+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 62

Thread: CLARIFICATIONS/RELATED ORDERS/SUPPORTING AUTHENTIC REFERENCES etc ON PENSION MATTERS

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

    Default CLARIFICATIONS/RELATED ORDERS/SUPPORTING AUTHENTIC REFERENCES etc ON PENSION MATTERS

    Hi All

    To start, I quote what Mr Jeetendra, Sr Member has put in a thread under Pay Fixation topic/issue of 6th CPC:

    Quote Originally Posted by jitendraacr View Post
    As all of us know that after implementation of 6th CPC, a number of anamolies have come out and we are discussing on these issues in length. Now I request to all members to post any clarification/orders obtained by themselves or by their department, from Ministry of Finance/DoP&T or from any other authentic website(not from bloggers) which is in contrary to present notification/Resolution. This sort of little work will help many of us. May I request all of you to post also your efforts for obtaining these clarifcation and become our torchbearer.
    Thanks in anticipation.
    Consequent to the issue of 6th CPC related pension implementation OMs of 1st Sept and 3rd Oct 2008 of the Deptt of P/PW and also related OMs of MoF, several pensioners may be seeking redressals/ remedies etc on omissions/ anomalies/ disparities/ related aspects.

    ALL RESPONSES LIKE CLARIFICATIONS/ OMs/ ORDERS/LIKE COMMUNICATIONS etc obtained individually or thru their Pensioner bodies RECIEVED from the concerned MINISTRIES & DEPTTS - eg Personnel/ Pension/ Pensioners' Welfare/ other offices including old parent deptts/ ministries if any, MAY PL. BE POSTED & HIGHLIGHTED HERE- so that the same can GIVE US NEW GUIDANCE/ STRATEGY/ IMPETUS.

    (My thanks to Mr Jeetendra for the excellent idea!)

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 14-10-2008 at 10:47 AM. Reason: minor typing mistakes

  2. #2
    Member kssitaraman is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    60

    Default Pension revision under Para 4.2 for Pre-2006 Pensioners

    The Ministry of Finance has yet issued another OM dated 14/10/08 with a ready reckoner for pension revisions under Para 4.2 probably to help out the disbursing banks, this time showing all the three scales of pay viz., IV, V and VI and also requiring the disbursements to be made within a week. This is for information please.

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

    Default

    Hi All concerned Pensioners - attn: Pre-1986/1996/2006 retirees:

    Thanks to Mr Sitaraman for pointing out the issue of the OM No 38 37 08/PPW etc dt 14th oct on 6th CPC implementation/revision of pension of pre-2006 pensions/ family pensions.


    POSITIVE ASPECTS:

    Concerned banks etc. have been asked to disburse current arrears/ addl. pension within a week (by 21st oct 2008).

    Concordance tables provided for pre-1996/pre-2006/post-2006 pay-scales/bands for proper fixation BENEFICIALto pensioners. (THIS MAY SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF Pre-1986 Retirees also)

    Illustrations given for guidance.

    Concerned banks etc. to disburse pension/ arrears as per OM of 1st Sep 2008.
    DR amounts also to be added for periods relevant at rates already ordered.

    All actions to be completed within a month (may be before 15th Nov 2008?)

    Guidance has also been given as to the procedure to be followed in cases of missing details like DOB/age/ service details in the earlier PPOs etc and also in case of missing details like DOB among family pensioners.

    (THIS IS HAPPENING IN MANY CASES_ ALL PENSIONERS/ FAMILY PENSIONERS MAY CHECK FOR MISSING DETAILS IN THE RESPECTIVE PPOs AND DECIDE ON THE COURSE OF ACTION TO FOLLOW. BANKS/ POs MAY PLEAD HELPLESSNESS. FRIENDS/ EX. COLLEAGUES/ PENSIONERS' ASSOCIATIONS must come forward to ASSIST aged pensioners/ helpless family pensioners etc.)

