FOLLOWING CCS PENSION RULES MINISTRY OF SHIPPIMG DONE AWAY WITH PRO RATA CALCULATION OF PENSION IN ALL PRORTS UNDER THEM

RBI HAS REVICED FAMILY PENSION ALONG WITH REVISION OF LENGTH OF SERVICE FOR FULL PENSION TO AVOID VIALATION OF DOPPW PENSION POLICY

There is a technical & legal problem in increasing family pension alone to 30% of the last pay drawn. If family Pension is revised to 30% of last Drawn Basic without revision of the present length of service for full Pension (33 years 50% 0f LPD), the Present system of calculation of Pro rata pension for less than 20 years will be in violation of the Govt of India, DOPPW Pension Policy. The effect of this violation is that family pension will be more than the live pension in case of an employee retiring on superannuation with less than20 years of length of service.
Example.
Last pay basic drawn 15000, family pension on 30% flat rate will be 4500.where as live pension for 18 years of service on superannuation will be 15000/2 = 7500 x 18÷33 = 4091 which is less than family pension. Hence the revision of length of service for Pro rata Pension to 20 years from the present 33 years or removal of pro rata calculation as adopted by DOPPW is a must before revision of family pension to 30%.
This above problem occurs due to short service length of last grade employee like P T Sweeper made fulltime sweeper, compensatory employment of next of kin of employee died in harness & Ex-servicemen employee.

RBI AMENDED PENSION REGULATION ALLOWING 50% PENSION FOR 20 YEARS SERVICE

RTI APPEAL REGARDING USAGE OF PENSION FUND

Online RTI Appeal Form Details

RTI Appeal Details :-

RTI Appeal Registration number	TNIAC/A/E/20/00028
Public Authority	The New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Personal Details of Appellant:-

Request Registration Number	TNIAC/R/E/20/00074
Request Registration Date	18/02/2020
Name	M B CHANDRAN
Gender	Male
Address	VINOD VIHAR , 159/SRA, SAHAKARANA ROAD, PONNURUNNI
Pincode	682019
Country	India
State	Kerala
Status	Urban
Educational Status	Illiterate
Phone Number	+91-9446718293
Mobile Number	+91-9446718293
Email-ID	vinodvihar31[at]gmail[dot]com

Appeal Details :-

Citizenship	Indian
Is the Requester Below Poverty Line ?	No
Ground For Appeal	Provided Incomplete,Misleading or False Information
CPIO of Public Authority approached	CPIO Head Office
CPIO's Order/Decision Number	Details not provided
CPIO's Order/Decision Date
(Description of Information sought (upto 500 characters)
Prayer or Relief Sought
Dear Sir, This First Appeal is submitted due to the refusal of the CPIO to part with the information requested regarding No3 & 4 points of my RTI Request vide TNIAC/R/E/20/00074, held with him on the ground that it affects the Privacy of third Party. This is purely an evasive reply & will full concealment of information requested which is punishable under section 20 of the RTI Act. The Annuity NO ON 0005 purchased from LIC using money in the employees Pension fund for Paying Pension to former CMD Shri G Srinivasan is not a confidential , Secret or Personnel matter & This is available in the Public domain of company site under retirees corner. It is noticed by me that two types of discriminating principle is adopted by the company for payment of Pension using the pension fund which is contributed by all the employees. It amounts to misuse of employees pension fund by the insertion of new Para 54B to benefit the Chairman & Managing director after the notification of our original General Insurance Employees pension scheme in 1995.It amounts to favoritism & nepotism shown by the top employees of the company by themselves. In fact the fencing itself has eaten away the crops. I have fiduciary interest in the pension fund since it contains my contribution & I am getting pension from the same Pension fund. The mismanagement affects my future pension. I am deprived of the right to Approach the Central Vigilance Commission to highlight the misuse of Employees pension fund showing favoritism to a section of employees by them due to the refusal of the CPIO to part with the information requested. Hence this First appeal is lodged with the first appellate authority. Yours faithfully, M B CHANDRAN SR NO 29340 RETIRED EMPLOYEE. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD.
Supporting document (only pdf upto 1 MB)

