1)Adverting to Delhi HC orderdt 12/7/2016 & the SC Bench order dt 31/3/2016 ,points emerging for careful consideration were: In what areas it has to be strengthened to be clearly diagnosed, understood & needed preparations on law, constitutionality, Fundamental Rights, avoid discrimination, & in particular areas which Hon Dipak Misra has emphasized there were inadequate pleadings.
b)40% IR to ALL SIMILARLY PLACED PENSIONERS.
2) Hon Dipak Misra,even in his adinterim Order of 7/5/2015 clearly contained the idea of payment in continuum still persisting & above all the principle of enhancement of pension so vital has to be decided.
b)It was again Hon Dipak Misra who as recent as 1/7/2015 in Rajasthan Librarians & others, detested 6/7 grades below getting more pension than Seniors & Superiors,
Characterized same correctly as HOSTILE DISCRIMINATION
& allowed in principle PENSION UPGRADATION
c) We know that he mentioned DR formula as misleading during 31/3 2016 proceedings Yet,he has not knocked it out then.
3)Sanctified SC should have resolved the Main Issue ,even WITHOUT any Board Resolution, of its own, on the basis of contesting parties learned Submissions & Arguments. But that was not to be
4)Para 27 of SC Order re 40% IR:
"27. Keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, it is hereby directed that the Corporation shall pay 40% as per Para 3A of the Appendix to each of the employees within six weeks and shall file an affidavit before the High Court of Delhi to the said effect. The Corporation is at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited in the Courts so that it can pay the employees who have retired. Needless to emphasize, the aforesaid payment shall be subject to final results in the writ petitions.
5)Hon Dipak Misra's contentions:
LIC IS CONTROLLED BY SECTION 21 OF LIC ACT. 1956.
SECTION 48 EMPOWERS THE AUTHORITIES TO MAKE RULES
GOI FRAMED RULES NAMELY, LIC(EMPLOYEES) PENSION RULES, 1995,
RULE 37 PROVIDES FOR PAYMENT OF DEARNESS RELIEF TO PENSIONERS.
APPENDIX IV OF THE 1995 RULES IS PRINCIPAL PLINTH OF QUARREL
ON SCANNING OF ANATOMY OF RULE 55 OF THE 1995 RULES, THE BENCH IS ABSOLUTY CLEAR THAT IT DOES NOT CONFER POWER ON THE CHAIRMAN TO ISSUE ANY INSTRUCTIONS .
BOARD CAN PASS A RESOLUTION BUT NOT AUTHORISED TO TAKE A DECISION WITH REGARD TO CERTAIN MATTERS ,WHICH ARE WITHIN THE DOMAIN OF THE RULE MAKING AUTHORITY
6)THE SC BENCH PERUSES SECTION 48 AND COMES TO THE CONCLUSION THAT NO BENEFIT OF PENSION OR ANYTHING ANCILLIARY THERETO CAN BE CONFERRED WITHOUT THE RULES FRAMED UNDER SECTION 48
Submissions : While discussing on controversial Sec 48, i)Arguments advanced for obeying the statute are not fatal to the maintainability of the verdicts. Legal sittings having extended so long for many many years.Courts have to maintain a fine, delicate balance of the strength & purity of the submissions, the clarity & holistic presentation with proper delineation of reason & logic, impenetrable as it should be & as it has been,conferring the balance of advantage in pensioners favour.
ii)Your Honour, we request pragmatically that Bench must lay focus & attention, not to law or statute per se, but the implications to the aggrieved ,the violation of Fundamental Rights to citizens, more so Sr Citizens,& then only apply any dictum with the force & impetus it had served in realizing or sabotaging the overall superiority of canons of law.Blind adherence to statutes & law, without weighing the force of implications,reach or repercussions, whether help or hurt,is what should be eschewed .
iii)More paramount than mere mechanical,rugged, blind imposition of law ,Your Honour,will be the facets of the issue,the nature of environment & circumstances,
bonafide impact, severity of loss juxtaposed amongst pensioners & such other overriding & cardinal principles tested on the touchstone of judicial balance which should drive the Hon Bench to appreciate the underlying responsibility of HC & SC as a savior & protector of the aggrieved in the realization of their genuine, modest demands.
iv)Bench will surely sense,understand , & realize the gravity of the situation, the continuous loss sustained by pensioners all these years & decades,so the remedy for the malady must prove to be a valid medicine without killing the patient or the pensioner.15,500 pensioners have died so far & the number of Family Pensioners have shot up from 17 % to 40 % of Regular pensioners.Who will wipe the tears of the widow , is a sad question.