    ( Banks etc also have to take action to ensure entries in the Pension Books/ Records and issue necessary Pension Orders with copies to the concerned authorities. Pensioners/ Family Pensioners shd watch/ enquire/ ensure to avoid future gaps!)

    NEGATIVE:

    I WAS HOPING THE ISSUE OF PENSION INJUSTICE THAT HAS BEEN PERPETUATED ( REF: my main thread starting with "Injustice to Pre-2006 pensioners.......etc") WILL BE RESOLVED THRU THIS OM ONLY TO BE DISAPPOINTED! ALL AFFECTED MAY HAVE TO FIGHT & WAIT.

    CORE ISSUE OF DISPARITY ARISING OUT OF BUNCHING PRE-2006 SCALES/BANDS FOR PENSION PURPOSES and RELEGATING THE PARITY TO A LOWER STARTING LEVEL PAY IN THE NEW BUNCHED PAY BAND REMAINS OUTSTANDING.

    DoP/PW and MOF to act fast to undo the damage and injustice.

    vnatarajan

  4. #4
    Senior Member sudacgwb
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    209

    Talking Arrears to Pensioners - One Installment?

    The OM dated 14/10/2008 at para no: 7 (page 2) ......enhanced pension and ARREARS ARE DISBURSED TO ALL ..... BY 30.11.2008. Does this means the arrears will be disbursed in one installment?

    If, yes, Govt. has rectified the grave mistake of giving arrears to pensioners in two installments.

  5. #5
    Junior Member ranganathan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    22

    Default

    the new om of oct 14, does not indicate the removal of the 40% cap already in place for the current year. continuing the trail left by mr Natarajan,; the 14 oct Om does not remedy the misgiving regarding disparity. i should think it rather consolidates and gives a practical shape to this misgiving.the positive aspects are of course there which will speed up the mid-way settlement as per their definition of the minimum pension
    Last edited by ranganathan; 16-10-2008 at 10:04 PM.

  6. #6
    Member kssitaraman is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    60

    Default Thread CLARIFICATIONS/RELATED ORDERS ETC

    Pensioners including myself are indebted to Sri Natarajan for putting in a nutshell for their info the positive aspects of the Pension Dept's latest clarification.

    As regards the negative side mentioned by him, I take this opportunity to make the following comments, which I hope he will appreciate.

    The Govt must have cleared more or less all the minor doubts that arose in the minds of the Pensioners from the original orders, with its subsequent clarificatory OMs the latest being the one in discussion. Sri Natarajan's case as he has explained in several of the Threads seems to be special, involving even fundamental questions like juniors getting more than the seniors, etc; the juniority/seniority issue has been taken care of as regards serving employees while it appears to have been overlooked in the case of pensioners. This is indeed an anamolous situation requiring urgent and just remedy. The number of pensioners losing their rights and money in this manner must be handful and acceding to their demand by the Govt. cannot be a big burden since the outgo in the event of acceding to the demand must be a fraction of the largesse so kindly granted by the Govt. So I feel Sri Natarajan has a good case at hand for appeal. If Sri Natarajan has already not done so, he may along with others similarly placed, lodge, yes lodge an appeal with the Pension dept. immediately. If I remember correct, the govt. has already set up an Anamolies Committe to function for a year, to consider and dispose of all cases of complaints within a time frame. Pension cases may not take a lot of time and so hopefully he will have a favourable OM exclusively dealing with this issue. So let us hope for the best.

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

    Default

    My thanks to Shri Sitaraman. Perceptions on injustice appear to vary. Equal pension for retirees of equal rank/ grade irrespective of date of retirement is a foregone conclusion/clarification and is constitutionally validated under Artcle 14. Many court judgments have proved the point.

    Elsewhere, in another thread, Mr Vijai Kapooor had rightly pointed out that the issue of parity in pension was taken up in all earnestness in 5th CPC and also implemented to a great extent. Though point to point equality was not possible, there was some bunching of increments, and old pensioners did get not only equality but something more than equality in many cases.

