+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 17 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 323

Thread: JUSTICE THROUGH RESTORATION OF PARITY TO ALL OLD PENSIONERS-6CPC OMs-PLEA TO HON. PM

  1. #41
    Junior Member V.RAGHURAMAN is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Mandaveli, Chennai
    Posts
    3

    Default JUSTICE THROUGH RESTORATION OF PARITY TO ALL OLD PENSIONERS-6CPC OMs-PLEA TO HON. PM

    Dear friends,

    I had lodged my < 500 character grievance under 'Social Justice' with the PM Portal and it is worded
    more or less as below.

    Dear Mr. P.M.,
    Regards, I am a pre 2006 retiree from DAE & retired in the pre revised scale of Rs.18400-500-.
    My basic pension has been refixed by DP&PW and MF at Rs.23700 through misinterpretation and
    in violation of 1]Supreme Courts' directives for not creating classes of pensioners out of those retiring in equivalent grade, pay and service and 2]Cabinets' approval of 6 th cpc recommendations on pension fixation. I request you to redress issue and fix my pension at Rs.27350. With best wishes.

    I secured Thanks for views or something to the effect for my posting from the Portal Administrator..

  2. #42
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear All

    Now Anomoly Committee has been set up a couple of days ago.

    Circular is available on MoP/PG/P- DoPT site.


    Gist:

    "Centre decides to set up anomaly committee for 6th pay panel
    Thu, Jan 15 08:22 PM

    New Delhi, Jan 15 (PTI) The Government has decided to set up an Anomaly Committee to settle disputes arising out of implementation of the sixth pay commission recommendations. The panel will receive anomalies upto six months from the date of its constitution and will dispose them within one year, the Department of Personnel, Public Grievances and Training said in its order.

    DoPT sources today said the items already taken up by the Fast Track Committee will not be considered by the anomaly committee. They said there will be two Anomaly Committees -- national and departmental.

    The national anomaly committee will deal with anomalies common to two or more departments and in respect of common categories of employees. The departmental anomaly committee will handle cases pertaining exclusively to the department concerned and will have no repercussions on the employees of another ministry or department.

    The anomaly will include cases where the maximum of the revised scale is less than the amount at which one is entitled to be fixed and where the amount of revised allowance is less than the existing rate, they said. PTI."


    PENSIONS- will the anomolaies be settled by this Committee?
    THEN ONE YEAR?

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 16-01-2009 at 07:33 AM.

  3. #43
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Relevant Parts of the Anomoly Committeee OM:
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No.111212008-lCA DT 11th January 2009
    Government of India
    Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions
    Department of Personnel & Training
    lCA Section
    Setting up of Anomaly Committee to settle the Anomalies arising out
    of the implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission's recommendations.

    The undersigned is directed to say that in terms of an agreement with the
    Staff Side of the National Council, it has been decided that appropnate Anomaly
    Committees should be set up, consisting of representatives of the Official Side
    and the Staff Side to settle the anomalies arising out of the implementation of
    the 6th Pay Commission's recommendations, subject to the following
    conditions, namely:………….

    Anomoly:
    (a) Where the Official Side and the Staff Side are of the opinion that any
    recommendation is in contravention of the principle or the policy
    enunciated by the Sixth Central Pay Commission itself without the
    Commission assigning any reason; and
    (b) Where the maximum of the revised scale is less than the amount at
    which one is entitled to be fixed except in those cases where the
    same is as a result of modified fixation formula adopted by the
    Government; and


    There will be 2 levels of Anomaly Committees, National and
    Departmental, consisting of representatives of the Official Side and the Staff
    Side of the National Council and the Departmental Council respectively.
    (3) The Departmental Anomaly Committee may be chaired by the Additional
    Secretary (Admn.) or the Joint Secretary (Admn.), if there is no post of
    Additional Secretary (Admn.). Financial Adviser of the Ministry/Department
    shall be one of the Members of the Departmental Anomaly Committee
    (4) The National Anomaly Committee will deal with anomalies common to
    two or more Departments and in respect of common categories of employees.
    The Departmental Anomaly Committee will deal with anomalies pertaining
    exclusively to the Department concerned and having no repercussions on the
    employees of another Ministry/Department in the opinion of the Financial
    Adviser. The items already taken up by the Fast Track Committee, will not be
    considered by the Anomaly Committee.
    (5) The Anomaly Committee shall receive anomalies through Secretary, Staff
    Side of respective Council upto six months from the date of its constitution and
    it will finally dispose of all the anomalies within a period of one year from the
    date of its constitution. Any recommendations of the Anomaly Committee to
    resolve the anomaly shall be subject to the approval of the Government
    (6) Cases where there is a dispute about the definition of "anomaly" and those
    where there is a disagreement between the Staff Side and the Official Side on
    the anomaly will be referred to an "Arbitrator" to be appointed out of a panel of
    names proposed by the two sides. However, this arbitration will not be a part of
    the JCM Scheme.
    (7) The Arbitrator so appointed shall consider the disputed cases arising in the
    Anomaly Committees at the National as well as Departmental level.
    (8) Orders regarding appointment of the Arbitrator and constitution of
    Anomaly Committee at National Level will be issued separately.
    (9) All Ministries/Departments are accordingly requested to take urgent action
    to set up the Anomaly Committees for settlement of anomalies arising out of
    implementation of the 6th Pay Commission's recommendations, as stipulated
    above.

