+ Reply to Thread
Page 63 of 77 FirstFirst ... 13 53 61 62 63 64 65 73 ... LastLast
Results 1,241 to 1,260 of 1540

Thread: Injustice to pre-2006 pensioners in old s-29 & 30 scales(18400-22400 & 22400-24500)

  1. #1241
    Member ssharma is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    33

    Default

    I'm happy we are mving from MPB to MPPB concept but i fail to understand this narrow mindedness on part of the government. the word 'minimum' is in itself unjust to use. the only word which should be used is 'Actual'.. Actual pay in the pay band. APPB.

  2. #1242
    Junior Member kvn is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kanaujiaml View Post
    Dear friends. I have got a special great news to share with pre 2006 pensioners, particularly from s29 pre revised pay scale. The Union of India "appeal" in Delhi High Court against CAT PB Judgment in OA No. 655 of 2010, was heard today (29.04.2013) and "dismissed" by the Delhi High Court. It is a great news and I congratulate all the pensioners friends for this achievement.
    Sir, My hearty thanks to You and best wishes. It is a great achievement on your part.

    with warm regards
    viswanathan.k (A 1991 Rly. pensioner-anxiously waiting to see the flash NEWS of joy)

  3. #1243
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default


    All that matters is PPB -

    AS THE DAYS ROLL BY, I JUST WONDER WHAT IS THE HISTORY BEHIND THIS MYSTERY....

    WHY HOW WHO WHEN AND FINALLY WHO ORDERED THIS DELIBERATE CHANGE .....

    WHAT WAS TO BE "MINIMUM OF THE PAY IN THE PAY BAND WITH DUE CORREPSONDENCE TO THE PRE-REVISED PAY SCALE" - WAS TRANSFORMED TO BE IMPLEMENTED AS "MINIMUM OF THE PAY BAND IRREPSECTIVE OF THE PRE-REVISED PAY SCALE" .......

    When the reasearchers sought to unearth the "mystery in the babudom", the FILE was conveniently lost in the jungle of DOE.....

    A GLARING CASE OF WANTON HAPPENING........FILE MUST HAVE BEEN HIDEEN ... AND REPORTED LOST.... LEST WE GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THE TRUTH.....

    INFLICTION OF SUCH A HARASSMENT AND ANGUISH AMONG THE VERY OLD HELPLESS PENSIONERS WILL NOT GO "UNREWARDED" AS THE "UNASSUAGED FEELINGS " OF THE "CHEATED" - SOME OF WHO ARE NO MORE- WILL HAUNT THE MINDS OF THOSE WHO ARE "IRRESPONSIBLY AND ARROGANTLY" RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS SHAMEFUL ACT.......

    SO MANY TRIBUNAL/ COURT CASES.... SO MANY JUDGMENTS..... STILL THE EPISODE CONTINUES.....

    AS SOMEONE POINTED OUT, WILL THE GOVT(S) GO TO HON SC AS IF THEY ARE THE ONES CHEATED?

    YES. THEY WILL GO... ONLY TO BE THROWN OUT AT THE VERY POINT OF ENTRY ITSELF.......

    Regards,

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 30-04-2013 at 01:58 PM. Reason: adding colour....

  4. #1244
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Respected Natarajan Sahib,

    Kindly accept my heartiest congratulations. Your efforts brought cheers all round.
    In the case about 1.1.1946 born pensioners the DOE had played the same game. The file was intentionally misplaced and when the matter was taken up with the CIC and a notice was served on the officers concerned suddenly the file surfaced and the required information was supplied to me.

    With regards,

    Gopl Krishan

  5. #1245
    Member ssharma is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vnatarajan View Post

    All that matters is PPB -

    AS THE DAYS ROLL BY, I JUST WONDER WHAT IS THE HISTORY BEHIND THIS MYSTERY....

    WHY HOW WHO WHEN AND FINALLY WHO ORDERED THIS DELIBERATE CHANGE .....

    WHAT WAS TO BE "MINIMUM OF THE PAY IN THE PAY BAND WITH DUE CORREPSONDENCE TO THE PRE-REVISED PAY SCALE" - WAS TRANSFORMED TO BE IMPLEMENTED AS "MINIMUM OF THE PAY BAND IRREPSECTIVE OF THE PRE-REVISED PAY SCALE" .......

    When the reasearchers sought to unearth the "mystery in the babudom", the FILE was conveniently lost in the jungle of DOE.....

    A GLARING CASE OF WANTON HAPPENING........FILE MUST HAVE BEEN HIDEEN ... AND REPORTED LOST.... LEST WE GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THE TRUTH.....

    INFLICTION OF SUCH A HARASSMENT AND ANGUISH AMONG THE VERY OLD HELPLESS PENSIONERS WILL NOT GO "UNREWARDED" AS THE "UNASSUAGED FEELINGS " OF THE "CHEATED" - SOME OF WHO ARE NO MORE- WILL HAUNT THE MINDS OF THOSE WHO ARE "IRRESPONSIBLY AND ARROGANTLY" RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS SHAMEFUL ACT.......

    SO MANY TRIBUNAL/ COURT CASES.... SO MANY JUDGMENTS..... STILL THE EPISODE CONTINUES.....

    AS SOMEONE POINTED OUT, WILL THE GOVT(S) GO TO HON SC AS IF THEY ARE THE ONES CHEATED?

    YES. THEY WILL GO... ONLY TO BE THROWN OUT AT THE VERY POINT OF ENTRY ITSELF.......

    Regards,

    vnatarajan
    when retirees should be happily enjoying their retired life they are still being dragged into rubbish! what a shame this babudom is.

  6. #1246
    Member Imayan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    59

    Default Benefits of Judgement dt. 29.4.2013

    Hon'ble Delhi HC has quoted the following in their Judgement dt. 29.4.2013 :

    "26.........
    As a result, all these petitions succeed and mandamus is issued to the respondents to refix the pension of the petitioners accordingly within a period of two months and pay the arrears of pension within two months.....

    8.We are in complete agreement with the reasoning of the Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court and adopt the same and do not burden ourselves any further......."

    Mandamus for petitioners.
    How about non-petitioners ?
    How do we get the benefits faster ?

    Best regards,

    Imayan
    Last edited by Imayan; 01-05-2013 at 10:07 AM.

  7. #1247
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    THE GOVT'S WRIT PETITION 1535 of 2012 was against the CGS29PA & others but the litigation issue they raised was branding the PR BENCH CAT'S VERDICT OF 1 11 2011 IN OA 655 OF 2010 AS ERRONEOUS.

    Since this WP is DISMISSED AND THE PR CAT JUDGMENT IS UPHELD, THE DIRECTIVES GIVEN BY THE PR BENCH CAT ON 1 11 2011 IN THE OPERATIVE PARA OF THE SAID JUDGMENT STANDS NOW.( Revised pension to be in ternms of the Gaz Resolution dt 29 08 2008 without dilution by OMs of 3/14 Oct 2008, D o Effect 1 1 2006; arrears to be paid within 3 months then etc)

    CGS29PA Pensioners/ Others had agreed to keep the Contempt petition (filed by them after 90 days of 14 11 2011- viz D o Receipt of Judment copy by DOPPW) ) against Govt at the PR BENCH CAT pending till the verdict of DHC, which has happend now.

    CONTEMLPT SHALL BE REVOKED at the PR BENCH CAT-
    PR BENCH CAT JUDGMENT COVERS ALL AGGRIEVED / MPB AFFCTED PENSIONERS , irrespective of whether they are litigants aor not.-

    FASTER?- no option than to approach CAT thru contempt revocation- as the Govt is known to be indifferent/ immune to Court verdicts.
    Govt will delay by trying to go to HSC with a SLP (shamelessly - only to get a humiliation at the ntry point itself....)

    But the legal hurdles and harassments inflicted by Govt functionaries on aged pensioners will have its own repurcussions ...... when the elections come up.........

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 01-05-2013 at 12:37 PM.

  8. #1248
    Member Imayan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Thanks a lot,Mr. Natarajan,

    We compliment you , being a lead crusader for the pensioners.
    We will, certainly, follow your valuable advice in this regard.
    Best regards,

    Imayan

  9. #1249
    Senior Member G.Ramdas is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    185

    Default

    Dear Friends,
    Congrats to S-29 pensioners!Special appreciation to leaders - VN and Kanaujia and all others for leading the pensioners in the right direction!
    G Ramdas

  10. #1250
    Junior Member captkhanna is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    New Delhi
    Posts
    21

    Wink

    Congratulations to all who have been fighting this battle led and initiated by Shri V N Natrajan Jee. But the battle is not fully won. All of us have been part of the now degraded and 'finger me and finger everyone' system. Our times were slightly better as objectivity and positivity was not abandoned by most of us. The present incumbents, specially in the positions of power, are into depravity and enjoy putting the veterans in as much difficulty as they can by denying them their rightful dues. But truth has to prevail ultimately.
    Let us hope DOPT mandrins show some heart to accept their mistake and issue OM to implement the Court's directions immediately.

  11. #1251
    Member Imayan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Revival of the contempt petition will certainly shake DOP.

  12. #1252
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Not at all...
    vnatarajan

    PS:

    I meant that any SYSTEM OF JUSTICE can correct only those who respect LAW AND LEGALITY.
    OUR BABUDOM HAS GONE BEYOND THAT. More than 40 Tribunal/ HC unanimous verdicts and yet no reprieve for the pensioners?
    THEY FRAME "NATIONAL LITIGATION POLICY" AND IN TERMS OF THAT, any APPEAL- PETITIONS filed AGAINST PRO-PENSIONER JUDGMENTS MUST BE WORTH THE PAPER THAT ADORNs TOILETS..... because most of such judgments are unanimous/ clear/ precise to the point!
    I am beng harsh and sarcastic as the LIMIT OF PATIENCE of very old pensioners are being tested again and again by a very few at the lower end of heirarchy ahich goes UNCHECKED/ UNBRIDLED by the higher ups- a sheer act of OMISSION OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY!

    Yet they hope for PERFORMANCE BONUS running into lakhs of Rupees for each at the top, every year- a new privilege ( in the pipeline....?) only for babudom.........

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 05-05-2013 at 03:05 PM. Reason: adding substance- more and more...making things clear....

  13. #1253
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default



    PLEASE CIRCULATE /PUT THIS ON EVERY POSSIBLE WEBSITE/ SEND EMAILS ETC

    DEAR PRE 2006 PENSIONERS/ OTHERS INTERESTED,

    To illustrate the magnitude of the WIDESPREAD DISCONTENTMENT OF THE CIVIL AND MILITARY PRE 2006 PENSIONERS and the TOTAL INDIFFERENCE OF THE RECKLESS ADAMANT UNWILLING AUTHORITIES CONCERNED DESPITE SEVERAL TRIBUNAL AND COURT JUDGMENTS, a table (draft) prepared compiling the judgments delivered so far on the SCPC CORRECT MODIFIED PARITY, is reproduced hereunder:

    (Pl read seriatum the column data)


    LIST OF COURT CASES WITH JUDGEMENTS ON MODIFIED PARITY FROM 1-1-2006
    FOR Pre-2006 PENSIONERS

    S.No. Court/Tribunal Petition No & Year First Petitioner No. of Cases /Petitions Date of Judgement Remarks

    1 AFT- PB Delhi OA 139/2009 Col. PK Kapur 1 30/06/2010
    2 AFT- PB Delhi OA 24/2010 Lt.Comm Avtar Singh 2 14/09/2010
    3 AFT- Chandigarh OA-277/2010 Romesh Chand 9 01/11/2010
    4 AFT- Chandigarh OA-257/2010 Jagdish Chandar 6 25/11/2010
    5 CAT- PB Delhi OA-655/2010 Central Govt SAG(S-29) Pensioners 4 01/11/2011
    6 CAT- Ernakulam OA-843/2010 S29&S 26 SP Pillai 1 24/11/2011
    7 AFT - PB-Delhi OA- 106/2009 Wg.Comdr. VS Tomar 3 07/12/2011
    8 AFT - Hyderabad OA- 568/2010 S 29 Dr.Kotra 3 30/12/2011
    9 CAT- PB Delhi OA-201/2010 ML Gulati 1 29/02/2012
    10 CAT-PB Delhi OA- 126/2011 Wg.Comdr. 2 16/08/2012
    11 Pb & Hy High Court CWP 19641/2009 RKAggarwal &Ors 8 21/12/2012
    12 Uttrakhand HC WP(S/S)584/2012 ASI (M) Vinod Singh & Ors 7 15-3 2013 Revision of Pension ordered from 1-1-2006
    13 Delhi High Court WP (C)1535/2012 bbUOI vs CG SAG (S 29) Pensioners 4 29/04/2013 Petition against PR CAT Judgement in OA 655-2010 dismissed.

    AREN'T THE GOI/ CONCERNED MINISTRIES/ DEPARTMENTS OF DOPPW-DOE-DOLA VOLATING THE NATIONAL LITIGATION POLICY LEFT AND RIGHT?

    ARE THE BABUDOM ABOVE LAW OF THE NATION- AS IF THEY HAVEA RIGHT TO DISOBEY EVERY COURT ORDER? EVRY LAW-MAKER APPEARS TO BE BENT ON BEING A LAW BREAKER!

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 13-05-2013 at 07:32 AM.

  14. #1254
    Member RPGoswami is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    52

    Default

    //May be this list can be brought to the notice of the nevv Lavv Minister & an;d hope for a suitable reaction. May be
    e

  15. #1255
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default


    What an innocent way of hoping for a solution from a "lawyer turned politician"?

    PL IGNORE IF WHAT I WRITE HERE IS WRONG....... MY MEMORY IF CORRECT............. ( ALL REAADING THIS MUST PARDON ME IF I AM WRONG.....)

    HE IS THE PERSON WHO POOH-POOHED THE PRE 2006 RETD IIT PROFS GROUP/DELEGATION WHEN THEY APPROACHED HIM (HE WAS THEIR MINISTER FOR HUMAN RESOURCE AND HIGHER EDUCATION ETC AT THAT TIME) FOR A SOLUTION AFTER OUR (OA 655/2010 CGSAGPA VS UOI ) PR BENCH CAT VERDICT OF 1 11 2011 AND HE EVEN WENT TO THE EXTENT OF REMARKING THAT GOVT HAS EVERY RIGHT TO DEFEND THEIR ACTIONS UP TO HON SC AND NONE CAN FIND FAULT WITH IT (GOI) IF THEY WENT TO DHC FOR APPEAL. ON FURTHER ARGUMENTS, HE SARCASTICALLY PARRIED TO TELL THEM THAT HE CAN SUGGEST A GOOD COUNSEL FOR FIGHTING THEIR CASE..... SOME RETD IIT -PROF READING THIS MAY CONFIRM.....
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    IF THIS NEWS/ INFORMATUON FOUND IN THE WEB IS CORRECT, ........ sometimes ONE may even oblige people like Dawood Ibrahim as amicus curie ( A.C. ) if what I have come across is correct:

    State Through CBI Vs. Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar & Ors [1997] INSC 529 (7 May 1997)
    M.K. MUKHERJEE, G.T. NANAVATI, B.N. KIRPAL
    ACT:

    HEADNOTE:

    Present:
    Hon'ble Mr.Justice M.K. Mukherjee Hon'ble Mr.Justice G.T. Nanavati Hon'ble Mr.Justice B.N. Kirpal Ashok Desai, Attorney General, and Altaf Ahmad, Additional Solicitor General, Pallav Shishodia, P. Parmeswaran, Advs.

    with them for the appellant.

    Kapil Sibal, Sr. Adv. (A.C.), Ashok Grover, Sr. Adv. Rajiv Sharma, Adv. (A.C.), T.C. Sharma, Ajay Sharma and Ms. Neelam Sharma, Advs., with them for the Respondents.

    The following Judgment of the Court was delivered
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It will be a miracle if he really "implements the DHC verdict in toto......"
    Why not help pensioners - as helping.......?

    vnatarajan

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 13-05-2013 at 07:37 AM. Reason: Editorial corrections

  16. #1256
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default



    DEAR PRE 2006 PENSIONERS/ OTHERS INTERESTED,

    THIS IS IN CONTINUATION OF THE POST AT SL NO 1253 REG. THE SETTLED MODIFIED PARITY CASES- JUDGMENTS DELIVERED SO FAR.

    SHRI MLK JI HAS PREPARED THE FULL LIST, WHICH HAD BEEN ABRIDGED INTO A SMALLER TABLE BY SHRI N P MOHAN VIDE MY POST AT SL NO 1253.

    NOW I REPRODUCE SHRI MLK JI'S LIST HERE - AND AS IT IS A LONG ONE, I MAY HAVE TO SPLIT THE SAME IN PARTS.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (NB: Pl read the titles of columns seriatum and then access the inof on each case seriatum)

    CASES OF PRE 2006 PENSIONERSS IN VARIOUS COURTSAGAINST WHICH JUDGEMENTSFOR GRANTING MODIFIED PARITY HAVE ALREADYBEEN RECEIVED, AS ON 14.05.2013.

    Ite m HEARD BY PETITION NO. & YEAR LEAD PETITIONER NEXT DATE FIXED FOR HEARING REMARKS IN BRIEF

    1 AFT-PB Delhi OA 139/2009 Lt.Col.PK Kapur DOJ 30.06.2010 * Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    2 AFT-PB Delhi OA 24/2010 Lt.Com.AvtarSingh DOJ 14.09.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    3 AFT-PB Delhi OA 270/2010 Sq.Ldr. V K Jain DOJ 14.09.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    4 AFT Chandigarh OA 277/2010 Romesh Chand DOJ 01.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    5 AFT Chandigarh OA 312/2010 OP Singh DOJ 01.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    6 AFT Chandigarh OA 313/2010 MS Minhas DOJ 01.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    7 AFT Chandigarh OA 314/2010 YS Nijjar DOJ 01.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    8 AFT Chandigarh OA 325/2010 Dildar Singh Sahi DOJ 01.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    9 AFT Chandigarh OA 326/2010 Gurlochan Singh DOJ 01.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    10 AFT Chandigarh OA 327/2010 Gurmeet Singh DOJ 01.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    11 AFT Chandigarh OA 445/2010 Balwant Singh DOJ 01.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    12 AFT Chandigarh OA 476/2010 Karam Chand DOJ 01.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    13 AFT Chandigarh OA 257/2010 Jagdish Chandar DOJ 25.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    14 AFT Chandigarh OA 409/2010 N N Sud DOJ 25.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    15 AFT Chandigarh OA 410/2010 HS Tonque DOJ 25.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    16 AFT Chandigarh OA 521/2010 GS Kang DOJ 25.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    17 AFT Chandigarh OA 522/2010 SS Matharu DOJ 25.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    18 AFT Chandigarh OA 346/2010 DOJ 25.11.2010 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    19 CAT-PB Delhi OA 306/2010 D L Vohra s29 DOJ 01.11.2011 Modified Parity case. OA allowed to refix pension in 3 months as per OM dt 29.08.08.
    20 CAT-PB Delhi OA 507/2010 PPS Gambhir s29 DOJ 01.11.2011 Modified Parity case. OA allowed to refix pension in 3 months as per OM dt 29.08.08.
    21 CAT-PB Delhi OA 3079/2009 s29 and s30 Pensioners Association DOJ 01.11.2011 Modified Parity case. OA allowed to refix pension in 3 months as per OM dt 29.08.08.
    22 CAT-PB Delhi OA 655/2010 s29 pen.Association DOJ 01.11.2011 Modified Parity case. OA allowed to refix pension in 3 months as per OM dt 29.08.08.
    23 CAT Ernakulam OA 843/2010 S29 and s26 S.Parmasivan Pillai & Ors.24.11.2011 The prayer was for modified parity and for counting of special pay for pension. OA allowed.
    24 AFT-PB/Delhi OAs 106 / 2009,76/ 2011 and 24/2011 Wg.Comm. V S Tomar & Ors. Vs. UOl DOJ 07.12.2011 Modified parity case. OA allowed.
    25 CAT Hydrabad OA 568/2010 s29 pensioners Dr. Kotra & Ors. DOJ 30.12.2011 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    26 CAT Hydrabad 0A931/2010 Clubbed With OA 568/2010 s26 Pensioners. DOJ 30.12.2011 Modified Parity case. OA allowed.
    27 CAT-PB Delhi OA 201/2010 M L Gulati s29 Vs UOI DOJ29.02.2012 Modified parity case. OA allowed.
    28 AFT-PB Delhi OA 126 of 2011 Wg.Comm.KG Rao Vs UOl DOJ 16.08.2012 Modified parity case. OA allowed.
    29 AFT-PB Delhi OA 289 of 2011 Lt.Col.BGV Kumar Vs UOl DOJ 16.08.2012 Modified parity case. OA allowed.
    30 Pun. & Har. HC CWP19641/2009 RK Agarwal (s29) Rtd.CEEs and XENs DOJ 21.12.2012. Modified Parity case. CWP allowed by the Hon. P & H High Court
    31 Pun. & Har. HC CWP19642/2009 Satish Bhalla (s29) DOJ 21.12.2012.Modified Parity case. CWP allowed by the Hon. P & H High Court
    32 Pun. & Har. HC CWP3452/2010 0 P Kapur (s29) DOJ 21.12.2012. Modified Parity case. CWP allowed by the Hon. P & H High Court
    33 Pun. & Har. HC CWP12638/2010 M L Kansal (s29) DOJ 21.12.2012. Modified Parity case. CWP allowed by the Hon. P & H High Court
    34 Pun. & Har. HC CWP20725/2010 RK Sehgal (s29) DOJ 21.12.2012. Modified Parity case.CWP allowed by the Hon. P & H High Court
    35 Pun. & Har. HC CWP20726/2010 R K Bali (s29) DOJ 21.12.2012. Modified Parity case. CWP allowed by the Hon. P & H High Court
    36 Pun. & Har. HC CWP20727/2010 B K Jain (s29) DOJ 21.12.2012. Modified Parity case. CWP allowed by the Hon. P & H High Court
    37 Pun. & Har. HC CWP20753/2010 CK Gupta (s29) DOJ 21.12.2012. Modified Parity case. CWP allowed by the Hon. P & H High Court
    38 Delhi HC WPCs1535/2012, 2348/2012, 2349/2012 and 2350/2012 UOI Vs CG SAG s29 Pensioners Association and four other Respondents. DOJ 29.04.2013 Modified Parity case. Hon.ble Court dismissed all the four UOI Petitions and upheld the Judgment of Hon.ble CAT-PB in OA Nos. 3079/2009, 306/2010, 507/2010 and 655/2010 dated 01.11.2011.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Modified Parity means computation of revised pension of pre 2006 pensioners on the basis of Union Cabinet approved6 CPC Report Para 5.1.47, given in item 12 of the GOI, Ministry of Personnel (DOP) Resolution No. No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 29.8.2008, which lays down that The fixation of pension will be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than fifty percent of the sum of the minimum of the pay in the pay band and the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from the pensioner had retired (5.1.47). It may not be out of place to say that instead of this formula, MOP(DOP) in collusion with MOF(DOE), with the approval of Minister of State, by subsequent issue of OM No.38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 03.10.2008, to modify the revised pension computation for mula and to mean that. The pension calculated at 50% of the minimum of pay in the band plus grade pay would be calculated (i) at the minimum of the pay in the pay band (irrespective of the pre-revised scale of pay) plus the grade pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale.. This modification meant reduction in revised pension of those who retired from higher pre revised pay scale but were clubbed together with lower pre revised scale, to create a pay band. This modification was not only unauthorized by the Union Cabinet but was also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The Govt. of India, in face of so many litigations, vide MOP(DOP) OM dated 28.1.20.13, accepted its mistake and decided to correct the formula of revised pension as given in Resolution dated 29.8.2008 but prospectively i. e. from 24.9.2012 onwards but not from date of implementation of the 6 CPC Report i. e. 1.1.2006. Since the date of effect is not 1.1.2006. all the above Judgments are yet to be COMPLIED AND HENCE AND HENCE ATLEAST ONE CONTEMPT PETITION IS AT PRESENT UNDER CONSIDERATION OF THE CATPB , NEW DELHI.
    (Thanks to Shri MLK ji for the entire compilation and foot-note)