    In the 6th CPC, the decision I and my friends are pointing out is retrogressive, taking the higher rank/ grade pensioners to lower levels resulting in lowering of the equality principle.

    As rightly observed, widespread protests have already been launched and representations have gone to DoP/PW and even PMO. (I feel sorry to point out, nowadays, decisions are made in the courts and not in the Ministries and veterans like us are made to feel that there is a great fall in standards of administration! And even after that, the spirit and essence of the judgments are repeatedly violated!))

    Unfortunately many pensioners/ family pensioners are too old, have no access to e-support, lack even moral support to fight.

    CLARIFICATIONS CAN BE PROVIDED FOR GUIDANCE BUT INDIVIDUALS HAVE TO TAKE UP THE FIGHT FOR JUSTICE.

    vnatarajan.
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 17-10-2008 at 12:11 PM. Reason: typographical

  8. #8
    Member kssitaraman is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Dear sri Natarajan,

    I am struck by your very prompt responses while having a very busy schedule indeed attending to other threads and helping out the other pensioners as well.

    I am in full agreement with the viewpoint that standards have gone down at all levels including administrative. You will be surprised to know, if you are not already aware that in an earlier Nakara case in 1979,the Govt did hold the view that once the employee retires, the nexus between him and the employer was broken. the Pension once fixed is never altered during his life time regardless of the erosion of money value or subsequent revision of Pay scales and pension. This was promptly challenged by Nakara in the Supreme court. A full Bench of the Apex Court consisting of S/Shri Y.V.Chandrachud (CJ), V.D.Tuljapurkar (J), D.A.Desai (J), O.Chinnappa Reddy (J) and Baharul Islam (J) delivered judgement in 1982 quashing the cut off date 1.4.1979. This turned to be a land mark judgement which benefitted lakhs of pensioners. The Apex court held that the Pension scheme consistent with available resources must provide that the pensioners would be able to live - (a) free from want with decency, independence and self-respect; (b) at a standard equivalent at the pre-retirement level and constitute that they 'live' and not merely 'exist'; (c) the pension is neither a bounty nor a matter of grace depending upon the sweet will of the employer; it is not an ex-gratia payment but a payment for past service rendered. It is a social welfare measure rendering socioeconomic justice to those who in the hey-day of their life solely toiled for the employer on an assurance that in their old age they would not be left in the lurch. The quotes in 'bold' and 'italics' are from Pages 7/8 of RAILWAY FEDERATION NEWS January-
    february 2008 Issue published by AIRRF

    I also wish to state that the present Govt. is most sympathetic and helpful to pensioners--the FM himself being attached to senior citizens-- and it was not the case earlier nor can it be assured in the future. So I feel without further loss of time the present Govt should be approached as regards the anomaly now in discussion for a quick and favourable remedy.

  9. #9
    Senior Member sudacgwb
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    209

    Exclamation Misgivings of pension vs senior / junior

    It must be remembered salary depends not only on the grade/scale of entry but length of service. A senior newly joined is in all probability gets less gross compared to the official even in the lower grade with long years of exp. getting more salary. Consequence of this is difference in pension which is function of last pay drawn and service etc.

    What was essential was to ensure a person retiring will get minimum pension a person gets from that grade/post/scale notwithstanding when he has retired/retiring. This has been taken care in case of all pensioners.

    The only point that must be ensured is to make the govt. to pay the arrears in one installment as the OM dated 14/10/2008 tends to say so.

  10. #10
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear Shri Sitaraman

    Grateful thanks for your rejoinders and suggestions. I and my friends are on the task.

    (I have posted the implications of disparity in my main thread of the Discussion Board : "Injustice to Pre-2006 Pensioners............etc.")

    vnatarajan.

