If this news is correct, the GOI has no rhyme or reason to oppose the similar demand of the LIC Pensioners in the SC for we are also the pensioners of the GOI's own Business venture.  Our Counsels have now a more strong case against our opponents in the SC hearing on probably 26th inst for wresting a favourable order from the Hon. Judges.

J.M. ABOOBUCKER

Memory problem ?

7th CPC. - OROP for Civilians, too. - Revised Pension Formula

7th CPC recommends the following pension formulation for civil employees including CAPF personnel, who have retired before 01.01.2016.

( i ) All the civilian personnel including CAPF who retired prior to 01.01.2016 (expected date of implementation of the Seventh CPC recommendations) shall first be fixed in the Pay Matrix being recommended by this Commission, on the basis of the Pay Band and Grade Pay at which they retired, at the minimum of the corresponding level in the matrix. This amount shall be raised, to arrive at the notional pay of the retiree, by adding the number of increments he/she had earned in that level while in service, at the rate of three percent. Fifty percent of the total amount so arrived at shall be the revised pension.

( ii ) The second calculation to be carried out is as follows. The pension, as had been fixed at the time of implementation of the VI CPC recommendations, shall be multiplied by 2.57 to arrive at an alternate value for the revised pension.

( iii ) Pensioners may be given the option of choosing whichever formulation is beneficial to them. It is recognised that the fixation of pension as per formulation in ( i )above may take a little time since the records of each pensioner will have to be checked to ascertain the number of increments earned in the retiring level. It is therefore recommended that in the first instance the revised pension may be calculated as at ( ii ) above and the same may be paid as an interim measure. In the event calculation as per ( i ) above yields a higher amount the difference may be paid subsequently.Illustration on fixation of pension based on recommendations of the Seventh CPC.

BEFORE US 25 MISC CASES; OUR SC CASES MAY BE POSTPONED

It looks like the enthusiasm is a bit premature. Mr Jay Savla called me to say that there is another list of 25 miscellaneous matters before the same Bench and some possibility of the Bench not sitting  in the AN. 

In that view of the matter, OUR WAIT CONTINUES. NOTHING MAY HAPPEN ON 24th for us. Also, Wednesday 25th is a holiday in Delhi.

So let us look for Thursday 26th. 

Sreenivasa Murty M

earlier we had reported -

M.Sreenivasa Murty

Don’t we still see the WRITING ON THE WALL? LIC PENSIONERS – YOU ALL SHOULD UNITE YOUR LEADERS WON’T

What a timing? The 7^th Pay Commission Report could not have come out at a better time than now, as far as we in LIC are concerned. 

Is it wrong to expect that on 24 Nov 2015, when the Final Hearing in our matters resumes before Hon’ble Justice Dipak Misra, the mood of everybody supporting our cause for full-fledged pension up-gradation should be upbeat? 

The strength or the weakness in our case remained what it has been, for many years. What has changed for the worse, are only 

1) the level of insensitivity of the Corporation towards its past employees bordering on hatred and 

2) most dogmatic polarization of Pensioners’ representatives, both individual leaders and Organizations, who come in the way of what is legitimately due to the Pensioners. 

Now is the time to seriously review our strategy. We can ill afford to lose the golden opportunity.

I, on behalf of the Hyderabad Association have been making hectic preparations for the last few weeks and focus on what needs to be done in the eleventh hour, not to let the situation slip out of our hands. I am fortunate to receive the unstinting support of Sri C H Mahadevan and all my seniors in the Hyderabad Association.

   

In the meantime, I renew my appeal to all the doubting Thomases, the Prophets of doom, ‘I only act - you all follow me’ clan’s high chiefs, to lie low, if not step aside. 

Please don’t revel any more in your unique status of speaking LIC’s language on Pension, directly or indirectly. 

Your members will also get up-gradation soon, whether you want them to or not, whether you are working for it or not.

Good days are ahead. 

 It’s the writing on the wall!

7th Pay Commission recommends PENSION PARITY

The Commission in its Report submitted to the Finance Minister yesterday evening recommends 

"a revised Pension Formulation for the Civil Employees as well as Defence Personnel who have retired before 1st January 2016. This Formulation will bring about PARITY between past Pensioners and Current Retirees for the same length of service in the pay scale at the time of retirement" Justice Mathur explained.

