+ Reply to Thread
Page 71 of 77 FirstFirst ... 21 61 69 70 71 72 73 ... LastLast
Results 1,401 to 1,420 of 1540

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

  1. #1401
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default



    (this next post are part of a draft prepared in haste---- not for circulation-an aid for my speech 0

    PENSIONERS' DAY/ NAKARA JUDGMENT DAY CELEBRATIONS THIS YEAR - ON 17 DEC 2013 -BY THE AIFPA(REGD),CHENNAI- A FEDERATION WITH 250 STRONG AFFILIATED ASSOCITIONS IN ITS STRUCTURE - WITH AGGREGATE MEMEBRSHIP RUNNING TO SEVERAL THOUSAND PENSIONERS/ FAMILY PENSIONERS, PIONEERING FEDERATION WHICH PUBLISHES THE FAMOUS JOURNAL -"PENSIONERS' ADVOCATE"- (EXTRACTS OF MY TALK -PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS ...)
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DEAR AGGRIEVED PRE 2006 PENSIONERS FIGHTING FOR ARREAR PPAYMENT- JUSTICE WITHHELD DISREGARDING EVEN THE FINAL JUDGMENTS / LEGAL FINALITY.



    CELEBRATION OF PENSIONERS' DAY ON EVERY 17TH DEC IS TO PAY TRIBUTE TO THE VETERAN CRUSADER LATE SHRI DS NAKARA WHO FOUGHT FOR THE EQUALITY AMONG THE HOMOGENOUS CLASS OF PENSIONERS WAY BACK IN LATE 70s WHICH LED TO THE FAMOUS NAKARA CASE JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 17 DEC 1982 BY A CONSTUTIONAL FIVE JUDGE BENCH OF THE HSC.


    THIS YEAR, ON THE PENSIONERS' DAY, 17th DECEMBER 2013 , I HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF ADDRESSING A GATHERING OF NEARLY 200 AND ODD OLD /SR CITIZEN- PENSIONERS , VIP GUESTS OF HONOUR ( HON MEMBER JUSTICE ...................,TN PENSION ADALAT; HON JUSTICE (RETD) ...............), MHC/ Also perhaps formerly Cahirman, TN Pension Adalat ), SOME MEMBERS OF THE PRE 2006 S29-30 GROUPS , AND OTHER INVITEES AS A PART OF THE CELEBRATION ORGANISED BY THE ALL INDIA FEDERATION OF PENSIONERS' ASSOCIATIONs (REG), CHENNAI . I WAS GREETED / ACKNOWLEDGED IN RECOGNITION OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS MADE TOWARDS CORRECTING THE INJUSTICE INFLICTED UPON SEGMENTS OF PRE 2006/OLDER PENSIONERS AS A RESULT OF DENIAL OF CORRECT SIXTH CPC MODIFIED PARITY AND PROMOTING AN AWARENESS AMONG THE LOT OF AGGRIEVED PENSIOERS . MY GRATEFUL THANKS TO ALL IN THIS REGARD.


    THIS MESSAGE IS TO SERVE AS A RECOLLECTION OF WHAT I TRIED TO CONVEY AS PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THIS MEMORABLE DAY...... VIEWS CONVEYED BY ME WERE AS FOLLOWS (some point shown in brackets are for elaboration...):

    A.ON NAKARA CASE JUDGMENT:

    1. HOMOGENOUS CLASS OF PENSIONERS CAN NOT BE DISCRIMINATED FOR / OR DENIED EQUALITY FOR LIBERALISED PENSION FORMULATION/ PROVISIONS , IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR DATEs OF RETIREMENT OR THE DATE OF EFFECTIVITY VIZ. CUT-OFF DATE. EVEN TODAY, THE PRINCIPLE EMERGES DIRECTLY/INDIRECTLY IN MANY JUDGMENTS OF COURTS/ TRIBUNALS AND IN MANY VERDICTS IT IS RULED THAT "PAST PENSIONERS CAN NOT BE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST THE PRSENT PENSIONERS AMONG THE HOMOGENOUS CLASS".


    2.ALL PENIONERS WHOSE PENSIONS ARE GIOVERNED BY THE CCS (PENSION) RULES, 1972 BELONG TO THE SAME SCHEME / AND FORM A HOMOGENOUS CLASS.

    3.ADVERSE JUDGMENTS THAT HAVE COME UP AGAINST THE NAKARA JUDGMENT/ NAKARA RATIO OR PRINCIPLE (DESCRIBED IN SL NO 2) ARE MAINLY DUE TO THE GREED/ MISCONSTRUED DEMANDS MADE THRU LITIGATIONS BY SOME OLD PENSIONERS (MISLED BY LEGAL COUNSELLING ALSO) .

    4.NAKARA RATIO/ PRINCIPLE ADDRESSED STRICTLY THE "PENSION" ONLY (AT BEST "EMOLUMENTS") AND THUS INVOLVED ONLY MONTHLY PYMENTS PERMISSIBLE AS PER THE RULES PREVALENT AT THAT POINT OF TIME. IT NEVER COVERED THE "ONE-TIME RETIRAL BENEFITS LIKE GRATUITY/ LEAVE ENCSHMENT ETC" OR "SPECIAL BENEFITS-(LIKE SPL PAY IN LIEU OF LACK OF HIGHER LEVEL PROMOTIONAL POSTS/ NPA/ RUNNING TIME ALLOWANCE ETC)" OR " ADDITION OF DR" etc. HENCE PENSIONER CASES DEMANDING ENHANCED REVISED PENSION BEYOND THE REACH OF NAKARA JUDGMENT ESSENCE WERE DISMISSED / DISALLOWED. SOME MORE ADVERSE PRONOUNCEMENTS DID USE STRONG EXPRESSIONS TO CONVEY THAT "NAKARA JUDGMENT" HAS WORN THIN ALREADY OR HAD BEEN WATERED DOWN ALREADY OVER A PERIOD OF TIME .

    5.HOWEVER, IN NONE OF THE JUDGMENTS CITING THE NAKARA JUDGMENT, THE ESSENCE OF THE NAKARA JUDGMENT - AS ENUNCIATED IN SL NO 1 HAD BEEN CONTRADICTED. IT IS ONLY THE INFRUCTUOUS DEMANDS BEYOND THE REACH OF NAKARA RATIO/PRINCIPLE THAT HAVE BEEN DISALLOWED. IN ALL AVOURABLE JUDGMENTS , THE PRINCIPLE HAD BEEN ALLOWED, UPHOLDING THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY IN TERMS OF ARTICLE 14.

    B. ON SIXTH CPC MODIFIED PARITY- LEGAL PROCEEDINGS SO FAR- EMERGENCE OF THE POLICY OF "MINIMUM GUARANTEED PENSION" WEF 24 SEPT 2012-EFFORTS TO REALISE ARREARS FOR THE ERIOD 1 1 2006 TILL 23 9 2012:



    AT THE OUTSET, DURING THE OPENING REMARKS ITSELF , I HAD INTRODUCED THE PIONEERING CORE MEMBER/RTI ACTIVISTS OF THE GROUP WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THIS BATTLE FOR JUSTICE- S/SHRI A RAJAGOPALAN (S29),V RAGHURAMAN(S29), G RAMADAS (S30),R SUNDARARAJAN (S30) , P K RANGANATHAN (S29) AND ACKNOWLEDGED THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS . I ALSO EXPLAINED THE EFFORTS MADE THRU RTI EXERCISES, SOCIAL NETWORK SITES TO SPREAD AWARENESS, FORMATION OF THE 660 MEMBERS- STRONG CGSAG(S2(PA (REGD),DELHI AND THE RESOURCES THAT HAD TO BE BUILT UP TO FIGHT THE CASE TILL THE END.


    1.THE SIXTH CPC CORRECT MODIFIED PARITY HAS BEEN MORE OR LESS VITIATED TO BE A MOTIVATED DISPARITY.

    2.SIXTH CPC CORE RECOMMENDATION FOR REVISING PENSION OF PRE-2006 PENSIONERS ACCEPTED BY CABINET AND GAZETTED/ NOTIFIED ON 29 AUG 2008 WERE SUCCESSIVELY ALTERED AND MODIFIED THRU LATER INSTRUCTIONS AND CALARIFICATIONS ( in reality they were MODIFICATIONS) ON 1 SEPT 2008/3 & 14 OCT 2008 ETC.

    3. THE ORIGINAL BASIS OF "MINIMUM OF THE PAY IN THE PAY BAND CORRESPONDING TO THE PRE-REVISED PAY SCALE FROM WHICH THE PENSIONER RETIRED" WAS UNAUTHORISED LY MODIFIED TO THE BASIS OF "MINIMUM OF THE PAY BAND IRRESPECTIVE OF PRE-REVISED PAY SCALES OF THE PENSIONERS" . THIS UNAUTHORISED MODIFICATION MADE BY LOWER HEIRARCHY IN ADMINISTRATION WENT UNCHECKED and WAS ENDORSED WITHOUT SCRUTINY UPTO HIGHEST LEVELS AND EVEN THE SIGNATURE OF HON. MOS WAS OBTAINED , BUT NOT PUT UP TO CABINET FOR FINAL APPROVAL (In effect it was a deliberate/unauthorized modification of a CABINET DECSION).

    4. THIS UNAUTHROISED MODIFICATION RESULTED IN REDUCED PENSIONS FOR SEGMENTS OR ALL OF AT LEAST 8 PRE REVISED PAY SCALE PENSIONERS, THE REDUCED AMOUNTS OF BASIC PENSION RANGING FROM RS 198 TO RS 3650 PM WEF 1 1 2006. (My estimate is nearly 2.5 lakh pre 2006 pensioners might have suffered the loss)

    5.ALL APPEALS WERE REJECTED EN MASSE FOR CORRECTION. RELIEF WAS SLECTIVELY GIVEN ONLY TO PRE 2006 S30 SCALE PENSIONERS DUE TO A HIGHER LEVEL ITERVENTION/ AND THROUGH RECOMMENDATION OF COMMITTEE OF OROP . SIMILARLY AFFECTED OTHERS WERE IGNORED IN PSITE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS BY OROP COMMITTEEE.

    6. AGGRIEVED LOT OF PENSIONERS WENT FOR LITIGATION HAVING NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE. . PR BENCH GAVE THE LANDMARK JUDGMENT ON 1 11 2011 IN FAVOUR OF THE PENSIONERS FOR IMPLEMENTING THE GAZ RESOLUTION DT 29 08 2008 IN TO TO WEF 1 1 2006 AND PAYMENT OF ARREARS THEREOF. THIS JUDGMENT WAS COMMON TO FOUR GROUPS OF PRE 2006 S29 PETITIONERS.


