Points raised in Chat column by Mr B R Mehta-UPGRADATION IS

Referring to the hackneyed grounds taken by LIC as stated by Mr Mehta,it is not difficult for the counsel under the six SLPs to demolish them before the Supreme Court for the following reasons:

Firstly, for the LIC's objection that there is no provision for upgradation in our Pension Rules,it has to be remembered that on the date 28/6/1995 when our Pension Rules were notified,only the 5th Pay Commission recommendations had been implemented by GOI upto which there was no provision for upgradation of pension even for Central Government employees who were governed by the CG CCS Pension Rules 1972.It was only in the Sixth Pay Commission Recommendations,provision was made for upgradation with a modified parity upgradation  and all those governed by CCS Pension Rules 1972 have been brought under its ambit.Rule 55 B has also been introduced in our Pension Rules 1995 whereby Chairmen & Managing  Directors of LIC retired after 1/1/1996 have been made eligible to be covered by the CCS Pension Rules 1972.Consequently going by the ratio of the D S Nakara judgment ,there cannot be two different classes of pensioners under the same pension rules.

Further Rule 56 of the Pension Rules provide that wherever the Rules  have no express provisions,the provisions as per CCS Pension Rules 1972 will apply.There is no express exclusion of pension upgradation in our Pension Rules.Even In Rule 55 B,there is no exclusion mentioned of the benefits being extended to other pensioners covered by the same Pension Rules.

Secondly,the increased expenses on account of upgradation of pension cannot be singled out for their impact on the rewards to the  policyholders under their policies.The additional contribution made by LIC every year as a result of actuarial valuation of the Pension Fund constitutes only a small percentage of the management expenses as a whole .If five yearly wage revisions for nearly 1.15 lks employees are not likely to have any adverse impact on policyholders' benefits, cost of  upgradation of pension for a closed group of about 1.3 lks beneficiaries( including in-service Pension optees) will by no stretch of imagination impact the policyholders adversely.Not only is the LIC Pension Scheme closed to new entrants from 1/4/2010, but the proportion of family pensioners has also been increasing steadily standing at about 32% at present implying steady reduction in per capita pension.

Above all, the present infirmities in our Pension Rules  constitute violation of Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution.

Besides, the upgradation ordered by the Delhi High Court in its judgment dated 27/4/2017 has created new anomalies making it imperative that not merely minimum pension,but the regular pension as well needs to be upgraded.Also the Delhi High Court with all its generosity towards minimum pensioners has through possible inadvertence excluded upgradation in minimum pension for family pensioners who indeed need upgradation in minimum pension considering the meager percentage of family pension in relation to regular pension.

Thus ,viewed from any angle,LIC's objections to upgradation of Minimum pension ordered is unsustainable and untenable.

Greetings.

C H Mahadevan