Feel free to contribute on burning issues concerning the armed forces. Contributions would be acknowledged - Use the 'Comments' tab or email navdeepsingh.india[at]gmail.com. No operational/business/commercial matters to be discussed please. Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained. Information on this blog is opinion based and is neither official nor in the form of an advice. This is a pro bono online journal in public service related to issues, policies and benefits, and the idea behind it is to educate and not to create controversy or to incite. Be soft in your language, respect Copyrights.

Thursday, November 3, 2011

Congratulations to pre-2006 civil pensioners on Full Bench Judgement of CAT in their favour

The Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has finally allowed the petition by pre-2006 pensioners seeking modified parity with post-2006 retirees. The CAT has inter alia held that the term ‘minimum of pay in the pay band’ would mean minimum of pay within the pay band corresponding to the scale held at the time of retirement and not minimum of the pay band itself as interpreted and implemented by the government through a clarification.

However, it is the following extract which specially merits mention on this blog being a subject much discussed by us here :-

“On the basis of the recommendations made by VI CPC, which stood validly accepted by the Cabinet, it has been argued that principle for determining the pension has been completely altered under the garb of clarification. According to the learned counsel for the applicants on the basis of the aforesaid resolution/modified parity revised pension of the pre-2006 pensioners shall not be less than 50% of the minimum of the pay band + grade pay, corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired.

15. Applicants in para-11 of the Additional-Affidavit have explained how the Note prepared by a junior functionary (at the level of an Under Secretary) in the Department of Pension & Pensioners Welfare in regard to para-4.2 of the OM dated 1.9.2008 has been given a go-by to the resolution dated 29.08.2008. The Note so prepared has been extracted in this para, which thus reads:

X X X


16. It is pleaded that first the need for such a doubt being raised is not clear as both the formulation of the CPC in para 5.1.47 as well as in Government Resolution dated 29.8.2008 (Annexure A-7 of the OA) is clear that the fixation of pension will be subject to the provision that the revised pension in no case, shall be lower than fifty percent 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. (emphasis added). The use of words sum of, and thereon leaves no doubt that both the minimum of the pay in the pay band and the grade pay have to correspond to the pre-revised pay scale. Second, without bringing out merits or demerits of either formulation, the lower functionary in DOP & PW incorporates in the clarification against item 4.2 in the OM dated 1.9.2008, the first option about minimum of pay in the pay band (irrespective of the pre-revised scale of pay). What is worse is that there is no application of mind even at the level of Director and Secretary who merely sign the note and the clarification is issued after obtaining finance concurrence and approval of MOS (PP), without going back to the Cabinet for such a modification.

17. The learned counsel has further argued that the resultant injustice done to the pre-1-1-2006 pensioners had even been recognized by MOS (F) and MOS (PP) in their letters to the PM and MOS (F) respectively, copies of which are at Annexures A-11 (page 169) and A-12 (page 170) of the OA. A formal proposal was also sent by DOP & PW to Department of Expenditure seeking rectification but was not accepted by the latter. It was also incorrectly mentioned that the earlier provision in para 4.2 of OM dated 1.9.2008 has been issued in pursuance of the approval of the Cabinet granted to the Report of the Sixth CPC and any change would entail substantial financial implications and this was done only with the approval of the Secretary (Expenditure) without putting up the note to MOS (F) who had himself supported the change. A copy of this Note dated 2.1.2009 is enclosed as Annexure 5.

Proof enough how misleading notes by lower level functionaries can wreak havoc for the public at large.

78 comments:

Sainathan said...

Maj Navdeep,
I would like you to comment/clarify on an issue which affects many pre-2006 Defence pensioners.
I am referring to those pre-2006 pensioners who retired with less than 33 years of service.
What is the basis on which their pension is being worked out pro-rata, by adding weightage to the number of years they actually served? The Sixth Pay Commission does not say so anywhere. Nor does the cabinet decision.
Is it not a fact that this is also one of the uninted changes introduced by some lower level functionary of the govt? We have seen that as long as a faulty decision does not cause loss to the Govt. it tends to be supported by the Babus, right upto the top.
What is the remedy? Can we go to AFT to get the relief? Where can one get a copy of the petition and CAT judgement of the present case?
Thank you

V Natarajan, President, Pensioners' Forum, Chennai said...

Dear Maj Navdeep,

Great! Many thanks for your support all through. We stand united on this issue for obtaining the legitimate, rightful, MIniMUM GUARANTEED PENSION.

Regards,
VNatarajan

Exweltrust2006@yahoo.com said...

Dear Sir,
It is a very good and encouraging information to all central Govt.pensioners.

Thank you sir.

S.Kanthiah
Exwel Trust, Tirunelveli-Dist, Tamil Nadu.

corona8 said...

There's a need for a specialized format of litigation which, while quickly obtaining justice for affected litigants, would also ensure linking up laws on penal provisions for penalties being imposed on officials who seek to deprive individuals, or sets of individuals, their due entitlements. That would provide for an appropriate deterrence for perverse and callous mal-administration in the future.

sudeshkumarb said...

Sir AFT chandigarh in his order on a petition by retired Honorary officers has also upheld thier plea and asked Govt of India (MOD) to rectify the calculation for pension to Honorary Officers .In this connection OA 50/2011,and OA 1172/2011 is relevant.sudeshkumar Honorary Lieutenant Indian Navy

V Natarajan said...

Attn : Mr Sainathan,

You can get the full judgment from he website of CAT Delhi:

(The Judgement is on PCAT Delhi web site and can be seen on http://cgat.gov.in/judgement_main.htm and accessing OA no 655 of 2010).

If u r not ble to access it, pl send email to me at v_nattu@hotmail.com. Even Maj. NS may be able to help u. Regards.
N

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr Natarajan,

Great News,

My heartiest congratulations to you,

Finally the truth has prevailed

Thanks a Lot for the Good work done

Anonymous said...

Has the judgement been given in favour for minimum of pay
( in the new pay band) corresponding to the basic pay at the time of retirement OR it is just that the petition has been allowed / admitted for hearing ?
Secondly , a long wait is likely , for orders to be issued for defense pensioners.
It may also end up in meeting the same fate , as has been for granting broad banding / rounding of percentages of disability for pre 1-1-06 retired ESM. ????

WG.CDR.V.SUNDARESAN(RETD) said...

Hearty congrats. atleast somebody is intelligent enough to say a spade a spade.
how come none in the defence min. has pointed out theses? I only hope the govt. will do some justice, not only the affected civil pensioners but also the defence forces.
By the by anybody in our services planning to approach the AFT/SC for remedial measures/ better late than never.

Anonymous said...

Dear Navdeep
In view of the fact that O/M of 3-10-08 is quashed,what about the clarification giwen under 4.2 regarding pro-rata reduction of pension also stands deleted.will the pensions of pre-2006 retires be restored to full in case of service more thsn 20 years.
Kalra
kalrais@hotmail.com

captainjohann said...

Sir, Can you give a model calculation which will clarify matters further in this matter.Thanks

sudeshkumarb said...

Wing Cdr Sunderesan Sir ,AFT Chandigarh has already given thier verdict in respect of Majors and Honorary commissioned officers on similar lines .uU may go through AFT Chandigarh site (judgements OA50/2011 and Oa 1172/2011 dated 30 may 11 and 17 aug 11 respectivly.No action has been taken by the MOD till date .The time given was for 4 months.

LT.COL.(RETD) K.B.MATHUR said...

The Government may try to delay the implementation by challenging the judgement given by Central Administrative Tribunal ,as usual .

Anonymous said...

This judgement is a sort of 'OROP' which the ESM have been demanding. We need to ensure that this is implemented for ESM also quickly.

govindarajan said...

The CAT has admitted the petition. Let us wait and see the direction that CAT gives on the subject.

V Natarajan said...

Dear Mr Govindrajan,

Perhaps you have not read the earlier posts in the blog:

JUDGMENT ALREADY PRONOUNCED ON 1 11 2011: Operational Para directs:

"30. In view of what has been stated above, we are of the view that the clarificatiory OM dated 3.10.2008 and further OM dated 14.10.2008 (which is also based upon clarificatiory OM dated 3.10.2008) and OM dated 11.02.2009, whereby representation was rejected by common order, are required to be quashed and set aside, which we accordingly do. Respondents are directed to re-fix the pension of all pre-2006 retirees w.e.f. 1.1.2006, based on the resolution dated 29.08.2008 and in the light of our observations made above. Let the respondents re-fix the pension and pay the arrears thereof within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. OAs are allowed in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to interest and costs."

Pl see my reply given to Mr Sainathan on 3 11 2006 , 3.16 pm in this very blog/ thread.

Regards,
VNatarajan

SKP said...

Dear Maj Navdeep,

Requesting your considered comment and valuable views on the point as raised by Mr Sainathan at serial1.

I think the manner in which the sixth pay comission order has been interpreted and implemented wrt the a/m point,is completely wrong and needs to be corrected

SKP

AURATHERAPY said...

Dear Sir,
Will pl. clarify how the pre- 2006 civil pensioner will be benefited by the cat's judgement

m b barve said...

WILL HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE WHETHER GOVT GOES TO SUPREME COURT.

Anonymous said...

But what is the surity that the Govt will not go to Supreme Court as was done in the case of Rank Pay case of 4th Pay Commission. Over a year has passed without any justice been done to those also effected. BTW what is the latest on this?

Anonymous said...

The Lord (Judiciary/CAT) giveth and the LORD (Junior level Babus) taketh away. Don't worry they will go to the Supreme Court

Penmil said...

@Natarajan,November 6, 2011 7:08 AM
Dear Shri Natarajan Ji,
Congratulations to you and all your colleagues for obtaining a land mark judgment.
This sure sets the principle of modified parity right and is an essential requirement to prevent slide down of pensions further, in the 7th CPC.
Great job !
Even though the judgment is by the CAT, I am hopeful the application will also extend to the military pensioners.
What do you think the military pensioners do, to get the benefit of this judgment?

N.R.Jayaraman said...

Regarding pre-2006 civil pensioners on Full Bench Judgement of CAT in their favor, would someone give me the full link ID to read the entire judgement?
thanks

Anonymous said...

Dear Shri Penmil/ Shri Jayaraman,

As the one who spear-headed the "movement" on MOD PARITY issue viz "Min of the Pay Band" vs "Min of the Pay in the Pay Band" (MPB vs MPPB) right from the start (pl see the website GconnectIn - A community website for Central Govt Employees etc TO SEE THE THREAD ON "Injustice to pre 2006 s29 & s30 pensioners.....", started by me in Oct 2008, 95000 views in 3 years almost 100 views per day, more than 1050 posts etc; - a website just like Maj Navdeep's this blogsite) I am trying first to clarify the points of my two good friends first and also the points of others to the extent I know ( I am not a Lawyer like Maj NS who is also one of my greatest "unseen" friend:

Reg Penmil's query, already Rtd Lt Cdr Avtar Singh first and Maj NS later have steered cases ot two/three groups of pre 2006 Rtd LT Cdrs/ Majors/ Sqdrn Leaders at the AFT PR BENCH Delhi and AFT Chandigarh respectively, totalling to 16 OAs heard in three lots, main issue being the MOD PARITY between - pre 2006 Retd LC/M/SLs and post LC/M/SLs, based much on their valuable inputs and the very DOCUMENTS which we had used now, to SET THE TEMPO FOR SCPC MOD PARITY JUSTICE, BY WINNING THEIR CASES IN THE SHORTEST POSSIBLE TIME. In fact we have cited the AFT judgments in our suppelementary affidavits. THEIR EFFORTS (LT CDR AS AND MAJ NS)AND SUCCESSES HAVE BEEN GREAT.

SO FOR YOUR DERIVING FULL ADVANTAGE ON MOD PARITY FOR SUCH SEGMENTS / SECTIONS OF MILITARY PENSIONERS FOR WHOM THE SAME MAY BE BENEFICIAL, YOU HAVE TO COMPUTE AND SEE AND THEN GO FOR SIMILAR APPLICATIONS TO MOD (LATER TO COURTS IF NEEDED) CITING ALL THESE JUDGEMENTS. MAJ NS IS THE BEST EXPERT WHO CAN ADVISE ON THIS ISSUE.

REG SHRI JAYARAMAN'S QUERY, HE MAY SEE MY EARLIER REPLY TO MR SAINATHAN IN THIS VERY THREAD FOR THE LINK TO FULL JUDGEMENT DETAILS.

Reg further course of action:YES. WE THE PETITIONERS ARE AWARE THAT THE GOVT WILL GO TO THE NEXT LEVEL VIZ MAY BE HIGH COURT THIS TIME - ONLY TO GET DOUBLY THRASHED- AS WE ARE FULLY PREPARED TO GET ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY TO AGAIN EXPOSE "ADDITIONALSHORTCOMINGS" IN THE ADMINISTRATION AND APPLICATION OF THE CABINET DECISION ON SCPC RECOS CORRECTLY!

Govt can not take things for granted all the time and all through with the same "faulty and biassed" mechanism of differentiating the "OLD/ PAST PENSIONERS"' from the "CURRENT/ WIULD BE PENSIONERs" at the pleasure of only top five SCALES IN ADMINISTRATION!

I am sorry to note that even the implementation of verdicts on famous Retd Maj Gens (pre 1996 first and later pre 2006) of SPS Vains fame are being delayed and rocked here and there to delay justice, pronounced long ago!

May wisdom dawn on the concerned before "IT IS TOO LATE"!

Regards,
VNatarajan

N.R.Jayaraman said...

Thanks Mr. Natarajan,
Great service you are doing to pensioners cause. May God bless you with strength, wealth and health to continue the service. Any way thanks for the info too. I look forward to the posting of the full judgement copy or its availability
Regds
Jayaraman

V Natarajan said...

Dear Shri Jayaraman,

Pl try these links:

The Judgement is on PR CAT Delhi web site and can be seen on http://cgat.gov.in/judgement_main.htm and accessing OA no 655 of 2010.

Main Page: http://cgat.gov.in/judgement_main.htm

Click the PR BENCH Delhi
Select "JUDGEMENTS"
Select Original Application say OA.
Enter Case No 655 Year 2010.

Judgment will appear in the link:

http://judis.nic.in/judis_cat/CaseNo_Cat_Result.aspx

Pl try. Regards,

VNatarajan

Penmil said...

Dear Shri Natarajan Ji,
Thanks for the encouragement.
Hope everyone joins in,to get this modfied parity restored to all central government pensioners.
On a quick look basis, all the Pre 2006 pensioner officers from Lt to Maj Gen may be benefited if MPPB is reckoned for fixation of pension.Majors and Maj Gen will be the ones who will get the max benefit, being at the top of PB3 and PB4 respectively(just like S-28/29 Scale Officers are at the top of PB4).
Yes.I recall reading your many posts, on this subject, since 2008.

N.R.Jayaraman said...

Thanks Mr. Natarajan,
Got it
Regds

uday said...

Dear Sir/sirs,Is thr anybdy who cud giv d details on pensioners who retired on Nov 2002 as tech person fm IAF (Gp-I).
1.wht sd b his actual pension as on nov 2011 as per current trend.Means wt he supposed to get now?
2.How much he wd b benefited by CAT decision now.
I think mny of ths category of pensioner do not know.Pl if u hv correct data or info let us kno.

MY id uday_chak@yahoo.co.in

Thanx n warm Regrds
jai Hind

N.R.Jayaraman said...

Sir,
Will some one give a model calculation say some one's basic pay is Rs 10,000/- or surmise some other basic pay when he draws full pension without commutation. What could be the difference the judgement would make? Can some one put up a model work out to throw more clarity to understand.
Thanks

B.Ramadurai said...

Dear Natarajan Sir,

Thank you for the great fight you have put up on behalf of the Pre-2006 pensioners. At the same time I would request you to kindly takeup the issue of full pension for those who have completed 20 years of service prior to 01.01.2006. The judgement also hinted it for not asking for it vide para No.9 of the judgement.
"Applicants have not challenged the validity of the OM dated 2.9.2008. As such, on these grounds pre-2006 retirees cannot claim benefit at par with post-2006 retirees, who are governed by the separate set of Scheme."

I am one of the affected pre-2006 pensioner who has crossed 20 years but not reached 33 years.

I am ready to join you if you file a case for this purpose.

Ragards.
B.Ramadurai

Sanjay Agarwal said...

May I request for a clarification on entitlement of pension in respect of an officer commisioned in 1955 and prematurly retired in 1977 in the rank of substantive Major.

The offr is still getting the pension of a Major when it should be as that of a Lt Col..if correct, the auth is not known...Could anyone help...

Sanjay Agarwal(leopargil@gmail.com)

V Natarajan said...

Dear Shri Ramadurai,

There is another case for the sub 33 year plus 20 yr pre 2006 pension injustice which is coming up for hearing at PR CAT- two judge bench on 23rd Nov 2011. Leader of the group is Mr Pratap Narayan. This is exactly an adjunct to our case.We didnt want to mix up both the issues.

V Natarajan

N.R.Jayaraman said...

Attn: Mr Natarajan
has there been any move from govt in respect of the CAT Judgement for pre 2006 pensioners? Is there any move seen accepting the judgement?

హరేఫల said...

What is the latest development? Can we expect some revision?

Ramadurai.B said...

Can anyone give the details of the following case:CAT–PB Delhi OA 1165 /2011 Pratap Narain & Ors Vs. MOP/DOP 23.11.2011.This case is basically for full pension for pre 2006 pensioners as in case of post 2006 pensioners,
who retired with more than 20 but less than 33 years of qualifying service

N.R.Jayaraman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
N.R.Jayaraman said...

Mr Ramadurai,
In response to your query I find from the case list that Prathap Narain & others case 1165/2011 is ready for hearing in Court No 1 and listed for 24.01.12.
Thanks

VNatarajan said...

Dear Dr Ramadurai,
Shri Pratap Narayan can be contacted via email pratap@narayan.org. There are nearly 35 to 40 so far who have joined the group fighting for "no pro-rata application on pension for 20 yr plus pre 2006 retirees ( inlcudes normal/ vrs ). vnatarajan

N.R.Jayaraman said...

I read the following news recently in Central Govt Employees News dt 07.12.2011. Wish this will also discuss the Cat issue?
------------
The next meeting of National Anomaly Committee will be held on 5th January, 2012.
The last, third meeting of National Anomaly Committee held on 15th February 2011 in Room No.119, North Block, New Delhi under the Chairmanship of Secretary (Personnel). The list of participants who attended the third meeting of the National Anomaly Committee as follows...

1. Shri.U.M.Purohit, Secretary (Staff Side)
2. Shri.Rakhal Das Gupta, Member
3. Shri.R.P.Bhatnagar, Member
4. Shri.Guman Singh, Member
5. Shri.C.Srikumar, Member
6. Shri.S.K.Vyas, Member
7. Shri.R.Srinivasan, Member
8. Shri.K.K.N.Kutty, Member
9. Shri.S.G.Mishra, Member
10. Shri.K.S.Murthy, Member

An important Office Memorandum[F.No.11/2/2008-JCA Vol.(II) dated 2.12.2011] has been issued by the Department of Personnel and Training regarding the meeting of the National Anomaly Committee.

The 4th meeting of the National Anomaly Committee to discuss the anomalies arising out the implementation of the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission is scheduled to be held on Thursday, the 5th January, 2012 at 3.00 P.M. in Room No.119, North Block, New Delhi, Secretary, Department of Personnel & Training will chair the meeting. The Agenda points for the meeting will be published shortly.

The list of Staff Side of the National Anomaly Committee as follows...

1. Shri.U.M.Purohit, President, AIRF, 42/13, Railway Quarters, Malad (East), Mumbai - 400 071.

2. Shri.S.G.Mishra, General Secretary, AIRF, Gauri Niwas, Mavaiya, Lucknow.

3. Shri.Shiv Gopal Mishra, General Secretary, AIRF, 4, State Entry Road, New Delhi - 110055.

4. Shri.Rakhal Das Gupta, Working President, AIRF, P.O.Bongaigaon, Distt.Bongaigaon, Assam.

5. Shri.Ch.Sankara Rao, Asst.General Secretary AIRF, Railway Quarter No.566/3, Rail Nilayam Colony, Secunderabad 500071 (AP)

6. Shri.Guman Singh, President, NFIR, B-9, Nand Puri Hawa Sarak, Baisgodam, Jaipur-302019.

7. Shri.M.Raghavaiah, General Secretary, NFIR, Railway Quarter No.428/1, Chilkdlguda, Secunderabad - 500025 (AP)

8. Shri.R.P.Bharnagar, Working President, NFIR, Railway Quarter No.F/3, Near Loco Workshop, Parel, Mumabi-400012

9. Shri.K.S.Murthy, Vice President, NFIR, Block No.112/6, Unit 2, Garden Reach, Kolkata-43

10. Shri.S.K.Vyas, 13-C, Ferozeshaha Road, New Delhi-110001

Major NS Subramaniam said...

Dear Maj Navadeep,

Good news for pre-2006 retirees. Pl clarify if an offr having more than 15 yrs army service and 20 yrs NCC service will get MSP also while revision of pension, as VIth CPC introduced first time for pension. I am getting def pension at present.
Thank You & Regards,
Maj NS Subramaniam

preetam_thakur said...

This is just first step on tight rope (rather loose rope). No hope, the advocates and allies will make money from the Association of Civil Pensioners.
Preetam Singh Thakur,
Ex- Assistant Commandant.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr.V Natrajan
Many Thanks and greetings for the efforts and and hardship accepted by you, for betterment of others. I simply wish to know:-
Despite all this judgements:-
(a) How would you like if any Sub Maj getting pension more than a commissioned officer or Hon commissioned officer?. This Govt has done while bridging gaps pre 2006-post 2006.
(b) Is there any move by Govt of India to revise pension of Hon Officers and commissioned officers.
Best Regards
Hon.Lt (Retd), I.N. A K Sharma

SANTOKH said...

Hi All,
Any news about implementation/appeal of CAT Judgement?
Thanks

COL LAMBA said...

GEN V K SINGH AGE ROW
1.APPLICATION OF UPSC IS TO BE FILLED IN OWN HANDWRITING. BY INDIVIDUAL ANY WRONG INFORMATION DISQUALIFIES. COAS SAYS THAT THE DATE ENTERED IN UPSC AS1950.IS BY HIS TEACHER. SO HIS CASE IS NULL & VOID FROM DAY ONE. HE HAS APPLIED FOR COMMISSION AS1950 AS BASE YEAR [ HAS ANY TIME DURING FIRST TWO YEAR HE HAS UP CASE AS PER LAID DOWN
PROCEDURE IN WRITING WITH ARMY H.Q]
2. ARMY LIST IS LIKE A BIBLE [HAS HE EVER CONTESTED THIS AS PER LAID DOWN PROCEDURE[ STATEMENT OF CASE]
3.HE HAS ACCEPTED THREE TIMES AT TIME OF PROMOTION THE DATE AS
1950[ WHY HAS HE NOT PUT HIS FOOT DOWN & WAIT FOR PROMOTION TILL THE
CASE IS RECTIFIED]. HE HAS ACCEPTED PROMOTION FOR HIS BENEFIT & BLAMING EX COAS .THIS IS NOT EXPECTED FROM AN OFFICER

4.IS IT YOUR CHOICE THAT ONE DAY YOU ACCEPT ONE BIRTH DATE AND OTHER DAY YOU GO AGAINST YOUR OWN ACCEPTANCE?
5. NO ONE DAY HE SAYS UPSC APPLICATION WAS FILLED BY HIS TEACHER & ON OTHER DAY HE SAYS HE HAD FILLED HIS UPSC APPLICATION.LET IT BE ANY ONE HE HAS GIVEN FALSE DATE OF BIRTH IF HE CLAIMS AS 1951 IS CORRECT. SO HIS COMMISSION IS AT STAKE.

6.CAN ANY CHIEF OF COUNTRY GO AGAINST HIS OWN GOVT &STILL EXPECTS TO CONTINUE AS PER HIS WISH?

7.HOW MUCH TAX PAYER MONEY , ARMY & MOD TIME HAS BEEN WASTED?

8.IN THE INTEREST OF NATION & ARMY HE SHOULD RESIGN & GO WITH RESPECT,ELSE MOD WILL SHOW DOOR.

ML Sharma said...

Sir
Do you have any information on the status of case:CAT–PB Delhi OA 1165 /2011 Pratap Narain & Ors Vs. MOP/DOP 23.11.2011.This case is for full pension for pre-2006 pensioners who retired with more than 20 but less than 33 years of qualifying service . This case was listed on 24.01.2012 for the hearing as per the information made available on your portal
Regards

ML Sharma
B-51, Vivek Vihar Phase-2
Delhi-110095
Retired Reader, University of Delhi

Dr. J Prakash said...

Hi All,
Any news about implementation/appeal of CAT Judgement?
Thanks
j Prakash

N.R.Jayaraman said...

This is the latest that I read
"NewIt is reliably learnt that an appeal has been filed by the Government in Delhi High Court against PB-CAT Judgment Dated 1-11-2011 in OA 655-2010 for Modified Parity to Pre-2006 Pensioners. It is learnt to be presently under scrutiny of Registry HC."

Dr. J Prakash said...

1. Can we procure a copy of government's appeal in HCD against the judgement of CAT PB, granting Modified Parity to pre 2006 pensioners.
2. What is CA No. and date of filing?

Dr. J Prakash

N.R.Jayaraman said...

I am sorry sir, I read it in the News flash of the following website: Coordination Committee of Central Government Pensioners association. Their site is: http://cccgpa.in/

N.R.Jayaraman said...

sir,
Forgot to add. The same info is also found flashed in the following site: CAT Judgment Dated 1-11-2011

N.R.Jayaraman said...

This is latest news:
New:- Secy Genl BPS, Secy Genl RSCWS, Secy Genl CCCGPA, Secy Genl RREWA & Org. Secy CCCGA, met senior advocate (Mrs) Minakshi Arora on 28-2-2012, at Delhi.
It was decided that BPS, RSCWSs & CCCGPA should jointly implead as a party to contest the appeal against the judgment of CAT in OA-655-2010

N.R.Jayaraman said...

To know the minimum benefit one would get (for Pre 2006 retirees) if the CAT judgment is upheld, please see go to the following page:

http://cccgpa.in/pdfdocs/Table_showing_Minimum_Revised_pension_of_Pre-2006_Pensioners.pdf

N.R.Jayaraman said...

Dearness Allowance for Central Government Employees and Pensioners...
Rate of additional Dearness Allowance from January 2012, Cabinet Ministry will decide in the next meeting which will be held on 15th March 2012...
DA from Jan 2012 – Cabinet will decide in the next meeting…
DA from Jan 2012 – Cabinet will decide in the next meeting which is held on 15.03.2012 …
The additional Dearness allowance which is announced every six months by the Central Government to the Central Government employees and the Pensioners is based depending upon the price hike of essential commodities all over the nation.
The statistics of All India Consumer Price Index for Industrial Workers (AICPIN-IW) is increased on account of the proportionate rise in twelve-month as of December 2011, regarding the additional DA to be announced from 1.1.2012, which is based on the price rise from July 2011 to Dec 2011 in about 70 selected areas throughout India. These calculation are done by the Labour Ministry and it was sent to the Finance Ministry and discussed in the meeting of the Cabinet Ministers. The decision is expected to be finalized in the next meeting.
DA from 1.1.2012 may increase 7% form the existing rate is expected. Now all the Central Government employees and pensioners are getting 58% from their basic pay (Pan in the pay band + Grade Pay), it will become as 65% from 1.1.2012. The minimum of the enhanced amount of DA will be Rs.500 to the existing employees.
After the final decision is taken from the Cabinet Committee, order will be issued by the Finance Ministry in the end of this month and the DA for the month of March will be included in the salary and the previous two month’s DA will be paid as arrears in the month of April 2012.

N.R.Jayaraman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
N.R.Jayaraman said...

More clarity in the news on appeal:-
Contempt petition against non-implementation of judgment in OA 655-2010, was heard by the full bench of PCAT Delhi on 14-3-2012. Govt Advocate requested for more time to reply. Considering the age profile of Petitioners and since no Stay Order had been issued by the High Court on the Appeal of the Govt (and which had even not yet been Registered), the Tribunal posted to 21st March, 2012.

N.R.Jayaraman said...

Latest news:
Request of GOI for "Stay" was "Not Granted" by Delhi High Court in the hearing on 19/3/2012 on the Appeal against CAT’s judgement in OA 655-2010 dated 1st November, 2011. Next hearing has been fixed on 4th May, 2012

COL LAMBA said...

1.PENSIONERS HAVE FILED
Contempt petition against non-implementation of judgment in OA 655-2010, was heard by the full bench of PCAT Delhi on 14-3-2012.
2.WHAT IS CASE NUMBER,COURT NUMBER.CASE TITLE FOR CONTEMPT PETION .KINDLY E MAIL TO ME

3.Govt Advocate requested for more time to reply. Considering the age profile of Petitioners and since no Stay Order had been issued by the High Court on the Appeal of the Govt (and which had even not yet been Registered), the Tribunal posted to 21st March, 2012.

N.R.Jayaraman said...

The details are not given in the site: http://cccgpa.in/ and in http://rscws.com
However the . One of the site is Railway pensioners site and the other is Central govt pensioners association site. I am only taking information from such sites and sharing with others. I am sorry, I am unable to help much beyond this.
You can go to the site and see the addresses given in the contact list of members as they have not indicated the E mail ids.

Anonymous said...

Sir,
On 04 Jun 2011 an article was appeared on the site saying that the armed forces pensioners retired from 01 JAN 1996 TO 09 Oct 1997 will get pension at par. MOD was suppose to issue the notification by 05 Aug 2011. You are requested to kindly through some light on the issue.
Thanks,

Yours Sincerely

sandhuangrejsingh@yahoo.com
Ex Sub A S Sandhu

sanjay said...

what is next date after 21 march 2012 by cat and for what.

N.R.Jayaraman said...

For interesting news on the Case No 655 on pensioners case go to the following and see:-
http://rscws.com/pdfdocs/Noting_on_CAT_Judgment.pdf

B.Ramadurai said...

Mail which I got from Mr. Pratap Narayan regarding full pension for service less than 33years for pre-2006 pensioners:
Date: Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: OA:1165/2011
To: Ramadurai Balasubramanian

The Government Advocate wanted some time to reply to the third OA filed on the same subject in January, which has now been clubbed with the other 2 filed last year. I have also filed an Affidavit containing some additional points in our favour which have come to our notice later in answer to RTI queries. The case is now fixed for 3rd May.

Anonymous said...

Sir
I am medically boarde out of ser from Air force after comp. of 11yr 10m in dec 1999. Can I get a revised LPC as per sixth pay comm.for fixation of pay as I am persently employed in bank .
If possible pl. mail me at my id is r.kirpal01@yahoo.in

N.R.P. Rao said...

Dear Sir,
What is the latest news on implementation of CAT Orders on Pre=2006/pew1996 defence pensioners' it was t be implemented by February, 2012.
N.R.P. RAO,
EX-JWO, IAF

s.ksaxena said...

How pay commission can divide pensioners in two i.e pre 2006 pensioners and post 2006 pensioners when both are governed by same pension service and fundamental rules.If this could have capt in mind
this misinterpitation could not been arrived.
govt is requested to implement CAT Delhi decision

N.R.Jayaraman said...

Hearing of the case No WP 1535 / 2012 started on 4-5-2012 in Court No 3 of Delhi High Court - reg Appeal of Union of India against PB CAT Delhi Judgment in OA 655 / 2010. The case was "Part Heard" (Govt pleader completed his arguments). Further hearing will continue on Monday 7th May, 2012

B.Ramadurai said...

Can anybody inform about the case No WP 1535 / 2012 started on 4-5-2012 in Court No 3 of Delhi High Court - reg Appeal of Union of India against PB CAT Delhi Judgment in OA 655 / 2010.
further hearing was supposed to be heard on 07.05.2012.

B.Ramadurai said...

Can anybody give information about the case OA 1165 / 2011 in Delhi PCB(full pension for pre-2006 pensioners with 20 years of service)

N.R.Jayaraman said...

This is the latest :- ''No hearing could be held in Delhi High Court on 21-5-2012 - Reg Modified Parity to Pre-2006 Pensioners (since the turn of the case came up at the fag end of the day. The case was adjourned till after vacation and fixed on 17th July, 2012. (Ref: UNION OF INDIA & ORS. VS. CENTRAL GOVERNMENT SAG & ORS. – W.P (C) NO. 1535/2012)''

Anonymous said...

i would like to know what was the decision on the appeal at delhi high court?

Dr. J Prakash said...

The next hearing is on 29.11.2012.

Amardeep Singh said...

Hi, Do we have any update on 29-11-2012 hearing??

N.R.Jayaraman said...

Latest as on 29-11-2012

Appeal of the GOI in W.P. No. 1535/2012 - (against CAT Judgment) in the Case for Modified Parity for Pre-2006 Pensioners - in the Delhi High Court - could not be taken up for hearing on 29.11.2012 , as one of the judges of the Bench Justice Siddharth Mridul was on leave The matter has been adjourned. The next date of hearing is fixed as 29.04.2013

M B Chandran Menon. M.com.,AIII,DME said...

The case was heard on 29.11.12. Respondents submitted Counters to the Petition with a para wise reply in writing. Court gave 4 weeks time to UOI to submit their Rejoinder.

N.R.Jayaraman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Vidya Bhushan said...

Now when the High Court of Delhi in its recent decision dated 29.4.2013 given in favour of pre-2006 pensioners in W.P.(C) Nos.1535,2348-2350/2012 ruled that- "Simple solution is to give effect to the Resolution dated 29.8.2008 whereby recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission were accepted with certain modifications", does it mean that the benefit of full pension on completion of 20 years of qualifying service will also be given to pre-2006 pensioners as has already been given to pro-2006 pensioners, besides stepping up of revised pension w.e.f. 1.1.2006.

THA.PI.SUNDAR said...

Sirs,
Will you pl. provide me with the information that what is the time-scale of the VI pay commission Revised Scale for S10 category(New S2)ie. Rs.9300- 34,800.

Subramanian, Madurai.