KUDOS TO COM. CN VENUGOPALAN..!!
MY DEAR FRIENDS,
SOME TIME AROUND 5 YEARS AGO, COM. CN VENUGOPALAN HAD TOLD ME THE CASE OF COM. PADMANABHAN, WORKMEN RETIREE FORM SYNDICATE BANK HAILING FROM KOCHI (KERALA ) & ASKED ME WHTHER I COULD TRY TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE BY TAKING UP THE MATTER THROUGH THE LEADERSHIP ( even by specifically mentioning the name of a particular leader) OF SYNDICATE BANK'S AISBRF, AN AFFILIATE OF AIBRF.
I TOOK UP THE MATTER WITH THE TOP LEADERDHIP OF AISBRF & REPORTED BACK THE SAME TO COM. CN VENUGOPALAN ACCORDINGLY.
HOWEVER, THERE HAS BEEN NO RESPONSE FROM THE KEADERSHIP OF AISBRF. THIS HAD HAPPENED AROUND 5-6 YEARS AGO.
AS THE MATTER STANDS THUS, COM. CNV CONTINUED HIS BATTLE UN-DETERRED DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE AGGRIEVED POOR RETIREE COM. PADMABABHAN LOST HIS HOPES EVEN.
AT LAST THE SUCCESS STORY OF MY BELOVED FRIEND COM. CN VENUGOPALAN ENDED ON A HAPPY NOTE WHO SINGLE HANDEDLY FOUGHT RELENTLESSLY OVER THE YEARS! DETAILS OF THE RELATED JUDGMENT IS ANNEXED IN THE FOLLOWING LINK:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yu5dtXgx0NFe4-6MNTB_NN9CQXuQIySN/view?usp=drivesdk
FRIENDS, I TIME AND AGAIN REITERATE THAT... WHAT ALL THE BENEFITS WE THE RETIREES GOT TILL DATE, HAS BEEN ONLY THROUGH PERSISTENT LEGAL FIGHT ALONE!!!! NO ORGANISATIONAL ACHIEVEMENTS TILL DATE WORTH THEIR NAME... BUT FOR THEIR PLAYING TO THE GALLERIES LIKE SAGE DRAMAS ONLY FOR LEIVY COLLECTIONS LIKE BEGGARS.
ON THE CONTRARY GOING ONE STEP AHEAD......
THE IBA-AIBEA NEXUS HAD EVEN SABOTIZED OUR 100% DA LEGAL BATTLE AT THE SUPREME COURT BY DELIBERATELY FILING AN INTERVENING PETITION IN OUR 100% DA CASE, THROGH THEIR BOOT-LICKER LEADERSHIP OF AIBRF LIKE "SHIKHANDI" OF EPIC MAHABHARATHA - SHAME..SHAME..
THESE ARE THE WORTHLESS & CUNNUNG LEADERSHP WHO CLAIM THEMSELVES AS THE SAVIORS OF THE RETIREE FRATERNITY -
SHAME!! SHAME!! SHAME!!
***** ***** ****
� CN Venu gopal & DS మూర్తి
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1iOsMheSrxdrvVUKi_LSgHNH4XsbPN6jI/view?usp=drivesdk
BANK PENSION UPDATION -MR D S MURTHY STRONGLY SUPPORT MR VASANT VANKUDRE CRIMINAL CASE!!
***** ***** *****
THE DETAILS AS FURNISHED BY COM. CN VENUGOPALAN ARE FURNISHED HERE. CONTENTS ARE SELF-EXPLICIT.
దేవులపల్లి శ్రీనివాస మూర్తి
✴️QUOTE✴️
C N VENUGOPALAN
Finally, Canara Bank prepares to pay pension to K A Padmanabhan who was denied pension by Syndicate Bank from 01.05.2010 on the ground that he did not refund the management share of CPF before the stipulated last date of 15.12.2010.
The workman Director of Syndicate Bank who was approached for help was of no assistance in the issues and told that he should be approached only through state level leaders.
Writ Petition 7321 of 2014 was allowed by Kerala HC with a direction to pay pension with prospective effect from 2018.
When Syndicate Bank declined it, the order was again challeñged through fresh writ petition in which Syndicate Bank was directed to pay to the petitioner interest on the 2.8 times pay for Nov.2007, Which Syndicate Bank forcefully credited back to the SB account of the employee on 20.06.2013 to defeat his claim for pension.
Though the employee abandoned further legal action, the matter was pursued by me through a writ appeal in 2019.
The Division Bench allowed the Appeal on 02.12.2022 directing the Bank to pay pension from 01.05 2010.
The order did not go into the merits of the case, yet gave a direction to pay pension.
Though Canara Bank did not act on it till now and was planning to go in for appeal with SC, other steps initiated made them come forward to pay the pension as directed by Kerala HC.
There are another 186 cases where Syndicate Bank did not pay pension on the same ground and denied justice to employees.
This present act of Canara Bank to pay pension is a good indication that employees will get justice in the updating case too especially in the wake of the false affidavit filed on 24.08.2022 and the Kerala High Cou byrt order in favour of updating produced before Supreme Court
**** **** ****
C N VENUGOPALAN
Nandanam,bKesari Junction North Paravur, Kerala – 683 513
No.230427 dated 27.04.2023
S/Shri. K Satyanarayana Raju, Managing Director & CEO,Canara Bank, Head Office, Bengaluru.
Dear Shri. Satyanarayana Raju,
Sub: Payment of pension to Shri. K A Padmanabhan Employee No.17868 of e-Syndicate Bank in compliance with the direction of Kerala High Court in Writ Appeal No.1957 of 2019
====
It was a matter of disgrace that in spite of High Court of Kerala directing to pay pension to the above employee, Canara Bank took the matter to the Supreme Court of India in violation of the National Litigation Policy through SLP No. 5357 of 2023, preposterously, to taste the defeat once again, simply as it can litigate at the cost of public money. Canara Bank was following the foot-steps of Syndicate Bank, which went into obscurity after committing sins to employees who worked for it.
Now, I make a humble request to you to be pleased to pay the pension to the employee as directed by the High Court, in the following mode, to be fair and reasonable:–
Appropriate Rs.6,51,355.00 from the fixed deposit towards Bank’s Contribution to the PF [including Management portion of NRW, if any with interest] as directed in paragraph 13 of the order dated 02.12.2022.
Pay pension to the employee from 01.05.2010 along with interest at 9 percent on the pension payable for each month from 01.05.2010 to 30.04.2023.
Pay commutation of pension by reckoning the age of 60 at the time of retirement [30.04.2010] and interest at 9 percent on the amount of commutation from that date.
Fix the date of restoration of full pension reckoning 15 years from the date of commutation.
The release of the management share of CPF of Rs.6,51,355.00 by Syndicate Bank on 03.05.2010 to the employee was erroneous as the CPF was to be retained by the Bank for transfer to the Pension Fund. It was not taken back when requested to do so. So, it can attract no interest apart from its refund. Banks have also not collected anything additional to 156 percent of CPF even from the compulsorily retired employees for giving them pension in the year 2018. The provision for payment of the 56 percent of CPF was coming into the Pension Regulations only through clause 3 [b] of the Pension [Amendment] Regulations 2017 and it is void in terms of sections 19 [1] and 19 [4] of the Banking Companies [Acquisition &Transfer of Undertakings] Act, 1970, it being inconsistent with the Pension Scheme. The order of the Hon’ble Court also does not mention payment of anything beyond Rs.6,51,355.00. Pertinently, the amount was remaining with the Bank itself in the form of Fixed Deposit from the very date of its release [i.e. 03.05.2010] and the Bank was applying the money in its lending activities and earning handsome interest. Grey matter was wanting in the skulls of the blind and blunt officials of the Syndicate Bank to act in a prudent manner. They were departing from Settlement on pension dated 27.04.2010 and stipulating the conditions applicable to both pre-27.04.2010 retirees and post-2010 retirees to the employee and denying him pension.
The bank had recovered Rs.62,440.00 as Contribution to Pension Fund on 23.06.2010 from the salary arrears of the employee on the basis of the Settlement dated 27.04.2010. It later forcefully paid the amount back on 20.06.2013 to defeat the right to pension of the employee clandestinely. The amount is not payable by the employee in terms of the Pension Regulations in force and the settlement cannot override the Pension Regulations. The ruling dated 13.02.2018 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No 5525 of 2012 viz. Bank of Baroda & Anr. Vs. G Palani & Ors. is making it explicit that Settlement/Joint Note cannot supplant any of the provisions of the Pension Regulations, which is statutory. An option for pension was stemming from the Syndicate Bank [Employees] Pension [Amendment] Regulations, 1998 to the employee, which was not given to him. The Bank was later betraying him by giving an option on the unlawful terms of the Settlement dated 27.04.2010. Hence the amount of Rs.62,440.00 is not payable to the Bank by the employee. The provision for the contribution to Pension Fund are coming into the Pension Regulations through the Bank [Employees] Pension Amendment Regulations, 2017 only and they are void in terms of section 19[1] and 19[4] of the Banking Companies [Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings] Act, 1970, it being inconsistent with the Pension Scheme. The order dated 02.12.2022 of the Hon’ble High Court is also not directing the payment of Rs.62,440.00 by the petitioner.
Syndicate Bank was virtually putting the employee to starvation for 13 years without giving him pension and enjoying the money as a sequel to its own mistake. The employee had to sustain a loss of Rs.2,00,000 by way of legal expenses also. It would be an act of wisdom to imagine yourself in the place of the employee as it will lead you to the right course of action which are outlined in para 2 above and can obviate inconvenience and further litigation.
Pertinently, it is to be mentioned that moral turpitude is attributed on employees who depart from the code of conduct and they are punished. What else is the mode of behaviour of the top management of the Bank in not paying due pension to an employee for the mistakes on the part of the Bank.
To my knowledge, there are nearly 200 similar cases where pension was denied by Syndicate Bank for failure of refunding the CPF and 56 percent of it within the time frame of 15.12.2010 where Canara Bank can be arrayed into litigation.
For the time being, I request you to kindly pass on necessary instructions to those concerned to settle the payment of pension to the employee and to furnish the detailed working of the payment to obviate filing of contempt petition before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala at your cost.
Thanking You,
Yours faithfully,
C N VENUGOPALAN
✴️YNQUOTE✴️
.