MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS

(CYBER AND INFORMATION SECURITY DIVISION)

ORDER

New Delhi. the 20th December, 2018

S.O. 6227(E).—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 69 of the Information Technology Act. 20(10(21 of 2000) read with rule 4 of the Information Technology ( Procedure and Safeguards for Interception. Monitoring and Decryption of Information) Rules. 2009. the Competent Authority hereby authorises the following Security and Intelligence Agencies for the purposes of interception, monitoring and decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource under the said Act, namely:—

(i) Intelligence Bureau;

(ii) Narcotics Control Bureau:

(iii) Enforcement Directorate;

(iv) Central Board of Direct Taxes;

(v) Directorate of Revenue Intelligence;

(vi) Central Bureau of Investigation;

(vii) National Investigation Agency;

(viii) Cabinet Secretariat (RAW);

(ix) Directorate of Signal Intelligence (For service areas of Jammu & Kashmir. North-East and Assam only);

(x) Commissioner of Police. Delhi.

[No.14/07/2011-T]

RAJIV GAUBA. 

Union Home Secy

10 Agencies authorised by government to snoop on any computer

•  editor3
• | Corporate Law
•  22 Dec 2018
•  30 Views
•  0 comment

MHA on Friday authorised 10 central government agencies for the purpose of interception, monitoring and decryption of any information generated, transmitted, received or stored in any computer resource.

Meanwhile after severe criticism of Move Finance Minister Shri Arun Jaitely has defended the move and said on his twitter handle as follows:-

" The Information Technology Act has been in existence for almost two decades. Section 69 of the IT Act authorises in the interest of sovereignty, integrity etc. to direct a notified agency to intercept or monitor or decrypt an information stored in a computer resource.

There are safeguards, as prescribed by the Supreme Court, which are included in the rules. An interception or monitoring is only authorised under an specific approval of the Home Secretary.

The rules required authorised agencies to be notified. In the absence of this authorisation, any police officer may start exercising the power.

In fact, during UPA-II in a detailed debate in Parliament relating to a corporate lobbyist, the then Home Minister Shri P. Chidambaram strongly defended this power of interception being given to taxation authorities.

There is no general snooping order. The power to intercept in the interest of national security and public order already exists in law. This is only an order as to who are the authorised agencies.

The power existed and was used during the UPA Government also. How else will terrorists who use technology extensively be traced? Otherwise, the terrorists will use IT, but the intelligence and investigative agencies will be crippled."

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY FROM A POST.COM FW ERI BOI

Regards, E.R.Iyer

Festivals & Important Days of 2019

FEDERATION OF CLASS I OFFICERS ASSOCIATIONS's Circular dated 20.12.2018

Click below link to view details:-

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pIeYWvydE2lfF5fnvGnBRzVLWT19NdM2/view?usp=drivesdk

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY FW ERI BOI FROM ZEE NEWS

आज का सुविचार 

Regards, E.R.Iyer

Calcutta High Court allows BJP’s ‘Rath Yatra’ in West Bengal

Mamata Banerjee. File photo

Kolkata, December 20

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday allowed the BJP’s ‘Rath Yatra’ programme in West Bengal, setting aside the state government’s refusal on apprehensions of communal unrest.
Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty directed the state BJP to inform the superintendents of police of the districts, in which the rallies would enter, at least 12 hours ahead of schedule.
The party was also directed to ensure that the ‘Yatras’ were conducted abiding by the law and did not impede normal movement of vehicular traffic. Justice Chakraborty said the petitioner BJP would be vicariously responsible for any damage or loss of public property. He also directed that the police would deploy adequate force to ensure that there is no breach of law and order.
The party had planned three ‘Rath Yatras’ from different parts of the state. The chariots were meant to travel across the state’s 42 parliamentary constituencies over one-and-a-half months.

The state BJP had moved the court challenging the state government’s denial of permission to its programme. PTI

Implementation of DHC judgment by LIC on Minimum Pension Upgradation

Recently,I got data on arrears paid by LIC for two family pensioners  arising out of minimum pension  upgradation ordered by DHC.

When I went through the calculations made by LIC,I noticed some mistakes committed by LIC by not revising the basic family pension as required by the DHC. I have made fresh calculations in these two cases and requested Mr R K Sahni -who is conversant with Excel calculations-to check my calculations so that we may appropriately submit before SC . If the mistakes are confirmed,there is a likelihood that the software for calculations must have been flawed and there must have been mistake in payments in all cases where they have paid arrears on minimum pension upgradation.

Interestingly,in one of the cases,the arrears have been paid from May 2002 ,which is an earlier effective date than 29/1/2007 which was taken as the effective date for payment of DR arrears.

As the both the items of partial relief have been ordered by the DHC have emanated from the same set of  Writ Petitions ,this changed effective date for payment of minimum pension arrears should give us a handle to submit before SC for issuing a direction to LIC to pay the difference of  DR arrears from 18/12/1998 to 28/1/2007 also with interest.

Another aspect which I noticed was,as these two cases relate class III retirees.in the scale of HGA from 1/8/1997 to 31/7/1992, there were two stages above last pay threshold for minimum pension,and they don't get the benefit of upgradation.The family pensioners of such deceased retirees get less gross pension in October 2018 even though prior to minimum pension upgradation such family pensioners would have got more than minimum pensioners.This throws up an anomaly which can be used as an additional ground for upgradation of regular pension.

I request pensioners to let me have data on minimum pension upgradation settled by which they might have come across,so that I can verify calculations in those cases also and we can effectively submit before SC.

Greetings.

C H Mahadevan

History of RBI Governors

How many of you know that Dr ManMohan Singh didn't complete his 3 yr term as the RBI Governor as the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi had removed him on January 14, 1985.Dr Singh remained in office for 2 yrs 4 months.

Pseudo experts should explain why Rajiv Gandhi Kicked out MMS.

Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi appointed Chairman of Allahabad Bank Amitav Ghosh as RBI Governor, replacing Manmohan Singh but sacked the new Governor in mere 20 days.

Yes, you heard it right  ....  just in 20 days.

Apart from BA & MA

Shaktikanta Das is

- IAS 

- Financial Management from IIM B 

- CT from IIM Calcutta

- DBIC from NIBM

- Dip. in Project Mgt from ASCI

- Secretary in Eco Affairs, GOI

- Sec, Dept. of Expenditure, GOI

- Revenue Secretary 2014 -15

- Eco Affairs Secretary 2015- 2017

Please Note : 

In Congress Rule.....

1) One of India's longest serving RBI governors - Mr D Subbarao was a B Sc Physics (Hons) and M Sc Physics.. god knows why such stupid issues get picked up and debated.

2) RBI Governor S. Venkitaramanan was Masters in Physics and CD Deshmukh whom Nehru later made FM was graduate in Natural Sciences.

3) Check the history of past 25 RBI Governors.  Out of the 25, most were from IAS cadres and Chief Secretaries. Only less than 5 were real economists / Doctorate.

4) One of the most known RBI governor Mr. Bimal Jalan was also a MA (Hist)

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY FW ERII BOI FROM BRAHMA KUMARIS

Regards, E.R.Iyer

No proposal to increase or decrease the age of retirement of Central Government Employees

No proposal to increase or decrease the age of retirement of Central Government Employees

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS

LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO: 1549

ANSWERED ON: 19.12.2018

Senior Citizen Entitlement of Employees

RAVINDRA VISHWANATH GAIKWAD

Will the Minister of

PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS be pleased to state:-

(a) whether the Government has worked out a plan to lower the age of senior citizen entitlement of employees to 58 years;

(b) if so, the details thereof;

(c) whether the Government is contemplating to increase or decrease the age for pension;

(d) if so, the details thereof and if not, the reasons therefor; and

(e) the details of salient features of pension policy?

ANSWER
MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS AND MINISTER OF STATE IN THE PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE
(DR. JITENDRA SINGH)

(a) to (d): No Madam. Department of Social Justice & Empowerment has informed that there is at present no proposal in that Department for lowering the age of senior citizen. Government employees become entitle to pension on retirement. There is also no proposal to increase or decrease the age of retirement of Central Government Employees.

(e): The salient features of the pension entitlements of employees retiring from the Central Government are as under:

i. A Government servant retiring in accordance with the rules, after completing a qualifying service of not less than 10 years, is entitled to a pension @ 50% of his last pay or 50% of average emoluments for the last 10 months, whichever is more beneficial to him/her.

ii. After completion of 80 years of age or above, additional pension @ 20% to 100% is payable to the retired Government servant.

iii. A retired/retiring Government servant is entitled to, at his/her option, a lump sum payment, by commutation of a maximum of 40% of his/her pension.

iv. On retirement, a Government employee is entitled to a retirement gratuity based on his/her emoluments and length of qualifying service.

v. On death of a Central Government pensioner, the family is entitled to a family pension the amount of which is 50% of the last pay for a period of seven years, or for a period up to the date on which the retired deceased Government servant would have attained the age of 67 years had he/she survived, whichever is earlier. Thereafter, the amount of family pension is 30% of his last pay. The amount of family pension is also increased by 20% to 100% after the family pensioner attains the age of 80 years and above.

