+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Pensioners' federations /pensioners' associations & 6cpc grievances

  1. #21
    Member kkhameedkutty is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Thiruvananthapuram
    Posts
    37

    Default G-Connect Birthday

    Long Live G-Connect !!!!

    Many Thanks to G-Connect and its administrators for giving an oppertunity to express view of GOVT. PENSIONERS on various matters.

    KKH Kutty

  2. #22
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default Pensioners' federations /pensioners' associations & 6cpc grievances

    Congatulation to the G connect team on this memorable day of one year of service to pensioners and senior citizen. This platform has done service through me to a number of pensioners and senior pensioners of age 80 years or more at Bangalore, in arriving at the Revised pension, through pension and arrears calculator in addition to serving as a platform to share views and informtion. all those who have got the service do not access like me aqnd wants me convey their gratitude.

    I pray the god, the almighty, to bestow on the team long healthy life, prospeirity, and intellectuality to become a very big platform in this service.

    R S Subba Rao[/COLOR]

  3. #23
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    469

    Default

    There are cases of my type where their date of birth being 1.1.1946 retired on the 31st December, 2005 depriving them of the benefits of the 6th Pay Commission. Their cases also deserved to be pursued.

  4. #24
    Senior Member sundarar is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    631

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gopal Krishan View Post
    There are cases of my type where their date of birth being 1.1.1946 retired on the 31st December, 2005 depriving them of the benefits of the 6th Pay Commission. Their cases also deserved to be pursued.
    Dear Sir, Pl. check for CAT PR Bench Delhi Judgment dated 26.3.2010 in this regard from CAT Website. The OA No. is 2232/2009. The OA was dismissed.

  5. #25
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    469

    Default Relaxation of provision of FR 56 under FR 5A

    Quote Originally Posted by sundarar View Post
    Dear Sir, Pl. check for CAT PR Bench Delhi Judgment dated 26.3.2010 in this regard from CAT Website. The OA No. is 2232/2009. The OA was dismissed.




    As advised I have gone through the case. Background of my case is as follows:-

    2. Based on the 3rd Pay Commission report, Ministry of Finance modified FR 56(a) vide 7(7)-EV(A)/74 dated the 7th February, 1975 providing that every government servant shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which he attains the age of fifty eight years. A note bearing No. 7 was also incorporated providing that a government servant whose date of birth is the first of a month shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of preceding month on attaining the age of fifty eight years or sixty years as the case may be . This provision took effect from the 5th April, 1975.

    3. FR 56 and FR 5A are relevant in my case.


    4. Obviously the government servants used to retire on the last date of the month in which their dates birth fell even after issue of the orders by the Government in the Department of Personnel in November, 1973 and May, 1974 pursuant the acceptance of the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission. That is why need arose for the Ministry of Finance to modify the provisions FR 56(a). Those provisions were made applicable only from the 5thh April, 1975. In other words government servants started to retire, post-third pay commission, on the last day of the month in which their dates of birth fell from November, 1973/May 1974, which continued till the 4th April, 1975.

    5. My date of birth being the Ist January, 1946, I superannuated on retirement on the 31st December, 2005

    6. On my request, prior to July, 2009, the Department of Chemicals and Petro-chemicals, in view of the fact that after rendering 37 years of meritorious service and after my retirement I was found suitable retrospectively for inclusion in the suitability list of Directors of CSS for the year 2000 but without any benefits of that post, felt that my case was a rare and exceptional one, as in addition to the loss already suffered . Hence the Department opined that as in my case, in which I had already suffered on the promotion front as Director, FR 56 was causing undue hardship and that I be allowed to retire notionally on the 31st January, 2006 and accordingly pay revised notionally and pensionary benefits allowed as in the cases of post-2005 pensioners. Thereafter, as provided in FR 5A the opinion/decision referred to above was taken up for the concurrence of the Department of Expenditure.


    7. The Department of Expenditure did not concur in the opinion/decision on the following grounds:

    (a) “Shri Gopal Krishan may not be the only Government employee(s), retired or serving, whose date of birth falls on 1st day of any of months and they have retired/would retire from the Government service on the afternoon of the last day of the preceding month. Hence, his case cannot be categorized as an exceptional case.”

    (b) ” Further, there are strong possibilities of such cases at the time of implementation of recommendation of preceding Central Pay Commissions as a cut off date was also drawn for implementations of their recommendations. If relaxation in the instant case is allowed then there are possibilities that claims from such other retired employees may also surface. “

    © “Further, the fact that after his retirement on 31.12.2005 he was found suitable for inclusion in the suitability list of Directors of CSS for the year 2000 cannot be a ground for relaxation in terms of FR 5A as there are other employees who are found eligible for promotion in their next grade after their retirement only due to administrative reason. However, it is a co-incidence that Shri Gopal Krishan happens to be the sufferer on both the counts.”

    8. Logic at (a) above is misplaced as in all other cases, wherein date of birth falls on the 1st day of any month including January ,would not cause any detriment in terms of pensionary entitlement and terminal benefits. The position changed radically in the light of the entitlements of payouts to all the employees, in the wake of the 6th Central Pay Commission’s (CPC) recommendations. Since the sixth CPC set 01.01.2006 as the cut off date for the new and enhanced entitlement, an employee with date of birth as the 1st January, 1946 only, was bound to suffer substantial losses in pay and other allowance if he were to retire a day prior to his date of birth under FR 56. With reference to (b) above it may be stated that decisions based on the recommendations of the 5th and 4th Central Pay Commissions were made applicable from the 1st January, 1996 and the 1st January, 1986 respectively. As such only those with dates of birth as the 1st January, 1936 or the 1st January, 1926 would be effected. In any case the Government of India, for the first time, decided that the additional quantum of pension/family pension on attaining the age of 80 years and above would be admissible from the 1st day of the month in which the date of birth falls. This decision of the Government was also only post- sixth Pay Commission. Similar treatment is required to be given to those whose date of birth is the 1st January, 1946 as not doing so would be discriminatory. The argument at (c) above is also illogical. When one is suffering hugely (not getting PB IV) on one count and because of the provision of FR 56 he is made to suffer on another count that would mean that the rule in question is harshly operating against him only, who is already a sufferer. Had that case been a normal one, i.e., without loss of PB IV, the position would have been different. Loss of promotion after inclusion in the promotion list in other cases may not be that huge. Moreover that may not be in respect of those with the date of birth as the Ist January, 1946. As such the case of the undersigned stands alone.


    9. At this stage, keeping in view the above points, the problem was discussed informally with the then Director, Shri Manoj Sahay, in the Department of Expenditure. He suggested that I should get a representation, suggesting that the matter may be restricted to the 6th CPC in the light of the points mentioned above, forwarded from my Department. Accordingly a representation was submitted to the Department of Chemicals and Petro-chemicals, which was forwarded to the Department of Expenditure on the 4th September, 2009 for favourable consideration.

    10. As during another informal discussion a couple of points had come to light, such as, number of such cases would be very large, the cases would involve extension in service etc. etc., I submitted a representation, to the Department of Expenditure on the 14 October, 2009 stating that (a) on the basis of the data I obtained from the Central Pension Accounting Organization (CPAO) number of such pensioners would be negligible (b) in the light of the fact that after the sixth Pay Commission additional quantum of pension/family pension had been allowed from the month in which the date of birth falls it would be discriminatory if the same treatment is not given to those whose date of birth was 1.1.1946 and (c) the Fundamental Rules provide for extension in service to all those whose date of birth is other than 1st of a month, whereas those whose date of birth is 1st of a month are being deprived of the same.

    11. Without taking any action on the communication dated the 4th September, 2009 from the Department of Chemicals and Petro-chemicals, the Department vide their communication dated the 11th January, 2010 forwarded the gist, as understood by them, of my representation dated the 14th October, 2009 referred to above, to the Department of Personnel for comments in the matter. Before comments of the Department of Personnel could be received by the Department of Expenditure, on the 26th February, 2010, I suggested to them that if old precedents/guidelines as to what would constitute “hardship” are not available the Department may like to take a view on that also. This suggestion of mine was forwarded to the Department of Chemicals and Petro-chemicals on the 17th May, 2010 for examination in the light of Rule 5A of FR/SR and then to refer the case to Ministry of Finance for concurrence.



    12. In reply to the communication of the Department of Expenditure dated the 11th January, 2010, Department of Personnel and Training wrote back on the 29th March, 2011 to the Expenditure Department practically offering no comments. It was, however, suggested that the Department of Pension might be consulted. On the other side, in response to the O.M. of the Department of Expenditure the Department of Chemicals and Petro-chemicals suggested vide their OM dated the 18th April, 2011 that all such cases wherein individuals are deprived of the benefits of the 6th Pay Commission may be treated as “hardship” cases under FR 5A and relaxation given in FR 56. It was also mentioned that earlier the request of the undersigned had been considered in the Department of Chemicals and Petro-chemicals and it was decided to relax the provision of FR 56(a) in terms of FR 5A with the approval of the Secretary. The same was referred to the Department of Expenditure for concurrence as the Department of Chemicals and Petro-chemicals was competent to do so only with the concurrence of the Ministry of Finance.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Similar Threads

  1. Grade pay for past pensioners
    By yenyem in forum Pensioners
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 28-12-2012, 05:43 PM
  2. Replies: 23
    Last Post: 25-12-2008, 11:00 AM
  3. pre 1996 Pensioners _ parity
    By RSundaram in forum Pensioners
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 02-12-2008, 08:22 PM
  4. Pensioners of pre-2006 & pre-2.9.2008
    By sundarar in forum Pensioners
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-12-2008, 07:54 PM
  5. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-10-2008, 06:26 AM

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