Meeting with the MD today 12.02.2020

Meeting with the MD today 12.02.2020

FEDERATION OF RETIRED LIC CLASS I OFFICERS' ASSOCIATIONS           

President :    N.P. Bali 705, Sur, Veena Saaz, Thakur Complex, Kandivali (East), Mumbai - 400 101 Mob : 9820324213 Email Id -npbali@hotmail.com

General Secretary :    D Krishnan No.6/1, Sreshta Riverside Apartments, Wood Creek Road, Nandambakkam, Chennai - 600089 Tel : 9176635967 / 044 42850049. Email Id -dkrishnan1@gmail.com

Ecircular No.DK/8                                           12-02-2020

REG:  MEETING  WITH  MD  TODAY

Friends,

Around 10th Jan 2020, I received a call from Madam Aruna Seth,  Secretary Personnel, CO, asking if I could go over to Mumbai for a chat with MD, on some pending matters. I said I could go over. The date for meeting was given as 12th Feb. 2020.

 The meeting looked a formal one, arranged in the Discussion chamber. Those who attended included MD, ED (Personnel), Chief Personnel, Secretary Personnel Smt Aruna Seth, and one officer of Manager rank. Our side was represented by Sri Arunachalam and I.

 I asked the MD what the purpose of this meeting was. He said, there were a number  of things on the unfinished Agenda of matters discussed/represented to them from our side, and these were reviewed in the presence of Chairman, ED legal, ED (P) and others, and they had not found a way of taking decisions on any of them. So, I asked whether we had been called to say 'NO' to all our pending matters. He smiled in acceptance. But said the Chairman was keen that it should be officially communicated.

 It was mainly on the pending items of the DHC order where they expressed difficulty. 

 I told him that we had come here to see if problems could be solved even if it meant some compromise from our side.  I took the example of the date LIC had wrongly reckoned from 2007 for the Arrears calculation. I said we could take a flat amount if not the exact balance. I said the other important point about rate of DR applied to pre-1993 retirees at 0.23% instead of 0.29% could also be sorted out in a similar way. We wanted to move on.

 Then I asked about 1992-93 retirees waiting for justice, now in their late 80s. I told him this was rank injustice to people similarly placed as MC Jain who won the point in SC. MD listened and said, let us re-examine the matter

 Then I asked about Captain Vasudevan's case for full pension after reckoning the Army Service of 4 years. Though there was no positive answer, we got to know later,  from Smt Aruna Seth, that a group of similarly placed ex-army people in LIC and outside had gone to Delhi HC and got a favourable verdict and she said 'you please verify it'.

 MD mentioned that even the Pension firmly on 1st of month is still not sorted out, since the NEFT transfers, on holidays are done only for individuals but not to corporates. He said since this was a decision by the banks and not RBI, he was following it up.

 MD also mentioned that 3 matters are lying with the Government for approval viz., Extending age from 65 to 67 for giving 7 years full pension for widows, Improving Family Pension to 30%, and increases for 80+ wallas.  He said he had discussed these with the ministry and every month our ED (P), on her Delhi visit, is following up.

 MD said, the 33 years' service for full pension has not been changed though he had discussed a number of times with the Ministry.  Similarly with Pension being reckoned on the basis of last month pay drawn, instead of  last ten months average. These changes have not happened.

 I made a repeat request for full medical check-up for pensioners once a year, which he said he will see.

 I discussed the Kolkata Voluntary Retirement case where the officer was denied the group insurance scheme. It was not covered in the Circular on Voluntary Retirement and he was shocked after his VR. I said if the point was about fitting in a younger age person into a higher age premium structure, the officer may not still mind joining such an offer.  ED (P) promised to review the case.

 The biggest gain of the visit was around discussions on Medi-claim matters. Sri Sanjay Gupta (Actuary) is the Nodal officer and he clarified on many things where we come into difficulties.  He said Nursing charges were not to be added to Room rentals. Where they do it, we can refer to him and he will solve it. Similarly, VRK's point about Asst.  Doctor's  fee not reimbursed was also not correct.