v)One cannot wriggle out of Constitution the hallmark of proclamation of Fundamental Rights & blind to this ,formulate a solution. Here also, more than bonafides, the criteria & overriding consideration must prevail to click & clinch Utmost Good Faith of litigants mercifully approaching a benign, impartial, neutral, benevolent Hon HC/SC Bench which & which alone can render true, neutral, empathetic justice realizing their hardship &thus helping & offerring pragmatic solution, in tune with reality, to the problems tackled in so many HCs .
vi)Facts, merits, legal concepts, intricacies, charts of anamolies in DR, Pension ,Constitutional issues,Fundamental Rights, Case laws,equity & equality ,with no discrimination ,with more pleadings on all essentials,have come to sharp & deeper focus now. Nothing is done inconsistent with any cardinal tenet ,merits of submissions have been weighed & checked again & again. Delay has been inordinate, even after NO Stay order of SC Bench, dt 30 September, 2013, &thanx only to generous condonation of 6 months, 23 days delay,which normally is not waived, leading to proliferation of SLPs,then converted as CAs & after few hearings, came SC Bench order dt 31/3/2016
(7) TWO CATEGORIES OF EMPLOYEES
• PRIOR TO CUT-OFF DATE i.e.1st August, 1997
• After the cut-off date Who are not getting the benefit of dearness relief Despite subsequent pay revisions ,affecting the quantum of pension
------------------------------------------------------------------
8) The Bench is inclined to set aside the orders passed by all the three High Courts and transfers the writ petitions from theHigh Courts of Rajasthan and Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh to the High Court of DelhI
(I) TO DECIDE THE CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF PARA 3A OF THE APPENDIX IV TO THE RULES AS ARGUED BY MR. PANCHU
(II) TO DEAL WITH THE CASES OF THE PERSONS, WHO HAVE RETIRED AFTER THE CUT-OFF DATE
(III) TO CONSIDER THE CONTENTIONS RAISED BY MR. GUPTA AND OTHER CONTENTIONS TO BE RAISED
(9) THIS COURT HAS NOT EXPRESSED ANY OPINION ON THE MERITS OF THE CASE , EXCEPT THE RESOLUTION COULD NOT BECOME OPERATIVE UNLESS IT WAS CONFERRED THE STATUS OF A RULE AS PROVIDED UNDER SECTION 48 OF THE ACT
10). THE COURT STATED THE CONTROVERSY RELATING TO PENSION COULD NOT BE PUT TO AN END FOR SOME REASONS OR OTHER
"THE CONTROVERSY OF THIS NATURE DOES NOT SEE THE SUNSET WITH SUCH IMMEDIACY"
Submissions:i) Your Honour, We are fighting this legal battle,with so many constraints of Elders, Sr Citizens & Pensioners who dedicated themselves during service for 35 yrs & more as loyal soldiers & made this institution a glorious & glittering one, with ever so many accolades & achievements.
ii)It is ,therefore, very much desirable, Your Honour, that this issue, not a controversy, as many are already enjoying the benefit , & past decades have witnessed Case laws ,after delving deep into the niceties & holistic ramifications of the issue ,with absolute neutrality.Many case laws became a Magna Carta for pensioners & rightly so.We plead with all humility & modesty, to consider our genuine, modest & legitimate demands,
in this era of benevolent wage settlements with a thumping rise in salary & other incidental allowances & benefits,
handsome Retirement bonanza, compared to pittance we got,
several disabilities of elders unique to them casting monetary burden,
many many, around 15,500 pensioners have already died,a tragedy none else cares,
rising tide of Family Pensioners enabling LIC to gain relief in Regular pension outgo,&
more so as NPS already started from May 2010 ,this Group of eligible Pension upgradatiom, will become a CLOSED CADRE.
iii)Your Honour, 1998 onwards 17 yrs & more , is it not enough to bear the AGONY with patience, perseverance, endurance & this must ,therefore, end this ding-dong ,which has cost us heavily.
iv)Above all,your Honour, we know primarily , we set store on Constitutional Principles, Fundamental Rights, discrimination to end at any cost as it plays havoc,duly supported by valid case laws ,& simple Tables & Charts for illustration, which captures the heart of the matter, 7 steps below getting more pension than their Seniors, You will certainly agree, such widening, gaping, monstrous Anamolies must be put an end to,Your Honour.
v) Basic Pension unchanged & static right from 1/11/ 1993 ,a long long 23 yrs !! is unthinkable & unjust; it will be a travesty of justice, building up, perplexing anamolies, glaring discrepancies & unbridgeable paradoxes, 7/8 cadres below,a Peon & RC getting more pension than pre-8/1997 ZM & ED & so,has to be addressed & redressed,by LIC by your esteemed ,pathbreaking Judgement,Your Honour .Basic criteria is grant of similar pension for all those with same length of service for the same cadre & that is violated. It is an anachronism that LIC pensioners still continue in pre-1995 IV Pay Commission mode.
vi)Hon Justice Dipak Misra has referred in SC Order dt 31/3/2016 about this LIC Letter to MOF. LIC SECRET LETTER dt 31/12/2001 which forcefully stressed the 'need to rationalize the DR structure available to different groups of pensioners in order to reduce the administrative inconvenience & also to see that different generations of pensioners are protected by merging the pension to a suitable index.'—,also reminded MOF/UOI on 12/8/2003 ,so successive pension revisions at CPIndex 600,1148, 1740, 2328,2994 & now 4708.
vii)Your Honour, we HIGHLIGHT this crucial piece of LIC's own letter to MOF/ UOI as this concept was already in the making but Bureaucracy never rose to the occasion to take honest decisions within definite stipulated time frame, as otherwise, it becomes a burden for all to wait & wait, watch & watch ,with no end results.
viii) VI Pay Commission, apart from granting decent rise in salary, allowances etc & pension upgradation, also added value rightly, increased % of pension at ages 80,85,90,95 & 100 years to the tune of 20,30,40,50 & 100% ,which we don't secure & that demonstrated empathy towards Elders. Older Govt pensioners had, therefore, an added reason to rejoice.
ix)After a decent Pension fixation Formula with examples, 7th PC allows multiple of factor 2.86 times & fix pension,whichever is higher
It must be brought to the notice of the Hon SC Bench ,that even after this sound Methodology for fixing New Pension, the Value-added Pension for Elders continues, at ages 80.85.90.95 & 100 at the rate of rise of 20%,30,40,50 & 100 %.This is remarkable.
x) Your Honour, we assert that we are living in a Welfare State, a Socialist pattern of society, in an egalitarian economy,& so, all the more necessary to worship concepts of Equity & Equality enshrined in our Constitution. Please ensure that such discrimination must be put an end to & pave the way for a clear & comprehensive Verdict ,without any doubts or ambiguity or susceptibility to different interpretations,as all along that has consumed such large time factor,which when Elders are part of the subject matter can be hastened as an obiter dicta ,without too many adjournments.
xi)Your Honour,Hon Justice Dipak Misra & Hon Sapre thundered, as recent as 1/7/2015 " The question is whether inherent, apparent, or latent discrimination is permissible. in our view, the short answer is that, it cannot ever be permissible ' . -------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 then the pension would have to be stepped up to avoid such hostile discrimination. so said Hon Dipak Misra & Hon Sapre in the case of Rajasthan Govt Teachers & University staff.
11)29 page SC order of 31/3/2016, Delhi HC order dt 12/7/2016 ,thereafter many talks with Sr Counsel have injected hopes, to fill up blanks & to remedy & remove deficiencies or incomplete pleadings mentioned by Bench ,It is absolutely necessary to include CHARTS to drive home our case to wrest from Bench as such charts are self-explanatory & expose the Loss sustained, Pension Anamolies etc with ease & felicity. That has also been done.
(12) THE FACT REMAINS THAT CERTAIN RESPONDENTS ARE SEPTUGENARIAN AND THEY HAVE TO FIGHT ANOTHER ROUND OF LITIGATION
(13) THE COURT(SC) FEELS THE PAIN WHILE REMANDING THE MATTER AS PLEADINGS ARE NOT ADEQUATE
Submissions: i) Your Honour,Basic Pension remains unchanged & static right from 1/11/ 1993,making insurance pensioners still struggling with IV Pay Commission mode ! The pathetic condition of a class of people arbitrarily alienated from the beneficial stream of pensioners due to delay, dither & not to comply with the judgement is sad and ,what i is arbitrary, is unconstitutional, so thundered late Dr VRKrishnaIyer ,the BhismaPitha of legal jurisprudence.
ii) Institutions trying to create classes of pensioners ,heterogeneous, instead of one homogeneous group, subdividing & subclassifying ,though all are having same length of service,is unconstitutional .
iii)Nothing should be in derogation of Fundamental Rights or no abridgement of such Rights,
if there is any such law, then that law is inconsistent ,as Rule of res judicta comes into play laying concerns on impractical pleas, not in tune with the facts & circumstances of the case,
iv) Why different yardstick are adopted, on the other hand , more sympathy & empathy should be displayed by Corporation, as Pensioners are Sr Citizens& Elders, aged & majority above 70 years old & more than 15,500 pensioners have already died.
(14) that the amount of pension is a paltry sum
b) the Corporation should have been gracious enough to recognise the services
(c) the UOI should have come with an affirmative response when the resolution was passed
(d) We have already adjudicated the said facet.
15) a) It is a case where we are constrained to say that the end does not bring finality
(b) We have not expressed any opinion except we have finally concluded about the Board resolution
Submissions: i)As The Minutes of the 492nd Meeting of LIC of India held on 24/11/2001 at 11.30am, at Hotel Le Meridian ,New Delhi ,states in Heading "Amendment to LIC of India (Employees)Pension Rules 1995---"UPGRADING of Basic Pension to AICIPI 1740 Points and 100% DA neutralization thereon in respect of Retirees prior to 01/08/1997."
"examining the proposals as per Board Note in line with the demands made by the Federation viz. giving effect to the proposals from 01.11.1993 and upgradation by giving weightage of 11.25% as in the case of inservice employees,
ii)Your Honour, it may please be noted ," as the cost implication is not much, it is suggested that we may accede to this demand & upgrade the pension payable in relation to AICPI 600 points & 1148 points respectively by merging the Dearness Relief payable upto the level of 1740 points. On the pension so upgraded, Dearness Relief of 0.23% shall be paid over every 4 points rise or fall from 1740 points.'
iii)During current wage agreement, 1/8/2012—31/7/2017, LIC Management has conceded that they are prepared to consider 2nd Pension Option for leftout employees. Suffice it to say , while preparing the Note to Board,it was mentioned that at any rate, 2nd Pension Option is too costly & prohibitive, then costing Rs500cr & so cannot be considered but for Pension Upgradation,"cost implication is not much" & so ,thereafter only LIC Board Resolution dt 24/11/2001 came into being.
iv)When it comes to Administrative Order, Statutory Provision ,Constitutional Rights or Provision, certainly Constitutional Rights overweigh & eclipse the earlier 2 & so Supreme & have to be respected in letter & spirit.
As a corollary, such aberrations & deficiencies have to be corrected & Equity restored
v) Your Honour, the Amendment is a deliberate calculated move, is highly arbitrary & discriminatory and violates the Pensioners' Fundamental Rights to equity &equality guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 and also the Right to life and dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution
vi)This Notification dt 22/6/2000 divides pensioners into 2 groups –pre 1-8-1997 and post 1-8-1997-------This is artificial &arbitrary and violates the Fundamental Rights .This has to be SPECIFICALLY declared null and void ab initio . As long as this remains in the statute books, LIC Mgmt will continue to deprive the pre 1-8-1997 retirees of all the pensionary revisions arising out of successive Wage Settlements.
vii)If the Constitutional validity of LIC of India Employees ( Pension) Amendment Rules 2000 Notification dt 22-6-2000 issued u/s48 of LIC Act 1956 is to be tested only by the Delhi HC as directed by SC by remanding the case to Delhi HC, thenAIRIEF, Sri Asthana and our Sr. Advocates , in consultation with other groups unitedly present a strong and forceful case before the Delhi HC to ensure that the Notification is declared ultravires of the Constitution and effectively convince them that pensioners cannot be divided into different groups but form one single homogeneous group only and that their pensions are upgraded on the same principles as and when the Pay Scales of in- service LIC Employees revised.
viii)Whereas THEY SAID IN THAT NOTE PENSION NEW OPTION COST WILL BE PROHIBITIVE, WHICH NOW, IN WAGE DIALOGUE & NEGOTIATIONS,LIC CHAIRMAN APPEARS TO HAVE GIVEN A MENTAL NOD & TOLD THE UNIONS WHO HAVE ALREADY TAKEN UP THE MATTER .THIS ALSO GOES TO SUPPORT REGULAR PENSION UPGRADATION MORE COMFORTABLY & EASILY TO BREAK ANY DEADLOCK
ix)The Hon'ble Kerala High Court goes on to observe, …"the status of the Corporation(KSWC) as a jurist person, as a body corporate with a common seal and its existence would be scuttled and subservient to the dictates of the Government, as if the Corporation is a department in the Government. This is plainly impermissible."
