FLASH

WATCH THIS BLOG REGULARLY FOR LATEST NEWS ON ONE RANK ONE PENSION & OTHER SERVICE BENEFITS RELATING TO EX-SERVICE PENSIONERS,CENTRAL GOVT PENSIONERS,LIC/GIC PENSIONERS* A UNIQUE BLOG WITH MORE THAN 1 CRORE VIEWERS & 700 FOLLOWERS #

FLASH

  • FlashFLASH* NAVAL SAILORS WHO JOINED ON OR BEFORE 03/07/1976 & DISCHARGED AFYTER 10 YEARS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR SPECIAL PENSION AS PER SC JUDGEMENT IN CIVIL APPEAL 2147/2011 New **** L*OROP CASE NEXT HEARING LIKELY ON 15/12/2017
  • New











    .
  • Wednesday, 26 December 2012

    PRE-2006 PENSIONERS CASE IN KERALA HIGH COURT

    SIMILAR TO THE PRE-2006 PENSIONERS CASE(WP(C) 1535/2012) PENDING BEFORE DELHI HIGH COURT ANOTHER CASE OF SAME NATURE IS PENDING BEFORE KERALA HIGH COURT AS SHOWN BELOW

    KERALA HIGH COURT
    CASE STATUS INFORMATION SYSTEM
    Case Status         :  PENDING

    Status of          OP (CAT)  1767        of    2012           

    UNION OF INDIA                 Vs.                  P.K.BHARGAVAN PILLAI

    Pet's Adv.            :   SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMO                   
    Res's Adv.           :   SRI.M.R.HARIRAJ    
    Last Listed On :     Friday, September 14, 2012     
    Category             :   Central Civil Service Rules (CAT)



    CONNECTED APPLICATION (S)

           CMAP     3001    of   2012 
           IA     11661    of   2012

    CONNECTED MATTER (S)
    No Connected Matter
    Case Updated on:   Friday, September 14, 2012 

    PRE -2006 PENSIONERS CASE IN CAT ERNAKULAM

    IN A LAND MARK  JUDGEMENT FOR PRE- 2006 PENSIONERS , ERNAKULAM CAT HAS ORDERED TO PAY 50% OF THE REVISED PAY(INCLUDING GRADE PAY) AS PENSION.


    TO REFER THE FULL TEXT OF JUDGEMENT CLICK THE FOLLOWING LINK
     http://judis.nic.in/judis_cat/CaseNo_Cat_Result.aspx

    Thursday, 20 December 2012

    LIC PENSIONERS CASE LATEST SUPREME COURT ORDER

    ITEM NO.3               COURT NO.4             SECTION XV
                S U P R E M E   C O U R T   O F   I N D I A
                             RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
                        
    IA  No.3  In  Petition(s)  for  Special  Leave  to  Appeal  (Civil)
    No(s).29956-29957/2011
    L.I.C.                                            Petitioner(s)
                     VERSUS
    KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASTHANA & ORS. ETC.            Respondent(s)
    (With appln(s) for clarification and office report)
    Date: 17/10/2012  This I.A. was called on for hearing today.
    CORAM :
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI
            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
    For Petitioner(s) Dr.A.M.Singhvi, Sr.Adv.
     Mr.Parag P.Tripathy, Sr.Adv.
                         Mr. Ashok Panigrahi, Adv.
     Mr.Surajit Bhaduri, Adv.
    For Respondent(s)/ Mr.Amarendra Sharan, Sr.Adv.
    Applicant Mr.R.K.Singh, Adv.
     Mr.Kumar Gaurav, Adv.
                         Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Adv.
     Mr.Aakash D.Pratap, Adv.
     Ms.Vimla Sinha, Adv.
     Ms.Sushma Suri, A.O.R.
               UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
                                   O R D E R 
    I.A.No.3 of 2012 In SLP(C)No.29957 of 2011
    This  is  an  application  by  the  respondent  for
    clarification of order dated 14.11.2011.
    We  have  heard  Shri  Amarendra  Sharan,  learned  senior
    counsel  for  the  applicant  and  Dr.A.M.Singhvi,  learned  senior
    counsel for the SLP-petitioner and are satisfied that order dated2
    14.11.2011 needs to be clarified so that neither party may remain
    under  a  mistaken  impression  about  the  purport  of  this  Court's
    order.
    In  view  of  the  above,  paragraph  3  of  order  dated
    14.11.2011 is substituted with the following:
    "In  the  meanwhile,  the  proceedings  pending
    before the High Court under the Contempt of Courts
    Act,  1971  shall  remain  stayed  subject  to  the
    condition that within eight weeks from today, the
    petitioner  shall  deposit  in  the  Registry  of  the
    High Court the amount due to the pensioners i.e.
    the writ petitioners with effect from the date of
    their eligibiity to get retiral benefits."
    I.A. No.3 of 2012 is disposed of in the manner indicated 
    above.
    As a sequel to disposal of I.A.No.3 of 2012, I.A.No.4 of
    2012 in I.A.No.3 of 2012 in SLP(C)No.29957 of 2011 is also disposed
    of. 
        (Satish K.Yadav)          (Phoolan Wati Arora)
          Court Master            Court Master

