+ Reply to Thread
Page 66 of 77 FirstFirst ... 16 56 64 65 66 67 68 76 ... LastLast
Results 1,301 to 1,320 of 1540

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

  1. #1301
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default


    Reasons:

    1.Some more SLPs- including State Govt related/ originated adopting CG SCPC formulations - in cases relate to Hon HC judgments there (eg Haryana )...try to take shelter under them by rushing them in eleventh hour as done in above cases..... delay as much as possible....

    2,Possibility of going for Review and later even Curative petitions in these cases as done in Rank Pay cases of old Military Pensioners ... stooping down to any levels---violating the National Litigation Policy to the core in sum and substance...

    3.Delay the Contempt processes...try to buy time...... avoid implementation by prolonging as much as possible.....

    vnatarajan

  2. #1302
    Member kkhameedkutty is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Thiruvananthapuram
    Posts
    37

    Thumbs up Justice delayed, but achieved

    Congrats to all Pre-2006 pensioners for acheiving judgement of full parity with post 2006 pensioners. Hope 20 years service case also will be settled soon by honorable SC as a result of restless effort put by senior members.

    Thanks & Best Regards,

    KKH Kutty

  3. #1303
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Thanks Dr Kutty...

    Not yet full parity...but only modified parity.... but certainly the powers , if sensible...must accord full parity.... BEST WAY IS TO RESORT TO THE FR 9 SECTION 21 (1) PROVISIONS - PENSION AS A RATIO OF ONE'S PAY...... THAT IS 50% OF THE LAST EMOLUMENTS DRAWN IRRESPECTIVE OF THE CUT OFF DATE/ DATE OF RETIREMENT SUBJECT TO QS STIPULATED....

    vnatarajan

  4. #1304
    Member kkhameedkutty is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Thiruvananthapuram
    Posts
    37

    Smile

    Dear Natarajan Sir,

    Thanks & nice to read your comments. I meant full parity for "arrears" with effect from 1-1-2006. You are absolutely right. When pension of those who retired on after 1-1-2006 is 50% of last pay drawn, why a pre-2006 pensioner get pension @ 50% of minimum of the pay scale? This becomes very wide when somebody retire after receiving many increments and sometimes reach stagnation in the same pay scale. I don't understand why honorable SC so far didn't interefere in this discriminatory rule and stop it. Our next fight should be to remove this discrimination. All those who joined govt service on or before 31st March 2004 and retired with "eligibility for pension" are a single category of homogenous group bound by same Pension Rules 1972. There can not have different categories of pensioners within this homogenous group. If we look at past judgements of honorable SC, each one support this principle. Pensioner is a pensioner whether he retired yesterday or today. As long as they are bound by same pension rules, agreed at the time of joining government service is same, there should not be any difference in computation of pension whenever it get revised, irrespective of their date of retirement.

    Hope it will also be settled with your geat efforts. It is very important to see that you are not fighting for more pension, but against injustice and discrimination put among same family of pensioners by divinding them to different groups.

    With Regards,

    KKH Kutty

  5. #1305
    Member Imayan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Part of the crusade:
    I have a suggestion: Legally, we are strong having won the case in Hon' SC.
    How do we persuade the senior beauracrats / political masters to issue the "just" orders now ?
    Can a representation be made to them personally at Delhi ?
    Firstly, meeting can be organised with Secretary,Deptt. of Pension /MOS ,DOP.
    After a fortnight, there can be a meeting with PM/President.
    This is essential as lobbying is required even for just and right actions.
    Delhi based senior pensioners / veterans can take initiative in this regard.
    Comments pl.

    Imayan
    Last edited by Imayan; 05-08-2013 at 03:05 PM. Reason: spelling

  6. #1306
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default

    This is a clear case of contempt of the direction of CAT of November, 2012. In addition to what has been suggested by Shri Imayan, we could press for action against officers of the DOPT and DOE for intentional disobedience of the decision of CAT. I am sure that would coerce the officers into implementing the decsion of the CAT.

    Gopal Krishan

  7. #1307
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    ARTICLE 311 PROVIDES IMMUNITY TO THEM FROM EVEN GRAVER ACTS OF OMISSION AND COMMISSION ...and so these types of "disobeying orders of justice and truth" must be a sort of daily agenda nowadays for these..... Other shelter is provided by the Article vesting authority in them to act on behalf of the Hon President of India... ...to issue Exec Instructions ....and then the "unwanted clari-modifications".......