x) When it comes to Administrative Order, Statutory Provision ,Constitutional Rights or Provision, certainly Constitutional Rights overweigh & eclipse the earlier 2 .& so Supreme & have to be respected in letter & spirit
xi)Your Honour,we would like to point out, in this connection, the implicit desire & decision of MOF/UOI vide Circular dt 5/1/2015 to CEOs of PSBs/Financial Institutions /Insurance Cos granting assurance of freedom of non-interference in PSBs etc on commercial decisions,personnel mattes etc,which implies autonomy & so, it has to be practiced & implemented
------------------------------------------------------
16)IMPORTANT & FORCEFUL POINTS EMPHASISING CONSTITUTIONS SUPREMACY & VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS :
i)Your Honour, a classification founded on such fortuitous circumstance as date of retirement would not stand the test of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution."
Hon Supreme Court has given an important ruling in that "all pensioners form a homogenous class irrespective of their dates of retirement and are entitled to same relief as subsequent retirees etc.' As such. pension should be fixed,revised,modified & changed in ways ,not entirely dissimilar to the salaries granted to serving employees
ii)Your Honour, it is painful to note & it is a great tragedy that LIC,UOI had continuously shelved the issue without coming to grips with the problem to resolve the same satisfactorily. Chart of Anamolies after 1/8/2012 wage notification,is revealing & gripping, to indicate the Sustained loss in pension over so many years .For EDs,Group I to Group V,difference/loss will range Rs 49,051---11968; for DMs,loss will be Rs32,214 ---08509; for AAO loss stands at Rs22,294–06993.His chart is also for Supdt, SHs, DOs,HGAs,Asst, Steno,RC,SubStaff, Driver,&Sweeper too.
iii)When discrimination occurs, when the right to equality is violated, it automatically deprives this group pensioners of their inviolable right earned by them by this provision in an egalitarian society of the provisions of the Constitution of India, especially the Fundamental Rights as guaranteed by the Constitution, is liable to be struck down as illegal and the appellant herein being a State as defined under the Constitution cannot claim immunity for its policy decisions, that too when the said policy decision can not stand on its own legs.
iv)Your Honour, while in the instant case the retired employees are being treated unequally in as much several classes have come up amongst the one class of retired employees (pensioners), this mini-classification itself is violative of Articles 14, 16. No law permits creation of different classes amongst one class.
v)There can be no law in breach of Fundamental Rights of equity and equality as guaranteed under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and also right to life with dignity as guaranteed under Article 21. If there is any such provision ,it itself is null and void
vi)Your Honour, we wish to bring to your kind notice ,earlier SC Bench Clarificatory order of 17/10/2012 to pay Retiral benefits from the date of eligibility, signifying retirement date only,as the quintessential date for pensioners to be given effect to.
vii)Hon Justice Dipak Misra & Sapre in their 1/7/2015
judgement order under CA1123 of 2015 in connection with Rajasthan teachers & other staff ,where 6 grades below cadres were getting more than their seniors, cleared cobwebs on pension upgradation to end hostile discrimination.
viii)Your Honour, MOF/UOI stance to stall improvements & observing that such grant of pension updation will lead to repercussions inPSBanks & elsewhere, is nothing but a concocted bogey by CGovt . The Kerala HC ,in the case of Manmohan C & Others vs Kerala StateWareHousing Corporation (WP9),No12768 /2006 asserted, 'such a statement is unfounded, & is nothing but meekness with no constitutional or legal foundation.'
ix) Pensions have to be revised periodically in a manner not dissimilar to salary revision of serving employees. Cost of living & other obligations of the pensioners are similar to that of Central Govt , Railway & State Govt pensioners.
x)Your Honour, honestly, there is no justification in trying to disallow pension revision to insurance pensioners,more so when managed within LIC finances itself ,as earlier detailed.
xi)Most important, GOVT Pension Regulations do not provide for revision of pension. Central Civil Services(Pension )Rules, 1972 are statutory in character. But, Govt has repeatedly gone ahead with pension revision & with it Railways only thro Administrative orders, without any amendment in its own Pension Regulations. That did not preclude the Govt from giving effect to V CPC & again VI CPC recommendations on an Administrative basis, many times with
better improvements & modifications.
