Re: Sri CHMahadevan's query[1]

From:"Seetha And Kishore" <rbkseetha@yahoo.com> Date:Thu, 9 Jul, 2015 at 3:14 PM Subject:Sri CHMahadevan's query    Dear Sri Mahadevan, 1)There is no parallel between the Present Delhi Case & the case of Gratuity of a group of Class I Officers retired between 1/8/1992 & 31/7/1994 In Gratuity case the subject matter of writ  was in Powers of LIC Chairman being wrongly used to prescribe different cut-off dates for different benefits & to deny Gratuity to those affected In Delhi case, it is a Jumbo,actually of all pensioners,for the time being,1/1/1986—31/7/1997 pensioners & now Respondent, Fedn of Retired Class 1 Officers Assns 2)In view of the specific nature of that gratuity writ, 1st after Kozhikode Class I O fficers Assn, a ffiliated to AIRIEF took up the matter ,SJ success in Kerala HC, LIC appeal,DB dismissed LIC appeal, then LIC SLP converted to CA 1289/2007,,also dismissed,  SC judgement dt 12/2/2008.LIC CO circular dt 18/3/2008 allowing difference in gratuity,with SI of 10%after implementing then wage revision,but confined to Officers retired between 1/4./1993 to 31/7/1994 As CO ignored & officers retired 1/8/1992—31/3/1993 were arbitrarily discriminated & deprived of this benefit, suitable steps were taken   & then came LIC CO Circular, dt 19/9/2008 to grant difference in gratuity to them also with SI 10%. 3)As all data of officers retired between 1/8/1992—31/7/1994 were available in LIC Records,there was no problem.I recall I had made many visits to LIC DO 1 & LIC DO2,Chennai  & thro telephone vigorously to MgrOS & SDMs & matters were speeded up to some extent & officers were happy by & large. There was ,therefore, no need for LIC to call for any List of Association members Greetings & warm regards, RBKISHORE VP,AIRIEF