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 16-05-2013 at 03:14 PM. Reason: adding footnote;

  17. #1257
    Member ssharma is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vnatarajan View Post
    ATLEAST ONE CONTEMPT PETITION IS AT PRESENT UNDER CONSIDERATION OF THE CATPB , NEW DELHI.
    (Thanks to Shri MLK ji for the entire compilation and foot-note)

    vnatarajan

    I'm very happy to know about the contempt petition shri VN ji and thanks to Shri mlkji for the compilation.

  18. #1258
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Unless there is a stay from the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the decision of the Delhi High Court and the Government did not implement the decision within the stipulated time, there would anothr casse of contempt petition in the High Court against the Officers concerfned.

    Gopal Krishan

  19. #1259
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default



    Dear Interested,

    Shri GK is perfectly right.
    AS I STATED EARLIER, YOU CAN ONLY "GOVERN" CITIZENS/THEIR SYSTEMS IF ONLY THEY HAVE RESPECT FOR "GOVERNANCE"

    similarly, if one had respect for law and justice, the 40 Odd Mod Parity (Civil- Military- Tribunals-HCs) cases's judgments covered in 13 episiodes involving a large chunk of Court/ Judicial hours- Hon Judgs' involvment, expending a huge amount of tax payers' money , by this time the ORDERS OF HON DHC AND P & H HCs/ PR CAT'S JUDGMENT ETC would have been implemented in toto.

    INSTEAD, THE MALADVENTURE MAY CONTINUE AT HON SC WITH AN SLP.....

    Now for the first contempt:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (Extracted from the Cause List of Pr bench Cat- pl chk for accuracy.....)

    COURT NO: I DAILYCAUSE LIST
    CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH NEW DELHI
    LIST OF CASES TO BE HEARD ON FRIDAY THE 24 TH DAY OF MAY, 2013 AT 10.30 A.M.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SYED RAFAT ALAM CHAIRMAN
    HON’BLE DR. BIRENDRA KUMAR SINHA ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CONTEMPT PETITIONS
    FOR DIRECTIONS (i.e. MAs/RAs)

    ----------------------------------------------------
    23 MA 1391/2013 CENTRAL GOVT. S.A.G.(S-29)
    SH. TARUN GUPTA

    CP. 158/2012 V/S ------ -----------------------------
    O.A. 655/2010

    vs S.......... K..............& ORS
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    vnatarajan

  20. #1260
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    AS THE MATTER HAS TO BE PLACED BEFORE A "FULL/TRIPLE BENCH" AND NOT A "DOUBLE BENCH" AS LISTED ON 24TH MAY, A NEW DATE 28TH MAY 2013 IS NOW GIVEN FOR THE DIRECTIONS.

    IT IS LIKELY THAT ORDER FOR SENDING NOTICES MAY BE ISSUED. HEARING CD BE AFTER VACATION ONLY- PROBABLY ON 16TH JULY 2013.

    vnatarajan

+ Reply to Thread
Page 63 of 77 FirstFirst ... 13 53 61 62 63 64 65 73 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Grade pay for past pensioners
    By yenyem in forum Pensioners
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 28-12-2012, 05:43 PM
  2. Injustice done by cpc
    By balajeeva97 in forum Pay Fixation
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 29-05-2009, 07:09 PM
  3. pre 1996 Pensioners _ parity
    By RSundaram in forum Pensioners
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 02-12-2008, 08:22 PM
  4. Scales for new joinees after 2006
    By anu_dual in forum Pay Fixation
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 18-09-2008, 02:23 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