xii)a)Your Honour, look at liberal benefits granted,the maximum gratuity too was revised to Rs 10 lakh, up from the earlier Rs 3.5 lakh, wef 1/1/2006 . If an employee dies during service, his family will get full pension (enhanced family pension) for 10 years. 7th Pay Commission enhanced Gratuity to Rs 20 lacs
b)Further,The linkage of full pension with 33 years of service was scrapped. The maximum service length for full pension would be 20 years.These have not been allowed as yet for LIC.
xiii) Your Honour, the power to fix pay also includes the power to fix notional pay. This is a perfectly permissible procedure being an integral part of civic jurisprudence. Commonsense, equity, equality, similarity in circumstances, suggest straightaway acceptance of SAME RULE for insurance pensioners also, left to credible LIC on sound principles for solution to pay attention to those dates when discrimination arose palpably & to resolve the glaring disparities in cadre pensions as enunciated .
Your Honour,there cannot be any other ,other than the principled, logical decision to grant the principle from 1/11/1993 or date of retirement, whichever is later. No different yardstick should be there as dispensers of justice & there should not be any arbitrary date.
xiv)a) LIC Basic Family Pension ranges after the death of the pensioner to the widow ,from Asst to ED, For pre-8/92, pre-8/97, pre- 8/2002,pre-8/2007 to a woeful pittance of Rs572-1050, 1100-2100, 1349—3540, & Rs2048—5266 with DR. This is abhorringly low.
b)Your Honour, is it Empathy or Stone-hearted Bureaucrats who come in the way ? CGovt, State Govts, Railways, Defence. PSUs,& RBI too secure 30 % of Basic Pay as Family Pension.MOF/UOI has not conceded this straightforward Formula to Financial & Service Sectors like Banks ,LIC,GIC etc. We are still governed by the graded Restrictive Appendix V,which deprives of a decent FP ,after death of Regular Pensioner.
c)Your Honour, we wish to bring to your kind notice the very many inadequacies & insufficiencies the Insurance pensioners are silently suffering ,of alarming, discriminating RESTRICTIVE GRADED FORMULA of Family Pension in Pension Rules 1995, as a sequel & aftermath of pension upgradation .We wish to pinpoint the gross inequity in formula fixation, with the sole aim to deny right, ethical FP to enable widows & others to lead & live a somewhat decent life, endeavour to have peaceful ,fair standard of living .
d) As the numbers have multiplied, as a result of many deaths of RP. more than 15,500 & Ratio of FP to RP has jumped from 17 % to 38 % & in some Zones to 40 % & more, it is natural to make a parallel reference to FP as a corollary. Outlay on RP ,because of deaths, will become less & virtually transferred to FP,with lesser impact.
e)The tribe of Family pensioners to REGULAR PENSIONERS RATIO
jumping from 17 % to 36 % earlier, as per latest data collected rises to 39.9% , as at 31/3/2011, FP has GALLOPED to 42.04 % as at 31/3/2015 !! 12,272 FP to 30,731 RP as at 31/3/2011 to 14,485 FP to 34,457 RP as at 31/3/2015 . 43,003 TP to 48,942 as at 31/3/2015, a MERE 1125 pa ADDITION to TP as against 1907 in EARLIER YEARS .
17)a)The Supreme Court judgement in case NO Appeal(Civil)NO 1289/2007 (Para 25) which read :"The revision of scales of pay as also other allowances is technical in nature. When a benefit is extended to group of employees the effect of such benefit if otherwise comes within the purview thereof must be held to be applicable to other group of employees" and the Jaipur HC judgement was in tune with this Apex court verdict.
b)V CPC further observed "We are of the view that Court judgments when delivered on merits should not only be implemented invariably but their benefits should also be extended to similarly placed persons without requiring them to resort to litigation (para141.27)
c)That was explicitly made clear in Gratuity case of 2008 & Delhi HC Judgement applying Jaipur judgement ' in rem ' .
18) Your Honour, we forcefully plead with you to effectuate meaningful implementation of the clearcut submissions made & also, in that direction,to issue orders to LIC/UOI to operationalise & implement pension revision with successive wage revisions for all groups of pensioners,with the correct effective dates from which discrimination arose, to enable all to come under one homogeneous group of pensioners, without pre &post labels to establish equity & equality
Rest sooner,
R.B.KISHORE
VP,AIRIEF
No comments:
Post a Comment