    Deputy Secretary (JCA)
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    WHERE DO THE PENSIONERS BUTT IN? NO SCOPE?
    VNatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 16-01-2009 at 09:44 AM. Reason: Typographical errors

  4. #44
    Senior Member Kanaujiaml is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    499

    Default

    My dear all pensioner friends.

    I have also seen the Govt. Notification regarding setting up of Anomally Committee. These Committees would deal with only the cases of working employees and NOT PENSIONERS. In the past also, Anomally Committee was dealing with cases of working employees only.There is no forum for Pensioners except Ministry of Personnel, Deptt of Pensioners and Pensioners welfare. This Deptt. has already done us great harm by issuing an OM dated
    3rd Oct .We have following alternatices available :

    1 Appeal to Prime Minister for not dividing pensioners into Pre2006, post 2006 and post 2008 in view of Constitutional Bench of honorable Supreme Court of India judgment dated 17 02 9182 and other such Judgments.
    2 Appeal to President of India on similar grounds.
    3 Appeal to NHRC and other such statuary Authority who is ready
    to take up our case with the Govt.
    4 PIL in honorable Supreme Court.

  5. #45
    Senior Member dnaga57
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    153

    Default

    To my understanding, Anomalies committee will deal with 'anomalies across cadres, departments etc' in applying/implementing GoI memorandums. It will not deal with the Memorandums themselves, a fait accomplii.
    Our case is 'faulty interpretation of PC recommendations' while issuing Memorandums. This would be out of purview of the said Committee.
    Hence, we have recourse only to 'Appeal. Lobby, Knock on doors of justice'.

  6. #46
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear All- PART ONE of DRAFT TO PM TODAY. PART II WILL FOLLOW SOON

    As r u all aware, we have put up earlier two drafts- one by Mr K and another by Mr PKR- models for making our individual pleas to the hon. PM. sooner or a bit later.

    I have also tried to bring out a "PILLAYAAR"- my draft- but as Mr Badri/ Mr Sundar may look at it - cd be an "HANUMAAR also- I dont mind - (I think hanumaar is the first Geologist- (my profession) as he carried the first rock sample (a mountain itself) to Lanka!'

    Mine is a masala-mix of all- my rep to DoP&PW/NHRC/ K & PKRs drafts/ some legal tips of BRY-BRN Raos etc.

    Appendix has to be added as one feels- say pension details from PPOs/ earlier reps copies/ gist of court judgments (NHRC- PKR drafts)/ OMs references (NHRC draft) etc.

    This draft is very exhaustive - and one can cut/ size/ reduce/ add/ modify etc- purpose is to provide all with ready access to info!

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    DRAFT PREPARED BY VNATARAJAN FOR HIS APPEAL TO HON. PRIME MINISTER OF INDIA, JAN.09


    No: 2009-1 Dated Jan.,2009

    From:
    (Individual's name etc)

    To:
    THE HONOURABLE PRIME MINISTER OF INDIA,
    PMO’s Office, South Block, Raisina Hill,
    New Delhi -110011.

    Sub. : - Implementation of Recommendations of 6 th CPC Report-INJUSTICE due to anomaly in fixation of Revised Basic Pension, between Pensioners of the same status and pay who retired prior to 01 01 2006 and those who retired after 01 01 2006.

    Respected Sir,

    With profound disappointment and utmost distress, I and many old, aged, support-less Pre-2006 and earlier Pensioners have to APPEAL to your esteemed office to look into the turmoil and turbulence that has been created amongst all of us due to the loss of our pension entitlements due to the disastrous Office Memorandums F.No 38/37/08-P&PW(A)(ptI/II) dtd 3rd and even No.38/37/08-P&PW(A)ptI dtd 14th October 2008 issued by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions (through their Deptt. Of Pensions & Pensioners’ Welfare). We feel the very edifice of Pensioners’ rights and protections based on Equality, Dignity and Justice, guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and also pronounced in various Judgments of the Supreme Court/ High Courts of India, stands shattered.

    A. I retired as Dy. Director General, Geological Survey of India in pre-revised scale Rs.18400-22400 on 31-05-1997. The revised pay band, irrespective od the pre-revised pay scales, for pensioners of erstwhile S25 to S-30 as per 6 CPC is Rs.37400-67000 + Grade Pay (GP)10000 [.OM 38/37/08- P&PW(A)pt1,14th Oct '08]. My revised pension is fixed accordingly at Rs.23700 which is 50% of the sum of minimum iof the pay band i.e Rs.37400+ GP10000. This fixation is anomalous, erroneous and unjust since the corresponding minimum pay in the equivalent scale for promotees to my rank [Dy Director General, Geological Survey of India] is Rs.44700 after 1.1.2006,- as the Pre-revised Pay Scale (S 29) of Rs18400-22400 is revised to Rs 44700-67000 (Ministry of Finance's OM FNo1/1/2008-1C,30/08/08 (Page 32/ 6CPC Pay Revision). Thus the 50% of the minimum pay in the pay band [Rs 44700] +Grade Pay Rs1000] works out to Rs.27350. Therefore my revised pension, IN THE LEAST, has to be fixed at Rs.27350.(instead of Rs23700). My submissions in this regard are presented hereunder

    B. Pension Fixation Irregularities, Disparities among equally placed pensioners, and Details

    1.In the pre-revised pay scales ( wef 1/1/1996) there were among others, the following 7 different scales S24,: S25,S26,S27,S28,S29 and S30.I retired from an SAG level post- Scale S29, as Deputy Director General, Geological Survey of India, on 31.05.1997(an).At the time of retirement my basic pay was Rs 19400/- in the pre- revised S29 Scale of 18400-500-22400. My basic pension was fixed at Rs9700, on the basis of this last pay drawn.

