Re: Digest for bankpensioner@googlegroups.com - 13 updates in 6 topics

57 views
Skip to first unread message

vaidya nathan

unread,
Apr 8, 2026, 12:07:21 AM (yesterday) Apr 8
to bankpe...@googlegroups.com
Retirees to settle with IBA

Sir
 There are 2/3 Retirees Associations , none of them registered or recognised by Banks or Govt.  IBA settles Bipartite settlement, but is a  un registered body and NOT answerable to RTI. FM and DFM are willing to settle updation issue if two unrecognised parties settle the matter. HOW. First of all, IT is NOT Legal.  Even if settled, it can be denied by Govt on the pretext of No Recognition. Supreme Court also Ordered Retirees union to settle with Bank management and Union. But all banks and Unions direct Retirees Assn. To settle with IBA, unrecognised body. What a classical, cut throat, criminal, political, nefarious nexus between banks, unions, Govt. FM, DFM and IBA.

VAIDYANATHAN 
Banglore

On Tue, Apr 7, 2026, 5:25 PM <bankpe...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Sanjay J <sanjay...@gmail.com>: Apr 07 03:12PM +0530

Friends,
 
As we stand just 48 hours away from the next hearing on *April 9, 2026*,
anxiety is natural. However, some of our members' conclusions are based on
preconceived notions rather than the legal reality unfolding in Court No.
2. What some see as the "end of the road" is, in fact, the beginning of a
detailed judicial examination.
 
*We are driving looking at the road ahead; they are focusing too long on
the rear-view mirror.*
 
*1."It failed in HC, so it will fail in SC":*
 
If the IBA’s technical objections were insurmountable, this case would have
been "dismissed in limine" (at the threshold). The fact that the Supreme
Court admitted the appeal, converted it into Civil Appeal 7993/2023, and
has been hearing it substantively means *the High Court’s dismissal is not
the final word.*
 
High Courts often stick to the "Letter of the Law." The Supreme Court
exists to enforce the *"Spirit of the Law"* (Equity). Many landmark service
matters in India succeeded in the SC only after a defeat in the HC. *This
is the first seed of optimism for us.*
 
*2. The Nakara Judgment & The "Math":*
 
If M.C. Singla’s case were a "joke" or had "no prayer," the Bench would not
be doing "math" with the IBA.
 
- Why did the SC ask for comparative charts for three specific
retirement periods?
- Why are they scrutinizing the "multiplying factors"?
 
The Judges are no longer asking *if* it should be done, but *how* it should
be calculated to ensure fairness. As seen in the excellent *Excel sheet*
shared recently by our member, the "Formula" isn't a mystery—it is a
logical staircase. We are asking the Court to interpret Regulation 35(1) in
the spirit of the Nakara Judgment: that Pension is a *"Deferred Wage,"* not
a bounty.
 
*3."Where is the Prayer?":*
 
If there were "No Prayer," there would be "No Hearing." In a Civil Appeal,
we carry forward the original prayer asking the SC to grant what the HC
denied.
 
The prayer is simple: *"Set aside the High Court order and Declare that
Regulation 35(1) mandates Updation."*
 
Once that Declaration is made, the math follows automatically as a matter
of execution.
 
*4. What do you mean by a "Favourable Verdict"?*
 
Many think a favourable verdict means the Judge announcing "Pay everyone
₹38,000." That is not how Supreme Court judgments work.
 
*A favourable verdict is a Declaratory Judgment that establishes the Right,
from which the Money follows.*
 
Specifically, we are expecting a verdict that declares:
 
- *The "Mandate" of Reg 35(1):* That the amendment changing "will" to
"shall" in 2003 was not cosmetic but created a statutory obligation to
update pension with every wage revision.
- *Homogeneity:* That dividing pensioners by date of retirement (e.g.,
Pre-2002 vs. Post-2002) for the purpose of "formula application" violates
Article 14 (Equality), reaffirming the *Nakara* principle.
- *The Mechanism:* That the "Appendix-I" mentioned in the Regulation is
not a static relic of 1987 but a dynamic template that must be refreshed
(just like the RBI scheme).
 
*In short:* The Verdict gives us the *"Key" (the Legal Right)*; the
*"Treasure"* (the Arrears) is the automatic consequence of unlocking the
door.
 
*5. The Reality of April 9, 2026:*
 
The real uncertainty is not the "Merit" of our case, but the "Clock" of the
Court.
As we approach this Thursday, *April 9th*, we must be prepared for the
procedural realities of the Supreme Court. Whether the matter reaches the
board for a full-day hearing or gets a short date depends on the Bench's
load. But let us be clear: *An adjournment is not a defeat.* The signals
from the Bench—specifically their interest in the "Charts"—remain
consistently encouraging.
 
Let us wait for the proceedings of the 9th with hope.
 
Regards,
MOHAN P <moha...@gmail.com>: Apr 06 07:05PM +0530

Dear Shri Suman Kumar,
 
What is wrong in asking IBA to discuss retirees issues with retirees
organisations?There is no platform for retirees/pensioners right now to
talk with IBA.
 
On other side, can we negotiate directly with Govt of India on our pension
or revision of pension ? Are we getting pension directly from GOI now?
 
Please don't forget the fact that bank retirees are receiving monthly
pension as per Bank Employees Pension Regulations,1995.derived from
Memorandum of Settlement 1993 signed between serving employees' Unions and
IBA.
 
All post retiral benefits including revision of DR half yearly are also
discussed and settled along with wage revision once in five years through
Bipartite Settlements /Joint Notes signed between IBA and Bank Unions(UFBU).
 
Since 1966,this process in in force replacing earlier tribunal awards like
the Shastri and Desai Awards up to the last 12th BPS/8th Joint Note.Such
settlements have statutory force and they are enforceable, and violations
can be challenged in labour courts/tribunals.Every bipartite settlement is
formally signed under Section 2(p) and Section 18(1) of the Industrial
Disputes Act, 1947, read with Rule 58 of the Industrial Disputes (Central)
Rules, 1957.
Under Section 18(1) of the ID Act, a settlement arrived at by agreement
between the employer(s) and workmen is binding on the parties to the
agreement (i.e., the signatory banks and the represented workmen/officers).
Thus,it is a legally recognised and binding collective bargaining
mechanism, not merely a voluntary agreement.
DFS/GOI give their 'No Objection' on these matters and may not interfere
directly in such negotiations.
 
As long as there is an established system, legally binding we may have to
go in tune with such negotiations and subsequent settlements/Joint Notes
which are signed by IBA and Unions.
 
Naturally seeking a platform to discuss retirees issues with IBA and
Unions by retirees organisation is part of existing system and often
reminded us by MOF. And also remember that we are not direct employees
of GOI.
 
Whether to go through a legal process now, by Retiree organisation to
secure a platform is a matter for debate.
Regards
Mohan.P
 
 
 
On Mon, 6 Apr, 2026, 10:10 am SUMAN KUMAR Suman, <suman...@gmail.com>
wrote:
 
MOHAN P <moha...@gmail.com>: Apr 06 10:29PM +0530

Pl.Read in detail;
 
Copy of AIBRF Circular is attached herewith:
 
Niranjan Cn <niran...@gmail.com>: Apr 06 04:31PM +0530

Dear Shri Somashekarji,
 
I am writing to share some reflections on the recent developments regarding
the AIBRF Writ Petition.
 
There is a growing sense of distrust among retirees toward various
entities, including UFBU, AIBRF, IBA, and DFS. This raises several critical
questions: who is truly qualified to negotiate on behalf of retirees, and
what criteria should be established for such talks? Furthermore, it is
worth considering whether the current leadership is adequately equipped for
these complex negotiations and if any eventual agreement would be accepted
by the general pensioner community.
 
We must also be realistic about our expectations. Historically, when we
were in service, how much did we advocate for the pensioners of that time?
Today, the UFBU faces significant internal pressure from NPS members,
making it difficult to expect them to prioritize retiree interests.
 
Unfortunately, we seem to have reached a stage where many pensioners will
remain dissatisfied regardless of the outcome.
 
Best regards,
 
Niranjan Cn
 
On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 4:03 PM JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com>
wrote:
 
JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com>: Apr 06 10:40PM +0530

WP is a long drawn process and it may take 4-5 years to start hearing. In
M C singla case appeal filed in 2016, preliminary court procedures took 7
years and the case was finally admitted in 2023. How this will be useful to
pre 2002 retirees only god knows. It should have been filed at least 10
years back.
IBA is not our employer and it is only the agent of 12 Banks to conduct
Wage negotiations and submit a report to the banks. We have no grievances
against or have any working relationship with iBA. Banks should first
recognize retiree associations and then give mandate to IBA to
negotiate retirees issues with retiree associations.
Which association will banks recognize? There are more than 3-4
associations.
This may help employees retiring after 8-10 years and not pre 2002
retirees. It has already been 13 years since the HC verdict was passed in
Singla case. Now AIBRF realized that HCs have directed parties to negotiate
with management, when M C Singla case final hearing is days away. Why
bring MC Singla case in this WP.? Was this WP an emergency not to wait
for a few days? Did AIBRF at any time write to UFBU bringing High Court
directives to their notice and demand immediate discussion of updation?
One association wants negotiation and another wants updation as per RBI
lines and mentors of both are pulling strings sitting in the background.
Nothing but drama.
 
 
Satyanarayana Rao <karna...@yahoo.co.in>: Apr 07 06:22AM

Recognised and registered unions under trade union act are struggling to achieve their demands successfully.
Latest is PLI issue and implimentation of 5 days week .
Retirees association have no trade union right and not recognised undey
Industrial dispute.
Practically the impact and will not have any bargaining status and strength.
It is a futile ambition and exercise.
 
Yahoo Mail: Search, organise, conquer

On Tue, 7 Apr 2026 at 9:23, JSOMA SHEKARA<jsomase...@gmail.com> wrote:
WP is a  long drawn process and it may take 4-5 years to start hearing. In M C singla case appeal filed in 2016,  preliminary court procedures took 7 years and the case was finally admitted in 2023. How this will be useful to pre 2002 retirees only god knows. It should have been filed  at least 10 years back.IBA is not our employer and it is only the agent of 12 Banks to conduct Wage negotiations and submit a report to the banks.  We have no grievances  against or have any working relationship with iBA. Banks should  first recognize  retiree associations and then give mandate to IBA to negotiate retirees issues with retiree associations.Which association will banks recognize? There are more than 3-4 associations.This may help employees retiring after 8-10 years and not pre 2002 retirees. It has already been 13 years since  the HC verdict  was passed in Singla case. Now AIBRF realized that HCs have directed parties to negotiate with management, when M C Singla case final hearing is days away. Why bring  MC Singla case in this WP.? Was  this WP an emergency not to wait for a few days? Did AIBRF at any time write to UFBU bringing  High Court directives to their notice  and demand immediate discussion of updation?One association wants negotiation and another wants updation as per RBI lines and mentors of both are pulling strings sitting in the background.Nothing but drama.
 
On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 7:05 PM MOHAN P <moha...@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Dear Shri Suman Kumar,
What is wrong in asking IBA to discuss retirees issues with retirees organisations?There is no platform for retirees/pensioners right now to talk with IBA.
On other side, can we negotiate directly  with Govt of India on our pension or revision of pension  ? Are we getting pension directly from GOI now? 
Please don't forget the fact that bank retirees are receiving monthly pension as per Bank Employees Pension Regulations,1995.derived from Memorandum of Settlement 1993 signed between serving employees' Unions and IBA.
All post retiral benefits including revision of DR half yearly  are also discussed and settled  along with wage revision once in five years through Bipartite Settlements /Joint Notes signed between IBA and Bank Unions(UFBU).
Since 1966,this process in in force replacing earlier tribunal awards like the Shastri and Desai Awards up to  the last 12th BPS/8th Joint Note.Such settlements have statutory force and  they are enforceable, and violations can be challenged in labour courts/tribunals.Every bipartite settlement is formally signed under Section 2(p) and Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, read with Rule 58 of the Industrial Disputes (Central) Rules, 1957.Under Section 18(1) of the ID Act, a settlement arrived at by agreement between the employer(s) and workmen is binding on the parties to the agreement (i.e., the signatory banks and the represented workmen/officers).Thus,it is a legally recognised and binding collective bargaining mechanism, not merely a voluntary agreement.DFS/GOI give their 'No Objection' on these matters and may not interfere directly in such negotiations.
As long as there is an established system, legally binding we may have to go in tune with such  negotiations and subsequent settlements/Joint Notes which are signed by IBA and Unions.
Naturally seeking a platform to discuss retirees issues with IBA  and Unions by retirees organisation is part of existing system and often  reminded  us  by MOF. And also remember that  we are not direct employees of GOI.
Whether to go through a legal process now,  by Retiree organisation to secure a platform is a matter for debate.RegardsMohan.P
 
 
On Mon, 6 Apr, 2026, 10:10 am SUMAN KUMAR Suman, <suman...@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Dear Mohan sir.  What's use of talking IBA When they rejected to accept Better talk Directly to Govt.They simpky escape from when legalProceed ings. They are not authority orTo face  without recognized by orBinded by law or constitution.No use What made our leaders to discuss with IBA
suman.
 
On Sun, 5 Apr, 2026, 7:08 pm MOHAN P, <moha...@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Direct Dialogue with AIBRF on Retiree Issues at IBA Level
 'After exhausting all organizational efforts, AIBRF has now taken a historic step by seeking legal intervention. A Writ Petition has been filed before the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court with the following primary prayer:
to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to the Respondents:
Indian Banks' Association (IBA)
In-service unions under UFBU
Government of India (DFS)
Reserve Bank of India (RBI)
 
to constitute and operationalize a structured, transparent and periodic consultative mechanism with the Petitioners, as representative bodies of bank retirees, for effective engagement on all policy matters affecting bank retirees.***
 
--
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/CAMCbyDRDffGifVkMb4y9fH3thGBD7pVmUoNPdwyDVGCuoOh1iw%40mail.gmail.com.
 
 
 
--
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/CAAcuBS_Jqp3EsnJGbrWt_xjzrJPynEhLRyVPe1L%2B%2Bq_bHhL7YQ%40mail.gmail.com.
 
 
 
--
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/CAMCbyDRaSRhc-6ovKmDLqLcxb2R6E0%3DTX3P%2BgkYyF0p%3D6yiH3A%40mail.gmail.com.
 
 
 
--
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%3DeiW1aSrM9z4p56APLw54FpvP3q5aE0Rs8aW-03B-VCji_1g%40mail.gmail.com.
Ramani Konnayar <knra...@gmail.com>: Apr 07 10:46AM +0530

Dear Sir,
 
I concur with your views. AIBRF has reportedly initiated this step due to
the perceived reluctance/disinclination of UFBU to take up and negotiate
the issues of pensioners.
 
But, the big question is when UFBU itself is unable to achieve even
non-financial demands such as 5-day week, despite resorting to strike
action, will a pensioners' association with zero bargaining power be able
to wrest anything from banks through IBA. It will only be a paper tiger.
 
K N RAMANI
 
 
 
On Tue, 7 Apr, 2026, 9:23 am JSOMA SHEKARA, <jsomase...@gmail.com>
wrote:
 
JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com>: Apr 07 10:12AM +0530

No pensioners will object if AIBRF get recognition to negotiate retirees
issues.
Whether it is legally permissible and intention behind filing WP will be
debated separatel
If verdict in M C Singla case comes in favour of retirees major issue will
be solved.
If M C Singla case appeal is dismissed sub juice hurdle is cleared for IBA
and UFBU to continue discussions of 08.03.2024 .
Now again IBA will claim sub juice and IBA and UFBU will get relief and
discussion on updation will never start, In case court pass stay order on
negotiations till final verdict is passed based on AIBRF WP.
AIBRF could have waited till M C Singla case decided by SC.
 
 
 
 
 
Ramani Konnayar <knra...@gmail.com>: Apr 07 10:18AM +0530

Dear Shri Niranjan Sir,
 
I fully agree with the contents of the penultimate paragraph of your letter
mentioning the reason for UFBU not prioritizing the interests of retirees.
I will go one step further and say that it is not just a case of "inability
to prioritise" but one of "trying to resist and avoid altogether" so as to
take care and protect the future of the majority membership under NPS.
 
K N RAMANI
 
 
MOHAN P <moha...@gmail.com>: Apr 07 12:50PM +0530

DETAILED UPDATE
 
MC Singla Pension Updation case and the administrative hurdles facing
the upcoming hearing scheduled for April 9, 2026..
 
Avoidance of Constitutional Bench Diversion:
There was significant concern that the presiding judges, Justices Vikram
Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, would be pulled into a 9-judge Constitution
Bench for the Sabarimala matter. However, they remain assigned to Court No.
2, meaning the bench remains intact.
 
The 3-Judge Bench Obstacle:
Although the judges are available, the registry has currently listed a
three-judge bench for Court No. 2 instead of the required two-judge
configuration. Since MC Singla is a "part-heard" matter, it can only be
concluded by the exact two-judge bench that started it; a third judge
cannot legally participate in the middle of the case.
 
Low Priority Listing:
Due to the bench configuration shift, the MC Singla case has been pushed
down to Serial Number 249 on the cause list. At this position, it is
"procedurally invisible" and highly unlikely to be reached before the day
ends.
 
Administrative Shuffle:
That when bench configurations change, the registry’s algorithm
automatically prioritizes fresh admissions and urgent mentions, bumping
older civil cases like pension updates to the bottom of the pile.
 
The Critical Date (April 8): The ultimate fate of the April 9 hearing
depends entirely on the final cause list published on the evening of April
8. If the registry splits the bench back into a two-judge configuration for
the morning, the case could be fast-tracked for a hearing.
 
Impact on Pensioners: The update emphasizes the frustration of
approximately 800,000 pensioners whose financial relief depends not just on
legal arguments, but on the "random luck" of court administrative
scheduling.
 
kalyanam rajagopal <kalyan...@gmail.com>: Apr 06 08:18PM -0700

I am writing to clarify the regulatory framework regarding pension
eligibility and payment dates for resigned former employees - AS AMENDED IN
2025
 
Under Regulation 2(wa) and Regulation 3(15), resigned former employees
become statutorily eligible for the pension scheme upon providing an
undertaking, refunding PF, and accepting the required terms. While these
provisions determine eligibility, they do not dictate the pension start
date.
 
Key regulatory points include:
 
- Regulation 22 & 29: The insertion of the "no forfeiture" clause in
Regulation 22 ensures that service of not less than 20 years qualifies as
service for voluntary retirement under Regulation 29. However, such
employees are not eligible for notional service.
- Regulation 39: Family members of deceased resigned former employees are
eligible for a family pension on par with retired employees due to the
non-forfeiture of service.
- Regulation 41: Resigned former employees defined in 2(wa) are
explicitly excluded from commutation benefits.
- Regulation 52: This regulation exclusively governs the payment date.
The last proviso states that for those who opted to join the scheme on or
after April 27, 2010, pension (including family pension) is payable with
effect from November 27, 2009. This remains the standing provision as of
the 2017 amendment.
 
While specific provisions were inserted to extend benefits (Reg 2(wa),
3(15), 22, and 29 & 39) or deny others (Reg 29(5) and 41), the payment date
for those joining after April 27, 2010, remains governed by Regulation 52.
 
The Joint Note / settlement dated March 8, 2024, stipulates that pension
payment is prospective, beginning the month following the receipt of BCPF.
Payments have been processed accordingly. This specific provision was not
inserted under Reg 52
 
Kalyanam Rajagopal
 
On Sunday, February 8, 2026 at 8:30:41 PM UTC-8 Arun Sharma wrote:
 
Last year, Govt. of India, Ministry of finance directed all PSB's to
provide pension benefits to all resignees who are otherwise eligible.As we
all know, In the Memorandum issued by Govt, there was no mention of
number of years of service for entitlement and eligibility. IBA arbitrary
decided the criteria of 20 years of service as entitlement which was unfair
to those who had served the banks between 10 and 20 years. AS per Pension
rules as of 1-1-1986 the eligibility for pension benefits entitlement is
ONLY 10 years of service.
Only our Finance Minister or supreme court can give justice to these
employees who have been denied their legitimate right. I hope someone is
following up on this matter,
 
Arun Sharma
 
On Fri, Feb 6, 2026 at 10:43 PM R.K. Pathak <ratnaka...@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Please call me on 9373053695
 
On Sat, 7 Feb, 2026, 11:50 am Hemantkumar Gandhi, <himansh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
 
Shri RK Pathakji
 
I served UCO Bank for 25 years and resigned in 2018. I had opted for the
pension scheme, yet my pension was denied. Please advise to me in this
matter
 
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Hemantkumar Gandhi
 
 
On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 22:28 Arun Sharma <917...@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Case of pension benefits to Bank employees who resigned with service
between 15 and 20 years is not on any Agenda. There are a couple of hundred
nationwide living bank employees still hoping that with the support of
Association justice will be given to such bank employees who have been
denied pension benefits. Only the Supreme Court or Ministry of Finance can
help in their legitimate demand.
 
On Mon, Feb 2, 2026 at 8:05 PM Sriramamoorthy Seethepalli <
srira...@gmail.com> wrote:
 
Dear all,
I am 83 years old and a resignee with 18years 3 months confirmed service
from SBI, and denied pension/proportionate pension. I have been in touch
with Sri Pathak ji in this regard.
Request to advise me of any developments in this regard and oblige.
Regards,
Sincerely,
S.Srirama Murthy,
7989061906,mail; srira...@gmail.com
 
On Thu, Dec 26, 2024 at 9:23 AM Hardev Singh <harde...@hotmail.com> wrote:
 
To Sh. C N Prasad Ji and Sh. R K Pathak Ji, please update of with
service between 15 and below 20 years resigned being considered for pension.
 
Thanks
 
Hardev Singh
 
On Sunday, December 22, 2024 at 11:25:59 PM UTC-5 NAAGESWARAN V K wrote:
 
Any chance of those with service between 15 and below 20 years being
considered for pension?
 
--
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/15c38700-cd0d-4dab-b687-1782399ea929n%40googlegroups.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/15c38700-cd0d-4dab-b687-1782399ea929n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
 
--
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/CAECOHc9AH9O5jwOL1OTzN6Lg7qNNuir_MVV6M%3Dm53_qZZP7Zug%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAECOHc9AH9O5jwOL1OTzN6Lg7qNNuir_MVV6M%3Dm53_qZZP7Zug%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
 
--
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/CAGdD0Kj--NKPVCV%3DNerT9pHrJTiYv1FK3i-s9DSC3cApxj5GUw%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAGdD0Kj--NKPVCV%3DNerT9pHrJTiYv1FK3i-s9DSC3cApxj5GUw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
 
--
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/CAEaS_PUwV0GftBN-zaX7-tPFijq_fupfD9b_Lvg%2BAgS3qcYOWg%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAEaS_PUwV0GftBN-zaX7-tPFijq_fupfD9b_Lvg%2BAgS3qcYOWg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
 
--
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/CAKK4Yz7Mh3avU%3DvyLq-14x9-HEcaUKkoONPM%2Bvx0r8XD_MqY7g%40mail.gmail.com
<https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKK4Yz7Mh3avU%3DvyLq-14x9-HEcaUKkoONPM%2Bvx0r8XD_MqY7g%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
.
CHIRAMEL MATHEW SIMON <simon...@gmail.com>: Apr 06 05:56PM +0530

Banks' PO ension scheme constitutes a Defined Benefit Plan, which is a
post-employment
benefit as per AS-15, which is largely different from defined
contribution plans. Under the defined benefit plan, the actuarial and
investment risk falls upon the employer (bank), for which a very detailed
actuarial calculation is performed every year to determine the charge.
 
Thus, we the employees need not worry about the availability or sufficiency
of Pension funds.
 
On Mon, 6 Apr 2026, 10:10 S.T.CHANDRASEKHAR Babu, <sund...@gmail.com>
wrote:
 
Sanjay J <sanjay...@gmail.com>: Apr 06 05:38PM +0530

Thank you, Sir 🙏
 
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages