A} 1)SC Bench hearing on 23 September ,2015 will be a Do or Die situation.Bench will have to decide on condonation of delay & submissions on Counter Affidavit .UOI & LIC Counsel will try to enact their best .SC Bench will then concentrate on the arguments for Full DR & Pension Upgradation,the real & core issue atlast entering the arena of SC,having been delayed,not only by LIC,UOI delay & dither, but also significantly SC Bench own vague or unclear orders or verdicts right from 14 Nov 2011 & even now 7th May,2015 Interim Order as also 7th September Order to LIC to act.How LIC will take it,we know they will stick to only DR calculations.
2)It is ,in this context,one feels sorry,when Pensioners Fedns approached recently LIC Chairman & other top Management to ensure that pre-8/97 pensioners are taken care of & paid their dues.We all knew it was preposterous,going too far, an attempt to derail & sabotage proceedings & perhaps last-ditch effort to wean away attention from the unique proceedings to happen from 23 Sep onwards,depending on mood & mind of SC Bench ,also taking into account principles of judicial processes.Either this way or that way,either implement partially or buy time to act on the destined date,LIC shall face contempt & so they turned deaf ears.The point is when sane counsel plead all 40,000 pensioners of all Fedns must be together & help & contribute to success,such actions deserve wholesale condemnation.
3)We wish & pray 'DR SCHOOL ONLY ' REALISES THE LIMITATIONS OF ITS IDEALISM & LINGO.How come, after good deal of years of releases,dissertations,ultimate acceptance of that theme of twin benefits, again a UTurn to be thought of is itself reprehensible.DOUBTS LOOM LARGE IN THEIR MINDS & SO INSTEAD OF BEING A SPORT, THEY WANT TO BE A SPOILER OF THE SHAPE OF A BETTER WORLD FOR ENTIRE PENSIONER FRATERNITY AS AGAINT THE LIMITED CANVAS OF BENEFIT OF 100% DR TO PRE-8/1997 PENSIONERS ONLY,14500,LEAVING NEAR DOUBLE & GROWING PENSIONERS WITHOUT ANY CHANCE OR HOPE OF A FURTHER PENSION UPGRADATION AND A BRIGHTER FUTURE,AS SIMILAR PARADOXES & INADEQUACIES & INSUFFICIENCIES THEY FACE & BEGIN TO FACE IN HIGHER PROPORTIONS WITH EVERY SUBSEQUENT WAGE REVISION.
4) IS IT NOT UNFAIR TO GO FOR THE LOWEST QUOTATION, THE LEAST BENEFIT, THE EASIEST SOLUTION ,THAT TOO WHEN THE SUN SHINES ON THE HORIZON. HERE IT IS A TRIFLE & DOES NOT AT ALL FIT INTO THE BOUNDARY OF GREAT EPIC BATTLE WE ARE WAGING & ENTIRE FINANCIAL & SERVICE SECTORS ARE LOOKING EAGERLY & EXPECTANTLY. ARE WE TO SAY WE GOT 24/11 /2001 IMPLEMENTED IN 9/2015 AFTER 14 LONG YEARS. POSTERITY WILL NOT PARDON SUCH A MOVE. IN THAT PROCESS FORGET THE UNDYING PRINCIPLE OF PENSION REVISION WITH EVERY WAGE REVISION AS ALREADY COVERED THE GROUND METICULOUSLY THE DOUBLE-DECKER BENEFIT or REVISION IN CHAIN OR PERHAPS who KNOWS Hon Justice Dipak Misra's ' IN CONTINUUM' & ISSUES LIKE 'ENHANCEMENT OF PENSION' IN THE 7TH MAY 2015 INTERIM ORDER OF BENCH.SEEMS TO SUGGEST AS AN OPENING TO FINALISE THE CONCEPT SOON. PRAY.