    Monday, 17 December 2012

    THE MUCH AWAITED ENHANCEMENT OF PENSION MAY BE DELAYED FURTHER. 

    CLICK THIS LINK FOR LATEST NEWS ON OROP IN HEADLINES TODAY TV CHANNEL

    Tuesday, 11 December 2012

    LIC PENSIONERS- LATEST JUDGEMENT OF SUPREME COURT

    ITEM NO.20                               COURT NO.10                                 SECTION XV
    S U P R E M E     C O U R T    O F      I N D I A
    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
    Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No(s).16117-16118/2011 (From the judgement and order dated 21/01/2011 in DBSAW No.493/2010 in SBCWP No. 6676/1998 & DBSAW No. 494/2010 in SBCWP No.654/2007 of The HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR)
    LIFE INSURANCE CORP. OF INDIA & ORS.
                                              Petitioner(s)
    VERSUS
    KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASTHANA & ORS.
                                         Respondent(s)
    (With prayer for interim relief)
    Date: 15/07/2011                   These Petitions were called on for hearing today.
    CORAM :
                    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI
                    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU
    For Petitioner(s)                     Mr. T.R. Andhyarujina, Sr.Adv.
                                                Mr. A.V. Rangam,Adv.
                                                Mr. Buddy A. Rangandhan, Adv.
    For Respondent(s)                  Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Adv.
                                                Mr. R.K. Singh, Adv.
                                                Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal,Adv.
    UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
    O  R  D  E  R
    These petitions are directed against order dated 21.1.2011 passed by the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court whereby the special appeals filed by the petitioners against the order of the learned Single Judge in the matter of grant of dearness
    allowance to the respondents were dismissed. We have heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.
    Since the petitions filed by the petitioners for review of the order passed by the Division Bench are pending consideration, these petitions are disposed of with a request to the Division Bench of the High Court to make an endeavour to decide the review petitions as early as possible, but latest within three months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.
    We also direct that till the disposal of the review petitions, the proceedings initiated against the officers of petitioner No.1 under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 shall remain stayed.
    (A.D. Sharma)                                                           (Phoolan Wati Arora)
    Court Master                                                                   Court Master

    LIC SLP IN SUPREME COURT CRRENT STATUS

    SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
    Status of Special Leave Petition (Civil)    29956 -29957    OF   2011

    Case StatusStatus : PENDING

    L.I.C.   .Vs.   KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASTHANA & ORS. ETC.
    Pet. Adv. : MR. ASHOK PANIGRAHI   Res. Adv. : MR. RAMESHWAR PRASAD GOYAL
    Subject Category : SERVICE MATTERS RETIRAL BENEFIT

    CLICK THE FOLLOWING LINK TO VIEW

    http://courtnic.nic.in/courtnicsc.asp

    Listed 2 times earlier.  There are no further orders of listing
    Last updated on Dec 11 2011


    Sunday, 9 December 2012

    ANSWER TO QUESTION ASKED IN RAJYA SABHA REGARDING OROP

    GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
    MINISTRY OF  DEFENCE
    RAJYA SABHA
    UNSTARRED QUESTION NO-1296
    ANSWERED ON-05.12.2012

    Decision on one rank one pension scheme


    1296 .    SHRI PRAKASH KESHAV JAVADKAR
    HUSSAIN DALWAI
    (a) whether Government has taken any decision regarding the demand of ‘one rank one pension’ for the ex-servicemen;
    (b) if so, the details thereof;
    (c) if not, the reasons therefor; and
    (d) how Government proposes to give full ‘one rank one pension’?