    Their birth-right is our death-warrant......

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 06-08-2013 at 06:30 PM.

  8. #1308
    Member ssharma is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vnatarajan View Post


    Their birth-right is our death-warrant......

    vnatarajan
    not a healthy attitude to take mr natrajan. we are with you. you have come far. this wont take much longer.

  9. #1309
    Senior Member dnaga57
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    153

    Angry

    I think that Contempt petition is not the end but a means to achieve justice. If some one are not wrapped on the knuckles for these shenanigans, it is just indicative of the putrid system which has permeated the whole gamut of governance.
    We need to guard against any subterfuge by way of sly SLPs on any other case in HSC. Unfortunately, we cant get a caveat- I presume- on other cases whatever they are.
    But we can get a caveat against Review or curative petition pertaining to our case, I think.
    Also Shri MLK & VNji can maintain their vigil on HSC listings.
    As an aside, can we file an SLP listing ALL known cases of pensioners ( SPS Vains, AFT & CAT rulings, P&H HC etc etc) requesting HSC to minimise 'litigationary attitude by GoI against its own policy.
    As Mark Tully stated 'The tragedy in India is the persons elected by the people to represent them have chosen to rule them'
    Tragedy, indeed !!!

  10. #1310
    Junior Member SK Jain is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Respected VN Sir, Kanaujiaml Sir, dnaga57 Sir and other learned pre-2006 Pensioners,
    Some months back, Chairman of Indian Ex Servicemen Movement had written a letter to the then H'ble Chief Justice of India and the letter was prominently circulated on internet. I am not sure if any of you have seen that letter or not. I intend to say if any such possibility can be explored and anyone or more Pensioners Association can write a letter to H'ble Chief Justice of India on present affairs of justice.
    At present, Govt. Functionaries have made a mockery of justice system in India. Almost all the cases of Govt. employees and Govt. pensioners end in H’ble Supreme Court. All such litigants cannot afford the continuous legal battle whereas Govt. Functionaries do that at Public Expense (Tax Payers Money). Cases of old Pensioners are more painful wherein many of them are regularly leaving for heavenly abode without getting their legitimate dues.
    We can only look up to the Almighty with pain and anguish.
    Last edited by SK Jain; 07-08-2013 at 04:21 PM.

  11. #1311
    Senior Member dnaga57
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    153

    Default

    A good suggestion by Mr S K Jain.
    I think both VNji & MLKji have a large list ( about 30 or so) of Pensioners cases where judgement has been delivered a few years back but still getting fought in higher courts by GoI.
    We can atleast try to have this published as a letter to editor of leading dailies & magazines to draw public, judicial attention
    Just a suggestion...
    As the saying goes 'One cannot fart against thunder'

  12. #1312
    Member ssharma is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dnaga57 View Post
    A good suggestion by Mr S K Jain.
    I think both VNji & MLKji have a large list ( about 30 or so) of Pensioners cases where judgement has been delivered a few years back but still getting fought in higher courts by GoI.
    We can atleast try to have this published as a letter to editor of leading dailies & magazines to draw public, judicial attention
    Just a suggestion...
    As the saying goes 'One cannot fart against thunder'
    people are already contemptuously looking down on pensioners drawing 50-60k as pensions! no public sympathy will be available, in fact the opposite.

  13. #1313
    Junior Member SK Jain is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Mr. Sharma,
    A basic pension of 30,000/- if added with 80%DA works out to 54,000/-. Would you kindly spell out the affected pensioners?

  14. #1314
    Member ssharma is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SK Jain View Post
    Mr. Sharma,
    A basic pension of 30,000/- if added with 80%DA works out to 54,000/-. Would you kindly spell out the affected pensioners?
    if full parity is achieved then that is s-29 grade itself i believe. more for military pensioners.

  15. #1315
    Senior Member dnaga57
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    153

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by ssharma View Post
    people are already contemptuously looking down on pensioners drawing 50-60k as pensions! no public sympathy will be available, in fact the opposite.
    Dear Mr Sharma
    The same public do not seem to mind the 'gigantic perks, privileges of MPs MLAs , legitimate ones that is'.
    Also only a fraction of pensioners are in the bracket you mention. There are 23 grades below PB4 band. If you consider Family pensioners, the below 20000 pensioners will form a huge number.
    PR CAT judgement is not S 29 specific,nor is the GoI order of revision from 24-09-2012. In fact , if PR CAT was applicable only to S 29, there may have been less rustling in babus.
    My point in going public is not just for pension revision, but our litigation system which appears interminable. It gets compounded when GoI goes against its own stated litigation policy. Such a blatant violation of what they profess & practice would be of both interest & value to general public.
    It is not for money that we formed the group or fought the legal battle, it is for the principle of fairness, non manipulative application of awards & recommendations, no mischievous twisting of recommendations of tribunals & commissions.
    A guiding principle in Establishment rules of enlightened administrations is
    " If more than one interpretation is possible in any of the rules, the interpretation most advantageous to the employee will apply"
    Can G o I become an enlightened, model employer ?

  16. #1316
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear Pre 2006 Pensioners/Others interested,

    (I shall come back to other points later)...

    I REQUEST A GRIEVANCE MAY BE LODGED TO THE HON PRESIDENT OF INDIA AS JUSTICE IS BEING DELAYED TO THE AGGRIEVED LOT BY UNWANTED/ UNJUSTIFIED EXTENSION OF LITIGATION PROCESS - AND AT LEAST HALF OF THE VIEWERS HERE/ THEIR FRIENDS MAY REACT POSITIVELY TO POST SIMILAR GRIEVANCE IN THE HELPLINE / GRIEVANCE PORTAL OF THE HON PRESIDENT OF INDIA'S WEBSITE...... VERY EASY TO ACCESS-- VERY EASY TO LODGE THE GRIEVANCE... DO NOT USE ANY "SPL CHARACTERS WHILE TYPING" AND IMMEDIATELY THE TEXT WILL BE REGISTERED-- PL TRY AND POST YOUR SUCCESS HERE.....

    After I lodged, Sri D Naga followed immediately by posting his grievance. His number ends in 8 while mine in 4. Now the GRIEVANCE with Regn number:

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    (What I emailed to all other pensioner friends after posting of my GRIEVANCE)
    DEAR FRIENDS/PENSIONER ASSOCIATES,

    LODGED A GRIEVANCE IN THE PORTAL OF HON PRESIDENT OF INDIA TODAY - 9 AUG 2013 MPRNING

    (PL TRY AND LODGE SIMILAR GRIEVANCE TO CREATE SOME IMPACT... EASY ...TYPE IN THE BROWSER "PRESIDENT OF INDIA" AND GET THE CHOICE....IN THE HOME PAGE SELCT "PRESIDENTS' SECRETARIAT",... THEN HIS "HELPLINE"... LODGE THE GRIEVNACE IN THE PORTAL...)