5)PENSIONERS NEVER GET ANY ARREARS & EVEN WHEN IT IS POSSIBLE TO GET RIGHTFUL ARREARS, AS SC ITSELF GRANTED IN SEPTEMBER 2008 FOR CLASS I OFFICERS RETIRED BETWEEN 1/8/92 ---31/7 1994 ,THAT TOO WITH 10 % SIMPLE INTEREST.MEMORY IS TOO SHORT WHEN WE DESIRE TO GET CREDIT FOR SOCALLED BRAVE BREAKTHROUGH, WHICH ULTIMATELY ON DEEP CONSIDERATION TURNS INTO BIG BREAKDOWN.
EVEN IF IT IS RETROSPECTIVE FROM 1/8/97 ,IT DEPRIVES EVEN PRE-8/1997 PENSIONERS FROM FURTHER MERGERS OF DR & FITMENTS WITH BASIC PENSION FOR SUCCESSIVE CPI EVERY 5 YRS COINCIDING WITH WAGE PERIOD.WHAT EN ELUSIVE OR ILLUSORY VICTORY IT WILL BE! DOES ANY ONE WANT POST-8/97 GROUP OF PENSIONERS TO FILE WRITS IN MANY COURTS & again REPEAT & EXPERIENCE THE LABYRINTH OF PERPLEXING PROBLEMS & COMPLICATED LEGAL ISSUES SO DEFTLY TACKLED ALL OVER AGAIN?
6) PRAGMATIC,LONGRANGE & BENEFICIAL, HOLISTIC SOLUTIONS ARE ALWAYS BETTER THAN PARTIAL, CONTRIVED, CONSIDERABLY LESSER , ILLUSORY BENEFITS EVEN IF IT IS WITHIN EASY REACH AS WE ARE SACRIFICING AT THE ALTAR OF TESTED & ESTABLISHED PRINCIPLES . THE LEGAL OUTCOME SECURED AFTER SO MANY ENTREATIES TO SO MANY DIFFERENT SPECTRUM OF OPINION MAKERS & LEADERS INCLUDING POLITICAL ESTABLISHMENTS HAVING UTTERLY FAILED,THEN ONLY AIRIEF MOUNTED LEGAL BATTLES.LET US NOT CONFUSE & JOIN HANDS WITH OTHERS TO DEFEAT THE VERY PURPOSE OF THE BEST SETTLEMENT EVER FOR ALL GROUPS OF PENSIONERS. IT IS NOT A FIGMENT OF IMAGINATION IF WE UNDERSTAND THE ESSENCE OF LEGAL PRONUNCIATIONS WHICH EMIT VALUE & SANE SOLUTION TO THE AGGRIEVED LITIGANTS & HAS TO BE TAKEN IN THAT SPIRIT WITHOUT AROUSING ANY ILL FEELING WITH THE VERDICT ITSELF OR THOSE WHO PURSUE THE LEGAL BATTLE TIRELESSLY & HEROICALLY.
7)IT CAN EASILY BE UNDERSTOOD BY ANYONE WITH EVEN AN IOTA OF PROGRESSIVE, STEP BY STEP PROCESSES & PROCEEDINGS IN VARIOUS COURTS ,WITH SEVERAL UPS & DOWNS & SETBACK WITHOUT ANY SINGLE DEFEAT SO FAR,WHEREAS THE OTHER SIDE LIC OR MOF/UOI HAS NOT GAINED EVEN A WEEBIT IN ALL THESE TEDIOUS & TORTUOUS COURSE OF LEGAL PROCEEDINGS & REAL KURUKSHETRA BATTLE AS WE HAVE RIGHTLY CHRISTENED IT.
8)IN SPITE OF ALL THESE DEVOTION & DEDICATION, COMMITMENT & CONSISTECY SHOWN TO THEIR MASTERS, INSTITUTION OR CORPORATION WHICH HAS BENEFITED OUT OF THEIR SERVICE WITH ALL HANDICAPS & LIMITATIONS & FAMILY PROBLEMS NOT ADDRESSED DURING SERVICE AS ONE OUGHT TO HAVE DONE , BECAUSE OF COMPULSIONS OF OFFICE RULES OR DECENCY OR DECORUM, WITH ALL THESE SILENT PAINS & PANGS, ONLY THING PENSIONERS GOT WAS A GOOD GOODBYE & NOTHING ELSE.
