Not only M C Singla case, it seems Supreme Court wants to settle the issue on PENSIONERS both banks and Insurance, especially on the greater issue involving law, not on the basis of Ruppee, Anna, Paisa but the law of Equality under Article 14, Right to live with dignity undsr Article 21, Own and enjoy your property under Article 300 A and to prove Regulation 56 under Residual issues is not just a dead letter but a vibrating provision to ensure eligibility of Pension as envisaged at the time of drawing Pension Regulation 1995.
It's not as though to look at the Regulation 56 in case of doubt as suggested by IBA /UFBU Combine but it's the essence of Pension Regulation 1995, to draw the attention for implementing Pension payment on the lines of Central Civil Service and nothing short of it.
It's not as though to look at it to pay or not to pay UPDATION but to read and understand the provisions of CCS Rules in case of doubt, for proper implementation of Pension Regulation.
Absence of deeper knowledge on the legal provisions and inability to understand the Implied understanding of the Statute on the part of Bureaucrats and neo Bureaucrats of UFBU and most importantly the lethargic ( CHALTHA HAI) attitude of membership dragged all of us to this level during 30 long years.
Hope Supreme Court of India shall UPHOLD its own doctrine of Equality under Article 14 as established in D S NAKARA Case.
Still there is one dark corner in all the deliberations of High Courts on the issue of ability to pay (which has no relevance in the eye of law) still forgetting or failure on the part PENSIONERS to bring to the knowledge of the Court, the available Regulation 11 of Pension Regulation 1995 fixing the onerous of responsibility on the Banks, for Actuarial Calculations and Provision of enough Corpus every accounting year.
Hope Supreme Court, in the Interest of upholding JUSTICE, shall have a panoramic view of all aspects involved in Pension related case of millions of Bank's and Insurance Retirees who's Pension Income eroded by 80% and they are living with just 20% of real value of Pension, shall provide a LANDMARK judgement as one in D S NAKARA case.
GUNASEKARAN R
Ex CANARA
No comments:
Post a Comment