Vi. The family of a Government servant, who dies while in service after having rendered not less than seven years' continuous service, is entitled to a family pension 50% of the last pay for a period of ten years. Thereafter, the amount of family pension is 30% of his/her last pay.

PDF Version

AIRIEF SECRETARY LIST

1 Shri M.P. Agnihotry

 Secretary RIEA Bhopal 

Deluxe H.I.G. 10, Bima Kunj, Kolar Road Bhopal - 462042 

Tel.: 0755-4009673, M.: 9425206198 

2 Shri H.S. Ghuraiya

 Secretary RIEF Gwalior 

C-49, Govindpuri University Road Gwalior - 474011 

Tel.: 0751-2239990, M.: 9826773754 

3 Shri V.C. Jain

 Secretary IPA Indore 

203, Sanmati Apartment, 42-B, Sainath Colony Indore - 452018 

Tel.: 0731-2497323, M.: 9406628570 

4 Shri S.P. Tiwari

 Secretary RIEA Jabalpur 

392/C, Napier Town Jabalpur - 482001 

Tel.: 0761-2450051, M.: 9424311156 

5 Shri V. Sunderasan

 Gen. Sec. CRIEA Raipur 

C-3, LIC Colony Mova Post Saddoo Raipur - 496001 

Tel. :0771-2282485 

6 Shri A. Krishna Rao

 Secretary CRIEA Bilaspur 

Laxmi Niwas, Near Maharashtra Mandal, Tikarapara Bilaspur - 495001 

Tel.: 07752-269241, M.: 98271-89140 

7 Shri Sanjib Kumar Patranabish

 Secretary RIEA Asansol 

Rekha Bhawan, R.G.S Road, P.O. Ushagram Asansol - 713303 

M.: 9475230765 

8 Shri Ramkrishna de

 General Secretary ACHDLICPA 

46, Barisha Purabpara Road, Kolkata (W.B) 700063 

Tel.: 033-24972356 

9 Shri Dilip Kumar Dutta

 Secretary LIC PWA Jalpaiguri 

Naren Villa Jalpaiguri - 735101 

Tel.: 03561-224467, M.: 8900426500 

10 Shri Amitabh Sinha

 Secretary KDLICPA Kharagpur 

404, Michael Madhusudan Nagar, P.O. Midnapur Dist. Midnapur (west)- 721101 

Tel.: 03222-263867, M.: 9333413815 

11 Shri Shekhar Lal

 General Secretary RIEA Bhagalpur 

RBSS, Sahay Road, Mini Market Lane, Mundi Chowk Bhagalpur 

Tel.: 0641-2421615, M.: 09431295801 

12 Shri Chayan Singh

 Secretary JDRIEA Jamshedpur 

H.No.381, Lane No. 26, 'A' Block, Tiuladungri Jamshedpur - 831003 

Tel.: 0657-2348270, M.: 9709105245 

13 Shri Pawan Kumar Sharma

 Gen. Sec. RIEA Mujaffarpur 

Parao Pokhar, Lane 4, P.O. Ramana Mujaffarpur (UP) 842002 

Tel.: 0621-2278703, M.: 09934448963 

14 Shri Surendra Prasad

 Gen. Sec. IPA Patna 

Road No. 23, Quarter No. 168, Shri Krishna Nagar Patna (Bihar) 800001 

M.: 9470641375 

15 Shri V.K. Mehra

 Secretary RIEA Kota 

570-A, Talwandi Kota - 324005 

Tel.: 0744-2420239, M.: 9314414963 

16 Shri Rajkumar

 Secretary RIEA Amritsar 

H.No. 701, Desh Bhagat Nagar, Hardochanni Road Gurdaspur - 143521 

17 Shri O.P. Gupta

 Secretary LIC PA Bikaner 

55-D-Block, Shri Ganga Nagar - 335001 

Tel.: 0154-2474652, M.: 9461567677 

18 Shri S.P.Sood

 Gen. Sec. LIC CI.I (Retd.) O.A. 

