* CHRONICLE - PENSIONERS CONVERGE HERE, DISCUSS ISSUES OF THEIR CHOICE * CHRONICLE - WHERE EVEN THE CHAT COLUMN PRODUCES GREAT DISCUSSIONS * CHRONICLE - WHERE THE MUSIC IS RISING IN CRESCENDO !

               
                                   

Thursday, May 19, 2016

How LIC is wrong on IR calculations

What Para 27 of the Supreme Court Order dated 31/3/2016 states


“Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, it is hereby directed that the Corporation shall pay 40% as per Para 3A of the Appendix to each of the employees within six weeks and shall file an affidavit before the High Court of Delhi to the said effect……….”.

What Para 3A of Appendix IV   states
3(A) In case of employees who have retired or died on or after the 1st day of August 1997, the dearness relief shall be payable for every rise or to be recoverable for every fall, as the case may be, of every 4 points over 1740 points in the quarterly Average Consumer Price Index for Industrial Workers in the series of 1960 = 100 Such increase or decrease in dearness relief for every said 4 points shall be at the rate of 0.23 per cent of the Basic Pension;

What items (b) & (c) of Annexure to letter dated 13/4/2016 by ED (P) to ED (IT) state:

(b) For the purpose, the basic pension /family pension  payable shall be revised  by merging the Dearness Relief payable as on 1/8/1997, and,
 (c) On the pension so upgraded, Dearness Relief of 0.23% of basic pension is to be calculated for every 4 point rise or fall of AICPI from 1740 points.

Why the method of calculation as per (b) & (c) is incorrect?
The Basic Pension stated in para 3A applicable to the pensioner   will not be the same as the revised Basic Pension   calculated as per (b) above as the former carries a weightage provided in wage revision w e f 1/8/1997 while the latter does not provide for such weightage. In other words, the basic pension  arrived at as per (b) above cannot be taken for calculation of interim relief as per para 3A  above.

Consequently (c) is not correct as there is no upgradation, and it is erroneous to calculate applying 0.23% of the wrong (lesser) basic pension which will result in underpayment of interim relief to the eligible pensioners.

For the same reason the payment made under this  method will be in contravention of the Supreme Court order dated 31/3/2016 and will attract  charge of contempt of court .

CH MAHADEVAN