 Submitting  self-attested  copies should do, and Originals need not be submitted.

 The Deductions made out of the claimed amount, not informed to the claimant was another matter, which he said he would follow up on.

 There was quite some discussion on non-hospitalisation reimbursement on special Reports and why the fee paid to the MD Doctor was not reimbursed. He explained that the scheme basically was only for Hospitalisation, and these were extended concessions negotiated with New India Insurance Company, and they had only agreed for about 16 or so Special reports, that too without Doctor prescribing being paid, which actually would fall in the area of domiciliary treatment which is not part of this Scheme.

 He said Robotic surgery was permitted for certain difficult situations like cancer surgery, and spinal surgery.

 About the problems encountered on Cash-less scheme he has noted the points and has promised to take it up.

 Actually there are Zonal Nodal Officers too who can help in such cases. Sri Sanjay Gupta CO Nodal officer at ADM level, felt that the Nodal Officers at Zones need a training on these practical matters.

 He mentioned and demonstrated the use of LIC portal, which is part of the LIC site. That gives out all Circulars and changes are being up dated.

 Sri Gupta mentioned that the confusion, for local New India or TPAs, comes because they are more familiar with the general scheme the Insurance company  offers to others, whereas ours is a negotiated scheme with special features.

 Many members might still have questions, because this is a brief Circular drafted on my mobile while still in Mumbai.

This communication is supposed to be shared with all the Associations that met the Chairman last time, on 24-07-2019, though in a representative way we were called.

 They have promised to share the names of all Zonal Nodal officers for our Medi-claim.  This perhaps is no way to share information through a scrappy Circular drafted without any flair. I thought speed was of the essence here. 

 I must add here, that though this was negative kind of message from the CO, we made full use, trying to tell them that we had come in a positive spirit of compromising on matters. We want to get a move on and that they should review matters from that spirit. We mentioned about Pension Revision giving live examples of how very senior retirees were suffering on account of erosion in value of their pension.

 Thanks and best wishes  

  D.Krishnan

General Secretary

- February 12, 2020

Why the need for Pension updation & Is there any provision for Updation in our scheme

The GIC Pension scheme 1995 was drafted with basic Principles of CCS Pension rules 1995 as amended up to 4^th central Pay commission. Consequently the formula of fixation of Pension is adopted from the CCS pension rule as amended on the implementation of 4^th CPC in 1995.

The Core values taken from the CCS Pension rules as amended up to 1995 are as follows

1) 50 % Pension for 33 years & Pro rata for lesser years.

2)  Minimum Pension & Minimum Family Pension as mentioned in 4^th CPC.

3) The rate of Commutation of Pension (30%)

The above three core values as amended in CCS Pension Rule 1972 up to 7^th CPC are as follows.

1) De linking of 33 years of service for full pension by  introduction of 50% Pension for 20 years( VRS) and above, 50 % Pension for 10 years and above in case of Superannuation Pension. The Pro rate Calculation is done away with.

2)  Minimum Basic Pension & minimum basic family Pension as per CCS Pension rule as on date is Rs 9000 & The rate Of family pension is 30% flat on last drawn basic pay where as in GIC Pension Scheme the minimum Pension varies from Rs 375 to 3010 only between wage revision carried out so far.

3) The rate of Commutation is 45% against our 33%  

Why the need for Pension updation & Is there any provision for Updation in our scheme 

The Non Updating of above three core values in GIC pension rules 1995 has made it redundant & static Scheme compared to our Mother Scheme CCS Pension rules 1995.

There is no mention of revision of pension in CCS Pension rules 1972 but still Central Govt Pension is getting updated along with every Wage revision. Consequently the CCS Pension rules 1972 get amended with every Pension revision due to implementation W.E.F. 5^th CPC to 7^th CPC.

