Friends,
It is now 6 months and we are yet to get our judgement. We spoke to the Advocates here at Chennai and also at Delhi, but they are all of the opinion that we should wait, as there are no way out. The six months time limit is only for High courts and not for Sup.court.
We have one way out to mention it before the judge himself. but it may work against us and not only that they will even order to go for re arguments.
This is why we wait and pray for early results.
Our Madurai Case came up once before the judges and the management asked for time to submit their reply. Now it is again listed and may come up before next week.
we have so far received 12 representations from retirees of SVRscheme for getting pension in the case of less than 20 years of service. we will finalise the list by 12th of this month and any body coming under the above can send email with their scanned copy of the representation given to the concerned company.
Nothing else to add.
nagarajan
nisvrea
It is now 6 months and we are yet to get our judgement. We spoke to the Advocates here at Chennai and also at Delhi, but they are all of the opinion that we should wait, as there are no way out. The six months time limit is only for High courts and not for Sup.court.
We have one way out to mention it before the judge himself. but it may work against us and not only that they will even order to go for re arguments.
This is why we wait and pray for early results.
Our Madurai Case came up once before the judges and the management asked for time to submit their reply. Now it is again listed and may come up before next week.
we have so far received 12 representations from retirees of SVRscheme for getting pension in the case of less than 20 years of service. we will finalise the list by 12th of this month and any body coming under the above can send email with their scanned copy of the representation given to the concerned company.
Nothing else to add.
nagarajan
nisvrea
77 comments:
justice delayed is justice denied. we feel our advocate can request the concerned judge for early judgement in his chamber,if he feels it appropriate. otherwise it is an endless wait.
Happy diwali to all our retired Gen.ins. employees
wish you all a happy deepavali
sir is it possibal we get judgement this year
I think our advocate may be requested to find out the reason of delay in judgement from office of SC.
When will the judgement from sc will be given retired persons suffer a lot in inflation
Will sc will give judgment for the case
god is great please wait and see
Jayakumar Suryanarayana Bengaluru
Does SC CJ want BRIBE to pronounce judgement on GIPSA SVRS pensioners.We request our beloved PM to intervene and protect pensioners rights to get their revision poension of 2002 who has taken
volunta
ry retirement in 2004.
Respected jaikumar ji,I understand your and our frustration but we should avoid such comments as they are not in good taste and may not be construed against us. let us pray to God for patience on our part.
Does sc forgot about the case any reminders has to be made
be patient do not be impatient. such time will come to remind sc. about our case. till such time please keep patience.
How long already. Ten years gone
Will pensioners will have good news and great new year with favourable judgment?
I endorse Mr. Jayakumar's statement and can create a separate fund for the panel of judges who was appeared in the historical case
The laid down right procedure in such cases where inordinate delay in delivery of judgement is found would be to bring the matter of inordinate delay in judgement to the notice of honourable Chief Justice of Supreme Court of India for information and necessary action.
Judgement at the Apex court level should not be delayed as it indicates some fishy happening at the highest level that too on a legal issue.The affected parties here are the retired senior citizens and their eligible payment.Even opposing GIPSA Managers will also come in this group after their service! It is a wonder that our judicial wing is unnecessarily delaying the pronounce of judgement does not speak good of our ethics.
Judgement at the Apex court level should not be delayed as it indicates some fishy happening at the highest level that too on a legal issue.The affected parties here are the retired senior citizens and their eligible payment.Even opposing GIPSA Managers will also come in this group after their service! It is a wonder that our judicial wing is unnecessarily delaying the pronounce of judgement does not speak good of our ethics.
judges who heard our case are sleeping.They need to be awakened.if our legitimate benefits are not in our destiny then let it not be but it will end our painful wait.
Times of India Pune ed. dated 05-12-2014 has reported that "The Delhi High Court on Thursday directed the Supreme Court registry to provide information to an RTI activist regarding cases which have been heard but judgements have been pending after being reserved."
Let us hope that this direction of HC would not only give information about pending decisions including our case but also would compel the SC to fasten the delivery of judgement.
When will the judgment be given?
it is understood that everybody got vexed, all the way we have waited. still another three months to complete one year. so there may be a chance to request sc about the delay, More over the recent directions of Delhi High court to SC regarding the delay of delivering the judgement in another case, also advantage to us.The chief justice of SC. may ask the statistics of similar cases of pending judgment. If god grace if it is done,ours' also got cleared. still such time keep on praying
Judgement was kept IN RESERVE in Feb 2014.Howlong SC takes to release the judgement order? the affected parties are senior citizens, and are eligible emloyees of 2002 wage settlement.WE PPRAY THE CJ'S OF SUPREME CORT TO RELEASE THE JUDGMENT AND HELP THE SENIOR CITIZENS.
Will PM will help is us in the case
let supreme court judges enjoy their christmas holidays from dec19to jan1st. we are helpless and only can wait.
Who will save us from our endless wait and when will the favourable new year will start
please inform the case no at supreme court to enable us to check the satus of the casae in the supreme court website
what is the use of getting case no. more over our association is also watching the day to day judgements. if ours' case, whether the judgement is favor to us or not. the intimation will be sent to our mobile. So do not lose your patient, wait for some more time
Wishing a Happy New Year 2015 to all & delivery of reserved judgement in our favour.
I think that since judgement has already been delayed for about 10 months which is by any yard stick can be treated as unduly delayed. Hence it would be wise to tell our advocates at Delhi to contact concerned honourable judges and bring to their kind notice and remind them about the delivery of judgement.
Thanks Mr Kamalakaran for your updates, Let's wait patiently & pray God.I Wish all colleague members & families very Happy & Prosperous New Year 2015
With reference to staff mediclaim renewal we have to inform that we have received a reply from UIIC RO Bhopal that premium for 14 months has to be paid before 31-01-2015.
On 27th feb 2014, SC kept in reserve the judgement on VRS ensiners case of wage revision of 2002. Till this day no news about the passing of judgement makes us feel that the managements of GIPSA is playing fools with the retirees and influensing the SC to delay proceedings.This anti-labour attitude of GIPSA and SC is highly warranted.Perhaps the CJ must be waiting for all retirees to DIE and shoulkd not claim any amount?
OM MAHAGANAPATHIYE NAMAHA
OM MAHALAKSHMIYE NAMAHA.....LET US PRAY TODAY TO GET OUR ELIGIBLE BENEFITS
Om Mahaganapathiye
Om Dhanalakshmiye Namaha....Let US ALL PRAY TOGETHER TO GET THE POSITIVE JUDGEMENT TO OUR RETIREES.NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE IF OUR PRAYER TOUCH THE ALMIGHTY.
is it true that we lost the case??? very disappointing!!!
It's ok Cheers friends, let's be happy & contented in what's god have given to us & blessed.
It is disappointing but we have to accept that victory or defeat are two sides of same coin.It appears that our association fought the case sincerely but judges have their right to differ from our view point.What went wrong and what lacks in our petition would be known when full judgement is available. If there are valid points for review of judgement then we should file review petition otherwise we should accept whole heartedly that matter is over. But we should continue to fight for our legitimate dues in future.
Is pension updation case will favour us?
I have uploaded full judgement at my blog. Please visit following link to read the judgement.http://indiainsuranceguide.blogspot.in/2014/07/pick-from-news-papers.html
I have read the judgement and has valid ground for review petition. In the judgement while denying us any benefit honourable judges have considered that employees were also given notional benefit of 5 years in service for counting pension. The facts are opposite and in SVRS scheme notional benefit of 5 years was not given.
We need not regret the judgement what the SC has given.It speaks of its bias towards the Management and the government who are not in favor of Senior citizens benefit which is legal and implementable- and of course the companies are not so poor to bear the amount of arrears to this senior class of citizens.The court is wroingly directed by the advocates of the companies who of course has done it after receiving heavy fees fom the company.
Our country's justice does not depend on dharma and karma but on the money power of the parties of dispute.
Lawyers for pensioners has done their duty but the court judges must have been highly bribed by the management and therefore the result is against pensioners.Our country does not depend on NYay Neethi-but only MONEY POWER.Let the retirees happily accept this defeat om inhumanitarian grounds of the court and we all will die peacefully.If the arrears of the court employees is in stake,perhaps the result would have been a contradict because even the chief justice will also get affected. How could CJ think of the pain of somebody'sinjury if he is not injured!
Will PM will help senior citizen sufferings
Thanks for the right direction. All svrs optees must send representations for notional credit in pension. Whether it should be review petition to same bench or appeal to a larger bench may be discussed and decided. All must send contributions immediately so that funds are not a problem in filing petition. Please inform you bank's IFSC and branch name to send contribution by NEFT by online bank transfer."Truth alone will Triumph".Wishing good luck to all.
A good suggestin to claim from the management the difference of pension due to Notional credit of 5 years to thse who has put services of less than 33 years. we will support the move.
Jayakumar.S.
This is to inform that today we have transferred Rs.1000 our contribution online by NIFT to the account of NATIONAL INSURANCE SPECIAL VOLUNTARY RETIRED/RETIRED EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION" in the SB a/c No.801910100011930.Our bank Reference no. is IR54515798 dated 12-01-2015.
Hi happy to inform that today I have sent fund of Rs 3000.00 belongs to me Rs 1000 to Mr K G Naik Rs1000.00 and to Mr B T Kambale Rs 1000.00 towards legal fund to fight the case further. Let's try & hope for the Best.
What will happen? Will God help us?
Now whatever is happening seems to be on the right direction. But we should also examine as to what went wrong that judgement was delivered against us. We should examine the replies filed by lawyers/affidavits filed by insurers to see whether they have made false statements regarding 5 years notional credit given to optees of svrs. If so whether our advocates have denied in their statements to court that no notional credit was given to optees of svrs and that statements filed by companies are totally false. Further it is necessary that in future whatever replies are filed by our advocates in response to companies statements or other wise, same are thoroughly examined before filing in court by our association executives for correctness.
We think our association may take up with public sector insurance companies for uploading details of renewal premium of staff mediclaim for retired employees and provide facility of payment of renewal premium online.
I have posted one cheque for Rs1000/.Piease let me know whether u got or not
The Supreme court of India has no mindset to consider the economic aspects of retirees particuarly when their age exceeds 60, they are to be looked after well. In GIPSA SVRs case, the pensioners are asking their eligible wages of 2002 since they were in service till march 2004. Any scheme which in general is applicable as per the existing situation.This difference is also quite good enough for these retirees to cope up with the inflation of those times.Where is the question of non eligibility? Again SVRS is the scheme rought to lessen the cost of the organization and not a booster to the retiring person who is sacrificing for the organization sake.Although he has received ex gratia it is not an equivalent had he continued his services and would have to be paid higher benefits.It is a pure sacrifice of the SVRS people to protect the interest of the oranization.Inas much the sacrifice of the retirees has to be taken into consideration while granting them their eligible benefit. Perhaps a little more humanitarian mindset of the SC judges would definitely help their contemporary senior citizens when the entire world is having concern for Senior public for their contribution and experiences.
Let us hope SC judges will re-review their order and help the needy retirees of the insurance organization-particularly GIPSA-SVRS retirees.
The Supreme court of India has no mindset to consider the economic aspects of retirees particuarly when their age exceeds 60, they are to be looked after well. In GIPSA SVRs case, the pensioners are asking their eligible wages of 2002 since they were in service till march 2004. Any scheme which in general is applicable as per the existing situation.This difference is also quite good enough for these retirees to cope up with the inflation of those times.Where is the question of non eligibility? Again SVRS is the scheme rought to lessen the cost of the organization and not a booster to the retiring person who is sacrificing for the organization sake.Although he has received ex gratia it is not an equivalent had he continued his services and would have to be paid higher benefits.It is a pure sacrifice of the SVRS people to protect the interest of the oranization.Inas much the sacrifice of the retirees has to be taken into consideration while granting them their eligible benefit. Perhaps a little more humanitarian mindset of the SC judges would definitely help their contemporary senior citizens when the entire world is having concern for Senior public for their contribution and experiences.
Let us hope SC judges will re-review their order and help the needy retirees of the insurance organization-particularly GIPSA-SVRS retirees.
SVRS Case - I am giving below some Valuable Inputs on behalf Mr. A.K.Parameswaran Nair, Retired - SVRS - New India, Bangalore ( who is not a member of FACEBOOK ) which can be considered for incorporation in the Review Petition of our SVRS-case The following points have to be incorporated into the REVIEW PETITION to
be filed against the Judgements of the Hon. Supreme Court of India
delivered by Hon. Judge Shri. Anil R Dave on 7th Jan. 2015 in Transfer
Case (Civil) No. 48 of 2010 in Manojbhai N. Shah & Others ( Petitioners)
V/s 4 Nationalised Insurance Companies and Union of India and Others (
Respondents) in the following Transfer Cases.
Transfer Case No.s:
TC (C) No. 45/2010;
46/2010:
47/2010;
49/2010'
06/2011;
07/2011;
19/2011;
20/2011;
21/2011;
23/2011;
82/2011;
83/2011;
27/2014;
28/2014 and
SLP (C) No.10903/2011.
page 2
I am one of the employees who retired on 1.4.2004 on the basis of the SVRS
Scheme of 2004 " after fully reading, understading and believing the
contents of the Gazette of India Notification Dt. 1.1.2004".
I am not a Supreme Court Judge nor a Supreme Court advocate. But I am an
LL.B Graduate from Bangalore University. During my three year LL.B
studies one of the papers in IIIrd year LL.B i.e. ' Law of Taxation ' was
substituted by one paper of LL.M as a subject in the IIIrd year by the
College and the subject is named as 'Interpretation of Statutes and
Principles of Legislation' which states that:
i. There should not be any presumption or assumption in giving a
Judgment and
2. All Judgements should primarily be based on ' prima facie
Documentary Evidence' from ' Source of Origin with EMPATHY and without
Synmpathy or Antipathy'.
I am submitting ' TWO prima facie Documentary Evidence on behalf of the
employees who retired on SVRS Scheme of 2004 for their legitimate right to
claim :
1. Notional Credit / Increment for Calculation of Pension;
2. Revision of Pension based on Wage Revision effected on 1.8.200; and
3. Payment of Arrears based on Wage Revision from 1.8.2002
page 3
1. PRIMA FACIE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE TO PROVE ELIGIBILITY FOR 5 YEARS
NOTIONAL CREDIT / INCREMENT :
Page No.17 Para No.16 of the Verdict by THE HON. sUPREME COURT OF iNDIA IN
a. Civil Appeal No. 256 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 9953 of 2008
in National Insurance Co., Ltd., & Others ( Appellants ) v/s Kripal
Singh ( Respondent )
with
b. Civil Appeal No. 257 of 2014 ( Arising out of SLP (C) No. 10548 of
2008 in United India Insurance Co., Ltd., & Others ( Appellants )
V/s Shamsheer Singh Puri ( Respondents )
and
c. Civil Appeal No. 258 of 2014 * arising out of SLP (C) No. 10756 of
2008 in The New India Assurance Co., Ltd., & Others ( Appellants )
V/s Devinder Singh ( respondents ) Clearly documents the
eligibility of 5 years Notional Credit / Increment to employees
retired on 1.4.2004 as per SVRS Scheme.
Though this benefit is PENDING TO BE RELEASED TO ALMOST ALL THE EMPLOYEES
who retired as per the SVRS Scheme of 2004, the Hon. Supreme Court of
India made the Judgment mentioning that the Managements of the 4
Companies HAVE ALREADY PAID THIS NOTIONAL INCREMENT IN 2004 ITSELF WHICH
APPEARS TO BE NOT CORRECT. However, if at all the Managements have
paid Notional Credit / increment to SVRs Employees of 2004, the Hon.
Supreme Court may kindly direct the managements to submit " a prima facie
Documentary Evidence substatiating THIS PAYMENT by mentioning the
I. Total No. of Employees who have retired as per the SVRS sCHEME of 2004
AND
II. Total No. OF Employees to whom Notional Credit / Increment of 5 years
was given " any time from 1.4.2004 till date "
Hoever prima facie documentary evidence submitted by the employees,
Retired under SVRS Scheme of 2004, " undisputedly" prove their claim of
eligibility for 5 years' Notional Crediti / Increment which is still
pending to be paid by the Management. The fact that the verdict of the
Hon. Supreme Court of India itself was delivered on 10.1.2014 only
justifies that this benefit is NOT PAID PRIOR TO THAT DATE'.
2. PRIMA FACIE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE FOR REVISION OF WAGES, PAYMENT OF
ARREARS AND REVISION OF PENSION DUE TO WAGE REVISION FROM 1.8.2002 ;
For Wage Revision, the Personnel Manual and Pension Scheme of the Company
itself is a Documentary Evidence for undisputedly giving benefit of this
w.e.f 1.8.2002. For this. the word 'Revision' should be understood as
"RE-VISION" ( WHEN LOOKED AT IT AGAIN) and 'Retrospective Effect' should
be understood " RETRO-SPECTIVE EFFECT" ( LOOK AT IT FROM A PREVIOUS DATE).
In view of the above, it is undisputably documented in the Personnel
Manual and Pension Scheme of the Companies as to how to make the wage
revision.
Since this benefit is specifically for the employees who retired on
1.4.2004 as per the SVRs Scheme of 2004, no other interpretation has a
place to ' mis-interpret' the gazetted document which will amount to '
disrespecting the Gazette Notification itself and disrespecting the
integrity and solidarity of the Democratic, Socialistic, Secular, Republic
of India ( DSSRI)and thereby depriving the benefits justifiably offered
to the employees who read, understood and believed the contents of the
Gazette of India Notification dt. 1.1.2004, Para 5(2) prima facie
documentary evidence reveals 100% meaning of its contents and undisputable
right of the employees who retired under SVRS Scheme. Hence this benefit
also should be ordered to be paid by the management to the Retired
Employees under SVRS Scheme.
Kamala Kannan's letter is Really an eye opene to claim a review petition in Supreme court. Therefore all the pensioners organization of GIPSA can definitely putup a strong case which is supported by various evidences, the gezette and the company manuals which uphelds the eligibility of the employees to receive
1. Five years Notional years to those who have put less than 33 years of service.
2.The implementation of August 2002 Wage revision to all employees who were in service at that time.
3.Stagnation increments were not awarded to employees who surpassed Maximum scale in the Cadres. Forexaample Hubli region of UIIC has not granted stagnation incremeent to 15 Officers of Hubli in 2003
who are eligible to get and also declared as a condition to be granted even under the pension instruction document.
There may be amny lacunae like HUBLI RO of UIIC in other companess too.
It is the right time for all these retirees association to get together and fight out jointly against tthe ineffective implementation of thee recorded scheme and has avoided eligible pYMENT OF THE EMPLOYEES BY INFLUENCING THE LEGAL INSTITUTION LIKE SUPREMECOURT IN THE ANTI LABOUR ATTITUDE.Let us not blaqme the government , the management or the Supreme court but direct them to act according to what they have promised in thepension rule, in the wage revision rule or in the government gezette or company manual and act accordingly and cordially give all the benefits to the pioneers of insuranace industry[senioe retirees] and do justice in this land of justice.
In view of Jayakumar comments I think our association can file an RTI with all public sector insurance companies regarding following:
1.How many employees have been given notional credit of 5 years who retired under SVRS scheme in 2004
2.How many employees retired under SVRS scheme in 2004 have been given/not given stagnation increment though they were entitled.
3.How many employees retired under SVRS scheme 2004 have been given benefit of pay revision in 2002 under all heads pension etc.
4.What is the basis of their reply in SCI that employees retired under SVRS have been given 5 years notional credit.
Sir,
I have through the Judgement copy. I feel our Advocates had given more stress on the revision of Pension,consequent on the Revision of Wages in August 2002. I feel the stress should have been on payment of salary arrears for those on the rolls of the Company as on that date. It will automatically take care of all other benefits such as Gratuity, pension etc.
P.U.Mohandas
SVRS Optee from Oriental, Cochin.
Dear friends,
We have done our best in the case with which we have received a judgement decided taking in to account a benefit not given to us.
Those who have read the judgement have raised many questions which is natural and we are duty bound to answer them.
we waited for one month to answer your queries since our job of filing the Review petition is over. We filed our Rev.Petition on Monday and it was done after thorough study of the judgement and also we consulted many senior counsels and leading advocates in the field and finally we finalized our draft on Sunday and it was left to the lawyers to file it.
We heard from them that it was filed on Monday.
Let us list the questions which we received from members one by one.
1)What made the judges to presume that we were paid 5 years notional credit.?
2)We read in the judgement that the management has submitted that 5 years notional credit was paid.
3)What was the reaction of our Counsels. Did not we object to that.
4)What happened to the main claim of our petition ie. arrears of pay for the period we worked.
and actually in service and Pension is only a consequential benefit.
5)Why the judges have not mentioned any thing about the payment of arrears.
6)Why there was no mention about the case laws in support of us except Kirpal sing's case.
These were the common questions came to us from members either over phone or thru e mails.
Our answer for the above questions are only one.
We did our job excellently well and our counsels made remarkable arguments in the court in support of us and there was no ambiguity in our mind that we will lose our case till such a time we got the judgement.
We gave our written submission after the argument which had the elaborate explanation and argument and reference of case laws and the most important case laws were Nakara's and Bank of india vs mohandas.
The judges have misunderstood the case of National insurance co. vs Kirpalsing for 5 years notional credit which is only for eligibility criteria, for calculation of pension.
No where in the written submission of the management they have mentioned about the notional credit. and the writing of the judges in this aspect is wrong.
They have mentioned about the arrears payment in the final pages and denied our right to get it in simple 5 lines with out giving any valid reasons, which is most necessary in any judgement.
If at all the management have mentioned the payment of 5 years notional credit at the time of argument we would have denied it on the spot.
Taking all these questions and also other legal aspects of the case we decided to file a Review Petition even though it will cost us more and more.
We took the decision only after the overwhelming support we received from the members.
Now it is finalised and filed, let us give you brief details of how it will be processed.
The petition will go only to the same judges and they will study it and decide whether it is fit for review and then if they feel in the affirmative they will send the same to the Chief Justice to form a special bench to hear the petition.
Please remember the bench, if constituted will be of the same judges only. The advantage we have is we will have a chance of arguing again and the points are limited and we can make argument more agressively and try to get our right. It may cost us more but this is the last chance we have and let us utilise it. We are all now again geared up to fight and finance part of it we totally depend on you since the time limit is very short we seek your co-operation for an early collection of funds.
This Review petition will not get delayed as was the case of original one. It may take 3 to 6 months as per the opinion of the Advocates.
Let the energy of our members be on the high and we, the officer bearers and committee members are here to work for you.
Let us fight till we succeed.
Please contribute minimum of Rs.1000/- each immedietely and help us in making the final assault.
With king regards
Nagarajan
Nisvrea
Mr. Nagarajan'sRTI is very apt and correct and let all the pensionsers of GIPSA who have been deprived of revision pension,Stagnation Increment,Noional credit, and so on shall allJOIN TOGETHER IRESPECTIVE OF COMPANY OR CREED -CONTRIBUTION AS PER THE ASSOCIATION AND FILE REVIEW PETITION AND GET OUR ELEIGIBILE ARREARS ON ALL COUNTS LEGALLY,CORDIALLY,CONSTITUTIONALLY.LET US FIGHT TILLDEATH.
S.JAYAKUMAR
[PS PL MENTION THE WAY TO SUBSCRIBE OUR CONTRIBUTION.
NATIONAL INSURANCE SPECIAL VOLUNTARY RETIRED/RETIRED EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION" in the SB a/c No.801910100011930
Bank of india,
T Nagar Branch
chennai
Sir, what is the latest position of payment of pension to SVRS optees having less than 20 years of service in the light of SC judgment dated 10.1.2014.
DATE:21/2/15
MEETING NOTICE
FRIENDS,
OUR GENERAL BODY MEETING IS SCHEDULED TO BE HELD ON 7 THE MARCH 2015, 4 PM, AT THE FOLLOWING VENUE:
TAG AUDITORIUM OF SRI RKM SCHOOL (SOUTH BRANCH),
DHANDAPANI STREET, NEAR T.NAGAR BUS TERMINUS,
T.NAGAR, CHENNAI 600017.
THE AGENDA FOR THE MEETING:
DISCUSS ABOUT THE OUT-COME OF THE SUPREME COURT CASE
ORGANISATION MATTERS
PASSING OF ACCOUNTS 2012-13 AND 2013-14.
ANY OTHER MATTER WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE CHAIR
ALL MEMBERS ARE REQUESTED TO ATTEND THE MEETING WITHOUT FAIL.
HIGH TEA 7 PM.
V.A.NAGARAJAN
ALL INDIA GENERAL SECRETARY
Post a Comment