"Past Pensioners will first be placed in the proposed Pay Matrix on the basis of where they stood in the existing pay band and pay grade structure when they retired. This amount is to be raised to arrive at the Notional Pay of Retirees taking into account the number of increments they earned in that level while in service at the rate of 3%.  

50% of the total amount arrived at in this manner will be the New Pension."

A VERY GOOD NEWS FOR US.  It is like a silver lining in the dark clouds.  We are also fighting For Pension Parity in LIC.  This news will certainly be a shot in our arms and certainly strengthen our just cause and help our Counsels to argue our case with redoubled vigour. The GOI would be fighting a losing battle in the hearing coming up on 24th inst in the light of the Pay Commission's Recommendation for PENSION PARITY.

J.M   ABOOBUCKER

Straddling the fence

This refers to " Time for Govt to resolve OROP row amicably" by Vinay Kumar (Nov.17, FPJ). The leaders consider that all is not well with the government's offer in its notification (Nov 17, 2015). But, is it not too much to demand for revision equalisation of pension every year ?

The leaders are well aware that no country in the world has annual revision of pension. They should honourably accept the government's offer to update pension once in five years instead of once in ten years along with revision of scales of pay of serving employees.

Majority of the military personnel, after retirement, take up jobs in other organisations. A good number of them get promotions. All on reaching superannuation age, retire with  'second pension' and / or other superannuation benefits.

The government on its part must agree to grant OROP to personnel retiring voluntarily.


R.G. Nakhate, FPJ, 19-11-2015.

Pension Matters

Shri Sudhakaran's exercise of pension eligibility of officers - retired in Aug. 2012 to May, 2013, from AAO to ZM, from minimum to maximum of the different stages of revised pay scales in comparison with the position as of July, 2012 (based on old pay scales) is highly commendable. The task is Herculean requiring lot of patience. 

Salutations to him for his extraordinarily brilliant, clear and transparent chart. The retiree concerned can easily access to know how much benefit he is going to get with revision on cards.

Shri C H Mahadevan Sir, Shri Sudhakaran and I have been trying to 'console' Shr. K. Vijayaprasad for loss in his pension. He, like any other employee, must have been entertaining thoughts of updation of pension approved by the SC, by GOI, by LIC well before his retirement and hence, he is quite right expecting to get a difference of Rs.5000+ in his take home monthly pension. All of us, seniors retired in pre 1997 pay scales, without the benefit of 100% DR and those retired in subsequent 2002 and 2007 pay scales have also been entertaining the similar thoughts of updation for long.

Shri Vijayaprasad cannot feel fully satisfied to the figures given till date (equally applies to all of us - if we are honest to our wants). He has till date maintained the gentleman's cool. He has not reacted to the figures.

Had the SC decision come by now, probably, every pensioner would have entertained the thoughts of getting their pension re- fixed from 01-08-2012, based on the latest revised pay scales. It is the amount - new basic pay - May, 2013 indicated in Shri Sudhakaran's Chart. That is the OROP or simply put, stage to stage fitment in the revised pay scale/s relevant to the post and the pay the ensioner has retired. 

When the SC judgement comes in favour of pensioners, Shri Vijayaprasad shall get what he has been asking for. Viz : Fifty percent of the maximum of revised pay of the post he retired - ADM : Rs.74670 /- plus FPA and from 01-09-2012 and admissible DR from time to time. No less.

Let's succeed. Let's shake hands.

SN.

ADV N PRADEEPKUMAR

  PARA 52:“Having  Examined  The Matter  On  Principle, Let  Us  Turn  To Some  Precedents. In  D.R.Nim  V.Union  Of  India, The  Appellant  Questioned  His  Seniority   Which  Was  To Be  Determined  In  Accordance  With  The  Provisions  Contained  In Indian  Police  Service (Regulation Of Seniority)Rules,1954.These Rules  Required  First  To  Ascertain  The  Year  Of  Allotment  Of The   Person  Concerned  For  Determination  Of  His  Seniority. 

Please click below

'BANK NEWS'

Exclusion of claim on Domiciliary treatment of retirees under new Mediclaim scheme

Posted: 18 Nov 2015 03:50 AM PST

General Secretary ,All India Bank Retirees Federation has, taken up the matter with Chairman ,IBA,on exclusion of claim on Domiciliary treatment by retirees, under new Medi Claim Insurance Scheme vide letter dated 16.11.2015.

Please click below