    2.In the revised scales of pay accepted by the Government wef 1-1-2006, vide Memorandum F.No.1/1/2008 dt 30-08-08, the pay scales S24, S25, S26, S27, S28, S29 and S30, have been MERGED and designated as PB 4.

    3.Although, this merger placed the pre-revised scales S24 to S30 under a single pay band PB4, the above Memorandum had logically and equitably preserved the IDENTITY of these different scales in the revised Pay Band effective from, 1-1-06. As can be gleaned from page 32 of the Memorandum F.No.1/1/2008-IC dt 30-08-08, pay band 4 (PB4) is not a monolithic table but a cluster of distinct tables, each table corresponding to a particular pre revised table of pay scale. This is as it should be, being the essential feature of every pay structure and revision of pay structures. On this basis the pr -revised scale of S29, ( 18400-500-22400 ) from which I retired as Deputy Director General, GSI, corresponds to the particular table in which the minimum pay is, Rs 44700 ,the Grade Pay (GP) is Rs10,000/- and the minimum basic starting pay which is the sum of pay in the pay band and the GP is Rs 54700/--. For comparison and distinction, the position in respect of all other pre-revised scales in the pay band PB 4, the revised structure is as under (all in Rs)::
    Pay Pre-revised Minimum Pay in the Grade Pay Revised
    Scale No Minimum Revised Pay Band PB4 Basic Pay
    S24 14300 37400 8700 46100
    S25 15100 39690 8700 48390
    S26 16400 39690 8900 48590
    S27 16400 39690 8900 48590
    S28 14300 37400 10000 47400
    S29 18400 44700 10000 54700
    S30 22400 51850 12000 63850

    4.The very substantial differences in the scales in the pre-revised and the corresponding differences in the revised structure may be noted. Merely because the pay band happens to be a single scale 37400 – 67000/- IT DOES NOT constitute a single table and therefore the MINIMUM of the pay band CAN NOT become the MINIMUM OF THE PAY for all the individual/ distinct pay scales/tables, as is obvious from above..

    5.The Office Memorandum F. No 38/37/)OP& PW(A) dt 1-9-08, which lays
    down the provisions applicable to pensioners, has prescribed in para 4.2, an over riding provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than fifty percent of the minimum of the PAY in the pay band plus the grade pay CORRESPONDING to the pre revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired.

    6.In order to apply the above overriding provision of para 4.2, it is imperative to apply the appropriate TABLE of PAY in the Pay Band which corresponds to the pre-revised scale from which the pensioner retired. In my case the pre-revised scale at the time of retirement was Rs18400-500-22400.On going through the tables in the said Memorandum F.No. 1/1/2008-IC dt 30-08-08., it is absolutely clear that the corresponding table in the pay band (PB4) is the table of which the lowest level ( minimum basic pay) is Rs54700/- ( 44700 + 10000). As explained under pt no 3 above, no single table is prescribed for all those who retired from pre revised scales, S24 to S 30.It is hence imperative to identify and apply the appropriate table in the Memorandum F.No.1/1/2008/IC dt 30-08-08. under PB4, applicable to S29, as shown under pt no 3 above.

    7.It is submitted that revision of pension is not an autonomous exercise. But is rooted in the pre-revised pay at the time of retirement and the corresponding pay in the revised scale as per Memorandum F.No.1/1/2008-IC dt 30-08-08

    8.The ready reckoned tables attached to the Memorandum F.No38/37/08-P&W (A) pt I dt 14 Oct 2008, have unjustifiably ignored the multi table feature of the Pay Bands, Grade Pay and revised Basic Pay of the Memorandum F.No 1/1/2009-1C dt 30-08-08. They have erroneously lumped together, disparate pre-revised pay scales.

    9.Such an indiscrimination has also resulted in the introduction of two different starting basic pays for the same post one for the serving and the other for the retired on the one hand and the same minimum pay for all the seven pay scales, S-24 to S 30. from Junior Administrative Grade through Senior Administrative Grade to Higher Administrative Grade

    10. For example a pre-2006 Pensioner of SAG level and minimum pay in pre-revised pay Scale of 18400 -22400 would be now entitled for a Revised Basic Pension 23700 only whereas a post -2006 Pensioner of same status and pre-revised pay and retiring on 31 01 06, would be entitle for Revised Basic Pension of 27350. Thus a Pre-2006 Pensioner would suffer a loss of 3650 plus DR thereon, per month for rest of his life, (which is left not much in any case) simply because he had retired a few days earlier than a post-2006 Pensioner of same status and pre-revised pay. This is bound to happen with each of the pre-2006 retiree, with a loss of varying amount of per month, depending upon his pre-2006 status and pay. This is a clear cut case of withdrawal of due once granted. Besides, it is a case of dividing pensioners in to two groups with a cut off date and creating wide disparity between the two groups while fixing their Revised Basic Pension.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Contd in PART II later

    vnatarajan

  7. #47
    Senior Member badri mannargudi is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Surat
    Posts
    283

    Exclamation pre 1996 retireesand pre 2006 retirees vis a vis post 1.1.12006 retirees

    Dear friends,
    This refers to post # 46 in the instant thread.
    As those who are in the know of Bajanai Sampradayam, Radha Kalyanam (for that matter any Bajani Mahotsavam) starts with Ganapathi Poojai and the functions draw to a close with Pooja to Hanuman. Likewise, I wish success to Shri Natarajan and I pray to Lord Rajagopalaswamy.
    Coming to the issue of enlighting the uninitiated blocks of retired officers, recently I had asked a friend of mine who retired as Superintendent of C.Excise way back in 1990, about his revised pension. With pleasure he declared that his Basic pension is about 9.5T (as of now). He had served Govt for 39 years and as a Group B officer he had served for 3 years. Then I told him with approximately same length of service in the said cadre (with over all service of 26 years service), I retired voluntarily today, I would be getting 13 T approx, he was not surprised and told me that it could not be faught against. It is then that I told him about GConnect and about Shri Natarajan.
    (to be contd)
    With regards,
    Badri

  8. #48
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear All,

    I am posting the contn of my earlier posting at sl .no 46 above:---thiis is Part B- but it is contn of the same text. Some para pertains to individual data- so one can modify suitably:
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    C. Personal Submissions:

    1.Functionally, I held the position of a Head of the Department/ Cadre Controlling Authority (GroupC/D) viz. as the Head of the Airborne Mineral Surveys & Exploration(AMSE) Wing of GSI and I was the controlling/reporting officer for about .....Sel. Grade Directors (S 24;Scale 14300-18300) among all the rest. Relegating me to the level of this lower scale for BASIC PENSION purpose is most unjust/ unfair/ illogical and against any rule. NO REVISION CAN REDUCE MY ENTITLEMENT TO ONCE FIXED BASIC PENSION EQUIVALENT (WHICH SHALL BE NOT LESS THAN 27350) and payment of my deferred wage can not be reduced in an arbitrary and selective manner. Causing unwarranted reduction in my entitled BASIC PENSION (Rs 27350 to Rs 23700).

    D. Plea for review and justice:

    1.The glaring inequity/ inequality of treatment, resulting in hostile discrimination against the pre- 2006 pensioners is clear from the fixation irregularities and omissions presented above. The structuring of a single MINIMUM of the Pay Band for all the pre- revised pay scales ( for existing pensioners alone) is an exercise that cannot stand in the face of the basic feature of the multi table structure as per the Revised Pay Rules and multi-scales therein.. And is violation of the very scheme of the tables for revision of pay scales cast in Memorandum F.No.1/1/2008- IC dt 30-08-08.

    2. Such treatment offends protection guaranteed in Article 14 of the Constitution and goes against the principle and spirit of parity among pensioners of the same class/rank/post irrespective of their dates of retirement, established/ enforced in several judgments of the Supreme court and accepted by the Government. Many of the Pay Commissions have also emphasized on this aspect clearly and justifiably. Recognizing my original rank/GRADE as higher for GRADE PAY only and not for BASIC PAY for arriving at the REVISED PENSION is untenable/ irregular/against any Rule. This will amount to denial/deprival of my RIGHTFUL/ LEGAL/ CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED (under Article 14) entitlement to the RIGHTFUL PENSIONARY BENEFIT of a SAG level retiree at all times at the minimum in the least. Hence my submission for parity/ equality in Pension with respect to the the same rank/ scale/grade of my peers/ equals now.

    3.Reduction in Pay may be a sort of punishment for those in service!. Effective reduction in my entitled Pension- that too to the minimum of a new Pay Band –to that of the ‘Basic Pension equivalent’ of a lower scale (Sel. Gr. Director)- is like imposing punishment on a Pensioner for no offence of his, and this amounts to nothing but an unjust/ unfair/ unethical act of infliction of indignity.

    4.. The discriminative actions perpetuated through the OMs of 3 rd and 14 th Oct 2008, have resulted in depriving me (us) the Equality, Dignity and Justice, the three cardinal principles of Human Rights for which I (and many aged/ helpless/ legal support-less/ some even disabled are) am entitled at this old age. Violation of Article 14 of Constitution by ignoring Court Judgments on pension parity/equality before Law and violation of Article 21 of Constitution by depriving me the right amount of pension which in turn deprives part of means to my livelihood (viz. protection to my Life/ Property/ Freedom etc), are very much against human rights and Constitutional guarantees. Hence the plea for remedy/ resolution by the highest office of the country stands justified.

    E. Relief Sought:

    1.I shall be grateful for a sympathetic and just scrutiny of my submissions and a positive decision to restore my pension to Rs 27350(p.m. w.e.f 1.1.2006) at the MINIMUM instead of Rs 23700 now fixed by my pension disbursing Branch. In fact my rightful entitlement as per full parity shall be Rs28025pm(w.e.f.1.1.2006)as the former is only a modified parity.

    2.I also appeal once again to your kind good office to review and revise the pension orders suitably so that I and other similarly placed pre-2006 pensioners are given justice by the employer whom we all served through all the best years of life and are not driven to the time consuming, costly and physically and mentally exhausting prospect of court cases in their withering days ahead, for which our resources and legal assistance are neither affordable nor we can outlive the time/ delays involved (5-10yrs!).

    Eagerly awaiting your considered positive benevolent actions and orders soon,.

    Yours faithfully
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES UNDER VARIOUS ARTICLES:

    Right to Equality
    Article 14. Equal i ty before law.—The State shall not deny to any person
    Equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the
    territory of India.

    Right to Freedom
    Article 21. Protection of life and personal liberty.—No person shall be
    deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    RECENT ARC REPORT (4) ON ‘ETHICS IN GOVERNANCE’ CONCLUDES:
    “Rivers do not drink their waters themselves, nor do trees eat their fruit, nor do the clouds eat the grains raised by them. The wealth of the noble is used solely for the benefit of others”
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    WITH REQUEST TOALL TO ACT AND BE QUICK IN DOING SO - BEFORE FEB 10th-say before budget session- as all wd get busy for budget- then elections etc.

    Regards

    VNatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 17-01-2009 at 09:48 PM.

  9. #49
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear All

    I think my postings at sl nos 46 & 48, with Mr Badri's well wishes in between, are well within the normal protocol- pl forgive some grammatic/ american Spelling mistakes etc.

    Now I am topping (in fact bottoming) the same with two appensices wh are the same attached to NHRC appeal- except that one of them contains more gist of court cases regarding the violation of the acceptable norms of authority- like DoP&PW modifying the text/ language etc-
    in our case(I dont think President of India/ Hon PM wd have been pleased to do the same -without .....).

    APPENDIX I will appear now. Later Appendix II.

    THESE ARE APART FROM WHAT ONE HAS TO FURNISH IN TERMS OF PERSONAL DATA_ PPO references etc.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    APPENDIX I

    Part A

    PENSION PARITY/ EQUALITY-RELATION TO LIFE-CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14

    *Some citations of the Supreme Court judgments &
    Andhra Pradesh high Court judgment on Tuesday 27.7.2004
    in their order on Writ petitions Nos.13680,16407,23938 of 2001 & 6122 of 2002

    1.All India Reserve Bank Retired Officers Association vs.Union of India—AIR 1992, SC 767): Hon.Mr Justice Ahamadi reasserted: “The concept of pension is now well known and has been clarified by the court time and again,. It is not charity or bounty nor is it gratuitous payment solely dependent on the whim or sweet will of the employer. It is earned for rendering long service and is often described as deferred portion of compensation for the past service. It is in fact in the nature of a social security plan to provide for the December of life of a superannuated employee”.

    2.Famous landmark-D.S.Nakra case (1982): The Supreme Court held that pension is neither a bounty nor a gratuitous payment depending solely upon the sweet will or grace of the employer. It is a right and its payment does not depend upon the discretion of the Government. Entitlement to pension to government servants being the product of statutory rule is an enforceable right. Pension is paid as a monthly benefit for past satisfactory service rendered while the employee was physically and mentally alert and in expectation that he would be looked after in the fall of life.
    Classification of pensioners will have to answer the test of Article 14 of the Constitution, further held the court……
    …..the Supreme Court concluded, pensioners for the purpose of pensionary benefits form a class. Such homogeneous class could not be arbitrarily divided when the pension undergoes an upward revision. The fixation of the cut off date was arbitrary ..... The division classifying pensioners into two classes is not based on any rational principle, held the Court.

    3.Writ petitions Nos.13680, 16407, 23938 of 2001 and 6122 of 2002 .Ramachandra Raju and others vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh: The Fifth Central Pay Commission also required that as pension is not in the nature of a dole, it should be fixed, revised, modified and changed in ways not entirely dissimilar to the salary granted to the serving employees. A fortuitous circumstance of the date of retirement cannot constitute a legitimate ground for classification, and a classification founded on such fortuitous circumstance would not stand the test of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

    4.R.L.Marwah vs. the Union of India and others: The Supreme Court held that in the absence of any acceptable explanation or justification, the classification of pensioners who were working in the Government/autonomous bodies into two classes merely on the basis of the date of retirement is unconstitutional .....

    5.Indian Ex-services League and others vs. the Union of India and others: The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Nakra held that the pensioners constitute a homogeneous class and the benefits of liberalized pension should be extended equally to all retirees, irrespective of their date of retirement and could not be confined only to those who retired on or after the prescribed date. As a result of this ratio, the Supreme Court in Nakra struck down the relevant parts of the OM which confined the liberalized benefits to retirees on or after a specified date and extended the benefits to all retirees covered by the pension scheme.

    6.Supreme Court judgment on 9.9.08 in Bains case:
    “….The question regarding creation of different classes within the same cadre on the basis of the doctrine of intelligible differentia having nexus with the object to be achieved, has fallen for consideration at various intervals for the High Courts as well as this Court, over the years. The said question was taken up by a Constitution Bench in the case of D.S. Nakara (supra) where in no uncertain terms throughout the judgment it has been repeatedly observed that the date of retirement of an employee cannot form a valid criterion for classification, for if that is the criterion those who retired by the end of the month will form a class by themselves. In the context of that case, which is similar to that of the instant case, it was held that Article 14 of the Constitution had been wholly violated, inasmuch as, the Pension Rules being statutory in character, the amended Rules, specifying a cut-off date resulted in differential and discriminatory treatment of equals in the matter of commutation of pension. It was further observed that it would have a traumatic effect on those who retired just before that date. The division which classified pensioners into two classes was held to be artificial and arbitrary and not based on any rational principle and whatever principle, if there was any, had not only no nexus to the objects sought to be achieved by amending the Pension Rules, but was counter productive and ran counter to the very object of the pension scheme. It was ultimately held that the classification did not satisfy the test of Article 14 of the Constitution..….”

    7.“If any classification is made relating to pay scales and such classification is unreasonable and if unequal pay is based on no classification, then Art. 14. will at once be attracted, and such classification should be set at naught. (In other words, , where unequal pay has brought about, a discrimination within the meaning of Art 14, it will be a case of " equal pay for equal work' as envisaged by Art 14.) (Supreme court employees welfare Assn Vs Union of India AIR 1990 SC 334 (Muratri mohan Dutt and K Thommen JJ)”

    Part B

    OTHER JUDGMENTS WHICH HIGHLIGHT THE OTHER WEAKNESSES/ INFIRMITIES OF THE OMs besides the parity angle:

    “In Shri Sita Ram Sugar C o Ltd, Vs Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1277, 1297, the Supreme Court ( Mr Justice Thommen) has laid down that "Any act of the repository of power, whether legislative or administrative or quasi judicial, is open to challenge, if it is in conflict with the constitution or the governing Act or the general principles of the Law of the Land, or if it is so arbitrary or unreasonable that no fair minded authority could ever have made it "

    “Administrative action may be based on statute or may be be purely executive action of an administrative nature, that is, of non-statutory character. In either case, a statutory or non statutory order of the executive which is arbitrary may be set aside. ( Iron and Metal Traders vs Jaskiel, AIR 1984 SC 629.( and other judgments.)”

    “Administrative Instructions Art 309) Though non-statutory Rules cannot modify Statutory Rules, there is nothing to prevent the Government from issuing administrative instructions on matters upon which the statutory Rules are silent ( Comptroller Vs Mohan(1992) 1SCC 20. ( which means that non-statutory Rules cannot modify statutory Rules; administrative instructions can only be issued on matters that are silent in the statutory Rules)”
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regards

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 18-01-2009 at 01:47 PM.

  10. #50
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear All

    This is in contn of my posting above al no 49.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    APPENDIX II

    USEFUL REFERENCES:

    GOVT. ORDERS dated 1.9.2008 relatingTO PENSION SANCTION AND IMPLEMENTION FOR PRE-2006 PENSIONERS, which have been issued with the MANDATORY SANCTIONS OF PRESIDENT/ CABINET APPROVALS and the subsequent orders dated 3.10.2008 and 14.10.2008, WHICH ARE CONTRADICTORY and which have been issued without the express sanction of the President/Cabinet approval.

    1.Gazette Notification issued vide Resolution No OM/38/37/08-P&PW(A) dtd 29th August 2008 conveyed the Govt.’s decision on the recommendations made by the 6th CPC on the pensionary benefits to the Central Govt. Employees etc.to accept broadly the same subject to certain modifications.

    As such all the recommendations of different categories viz. ACCEPTED/ ACCEPTED WITH MODIFICATION/ NOT ACCEPTED are all listed in the said order.

    This order is signed by the Secretary to the Govt. of India MoP/PG/P herself.

    (It may be noted that the “modifications” detailed in this order have been made with the sanction of the President/Cabinet approval and stand sanctified through publication in the Gazette and do not invite any procedural lapse/ irregularity).

    2.OM F.No.38/37/08-/P&PW(A) dtd 1st Sept 2008 conveyed the implementation of the above recommendations contained in the Resolution Order at sl.no 1 above and it relates to CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972 etc. Its first paragraph states:

    “The undersigned is directed to say that in pursuance of Government’s decision on the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission, SANCTION OF THE PRESIDENT IS HEREBY ACCORDED TO THE REGULATION WITH EFFECT FROM 1.1.2006, OF PENSION...."

    This OM is also signed by the Secretary to the Govt. of India, MoP/PG/P herself.

    (It may be noted that this OM has the sanction of the President. CAG concurrence indicated )

    3. & 4..OMs F No.38/37/08-P&PW(A) Pt-1 and Pt-2 both dtd 3.10.2008 state that in view of the large number of references received in the Deptt of Pensions/and Pensioners’ Welfare seeking clarifications regarding earlier OM (s) , the matter had been considered in consultation with the MINISTRY OF FINANCE, Deptt of Expenditure, and the necessary clarifications/ modifications thereon are being issued.

    Provisions in the earlier OM are listed on one side and respective clarifications/ “modifications” are listed along-side

    These orders are signed only by the Director, Deptt. Of Pension and Public Welfare –NOT BY THE SECRETARY- The orders have the concurrence of Ministry of Finance (Deptt of Expenditure) vide their ICUO No 4.2/22/2008-C dtd 30th Sept 2008.No CAG concurrence.

    HOWEVER, IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE that the sanction of the President, that is, the sanction/approval of the Cabinet has not been obtained for this purpose and to that extent the OM dated 3.10.008 exceeds the powers to issue clarifications/modifications, in gross violation of the intent and spirit of the OM dated 1.9.2008.They lack the mandatory requirement of sanction of President or approval/sanction of the Cabinet for such new “modifications”/ “interpretations”.

