+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 41 to 54 of 54

Thread: Retiring of employees born on Ist of January, 1928/1938/1946/1956 by the Government

  1. #41
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    456

    Default

    Dear Krishna,
    From the orders of the Government of Tamil Nadu one thing is clear that all Tamial Nadu Government Servants whose increment falls due on the day following superannuation, on completion of one full year of service which are countable for increment under Fundamental Rules 26, be sanctioned with one notional increment at the rate as described under rule 6 of Tamil Nadu Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 2009, purely for the purpose of pensionery benefits and not for any other purpose. It follows from this that all those born on the Ist January would get the benefits of the order of the State Government in terms of increment even if they are treated to have retired on the 31st December. As such our contention before the CAT that all those born on the Ist January, 1956/1946/1938 should also be given the once-in-ten-years benefits of the respective CPCs as all had completed ten years on the date of retirement, gets support from the State Government decision. We can bring this fact also to the notice of the CAT as and when we get an opportunity for that purpose.
    You may also like to post the next date in respect of the case of Shri Kapoor before the CAT.
    Developments about the case proposed to be filed by some one in Mumbai CAT could also be posted for the benefit of those interested in this regard.
    Gopal Krishan
    9911178250

  2. #42
    Member JVSR is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Dear Gopal Krishan,

    Tamil Nadu Govt. GO, meant prospectively, but some of the Govt. Servants of Tamil Nadu retired earlier filed the cases in Madras High Court in 2015, 2016, for sanction of an increments who are completed one year of service and retired on last working day of the month (on completion of one year), and they are not in service 1st of the succeeding month. Madras High Court delivered the judgement in favour of Govt. Servants with pensionery benefits. Thoses cases were sent to you thru mail yesterday i.e. 29th July, 2017.

    jvsr krishna
    9441903448

  3. #43
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    456

    Default

    Dear,
    So far so good. But we have to be sure that there was no SLP in Supreme Court in respect of these cases.
    Gopal Krishan

  4. #44
    Member JVSR is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Shri Baldev Kapoor's next date for filing the Govt reply 03/10/2017.

  5. #45
    Member JVSR is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    32

    Default

    As per Provisions of FR-56 (a), the Government-Servant retires from Service on attaining the Age of Superannuation in the after noon of the last-day of the Month in which he completes the Age of superannuation. In other words all those born between the 2nd to the last-day of the Month deemed to complete age of superannuation in the after noon of the last-day of the same Month, and draw Pensionary-Benefits from the 1st of the succeeding-month. On the contrary, the same rule provides that the Person who is born on the 1st of any Month completes age of superannuation in the afternoon of the last-day of the preceding-month and superannuates on that day it self but draws Pensionary-Benefits from the 1st, i.e. his date of birth. The person is treated to be a retired person/pensioner as well as an employee of the Government on the 31st December, itself.

    As this rule was/is very harshly operating particularly against those born on the Ist January, 1938/1946/1956 as they were retired in the after noon of the preceding day of the date from which 5th/6th/7th CPC were implemented a number of persons filed cases in courts and got the relief. Some of the important decided cases are as follows:
    ->FOURTH CPC In S. Banerjee case it was HELD: Under paragraph 17.3 of Chapter 17, Part II of the
    Report of the Fourth Central Pay Commission the benefits
    recommended will be available to employees retiring during
    the period, January 1, 1986 to September 30, 1986. In the
    instant case, the petitioner was permitted to retire volun-
    tarily from the service of the Registry of the Supreme Court with effect from the forenoon of January 1, 1986. The fact that under the proviso to rule5(2) of the Rules, the petitioner will not be entitled to any salary for the day on which he actually retired has no bearing on the question as to the date of retirement. The petitioner could not be said to have retired on December 31,1985. It has then to be said that he had retired with effect from January 1, 1986 and that is also the order of this Court dated December 6, 1985. He, therefore, comes within the purview of paragraph 17.3 of the recommendations of the Pay Commission.
    The respondents to calculate and pay to the petitioner
    within three months his pension in accordance with the
    recommendation of the Pay Commission as contained in para-
    graph 17.3.

