The implication of Grameen Banks' Pensioners SC judgment for LIC Pensioners

THE SUBTLE IMPLICATION OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT ON RRBS’ PENSIONERS FOR OUR SLPs

The basic rationale for the judgments of Karnataka & Rajasthan High Court judgments upheld by the Supreme Court on 25/4/2018 has been that parity should be maintained between the employees of RRBs and those of 58 Nationalized Banks in the matter of pay as well as pension benefits. This has a subtle message and  a fortifying point for our SLPs in the Supreme Court.

While RRBs are separate set of entities although sponsored by Nationalised Banks, they have been now afforded-and rightly so- a status of parity with Nationalised Banks as far as pension benefits are concerned also. But in the case of LIC pensioners, LIC Pension Rules 1995, with the insertion of Rule 55B on 23/8/2001, have created a disparity within the same set of pensioners governed by these Rules. Chairman and Managing Directors retired after 1/1/1996 as per Rule 55B have been made eligible to be brought on par with Central Government pensioners   governed by CCS Pension Rules 1972, while 99.98% of the other pensioners governed by the LIC Pension Rules have been deprived of parity with these officers. This in spite of Rule 56 (Residuary Provisions) which states that where there are no express provisions in the LIC Pension Rules 1995, the CCS Pension Rules 1972 etc will apply. Lack of parity in this regard between the two sets of pensioners is to be construed as a lack of express provision in our Pension Rules. We are of course happy that the above-mentioned category of top management officers has been treated on par with Central Government pensioners, because this has provided a strong ground for us to fight in our SLPs. But what is incidentally unfortunate is that as many as six Chairman and three Managing Directors retired between 1/1/1986 and 31/12/1995 have also been deprived of the parity provided by Rule 55B.By a deeper reading of the Rule 55B,we can discern the subtle point that an option has been given to the concerned officers not for being governed  by the CCS Pension Rules 1972,but instead had been given an option “not to be governed by  the provisions  of this rule(55B)”.In other words, the parity with CCS pensioners has been happily bestowed  on this category of officers! No sane person would exercise such negative option!

We need to emphasize this aspect in our pleadings before the Supreme Court on 24 th July 2018.

I reproduce the set of Rules 55,55A,55B and 2(j) which have relevance in this regard.

Greetings.

C H Mahadevan

Rule 55

Power to issue instructions-

The Chairman of the Corporation may from time to time issue instructions as may be considered necessary or expedient for the implementation of these rules.

Rule 55A  (Notified in Gazette of India dt 6/12/1999 and came into force on the date of publication in the Official Gazette).

Power to Relax-

Where the Central Government is satisfied that the operation of any of these rules cause undue hardship in respect of any class or categories of persons, it may by order for reasons to be recorded in writing, relax the requirement of the provision of that rule in a manner not inconsistent with these rules.

RULE 55B   ( as amended on 13/8/2001)

Pensionary benefits to employees mentioned in proviso to sub-rule (j) of Rule 2 and employees appointed as Managing Director under Section 20 of the Act (LIC Act 1956) and who were in service on or after 1^st January 1996;

Notwithstanding anything  contained  in these rules, in respect  of an employee appointed as Managing Director under Section 20 of the LIC  of India Act 1956, and in respect of an employee covered by  proviso to sub-rule(j) of Rule 2,who were in service on and after 1^st January 1996, the pensionary benefits shall be calculated  in accordance with  the provisions contained  in the Central Civil Services(Pension)Rules 1972 and the  Central Civil Services( Commutation  of Pension)Rules, 1981, as applicable  to Central Government   servants and in accordance  with the instructions issued  by the Central Government  there under from time to time;

Provided that where such  an employee who has retired  on or after 1.1.1996 and before the  date of publication of  these rules in the Official Gazette  or the family of such employee in the event of death of such employee, gives a notice in writing within 90 days  of the publication of  these rules, expressing an option not to be governed by  the provisions  of this rule, then , the provisions of the above paragraph shall not apply  in respect of such employee or the family of such employee as the case may be. Option once exercised  under this proviso  shall be final”.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Rule 2(j):

“ “employee” means any person employed in the service of the Corporation on full-time work on permanent basis and who opts and is governed by these rules but does not include an employee retired before the commencement of these rules and who is drawing pension from the Pension Fund of the Oriental Government Security Life Assurance Company Limited in accordance with sub-regulation(2) of regulation 76 of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations,1960, made under the Act;* Provided that where the Chairman of the Corporation appointed by the Central Government in accordance with Section 4 of the Act was immediately preceding such appointment an Employee of the Corporation, then, subject to the terms of any contract, agreement or letter of appointment or directions issued by the Central Government, such Chairman for the purposes of these rules shall also be deemed to be an employee of the Corporation.”