1105, Sector  43B Chandigarh - 160043 

Tel.: 0172-2662725, M.: 09988019198 

19 Shri M.L. Khandelwal

 Gen. Sec. RIEA Jaipur 

2971, 3rd Crossing Uniara, Raoji ka Rasta, Chandpole Bazar Jaipur 302001 

Tel.: 0141-2310783 

20 Shri Sunder Mohan Mahajan

 Secretary JKRIEA Jammu 

P15, Radha Krishna Mandir Lane, Main Stop, Janipur Colony Jammu-180007 

Tel.: 0191-2533670, M.: 9419203721 

21 Shri B.L Bhadawat

 Gen. Sec. RIEA Udaipur 

H.S.1, Sector-5, Vasant Vihar, HiranMagri Udaipur-313002 

Tel.: 0294-2465457, M.: 09829151479 

22 Shri S.P. Saxena

 Secretary ADRIEA Agra 

49, Roshan Vihar, Sikandara Agra - 282007 

M.: 9760853888 

23 Shri J.P. Maheshwari

 Secretary J.B.P.S. Aligarh 

HIG-41, Vikas Nagar, Agra Road Aligarh - 202001 

Tel.: 0571-2411002, M.: 9456033072 

24 Shri JN Khanna

 Gen. Sec. RIPA Allahabad 

1041/A, Meerapur, Allahabad (U.P.) 211003 

M.: 09956095520 

 

25 Shri Rameshchandra Khandelwal

 Secretary BDRIEA Bareilly 

46, Akashpuram Extn, Pilibhit Bypass Road Bareilly - 243006 

M.: 9319121930, 9319912237 

26 Shri S.N. Prakash

 Secretary LICPA Faizabad 

7/11/15 Newatipura Faizabad - 224001 

Tel.: 05278-265094, M.: 8004313631 

27 

Lucknow 

28 Shri A.S. Zenith

 Gen. Sec. IPWA Meerut 

141/5, Phool Bag Colony, Opp.  Jain Mandir Meerut (UP) 250004 

Tel.: 0121-2764910, M.: 09897000505 

29 Shri Omprakash

 Gen. Sec. APBMS Varanasi 

17, Navodit Nagar, Mahmoorganj Varanasi (UP) 221010 

M.: 09889028358 

30 Shri K. Chandrasekharan

 Secretary RIEA Chennai 

574, School Road, Anna Nagar, West Extn. Chennai - 600101 

Tel.: 044-26150221, 26150759 

31 Shri T.P. Narayanan

 Secretary RIEA Ernakulam 

CRRA-2, Prasanth, Chakkalamuttu Road, Tripunithura Kochi - 682301 

Tel.: 0484-2776962 

32 Shri C.M. Gopalakrishnan

 Secretary RLICOA Kozhikode 

5/2871, Karthika, Thiruthiyad Puthiyara Kozhikode- 673004 

Tel.: 0495-2723636, M.: 9895180603 

33 Shri V. Karunaianandan

 Secretary RIEA Madurai 

2/650 Shenbagam ST. Gomathipuram Madurai - 625020 

Tel.: 0452-2582065, M.: 9442582065 

34 Shri P.M. Thomas

 Secretary RIEA Trivandrum 

T.C. 2/881, Plamthottatthil LIC Colony,  Puthupally Trivandrum - 695011 

Tel.: 0471-2445028, M.: 9846045028 

35 Shri P.K. Philipose

 Gen. Sec. RLEA Kottayam 

Sharon Near Railway Station Kottayam 686001 

Tel.: 0481-2563051, M.: 09447598153 

36 Shri N. Narayana

 Secretary LICPWA Bangalore 

No.14, 16th Cross JS Nagar, Nandini Layout Bangalore - 560096 

Tel.: 080-23196265, M.: 9880092797 

37 Shri N. Rajagopal

 Gen. Sec. RLEA Hyderabad 

12-2-417/A, 7, LIC Colony, Jai Nagar, Medhipatnam Hyderabad - 500028 

Tel.: 040-23534249, M.: 09948539567 

38 Shri K. Sambamurthy

 Secretary RLICEA Machilipatnam 

D.No.25-5, Buttaiahpet Machilipatnam 521001 

Tel.: 08672-227242, M.: 9492805892 

39 Shri G. Parthasarathy

 Gen. Sec. RIPWA Mysore 

"Shri Annapoorneshwari Krupa", No. 239, 1st D Cross, LIC Colony, Sree Rampuram Mysore 570 023 

Tel.: 0821-2364536, M.: 09945683009 

40 

 Ongle (Nellore) 

41 Shri J. Subrahmanyam

 Treasurer RLICEA Rajahmundry 

17-24-3 Vagavati Vari Street Seethampet Rajahmundry - 533104 

Tel.: 0883-2439533, M.: 9440895450 

42 Shri A. Chandrasekhara Navada

 Secretary RLICEA Udupi 

4-3-74 A Shree Ganesh Near Fire office Udupi - 576101 

Tel.: 0820-2525438, M.: 9480266839 

43 Shri P.V. Ratnam

 Secretary RLICEA Vishakhapatnam 

Flat No. 26, Jeevan Jyothi Apartment, Rama Nagar Visakhapatnam - 530002 

Tel.: 0891-2525612, M.: 9701652820 

44 Shri G.T. Parikh

 Gen. Sec. LICPA Ahmedabad 

8, Jeevan Darshan Society, Vasan Barrage Road, Vasna Ahmedabad 380070 

Tel.: 079-26607612, M.: 09429604829 

45 Shri Manoj R. Dave

 Gen. Sec. RIEF Bhavnagar 

Tripada' Plot No. 16 F.P./10/1, Sumeru Township Ghogha Road, Bhavnagar 364001 

M.: 09427233733 

46 Shri Vilas v. Adhyapak

 Secretary RIEF Kolhapur 

Sanjay Apptt. Near Timber Market Kolhapur - 416012 

Tel.: 0231-2622293, M.: 9422424251 

47 Shri J.K. Karulkar

 Gen. Sec. LICREA Mumbai 

4129 'Parijat' DMCH Society, Senapati Bapat marg Dadar, Mumbai 400028 

M.: 093222-47057 

48 Shri Mohanbhai R. Parmar

 Secretary IPA Nadiad 

A/9, Vinus Park, Near Gangotri Society, PIJ Road Nadiad - 387002 

Tel.: 0268-2556737, M.: 9824268672 

 

49 Shri K.P. Shrivas

 Sec. RIEA Nagpur 

32/B, Pande L.O. Nagpur - 440015 

Tel.: 0712-2283713, M.: 9822203413 

50 Shri N.T. Kadam

 Seretary NDRIEA Nasik 

50, Sahajeevan Colony, HPT College Road Nasik - 422005 

M.: 8975418897 

51 Shri P.S. Patil

 Secretary IDRLICEA Jalgaon 

25, Mayadevi Nagar, Mahabal Colony Road Jalgaon - 425001 

Tel.: 0257-2261662, M.: 89562-22975 

52 Shri B.P. Buch

 Secretary RIEF&WA Rajkot 

Shivranjan' Vima Nagar, Street No. 2, Raiya Road Rajkot - 360007 

Tel.: 0281-2472631 

53 Shri Brijmohan Shah

 Gen. Sec. SGPA Surat 

A-1, Jeevan Deep Flats, Kadampalli Road, Nanpura Surat - 395001 

M.: 09327326566 

54 Shri Ravindra Deo

 Gen. Sec. Retired IPA Vadodara 

11, Yogeshwar Kripa Society, Opp. Sudarshan Society, Manjalpur Vadodara - 390011 

Tel.: 0265-2642335, M.: 98255-23320 

55 Shri P.N. Shrivastava

 Gen. Sec. RIEA Kanpur 

128/800 'K' block, Kidwai Nagar Kanpur - 208011 

Tel.: 0512-2617995 M.: 09415428639 

56 Shri D.N. Krishnamurthy

 Gen. Sec. RIEA Coimbatore 

H.No. 14 (Old 64) Subramaniyapuram, Street No. 1, R.S. Puram P.O. Coimbatore - 641002 

Tel.: 0422-432776 

57 Shri P. Muthiah

 Secretary RIEA Tirunelveli 

86A/2, Subam River View Aptt. Salai Street Vannar Pettai Tirunelveli - 627003 

M.: 9487750461 

58 Shri S.B. Sengupta

 Gen.Sec. ANELICREA Guwahati 

Laxmi Nagar, 4th Bye Lane, Japorijog Road Guwahati - 781 005 

Tel.: 0361-2592336 

59 

 Kaddappa 

60 

 Gorakhpur 

61 Shri S.N. Chhabra

 Gen. Sec. LICR Cl.1 (O) A Panchkula 

H.No. 458/2, Sector-2, Panchkula 134112 

Tel.: 0172-2568213, M.: 07589303458 

62 Shri D.D. Gupta

 Gen. Sec. IFA Delhi 

61, Kadambari Aptt., Sector- 9, Rohini Delhi - 110085 

M.: 9899815234 

63 Shri N.S. Krishnamoorthy

 Gen. Sec. RIEA Salem 

408, Tirth Nagar, State Bank Colony Salem - 636004 

64 Shri M. Srinivasan

 Secretary RIEA Thanjavur 

180/2, Ammal Nagar, 10th Cross, Thanjavur - 613007 

M.: 9442317663 

*एक विन्रम अपील कृपया इसे दूर तक पहुंचाएं...*

*समय पर कर (टैक्स) अदा करने वाली भारत की जनता का कांग्रेस / बीजेपी और सभी political parties  से निवेदन है कि -   वो कर्ज माफी की घोषणा, हमारे द्वारा चुकाये हुए कर से ना करके... अपने पार्टी फंड से करें। क्योंकि वादा कांग्रेस/बीजेपी ने किया है, कर (tax) चुकाने वाली जनता ने नहीं। देश की जनता कर (tax) देश के विकास के लिए देती है ना कि मुफ्त में बांटने के लिये। सहमत हो तो इसे आगे फॉरवर्ड कीजिये। झंझट ही खत्म समझो।*