Employees with a  a huge amount to their credit  as employers contribution to their Provident fund have surrendered & joined the GIC Pension Scheme 1995 relying on the mother CCS Pension Rules 1972  which is getting amended time to time as per  Pension revision  as envisaged   in Para 55 of GIC Pension rule Scheme1995.

The rationale behind every Pay/ pension revision is the erosion of money value due to unforeseen contingencies  like inflation & price rise which cannot be compensated by the Dearness allowance which is granted from time to time the purpose.

The family Pensioners are the most affected lot due to this non updating of changes in core value of CCS Pension rules in GIC Pension rule1995.

In order to allow 30% of last drawn pay as family pension Pro rata calculation is to be ceased forth with otherwise the spouse of Late employees retired on superannuation having less than 20 will draw family Pension more than her late retired employee.

In short employee may be preferred to die to allow her spouse to draw more pension than he is drawing presently.

This Problem can be explained as given below.

Last drawn Basic pay of employee= Rs 44000

Basic Pension for 33 years  = 22000

Pro rata Pension for employee retiring on

Superannuation having 18 years = 22000x18/33  

                                                          = 12000 (A)

Family Pension 30% flat on Basic Pay = 44000

         Family Pension as per this         = 13200 ( B)

Family Pension B is more than the retired employee Pension A.

The RBI Which is also under Department of Financial Services has removed Pro rata Pension Prior to sanction of 30% flat family Pension on last drawn basic Pay.

 

ADJOURNMENT OF SLPS AT WHOSE BEHEST ?

OUR CASES ADJOURNED TO 19.02.2020
Diary No.- 21826 - 2017
ALL INDIA INSURANCE PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION THR. ITS PRESIDENT vs. UNION OF INDIA
Case Details
Diary No 21826/2017 Filed on 21-07-2017 05:25 PM
PENDING
    [SECTION: XIV]
Case No. SLP(C) No. 019799 - / 2017  Registered on 04-08-2017
(Verified On 04-08-2017)
Present/Last Listed On05-02-2020 [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. ABDUL NAZEER and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA] [CL.NO. : 7]Status/StagePending - (Motion Hearing
[DISPOSAL/FINAL DISPOSAL AT ADMISSION STAGE - CIVIL CASES]) List On (Date) (19-02-2020)-Ord dt:05-02-2020Tentatively case may be
 listed on (likely to be listed on)19-02-2020 (Computer generated
Our case in SC today
Our case adjourned to 19th February 2020 as LIC sought it on technical grounds. The bench will hear on main issue of SLP only on the next date... No more on DA/DR issue

ADJOURNMENT OF SLPS AT WHOSE BEHEST ?

Mr KML Asthana had sent a letter on 30 th January 2020 seeking adjournment due to ill health and the letter was received in the S.C. Registry on 4/2/2020.The LIC counsel took the plea that the request for adjournment was not circulated to them and hence service was not complete.It was a technical ground taken by LIC Counsel for adjournment.

There is no point on fixing blame on anybody.This is in the nature of the legal system in our country.

But one thing we can be happy about is that main arguments on SLPs will be taken up on 19 th February.

C H Mahadevan

RTI REGARDING PARA 54B OF GIC PENSION SCHEME

Online RTI Request Form Details

RTI Request Details :-

RTI Request Registration number	TNIAC/R/E/20/00036
Public Authority	The New India Assurance Company Ltd.

Personal Details of RTI Applicant:-

Name	M B C
Gender	Male
Address	xxxx
Pincode	682019
Country	India
State	Kerala
Status	Urban
Educational Status	Literate
	Above Graduate
Phone Number	+91-
Mobile Number	+91-
Email-ID	vinodvihar31[at]gmail[dot]com

Request Details :-

Citizenship	Indian
Is the Requester Below Poverty Line ?	No
(Description of Information sought (upto 500 characters)
Description of Information Sought
Dear Sir, The Method of calculation of pension of Employees covered under Para 54B is not explained in GIC Employees pension scheme 1995.Tow categories of employees have been created by inserting this Para 54B in GIC Pension rules 1995, the calculation for other than those covered under Para 54B IS explained in Para 34 of GIC Pension Scheme1995.The Calculation for those are covered under Para 54B is not explained in GIC Pension Scheme & it is beyond my comprehension, Hence I request the CPIO to furnish me the following information under RTI act. 1) Whether the mode calculation of pension of employees covered under Para 54B of GIC Pension Scheme 1995 having less than 33 years of service is Calculated as per Para 34 (6) (a) of GIC Pension rules or any other Method if so give details. 2) Whether the mode calculation of pension of employees covered under Para 54B calculated as 50% of the average of last drawn ten months basic pay as per Para 37 of the GIC pension Scheme 1995 or any other method. Yours Faithfully, M B CHANDRAN Retired Employee SR.NO. 29340.
Concerned CPIO	Nodal Officer
Supporting document (only pdf upto 1 MB)

PARA 54B OF THE GIC PENSION SCHEME 1995 CREATS UNEQUAL AMONG EQUALS

The appointment of CMD is on contract basis for a specific period.CMD can be appointed from the employees as well as from outside the industry. In order to count his service during the period of engagement as CMD for terminal benefits, if he is an employee prior to his appointment as CMD, amendment to GIC employees Pension scheme 1995 vide gazette notification S.O 475(E) dated 3^rd July 1996 is resorted were by a proviso to clause k of Para to was inserted to include CMD in the definition of employee. Thus CMD is made one among the equal (among all the employees)

Thus by this amendment, he is again brought to the status of an employee during his tennure as CMD & he is made one among the equals.

 A gain in the year of 2001 by a subsequent amendment to GIC Pension scheme 1995, Para 54B is inserted vide S.O. 775(E) dated 13^th Aug 2001 where in all amendment to CCS pension rules 1972 from time to time was made applicable to CMD only with retrospective effect from 01/01/1996 without allowing the same to all other employees. This is arbitrary, unilateral & against the spirit of article 14 of the constitution of India.

Thus this amendment with retrospective effect has created unequal among equals & should either be made applicable to all or should be struck down.

Amendment is made in CCS pension rules 1972 after every periodic Pay & Pension revision due to the implementation of Central Pay commissions by the central govt. GIC Pension rule 1995 was drafted according to the CCS Pension rules as updated up to 4^th Pay commission. At present CCS Pension rules stands amended up to 7^th Pay commission, Consequently GIC pension rule 1972 has been reduced to an out dated scheme. Provisions in the Para 55 of GIC Pension scheme 1995 have not been invoked in general to incorporate the basic changes of CCS Pension rules in GIC Pension scheme. The major basic changes in the incorporated in the CCS Pension rule is removal of linkage of 33 service for 50% pension, uniform rate of 30 % Family pension & increase in quantum of minimum pension.

The CCS Pension rules 1972 do not have any provision for periodic revision of pension, still it is revised after every Pay revision. Employees have joined the scheme surrendering their Provident Fund Contribution by the company to their credit till 1995 on the good faith that the pension will be updated with the future changes of CCS Pension rules by invoking the provisions under Para 55 of the scheme & will be revised along with every wage revision in industry.

Unilateral insertion clauses to original scheme in a manner detrimental to the interest of a section of the employees are arbitrary unconstitutional & against the spirit of article 14 of the constitution of India.

For the reason stated above and for the reasons to be argued at the time of hearing it is here by prayed that this Hon’ble  court may be pleased to:

1)    Declare that the order exhibit-P2 (S.O 775 (E))  to the extent it restrict the benefits of changes of CCS Pension rules 1972 to Chairman & managing Director is null & void and quash exhibit P-2 to that extent by issuing a writ of certiorari or  other appropriate writ, order of direction.

2)    Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to revise the basic pension/ family pension/ minimum pension  of petitioners after every wage revision & after every amendment to CCS Pension rules 1972  in accordance with   exhibit P-1(Para 55)

3)    Issue Direction to the Respondents to grand an interim payment of 10 % of  basic pension to petitioners.

4)    Grant such other reliefs as may be prayed for and the court may deem fit to grant, and

5)    Grant the Cost of this original Petition.