    7.THE GOVT CHALLENGED THE CAT VERDICT IN DHC BY FILING FOUR WP(C)S WHICH WERE DISMISSED BY A COMMON VERDICT BY DHC ON 29 APRIL 2013. GOVT SINGLED OUT THE GROUP OF CGSAGPA TO FILE ONLY ONE SLP (LEAVING THE 3SISTER GROUPS) IN THE HSC against them WHICH WAS DISMISSED ON 29 JULY 2013. THIS WAS FOLLOWED BY A REVIEW PETITION WHICH WAS ALSO DISMISSED ON 12 NOV 2013.

    8. IN SO FAR AS THE CASE INITIATED BY THE CGSAGPA - OA 655/2010 IS CONCERNED , LEGAL FINALITY IS ALREADY ACHIEVED FOR ALL AGGRIEVED PENSIONERS. THE GOVT., INSTEAD OF IMPLEMENTING THE VERDICTS, HAS CHOSEN TO PROLONG THE LEGAL BATTLE AS A COMPULSIVE LITIGANT-VIOLATING NLP, AND FILED 3 MORE SLPs AGAINST THE 3 SISTER GROUPS MUNCHED UP IN THE SAME COMMON JUDGMENTS OF THE TRIBUNAL/DHC, MUCH AGAINST THE LEGAL PROVISIONS. HOWEVER THE CASES ARE YET TO BE ADMITTED AND SHALL BE LISTED FOR ORAL HEARING ON 4 FEB 2014 FOR ADMISSION IF NAY/ NOTICES TO BE SENT ACCORDINGLY BY HSC.

    9.CONTEMPT REVIVAL PETITION AT PR BENCH CAT WAS SCHEDUULED TO COME UP FOR 18 DEC 2013(. BUT NOW FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REASONS, IT WILL COME UP ON 15 JAN 2013).

    10. NEVERTHELESS, ALL THESE EFFORTS HAVE RESULTED IN THE GOVT. TO COME UP WITH THE OM DT 28 JAN 2013 INDUCTING THE CABINET APPROVED POLICY OF "MINIMUM GUARANTEED PENSION" WHICH IS NOTHING BUT THE CORRECT Sixth CPC MODIFIED PARITY, BUT AGAIN A TRICK IS PLAYED TO MAKE THE EFFECTIVE DATE AS 24 SEPT 2013 INSTEAD OF 1 JAN 2006 , THUS PROLONGING THE LEGAL BATTLE for realizing the arrear part . HOWEVER THIS NEW ORDER PROVIDES A GUARANTEE THAT IN FUTURE, OUR PENSIONS/ FAMILY PENSION AMOUNTS CAN NOT BE REDUCED BELOW THIS THRESHHOLD LEVEL BY ANY MISCHIEVOUS ORDERS.THIS OUTCOME IN 2013 IS QUITE SIGNIFICANT AFTER THE NAKARA PRINCIPLE OUTCOME IN 1982 .

    11.GOVT. IS USING A MISCHIEVOUS AND MISLEADING EXCUSE IN THEIR SUBMISSIONS TO TRIBUNALS/ COURTS VIZ THE "HUGE" FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS TO PAY OUT THE ARREARS. BUT AS MENTIONED IN NAKARA JUDGMENT, THE CG PENSION COMING UNDER CCS(PENSION)RULES IS NON-CONTRIBUTORY IN NATURE AND IT IS THE ONUS OF THE GOVT TO RESPECT ITS OWN RULES AND PAY PENSION THRU ITS BUDGET SUO MOTO, AS IN THE CASE OF EMPLOYEES GOVERNED BY CCS (PAY)RULES BEING PAID SALARY FROM THE GOVT BUDGET. MOREOVER THE ARREARS RELATE TO UNDISBURSED PENSION AMOUNTS ARISING OUT OF SIXTH CPC IMPLEMENTATION ORDERS/ ANOMALIES FOR WHICH BUDGET WAS DULY PROVIDED AND THEREFORE THE GOVT'S STAND CAN NOT BE ACCPETED. ( IN FACT GOVT. HAD ALREADY SAVED THIS AMOUNT/EARNED INTEREST NOTIONALLY ON IT !. MOREOVER IT HAD ARRANGED FOR PAYMENTS BEYOND THE SIXTH CPC RECOS. IN SOME CAES WITHOUT RAISING ANY OBJECTIONS (PEG RE 2006 S30/31/32 ).

    12.MANY MEMBERS REQUESTED FOR RAPID REALISATUION OF ARREAR PAYMENT FROM THE GOVT. AND I POINTED OUT THAT THE CGSAGPA WILL CONTINUE THE LEGAL BATTLE THAT IS GOING ON AND THE OUTCOME WILL CERTAINLY BRING OUT THE RESULT WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME-FRAME WHICH IS CONTROLLED BY THE LEGAL PROCESS. EVEN IF DOPPW ACTS POSITIVELY, IT IS THE DOE WHICH CREATES OBSTACLES IN IMPLEMENTING COURT VERDICTS QUOTING FINANCIAL REASONS.

    (C0NTD IN NEXT POST PL.)