    (P.S.: I WANT THIS THREAD TO FOCUS MORE ON NEW OMs/ CIRCULARS/ ORDERS/ AUTHENTIC SUPPORTIVE DOCUMENTS etc SO THAT WE CAN READILY REFER TO THIS THREAD).
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 18-10-2008 at 07:16 AM. Reason: typographic

  11. #11
    Junior Member vijai kapoor is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    12

    Post pension disparity

    This has ref to mr Sudhacgwb

    He has rightly said that What was essential was to ensure a person retiring will get minimum pension a person gets from that grade/post/scale notwithstanding when he has retired/retiring. This has been taken care in case of all pensioners.

    However what has been done in order dt 3.10.08 and 14.10.08 is contrary to the above and is the whole cause of this dispute and debate.

    For example if a person has retired from S-29 scale (18400-22400) as per 6 cpc recommendation as well as order dt 1.09.08 para 4.2 he should get atleast 50% of the minimum pay in payband plus gde pay corresponding to pre-revised payscale. (This obviously meant minimun pay in payband corresponding to pre-revised scale plus gde pay corresponding to prerevised scale.)

    As per the fitment tables issued by M of Fin on 30.08.08 for serving officer the minimum pay in payband is 44700 which is corresponding to the min of pre-revised scale i.e. 18400. With gde pay 10000 the min pension comes to 27350.

    However the orders dt 3.10.08 and 14.10.08 has changed to 50% of minimum of payband (irrespective of pre-revsied scale) ie 37400 plus gde pay 10000 and thus min pension by this interpretation comes to 23700.

    What can now be done is to request and demand from P&PWs to correct this erroneous interpretation and issue correct clarification letter and table in line with Min of Fin OM dt 30.08.08.

  12. #12
    Junior Member vijai kapoor is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    12

    Default

    This ref to mr Sudhacgwb

    He has rightly said that What was essential was to ensure a person retiring will get minimum pension a person gets from that grade/post/scale notwithstanding when he has retired/retiring. This has been taken care in case of all pensioners.

    However what has been done in order dt 3.10.08 and 14.10.08 is contrary to the above and is the whole cause of this dispute and debate.

    For example if a person has retired from S-29 scale (18400-22400) as per 6 cpc recommendation as well as order dt 1.09.08 para 4.2 he should get atleast 50% of the minimum pay in payband plus gde pay corresponding to pre-revised payscale. (This obviously meant minimun pay in payband corresponding to pre-revised scale plus gde pay corresponding to prerevised scale.)

    As per the fitment tables issued by M of Fin on 30.08.08 for serving officer the minimum pay in payband is 44700 which is corresponding to the min of pre-revised scale i.e. 18400. With gde pay 10000 the min pension comes to 27350.

    However the orders dt 3.10.08 and 14.10.08 has changed to 50% of minimum of payband (irrespective of pre-revsied scale) ie 37400 plus gde pay 10000 and thus min pension by this interpretation comes to 23700.

    What can now be done is to request and demand from P&PWs to correct this erroneous interpretation and issue correct clarification letter and table in line with Min of Fin OM dt 30.08.08.

  13. #13
    Senior Member sudacgwb
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    209

    Exclamation Arrears to pensioners

    I wish Mr.Natarajan will focus first on the payment of arrears in one installment rather than spreading over two financial years. If that is not possible over a period of two months.
    Last edited by sudacgwb; 18-10-2008 at 09:12 PM.

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

    Default

    I and my friends thank Mr Vijai Kapoor for explaining the ambiguity in clear terms.

    Our thanks are also to Sudacgwb's suggestion- we all are for it and we will continue for the struggle for the payment of ALL the arrears (including our arrears of the invisible parts of the pension) in one or two instalments- at least within this FINANCIAL YEAR, which could become a reality-provided- all of us individually and collectively (through our associations also) voice the demand to DoP/PW & MoF and try hard.

    vnatarajan .

    .

