Shri C H Mahadevan's letter to ED(P)

• 

  27/8/2018

  To

  The Executive Director (Personnel),

  LIC of India,

  Central Office, Mumbai

  (FOR PERSONAL ATTENTION OF MR MUKESH GUPTA)

  Dear Sir,

  Re: Implementation of the Order dated 27/4/2017 of Delhi High Court-1)

  Effective date for payment of arrears, 2)Anomaly arising in upgradation of

  Minimum Pension

  I refer to the instructions issued under your circular Ref

  ER/A/Pension/Implementation dated 18/8/2018 to the Zonal Managers of the

  Corporation. As per information received by me, at least one Division in South

  Central Zone, viz, Machilipatnam Division is reported to have paid the arrears

  to 71 eligible pensioners.

  It is observed that the date from which the arrears have been instructed to be

  paid has been indicated as 29/1/2007 while it should have been 18/12/1998, the

  date on which the first Writ Petition No 6676 of 1998 was filed in the Jaipur

  Bench of Rajasthan High Court which was the starting point for the entire

  litigation. This is the date that needs to be taken as per the Order dated

  27/4/2017 of the Delhi High Court. I request you to kindly review your

  instructions in this regard and issue revised instructions to the various offices

  of the Corporation for payment of arrears from 18/12/1998 as otherwise, the

  eligible pensioners will be put to financial loss for a period of about 9 years

  including interest payable on the arrears.

  Another aspect arising out of the aforecited judgment of the Delhi High Court

  is the anomaly that has arisen in the matter of upgradation of minimum

  pension.

  In para 83 of the DHC judgment it has been stated by the High Court inter alia

  "Minimum Pension would, to some extent, have reference to the amount

  required to be paid in order to simply sustain oneself. Thus Article 21 of The

  Constitution would be attracted. Effect thereof would be that whenever there is

  an enhancement of minimum pension, the pensioners drawing less than the

  minimum pension would be entitled to the minimum pension so fixed. In other

  words..........1st August 2012 if the pension drawn inclusive of dearness relief

  on the respective dates was lower. Either/or principle, I.e .whichever is more

  beneficial, will apply. Enhancement cannot obviously work to the detriment of

  the post(sic) retirees."

  Again, in Para 107 (iii) a), it has been stated, "Retired Employees, who are in

  receipt of pension lower than the minimum pension as enhanced from time to

  time, would be entitled to benefit of the minimum pension irrespective of the
• 

  date of retirement. This direction would apply only when it is beneficial to prior

  retirees. Where such benefit of enhanced pension is granted, dearness relief

  would commence and would be calculated thereafter as per the applicable

  rate."

  Examining the rates of minimum pension fixed by the Corporation after the

  various wage revisions including that from 1/8/2012, it can be easily seen that

  even though the minimum basic pension has been increased for employees

  retired after 1/8/2012 and family pensioners of deceased employees in the

  category, the pensioners on minimum basic pension at the rates fixed on

  1/8/2007 do not really get the benefit by upgradation of minimum pension.

  They are better off with the existing minimum pension drawn on 1/8/2007 rates.

  In other words, the benefit of the DHC judgment dated 27/4/2017 does not

  really accrue to this generation of pensioners.

  Recently a case of a family pensioner (Pension ID No 6066600076) spouse of

  late A Krishnamurthy, on minimum pension was referred to me for calculation

  of arrears payable as per the Delhi High Court judgment. The employee-an ex-

  serviceman- had retired in 2003 and unfortunately died on 25/3/2015.The family

  pensioner was fixed on the minimum basic family pension of Rs 2330 from

  26/3/2015.

  When I calculated the arrears payable based on the upgraded minimum basic

  family pension of Rs 4720, the arrears of pension upto 31/7/2018 came to Rs

  3662.If instead 1

  st

  , August 2007 rate was taken for upgraded basic minimum

  family pension at Rs 2950, the arrears worked out to Rs 6524 which were more

  than on upgradation at August 2012 rate.

  The gross monthly pension is also obviously higher at 1/8/2007 rate than at

  1/8/2012 rate of minimum pension.

  According to the paras of DHC judgment quoted above, this family pensioner

  should be fixed at the basic minimum family pension of 2950 applying the DR

  rate of 0.15% of basic pension.

  I have found a similar anomaly in the case of another family pensioner with

  Pension ID no 404100934 with the following particulars:

  Office Code :0041

  Name: Tapendra Nath Lahiri

  Date of Retirement :31/7/1987

  Date of Death of retiree:23/11/2015

  Minimum Basic Family Pension fixed: Rs 600/-

  This clearly indicates that the spirit of the DHC judgment ordering upgradation

  of pension is not supported by the methodology adopted by LIC for

  recalibration of minimum pension after every wage revision.

  In general, the pensioners retired from 1/8/2007 upto 31/7/2012 and family

  pensioners in that category fixed on minimum pension. are better off without

  upgradation in minimum pension ordered by the Delhi High Court.

  The number of pensioners who will be entitled for the benefits provided by the

  aforecited judgment may be small, but this anomaly needs to be addressed for

  removal and suitable instructions need to be given to the various offices

  rectifying the situation.

  I hope both the above issues will be addressed keeping in view the letter and

  spirit of the aforecited judgment of the Delhi High Court and suitable

  rectifications will be done.
• 

  Yours faithfully,

  C H Mahadevan

  Executive Director(LIC)(Retd)

  Hyderabad