    ->Fifth CPC. In Venkatram Rajagopalan v. Union of India the Tribunal was concerned with the question whether a Government servant completing the age of superannuation in the afternoon of 31.3.1995 is deemed to have retired from service on superannuation with effect from 31.3.1995 or with effect from 1.4.1996. F.R. 56 and Rules 35 and 83 of the Pension Rules were considered by the learned Tribunal. Rule 83(1) of the Pension Rules provided that pension of a superannuated Government servant shall become payable from the date on which Government servant ceased to be in the establishment. Having regard to the same, it was held that a Government servant completing the age of superannuation on 31.3.1995 (let us say on the last working day of the preceding month) is deemed to have effectively retired from service with effect from 1.4.1995 (let us say on the first day of succeeding month). The learned Tribunal also noticed that the Office Memorandum of Government of India dated 14.7.1995 gave the benefit of increased death gratuity and retirement gratuity from Rs.1.00 lakh to Rs.2.50 lakhs in the case of Central Government employees who retire or die on or after 1.4.1995. Interpreting phrase "who retire or die on or after 1.4.1995", Full Bench of the learned Tribunal observed as under:
    According to Rule 83(1) of the Pension Rules, pension becomes payable from the date on which Government servant ceases to be born on the establishment (emphasis given). A Government servant continues to be borne on the establishment till midnight of the date of superannuation. The decision of the Hyderabad Bench of this Tribunal in T. Krishna Murthy's case (supra) cannot be brushed aside out by the learned Counsel for the respondents. Retirement may by voluntary or on superannuation. The principles for payment of pension will not vary on the basis of these distinctions. According to us, "afternoon of 31st of March" or "forenoon of 1st of April" means one and the same thing and on this basis also we see no reason to hold that the said case is not applicable to the present cases. In short, we are of the view that in the present cases the effective date of retirement would be i.4.1995 and not 31.3.1995.
    The Full Bench came to the t conclusion in laying down that Government servant retiring on last day of the preceding month is would become pensioner on the next day and therefore such pensioners also entitled for the benefit of enhanced gratuity. A person retiring on the last day of the preceding month ceases to be borne on the establishment with effect from beginning of first day of the succeeding month i.e., after 12.00 'O' clock in the night.
    -> The question before the Division Bench of Kerala High Court in Union of India v. George(supra)was whether the respondent who was in service till 31.12.1995 is entitled to the payment of retiral benefits at the rates as prevalent on that day or at the rate as revised with effect from 1.1.1996. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Kerala Bench upheld the claim of retired persons taking the view that those persons became pensioners on 1.1.1996. The Division Bench of Kerala High Court followed the judgment of the Supreme Court in Banerjee case, the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Malakondaiah case as well as the Division Bench judgment of Kerala High Court in O.P. No. 32459 of 2001, dated 4.1.2002. It was held that the retired person continued in service till midnight of 31.12.1995, that he ceased to be in service from 1.1.1996 and that he acquires status of pensioner. It was also held that the claim to pension has to be determined at the rate prevalent on 1.1.1996.
    <-> In all the three judgments discussed above, the issue was whether a Government servant retiring or voluntarily retiring on the last day of the preceding month can be treated to have acquired status of pensioner from the first day of succeeding month after the month in which such employee retired. The view consistently has been that from the midnight of the day of the superannuation, a Government servant becomes pensioner and all the benefits given by the Government with effect from first day of the month after retirement; assuming that such benefit is given - would be entitled for all the benefits.

  6. #46
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    456

    Default

    Mr Krishna,
    I had requested for your comments on the brief I had emailed to you
    But you have posted the same as it is under this thread. I hope you have no comments to offer and you agree with the same
    I would discuss the matter on these lines with the Secretary General of BPS. In case you have any additional materials let me know before hand. I would email the same to Maheshwari tomorrow.
    Gopal Krishna

  7. #47
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    456

    Default

    Dear Krishna,
    This is with reference to your email about Tamil Nadu Government order about increment. you had sent the same to others also. In fact as you told me the same was published by the Bharat Pensioners Saman in their magazine also. Any comments from them?
    Gopal Krishan
    Last edited by Gopal Krishan; 11-08-2017 at 06:27 AM.

  8. #48
    Member JVSR is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    32

    Default

    The following matter was published BPS Aug 2017 Magazine.

    INCREMENT:

    In order to set right this genuine anomaly, the Government of Tamilnadu has issued an order vide GO No. 311 dated 31.12.2014. As per that order, a Government servant whose increment falls due on the day following superannuation, on completion of one full year of service which are countable for increment under Fundamental Rules may be sanctioned with one notional increment at the prescribed eligible rate, purely for the purpose of pensionery benefits and not for any other purpose.
    When Tamil Nadu Govt. could resolve the issue "granting increment" for those Govt Servants served total one year, at least notional increment for the purpose of pensionery benefits, why the Central Govt. (Model Employer) hesitating to implement the same. Hence, it should be resolved with out any further loss of time.

    Thanking you,

    regards
    jvsr krishna
    9441903448
    jvsrkrishna@gmail.com

  9. #49
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    456

    Default

    Dear Krishna,
    The decision of the Government of Tamil Nadu is applicable prospectively. That fact has not been mentioned by the BPS. How that decision of the TN Government is going to help us in our case, which we are agitating before the CAT in New Delhi? Kindly elaborate for the benefit of those interested in the matter. A few of them had been talking to me on telephone desiring to know about the case. If they could also offer their comments in this regard.
    Mr Krishna has been writing to some interested pensioners from Kolkata, Mumbai and Chennai. If he has received any comments from them he may like to share with all those interested in this matter.
    Is there any development from BPS side to whom we had sent a detailed note about the matter with the request to support us in the CAT?
    Gopal Krishan
    9911178250
    Last edited by Gopal Krishan; 17-08-2017 at 03:07 PM.

  10. #50
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    456

    Default

    The case filed by Sh Krishna has been fixed for some date of October. Government has filed an MA. A reply to that is being prepared. I would request Mr Krishna to state details of the same for the benefit of those interested in the matter.
    Gopal Krishan

  11. #51
    Member JVSR is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    32

    Default

    In this thread, except Gopal Krishan & JVSR Krishna, no other like minded Govt. Servants or Retired Govt. servants are sharing....the information.

    From this I understand that others are silent spectators, just they are feeling, if somebody will get benefit, others also will get the same.

    It is not the case, rcently, Apex Court also delivered the judgement only to extend the benefits to the applicants only not for similarly placed persons. Hence, those having DOB 01 01 1956 and retired on 31/12/2015 come closer and do their best for filing the court case.

    jvsr krishna
    9441903448
    Last edited by JVSR; 23-09-2017 at 11:06 PM.

  12. #52
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    456

    Default

    My case would be heard on the 6th November.
    Gopal Krishan

  13. #53
    Member JVSR is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    32

    Default

    My case too posted on 6th Nov. 2017 at Hon. CAT Principal Bench, New Delhi.

    jvsr krishna
    9441903448

  14. #54
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    456

    Default

    Kapoor's case has been listed for 28th October.
    Gopal Krishan

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Similar Threads

  1. Injustice ti 1.1.1928/1938/1946 born pensioners
    By Gopal Krishan in forum Pensioners
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 07-07-2016, 04:48 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 25-09-2013, 01:41 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 16-01-2013, 07:55 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-04-2012, 04:54 PM
  5. LIEN rules and procedure for Central Government employees.
    By virgu in forum Other Service Matters
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 17-11-2011, 08:15 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts