-- In a major relief to senior citizens who retired from government
service before 2006, the Delhi High Court has directed the Centre to fix their
pension on the basis of recommendation of the sixth pay commission. The court
also ordered payment of enhanced pension amount with retrospective effect from
January 1, 2006 — when the pay commission recommendations came into effect.
The move would substantially increase the pre-2006 retirees' pension and bring
them on par with those who retired after the pay panel recommendations were
implemented. The order came while the court upheld a central administrative
tribunal (CAT) order of 2011, which said that government employees who retired
before 2006 are also entitled to the benefits of the sixth pay commission.
This court was hearing a petition by Central Government Pensioners Association. Dismissing the appeal filed by the Centre against the CAT order, a bench
of justices Pradeep Nandrajog and V Kameswar Rao said: "A direction is
issued to the respondents (Centre) to re-fix the pension of the petitioners
accordingly within a period of two months. In case, the arrears are not paid
within a period of two months, it will also carry interest at 9% with effect
from March 1, 2013."
CAT had quashed the August 29, 2008 government resolution which amended the
recommendations of the sixth pay commission due to which the pre-2006 retirees
were getting lower pension than the post-2006 retirees. The retired employees
had told the tribunal that there could be a difference of over Rs 25,000 in the
pension of a person retiring on January 1, 2006 from the one retiring a day
before.
In the court, the government submitted to pay the pre-2006 retirees increased
pension only from September 24, 2012 when it was finally approved following the
CAT order but the bench asked it grant them retrospectively from 2006 when the
pay commission was implemented.
"The only issue which survives after the CAT order is with respect to
office memorandum which makes it applicable with effect from September 24, 2012
denying arrears to the pensioners with effect from January 1, 2006," said
the court.
"The government of India has admitted that it was in the wrong and that
the tribunal is right. We conclude by noting that as regards the substance of
the view taken by the Tribunal, even the government accepts its correctness,
but insists to make the same applicable prospectively. This cannot be
allowed," said the bench.
This must be carefully studied and
follow-up action planned.
follow-up action planned.
A further amplification of the news item published by Hindustan Times - India-news as given in the link above
Wrong Implementation of Govt. Decision On ‘Minimum Assured Pension’ in r/o Armed Forces Pensioners With Less Than 33 Years’ Service
Dear Veterans,
As is well known, Armed Forces Officers retire at an early age and majority of them fall below 33 years’ service (including erstwhile weightage). This group of Officers has been cheated by the Bureaucrats by reducing ‘minimum assured pension (Modified Parity)’ pro-rata for less than 33 years’ service, which is contrary to the decision of Govt. In this regard, I would like to submit the following points:
1. Govt. decisions on the recommendations of 6CPC, concerning pensioners (including Armed Forces Pensioners), have been notified vide Govt. Resolution dated 29.08.2008.
2. Resolution dated 29.08.2008 is the core document and should have been implemented without any addition/ alteration. This logic has been held legally correct as per the judgements delivered by full bench of CAT (subsequently upheld by Double Bench of Delhi High Court) and by Double Bench of Punjab & Haryana High Court. Supreme Court has recently upheld these judgements.
3. It is not mentioned either in the recommendation of 6CPC or in the acceptance resolution of Govt. that the ‘minimum assured pension (Modified Parity)’ for Past Pensioners is for 33 years’ service and the same will be reduced pro-rata for lesser service.
4. The condition of 33 years’ service and pro-rata reduction has been added at the time of implementing Govt. resolution which is illogical and legally wrong.
5. In view of the addition/alternation to Govt. resolution at the time of implementation, pre-2006 Armed Forces Pensioners having less than 33 years’ service are not getting ‘minimum assured pension’ as decided by the Govt.
A Note on the subject with relevant extracts and links is attached herewith.
*******
Note – Wrong Implementation of Govt. Decision On ‘Minimum Assured Pension’ in r/o Armed Forces Pensioners With Less Than 33 Years’ Service
Instructions for revision of pension in r/o pre-2006 Armed Forces Pensioners have been issued vide GOI MoD letter No. 17(4)/2008(1)/D (Pen/Policy) dated 11.11.2008 whereby Govt. decisions on the recommendations of 6CPC have been implemented. This letter can be accessed here:
As can be seen from Para 1 of above MoD letter, the letter has been issued in pursuance of Govt. decisions on the recommendations of 6CPC notified vide resolution No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 29.08.2008. This Govt. resolution (issued in Hindi & English) can be accessed here:
Subject of our concern is “Implementation of ‘Minimum Assured Pension’ as decided by Govt. Vide Resolution Item No. 12 in r/o Past Pensioners”. This is quite different from Resolution Item Nos. 2 and 3 which deals with ‘Full Pension’ in r/o Future Pensioners. The term ‘Full Pension’ (i.e. 50% of past ten months average pay or last pay drawn) is not applicable to Past Pensioners. Further reading (if required) of relevant paragraphs 5.1.33, 5.1.47 and 6.5.3 of 6CPC Report will make it amply clear. 6CPC Report can be accessed here:
Resolution Item No. 12 requires a careful reading vide which recommendations of 6CPC (Para 5.1.47 of its report) regarding ‘Fitment Formula’ and ‘Minimum Assured Pension (Modified Parity)’ in r/o pre 2006 pensioners have been accepted by the Govt. Relevant extract of the same is as under:
“The fixation of the pension will be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than 50% of the sum of the minimum of the pay in the pay band and the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired.”
Please note that it is not mentioned either in the recommendation of 6CPC or in the acceptance of Govt. that the ‘Minimum Assured Pension’ for Past Pensioners is for 33 years’ service and the same will be reduced pro-rata for lesser service. Please also note the use of words “in no case” and its significance.
Irrespective to the clear Govt. decision as mentioned above, the same has been amended/ altered at the time of implementation. A careful reading of Para 5 of MoD letter dated 11.11.2008 (ref Para 1 above) will reveal the same. Relevant extract of the same is as under:
“The consolidation of pension will further be subject to the provision that the consolidated pension, in no case, shall be lower than fifty per cent of the minimum of the pay in the pay band plus grade pay corresponding to the pre revised scale from which the pensioner had retired/ discharged including Military Service Pay and …………. The pension so calculated will be reduced pro-rata, where the pensioner had less than the maximum required service of 33 years for full pension and in no case it will be less than Rs. 3500/-.”
As already mentioned, the term ‘Full Pension’ is not applicable to the Past Pensioners. As such linkage of this term to Past Pensioners is also wrong.
Now, it is worthwhile to mention that Resolution Item No. 12 has already been examined by H’ble Courts in the case of ‘modified parity of pension’ which was also implemented wrongly whereby ‘minimum of pay in the pay band’ was implemented as ‘minimum of pay band’. In view of pressure arising out from numerous court cases, the same has been corrected wef 24.09.2012 instead of 01.01.2006. Following judgements (related to modified parity of pension) support the main issue of implementation of Govt. resolution dated 29.08.2008 without any addition/alteration. There are three judgements and the judgement of Delhi High Court reproduces relevant paragraphs of other two judgements, which can be accessed here. SLP against these judgements has since been dismissed by H’ble Supreme Court upholding these verdicts:
1. Judgement dated 01.11.2011 in OA No 0655 of 2010, delivered by Principal Bench of CAT (A Full Bench). Para 26 of this judgement is important and relevant extract of the same is given below:
“According to us, such a course was not available to the functionary of the Government in the garb of clarification thereby altering the recommendations given by the VI CPC, as accepted by the Central Government. According to us, deletion of the words ‘sum of the’ ‘and grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised scale’ and addition of the words ‘irrespective of the pre-revised scale of pay plus’, as introduced by the respondents in the garb of clarification vide OM dated 3.10.2008 amounts to carrying out amendment to the resolution dated 29.08.2008 based upon Para 5.1.47 of the recommendations of the VI CPC as also the OM dated 1.9.2008 issued by the Central Government pursuant to the aforesaid resolution, which has been accepted by the Cabinet. Thus, such a course was not permissible for the functionary of the Government in the garb of clarification, that too, at their own level without referring the matter to the Cabinet.”
Para 26 of above judgement clearly states that no addition/alternation to Govt. resolution is permissible for the functionary of the Govt. at their own level without referring the matter to the Cabinet.
2. Judgement dated 21.12.2012 in Case No. CWP-19641/2009 delivered by a Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court. Para 26 of this judgement is important and relevant extract of the same is given below:
“Para 26. It is for the aforesaid reasons, we remark that there is no need to go into the legal nuances. Simple solution is to give effect to the resolution dated 29.08.2008 whereby recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission were accepted with certain modifications. We find force in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that subsequent OMs dated 03.10.2008 and 14.10.2008 were not in consonance with that resolution. Once we find that this resolution ensures that “the fixation of pension will be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than 50% of the sum of the minimum of the pay in the pay band and the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired”, this would clearly mean that the pay of the retiree i.e. who retired before 01.01.2006 is to be brought corresponding to the revised pay scale as per 6th Central Pay Commission and then it has to be ensured that pension fixed is such that it is not lower than 50% of the minimum of the pay in the band and the grade pay thereon.”
It has been amply reasoned by the Punjab & Haryana High Court that Resolution dated 29.08.2008 is the core document and should be given effect without any addition/alternation.
3. Judgement dated 29.04.2013 in W.P.(C) 1535/2012 delivered by a Division Bench of Delhi High Court. The above judgement of Punjab & Haryana High Court has been adopted by Delhi High Court. Also, the above mentioned judgement of Principal Bench of CAT has been upheld by Delhi High Court vide Para 9 of its judgement. This judgement has since been upheld by H’ble Supreme Court.
