Actualización de la peticiónUpdation of Pension to Bank Retirees/Pensioners - out of their own Pension corpus Fund -Petition to Hon'ble PM / FM
Jayaprakash NBangalore, India
14 jun 2017 — UPDATE: 14.06.2017 Petition to Hon’ble PM / FM: Sub: Violation of fundamental right to life as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution - RETIRAL BENEFITS AS A HUMAN RIGHTS – 01. During the wage revision on 25.05.2015, none of the issues of the bank retirees were solved and in turn the Indian Bank Association (IBA) representing all Banks and United Forum of Bank Unions (UFBU) representing Bank employees/officers issued a damaging Record Note of Discussion saying that there is no contractual relationship between the banks and retirees. IBA also informed that in view of high cost involved, it would be difficult to agree to updation of Pension. 02. In this regard, the relationship between banks and retirees has been dealt and touched upon by Hon’ble Courts as hereunder: A. In 1978, in Maneka Gandhi case, it ruled by Honorable lordship that the expression ''life'' did not mean mere animal existence but with dignity, it added another legal leaf in 2008 in Deepak Bajaj case, when it said right to life encompassed a person's reputation as well. B. By Supreme Court of India in D.S. Nakara & Others vs Union Of India on 17 December, 1982 Equivalent citations: 1983 AIR 130, 1983 SCR (2) 165 C. Supreme Court of India CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1123 OF 2015 [Arising out of SLP(C) NO. 321 OF 2015] State of Rajasthan and Ors. ... Appellants Versus Mahendra Nath Sharma ...Respondent dated 1st July 2015 on the subject of pension in the case titled State Of Rajasthan Vs Mahendra Nath sharma. The Hon'ble Court, inter alia, has reiterated the following tacitly and directly. The salient features of the judgement is as under: • The bench has authoritatively ruled that Pension is a right and the payment of it does not depend upon the discretion of the Government. Pension is governed by rules and a Government Servant coming within those rules is entitled to claim pension. • The judgment has recognized that the revision of pension and revision of pay scales are INSEPARABLE. • The bench has reiterated that revision the Basic pension cannot be less than 50% of the Basic Pension in the minimum of the Pay Band in the revised scale corresponding to the pre-revised scale. • The government CANNOT take a plea of financial burden to deny legitimate dues of the pensioners. • The Government SHOULD AVOID unwarranted litigation and not to encourage any litigation for the sake of litigation. • When pension is upheld to be a right and NOT A BOUNTY, as a corollary to the averment that revision of pension and revision of pay scales are INSEPARABLE, upgradation of pension is also a RIGHT AND NOT A BOUNTY. D. The relationship between Bank and Pensioner is Trustee and Beneficiary under Pension Regulation 2(zd) and it is wrong to deny benefits on the basis of there is no relationship between Pensioners and Banks E. A through scrutiny & audit by CAG needs to be ordered to verify the correctness of the Actuaries calculated in terms of Regulation 2(b) of the Pension Regulations, 1995 F. The CCS Rules, 1972 equally applicable to Bank Retirees in terms of Regulation 56 of Bank Pension Regulations, 1995 in the matter of Pensionary benefits to Bank Retired/Pennsioners as Government of India is the Employer being the owner of all Public Sector Banks getting periodical Dividends and also the Regulator of all Banks. G. Constitution & Composition of Pension Fund: under Regulation 5: Banks are not periodically contributing the adequate funds based on actuaries’ right from 1995 till date, rather additional contributions from the Retirees were collected in the 9th Bipartite Settlement to fill the gap in the Fund which is in total violation of the Regulations. Hence, a through scrutiny & audit by CAG needs to be ordered to verify whether Banks responsibility as per regulations since adhered to or not? H. The IBA has been miserably failed to adopt all the other General Conditions etc., of Clause No. 12 of the Pension Settlement dated 29.10.1993 and always fraudulently misled the Retirees and the Courts by giving false information about the Pension Fund position of all the Banks and thereby mentioning that Banks Financial position cannot afford to fulfill the demands of the Banks’ Pensioners. I. With regard to cost factor, the PSU banks have adequate/enough pension funds as on 31.03.2015 with a balance outstanding of Rs.180459.71 crores and that the interest earned on such corpus pension fund is sufficient to service pension paid, further monthly contributions from employees are added to the corpus fund, and thereby there is annual growth in the funds of the banks. J. As the IBA, GOI, individual banks, RBI, UFBU have not taken care of our Bank Retired/Pensioners issues, and there is no transparency in the wage revision negotiations, any member of the public having sufficient interest can maintain an action for violation of human rights/judicial/administrative/executive redress for public injury arising from breach of public duty or from violation of some provision of the Constitution or the law and seek enforcement of such public duty and observance of such constitutional or legal provision to demand Updation of pension as applicable to Pensioners of State and Central Government and other similar Institution as per Article 21 of the Constitution. K. In order to arrive at the correct position of the corpus fund: there is a need to: (a) File complaint before the Hon’ble NHRC as RETIRAL BENEFITS AS A HUMAN RIGHTS. (b) Demand for bringing Banks Pension Fund to the scrutiny of CAG to bring out the factual position as from 1995 to 2010, all banks en-masse stopped to contribute monthly and to pay pension to the then retired employees recovered from Bi-partite settlements [1995-2007]. (c) Demand for through audit and scrutiny of Pension Fund and to know whether Banks are contributing every month to pension fund or not? a. Call for the records and minutes of wage revision discussions in which our issues were discussed and finally taken the illegal stand as mentioned in Record Note of Discussion dated 25.05.2015. b. Direct the banks to submit the Actuaries calculated from 1995 till date c. Direct the Banks to Confirm that the adequate Funds have been provided as per Regulation 5(3) and submit the latest Position of Pension Fund accounts d. Investigate into the cost of updation of pension, improvement in family pension and 100% DA neutralization by Actuarials defined in Pension Regulations 1995, in a time-bound manner. e. The cost is not depended on budget allocation but purely from the interest earning of the already existing own Corpus Pension Fund without burden on the exchequer. f. Order the concerned banks, RBI and the Finance Department of GOI, to arrive at the decision on the demands of the retirees complying Regulation on Actuaries and Bank Funding g. Order for complying & reinstating Fundamental Rights under Article 21 of the Constitution as their own Pension Corpus Fund will service the updation amount and No Budgetary allocation required. Further Pension is not a bounty based upon the sweet will or grace of the Employer and Supreme Court Judgment reiterates that the Govt. should not perpetuate litigation for the sake of litigation. It is hereby demanded that a separate Bank Pension Commission may be constituted in place of IBA and All the Bank Retirees Association under one unified entity “The United Bank Retirees Associations’” may be involved to negotiate the Bank Retirees issues. The original petition was initiated by TEAM Jayaprakash, Jayaraman, Jayaram, HSN Murthy, Vasudevarao & Vijayalakshmi & submitted on 12.12.2016 followed by detailed justification submitted on 06.04.2017 based on judicial pronouncements passed in various cases. The petition has been repeatedly lodged in http://pgportal.gov.in but the same has been prejudicially disposed of neither giving proper justification nor giving personal hearing to the petitioners. The petition was also lodged in www.Change.Org seeking public support to bring moral pressure on the decision makers. We express our sincere thanks to 6600 people supported our cause so far and the pace of support is still moving on. It is hereby requested that all Bank Retirees may file as many individual petitions and endorse support online by login into following portals to bring moral pressure on the decision makers seeking reinstatement of natural justice & protecting the fundamental right under Article 21 in favour of the Bank Retirees at least in the forthcoming XI bipartite settlement. 1. http://164.100.51.5/HRComplaint/NewHRComplaint.aspx 2. http://pgportal.gov.in 3. www.Change.Org Search Petitioner Jayaprakash and support the petition Thank you, Team Jayaprakash
Apoya la petición ahora
Firma esta petición
Copiar enlace
WhatsApp
Facebook
Nextdoor
E-mail
X