My response to Annulment of Para 3A-Need for clarity to Approach

Respected Shri Mahadevan Sahab,

I have gone through your observations on interpretation of Para 3A of Annexure IV to LIC Pension Rules. You have rightly pointed out that discrimination caused by Para 3A has to be pleaded with due precaution. Various experts/activists interpret the discrimination caused by Para 3A in different manner and suggest various solutions to remove their perceived discrimination. But, if all such approaches, if pleaded in the SC, would create confusion and even defeat the very purpose. For sake of clarity, I give below excerpts from my note on Para 3A, which I shared with the participants in AIRIEF's meeting held at Bhopal:

" Q.2 What type of discrimination is caused by Para 3A?

Ans. Discrimination caused by Para 3A is interpreted in following three manners:

1. Same rate of DR to employees covered under para 1 and 2 as the rate of DA paid to in service employees during the period covered by para 1 and para 2. This interpretation was taken in WP No. 6676 of 1998.

2. Para 3A allows hundred percent neutralization of dearness relief. So the pensioners who retired on or before 31/7/1998 should also be allowed hundred percent neutralization. 

(Calculation: Para 3A deals with DR at 1740 CPI. 100*4/1740=0.23%)

Para 1 allows 100% neutralization up to Basic Pension 1250 at 600 CPI (100*4/600=0.67%) and thereafter it is gradually reducing for all the slabs of Basic Pension.

Similarly, Para 2 also allows hundred percent neutralization up to Basic Pension 2400 only at CPI 1148 CPI (100*4/1148=0.35%), After 2400 Basic Pay rate of DR are reducing.

For hundred per cent neutralization of DR, uniform rate of DR i.e. 0.67% for all the pensioners covered under Para 1 and 0.35% for all the pensioners covered under para 2 should be given.

3. Para 3A provides for uniform rate of DR to all pensioners similar to in service employees, as well as hundred per cent neutralization. Before 31/7/1997, there was discrimination in payment of DA to in service employees also as there was no hundred percent neutralization of DA after a given slab of Basic Pay. Discriminatory payment of DA prior to 31/7/1997 was thus resolved. When the discrimination of rate of DR, in case of the pensioners, was brought to the notice of LIC authorities, LIC proposed to resolve the discrepancy on the same line, by revising the pension of pre-Aug. 1997 pensioners, as per the pay scales calculated at 1740 CPI and applicable from 1/8/1997 and then allowing the same rate of DR to pre-Aug 1997 pensioners (0.23%) vide the Board Resolution dated 24/11/2001. 

In the AIRIEF's WP we have challenged Para 3A as per interpretation given in (3) above. Interpretation given in (1) above does not provide correct solution as it would give a small benefit only (We have calculated the difference at maximum of scale of ED: for para 1 it is 10397 pm and for Para 2 it is 10179 pm as on 1/2/2018, for earlier periods its quite low). Interpretation in (2) above lacks strong grounds (hundred percent neutralization was not given even to in service employees). Bank Pensioners have lost the similar case in SC in May 2018. (United Bank of India Retirees Welfare Association have raised the issue of 100% neutralization of DR which reached SC as CA no.005252 of 2018 in the SC, and decided against the pensioners). 

Apart from above interpretations, Delhi High Court has given another interpretation. In para 76 of the judgement, DHC states ".... Thus, grant of higher equalization @ 0.23% of basic pension in paragraph 3(A), without extending this benefit to those in paragraph 1 and 2 is unreasonable and discriminatory violating Article 14." Prescribing a solution, DHC further states in the same para, "Retired employees covered under paragraphs 1 and 2 are entitled to neutralization at ratio/scale as applicable and given to employees retiring post 31st July, 1997."  Accordingly, in para 79 DHC directed that the rate of DR on amounts above Rs. 2130 /- till Rs. 3850/- fixed in paragraph 1 at 0.17 of basic pension shall be enhanced to the rate of 0.29% as specified in clause (ii) of paragraph 2. Further, for pension in excess of Rs. 2130 (it should be 3850) rate of 0.23% of basic pension as stated in paragraph 3 (A) would apply with effect from applicable date.