    VNATARAJAN
    17/20 12 2013
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 22-12-2013 at 09:31 AM. Reason: typo

  2. #1402
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default



    (contd from previous post OF v natarajan- sl no 1401)

    C. SUGGESTIONS FOR 7TH CPC CONSIDERATIONS:

    1. FEDERATIONS/ASSOCIATIONS MUST TAKE NOTE OF REPETETIVE LEGAL DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF THE CPC WRONG IMPLEMENTATION ORDERS/ OMISSIONS IN RECOS ETC AND TAKE ADVANCE ACTIONS TO MAKE SUITABLE SUGGESTIONS....POINTS TO BE NOTED FOLLOW.

    2.IMPLEMENTATION OF SIXTH CPC RECO FOR REVISION OF PRE 2006 PENSIONS HAS LED TO A NUMBER OF LITIGATIONS , MAINLY DUE TO MISINTERPRETAION OF THE CORE RECO ITSELF. SCOPE OF MISINTERPRETAION MUST BE AVOIDED. RECOS MUST BE UNAMBIGUOUS. NO SCOPE FOR TINKERING/ ALTERING/ MODIFYING THE CORE RECOS MUST BE ALLOWED.

    3.AGAIN THE SIXTH CC CORE RECO'S SCOPE / ADDITIONS TO IT/ FITMENT FORMULATIONS ETC HAVE LED TO SEVERAL SUB-CLASSES OF PENSIONERS WITHIN THE HOMOGENOUS CLASS. EFFECTIVE MULTIPLUCAION FACTOR (MF) VARIES FROM 1.86 IN LOWER PAY BAND TO 3.10 .HIGHER PAY SCALE/PAY BAND PENSIONERS (HAG/ NOW SAG) ETC THIS IS UNFAIR .

    4.IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT PROVIDING THE THRESHHOLD LEVEL/ MINIMUM GUARANTEED PENSION (MGP) SHALL HAVE TO BE BASED ON "INDIVIDUAL'S LAST DRAWN PAY BASIS" RATHER THAM A GENERALISED STIPULATION LIKE "MINIMIUM OF THE PAY IN THE PAY BAND" BASIS TO AVOID ALLLITIGATIONS. THIS THRESHHOLD MGP LEVEL SHALL BE BASED ON THE MF THAT CAN (SHOULD) BE DECIDED TO BE SAME FOR ALL FROM BOTTOM TO TOP LEVELS.

    5.IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT OVER A PERIOD OF TWO REVISIONS, THE STAGES OF INCREMNETS IN RE-REVISED PAY SCALES GET SUCCESSIVELY MERGED - SAY FOR EG- FOUR STAGES OF S29 SCALE TAKING THE BASIC PAY TO 6700 IN IV CPC, GOT MERGED AND THE CONCORDANCE/.FIITMENT TABLE PROVIDED ONLY TWO REPLACEMENT STAGES IN THE V CPC REVISED OAY SCALE OF 18400-22400, THUS THE TOP BASIC OF 6700 NEARLY BOTTOMED TO 19400 BASIC, AND LATER IN THE IV CPC OUTCOME, ALL STAGES FROM 18400 UP TO 20900 WERE BUNCHED TO BE FITTED AT THE STAGE OF 44700/45950 PLUS GRADE PAY 10000!. IN EFFECT, ALL STAGES OF OLDER PAY SCALES GET PROGRESSIVELY MERGED IN SUCCESSIVE CPC FITMENTS AND COME TO THE LEVEL OF THE "MINIMUM OF THE PAY IN THE PAY BAND" ULTIMATELY , AS THE PAY BAND TAKES CARE OF ALL STAGES ACCORDINGLY WITH SUCCESSIVE MERGER OF DR COMPONENTS. (Financial implications will be very marginal, but this provision will go a ling way in avoiding litigations).

    6.In terms of the above, the expression "MINIMUM OF THE PAY IN THE PAY BAND" can be replaced by "LAST PAY DRAWN IN THE PAY BAND " in the Sixth CPC Core .Reco with incorporation of protective clauses like "IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FITMENT TABLES OF RP RULES" and subjecting to the condition of the UNIFORM MF (of say 2.75 to 3.0 for all).

    7. PROVISION FOR INCLUSION OF THE SPL PAY/ TECHNICAL PAY FOR PENSION, NPA (DOCTORS) FOR PENSION, RUNNING TIME ALLOWANCE FOR PENSION MUST NOT (REPEAT NOT) BE PLATEAUED OUT AFTER EVERY CPC RECOS AS THE SAME ARE NOT COVERED IN THEM. THESE MINOR ITEMS LEAD TO NUMEROUS LITIGATIONS.

    8.LIBERALISED PROVSION OF QUAL. SERVICE (LIKE 20 YRS INSTEAD OF 33 YRS) FOR FULL PENSION FORMULATION MUST BE AUTOMATICALLY ENVISAGED PROSPECTIVELY FOR ALL PAST ENSIONERS AND NO DISCRIMINATION MUST BE THERE.

    I CONCLUDED MY TALK EXPRESSING MY AND THE PENSIONERS' COMMUNUTIES' GRATEFUL THANKS TO THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF THE COUNTRY/ ITS HON JUDGES WHO HAD BEEN VERY FAST/ FAIR AND KIND IN PRONOUNCING IMPARTIAL VERDICTS WITHOUT MUCH LOSS OF TIME , SO FAR IN OUR JOURNEY FOR JUSTICE FROM CAT (NOV 2011) TO DHC (APRIL 2013) TO HSC ( SLP- JULY 2013) TO HSC (RP-NOV 2013)- etc.

