Restoration of commuted pension
T R Kartik
|
Sent with Mailsuite · Unsubscribe |
23/01/25, 22:44:30 |
MOHAN P
--
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/CAM-eYm40UWiyEp1ih4sj4k9FUU9Ap2S%3D13FBfspNmRxs5%2BiYkQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Daum.net
Daum.net
MOHAN P
Sir,
A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) can be filed to address a matter of public interest, provided it impacts a broader section of society and not just individual grievance. In the case of a bank pensioner seeking to reduce the recovery period of commuted pension from 15 years to 12 years or less , filing a PIL would need to meet certain legal and procedural criteria, such as statutory guidelines and legality. The reduction is to be perceived as discriminatory or arbitrary.Is it so?
Where as commuted portion recovery periods in banks are specifically set by statutory regulations.
Note ( 2 )under Regulation 41, of BEPR, 1995, it is clearly stipulates that:
“An employee who had commuted the admissible portion of pension is entitled to have the commuted portion of the pension restored after the expiry of a period of fifteen years from the date of commutation.”
The verdict under case No. WA- 17819 of 2024 filed by Ashok Kumar Agarwal, retiree in Punjab National Bank, and 48 Others, against Union of India,and another on reduced recovery period of commutation, before Allahabad High Court, it was clearly spelt out by the court on 15th Jan'25, as follows:
“Having accepted such offer, a binding contract comes into existence between the employee and the employer as per which the original pension is to be restored after 15 years. Having acquiesced to the commutation policy with open eyes, it is not open for the retiring employee to contend later that the period of restoration of full pension be reduced from 15 years to 10 years. Whether or not the lumpsum amount gets equalised on expiry of 10 years or 11 year is not decisive or material.
What is material is the nature of obligation which enures upon the parties when the retiring employee accepts the provision of commutation of pension. The employee with his open eyes having availed the policy, cannot subsequently turn around or seek modification in its terms. The argument that the table or the figures were not adequately disclosed, is also not acceptable, in as much as the chart specifies the manner in which the commutation is to be fixed and the period after which the original pension is to be restored. In case, the employees had any misgivings about it, they could have sought appropriate clarification before accepting the offer. Once, the petitioners have acquiesced to the policy and accepted the offer, their subsequent attempt to resile or seek change in its computation would clearly be impermissible.”
The existing recovery clause as above if amended under BEPR, 1995,perhaps it would have been easier. Will GOI or IBA go for it since few state Govts have done so.
When 4 states and 2 CAT have already reduced commutation period to 12 years , why PIL is not filed in SUPREME COURT against it.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/872449892.2503270.1737720267644%40mail.yahoo.com.
Srinivasan Badri
Whatever is applicable will not ispso facto applicable to bank retirees. We are on different platform of discrimination
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1478978354.2509233.1737720480747%40mail.yahoo.com.
yogendra singhal
When 4 states and 2 CAT have already reduced commutation period to 12 years , why PIL is not filed in SUPREME COURT against it.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/872449892.2503270.1737720267644%40mail.yahoo.com.
