KMLA

I also read it in the RKS blog.But I have some disagreements with what Mr KMLA writes.I have not yet gone through the judgment in full.But I can respond to Mr KMLA's post as follows:

It is not correct to say that Rule 56 is of no use to us.Merely because Central Government does not fund our pension scheme,it does not nullify the Rule 56 of our Pension Rules.Rule 56 has been included in the notified LIC Pension Rules 1995 fully taking into account that the Scheme is not to be funded by the GOI.Rule 55 B makes Chairmen & MDs retired after 1/1/1996 to be treated on par with CCS Pensioners ,but the pension payable to them including upgraded pension will be paid only out of annuities purchased by the Trustees from out of the amount  paid from the LIC employees' Pension Fund.In effect ,Rule 56 is selectively applied for employees governed by Rule 55B to the exclusion of employees governed by the other Rules of the LIC Pension Rules 1995.

The background note submitted to the Board for the meeting held on 24/11/2001 has clearly stated that our Pension Rules are patterned on the Central Government Pension Rules.The wordings of the various rules in our notified Rules are copy-pasted version of CCS Pension Rules 1972.

So our case stands completely on a different footing from the autonomous bodies' pensioners referred to in the DHC judgment delivered recently.Also a High Court judgment has no finality unless it is upheld on appeal in the Supreme Court.

Also it should be remembered that LIC's actions of payment of ad hoc amounts in the Jaipur & Chandigarh HC Registries and also payment of interim relief to pre-August  1997 retirees had factored upgradation of pension with effect from 1/8/1997 albeit in a faulty manner.Such an upgradation cannot be an one-time process nor it can be confined to only one segment of pensioners based on a cut-off date of retirement.

In my view,Rule 56 read with Rule 55 B makes  our case for upgradation stronger than other strong points in our favour.

All that is required is that we need to properly brief our senior counsel to bring out the strength in our case during the hearings in the Supreme Court. 

May be,the Rule 56 may not entitle us to OROP upgradation,but pensioners will at least get modified parity as enjoyed by CCS pensioners.

Kind regards.

C H Mahadevan