    My thanks once again to the AIFPA for their gesture and cooperation in ALL the endeavors of the CGSAGPA and its members.

    V NATARAJAN
    17/20.12.2013
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 22-12-2013 at 09:27 AM.

  3. #1403
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default



    DEAR PRE 2006 AGGRIEVED SEGMENTS OF PENSIONERS (CIVIL & MILTARY)-

    DO U WANT TO KNOW THE UPDATE ON THIS "JOKERS' JOURNEY" - A TALE OF SICKENING AND MADDENING VOYAGE FOR JUSTICE INFLICTED BY THE JOKERS ON THE OLD HELPLESS PENSIONERS....?.....

    On your responses, I shall update the matter....

    Regards,
    vnatarajan

  4. #1404
    Member tymanagoli is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vnatarajan View Post


    DEAR PRE 2006 AGGRIEVED SEGMENTS OF PENSIONERS (CIVIL & MILTARY)-

    DO U WANT TO KNOW THE UPDATE ON THIS "JOKERS' JOURNEY" - A TALE OF SICKENING AND MADDENING VOYAGE FOR JUSTICE INFLICTED BY THE JOKERS ON THE OLD HELPLESS PENSIONERS....?.....

    On your responses, I shall update the matter....

    Regards,
    vnatarajan
    Yes please..
    I want to know on what grounds the govt. does not want to implement the orders from 1.1.2006 (and pay arrears) after having accepted their mistake and issued orders to implement correctly from sept2012/13?. On what grounds the govt. wants to keep the legitimate money belonging to old pensioners? Again, it is not the question of money as every senior citizen agrees but is for avoiding feeling cheated..
    Regards, Managoli

  5. #1405
    Junior Member captkhanna is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    New Delhi
    Posts
    21

    Angry VN. Sir jee. We have to stop the jokers taking over all 52 cards in the pack

    Quote Originally Posted by tymanagoli View Post
    Yes please..
    I want to know on what grounds the govt. does not want to implement the orders from 1.1.2006 (and pay arrears) after having accepted their mistake and issued orders to implement correctly from sept2012/13?. On what grounds the govt. wants to keep the legitimate money belonging to old pensioners? Again, it is not the question of money as every senior citizen agrees but is for avoiding feeling cheated..
    Regards, Managoli
    V N jee,
    You are right, the jokers are playing games to endlessly deny justice to us.
    But you at the forefront of our fight have to stop their mechanism and get us victory.
    Please enlighten us on status

  6. #1406
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default Injustice to pre-2006 pensioners

    Quote Originally Posted by captkhanna View Post
    V N jee,
    You are right, the jokers are playing games to endlessly deny justice to us.
    But you at the forefront of our fight have to stop their mechanism and get us victory.
    Please enlighten us on status
    We have no choice but wait and wait. The matter has been adjourned to April 2014.

    Gopal Krishan

  7. #1407
    Member tymanagoli is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Respected VNji,
    What constitutional/legal issue is there for the govt. to go for SLP/Curative? Or does it want to annul the previous HC decision and recover the amount from pensioners already paid in 2013?
    Regards, Managoli

  8. #1408
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default

    As pointed out by Shri Natarajan Sahib Jokers are playing games every where. In another case the initial representation was made to the Department of Pension and Pensioners Welfare in the last quarter of the year 2012. The same was passed on to the Department of expenditure as, according to the Department of Pension, the same pertained to them. That Department in turn felt that the same was of Department of Personnel and Training. As such the papers were transferred to the Department of Personnel. This Department, which is under the Prime Minister, after one year now feel that the same relates to the Department of Pension and Pernsioners Welfare. As such are planning to send the same to the Department of Pension and Pesioners Welfare, where from the jounrny of the representation started in the last quarter of 20012. Of course with out any concrete action on the same.
    Gopal Krishan
    Last edited by Gopal Krishan; 12-02-2014 at 06:10 PM.

  9. #1409
    Member RPGoswami is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    52

    Default

    Will acceptance of OROP for Defence Personnel lead to pension parity for the civilians also? Or a new fight has to be launched?

  10. #1410
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Without fight Government is not going to give anything, particularlyto the pensioners, as is clear from the number of CAT/Court cases.
    Gopal Krishan

  11. #1411
    Member Imayan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    59

    Question

    Latest "Magic Man" in the country is Shri Rahul Gandhi.
    Be it, increaring LPG cylinders to 12 , OROP etc. his intervention helps---towards solving problems. We have seen this happening now....

    Why can't senior citizen pensioners / pensioner's associations at New Delhi meet him and request his intervention towards sloving our sufferings.
    Wonders can happen !

    Imayan

  12. #1412
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    DEAR PRE 2006 AGGRIEVED SEGMENTS OF PRE 2006 PENSIONERS/ OTHERS INTERESTED,

    WHAT HAPPENED ON 17TH FEB 2012 AT PR BENCH CAT PROCEEDINGS IN CP 158 OF 2012 - CGSAGPA VS UOI/ SECY CONCERNED....

    A SENIOR OBSERVER HAD REPORTED:

    "Our Contempt Petition was taken up before the Full Bench of CAT today after lunch. To begin with the GOI junior Advocate wanted pass over of this item as their Special Advocate (Shri ........., formerly A......) would be coming a little later. This was opposed by our Advocate whereupon the Bench proceeded with the case.

    Our Advocate started the argument by saying that in our case the CAT order was passed on 1-11-2011 with the directive to re-fix the pension based on GOI Resolution dated 29-8-2008 within 3 months of the receipt of the order. Instead of complying with this, GOI preferred Writs in DHC which were also dismissed on 29-4-2013 and CAT verdict was upheld. Once again, GOI moved SLP in our case in HSC which was dismissed on 29-7-2013. Yet instead of complying with CAT verdict duly upheld by DHC and HSC, GOI preferred a Review Petition which was also dismissed on 12-11-2013. With this, our case has reached a finality and yet GOI has not implemented the CAT verdict which is a clear case of Contempt.
    He also pointed out that the argument of heavy financial implications is incorrect. First, the Pay Commission, while indicating the financial implications of their recommendations, had taken into account such parity. Even the Government had taken this into account while accepting these recommendations as contained in its Resolution dated 29-8-2008. There is thus no additional financial implications in implementing the accepted recommendation of the Pay Commission to allow parity between pre and post 1-1-2006 retirees at the minimum level only in the case of S 29 grade pensioners; if anything, the Government saved this amount over the last 5 years earning interest at the cost the affected pensioners. Second, the significantly much higher additional financial implications did not come in the way of benefiting the pensioners as well as serving officials in the 3 grades above and the grades below at the cost of only the S 29 pensioners, where in fact there was reduction as can be seen from the following particulars (as per table prepared by me):
    5th CPC scale Minimum pension as per 6th CPC After alterations by GOI

    Pre 1-1-2006 Post 1-1-2006 Pre 1-1-2006 Post 1-1-2006

    S 32 (24050-26000) 32885 32885 38883 (+5998) 38883 (+5998)

    S 31 (22400-26000) 30995 30995 37750 (+6755) 37750 (+6755)

    S 30 (22400-24400) 29995 29995 33500 (+3505) 33500 (+3505)

    S 29 (18400-22400) 26140 26140 23700 (-2440) 27350 (+1210)

    S 24 (14300-18300) 16245 16245 23050 (+6805) 23050 (+6805)



    NOTE: Figures in bracket in the last two columns indicate increase or decrease over CPC recommendations.
    It was also highlighted that the significantly higher increase over CPC recommendation in other grades above and below and even to post 1-1-2006 in S29 had much higher financial implications in perpetuity because it benefited much larger serving officers also. Consequently, high financial implications only in case of pre 1-1-2006 S 29 pensioners, where in fact there has been reduction is not based on facts. He also reiterated the age profile of our members, including death of about 25 members since the institution of proceedings in CAT. He therefore emphasised that this was a fit case for proceeding ahead for wanton disobedience of the Hon'ble Tribunal's order.
    Shri ................ who had come by this time started his arguments as under:
    (i) The OA in CAT was filed by Central Government SAG (S29) Pensioners Association and the Government is not aware who its members are. This only elicited a derisive laughter form the Bench and our Advocate (apparently this is hardly the stage to raise this point; if at all this should have been raised when the matter was before CAT and not after its verdict duly upheld by DHC and HSC).
    (ii) GOI issued OM dated 28-1-2013, with the approval of the Cabinet, allowing stepped up pension w.e.f. 24-9-2012 and this has not been challenged with the result it can not be questioned now to demand arrears for the period 1-1-2006 to 23-9-2012.
    This was countered later by our advocate in his reply drawing attention to the fact that CAT had already prior to that on 1-11-2011 directed the GOI to re-fix the pension based on GOI Resolution dated 29-8-2008 and that even DHC while dismissing the Writ and upholding CAT verdict had taken Note of this belated acceptance by GOI of the correct fixation. The same verdict has also been upheld by HSC while dismissing SLP and Review petition in our case. In any case, a judicial verdict upholding constitutional right to equality can not be nullified by a subsequent GOI decision.
    (iii) It was pleaded on behalf of GOI that HSC while dismissing the SLP had allowed him the liberty to raise all the points before the Tribunal in either appeal or contempt petition, which he was doing now and consequently, the CAT verdict can not be said to have achieved legal finality and consequently the question of non compliance with CAT verdict does not arise at this stage. He also mentioned that in 3 other cases, covered by the same CAT verdict and High Court order dismissing the Writs, SLPs have been filed in HSC where notices have been issued and it has been minuted by HSC that the Respondents have undertaken not to take any precipitate action by way of contempt petition pending consideration of those SLPs. Hence as the matter is under consideration of a superior court, further action should pend in this matter.
    This was countered by our Advocate by saying that we are not a party to those proceedings nor have we received any notice. Further, with the dismissal of the Review petition in our case, the earlier observation while dismissing SLP giving liberty to raise any point in the contempt petition has ceased to have any significance. Even if, for the sake of argument, those 3 SLPs succeed, it would not have any impact on our case which has already attained finality with the dismissal of the Review Petition in our case. There is ,therefore, no justification for GOI not to implement CAT verdict and therefore liable to action for the contempt.
    (iv) There is serious financial implication which has to be considered.
    At this, ..............had observed that the Government did not take much time in conceding OROP involving Rs 500 Crores but are contesting something legitimately due to the old pensioners contrary to CPC recommendation earlier accepted by Govt.
    Finally, our Advocate felt that we should place before the Bench our written submission along with relevant documents and, in consultation with me, sought a few days time to do so. The Bench therefore directed that we should make our submission within one week and GOI should give their reply within a week thereafter. Accordingly, the case has now been scheduled for 5th March for final hearing. "

    Posted by me to avoid the harassment and hardship to old pensioners who are anxious to know the development

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 21-02-2014 at 01:54 AM.

  13. #1413
    Member Imayan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Thanx for such copious info.
    Our Counsel has hit the nail hard on the head of the GOI Counsel.
    Their arguments have gone flat.
    I can see the emergence of a favorable verdict.

  14. #1414
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default


    IRRESPONSIBLE LOT IN THE ARENA OF CONFRONTATION AGAINST OLD PENSIONERS HAVE NO SENSE OF PROPORTION , RESPECT FOR JUDICIARY, ETHICS IN GOVERNANCE, AND ABOVE ALL I DO SUSOECT SOMETHING WHICH IS BORDERING......

    IT WAS SHOCKING TO HEAR THAT THE GOVT DID NOT KNOW WHO THE CGSAGPA MEMBERS ARE----TILL 19TH FEB 2014???????....THAT TOO AFTER THREE YEARS OF THE LEGAL PRONOUNCEMENT BY THE SAME CAT WHERE THE CP HEARING IS GOING ON.... and also even after the succeeding failed stages of . DHC/ HSC-SLP-RP ETC......

    FILING OF SECOND BATCH OF SLPs IN HSC WITH NO bona fide/ genuine LOCUS STANDI AFTER SIMILAR PRECEDENT SLP HAD BEEN DISMISSED FOLLOWED BY DISMISSAL OF THE RELATED RP ON IT, LINKING SUCH SLPs WITH CAs FILED IN 2011 AGAINST OLD MILITARY PENSIONERS, AND ALSO WITH A TOTALLY UNRELATED SLP OF HAG LEVEL PENSIONERS, ENSURING THAT THE LOT COME BEFORE DIFFERENT BENCH ETC DO NOT SPEAK OF ETHICAL PRACTICES NOR THEY SHOW RESPECT TO JUDICIAL VERDICTS OF HIGHEST LEVEL IN THE COUNTRY !

    THE ADVERSARY WILL BE SHOWN THE DOOR IN NO TIME....

    SUCH BEING THE PATTERN of MISADVENTURISM SO FAR, THE ADVERSARY IS TRYING TO COMMIT FURTHER hara-kiri BY RESORTING TO FILE A CURATIVE PETITION SOON AGAINST THE DISMISSED RP ON 12 11 2013 BY THE HSC.....

    Let us c if the MAGIC MAN'S antidote at least is respectfully utilized to RESOLVE ALL OUTSTANDING LITIGATIONS/ ISSUES and bring to an end this SAGA OF 5 YEARS' OF MISADVENTURISM..?

    vnatarajan


    PS: REPLY DT 24 JAN 2014 TO AN RTI APPEAL WAS MORE A REVELATION OF THE INTENT TO FILE CURATIVE PETITION (....THREAT?....DISSUATION ?....) RATHER THAN ANSWERING THE ISSUE ON NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE CONCERNED TO PROVIDE REQUESTED MATERIAL INFORMATION......PTIABLE STATE OF AFFAIRS.....
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 21-02-2014 at 10:33 AM.

  15. #1415
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default



    IT IS MOST UNFORTUNATE AND PATHETIC THAT THE PRE 2006 PENSIONERS' CASES ARE CREATING PANIC / FEVER/ ........ AMONG THOSE ACTING AGAINST THE ETHICS OF JUSTICE AND WE DO WISH THEM A SPEEDY RECOVERY AND GOOD HEALTH SO THAT THEY ALSO CAN EFFECTIVELY ATTEND THE COURTS AND COOPERATE TO COMPLETE THE PROCEEDINGS.

    ANOTHER ASPECT IS THE ...'GUILTY ACCUSING THE INNOCENT" OF MAKING THE MATTER "SUB-JUDICE"....WHAT A HYPOCRICY?..... EVEN AFTER SO MANY TRIBUNAL AND COURT VERDICTS, INSTEAD OF OBEYING THE JUDGMENTS, THE "GUILTY" GO ON FILING PETITIONS AFTER PETITIONS/ APPEALS AFTER APPEALS IN THE HON HIGHER COURTS - WASTING THE PUBLIC EXCHEQUER/ TAX-PAYERS' (PUBLIC AND EVEN PENSIONERS) MONEY/ VALAUBLE COURT TIME/ LEGAL RESOURCES AND MISUSING/ TAKING ADAVANTAGE OF THE COMSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION PROVIDED TO THEM.........

    THEY MAY NOTE THE SYSTEMS ARE ALSO LOSING BPATIENCE....IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS, TRIBUNALS- COURTS HAVE STARTED "IMPOSING PENALTIES" "FINES' ETC AND THE "OFFICIALS" CONCERNED WILL BE MADE TO BEAR SUCH FINES BY MAKING PAYMENTS FROM THEIR POSKETS.......

