AIBRF FILE WP BEFORE MUMBAI HC TO ALLOW DIRECT DIALOGUE BY IBA

[MOHAN P]

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.

***

[Ramani Konnayar]

Dear Shri Mohan ji,

Even assuming that the WP is upheld and they (AIBRF)get recognition and right to the  negotiate from IBA, in the absence of any weapon in their hands, they will only be able to make representations to IBA on the demands of pensioners but not wrest, without any active support from UFBU. 

In this ciny, it is also to be noted that even UFBU has not been able to use the ultimate weapon of strike in recent years due to the changed scenario in the banking industry with large scale computerisation and arrival of so many big players in the private sector.

K N RAMANI 

--
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.

[Narayanan Venkateshwaran]

Too little too late. But it may be argued that "something is better than nothing"

Late Singlaji Case proceedings are now on in SC. 

It may serve the purpose of effectively bringing to the knowledge Hon judges of SC about the  decades old injustice perpetrated on poor bank pensioners

C V Narayanan

On Sun, 5 Apr, 2026, 7:08 pm MOHAN P, <moha...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[SUMAN KUMAR Suman]

Dear Mohan sir.  

What's use of talking IBA 

When they rejected to accept 

Better talk Directly to Govt.

They simpky escape from when legal

Proceed ings. They are not authority or

To face  without recognized by or

Binded 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:

--

[Ramani Konnayar]

Please read ciny as context.

[SUMAN KUMAR Suman]

What's the use of talking IBA 

When they reject 

Better talk Directly to Govt.

They simply escape from legal

Proceedings. They are not authority or

To face  without recognized by or

Binded by law or constitution.

No use 

What made our leaders to discuss with IBA

--

suman.

[R.K. Pathak]

It is just 1stage that WP is filed. It is to be scrutinised by registry the objections are to be removed, of any. Then Honourable Judges of find appropriate then issue notices to respondents. 

Respondents will take long time to cause appearance and then to file reply affidavit. 

This process will take minimum one year with constant pursuation from petitioner. 

In Bombay High court, even after filing WP for pension and removing objections, even after 8 months despite listing the matter, Bench couldn't reach the subject WP and to issue the notice.

IBA will take stand that they are private body and acting on the mandates from the bank and so on..

Any how better late than never and time to see how this take mode is resolving the issue.

Pathak R K 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKcPo_xfTJrJ6ZCp9E_OKA1cgJa1dZyCtE91s-P5ZpUA1gstVw%40mail.gmail.com.

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

We Bankers group whose members include in service employees has been fighting for the right to participate in negotiations for the last decade or so. The said group has exhausted  all possible avenues like filing WP in Allahabad High court, filing petition before CLC and also approaching tribunal etc, but so far has not succeeded because Banks, UFBU are strongly refusing to negotiate issues with associations  other than trusted UFBU.

Well, it is good that AIBRF has realized after two decades of BEPR1995 that UFBU leaders are not doing anything to resolve pensioners' issues.

However we cannot trust AIBRF as this may be another game plan by UFBU itself to divert issues.

AIBRF has  not made any attempt to  take into confidence other retiree associations like AIBPARC, We bankers, Erstwhile SBM retiree associations led by Sri Prasad etc 

Further timing of filing WP when  M C Singla case is nearing verdict sage is also give room for suspicion.

--

[RAMANI NV]

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKK4Yz4_zG23xcxeCzkOu%3D%2BzBdp-cD1%2B86F7%3D_%3DctfJQ2E_DOQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[MOHAN P]

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

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAcuBS_Jqp3EsnJGbrWt_xjzrJPynEhLRyVPe1L%2B%2Bq_bHhL7YQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[MOHAN P]

Pl.Read in detail;

Copy of AIBRF Circular is attached herewith:

On Sun, 5 Apr, 2026, 7:08 pm MOHAN P, <moha...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[Niranjan Cn]

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

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW0%3D1ktCu1Msi1XxuiGK3A-qvUD88HP%2Bs23RSKWJWL_iwA%40mail.gmail.com.

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

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.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAMCbyDRaSRhc-6ovKmDLqLcxb2R6E0%3DTX3P%2BgkYyF0p%3D6yiH3A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ramani Konnayar]

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 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWE_3QZtgDUYmD2%3DSH4kVZOOp%2BDY345xxjrfcxi8G%3D482g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ramani Konnayar]

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 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW1aSrM9z4p56APLw54FpvP3q5aE0Rs8aW-03B-VCji_1g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Satyanarayana Rao]

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

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW1aSrM9z4p56APLw54FpvP3q5aE0Rs8aW-03B-VCji_1g%40mail.gmail.com.

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

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.

 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWE_3QZtgDUYmD2%3DSH4kVZOOp%2BDY345xxjrfcxi8G%3D482g%40mail.gmail.com.