    VNATARAJAN

    9 AUG 2013

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

    Grievance for Registration No: PRSEC/E/2013/12564

    DEAR HONOURABLE PRESIDENT PRONOB MUKhERJEE SIR , WE, A SEGMENT OF PRE 2006 AND OLDER PENSIONERS AND FAMILY PENSIONERS BOTH CICVIL AND MILITARY, VERY SENIOR CITIZENS STARTED RECEIVING REDUCED PENSIONS WEF 1 1 2006, AS A RESULT OF INAPPLICABLE CLARIFICATIONS ISSUED BY DEPT OF PENSIONS AND PENSIONERS WELFARE ON 3 AND 14 OCT 2008 WRT THEIR OWN GAZETTED RESOLUTION DATED 29 AUG 2008 AND OM ON 1 SEPT 2008 . AFTER FAILING TO GET CORRECT PREVISED PENSION BY APPEALS TO GOI, MANY SUCH SUFFERERS HAD TO SEEK JUSTICE THRU COURTS OF LAW . IN THE MEANTIME, HON PRIME MEINISTER KINDLY INREVENED BY APPOINTING A HIGH POWER COMMITTEE PRESIDED BY HON CABINET SECRETARY AND OTHER SECRETARIES IN AUG 2012 AND AS A RESULT OF THEIR RECOMMENDATION , AND, WITH SANCTION OF YOUR KIND OFFICE, THE MIN OF DEFENCE AND DOPPW ISSUED ORDERS IN JAN 2013 FOR A CORRECTED MINIMUM GUARANTEED PENSION , SAME AS THE CORRECT MINIMUM REVISED PENSION SOUGHT BYTHE AGGRIEVED PENSIONERS BUT THE GOVT MADE THE DATE EFFECTIVE FROM 24 SEPT 2012 INSTEAD OF THE SIXTH CPC’S EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1 JAN 2006. WE HEREBY SUBMIT THAT ALREADY ABOUT 40 CASES OF CIVIL AND MILITARY PENSIONERS HAVE BEEN JUDGED BY CENTRAL ADMIN. TRIBUNALS AND ARMED FORCES TRIBUNALS IN MORE THAN TEN SEPARATE JUDGMENTS UPHOLDING THE PRAYER OF PENSIONERS FOR SUCH MINIMUM REVISED PENSION WITH EFFECT FROM 1 JAN 2006 REPEAT 1 JAN 2006 AS PER DOPPWS GAZ RESOLUTION DATED 29 AUG 2008 (SAME AS MINIMUM GUARANTEED PENSION AS NOW ENUNCIATED BY GOVT). GOVT INSTEAD OF REACTING POSITIVELY TO THE LEAD PR BENCH CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL JUDGMENT OF 1 NOV 2011, WENT IN SEPARATE APPEALS TO HON HIGH COURTS OF DELHI AND PUNJAB AND HARAYANA AND THEIR APPEALS WERE DISMISSED ON 29 APRIL 2013 AND 14 JAN 2013 RESPECTIVELY UPHOLDING THE PR CAT TRIBUNAL JUDGMENT OF 1 NOV 2011 . AGAIN INSTEAD OF IMPLEMENTING THE SAID JUDGMENTS OF TWO HIGH COURTS , THE GOVT WENT ON TO FILE TWO SLPs FOR EX PARTY RELIEF AT HON SUPREME COURT VIDE SLP (CIVIL) 23055 OF 2013 AND SLP (CIVIL)CC 13280 OF 2013 CORRCTED TO SLP (CIVIL) 24683 OF 2013 WHICH WERE DISMISSED AT ADMISSION STAGE ITSELF ON 29 JULY 2013. WE UNDERSTAND THE GOVT MAY GO ON AND ON FOR REVIEWS AND CURATIVES. THIS AMOUNTS TO HARASSING PENSIONERS IN THEIR EVENING GREY YEARS BY DENYING JUSTICE. MORE DISTURBING IS THE COMPULSIVE LITIGATION PRACTICED BY THE GOVT DOPPW AND MORE VISIBLY THE DOE AND DOLA VIOLATING THE NATIONAL LITIGATION POLICY IN TOTO. KINDLY INTERVENE AND PROVIDE INSTANT JUSTICE AND RELIEF.. SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF PENSIONERS AND FAMILY PENSIONERS BY V NATARAJAN PRESIDENT PENSIONERS FORUM AFFILITAED TO AIFPA CHENNAI ON 9 AUG 2013.

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

    PRESIDENT'S SECRETARIAT HELPLINE

    Lodge a Request View Status Change Password Forgot Password

    LogOut

    Your Request/Grievance is Registered Successfully!!

    Your Request/Grievance Registration Number is : PRSEC/E/2013/12564

    Print/View Grievance

    Note: Kindly note your Request Registration Number for further references
    An e-mail has been sent to the e-mail id [email protected], as provided by you
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 09-08-2013 at 11:43 AM.

  17. #1317
    Member ssharma is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    33

    Default

    Submitted as well.
    Quote Originally Posted by vnatarajan View Post
    Dear Pre 2006 Pensioners/Others interested,

    (I shall come back to other points later)...
    vnatarajan

  18. #1318
    Member ssharma is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    33

    Default

    if such is the case then pb4 should have separated* itself and let the rest of the grades go public. once pb4 becomes public and opinion turns negative then the other 23 grades will suffer too. No one listens to lengthy explanations in public, only sensational bits are highlighted.

    *as in the case of S30

    Quote Originally Posted by dnaga57 View Post
    Dear Mr Sharma
    The same public do not seem to mind the 'gigantic perks, privileges of MPs MLAs , legitimate ones that is'.
    Also only a fraction of pensioners are in the bracket you mention. There are 23 grades below PB4 band. If you consider Family pensioners, the below 20000 pensioners will form a huge number.
    PR CAT judgement is not S 29 specific,nor is the GoI order of revision from 24-09-2012. In fact , if PR CAT was applicable only to S 29, there may have been less rustling in babus.
    My point in going public is not just for pension revision, but our litigation system which appears interminable. It gets compounded when GoI goes against its own stated litigation policy. Such a blatant violation of what they profess & practice would be of both interest & value to general public.
    It is not for money that we formed the group or fought the legal battle, it is for the principle of fairness, non manipulative application of awards & recommendations, no mischievous twisting of recommendations of tribunals & commissions.
    A guiding principle in Establishment rules of enlightened administrations is
    " If more than one interpretation is possible in any of the rules, the interpretation most advantageous to the employee will apply"
    Can G o I become an enlightened, model employer ?
    Last edited by ssharma; 09-08-2013 at 01:53 PM. Reason: * for clarification

  19. #1319
    Junior Member SK Jain is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Respected VN Sir,
    I have submitted my grievance as udner with Registeration No. PRSEC/E/2013/12590

    "Honourable President Pranab Mukherjee Sir, We a segment of pre-2006 pensioners both civil and military want to bring our grievance to your kind notice for your prompt action. Our grievance relates to WRONG IMPLEMENTATION OF GOVT DECISION IN RESPECT OF PRE 2006 PENSIONERS. Govt decisions on 6CPC report concerning Govt pensioners both civil and military were notified vide Resolution No. 38.37.08.P and PW(A) dated 29.08.2008. Resolution Item No. 12 based on Para 5.1.47 of 6CPC report deals with FITMENT FORMULA and MIMIMUM ASSURED PENSION UNDER MODIFIED PARITY SCHEME in respect of pre 2006 pensioners and reads as (quote) The fixation of the pension will be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than fifty per cent 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 which the pensioner had retired (unquote). Govt Functionaries have subsequently incorporated two major amendments in the decision of Cabinet. ONE, minimum of pay in the pay band corresponding to pre-revised pay scale was implemented as minimum of pay band and TWO a condition of 33 years service (and pro rata reduction) for this MIMIMUM ASSURED PENSION UNDER MODIFIED PARITY was added in spite of the fact that neither such condition was recommended by 6CPC nor the same was decided by the Cabinet. As can be seen from Resolution Item No. 2 the term Full Pension is applicable to future Pensioners which has wrongly been linked to Past Pensioners. The amendment mentioned at ONE above has since been withdrawn from 24.09.2012 whereas the same should have been withdrawn from 01.01.2006. Thus the old pensioners have been denied their legitimate dues for the intervening period. Various judgements have been pronounced by Armed Forces Tribunals and Central Administrative Tribunals in favour of old pensioners. However, Govt Functionaries are not implementing such judgements and resorting to repeated APPEALS in HIGHER COURTS. Judgement dated 01.11.2011 of Principal Bench of CAT (a Full Bench) is most important wherein amendments to Govt Resolution have been set aside. This judgement has subsequently been upheld by Double Bench of Punjab and Haryana High Court and by Double Bench of Delhi High Court. Supreme Court of India has refused to entertain Govt. Appeal thereby dismissing SLP against the order of Delhi High Court. It is understood that Govt. Functionaries may plan further Review and Curative Petitions to further delay the matter. Meanwhile many of old Pensioners are leaving for their heavenly abode without getting their legitimate dues. May we request President of India to come forward in support of these so called senior citizens who are old Govt pensioners and have already given their younger days in the service of their Motherland. Major (Retired) S K Jain "

  20. #1320
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    D/ Maj Jain Sir.Excellent and elaborate enough to highlight both grievances covering 20 yr plus and modified parity issues.

    (Only addition I can think of is wrt the SLP.......actually "TWO" SLP(s) of the Govt which were linked and hence they were against both DHC Judgment (CGS29PA) dt 29 April 2013 and also the P & H HC Judgment (Atma Singh Grps ) dt 14 Jan 2013).

    I hope many more guests/ memebrs in GC discussion board/ other pensioners / their friends post this GRIEVANCE on behalf of themselves- and on behalf of the old/ aged pensioners and family pensioners....

    vnatarajan

+ Reply to Thread
Page 66 of 77 FirstFirst ... 16 56 64 65 66 67 68 76 ... 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