    5.OM No.38/37/08-P&PW(A).Pt.1 dtd 14th Oct 2008 conveys again some clarifications regarding delay in pension disbursals, about the discussions held with all concerned including the PDBs, provides the ready reckoner, concordance table, some illustrations etc for calculation/ fixation of the pensions, DR additions, arrears, payment deadlines,entry in PPOs,intimation on the disbursal of revised pension to the CPAO/ AO,PAO’s office etc.;actions for the CGA/CPAO are also outlined.

    This OM is also signed by the Director, Deptt of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare – NOT BY THE SECRETARY.

    The deliberate and detrimental “modifications””clarifications” of OM of 3 rd Oct 2008 are perpetauated here in the Form of Annexures of concordant tables/ illustrative examples.

    This OM/ all its contents, detrimental to the Pensioners do not have the mandatory requirements of the President or approval/ sanction of the Cabinet for such effectuations. No CAG concurrence .
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Now my draft for rep to Hon PM is contained in postings at sl nos.46 48 49 50 -pl check.
    All the best
    Regards
    vnatarajan.

  11. #51
    Senior Member Kanaujiaml is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    499

    Default

    My dear Pensioner friends.I sent my appeal to PM on 14 10 08. Now after 3 months of waiting, I have sent a reminder, which I am reproducing below :

    M L Kanaujia,
    473, Indira Nagar Colony, P.O. New Forest,
    Dehra Dun ( Uttrakhand ) – 248006.
    No. Mlk/2008/4 Date 14 01 09

    To,

    Honorable Prime Minister Of India,
    Prime Minister’s Office,
    New Delhi – 110001.

    Dear Sir,

    Sub.:- Restoration of pension as recommended by VI CPC Report para 5.1.47, as accepted by the Govt. vide Ministry of Personnel, PG and Pensions (Deptt of Pension and Pensioner’s welfare) Resolution No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A) dated 29 08 08 and in accordance with the Fitment Tables annexed to the Finance Ministry’s(Implementation Cell) F.No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 30.08.08.

    Ref.:- My appeal No. Mlk/2008/3 dated 14 10 08.

    With due respect I beg to invite your kind attention to my appeal No. Mlk/2008/3 dated 14 10 08 for restoration of my revised pension. Nothing has been heard so far nor any relief has appeared. I once again bring the following facts for your kind consideration and sympathetic action :

    1 That, VI CPC has recommended parity for pensioners vide para 5.1.47 stating therein that ‘revised pension can not be lower than 50 % of sum of minimum pay in the pay band and grade pay thereon corresponding to pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. VI CPC had merged 30 pre-revised pay scales into only 4 pay bands which resulted into bunchings and therefore, for two such bunchings, one additional increment was envisaged and Fitment Tables were issued for each pre-revised pay scale giving “minimum pay in the pay band”

    2 That, VI CPC recommendations contained in para 5.1.47 have been accepted by Govt. vide S N 12 of Ministry of Personnel, PG&P (DOP&PW) Resolution No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 29 08 08. Accordingly, Revised Fitment Tables giving “minimum of the pay in pay band” for each pre-revised pay scale, were issued annexed to Finance Ministry’s F. No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 30.08.08.

    3 That, Ministry of Personnel, PG&P(DOP&PW) vide OM No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) Pt. I dated 03 10 08, in complete contravention of Govt. accepted recommendations as detailed in pare 2 above, has issued amendment (para 4.2) modifying “minimum pay in the pay band corresponding to pre-revised pay scale as per fitment table” to “minimum of pay band without having any correspondance with pre-revised pay scale. Thus, Fitment Tables annexed to Ministry of Finance F. No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 30 08 08 for fixation of pension are not applicable to pre-2006 pensioners but the same are applicable to post 2006 pensioners and post 2008 pensioners. I am a pre 2006 pensioners and this arbitrary amendment to accepted and notified recommendations of VI CPC has reduced my pension by an amount equal to Rs. 3650.00 plus the DR thereon, per month, which has affected adversely my financial condition.

    4 That, the division of pensioners into groups with cut off dates, for pension and pensionary benefits, i. e. pre 2006 , post 2006 and post 2008, is arbitrary and upprincipled and is in complete violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, as held by Constitutional Bench of honorary Supreme Court of India vide judgment dated 17 02 1982.

    In view of the foregoing, I request your honor to kindly look into the case and consider sympathetically the entire matter of fixation of pension and arrange to remove disparity amongst the pensioners namely, pre 2006 , post 2006 and post 2008 by withdrawing amendment ( para 4.2) issued vide Ministry of Personnel, P G & P (D O P & PW) OM No. 38/37/08-P&PW( A )Pt 1 dated 03 10 08, so that, justice is restored and my pension is fixed exactly as recommended by the VI CPC vide para 5 . 1 .47 and as accepted by the Government vide Ministry of Personnel, P G & P (D O P & PW) Resolution No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 29 08 08 and, in accordance with the Fitment Tables annexed to Finance Ministry’s F. No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 30.08.08.

    I shall be grateful to you for ever for this act of kindness.

    Thanking you in anticipation,

    With regards,

    Yours faithfully,


    Date 14 01 09. Signature ( M L Kanaujia )
    Rtd. Chief Communication Engineer,
    N. E. Railway (PPO No.NE/10118/23255473,
    Indiara Nagar Colony, Dehra Dun -248006
    Last edited by Kanaujiaml; 18-01-2009 at 12:47 PM.

  12. #52
    Senior Member sudacgwb
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    209

    Thumbs down email ID of PM/PMO pl

    Dear Friends

    Will somebody give me the email ID of PM/PMO for sending the representation? I feel even after sending the hardcopy, email soft copy is advisable.

    Regards

    ss

  13. #53
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear Mr Sudacgwb,
    I am also trying frantically for the same- I and couple of my friends are trying- but till now no success.
    I thought Railway personnel may know the same- may be RREWA can inform us!
    There is an email id for the MOS attached to PMO- I am trying to get it- worst comes to worst I am planning how to utilise the email id of the MOS- if I get it!
    vnatarajan

  14. #54
    Senior Member sudacgwb
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    209

    Angry Complaint to PMO - regarding

    Sir,

    The days any complaint to PMO or responsible senior officers used to be acknowledged with an assurance of prompt action followed by prompt action has gone. The complaints are also treated with the same efficiancy as the issued that are responsible for the complaints to come up. More than the so many portals to receive the complaints, what is the need of the hour is not only to address the complaints as such, but to tackle the root cause for allowing things to go to such an extent as warranting the aggrieved to complain.

    The need of the hour is to bring in a degree of accountability in govt service. There are so many cases where even the pension is not even revised!

    It is astonishing to note the govt decided to give pension arrears in two instalments, for whose benefit?! What is the meaning of arrears? That which was due to the person but not yet paid...

    It is equally strange nobody is taking up the case of family pensioners and very senior pensioners (> 80 years of age) to get their arrears in one instalment.

    Let us hope with the effective intervention of RREWA things will change for the better. NOw govt has released funds to PEnsioners Associations which implies that (a) problem exists genuinely and (b) Associations can do a great deal to set right the things.

    With regards

    ss

  15. #55
    Senior Member badri mannargudi is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Surat
    Posts
    283

    Exclamation

    Quote Originally Posted by sudacgwb View Post
    Dear Friends

    Will somebody give me the email ID of PM/PMO for sending the representation? I feel even after sending the hardcopy, email soft copy is advisable.

    Regards

    ss
    Dear SSjee,
    Most of our friends may be aware of the fact that while the Website of Govt of India has given the Tel Number and Fax Number of PMO, as regards E mail Address it leads us to an area where, after giving certain details we can register the message in not more than 500 words.
    This shows that the e mail address is classified. Viewed in light of this, I do not see any possibility of learning e mail address (if any) of our Hon'ble PM.
    In my humble view, the secrecy maintained in this regard is understandable.
    With regards,
    Badri.

  16. #56
    Senior Member badri mannargudi is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Surat
    Posts
    283

    Exclamation

    Quote Originally Posted by vnatarajan View Post
    Dear Mr Sudacgwb,
    I am also trying frantically for the same- I and couple of my friends are trying- but till now no success.
    I thought Railway personnel may know the same- may be RREWA can inform us!
    There is an email id for the MOS attached to PMO- I am trying to get it- worst comes to worst I am planning how to utilise the email id of the MOS- if I get it!
    vnatarajan
    My dear friends,
    I beg for a pardon for rushing in my last post in the instant thread.
    In the official web site of Indian National Congress , ( www.congress.org.in ) The e mail address of our Hon'ble P.M is given. It is
    manmohan@sansad.nic.in
    I thank the Party which has provided the information which is not found in the Govt Website.
    With regards,
    Badri
    Last edited by badri mannargudi; 18-01-2009 at 11:43 PM. Reason: The name of the party has to be mentioned correctly.

  17. #57
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear Mr Badri

    Good and great job!
    Trust this works. No doubt the filtering/security settings/ firewalling will be elaborate - but I do hope old pensioners' emaisl may worm thru the portal! Or else they will go to Trash or Junk mail can directly!

    vnatarajan

  18. #58
    Senior Member Kanaujiaml is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    499

    Default

    Dear all. I am eagerly awaiting what pensioners are going to do after learning the e. mail id of PM.

  19. #59
    Member S.C.Maheshwari is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Gurgaon
    Posts
    41

    Default

    Friends,
    Email address of PMO = pmosb@pmo.nic.in
    Fax office 23012312,23016857,23018939,23014255
    Minister for Rlys= mr@rb.railnet.gov.in
    FAx23387333, 23382637, 23017986 (Resi)
    regards
    maheshwari
    Last edited by S.C.Maheshwari; 19-01-2009 at 12:24 PM.

  20. #60
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear Mr Maheshwari./ All to note.

    MANY THANKS.
    I HAVE TESTED. I HAVE SENT MY REP TO PM AT 13.05 HRS TODAY 19TH JAN.2009. EMAIL ID IS PERFECT. NOT BOUNCED SO FAR!
    TOTAL PAGES SENT TEN. NO LIMIT.
    Also sent MY HARD COPY with all enclosures by Regd Post AD.

    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 19-01-2009 at 02:48 PM.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 17 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 13 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-05-2012, 02:27 PM
  2. Pay parity for CSS/subordinate/autnomous bodies
    By pkkanwal in forum Anomalies
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 13-01-2009, 06:33 AM
  3. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-12-2008, 09:17 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-12-2008, 07:48 AM
  5. pre 1996 Pensioners _ parity
    By RSundaram in forum Pensioners
    Replies: 73
    Last Post: 02-12-2008, 08:22 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