HAPPENINGS IN HIGH COURT
a review on reportage
I quote from the text of the letter by Sri GNSji today after the hearing for the day is over by way of report” Curiously, our Federation's amended petition was also not in the case bundle but our counsel pointed out the same was filed as early as he first week of June 2016 (our counsel is following up with the Registry to get the matter set right). “Pointed to whom? To the judge when pulled up for not filing fresh affidavit taking things for granted that LIC would anyway ask for adjournment or what?
I would like another curious quote from another
stalwart the so called author of the legal battle who cannot come out of the
Jaipur High Court syndrome without appreciating the fact that SC on 31.03.2016
has in fact set aside saying in so many words that the issue was not properly
presented even with regard to discrimination in DR for pre 1997 and post 1997
for them to give partially favorable verdict even, not to talk of revision of
pensions periodically with every revision that takes place for in house
employees. I quote from his report “SINCE ONE FILE HAD NOT BEEN RECEIVED FROM JAIPUR HIGH COURT, THERE
WAS NO QUESTION OF THE CASE BEING HEARD TODAY IN ABSENCE.CASE OF KML ASTHANA
WILL REMAIN ABOVE ALL”. So both were sure that the case will not be heard and
they will not take or had taken any steps as the champions of legal battle to
press for early hearing and settlement from a sympathetic judiciary. So
indifferent was the approach, for the discerning pensioners that one is not
sure of the date on which fresh affidavit was filed (if at all filed) by his
counsel and the other states some papers were not received from Jaipur. Both
are bereft of any initiative to press matters. Both however in one voice cry foul
that because of Hyderabad as a new entrant which it is not, (not AIIPA and AIREF though), which have filed
fresh writs. As if to crown this bungling, LIC’s monumental lethargy in filing
affidavit on 40% IR and or reply to the notice served by Delhi High Court on
the Hyderabad’s petition presents a rare
scenario of mutual amity and understanding between petitioners and respondents.
In this back ground of utter callousness on the part of aging pensioner leaders
there is no wonder if the Delhi High Court has admonished all with a deserving
dose to LIC.
And if members of these groups do not see
anything to question and follow them doggedly God only can save them and
appreciate their colossus tolerance.
Still it is not too late for the members to help
themselves by taking the right choice to align with right leaders from
Hyderabad.
With greetings,
G K VISWANATHAM
To read reports on Supreme court proceedings prepared by S/Shri KML Asthana and GN Sridharan, please click below.
KML ASTHANA
AS USUAL A FALSE VERSION OF THE PROCEEDINGS. NOT ALL PARTIES WERE
REPRIMANDED FOR NOT SUBMITTING OBJECTIONS BECAUSE AS USUAL JAIPUR
IS THE FIRST AND ONLY UNIT WHICH HAD ALREADY FILED ITS OBJECTIONS ABOUT
THE PAYMENT OF 40% IN INCORRECT MANNER.
OTHER UNITS INCLUDING HYDERABAD DID NOT FILE ANY OBJECTION. WHY? AND NOW THEY ARE BOASTING.
THEIR WRIT PETITION HAS ALSO NOT BEEN TAGGED WITH JAIPUR WRIT PETITIONS INSPITE OF PRAYERS MADE AND IT WAS ORDERED THAT THE SAME WILL BE HEARD NOT WITH JAIPUR BUNCH OF CASES.
SINCE ONE FILE HAD NOT BEEN RECEIVED FROM JAIPUR HIGH COURT, THERE WAS NO QUESTION OF THE CASE BEING HEARD TODAY IN ABSENCE.
CASE OF KML ASTHANA WILL REMAIN ABOVE ALL.
ALL BOAST AS ALWAYS
KML ASTHANA
GN SRIDHARAN
Despite attempt by LIC counsel, as expected, to get two weeks adjournment, the cases came up today
,and there were serious discussions on the issues involved. All the lawyers were present. The Court heard all the cases during almost one hour in the forenoon.
On an enquiry by the Bench, the counsel for LIC admitted that they had not filed their counter, and at this, the Judge expressed anguish. Curiously, our Federation's amended petition was also not in the case bundle but our counsel pointed out the same was filed as early as he first week of June 2016 (our counsel is following up with the Registry to get the matter set right).
There was mention of the fact by participating advocates that old pensioners seven steps above get pension less than one third of the pension paid to lowest cadre. The Judge made an enquiry on how the funded scheme would sustain increase in pension in the days to come on the falling interest rate. A good deal of explanations emerged. Sometime during discussion, the Judge said discrimination must end'.
Mention was also made on the faulty calculation. Judge directed LIC counsel filing an appropriate affidavit within (as heard by us, within four days). LIC is to file counter for amended petitions before the next hearing.
The next hearing is to take place on 4th Aug 2016. From the way the Judge was observing, it is obvious that LIC will not ask for adjournment. It looks that the Bench is serious about the time schedules . For further details, we have to wait for the written order to come in a day of two.
We are in the process of engaging a Senior Counsel to take forward case.
GN Sridharan
Gen Secy. Fed of Retd. LIC Class I Officers' Assns