    ANSWER
    MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
    (SHRI JITENDRA SINGH)
    (a) to (d): Government has always been sensitive to the demand of One Rank One Pension. Keeping in view the spirit of the demand, several Commissions / Committees were appointed. Though the demand was not accepted, their recommendations resulted in improving the pension of past pensioners.
    A Committee was set up under the Chairmanship of the Cabinet Secretary in June, 2009. The Committee went into the demand and other related issues. It made seven recommendations aimed at narrowing the gap between earlier and current pensions. This has benefited about 12 lakh retired PBORs / Officers at an annual cost of Rs.2200/- crores approximately.
    Government constituted another Committee in July, 2012, headed by Cabinet Secretary for looking into the pay and pension related issues of relevance to Defence service personnel and Ex-servicemen. The Committee submitted its report. Its recommendations have been accepted by the Government and are in the process of implementation.
    Substantial improvements have been made in the pensions of Armed Forces Personnel after 01.01.2006. However, improvement of pensionary benefits is an ongoing process.
    source -http://rajyasabha.nic.in/

    Thursday, 6 December 2012

    LATEST NEWS ON PRE-2006 CASE IN DELHI HIGH COURT

     A writ petition WP(C) 1535/2012 has been filed by UOI for grant of stay against the order dated   01.11.2011 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal  Bench, New Delhi in OA No. 655/2010 and in other OAThe case came up for hearing on 4/5/12,7/5/12 & 17/7/12 in which  following orders have been passed.
    "We feel that it  would be appropriate that the petitioner files separate writ petitions in   respect  of  each of the OA which were filed before the Tribunal. The  present writ petition shall be considered as the writ petition in respect  of OA No. 655/2010.  We are issuing formal notice in this matter."   The learned counsel for the respondents state that there would be no necessity to file a counter-affidavit and  they would be relying on the pleadings before the Tribunal and shall not press the contempt application before the  Tribunal till the next date of hearing.  An adjournment slip has been filed on behalf of the respondent. 
      The case was again heard on 29.11.12. Respondents submitted Counters to the  Petition with a point wise reply  in writing. Court gave 4 weeks time to UOI to submit  their Rejoinder.Next date of hearing as per listing is 29/04/2013 .
    ( unreliable sources says that the  Govt. may issue orders before the next date of hearing accepting modified parity prospectively to avoid embarrassment as in the case of rank pay case of defense officers in which govt was directed to pay the arrears retrospectively with interest w.e.f. 1986. )

    Wednesday, 5 December 2012

    ORDERS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF  ENHANCEMENT OF PENSION(ESM)TO BE ISSUED BY THE END OF DEC 2012 & DISBURSEMENT ALONG WITH PENSION OF MARCH 2013
    NEW DELHI: The defence ministry on Wednesday took several decisions to ensure ex-servicemen get their pensions in time, stung by criticism over the huge delay in former NSG commando Surender Singh getting all his dues. Anti-graft crusader Arvind Kejriwal had raised the case of Singh, who was injured in the 26/11 terror attacks, last month, forcing the government to admit there had been a considerable delay since the soldier's retirement "paperwork'' had not been completed in time. 

    At a meeting chaired by defence minister A K Antony, it was decided that 50% of the pension of soldiers who are "invalidated out" or are "war casualties" should be disbursed immediately, pending the completion of retirement/medical board formalities. It was also decided the Army and Navy should follow the IAF's example of the which has established " e-tracking process" to ensure pensions are disbursed in time. 

    Antony also directed that orders for the recently announced Rs 2,300 crore pension package for ex-servicemen should be issued by this month-end. ``The minister said the disbursement of the enhanced pensions should begun by March 31,'' said an official. 

    Minister of state for defence Jitendra Singh will also hold a meeting with different banks this month to bring "uniformity'' in the disbursement of pensions. Antony also asked his officers to ensure "faster disposal'' of decisions taken by the Armed Forces Tribunal

    Ex-servicemen, however, still remain unhappy over the non-implementation of their long-standing demand for one rank, one pension mechanism, which has been promised by most political parties over the years but has never been implemented. 

    The defence community of 14 lakh serving and 23 lakh retired military personnel, after all, swells into a sizable - albeit diffused - votebank of around 1.5 crore people if family members are also taken into account.

    Monday, 3 December 2012





    CWP No.16346 of 2010

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
    *****
    CWP No.16346 of 2010
    Date of Decision: 09.11.2012
    *****
    Madan Lal Gandhi and others ………... . . .Petitioners
    Versus
    Union of India and others ……………. . . . Respondents
    *****
    CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI, CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
    *****
    Present: Ms.Alka Chatrath, Advocate, ….for the petitioners.
    Mr.Tarun Singla, Advocate, …..for respondent No.1.
    Mr.B.R. Mahajan, Advocate, ….for respondents No.2 to 4.
    *****
    RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J.
    The petitioners are all retired Class I officers of Life Insurance Corporation of India (for short ‘the Corporation’), who have challenged the discrimination against employees retired between 1.1.1986 and 1.8.1997 while framing Rules with regard to grant of Dearness Relief to pensioners at par with in-service employees, up-gradation of pension and have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari forquashing order dated 3.6.2010 rejecting the claim of the petitioners for removal of anomaly in the matter of rate of Dearness Relief to the pensioners and Dearness Allowance to serving employees on the same amount of pension/salary and up-gradation of pension on pay revision and further prayed for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus to implement the decision passed by the Corporation in its meeting of the Board of Directors dated 24.11.2001 and also for issuance of direction by way of mandamus for striking down the words “as on 1.8.1997” in clause (3) of Section 1 “Short title, commencement and application” in the notification dated 22.6.2000 and words “as on 1.8.2002” in Notification dated 5.9.2005 with consequential effects and for issuance of direction to fix pension of the petitioners as per the substitutedscales of pay equivalent to the stage applicable to them in the scrapped pay scale as on the date of their retirement and pay, pension at the rate of 50% of such basic pay as arrived at on and from 1.8.1997 and thereafter on and from 1.8.2002 with all consequential benefits with 12% interest. The petitioners have given a note in the index of the writ petition that a similar case i.e. CWP No.654 of 2007 titled as Krishna Murari Lal Asthana Vs. LIC of India and others was allowed by the Rajasthan High Court directing therespondent-Corporation to take a decision for implementation of the Resolution dated 24.11.2001 passed by the Board holding that the Corporation cannot provide different criteria for grant of Dearness Allowance to the existing pensioners based on cut off date i.e. 31.7.1997 and as such, the benefit arising out of the directions above would, however, be considered by the Corporation so that every retired employee may get the same benefit.

    The text of the directions of the order in CWP No.654 of 2007 titled as Krishna Murari Lal Asthana Vs. LIC of India and others decided on 12.1.2010 by the Single
    Judge of the Rajasthan High Court, attached as Annexure P-20 with the writ petition, is as under:

    “In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that resolution passed by the Board of LIC does not need approval of the Central Government thus the Corporation may give effect to its resolution dated 24.11.2001 to avoid discrimination amongst existing pensioners. In light of the discussion madeabove, both the writ petitions are allowed. The respondent Corporation is directed to take a decision for implementation of the resolution dated 24.11.2011 passed by the Board. The respondent Corporation cannot provide different criteria for grant of dearness allowance to the existing pensioners based on cutoff date i.e. 31.7.1997. The benefit
    arising out of the directions above would, however, be considered by the respondent corporation so thatevery retired employee may get the same benefit. Costs made easy.”

    Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the case of the petitioners is covered by the aforesaid judgment which has been further upheld by the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court in D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.494 of 2010 titled as Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Krishna Murari Lal Asthana and others decided on 21.1.2011, with the following observations:

    “We are of the view that whatever grievance with regard to the implementation of the Board’s resolution dated 24.11.2001 is concerned, the same can be raised by the Union of India who has chosen not to file any appeal in the matter and this can easily be considered as an approval of the said resolution of the Board dated 24.11.2001 which was allegedly pending for nine years. The Board of LIC, who is the appellant before us against the judgment of the learned Single Judge, had itself taken a decision to remove thedisparities and the discrimination with regard to the payment of Dearness Allowance and pension to the retired employees under its resolution of the Board dt. 24.11.2001, which was in public interest. It could not and should not have filed the present appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge as thelearned Single Judge has provided an umbrella to the appellant for the implementation of the decision ofthe Board dt. 24.11.2001 on the categorical statement made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India and not assailed in appeal by the Union of India. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the Union of India before the learned Single Judge, we find that these appeals filed by the L.I.C. of India have no merit and the same stand dismissed.”