    SCOVA MEETS ARE EYE-WASH PROCESSES.....SR CITIZENS AND PENSIONERS MUST WALK OUT IN PROTEST FROM SUCH MEETS - AS NOTHING USEFUL EMERGES OUT......

    e.g: Extract of 24th SCOVA Meet minutes:

    Extracted from Minutes of 24 th SCOVA mtg. held on 5/2/14 -- Pensioners’ Portal
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    PL READ SERIATUM THE ITEMS :

    Issue raised in 23rd SCOVA meeting as per minutes..../ Gist of Decision taken in the 23rd SCOVA meeting/.... Follow up Action and Decision taken in 24th SCOVA meeting

    8. 23.7
    Extension of benefit of OM dt. 28.1.2013 w.e.f 1.1. 2006 instead of 24.9.2012

    It was stated that a SLP filed by the D/o P&PW has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 29.07.2013. The Department was
    considering further course of action in consultation with the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Law.
    (Action/o P&PW)

    D/oP&PW: The matter is sub-judice, so no decision can be taken.
    (Action/o P&PW)

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

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 02-03-2014 at 05:32 PM.

  16. #1416
    Junior Member Dr.M.Jauhari is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    I live in Lucknow
    Posts
    26

    Default

    Dear Shri Natarajan,
    The only way to get our dues in this lifetime was Rahul Gandhi.As nobody thought of this back channel approach, even that hope is likely to vanish shortly after the results of Lok Sabha elections are announced.I am sure , the OROP is the result of this back channel diplomacy by army stalwarts.Civilian pensioners also form quite a formidable vote bank but will anybody care to give them parity on OROP?MJauhari

  17. #1417
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    are u sure shri rg is not aware of the problem...????????

  18. #1418
    Junior Member Dr.M.Jauhari is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    I live in Lucknow
    Posts
    26

    Default

    I have no method of being sure.However,these people are busy in other important matters and they can not be expected to follow the course of individual cases like ours.Army people have been vociferous in their demand for OROP and some of the ex top army officers like Gen.Kadyan et. al. are constantly pressing this demand in various forums.It is likely Gen.Bikram Singh might also have spoken to PM.There is nobody in the IAS fraternity to speak for civilian officers.Thus there is no pressure from the civilian side.This has encouraged the DOE to constantly negate all our efforts.This is my thinking.I may be wrong.MJauhari

  19. #1419
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default


    Except PRE 2006 S29 Civilians ( who are equals of Pre 2006 Retd Maj Gens) and PRE 2006 S21/22/23 Civilians to some extent (who are equals of Pre 2006 Retd Majors) , no other pre 2006 civilians appear to be affected by the MPPB-MPB fiasco of reduced MINIMUM pensions greatly (2.26 MF on LPD basis has saved most of them!). Hence a general apathy prevails. Hence the big FEDERATIONS/ ASSOCIATIONS are not much interested in blowing out this issue-but they are making a serious mistake.

    OROP for soldiers repeat soldiers is a long pending issue and has a vote bank significance. The leaders controlling them/ their groups like IESM etc have their own agenda ....in the long/ short term.......

    PL NOTE "OROP FOR SOLDIERS' is not same as "OROP FOR RETD COM OFFICERS"........OROP FOR PRE 2006/OLDER RETD COM OFFICERS IS (AS OF NOW) ONLY "MODIFIED PARITY" UNLESS THE AGGRIEVED PRE 2006 RETD MAJ GENS HAVE THE RESOURCE TO FIGHT FOR THE REAL"OROP" OF "POINT TO POINT PARITY" AS PRONOUNCED IN SPS VAINS CASE SLP JUDGMENT (I think HSC in CA5566 of 2008/ 9 9 2008) WHICH NO ONE APPEARS TO HAVE READ THOROUGHLY........

    Also note 'CIVILIAN PENSIONERS' can only fight thru courts if they can......THEIR FEDERATIONS/ ASSOCIATION HAVE NO SUCH INCLINATION TO FIGHT FOR OLD PENSIONERS AS IN THE CASE OF IESM ETC SPEARHEADING THE OROP ISSUE.....particularly f such pensioners belong to GR A.......Moreover, huge monetary resource is involved for fighting the cases up to HSC-SLP-RP_- Curative Pet stages......Age factor is another impediment .....

    We can not aspire for point to point parity....even Old Retd Com Officers have not got it so far....nor will they get it in future....

    ALSO PL NOTE, TILL NOW WHATEVER CIVILIAN AGGRIEVED PRE 2006 SEGMENTS GOT WAS DUE TO OROP COMMITTEES ONLY SO FAR LIKE:

    eg:

    1. PRE 2006 S30 GETTING "DISCRIMINATIVELY/ SELECTIVELY" BENEFIT OF A NEW SCALE MINIMU WEF 1 1 2006 ...
    2. PRE 2006 PENSIONERS GETTING THE "MPPB" BASED REVISED PENSION WEF 24 9 2012 IS ALSO DUE TO SECOND OROP HP COMMITTEE'S RECO ONLY.......

    So civilians have to wait for the OROP precedence if anything has to happen this time also...... why worry....let the court battle continue......as there is no "decent or dignified" alternative......WE R NOT BEGGARS......

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 04-03-2014 at 06:44 AM.

  20. #1420
    Junior Member Dr.M.Jauhari is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    I live in Lucknow
    Posts
    26

    Default

    Point well taken.Thanks.MJ

+ Reply to Thread
Page 71 of 77 FirstFirst ... 21 61 69 70 71 72 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