Report of the Dr.Tangirala Committee on SBI 40%-50% Pension

[Prasad C N]

Dear Friends,

We have attached the report of the Committee headed by Dr. Tangirala regarding the removal of the 40%/50% pension disparity in the State Bank of India.

A careful reading of the report reveals the following:

a. The DMD (HR) of State Bank of India stated that there should not be any disparity among different groups of pensioners in the calculation of pensionary benefits and, therefore, requested that the 40%/50% pension formula be abolished. He further pointed out that in Nationalised Banks (NBs), all retirees receive pension at a uniform rate of 50% of pay and recommended that the same principle be adopted in SBI as well. (Paras 2.3 & 2.8)

b. Representatives of FSBIPA stated that the Pension Scheme in Nationalised Banks was introduced in lieu of the Bank's contribution to the Provident Fund. (Para 2.13)

c. AISBOF reiterated the stand taken by FSBIPA and additionally stated that SBI has a robust Pension Fund. (Para 2.17)

d. Shri Sunil Mehta observed that the anomaly of having pension calculated at 40% and 50% within the same organisation needs to be corrected, as different rates for employees of the same organisation are not justified. He further stated that pension should be fixed uniformly at 50% of pay, in line with other organisations.

When Shri Manthan asked Shri Mehta whether there had ever been any demand from employees of Nationalised Banks for CPF in addition to pension, Shri Mehta categorically stated that no such demand had ever been raised by employees of any Nationalised Bank. (Paras 2.19 & 2.20)

e. In its letter dated 25.08.2023, the IBA informed that the matter had been discussed by both the HR Committee and the Management Committee, and it was decided to recommend that SBI be permitted to fix basic pension at 50% of pay. (Para 2.22)

f. The financial implication of implementing the proposal was estimated at ₹283 crore per annum, with a one-time provisioning requirement of approximately ₹5,400 crore.

g. The Committee ultimately recommended rectification of the anomaly arising from the existence of dual pension rates within the same organisation. (Para 4)

Against this backdrop, friends may reflect on how pensioners continue to face unequal treatment despite the clear recognition of the anomaly by all concerned stakeholders. Unless we awaken from our deep slumber and collectively raise our voice against such discrimination, we may continue to remain victims of unequal and step-motherly treatment.

Thanks a million.

With warm regards,

Prasad C. N.

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

Why this sudden demand for CPF as third benefit now?

AIBEA and some other organizations are fighting for bringing back NPS employees to OPS.  But NPS employees  had to surrender Bank contributions and also lose the 14% monthly contribution they are currently receiving now. They joined the Bank after 01.04.2010. That means they are retiring sometime during 2040-45. They have to wait for Pension  which they may get after 15 years and lose equal bank contributions now. 50% of their existing savings are surrendered to Banks. So the demand is for a third benefit so that NPS employees will retain the benefit even after reverting to OPS.

Bank pensioners have nothing to gain by this and by chasing mirage of CPF we may lose momentum on updation also. Are Bank pensioners being made scapegoats to retain CPF for NPS employees?

On Mon, Jun 1, 2026 at 11:06 AM JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com> wrote:

The Tangirala committee report clearly proves that SBI, IBA, UFBU all are cheating PSU Bank Pensioners and taking them for granted. Whenever any benefit is to be granted to DFS asks whether such demand will come from PSU Bank pensioners and IBA says no.

IBA submits  before the committee that no demand has come from Nationalized Banks for CPF. This is an utter false statement, Except AIBEA all other unions demanded CPF as a third benefit and was rejected and AIBEA only signed the 1993 agreement. This fact has been hidden before the committee.

Updating every settlement was also one of the agenda of the committee.

For this IBA replied this is not limited to SBI alone and will be discussed separately. IBA did not say matter is subjudice.

No  constituents of the UFBU followed up the matter and demanded IBA to convene a meeting to discuss updation as assured by the IBA to the committee.

But shamelessly UFBU agreed in the BPS meeting that the issue is sub judice.

SBI pensioners at any cost are not willing to forego CPF as a third benefit for full fledged updation. They were fighting for the 40:50 pension only and achieved it. AIBOC clearly stated that it will not demand updation for SBI pensioners.

So why are we demanding parity with SBI? CPF as a third benefit? We have to demand parity with RBI only. Because  the 1993 agreement which is the bedrock foundation for our pension scheme clearly states that

Provisions will be made by a scheme, to be negotiated and settled between the parties to this Settlement... for applicability, qualifying service, amounts of pension, payment of pension, commutation of pension, family pension, updating and other general conditions etc. on the lines as are in force in Reserve Bank of India." 

As DFS has approved updation multiple times it is a natural justice to extend the same to PSU bank pensioners also.

CPF as a third benefit is neither legally tenable nor practically viable for PSU Bank pensioners. It is like attempting to put toothpaste back into the tube. Only way it is possible is to rewrite 1993 agreement  including CPF as a third benefit with retrospective effect and reopen PF accounts.

We have been demanding Updation since 2008 when MC Singla case was filed and there have been hundreds of representations form individual retirees and retirees organizations and letters from MPs and MLAs to FM. Clearly DFS is aware of demand and has given positive signals. But UFBU was not interested and IBA responded accordingly.

However momentum is built  and with a little more persuasion we can achieve updation.

M C Singla case verdict also may come shortly. At this stage it is not advisable to divert issue by demanding CPF which is impossible at this stage

--
Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1949813304.4061003.1780148535907%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Sankaranarayana Sarma]

we are ready for the struggle

On Mon, Jun 1, 2026 at 9:43 AM 'Prasad C N' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

The Tangirala committee report clearly proves that SBI, IBA, UFBU all are cheating PSU Bank Pensioners and taking them for granted. Whenever any benefit is to be granted to DFS asks whether such demand will come from PSU Bank pensioners and IBA says no.

IBA submits  before the committee that no demand has come from Nationalized Banks for CPF. This is an utter false statement, Except AIBEA all other unions demanded CPF as a third benefit and was rejected and AIBEA only signed the 1993 agreement. This fact has been hidden before the committee.

Updating every settlement was also one of the agenda of the committee.

For this IBA replied this is not limited to SBI alone and will be discussed separately. IBA did not say matter is subjudice.

No  constituents of the UFBU followed up the matter and demanded IBA to convene a meeting to discuss updation as assured by the IBA to the committee.

But shamelessly UFBU agreed in the BPS meeting that the issue is sub judice.

SBI pensioners at any cost are not willing to forego CPF as a third benefit for full fledged updation. They were fighting for the 40:50 pension only and achieved it. AIBOC clearly stated that it will not demand updation for SBI pensioners.

So why are we demanding parity with SBI? CPF as a third benefit? We have to demand parity with RBI only. Because  the 1993 agreement which is the bedrock foundation for our pension scheme clearly states that

Provisions will be made by a scheme, to be negotiated and settled between the parties to this Settlement... for applicability, qualifying service, amounts of pension, payment of pension, commutation of pension, family pension, updating and other general conditions etc. on the lines as are in force in Reserve Bank of India." 

As DFS has approved updation multiple times it is a natural justice to extend the same to PSU bank pensioners also.

CPF as a third benefit is neither legally tenable nor practically viable for PSU Bank pensioners. It is like attempting to put toothpaste back into the tube. Only way it is possible is to rewrite 1993 agreement  including CPF as a third benefit with retrospective effect and reopen PF accounts.

We have been demanding Updation since 2008 when MC Singla case was filed and there have been hundreds of representations form individual retirees and retirees organizations and letters from MPs and MLAs to FM. Clearly DFS is aware of demand and has given positive signals. But UFBU was not interested and IBA responded accordingly.

However momentum is built  and with a little more persuasion we can achieve updation.

M C Singla case verdict also may come shortly. At this stage it is not advisable to divert issue by demanding CPF which is impossible at this stage

On Mon, Jun 1, 2026 at 9:43 AM 'Prasad C N' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

[Prasad C N]

Dear Shri Somashekaraji,

Being the General Secretary of SBMPC, my hands are full. Sitll, I am stealing some time to answer your question, eventhough this has already been answered.

Earlier, in State Bank of India had reason to give Provident Fund saying that they are not getting pension at 50%.  Perhaps, they had a valid reason to differentiate.  Now, having taken 50% Pay as pension quoting our scheme (where we have surrendered PF), we have every right to demand parity.

If Banks find difficulty in giving PF, atleast give us some extra pension, over and above what those in SBI are getting.  Atleast, while updating let us get extra loading or we should get Pension of Special Allowance, which would helps us in getting Pension Updation as per RBI lines.

We are attaching the Judgment of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, wherein all the issues raised by you are considered and decided.

Shri Sathyanarayana Raoji is quoting order of the Court to submit calculations.  Court wants to see whether Pension is being paid in terms of existing Regulations, including Regulation 35(1) - Appendix I.  Even IBA has also said in its affidavit that 'It is not the case of the Petitioners that the Pension is not being paid in terms of Pension Regulations".  Onus is on the Petitioners to prove that Pension is not being paid in terms of Pension Regulations.  

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards,

Prasad C N

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW1oNaUFAjgTKNMKsuuO-fEBkrUbMZ0UdAUaVFNXqS4epg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Satyanarayana Rao]

Pension regulations 35/1 Apendix1 verses RBI formula verses article 14 and16 and 21.verses Supreme court judges revisiting the high court verdicts in Pension updation case Ie Sri late Singla ji relentless fight even after  the dismissal of pension updation  case , demanding justice and parity with RBI pension formula are very clear to the knowledge of the Supreme court judges.

Now the onus to uphold the rights of Pensioners under article 14 and16 and  21 is left to the wisdom and jurisprudence of learned Supreme court judges.

Lots of discussion has taken place.

Let us wait for the final verdict which is going to be in our favour and let us dedicate this judicial victory to the great legal warrier and legend Sri Singla ji.

We thank Sri Sanjay, Sri C.N.Prasad., and Sri Somashekara ji and other for their activ deliberations and debate.

With regards to all.

Yahoo Mail: Search, organise, conquer

On Tue, 2 Jun 2026 at 9:09, 'Prasad C N' via bankpensioner

<bankpe...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1430670342.3386654.1780315362794%40mail.yahoo.com.