    Although counsel for the Corporation has submitted that SLP has been preferred against the aforesaidorder of the Division Bench but its operation has not been
    stayed by the Apex Court. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are
    of the considered opinion that since it is not in dispute that similar relief prayed for by the petitioners has been granted by the learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Krishna Murari Lal Asthana (Supra) which has been
    maintained in appeal and the petitioners are satisfied with the same order, the present writ petition is thus, allowed, in terms of the order passed in the aforesaid case namely Krishna Murari Lal Asthana (Supra).

    (A.K. SIKRI) (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN)
    CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE
    NOVEMBER 09, 2012


    COURTSY & SOURSE LINK:- http://airief-chd.blogspot.in/2012/11/chandigarh-high-court-case.html

    REPORTS FROM VISHAL RALLY HELD AT JANTAR MANTAR NEW DELHI  ON 01 DEC 2012
    Dear Colleagues,
    The planned IESM rally was held at Jantar Mantar On December 01. We had advertised the rally widely and great hype had been built up.  Unfortunately the attendance of around 3000 was much below expectations. Thankfully, the enthusiasm of those present did overcome the lack of numbers to some extent.  As a policy of gradual escalation a vehicle with medals mounted on it has been prepared and is scheduled to go around Delhi and NCR during the coming days. The vehicle was parked on site and drew great appreciation from all. There were many enthusiastic speakers that took the mike and spoke their mind on government’s repeated stonewalling our demand of OROP. Unfortunately, this upset our time schedule and we had to call off our planned march – along with the medal vehicle – on roads around Connaught Place.   
    On 02 December was the General Body meeting and the elections. There was no voting and all the old members of the Governing Body have been returned unopposed. Colonel KK Malhotra, Hony Captains Bhim Singh and Nagender Singh are the new members of the team. The General Body reaffirmed its resolve to continue with the struggle till our demands are met. 
    The pension enhancement coming out of the of Rs 2300 Crore that the Govt has sanctioned is expected to be announced by 15 December 2012.  

    Best regards,

    Lt Gen Raj Kadyan

    Chairman IESM
    262, Sector - 17A
    Gurgaon - 122 001



    Sunday, 2 December 2012

    THE DOUBTFUL DISTRIBUTION


    THE DOUBTFUL DISTRIBUTION OF RS.2300 CRORE SANCTIONED BY THE GOVT SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENHANCEMENT OF PENSION (PRE-2006 EX-SERVICE MEN)

    It has been declared by the govt that an amount of  Rs. 2300 is sanctioned by the govt for  the enhancement of pension as recommended by the committee of secretaries & approved by the cabinet.There was another development in between& the govt was directed by the apex court to pay the amount due to officers in the rank pay case.The MOD is seems to have  included this out go also in the earlier sanctioned Rs.2300 crore to pre-2006 pensioners thus reducing the enhancement of pension to a megre amount. This is evident form the report submitted by the Rajya Sabha committee which has calculated the total outlay for implementation OROP in full with the help of department of expenditure as RS. 1300 crore.All members are requested to discuss this matter seriously.

    Saturday, 1 December 2012



    SATURDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2012
    Decision on 'one rank one pension' scheme will be queried in Rajya Sabha

    Some important questions are scheduled for written answer to be given by MoD on 05th December, 2012 regarding One Rank One Pension.  An unstarred question number 1296 also wants clarification from govt about proposal to give full 'One Rank One Pension.  The details of question are given below:- 

    RAJYA SABHA
    List of Questions for WRITTEN ANSWERS to be asked at a sitting of the 
    Rajya Sabha to be held on
    Wednesday, December 5, 2012/Agrahayana 14, 1934 (Saka)


    Decision on 'one rank one pension' scheme


    Will the Minister of DEFENCE be pleased to state:

    1296. SHRI PRAKASH JAVADEKAR:
    SHRI HUSAIN DALWAI:
    (b) if so, the details thereof;
    (c) if not, the reasons therefor; and
    (d) how Government proposes to give full 'one rank one pension'?

    (a) whether Government has taken any decision regarding the demand of 'one rank one pension' for the ex-servicemen;

    COURTESY:-       http://karnmk.blogspot.in/



    http://164.100.47.5/EDAILYQUESTIONS/sessionno/227/3536RS.pdf