Both the above stated conclusions of DHC are erroneous as explained hereinbelow:

Rate of DR is calculated on a particular CPI at which a given pay scale is fixed. So, Rate of DR is relevant to the CPI and Pay scale corresponding to the given CPI. DHC has not taken into account this basic principle and applied incompatible rates of DR to the basic Pension based on different pay scales.

While challenging Para 3 A as discriminatory, it is not meant that it should be quashed. It is very much relevant and applicable to the employees who retired between the period from 1/8/1997 to 31/7/2002. It has provided rate of DR to all pensioners similar to in service employees, which was not provided to the pensioners who are covered under Para 1 and 2 of the Appendix IV. DHC holds Para 3 A discriminatory to the pensioners covered under Para 1 and 2 and intends to give the benefit of DR equalization (similar treatment to all) to them at par the pensioners covered under Para 3A. But it has to be done in a logical manner. As stated in earlier para, a given rate of DR is relevant to a particular CPI and corresponding pay scales. By comparing and applying the rate of DR @ 0.23% (which is for the pay scales existing as on 1/8/1997 and at CPI 1740) with/to the pay scales existing as on 1//1/1993 at CPI 1148 is neither logical nor mathematically correct. Similarly applying the rate of DR @ 0.29 to some categories of the pensioners covered in para 1 is also illogical and inaccurate.

The discrimination observed by DHC, caused due to Para 3A can be resolved logically only by bringing the pay scales of the pensioners covered under Para 1 and 2 at the level equivalent to those existing as on 1/8/1997 and then applying the rate of DR @ 0.23%.

The Board Resolution dated 24/11/2001 was passed by the Board of LIC to resolve the DR anomaly by upgrading the basic pension as per the formula applied to in service employees. Central Government had kept the resolution pending so it could not become rule; but it proves that solution of pensioners' grievances is revision of pension on the lines of CCS pensioners. Thus, there cannot be any other manner of resolving the discrimination. 

Para 3B, authorized the Corporation to decide the rate of DR corresponding to the CPI at which basic is fixed in case of retirees after future wage revisions, so Central Government has not to amend Para IV each time by issuing notifications in respect of future wage revisions. 

We have challenged the judgement of DHC on relief given in respect of discrimination caused by Para 3A and pleaded that the discrimination can be removed only by updating the pension with every wage revision, as is allowed to CCS Pensioners.

Though, board resolution dated 24/11/2001 is not enforceable till it is approved by Central Government; but it provides the correct solution to remove the disparity. LIC has adopted almost the same procedure while making payment of arrears of 40% as per interim order dated 31/3/2016 of the Supreme Court.

The said Board Resolution is almost in tune with the principles adopted by VII CPC with regard to Pension Parity among CCS Pensioners, which are fully approved by the Central Government.

One more point I would like to add is that updation of Basic Pension cannot be pleaded on the basis of para 3A of appendix IV alone. Simultaneously, we have to point out that discrimination in pension is caused because wage revision notification (amended service rules) revises basic pay of all the in service employees but restricts basic pension revision only to those who retired on or after the date from which the notification is effective excluding all past pensioners. So, we have to challenge the relevant provision of the wage revision notification, which usually happens to be para 1 (3), requesting for specific mention that the wage revision notification will also be applicable to past pensioners, prescribing thereby a suitable matrix for pension revision, as is done in case of CCS pensioners. It may be kept in mind that the term 'employee' defined in Pension Rules takes into consideration both -the in service employees as well as retired employees who opted for pension and are governed by the Pension Rules. We may also point out that Rule 35 (2) may be amended suitably to include revision of basic pension calculated at the time of retirement with every wage revision. In AIRIEF's SLP these aspects are covered. It has to be done in the light of SC Judgement dated 31/3/2016, wherein  para 26 states that the case was not considered by them as the pleadings were not adequate. Clarifying the statement it is stated, "we have no option as the pleadings are not adequate as it should have been while assailing a constitutional validity of a provision.  It is well settled in law that he who assails the constitutional validity of a statutory provision or a rule, has to specially assert the grounds for such challenge. [See State of Uttar Pradesh v. Kartar Singh11, State of Andhra Pradesh and another v. K. Jayaraman and others12, Union of India v. E.I.D.Parry (India) Ltd.13, State of Haryana v. State of Punjab & another14]." 

Provisions of Rule 55 B and 56 are also there to support our claim.

In addition to above, there are several other strong arguments for pension parity in respect of LIC Pensioners also, as are given in our SLP/Rejoinder. 