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

    Default

    hi All

    Those interested in seeing useful references/ clarifications etc wrt the disparities and also to understand how many scales are affected due to the recent corrigendum/ clarification OMs of the DoP/PW issued in Oct 2008 on pension revision, may also see the representation/ appeal made to the PMO by the Retd. Railway Employees' Welfare Association on 16th Oct 2008- in their website www.rrewa.org .

    vnatarajan

  16. #16
    Junior Member poojari is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    6

    Question Ignorable part of pension

    Can anybody clarify whether the person resigned from Govt. service after 1.1.2006 can opt for the new pay fixation ? What is the amount of ignorable part of pension which was earlier Rs. 1500/- in the 5th CPC ?

  17. #17
    Senior Member sundarar is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    631

    Default Disbursement of Arrears

    Quote Originally Posted by sudacgwb View Post
    I wish Mr.Natarajan will focus first on the payment of arrears in one installment rather than spreading over two financial years. If that is not possible over a period of two months.
    It is learnt that the State Bank of India at Tiruchirapalli, Tamilnadu has disbursed 1st instalment (40%) of pension arrears alongwith the September 2008 revised pension on 29.9.2008 itself. Whereas, same SBI in some other States, even after stipulation of one week by the O.M. dt. 14.10.2008, has not disbursed till this moment. The reluctancy in disbursing the arrears at least before the Festival days that are around shortly, could not be understood. The concerned Branch shows their hand towards their Local Head Office which is situated at the Capital of the State. The Help line of the said Local Head Office has not bothered to give a feed back for our request about the disbursement. Awaiting with hopes for early disbursement.

  18. #18
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    hi

    This is for the information of those pre-2006 and earlier/old pensioners, who believe that they have been subjected to some injustice or disparity due to the various implementation OMs of DoP/PW issued in Oct 2008 consequent to 6CPC recos.

    They may please visit the website of Retd. Railway Employees' Welfare Association(RREWA) and study their collective representation to the PM and also the different types of representations sent by individual pensioners to various authorities who matter to resolve the problem/ anomaly etc. The representations/ appeals contain a no of clarifications/ references/ precedences/ court case details/ earlier orders/ citing of rules etc.either in the text or as annexures.

    The above can be accessed in the RREWA's website at www.rrewa.org .

    They may be useful for drafting any representations for/ by the affected Pensioners/ Family pensioners.

    vnatarajan.

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

    Default

    hi All

    HAPPIEST DIWALI GREETINGS TO EVERYBODY! ENJOY EVERY MOMENT OF THIS LIGHT-FULL AND DELIGHTFUL DAY WITH ALL!

    SPECIAL WISHES TO GCONNECT AND ITS ESTABLISHMENT

    vnatarajan & Co-pensioners/ families from Chennai

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

    Default

    hi All

    Letters to the Editor of Hindu published on 27th Oct 2008 on one of the issues of 6th CPC reproduced (Courtesy : Mr R Sundaram/ Mr P K Ranganathan):

    Letter To The Editor In The Hindu 27/10/08

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

    Sixth Pay Commission

    The Sixth Central Pay Commission recommendations have brought some cheer to Central government employees in these difficult times. But a sizeable number of retired senior citizens have been left in the lurch. They include those who retired from some senior levels before January 1, 2006. The Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare’s clarification of October 3, 2008, has reduced to naught all accepted official norms, contravening the decision of the Supreme Court. It has brought despair to an arbitrarily created section of the same grade of pensioners.

    A spate of representations pointing out this anomaly has not met with any response. The government, in fact, reinforced the arbitrariness in its next clarification order dated October 14, 2008. The clarification has resulted in the denial of the minimum basic pay and the resultant minimum pension to those on one side of the chronological divide as on January 1, 2006.

    As a typical example, between two officers at the level of Joint Secretary, the one who retired before January 1, 2006, will draw a pension of Rs.23,700 whereas the others retiring on or after the same date will draw Rs.27,350 per month.

    P.K. Ranganathan,
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    vnatarajan

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Clarification and related orders
    By jitendraacr in forum Pay Fixation
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 30-10-2008, 01:31 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