9) IT MUST ALWAYS BE REMEMBERED BY ANY TRUE, SPIRITED,DEDICATED, SELFLESS UNIONS OR FEDNS ,MORE SO OF PENSIONERS THAT, WE ALL ARE IN A PASSING PARADE & IT BODES ILL FOR ANYONE TO TRUMPET. TO SUMMON SUCH POWERFUL & ASSERTIVE ARGUMENTS & INNUMERABLE CASE LAWS & QUOTING RIGHT & LEFT THE ACCEPTED PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY, THE ENSHRINED FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN ARTICLES 14,16 & 21 OF CONSTITUTION, DISCRIMINATION TO BE SET ASIDE & WHICH ALONE ENABLED THIS STERLING & SPECTACULAR HON SJ JAIPUR HC JUDGEMENT WHICH IS WHAT IT OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN & RIGHTLY THE LEARNED JUDGE HAD EXTENDED THE GOLDEN PRINCIPLES & LOGIC OF LIC BOARD RESOLUTION DT 24/11/2001 TO ITS LOGICAL CONCLUSION FOR SUBSEQUENT GROUPS OF PENSIONERS HINGED TO RESPECTIVE CPINDEX.
10) ONE & ONE TRUE , PRAGMATIC ASSERTION BY EVERY COURT OF OUR LAND THAT PENSIONERS RICHLY DESERVE AN UPLIFT,THAT MONSTROUS ANAMOLIES CAN ONLY BE REDUCED OR REDRESSED BY PENSION UPGRADATION ONLY. THEY DESERVE A PERMANENT REMEDY ,WHICH ALONE CAN ALLEVIATE THEIR SUFFERRINGS & ENABLE THEM TO BE PART & PARCEL OF A SOCIETY TO WHICH THEY HAVE RICHLY CONTRIBUTED THEIR SWEAT & BLOOD FOR LONG 35/40 YEARS.
11)Talks with Sr Counsel on this & other crucial aspects of the case,which will dominate for deciding the Twin Benefits accepted & allowed by Hon SJ Bhandari,Jaipur HC had taken place last month & Sr Counsel is confident pensioners case is strong & unassailable.We have to pool all arguments ,from many angles,especially thinking of likely obstacles which UOI or LIC counsel may shoot .That part of the strategy is taking shape & final touches are being given .This is a critical period & having fought & won a series of victories over a long period of time & being the strongest & staunchest votary of Full DR for pre-8/1997 pensioners & Pension revision with every wage revision, that salutary principle can never be abrogated but shall emerge ever shining to our utmost satisfaction.
B} It will be worthwhile & productive to go through the PATNA HC Judgement,latest 18/5/2015. Many times, we tend to read only if Judgement is short.Even activists may not have time to go in detail to extract quintessence of a Judgement which is RELEVANT to our case & cause.Though.I attach the verdict ,I have summarized the same & ESSENTIAL & FORCEFUL & ASSERTIVE points & Hon Judges REMARKS & FINDINGS are numbered I,II,III,IV to X so that we can utilize the same when Submissions open up with SC Bench on 23 September, 2015 or whenever date fixed for the same.
I have also included SUMMARY or Gist of another Judgement,very potent & pertinent exactly on issue of Pension Upgradation by SC Bench headed by Hon Dipak Misra & Hon A.M.Sapre & this is dated 1/7/2015.