Coming to Para 3A of Annexure IV to Pension Rules again, I may refer to para 17 of the SC Order dated 31/3/2016 wherein it is stated that petitioners of writ petition No.184 of 2007 in the High Court of Delhi (Federation of Retd LIC Cl 1 Officers Associations), have filed the said WP assailing the constitutional validity of Para 3A of the Appendix to the Rules contending, inter alia, that the said Para is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. Since DHC had given the judgement on the basis of the Judgement of Jaipur HC on similar petitions of Shri Asthana, which was set aside by SC; the case was remanded to DHC along with other WPs for assailing the constitutional validity of Para 3A. It was with regard to DR disparity caused to Pre-Aug 1997 retiree pensioners. Similarly, in Para 19, it is stated that there are certain employees who have retired after the cut-off date stipulated in Para 3A of the Appendix, but they are not being given the requisite dearness relief based on subsequent pay revisions. This is with regard to pension updation. So, we have to challenge the rules/provisions which cause discrimination in payment of DR to pre-aug 1997 retiree pensioners as well as the discrimination in payment of pension based on date of retirement.

By disputing a rule or any provision of rule does not mean to get the same quashed. In para 50 of SC judgement in DS Nakara Case, meaning of disputing the rule is explained reading as under:

"While examining the case under Art 14, the approach is not: either take it or leave it, the approach is removal of arbitrariness and it that can be brought about by serving the mischievous portion the Court ought to remove the discriminatory part retaining the beneficial portion. The pensioners do not challenge the liberalized pension scheme. They seek the benefit of it. Their grievance is denial to them of the same by arbitrary introduction of words of limitation."

M P Agnihotri

Commencement of Medical Services, Sri Sathya Sai Sanjeevani, Navi Mumbai

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY FW ERI BOI ROM BRAHMA KUMARIS

Regards, E.R.Iyer

Annulment of Para 3A-Your circular dated 16 12 2018-Need for clarity of Approach

Dear Sirs,

I have gone through the communications on Para3A as well as PU issue. I agree that our pleadings on Para 3A have to be guarded. I would like to bring to your kind attention another equally important aspect with regard to the pleadings on Pension Updation issue. Kindly spare some time to go through the note I am attaching herewith. The note deals with various interpretation of Para 3A, focus on the interpretation which would serve our purpose most and critical issues with regard to pension updation keeping in view the SC judgement dated 31/3/2016. 

With kind regards,

M P Agnihotri. 

My response on Para 3A-2.docx

My response on Para 3A-2.docx

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY GW ERI BOI FROM BRAHMA KUMARIS

Posted at: Dec 17, 2018, 10:54 AM; last updated: Dec 17, 2018, 11:22 AM (IST)

Sajjan Kumar gets life sentence in 1984 anti-Sikh riots case

Sajjan Kumar

Aditi Tandon
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, December 17
Congress leader Sajjan Kumar has been sentenced to life in a 1984 anti-Sikh riots case by the Delhi High Court after cancelling his acquittal from a lower court.
Kumar has got the life sentence for the murder of five Sikhs in Delhi Cantt in an anti-Sikh riots case of November 1, 1984.
This is the first conviction of a senior Congress leader in the anti-Sikh riots case. This is a big victory for Jagdish Kaur, anti-Sikh riot victim, as the Delhi HC set aside previous acquittal of Sajjan Kumar.

Sajjan Kumar was acquitted in the case by Delhi’s Karkardooma court on April 30, 2013.

The Karkardooma court had convicted five people, including then Congress MLA Mahendra Yadav and then Congress councillor Balwan Khoker and sentenced them to life but had acquitted Sajjan Kumar on the basis of doubt.

The HC found no doubt about Kumar’s role and dismissed his acquittal holding him guilty. The case pertained to two survivors Jagdish Kaur and Jagsher Singh who lost family members in Delhi Cant’s Rajnagar area on November 1, 1984, in anti-Sikh carnage after the assassination of former prime Minister Indira Gandhi. 

The Delhi High Court has also increased the sentences of two convicts, Giridhari Lal and Capt Bhagmal, from three years to 10 years rigorous imprisonment.

The HC found active connivance by police to shield accused, failure to record separate FIRs by the Delhi Police.

The fact of filing closure report suppressed by the Delhi Police, no incident recorded in DDR, it would've been impossible to convict Sajjan Kumar under these scheme of things, special mention about truthfulness of the three persecution witnesses - Jagdish Kaur, Jagsher Singh and Nirpreet Kaur, the court said.

Trial Court failed to note anything on section 120 (B) of the IPC.

The court commented on the need to have a mechanism to tackle riots having genocidal features.

8th ANNUAL MEETING OF LIC CLASS I RETIRED OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION, PANCHKULA ON 16.12.208