It can be seen from the above that Resolution Item No. 12 dated 29.08.2008 has not been implemented in letter and spirit by the functionaries of the Govt. At the time of implementation, a condition of pro-rata reduction of ‘Minimum Assured Pension’ for Past Pensioners having less than 33 years’ service has wrongly been added. As a result, pre-2006 Armed Forces Pensioners with less than 33years service are not getting ‘minimum assured pension’ as decided by the Govt. Now, as remarked by Punjab & Haryana High Court vide Para 26 of its judgement:
“A Simple solution is to give effect to the resolution dated 29.09.2008 whereby recommendations of 6 CPC were accepted.”
by the kind courtesy of REPORT MY SIGNAL
It appears if the resolution was accepted in true letter and spirit many armed forces pensioners with less than 33 years of qualifying service could have got a better pension and an approach to long standing demand of OROP.
ReplyDeleteGoodwill Membership of Retired Defence Officers Association (Regd),
ReplyDeleteG-203, Green Valley Apartments, Plot No 18, SECTOR 22, DWARKA, NEW DELHI 110077,
Phone: 9871351203-President Col BK Sharma, 9818039172-Secretary, Col Satwant Singh, Website:http://sites.google.com/site/rdoaindia; rdoaindia.blogspot.com,
Email: rdoaindia@gmail.com
RDOA has been instrumental in securing a favourable judgement in the now famous IV CPC Rank Pay Case as the Main Litigant from the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. See http://indiamydreamland.blogspot.in/2012/09/landmark-day-for-defence-officers-rank.html for details.
MoD vide its letter of 27 Dec 2012 has issued Implementation Instructions in compliance of the Hon’ble Supreme Court order of 04 Sept 2012. But this letter grossly falls short of the Supreme Court directive and does not meet the letter and the spirit of the judgment. RDOA had taken up the issue with MoD /Raksha Mantri to either withdraw the letter or issue amendments in keeping with the Supreme Court judgment and ‘to refix pay of all the officers without deduction of rank pay with effect from 01/01/1986 and not as on 1/1/86’ spread across IV/V/VI CPC for payment of arrears to the affected veteran officers (Revised Pension for Pre 1986 veterans and Revised Pay & allowances and Pension for post 1-1-1986 veterans) with the same principle, applying to V CPC (1996) and VI CPC (2006) thereof. MoD took no action on the issue. Chairman, Chiefs of Staff Committeee also took up the matter twice during May 2013 with the Raksha Mantri, on the Implementation of Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment of 04 Sept 12 in the IV CPC Rank Pay Case in response to the observations raised by RDOA, but nothing has materialised so far.
Therefore as ON 31 JULY 2013, Retired Defence Officers Association (RDOA) has filed a 'CONTEMPT PETITION' in the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in this Rank Pay Case, in which RDOA is the Principal Litigant in addition to Lt Col NK Nair & Others, against the Union of India. The Contemnors ( Defence Secretary, Secretary Defence Finance, Secretary Expenditure (MoF) and Controller General of Defence Accounts (CGDA)) have been charged for disobeying the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and Not implementing fully the HSC orders of 08 March 2010 and that of 04 Sept 2012. The petition is under examination and whenever the same is listed for hearing will be placed on the RDOA website and blog post.
The rank pay spark which was ignighted by Maj Dhanapalan was ultimately taken up by RDOA & Others vs UoI and was contested in Hon’able Supreme Court succssfully and consequently we all have received IV CPC rank pay arrears and pension arrears. We all should therefore whole-heartedly support RDOAs’ legal battle in this Contempt Petition for bringing full justice to all the veteran officers/pensioners in getting their financial dues of Vth and Vith Pay Commission as well. Veteran Officers/pensioners have already benifited well from the Ist part of the a/m action and with a favourable verdict on the Contempt petition the benefits will be much more substatial.
Therefore, those veteran officers, who are not a member of the RDAO, may consider becoming members of this Association at the earliest. For this, Individual Veterans may send the attached membership form duly filled and send the same alongwith a cheque for Rs 1500/- to the RDAO at the a/m address. This is the least we can do NOW to show our goodwill, support and soliderity with the RDOA Team in their mission, which will ultimately benefit all of us, financially.
Pre 2006 pensioners arrears payment is being delayed unusually and the aging senior citizens are facing difficulties with unpredicted ill health.
ReplyDeleteTHE 50% MIN PENSION CONDITION IF IMPLEMENTED WILL BENEFIT SOME AND VICE VERSA. THOSE PRE-2006 PENSIONERS TAKEN MORE YLY INCREMENTS WILL NOT BE BENEFITTED??? A 15 YRS PRE-2006 GP X SGT WILL GET RS 7550 AS BASIC PENSION WHERE AS A 21 YRS GP X SGT WILL GET RS 8037 AS BASIC PENSION ( WITH 5 INCREMENTS) WHERE AS HIS COUNTERPART POST 2006 WILL GET 8215 AS B.PEN
ReplyDeletewhen will they pay the arrears to the pre 2006 retirees already two months passed.
ReplyDeleteNo delay to payment arrear with revised pay.They are too ill &seek.
ReplyDeleteHOW MUCH TIME WILL TAKE TO RECEIVE THE ARREARS AND THE REVISED PENSION TO THE PRE 2006 PENSIONERS.
ReplyDeleteDear Sir,
ReplyDeleteWhat I feel there are 3 stages where this case has been dealt with.
(!) Recommendations of SCPC which staes that in no casae minimum pension of the pensioners should be fixed less than 50% of minimum pay band plus grade pay from which the pensioner has retired. There is no condition for qualifying service.
(2) Resolution of cabinet. They have accepted the recommendation of SCPC . It is only on lower level; under the disguise of clarification some words have been removed without the approval of cabinet.
(3) Judiciary. The Judiciary on all levels i.e. PB CAT,New Delhi in OA 0655?2010 has quashed the subsequent clarificatory orders of the ministry, which have been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court Delhi and the Apex Court. In between the Govt. has issued accepting their mistake partially i.e. arrears not from 1.1.2006 but from 24.9.2012 on pro-rata basis considering the minimum qualifying service for 50% pension of 33 years.violating the judgements of PB CAT, New Delhi and Delhi High Court and went on filing appeals before the Hon'ble Supreme Court . On two occasions their petitions have been dismissed. Now again they have filed 3 SLPs , we hope those will also meet the same fate. But they have been able to delay the justice to poor pensioners. I hope justice is delayed but will not be denied as we are demanding the implementation of accepted recommendations of the SCPC and not undue favour. Do you agree?
Ishwarlal
As per Govt agreeing in principle OROP, a Major in army who retired before 01.01.1986 will get the latest entiltlement of pension of a Major who retires on or after 01 Apr 2014?
ReplyDeleteMay I request some enlightened officer to explain as to how shall this justify given the following scenario:-
a) Served in Civil service under Central Govt from 15.03.1955 to 03.10.1964 ( 9 years and 203 days, 2/3rd of which i.e 6 years and 135 days were allowed to count for pension.
b) Commissioned Service from 04.10.1964 to 31.08.1985 i.e 20 years and 332 days.
c) Total service for pension works out to 27 years and 102 days.
d) Being an Emergency commissioned offr initially, later getting regular Commission, total reckonable service worked out to 19 years and 121 days.
Is it not a joke and fooling such veterans that a Major which rank is earned in just 6 years now is equated for pension with an officer with aforesaid service record.
This and such other cases need a separate and special attention.
Government expresses lip sympathy that it is concerned with the welfare of senior citizen retirees of government but it is stone headed in implementing the orders passed by the court. Principal administrative tribunal ND and Punjab and Haryana High courts gave judgments for notional fixation of the pay of pre 2006 retirees on par with post retirees applying the formula in the memo 1/1/2008 of ministry of expenditure dated 29-8-2008. What sort of crooks are sitting in the ministry of finance can be seen in the way they refuse to implement the court decisions. You write to PM,FM or even President. They have a deep borewell for sending down all the grievance letters on implementation of court orders in respect of pre 2006 retirees. it is not known whether they are physically or mentally paralysed. It is not known, as they do in all licensing, whether they expected to be bribed for implementing the court orders. .A couple of days ago, the supreme court dismissed the curative petition by government. Courts consider that their responsibility ends with delivering judgments. Retirees do not know how to get it implemented. The government has enough money to spend for digging 1000 tonne of buried gold ending in wasteful expenditure. It reserves the right to waste in any manner it fits right. Yet it will not implement court judgments. shreeramachandran pre 2006 retiree
ReplyDeleteGreat posting, Really very useful sharing. I Am working in a CMS In Chennai.Here providing very low cost price, CMS and responsive webdesign. Just send your mail, this is mail id info@excelanto.com.Do You have Any Information Let me now.....044-42127512
ReplyDeleteThanks for your valuable posting.I have collect more than information from your website. It's really wonderful blog. please added more than tips. i'm working in a top company in chennai.Here providing very low price CMS , responsive webdesign and ERP. you have any more than information kindly make me call this number 044-42127512 or send your mail info@excelanto.com.
ReplyDeleteHello sir,my father is ex-service man of Income Tax of India.He is also a member of pre 2006 pensioners.My question is how much time it will take to get the arrears ? Will he have to contact his head office or have to do any thing else.It has been almost a year ago when he got a letter from CAPCO with a pendency on his ppo no. but he didn't get any thing.
ReplyDelete