PDA

View Full Version : Anomaly in Retirement Age



csrayat
12-09-2010, 10:14 PM
The Constitution of India guarantees the equality to all the citizens of the Republic of India, hence non could be labeled special citizen or VIP, but the scenario is very discouraging. Just look at the pattern of Retirement Age of Central Government Employees and various State Government Employees. The Retirement Age various from 58 years to 65 years. Is it not the violation of constitutional and legal rights of employees ? The DOPT should look into it and bring uniformity in the Retirement Age of Employees through India.

K.B.Dhruwanshi
12-09-2010, 11:58 PM
Dear Friend csrayat,
Yes it is a disparity, but Central govt. & different State Govts have their own recruitement and service rules. DOPT is a nodal agency, but it cannot frame service rules for state governments. In my opinion,there should be some central unified service rule covering retirement age of all central & state govt. employees , then only there will be uniformity in retirement age.

prasannakumar
13-09-2010, 07:54 PM
Dear Sirs,
The age of retirement in Kerala is the minimum for the best of my knowledge. While in most of the states it is 58 and 60, it is 55 in Kerala. I strongly feel that there should be a uniform code for retirement age. My personal opinion is it should be 58.

Any difference of opinion shall be debated at length.

Regards
Prasanna Kumar

R K Rao
13-09-2010, 08:31 PM
[My humble opinion ]

Usually the benefits on Pay Commission, Bonus, DA etc. are passed on to the States also after implementation by Central Govt.

Similarly, there should be uniformity in the retirement age of Central Govt. and State Govt. employees.

There should be option for employees to seek retirement from 58 to 60 years with full pensionary benefits, so that depending upon health condition and other family matters, an employee can act accordingly.

RK

prasannakumar
13-09-2010, 08:59 PM
Dear Mr. Rao,
That is a very good point. I would like to add that, apart from the option as you suggested, I am of the opinion that, let there be a criterion on length of service. also e.g.

Say either 58 or 60 years of age whatever it is or 33/35 years of service which ever is earlier.

(Please note that this is my personal opinion only and I am left with a service of nearly 8 years)

Regards
Prasanna Kumar

RKPATHAK
13-09-2010, 09:35 PM
Age of retirement for every one should be 58 years so that there shall be job opporturnity for the youth. In deserving cases retired may be engaged as consultant on honorarium but that too should not go beyond 60 years of age

R K Rao
13-09-2010, 10:58 PM
Age of retirement for every one should be 58 years so that there shall be job opporturnity for the youth. In deserving cases retired may be engaged as consultant on honorarium but that too should not go beyond 60 years of age

Mr. Pathak, Yes I agree that elders should pave way for youth. But that is alright only if the vacancies caused due to retirement are filled and not to let lapse due to non-filling in time or due to abolishing, ban etc. In that case, we are not only NOT allowing the youth to come up but also to let go of the manpower we could have had for some more time (thus easing our work load). It would also help the retirees family if he pulls on for a couple of more years. But if the vacancy is filled up by youth, then most welcome.

[Also, Sir, the clause deserving cases may not necessarily be interpreted or implemented in the way you meant].



Mr. Prasanna Kumar,

Yes Sir, your suggestion is worth considering. A good one.

Regards to both of you.


RKR

ramanrao60
14-09-2010, 11:32 AM
my feelings are:
country cannot progress if only govt is expected to create all jobs
govt can only employ about 8 to 10 % of the work force available in an economy
these will be mostly in internal and external security,health and education sectors and perhaps enforcement area

retirement age is function of the physical ability of the population and demographics like life expectancy etc this should increase with time

prasannakumar
14-09-2010, 12:12 PM
Dear Sirs,
It is interesting that this thred has evoked such a good reponse.

To contnue the debate, my personal opinion is, there should be a liberal policy and package for the employees who opt for retiring before attaining the age of superannuation. However, these posts/vacancies invaribly have to be filled with young and enrgetic blood. The expertise of retired employees who are exceedingly efficient, shall be utilized as done in case of E.Sreedharan, Chariman, Konkan Railway (He was closely associated with my family when he was working as Executive Engieer for Hassan Manglore Railway at Sakleshpur, Karnataka)

Regards
Prasanna Kumar

chithra
21-09-2010, 08:45 PM
To get employment opportunity to the youth is not the retirement age. Govt is trying to reduce manpower by implementing the latest techniques. Instead Employment opportunity in other areas has to be increased. An experienced hand can do the work more efficiently than a new recruit y . Hence I feel reducing by retirement age nothing is going to gain

RKPATHAK
21-09-2010, 08:58 PM
I differ from Chitra. A youth is energetic and dynamic. Old aged person like me no doubt experieced but not enjoying good health remain on leave on medical ground. More so Govt is paying more salary to an aged person for example highest in the pay band whereas a new recruit shall be paid the minimum in the pay band. Aged persons should offer to retire on attaining the age of supperannuation so that job opportunities for young can be there

csrayat
21-09-2010, 10:06 PM
To get employment opportunity to the youth is not the retirement age. Govt is trying to reduce manpower by implementing the latest techniques. Instead Employment opportunity in other areas has to be increased. An experienced hand can do the work more efficiently than a new recruit y . Hence I feel reducing by retirement age nothing is going to gain

Dear Friend Chithra

Probably you have misunderstood the core idea. The thread is to reflect awareness among government employees for parity in retirement age. All central & state government employees should have identical retirement age as per constitutional provisons. Employement opportunities are also linked to retirement age and creation of vacancies. I would like to share that at my institution (Autonomous-Central Govt) Retirement age for non-teaching staff is 60 years, Teaching-Staff (non-Medical)-62 years, and for Teaching-Staff (Medical) it is 65 years.

csrayat
27-09-2010, 07:05 PM
Dear Sirs,
It is interesting that this thred has evoked such a good reponse.

To contnue the debate, my personal opinion is, there should be a liberal policy and package for the employees who opt for retiring before attaining the age of superannuation. However, these posts/vacancies invaribly have to be filled with young and enrgetic blood. The expertise of retired employees who are exceedingly efficient, shall be utilized as done in case of E.Sreedharan, Chariman, Konkan Railway (He was closely associated with my family when he was working as Executive Engieer for Hassan Manglore Railway at Sakleshpur, Karnataka)

Regards
Prasanna Kumar
PIL on retirement age of civil servants

Lucknow, Sep 24 (PTI) A PIL was filed in the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court today, seeking direction to extend the retirement age of officers of India Civil Services from 60 years to at least 65 years.

Neelendra Pandey, a local social worker, stated in his PIL that he is aggrieved with discrepancies in the retirement policy of different government services.

He said IAS, IPS and IFS officers retire at 60 years, while people of about 80 years and sometime even more continue as President, Prime Minister, Governor and Chief Minister, Minister and MLAs.

Professors and doctors of Central universities and institutions like AIIMS retire at 65 and primary school teachers retire at 62, Pandey said while terming the retirement policies as defective and challenging the same.

He requested the court to direct Central government to consider making a universal retirement policy for all public servants.

Source: PTI