PATNA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT :CWP 10757/2010
MMPSinha,S/oLate Justice BPSinha,A Retd Rly Servant,Patna
Petitioner Vs
UOI,-----Sy,Dept of Expenditure,Ministry of Personnel,Ministry of Railways, Rly Board
Hon Justice RKMishra, Per;Hon Justice Navanthi Prasad Singh
I ] A very simple,but ticklish issue arises in this writ petition.The issue is whether a person retiring from a higher grade can receive pension less than a person retiring in the lower grade.Is it not arbitrary & in view of the Judgement of the Hon Apex Court in the case of UOI & Another Vs SPS Vains{Retd}& Ors since reported in 2008/9SCC 125,the pension of the person in the higher grade would have to be stepped up accordingly.
------The facts are not,at all,in dispute.The petitioner retired in 1992 from the services of Indian Rlys as AddlGM,ER,Kolkata.-----
Petitioner points out that the Maximum pension that can be paid in Grade S29 would beRs67,000 +10,000 Grade pay & half of it,50% would beRs38,500.Thus,seen on the face of it,a person retiring in Grade S29 at the maximum scale would get not only higher remuneration but consequently,higher pension than Grade S30,for which it was feeder post both in terms of remuneration but consequently,higher pension than Grade S30,for which it was feeder post both in terms of remuneration& pension .
II] THIS IS HOSTILE DISCRIMINATION.ARBITRARY & IMPROPER. Briefly submitted,a JUNIOR CANNOT GET HIGHER REMUNERATION OR PENSION THAN A SENIOR .
In order to contradict the objection of the CG& the Indian Rlys that this is mere a theoretical submission,petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit giving facts & figures.
III] Petitioner ,thus,in theory & practice,has shown the discrepancy ie capable of happening & also happening.In fact, he submits that this is a clear case of impermissible discrimination & is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
There is no Counter affidavit filed on behalf of GOI-----it seems Rlys has been entrusted to defend the case by GOI.Their only defence is that petitioner retired prior to 2006 whereas,the cases illustrated by him are cases of persons,who retired after 1/1/2006 or are yet to retire.This,accordingly is reasonable classification for lower pension in the higher Grade
IV] In other words, the only explanation given is retirement at different times,but there is no explanation as to why a person of a higher grade will get pension less than of a junior grade.The factual assertion of this dichotomy, as pointed out by the petitioner ,has not been challenged.---
----
There is anamoly in pension.Respondents' only defence is that this anamoly is inherent in the system & inherent in the pay & pay structure as fixed with effect from 1/1/2006.
V] THE QUESTION IS WHETHER INHERENT, APPARENT, OR LATENT DISCRIMINATION IS PERMISSIBLE.IN OUR VIEW,THE SHORT ANSWER IS THAT IT CANNOT EVER PERMISSIBLE.A PERSON IN THE Higher ADMINISTRATIVE GRADE CANNOT DRAW LESS REMUNERATION OR LESS PENSION THAN A PERSON OF THE SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE GRADE WHICH GRADE IS THE FEEDER GRADE FOR THE HIGHER ADMINISTRATIVE GRADE.THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT HAS BEEN DEPRECATED BY THE HON APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF UOI & ANOTHERVs SPS VAINS (Retd) & OTHERS (SUPRA).THERE IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE BRIGADIER IN THE ARMY WAS RECEIVING HIGHER PENSION THAN THE MAJOR GENERAL.BRIGADIER IS THE FEEDER POST FOR MAJOR GENERAL.THE HON SUPREME COURT HELD THAT THE ONLY WAY OUT FOR THE CENTRAL GOVT WAS TO STEP UP THE PENSION OF THE MAJOR GENERAL SO THAT THIS DISCRIMINATION OF JUNIOR GETTING HIGHER THAN A SENIOR IS REMOVED.
Neither learned counsel for the UOI nor the counsel for the Indian Railways is able to distinguish the said decision of the Hon APEX COURT.Apart from saying that the said decision was based on pay basic scale,service conditions of defence services which are different from other civil services,there was no other distinction.
VI] It is the principle of law decided that is to be considered.The principle of law,as decided by the Hon Apex Court ,is plain & simple;that a Senior Officer cannot get pension less than his Junior.If that be ,the effect of pay fixation than the pension would have to be stepped up to avoid such hostile discrimination.There was no consideration of defence service or any special feature of defence service as distinguishing civil services.The distinction pointed out is illusionary.
VII] HENCE,HAVING CONSIDERED THE MATTER,THE FACTS NOT BEING IN DISPUTE,AS NOTED ABOVE,& THE LAW NOT BEING IN DISPUTE,AS NOTED ABOVE,THE RESULT IS THAT THE WRIT PETITION MUST SUCCEED & THE Judgement & order of the CAT,PATNA BENCH,PATNA HAS TO BE SET ASIDE,
VIII] IT HAS TO BE HELD THAT THE BASIC PENSION OF THE PETITIONER WITH EFFECT FROM 1/1/2006 HAS TO BE STEPPED UP TO Rs38,500 TO AVOID DISCRIMINATION. RESPONDENT NO3, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS THRO THE CHAIRMAN, RAILWAY BOARD & RESPONDENT NO 4,RAILWAY BOARD THRO SECRETARY ARE GIVEN 3 MONTHS TIME TO CALCULATE THE ARREARS OF PENSION ACCORDINGLY & PAY THE SAME WITHIN THE SAME PERIOD.
THE WRIT PETITION IS,ACCORDINGLY,ALLOWED.
(Navaniti Prasad Singh,J)
(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) 18/5/2015
-------------------------------------------------
C} Duty of Government is to avoid unwarranted litigations and not to encourage litigation for the sake of litigation; SC ,July 1, 2015
HON'BLE Supreme Court of India observed, that it is the duty of the State Government to avoid unwarranted litigations and not to encourage any litigation for the sake of litigation.
The Apex Court made these observations in the judgment delivered by the Division Bench consisting of Justices Dipak Misra and Abhay Manohar Sapre.
The Court delivered its judgment in a Civil Appeal No. 1123 OF 2015 (State of Rajasthan and Ors. vs. Mahendra Nath Sharma) in which two State Governments had denied pension benefits to Lecturers, Librarians and PTIs, who retired prior to 1.1.2006. After, 2006, State of Haryana and Rajasthan had released several notifications regarding pension to persons who retried before 2006, but the same was not extended to Lecturers, Librarians and PTIs as there was a confusion regarding their pay grade being from the Lecturer (Ordinary Scale), Lecturer(Senior Scale) or Lecturer (Selection Scale).
The matter accordingly reached the High Court where the single judge ruled in favour of retired persons. However, Division Bench set aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge and remitted the matter to the writ court to decide the matter afresh after considering the guidelines and various other aspects of the case.
After the matter was remitted back to the single judge, the single judge again ruled in favour of the petitioners, the retired persons. However, the State preferred an appeal against the judgment passed by the single judge and the matter reached the Division Bench. The Division Bench too awarded the judgment in favour of the retired persons, but with some modifications.
IX] The State then preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court, wherein the Apex Court also ruled in favour of the respondents. It also said, "It is a well known principle that pension is not a bounty. The benefit is conferred upon an employee for his unblemished career." The Court relied on observations made in D.S. Nakara vs. Union of India and emphasized that the parts reproduced from D.S. Nakara form fundamental concept in service jurisprudence.
X]The Court accordingly ruled in favour of retired persons and gave the states three months to pay back the amount, failing which interest at 9 per cent per annum would be levied on the amount, until the date of realization.
Let us hope & pray,steady ourselves ,without any bickering or personal vilification,as it leads nowhere,when we are nearing the Finale, fullest concentration is needed to marshal arguments copious enough & to talk to Sr Counsel asking his viewpoints & strategy he will discuss & adopt,the emphasis he will lay on vital points with only one purpose,to win & win only& to clinch the issue thoroughly with specific Order & effective date for Each benefit & a Deadline to LIC to implement with Action Taken Report(ATR) Monthly to SC to be vigilant & under their control to carry out the Orders
Greetings,Goodluck & Godspeed,
R.B.KISHORE, VP, AIRIEF
No comments:
Post a Comment