N. KASILINGAM 230/4E,
Sivanthakulam Road,
Ph: 0461 2321830 Shanmugapuram
(West),
E-mail:nkasilingamlic@gmail.com Tuticorin-628
003. Tamilnadu.
Dear Shri KISHOREJI,
Sub:
Hearing of our cases by Supreme Court on
08-04-2015.
I
hope that you are keeping up your good health.
Now, what has happened on 25-03-2015 in the Supreme Court is not the
question and the past is the past. What
is more important is what has to be done on 08-04-2015. Numerologically, 8th April 2015
is a good date in this year, 2015.
There is no second opinion on the dismissal of Civil Appeals of LIC of
India on 08-04-2015 but we want more and the cases must hopefully be heard on 08-04-2105.
The
Judgement by Hon’ble Justice Mr.M.N.Bhandari is elaborative and exhaustive and
with much pain-taking. To say that it
is not for updation of pension is absurd and of perverse thinking. The Single Judge has gone deep into the Board
Resolution dated 24-11-2001 by
point by point, apart from the review of various Judgements in this regard
including the earlier judgement of D.S.Nakara vs Union of India (AIR 1983 SC 130). I quote below a certain portion of the
judgement “if the state desires to deny it to a group of pensioners, it must
justify its action on the touch stone of Article 14 of the constitution and
must show that a certain group is denied the benefit of revision/liberation on
sound reason and not on the whim and caprice of the state”. Unless and until, the abrogation of Articles 14
and 16 of the construction is resorted to and done by the appropriate
authority, no denying of updation of pension for LIC Pensioners is thinkable! The present-day poiliticians would not have
very easily forgotten the days of Emergency in such a short period! So, emphatic was the judgement dated
12-01-2010 of Hon’ble Justice Mr.Bhandari!
Coming
again to the Board Resolution as reported by the Single Judge in his verdict,
the Chairman has then reportedly received a communication from Dr.S.Ram Khanna,
Board Member suggesting and proposing to give effect to the upgradation of
pension by giving weightage of 11.25% as in the case of In-service
employees. As at
24-11-2001, it was evaluated actuarially
as reported by the Chairman as at a finance burden of Rs.51.37 crores and the
annual outlay of Rs.6 to 8 crores.
After some discussion, the Board approved the proposal and decided to
implement prospectively, ie., some fourteen years ago. So it is
far from truth to say that there is no mention of updation of pension in the
Board Resolution dated 24-11-2001 and in the verdict of Jaipur High Court dated
12-01-2010. The learned Single Judge has held that the
resolution so passed by the Board of Directors on 24-11-2001 does not require
any approval of the Central Government and has accordingly directed the
corporation to implement the Resolution without any further delay.
In
the order of dismissal of the Appeal of LIC of India by the Double Bench on 21-01-2011, the Hon’ble Judges Mr.Justice Dalip
Singh and Justice Mr.Mahesh Bhagwati expressed their indignation and held that
LIC of India could not and should not have filed the present appeal instead of
honoring their own Board Resolution to remove disparities and discrimination
with regard to the payment of Dearness Allowance and Pension to the retired
employees. The same Double Bench also
dismissed the Review Petition filed by the LIC of India against their order
dated 21-01-2011 accordingly on 19-08-2011.
The writ-petition of Review is completely based on the Section of 48 of
LIC Act and LIC’s contention was then to the effect of that without any
notification under section 48 by Union of India, they could not be forced to do
some act which is contrary to the law prevalent. They could not act illegally and unlawfully
by a Judgement of the High Court. This
contention of LIC was dismissed by the Double Bench of Jaipur and subsequently
by the Bench headed by then Hon’ble Chief Judge of Punjab and Haryana High
Court at Chandigarh. Justice
Mr.A.K.Sikri who is now a Judge of Supreme Court and assisted by Hon’ble
Justice Mr.Rakesh Kumar.
We
can say that there is an advancement in the Judgement dated 09-11-2012, though
based on the Judgement of Jaipur High Court.
Here, the writ by itself for issuance of mandamus and direction for
up-gradation of pension was allowed by the Bench with 12% interest on
arrears. In Jaipur, the Judge
considered the period from 24-11-2001 to 12-01-2010 as great delay and
directed LIC of India to implement their order without any further delay. Annoyed again by the delay, the Punjab and
Haryana High Court in Chandigarh had directed with interest of 12% on the
arrears. The people who are searching
for the word up-dation of pension in the Judgements of Jaipur have no other
alternative except to be content with up-dation of pension in the orders.
It
is true that Sri.G.N.Sridharan, the author of the case in Delhi High Court is
always saying that his first priority is 100% neutralization of DA and the next
will be the up-dation of pension and his plea in the Delhi High Court is only
for 100% DA. But the Court on
30-01-2013 magnanimously awarded updation of pension without his asking for it
on the basis of the order of Jaipur High Court.
The Judges are Hon’ble Mr.Justice Pradeep Nadrajog and Hon’ble
Mr.Justice Veena Birbal. So, seven
Judges have concurred with the order of Jaipur High Court. Is it not mysterious why Shri G.N.Sridharan
is still harping on removal of DA anomaly alone? Moreover, Delhi High Court has further
declared that Jaipur Bench of Rajasthan High Court has concededly made a law
applicable in REM.
The
proceedings on 25-03-2015 have made one point clear. The Supreme Court Judges are not inclined to
accept any of the above orders applicable only to the petitioners alone! The orders will cover the pensioners as a
whole and there will be no ceiling what so ever on the amount lawfully due to
the pensioners. Now, it must be ensured
that the presence of our Senior Advocate in the court on 08-04-2015 all through
the day is a must whenever the case is taken up for hearing by the Supreme
Court. We must get an unambiguous orders
without giving any chance for LIC for wrong interpretation of the order. The ordeals meted out to Ex.Army Personnel
during the litigation and at the hands of bureaucracy for the implementation of
OROP Scheme which is still hanging on fire in the hands of the Government
though the present ruling party has assured in their manifesto for early
implementation must be lessons for us.
There are other two possibilities in the Court.
1) The Courts must go in for summer
vacation in May.
2) LIC of India may try for going for
the Review of the Order.
With
kind regards,
Yours sincerely,
TUTICORIN.
02/04/2015. N.
KASILINGAM
