LIC GROUP MEDICLAIM SCHEME GUIDE

LIC GROUP MEDICLAIM SCHEME GUIDE 


CLICK HERE 

DEAR FRIENDS, CONGRATS, YOUR BLOG CROSSED 4819309 HITS ON 10.05.2026THE BLOG WAS LAUNCHED ON 23.11.2014,HAVE A GREAT DAY
VISIT 'PENSIONERS VOICE & SOUND TRACK' WAY TO CATCH UP ON PENSIONER RELATED NEWS!

Sunday, 9 April 2017

MY RESPONSE TO MR R V RAMESH’s POST

       No doubt Mr R V Ramesh  as an enlightened senior retired officer of LIC has  highlighted all the relevant points in our favour in his detailed post. There can be no disagreement on all the arguments that he has adduced in justification for removal of DR anomaly for pre-August 1997 retirees and upgradation of pension for all pensioners.LIC in its Written Submissions  has only  written what is predictable ,viz,all the reasons  to deny what is just & legally  due  towards the pensioners not hesitating to  give misleading  calculations in their submissions.
But the ground reality today is that with the filing of Written submissions by petitioners & LIC  after the hearing is concluded and judgment  being reserved,  there can be no action choice  except to proceed with further required steps after the judgment is delivered which can be expected any time between 10th April  & 28th April 2017.Till then whatever we write, read or discuss about  the strength of our case points will only be academic-may be  of some use as and when the case lands in the Supreme Court on a SLP by the aggrieved party. So whatever has been argued  by the counsel representing the six Writ Petitioners would have definitely  covered a number of important points mentioned by Mr Ramesh with appropriate emphasis on  the relevant Constitutional provisions  in their arguments. Mr Ramesh may be aware   that the LIC counsel was also asked to file additional written submissions with reference to the  Hyderabad Association’s Written Submissions under our WP no 4894/2016.LIC filed  their additional written submissions on 31/3/2017 again stoutly defending  their grounds  for denial of upgradation of pension. Now it is for the Special Bench of Delhi High Court to weigh the facts and material before them taking into account the submissions of all the parties in the case and deliver the judgment.
Even though initially  Mr Nidhesh Gupta  vehemently argued  on violation of Article 14 of the Constitution, the questions raised in the course of the hearings clearly indicated that the Bench was also keen to be satisfied on the financial affordability of the Corporation and safeguards to  the bonus for the policyholders also although  there was apparently a strong case on constitutional principles.So,we at Hyderabad Association had to back our rejoinders to the LIC’s counter affidavits  with authentic    financial data on LIC’s soundness  based on past trends and  reasonable projections  for the future. The data were also utilized admirably well by Mr Nidhesh Gupta who also argued for our Association  in the latter part of the hearings in quite a convincing manner.
Let us hope and pray that by now there is sufficient material before the Bench in our favour that will result in a favourable judgment which may be barely a fortnight away.
Greetings.
C H Mahadevan
 

No comments: