Re: Embezzlement of Pension Funds

[Srinivasa Murti Devulapalli]

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xWCQCH1BIeSvKuSBeubMgrI2g5BxdrlV/view

I expressed my apprehensions with prima -face evidence - within my limited knowledge Contents are self -explicit....

Regards

On Fri, 19 Mar, 2021, 12:52 pm Prasad C N, <cn_pr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear Shri Srinivasa Murthyji,

I have seen not only in this group, but also in various Whatsapp groups regarding your posting in respect of embezzlement of Pension Funds.  In this regard, I you would like to share my understanding of the subject and consequences of your so called relentless campaign.  There are three possible situations that may arise.  They are : There is embezzlement of Pension Fund, There is no embezzlement of Pension Fund and there cannot be any embezzlement of Pension Fund. 

Time and again it is repeated not only by me, but by various Government authorities, that there is no surplus in pension fund.  It is also made abundantly clear that the balance in the pension fund is for payment of pension in terms of existing pension regulations.  Any modification or addition require additional funds which would be out of Profit and Loss account.   You can go through the MOU of second pension option or 11th bipartite settlement/8th joint note.  Even you can verify with your ex-colleagues who were in Pension department about the need and requirement of pension funds.  For abundant clarification, I am attaching AS – 15 document and also a copy of the letter/directives of RBI in this regard.   At no point of time, neither Indian Banks Association nor Banks nor the Government has stated that there is inadequate balance in the pension funds, for revision of pension.  If they say so, they would be prosecuted for not maintaining adequate balance as per actuarial reports.  Required information is available in Annual Reports of all Banks in their website.  If they are not there, you can seek a copy from the Bank. These documents clearly demonstrate that the pension fund is also one of the funds of the Banks, but no one else including pensioners have any right or obligation.  Balance in pension fund does not determine payment of pension, but it is the regulations.   Banks talk about the additional cost, but not adequate balance. 

Having presented my views, now, we shall discuss each of the situation :

a.       There is embezzlement of Pension Fund :

Perhaps, you have not understood the consequences of your statements and if it is true, you are not helping bank pensioners, but you are harming them.  In case, you are correct, then the first liability for the banks is to make good the embezzled amount outs of Profit and Loss account, as this embezzled amount would have gone into Profit and Loss account only.  Like any other fraud or embezzlement in any other account of the Bank, liability is that of the bank and should be made good out of profit and loss account only.  Therefore, this amount would be over and above required for pension revision.  The Banks will have no option other than laying hands on additional funds that they may have set aside for revision in pension. Therefore, we are thrusting upon additional liability and giving reasons for not grevisin our pension.    Mr.Murthyji, are we assisting bank pensioners or harming their interest by such actions ? 

Any order passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court or any record submitted by any party to Hon’ble Supreme Court, whether it is on account of your efforts or otherwise, are available tro general public including you and me.  Humbly, equest you to please obtain copies of such documents, base the information on these authenticated information and share such documents.  Otherwise, we still remember the instance of submission of ASG in Madras High Court.

b.       There is no embezzlement of Pension Fund :

We need to understand what would be the opinion, the executives and concerned authorities would carry.  Will they take our opinion and understanding seriously ?  What would be the damage out of such accusations.  These funds undergo several audits and those who are at helm of affairs are aware that taking any money out of these funds have to be reported and does not accrue any benefit to the bank.  There is no personal interest of any individuals, unlike Satyam and Ramalinga Raju.

c.       There cannot be any embezzlement of pension funds :

There are several instances, like PNB or OBC affairs, where revaluation of financial assets is undertaken.  Some organisations do undertake at regular and frequent intervals.  In some cases, there might be appreciation or in some other cases it may be depreciation.  Like financial assets, most of the organisations do revaluation of their real estate assets.  This exercise is also a required exercise as this would provide true picture of assets.  One has to prove existence of ‘mens rea’, if one says there is embezzlement of pension funds.  Only if there is a cause to believe existence of intent to commit fraud or embezzle monies.  No one can even remotely affix criminal intent.  Then, is it not ridiculous to expect CBI to investigate purported embezzlement.

Mr. Murthyji, Respect is based on the credibility and our credibility is based on the truth.  The truth has zero maintenance.  Truth is like pregnancy.  One can hide only for some time.  We need to introspect.  Praise by some ignorant does not make us warriors or intellectuals.  We must be humble and stop patting on ones own back.

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards,

Prasad C N

[Srinivasa Murti Devulapalli]

DIVERSION OF BANK EMPLOYEES PENSION CORPUS FUNDS  TO PRIVATE INVESTMENTS-AN URGENT NEED FOR AN AUDIT BY “CAG” – THE ONLY CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY - A CASE STUDY

Srinivasa Murti Devulapalli <devulapa...@gmail.com>	Mon, 20 Jan 2020, 10:00
to presidentofindia, vpindia, pmindia, Narendra, Nirmala, cagoffice

HARD COPIES BY SPEED POST

 

 

Devulapalli Srinivasa Murti

To: 
 Sri Ramnathkovind, His Excellency, President of India,  Rashtrapati Bhavan, New Delhi 110 004

 

Sri M. Venkayya Naidu, Hon'ble Vice-President of India, 6- Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi 110001

 

 Sri Narendra Damodardas Modi, Hon'ble Prime Minister of India, 7- Lok Kalyan Marg, New Delhi -110011

 Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman, Hon'ble Finance Minister of India. 15, Safdarjung Road,  New Delhi  110029

 

The Comptroller & Auditor General of India, Pocket-9, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Marg, - New Delhi 110 124

 

 

HON'BLE SIRS,/ MADAM,

 

 

SUB :  DIVERSION OF BANK EMPLOYEES PENSION CORPUS FUNDS  TO PRIVATE INVESTMENTS- AN URGENT NEED FOR AN AUDIT BY “CAG” – THE ONLY CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY -  A CASE STUDY

 

PREAMBLE:

 

HON'BLE SIRS/MADAM, In furtherance of the settlement (signed under the ID Act) dated 29th.Oct.1993 between the Bank Managements represented by “IBA” and theUnions repre- senting the employees – “PENSION REGULATIONS OF 1995”were adopted by all the Banks . These regulations were formulated on similar lines to the one prevailing in the Reserve Bank of India. A specific mention was also made in these regulations itself.

Thus, these regulations form part and parcel of the settlement signed under the Industrial Disputes Act – A Statutory Provision. The parties to the above settlement have no authority, whatsoever, to alter/modify the terms/provisions of the settlement already incorporated as above, subsequently at a later date without the prior consent of the Parliament . 

Contrary to the above, “IBA” went on issuing its administrative guidelines subsequently to its member banks over ruling the provisions of the settlement much detrimental to the interests of the pensioners, who are the ultimate beneficiaries of the Pension Trust – a fiduciary contract

THUS, A CONRACT OF FIDILITY WITH UTOMOST GOOD FAITH -  fiduciary in nature , IS ESTABLISHED UNDER THE RULE OF THE LAND. BUT GLARINGLY, WITHOUT ANY RETIREE REPRESENTATION ON THE PENSION TRUST BOARDS OF THESE BANKS AS OF NOW...

BANK RETIREES HAVE BEEN BETREYED BY THE IBA & WORKING UNIONS: - ONE MORE  GLARING EXAMPLE:

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yYPz0UgAq3XcfR9imF4Td40PgF5T9QUn/view?usp=sharing

 

DELIBERATE REMOVAL OF UPDATION CLASUE  FROM THE   PENSION  REGULATIONS BY IBA AND WORKING UNIONS: A GLARING BETREYAL:

You are quite aware that ,  for the first time in the Banking Industry, Pension Scheme  for the employees of the Reserve Bank of India,  was introduced  in year 1990 with the initiative of  the Government and the same was intended to be introduced in  all the banks in the public  sector.

With this intention,   A DRAFT COPY OF THE PENSION SCHEME  (as adopted in RBI ) was sent to the CMDs of all the PSBs to expedite necessary formalities  for its introduction by taking the consent of all the unions for its smooth introduction.  

That’s how an MOU was signed between the Bank managements and unions representing  both the Workmen employees  as also Officer-employees,  in  the year 1993,  WITH THE PRIOR CONSENT OF THE RESPECTIVE BOARDS OF THE BANKS WHICH PLEASE NOTE. 

( From 1993, the effective date was further stretched to 1986 for unknown reasons)

 All the above  mandated statutory  formalities  ,  has ultimately paved the CLEAR  WAY  to sign  the settlement in 1995 under the ID Act. 

Ultimately  -   BUT….. DELIBERATELY BY  OMITTING  THE PENSION UPDATION CLAUSE  (that was very much present in the signed MOU which is the genesis of this settlement) –

IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE ,  IT IS AN INDISPUTABLE  LOGIC  THAT THE  MOU SIGNED  IN THE YEAR 1993 IS  CERTAINLY , A  SOURCE OF STRENGTH  TO THE PENSION REGULATIONS  SIGNED  SUBSEQUENTLY  UNDER THE ID ACT IN THE YEAR 1995.

THE ABOVE  IS ONE OF THE MANY BETRAYALS  METED OUT AGAINST THE  RETREES BY THE  IBA AND THE WORKING UNIONS .

ARE THE FUNDS IN THE PENSION CORPUS  SAFE??  - WHY NEED FOR AN AUDIT BY  CAG ?

Pension trust corpus funds must be invested only in the "approved Government Securities" as per the terms of the Pension Regulations as approved by the Parliament- the Highest Law making body of the country. Contrary to the above statutory position, our Pension corpus funds have been diverted by the Trust Boards of the Banks, to "Private Investments" much detrimental to the interests of the innocent retirees like us. It's nothing but AN ACT OF "BREACH OF TRUST" ON THE PART OF THE TRUST BOARDS OF THE BANKS.

We have been deprived of our legitimate financial relieves as envisaged in the Pension Regulations- by the Bank Managements represented by the IBA (Indian Banks Association) and also by the Bank Unions represented by the United Forum of Bank Unions (UFBU) as well - ultimately forcing us to knock the doors of justice to mitigate our hardships.

To add salt to the injury, our hard earned pension corpus which have been contributed from out of our monthly salaries for over several years, has been subjected to gross mismanagement by the so called "Trustees" to which we have no access (no representation from the retirees) despite being the sole beneficiaries of the Pension Trust- VIZ:

AREAS OF MISAPPROPRIATION:

- By not remitting the managements contribution towards the pension    corpus promptly as envisaged in the regulations.

- By Diverting the Pension Corpus funds to Private investments

- Loss of interest for the belated period is not compensated.

- Misappropriation of the Corpus Funds to cover up the Banks' losses (Window dressing)

In short, the above tantamount to "Embezzlement of Funds " - A cognisable  criminal Offence.

If the same were to be indulged by any erring employee in a stray incidence, He/She would have been dismissed from the service mercilessly as per the service conditions. This is besides prosecuting him/her under the IPC for "CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST" - EVEN FOR A PALTRY AMOUNT OF INVOLVEMENT FOR THAT MATTER.

On the same logic, all the members of the Pension Trust Board/s are also punishable without any exception.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bwlxk5JrNIM1SzYyMEkwU2hQLUdmdGpBejVQd1p2cTFwRlFF/view?usp=sharing

 

 

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/10Wip9fM2yPfHkZhPJx1itaH124V-4Jsv/view?usp=sharing

 

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_7uUTEXmCpP5mBpt2QgwPV32_V5DoLar/view?usp=sharing

 

 

OCCULAR PROOFS/EVIDENCES

  

“CIRCULAR LETTER No. 28/34/2017/34 DATED 24-9-2017 ADDRESSED BY THE GENERAL SECRETARY OF AIBEA-TO ALL BANKWISE ORGANISATIONS UNDER AIBEA:
Dear Comrades,

Investments from Employee related funds like Provident Fund, Gratuity Fund and Pension Fund.

All of us are aware that due to the consistent efforts and prolonged struggles of AIBEA, there have been improvements in the wages and service conditions of bank employees in the last seven decades. Retirement benefits like PF, Gratuity, Pension, etc. are very important achievements of the organisation to enable the employees to lead a safe, secure and decent life after retirement from the Banks after spending their prime lifetime in their service in the Banks.

Before the K C Sen Tribunal in 1949, these were important demands from AIBEA and all our Unions. Right from the period of Sen Award, AIBEA has endevoured to improve these retirement benefits. Pension Settlement of 1993 and Settlement of one more option for pension signed in 2010 are landmark achievements. Since these benefits are payable upon the retirement of the employees, the funds are kept separately in Trust Accounts. The Money available in these Funds are invested as per the Government guidelines in approved Securities and the return on these investments are equally important to augment the financial position of these funds. 

 

In order to play the watch-dog role, representatives of our Unions are appointed as Trustees in these Trusts in all the Banks. Our Trustee have to play an important and vigilant role so that the Trust Funds are maintained and invested properly and employees’ interests are taken care.

Recently, we have come across an experience where the funds from the Pension Fund of a Bank was invested in a private company in the form of Non-Convertible Secured Debenture.
The same private company was also given huge loans ( around Rs. 14,000 crores ) by that Bank and other Banks. Rather, it should be said that the Company which was favoured with such a huge loan was also favoured with this investment from the Employees Pension Fund.
This account has become NPA and is one among the 12 major accounts before the National Company Law Tribunal. Obviously, the investment in the Debenture Bond also became a dead investment and NPA.
Since the Bank’s Pension Fund is an investor and hence a Creditor, the Insolvency Resolution Professional has asked the Pension Fund to submit its claim.
It can be anticipated that neither the Bank’s loan would come back nor there is any possibility to get back the money due to the Pension Fund.

RBI has already indicated that the Banks have to be ready for deep haircut and be prepared to make provisions for these accounts.
Hence neither the Fund will get back the money nor even interest on the NCD Bonds.
Hence our Unions and particularly, our Trustees in the employee-related Funds/Trusts should be careful, cautious and vigilant to ensure that such investments are avoided by the management. Any investment in such private companies should be properly scrutinised and verified about their credit ratings, reputation, etc., before our Trustees agree to the same. We should demand all details before an informed decision is taken on such investments.

Shortly we will convene a meeting of our Trustees of PF, Gratuity and Pension Fund in various Banks to understand such contingencies, caution to be exercised for agreeing on investments, etc. and to better equip our Trustees.

Yours comradely,

Sd//- C.H. VENKATACHALAM

GENERAL SECRETARY

=========================

AIBEA wants clarity on ‘transfer’ of  2,026 cr. from PNB Pension Fund

https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/money-and-banking/aibea-wants-clarity-on-transfer-of-2026-cr-from-pnb-pension-fund/article9747213.ece

 

 

 

CH Venkatachalam, General Secretary, AIBEA

 

Transfer effected to enable the bank show artificial profit, alleges General Secretary CH Venkatachalam

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, JULY 3

 

All India Bank Employees’ Association (AIBEA) has written to the Centre seeking clarifications over the reported transfer of ₹2,026 crore from Punjab National Bank (PNB) Employees Pension Fund to the bank’s profit and loss account.

“We are receiving anxious queries from bank employees and retirees about the fund transfer effected to allegedly enable the bank show artificial profit,” CH Venkatachalam, General Secretary, AIBEA, wrote to the Secretary, Financial Services.

The letter quoted from item 5 of the auditor’s independent report which mentioned that: “...we draw attention to Note 6 regarding change in valuation of plan assets of long-term benefits from book value to fair value,

resulting in increase in the value of plan value assets by ₹388.07 crore in respect of pension fund and by ₹53.08 crore in gratuity fund.”

 

Clause 11 of the balance sheet of March 31, 2017 said that:

 

“In accordance with the AS-15, during the current quarter, while considering the fair value of plan assets relating to pension and gratuity fund being long-term assets benefits of employees, interest accrued on investments has also been taken into account as against principal amount in earlier quarters/years.”

Consequent to this, employer contribution to pension and gratuity funds representing excess of fair value of plan assets over present value obligation amounting to ₹2,026 crore has been credited to ‘Payments to and provisions for employee cost during the current quarter/year.’

“From the above and allied information, we learn that the employee cost has become negative in the last quarter of 2016-17 and the total employee cost for the year has also come down,” Venkatachalam said in the letter.

Read along with information that ₹2,026 crore has been credited to employee cost due to excess value in pension fund, it means that the amount has been taken from the pension fund to the employee cost account in the P&L account.

Since the accounting procedure was changed as on March 31, 2016, from book value to fair value, it is not clear as to why this was not adhered to in Q1, Q2 and Q3 of 2016-17 and implemented only in Q4.

The government has not appointed a Workman Employee Director in banks; so there is no scope to know what transpired while finalising the balance sheet.

“However, a nominee director of the Finance Ministry serves on the board of banks, including PNB. Hence the government should be aware of the factual position,” Venkatachalam said.

Published on July 03, 2017

 ================================================================

 

EPISODE OF ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE- LEGAL NOTICE SERVED ON THE CEO:(A Primafacie evidence to the Criminal Breach of Trust )

QUOTE:

Hardeep Singh Dhindsa M: 98141-27257

Advocate Ph: 0172-2707638

Punjab and Haryana High Court #2160, Sector 21-C Room No. 16,

New Bar Complex ;Chandigarh-160022

Ref. No. ______Date: 28.01.2019

 

By Registered Post

To,

1.Shri M.K. Jain (By name) The MD -cum- CEO Oriental Bank of Commerce, Head Office, Institutional Area, Plot No. 5, Sector- 32, Gurgaon

PNSION FUND TRUSTEES:

2. Shri Pradeep Chouhan, GM HRD (Chairman of the Pension Fund Trust), Oriental Bank of Commerce, Head Office, Institutional Area, Plot No. 5, Sector- 32, Gurgaon

3. Shri Jitendra Mohan Singh, (CFO) & (alternate Chairman of the trust), Oriental Bank of Commerce, Head Office, Institutional Area, Plot No. 5, Sector- 32, Gurgaon

4. Shri Swarup Saha, GM (Treasury and IBD), Oriental Bank of Commerce, Head Office, Institutional Area, Plot No. 5, Sector- 32, Gurgaon

5. Shri Jagdish Prasad, Deputy GM (I&C), Oriental Bank of Commerce, Head Office, Institutional Area, Plot No. 5, Sector- 32, Gurgaon

6. Shri Praveen Kumar Sharma, deputy GM (I&C), Oriental Bank of Commerce, Head Office, Institutional Area, Plot No. 5, Sector- 32, Gurgaon

7. Shri Pradeep Kumar, Asst. GM (CS&P), Oriental Bank of Commerce, Head Office, Institutional Area, Plot No. 5, Sector- 32, Gurgaon

8. Shri. Kanwal Singh, Workman employee Oriental Bank of Commerce, Head Office, Institutional Area, Plot No. 5, Sector- 32, Gurgaon

 

Subject :- Legal Notice.

 

 

I , under the instructions of my client Shri M.S. Sidhu hereby Serve you the legal notice on the following terms:

1.That after the order of SLP - 5525/2013 dated 13.02.2018 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court to make payment of arrears on account of wrong calculation of pension to those employees who retired between 01.04.1998 to 31.10.2005, your bank had paid pension arrears to the debit of pension fund. The bank also debited Rs. 3.07 crores to pension fund on account of penal interest @ 9% imposed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this penalty was to be borne by the bank by debiting profit & loss account of the bank account and not from pension fund. Hence, by ignoring the relevant Regulations, misappropriation of Rs. 3.07 crores has taken place which is also criminal breach of trust, whereas, as per trust deed and notified pension regulations, only pension and family pension are to be debited in/from the pension fund account. Hence, the offence is a criminal breach of trust as well as misappropriation has taken place under your direct supervision regarding which you have the prior knowledge.

2. That as per RBI directives, when any loan or advance becomes NPA, certain amount of provisions are to be made out of profit of the bank. Whereas, no provision is ever made for any investment in banking sector and no loan or advance can be made from pension fund. By violating the provisions and the RBI Directives, the

Oriental Bank of Commerce made investment of Rs. 20 crores in Amtech Auto Industries, which already had loan advances from various banks including Oriental Bank of Commerce. The Amtech Auto has become bankrupt and the investment of Rs. 20 crores have gone bad.

 

The Oriental Bank has made provision of RS. 5 crores for investment of 20 crores. There is no provision for making provisions on investments in RBI manual neither there is any provision in pension regulations to make provisions on investments. The directives of RBI are not applicable on Pension Fund Trust whereas the trustees misappropriated Rs. 5 crore from this pension fund and this act of the bank was well within your knowledge and the Board of Directors along with the other decision makers but intentionally the same was ignored and as a result of misappropriation, breach of trust took place.

3. That the employees of the bank are paid pension at a rate as per regulation 35(2) of Pension Regulations, 1995, in case of an employee’s retiring in accordance with the provisions of service regulations or settlement after completing a qualifying service of not less than 33 years and amount of basic pension salary calculated at 50% of the average emoluments. As per regulation 2(za) services regulation mean Oriental Bank of Commerce Officers Service Regulations, 1982 made U/s 19 of the Act. This clearly confirms that pension is to be calculated on the pay drawn by the officers under Officers Service Regulations, 1982. However, MD or CEO of the bank, whole time directors, do not retire under Officers Service Regulations, 1982 nor do they draw salary as per service regulations. As such they are not eligible for any pension, yet they are being paid pension at the rate many times over the prescribed regulation 35(2) of regulations 1995 w.e.f. 01.01.2013. Hence, there is huge misappropriation as so many retired MD or CEO’s and whole time directors are continuously misappropriating pension fund with a mala fide intention and the said payments are paid by the trustees on directions of MD and CEO’s of the bank which again amount to misappropriation by deviating from the procedure/regulations.

4. That the trustees of the OBC employee’s pension fund did not stop here. On one hand the trustees misappropriated and illegally disbursed huge funds as so called pension to various MDs, CEOs and the whole time directors who retired because regulation 35(2) does not make them entitled for the same, on the other hand the same trustees under-paid pension and commutation of pension to all officers who retired between 01.11.2012 to 31.10.2017. The average emoluments under regulation 35(2) were  intentionally calculated less to put recurring loss to the said retired officers. In fact the role of Officers Service Regulations, 1982 mentioned in service regulations 35(2) is strictly restricted to calculation of average emoluments only. As per 2(d) of pension regulations, 1995 average emoluments mean the average of the pay drawn by an employee during the last ten months of his service in the bank. In relation to an employee who retired or died while in service on or after the 1st day of April, 1998, pay includes, as per section 2(s) (c) (ii):- all other components of Pay counted for the purpose of making contribution to the Provident Fund and for the payment of dearness allowance. All officers who retired between 01.11.2012 & 31.10.2017 were paid special allowance under OSR (1982) w.e.f. 01.11.2012 on the following scale.

a. Scale I-III : 7.75% of basic Pay+ DA

b. Scale IV-V : 10% of basic Pay+ DA

c. Scale VI-VII : 11% of basic Pay+ DA

This special allowance bearing factor of DA was intentionally not included while calculation of average emoluments of these officers. Thus willfully violating pension fund trust deed provisions and thus Pension Regulations. This has put all these officers on perpetual loss of thousands of rupees per month. This is nothing but criminal breach of trust by the trustees and MD&CEO of the Oriental Bank of Commerce.

5. That all of you noticees have been at the helm of affairs and are directly concerned with OBC employees Pension Fund as on 01.06.2018, are liable for the breach of trust as mentioned herein above. The names of the

trustees/officers are Shri Pradeep Chouhan, GM HRD (Chairman of the Trust), Shri Jitendra Mohan Singh, (CFO)&(alternate Chairman of the trust), Shri Swarup Saha, GM (Treasury and IBD), Shri Jagdish Prasad, Deputy GM (I&C), Shri Praveen Kumar Sharma, deputy GM (I&C), Shri Pradeep Kumar, Asst. GM (CS&P), Shri. Kanwal Singh, Workman employee besides Shri M.K.Jain CEO-cum-Managing Director.

The dereliction/diversion of funds has been engineered intentionally and systematically in connivance with each other with malafide intention in order to cause wrongful loss to the fund and wrongful gain to you noticees, which is well covered in the definition of Section 406,409 and 420 of IPC along with the act of Criminal Conspiracy etc. My client is member of the pension fund and draws pension from this Fund.

Your actions amounts to irreparable loss. Misappropriation from the Pension Fund has been made by all the trustees with mala fide intentions .Hence, it is direct loss to my client and similarly situated thousands of other members of the pension fund/pensioners.

Therefore, my client proposes to file a criminal complaint against you noticees before the appropriate authority in case of

1.Non reversing all the entries and not returning the amount siphoned by you over the years within one month.

2.Furthermore, the pension being paid after 01.01.2013 as MDs and full time Directors be stopped forthwith.

3. The pension of all officers who retired between 1.11.2012 and 31.102017 , be revised asper pension regulation 35(2) of 1995 including the special allowance. Accordingly commutation amount, gratuity be recalculated. Arears for all this be paid with 18% interest.

 

In case of not doing so I have instruction to file criminal complaint against all of you and you all shall be liable to pay cost and compensation to my client.

Regards

Yours faithfully

Date: 07.12.2018 (H. S. Dhindsa)

(Advocate)

 

Unquote: 

====================================

Hon’ble Sirs / Madam,

 

Our Basic pension has been static ever since we retired from the service - say around 20 years ago.

The plight of our family pensioners is still worse.

We have not been protected against the mounting inflation till date -- ever since the day we retired from the service over 20 years ago.

But, the salaries of the serving employees have been revised five times during these 20 years !

There are no clear and specific guidelines from the R.B.I./Finance Ministry about Management and utilisation of this fund . Therefore, the Bank authorities are taking unilateral decision of using this fund and in many cases this fund is invested in speculative and un remunerative investments by the Banks authorities resulting considerable shrinkage of this fund.

As the beneficiaries of the Pension Trust, we have been deprived of our legitimate compensation against the mounting inflation. As a consequence, the remaining huge surplus would be left with the banks themselves without any proper utilization as envisaged under the Pension Regulations in force.

Further, our pension corpus is a "sinking fund" as it covers only the employees who joined the service upto 31 03 2010 alone. (Those who joined the service subsequently- w.e.f 01 04 2010, are covered under the National Pension Scheme (NPS) introduced in the Banking Sector.

As such, our pension corpus will last for another 30-40 years only. As of now, the aggregate balance in the pension corpus would be over Rs.3.00 lakh crores! which constitutes the forfeiture portion of the employees' contribution while in service (in lieu of PF as explained above)

Ultimately, the huge left-over surplus belonging to us, would remain with the Banks/Govt. for ever. By that time, many of the retirees would have left for their "Heavenly Abode" without enjoying their hard-earned life-time savings.

Thus, It looks to me as though THE BANKS WANT TO FILL ITS COFFERS OUT OF  OUR COFFINS !"

In the wake of the gravity of seriousness, Only a thorough investigation on the above lines by an accredited Constitutional Authority like "CAG" alone will be able to bring out the truth to the surface with full facts and figures to render justice to the Job.

It's nothing but "stabbing us from behind the back" for the simple reason that we, the retirees are not represented on the Pension Trust Boards.

Adding salt to the injury,  we have not been taken care of by both the working unions (UFBU) and IBA as well on some pretext or the other.  WE ARE KEPT UNDER DARK AS TO OUR  PENSION CORPUS  FUNDS BEING MANAGED BY THE BANK TRUST BOARDS BEHIND OUR BACK. 

There has been inordinate delay in finalizing the Bipartite Settlements for unknown reasons.  The following figures speak by themselves which need no further explanation:

  

Delay in All the Bipartite Settlements        

   BP No.   Dt. of Effect    Dt. of Settlement      Delay in days
       01.      01 01 1966       19 10 1966                  291  Days
       02.      01 01 1970       12 10 1970                  284  Days
       03.      01 09 1978       01 08 1979                  334  Days     
       04.      01 07 1984       17 09 1984                  078  Days
       05.      01 11 1987       10 04 1989                  526  Days
       06.      01 11 1992       14 02 1995                  835  Days
       07.      01 11 1997       01 01 2000                  791  Days
       08.      01 11 2002       01 06 2005                  943  Days
       09.      01 11 2007       07 04 2010                  908  Days
       10.      01 11 2012       25 05 2015                  935  Days
       11.      01 11 2017          ??  ??                       ??  ??  (Current BP negotiations

 

Considering the above, can the retirees expect any solution/s to their buning issues ?  - (Updation of Pension/Family Pension-etc.)

Only the PCR Recommendations (Committee constituted by GOI),  brought a sea change in the service conditions of the Bank Officers. 

This is besides many other committees constituted by the Governments in the past resulted to bring improvisations in the service conditions of the bank employees at large  in the form of various “awards “ over a period of time. 

Let us not, therefore, lose sight of these historical facts.

IN ADDITION TO THE ABOVE, THE INDIAN BANKS’ ASSOCIATION -IBA HAS  GONE ON RECORD  BY THEMSELVES TO CONFIRM THAT IT HAS NO AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER  AND THE  BANKS ARE NOT  OBLIGED TO  FOLLOW ITS OWN DIRECTIVES.  IT HAS NO LEGAL SANCTITY EVEN,  UNDER ANY OF THE  RULES OF THE LAND.

WITHOUT ANY IDENTIFICATION UNDER ANY RULE OF THE LAND, HOW CAN IBA REPRESENT THE BANKS HAVING LEGAL STATUS AND SANCTITY OF A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKINGS OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA WHO ENJOYS THE STATUS OF A “STATE” UNDER THE STATUTE...??

IS IBA AN EXTRA CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY TO DIRECT ITS MEMBER BANKS WITHOUT ANY RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABALITY  WHATSOEVER...?

UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, ALL THE CONTRACTS/ AGREEMENTS ENTERED INTO SO FAR BY IBA,  ARE NUL AND VOID – AS SUCH THEY ARE UN-ENFORCEABLE UNDER THE RULE OF THE LAND. AND THEY CEASE TO HAVE ANY REPRESENTATIVE CAPACITY.

IF IT WERE SO, WHY AT ALL WE NEED TO HAVE AN "IBA" AT ALL..???...WHOSE VERY EXISTENCE  AND ENTITY IS OF DOUBTFUL CHARACTER AKIN TO THE TO THE ONE PECULIAR CHARECTER IN OUR EPIC MAHA BHARATHA - CALLED "SHIKHANDI”

 

 

In view of the statements of fact as enunciated above, an earnest appeal is now being made  to yours Honour ! to favorably consider the following: 

 

01.  To constitute  "Banking Pay Commission"  to ensure justice and fair play   

 

02.  To initiate Audit by "CAG"  the only constitutional authority who can render justice to the job

 

                        &

03.  To reconstitute the IBA with legal status and bring it within the ambit of RTI  Act.

Hon’ble Sirs / Madam, Many of our colleagues have already attained their Heavenly abode and We still remain waiting for our turn to meet them with one foot in the grave.

I therefore, volunteered to place before your Hon’ble Sirs/ Madam , the grievances as detailed above, and seek Your kind intervention/help to bring us the solace at this fag end of our lives only to ensure justice and fair play.

In the light of the fore going, ..... With folded hands.....I make this fervent appeal to your Hon’ble Sirs/Madam  to come to our rescue who are "with one foot in the grave "     at this fag end of our lives. "SOS"

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cmdl9V7Yl98

 

 

 

With Greetings and Regards

“|| यतो धर्मस्ततो जयः ||” IS THE ULTIMATE......
I remain - Yours, 
దేవులపల్లి శ్రీనివాస మూర్తి /Devulapalli Srinivasa Murti.                                                                                                                                                  JAN. 20,  2020 VIJAYAWADA   521108 :: 9989318300

 

https://www.change.org/p/hon-ble-prime-minister-of-india-sri-narendra-modi-plight-of-the-bank-retirees-urgency-to-constitute-banking-pay-commission  

-- 

d s murti

--

d s murti

[Prasad C N]

[Kalyanasundaram Subramaniam]

Dear Mr Prasad 

When I tried to get actuary report of latest three years from Indian Bank, I have been informed that they don't have it. Please see the attachment. 

What should we infer from this? Banks are maintaining some balance in pension fund without any updated actuary report. I wonder how the balance sheet of the bank has been approved. 

I have requested for actuary report for whatever years is available from the initiation of the pension scheme. 

I agree with your views. We should be paid pension as per scheme. How the banks make arrangement for that (like maintaining pension fund etc.) need not be our concern. Government pension is paid out of tax collection. But banks maintain pension fund, as they cannot depend on future earnings to pay pension.

Regards.

S Kalyanasundaram 

[Ramanathan Venkateswaran]

Excellent write up Prasad ji.  Venkateswaran R SVRS Canara Bank

--
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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/812337841.542241.1616138539747%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Srinivasa Murti Devulapalli]

--

[Srinivasa Murti Devulapalli]

FROM: 
D S Murti (Manager-Rtd.:Syndicate Bank) ; Ramavarappadu (PO):VIJAYAWADA 521108
devulapa...@gmail.com :: 0866-2843298 / 9989318300 

 TO:

The President of India,    Vice-President of India, Speaker Lok Sabha,  Ministry of Finance,  Ministry of Law & Justice, Supreme Court Judges and all the members of the Bar Council including all the Law Officers of  SCI, Former Judges/accredited legal luminaries,   NHRC, CAG Office, CVC, MPs,  Press, & accredited journalists etc.....  I make an earnest appeal to all the Hon'ble Members of the Parliament to go through the following content patiently.... and come to our rescue at this fag-end of our lives..... 

 October, 28,   2018

 Hon'ble Sirs,

 RE : EMBEZZLEMENT OF FUNDS IN THE EMPLOYEES PENSION CORPUS - THE LIFE-TIME SAVINGS OF THE THE BANK EMPLOYEES ARE IN DANGER - REQUEST TO ORDER FOR "CAG" AUDIT - I PRAY HIS LORDSHIP - SRI RANJAN GOGOI, HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA - "SOS"

=============================

 Just recently, I  addressed a letter (dated October 22, 2018)  to The Hon'ble Sri Ranjan Gogoi congratulating His Lordship on his assuming office as the Chief Justice of India , where in I made an attempt to invite His Lordship’s  kind attention - among other things, to the following:

-      The pathetic plight of the Bank Retirees

-      The discrimination and harassment meted out against them

-      The relentless efforts of our learned colleagues to fight back for justice unmindful of the frustrating experiences at the fag-end of our  lives.  

In this connection, I made an effort to draw the attention of His Lordship to the glaring   CONTRADICTING STANCES  TAKEN BY THE APEX JUDICIARY  while disposing of the  two identical  cases related to the bank retirees  within a very short span of  just 3 months gap – ie:- between  13th. February, 2018* and 16th. May, 2018**  (JUST THREE MONTHS !) THAT TOO AFTER HAVING KEPT THE JUDGMENT "RESERVERED "  FOR OVER 10 LONG MONTHS. 

  01. JUDGMENTS :: 1616-1684 D A ISSUE: 

  Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment  in CA# 5525 of 2012 ( dated 13th. February, 2018*  )

      https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jGEO6Zuxxlf1NjpBwZBtQ3j5d3cRepP1/view?usp=sharing

 

Hon'ble Division Bench of Karnataka High Court Judgment  dated 8th. March, 2012   in WA: #4269/2011 :

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1St4OMlrNELVZo0YmGK4W7mlN4dyGlbjZ/view

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 (While disposing of the above Writ Appeals of the  Banks Managements/IBA/MOF, the Hon'ble Division Bench of Karnataka High Court headed by His Lordship Mr.Justice Vikramjit Sen have made the following noteworthy observations among others - In my WA Nos.4901-4921 (page#90 of the above judgment) of the Judgment pronounced by the Hon'ble  Division Bench of Karnataka High Court was headed by His Lordship , His Lordship  Chief Justice. Vikramjit Sen - The Hon'ble division  Bench made among others,  the following noteworthy observations :  (Page: 138 of the above judgment) saying:-

  "..... WE MENTION THIS FOR THE REASON THAT IT APPEARS TO US THAT THE EXTREMELY SCARCE TIME OF THE COURT AS WELL AS THE BANK'S RESOURCES HAVE BEEN AVOIDABLY  AND UNNECESSARILY EXPENDED ON AN EXERCISE IN FUTILITY......")

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Orders of the Single Bench  dated 21st. April, 2011 in  WP#15295/21 04 2011 High Court of Judicature, Karnataka   : 

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/15hRld5FXLcHwzrAP7eTk9gmx0tPpC8MJ/view?usp=sharing

 Orders of the Single Bench dated 8th. April, 2011  in WP:# 41346/08 04 2011 High Court of Judicature, Karnataka:

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/19r78Hskny4rU74o067vBujmhutWgxlTy/view?usp=sharing

 02.  JUDGMENTS :: 100%  D A ISSUE:

Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment  in CA#5252-5255 of 20128 arising out of SLP(Civil)#7368-71 of 2017  (dated 16th. May, 2018**)

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RGAO_Hg5GXrqPvBaq3eXLggsnHqNrQYX/view

Hon'ble High Court of Judicature, Kolkata Division Bench in APO:315 of 2015 dated 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j5XhyhmiJRV-SC1ZKeNtPSyFMGFh-Fal/view?usp=sharing

 Hon'ble High Court of Judicature, Kolkota  Single Bench  in WPO # 507 of 2012 dated 

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1otDTwGfHBILyZBQq7Lz4ouDmO9JWG19q/view?usp=sharing

 Hon'ble High Court of Judicature, Madras  Division Bench in WA #    355 & 688 to 690  of   2013  dated: 17th. June, 2013

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hh9aasmQsxVtrPEelGWivTOwMBOue-jP/view?usp=sharing

 Hon'ble High Court of Judicature, Madras Single Bench  in WP#50000 of 2012 dated 14th. December, 2012 :

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ku5W5DjdQFjNhRxkQCETe87PIvO1M0xl/view?usp=sharing

In the above back drop,  Please click the following link for the full text of my  above letter dated  22nd. October, 2018 to His Lordship Chief Justice of India, Hon'ble Sri Ranjan Gogoi. 

 I vividly explained in my letter dated October 22, 2018 ,  the ill-conceived antecedents on the part of the Bank Managements/IBA/MOF combine,  leading to such a glaring discrimination much detrimental to the lamenting lot of our  fraternity - devoid of justice and fair play:

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ljq6GJacEBhJyyQxQiwrP1lfxgmByKuG/view?usp=sharing

 A TEST FOR ENDURANCE:  

 Last But Not the Least  - Our long-drawn legal battle/s have been proved to be A FORMIDABLE TEST FOR OUR ENDURANCE AT THIS EVENING HOURS OF OUR LIVES......A TEST FOR ENDURANCE: 

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RO_iv9wM1pa8QP2m1Fzy5o9b7zxfmeIb/view?usp=sharing

Earnestly soliciting your support, 

I remain - Yours ,

d s murti.

--

d s murti

[Ramachandraiah L]

While referring the email of Mr C N prasad and I would like express my views,Mr Prasad, you have done excellent job for the pensioners and continuing for which we solute you, you have been narrating in your letters so many issues and we may agree on do many issues except the issue of pension fund wherein you are informing that pensioners don't have any right or obligation on pension fund, how you can say that when every pensioners PF contributed by the bank/management contribution was transferred to pension fund in lieu of pension, other wise that portion of PF would have been credited to pensioners account, hence literally no pensioner is having right to reclaim it but morally every pensioner is having right/obligation over pension fund,this is my opinion.

Ramachandraiah L

--

[Srinivasa Murti Devulapalli]

[Srinivasa Murti Devulapalli]

...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

11 Attachments

 

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Srinivasa Murti Devulapalli <devulapa...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2021 at 13:48
Subject: Re: Embezzlement of Pension Funds
To: Prasad C N <cn_pr...@yahoo.com>
Cc: Google <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>

--

d s murti

[Sridhar Mandyam]

We should not worry much about balance in pension fund. If at all our pension is linked to pension fund common sense tells we should be getting less than 50 percent of the present pension we are getting. While looking at huge balance in pension fund, they forget that they are getting much more than their contribution. Hypothetically even if the balance in pension fund is NIL we will be getting our pdnsion.  Charge of embezzlement etc.,  is only jumping at wrong tree

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CANgcvGm1r1NHQvjYuO0iF4Ds32hn2ASjRAs5k0zN%2BcU%3Dm9zZAw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Srinivasa Murti Devulapalli]

ALL ARE SINNERS !!!!  NO SAINTS !!!!

ALL ARE "SINNERS"....  NO "SAINTS"......  DEVILS  NOW SERMONING

 VEDAS !..."POT CALLING KETTLE BLACK..."

1 message

            

Srinivasa Murti Devulapalli <devulapa...@gmail.com>                                       ^{17 November 2020}

at 08:01

To: 

<fboioa...@yahoo.com>, Bankpensioner Google <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>, D B S ..& OTHERS....

 

Devulapalli Srinivasa Murti

VIJAYAWADA, AP, India

 

17 NOV 2020 —  

 

LEADERSHIP BETRAYALS TOWARDS
PENSIONERS…. A PERENNIAL
PHENOMENA....

01.  REMOVAL OF UPDATION CLAUSE (AS APPEARED IN THE SIGNED MOU)  WHILE SIGNING THE PENSION SETTLEMENT IN 1995  UNDER ID ACT.  THANKS TO AIBEA.  

02.  WRONGLY DIRECTING  THE OFFICERS / EMPLOYEES NOT TO OPT FOR PENSION -  THANKS TO AIBOC/BEFI

03.  WRONG  FIXATION OF BASIC PENSION IN VII BP 16161684 – UFBU

04.  100% DA DISCRIMINATING THE RETIREES  WITH A CUT OFF DATE UPTO 31 10 2002 - UFBU

 

 

05.  HEAVY PRICE PAID BY  2ND OPTEE PENSIONERS ….  AIBOC / UFBU

06. NO SUPPORT TO THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR LEGAL RECOURSE  - .THE  FIXATION OF BASIC PENSION AS PER REGULATIONS, INCLUSION OF 5 YEAR NOTIONAL SERVICE,  PENSION FOR RESIGNEES, 100% DA NEUTRALIZATION, COMMUTATION ARREARS etc  - ON THE CONTRARY, ON THE CONTRARY,   SABOTAGING THE LEGAL FIGHT. AT THE SUPREME COURT LEVEL...  A VERY   VERY BIG THANKS TO  AIBRF

07. LAST BUT NOT THE LEAST …. SIGNING THE “RECORD NOTE “ NOTORIOUS “MAGNACARTA” – A VERY BIG THANKS TO  IBA/UFBU   - BEING TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN.

CONSIDERING THE ABOVE HARD REALITIES, …. ALL ARE SINNERS…. NO SAINTS…..  

THE IRONY IS -  "POT CALLING KETTLE BLACK !"  WHO UNABLE TO SEE THE BLACK BEHIND THEIR OWN BACK.....

  

IN THIS CONNECTION,  MY ATTENTION IS DRAWN BY SOME OF MY FRIENDS TO THE FOLLOWING COMMENT. THIS  IS FOLLOWED BY MY CLARIFICATION TO THE

SAME......

  

QUOTE:  

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Dear all, Good Day.

A few findings on verifying about  

Mr Devulapalli Srinivasa Murthy garu, retired from Syndicate Bank who spoke in the above audio clip. He is not with us. He was one of the then leaders

who canvassed against pension option _but secretly

submitted his own pension option letter to the management.

He took VRS and was always our adversary........ .......Working unions, Associations, and some of the pensioners have put their efforts to bring the issue up to present level. We thank all who are working for the rightful demands of our pensioners.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

UNQUOTE

 

Referring to the above, I once again reiterate  my following remarks....

 

".....ETREYAL 03.
NEGATIVE ROLE BY  AIBOC:

The present confusing situation created by the leadership aptly reminds me of the legend poet laureate of renaissance era - "William Shakespeare's famous soliloquy - "TO BE OR NOT TO BE ..!" ...

LET US NOT REPEAT ANOTHER HISTORICAL BLUNDER.....

This reminds of the similar confusing situation created by the then leadership of AIBOC during which period I was also the Office-bearer of Syndicate Bank Officers Association (SBOA-) representing AP State.  In fact, SBOA has been one of the strong affiliates AIBOC. -

Let me go further into the details......

When it was mooted to introduce the Pension Scheme in the Banking Industry, barring AIBOC/BEFI, all the remaining organisations had welcomed the move , as a social security measure.

The then leadership of AIBOC who was also heading their affiliate organisation in State Bank Of India, had opposed the scheme on the pretext that he would get the pension scheme as third benefit akin to the one prevailing in SBI .

That's how AIBOC remained as an Odd-Man-Out by prevailing on its membership not to opt . 

Arithmetical calculations were also shown in support of their stance which was popularly marketed among the membership at large in support of their stance.

Owing to the fact that a major junk of the Officers Community had not opted for Pension, the very viability of the scheme itself had posed a big question among all the rest.

The Pension Scheme as prevailed in SBI is in fact by virtue of a statutory provision and has no comparison with other Banks , and therefore, it was impossible to achieve as 3rd.benefit, owing to insufficient corpus even to maintain the break-even for smooth servicing of the scheme as envisaged which was a ground reality.

The above stance of AIBOC had created a lot of confusion

among the officer- employees in general and	much in
particular the office-bearers of its own affiliates even.

IN FACT, IN ONE OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETINGS, I OPPOSED THE STANCE TAKEN BY THE LEADERSHIP AND PREFERRED TO TENDER MY RESIGNATION AS AN OFFICE-BEARER OF SBOA / AIBOC AS IT WAS COMING IN THE WAY OF MY CHOICE FOR THE PENSION SCHEME.   

HOWEVER, MY LEADERSHIP PREVAILED UPON ME NOT TO TAKE THAT EXTREME STEP MERELY ON THIS COUNT ALONE AND REJECTED MY PROPOSAL-  

 

THAT'S HOW RELAXATION WAS GIVEN TO THE

OFFICEERS / OFFICE-BEARERS  WHOSOEVER WANTED TO OPT FOR THE SCHEME..."

Later , It has been  well within the knowledge of everybody that all the affiliates of the Nationalised Banks had formed as a separate entity (logo) within the AIBOC itself to exert pressure on their own leadership and to fall in line with all the other organisations who had to struggle for the 2nd option with prospective effect and that too after paying a "HEAVY PRICE " of refunding the PF amount by the retirees together with interest there on ! -IT'S INDEED ! A

HEAVY PRICE PAID BY THE INNOCENT RETIREES AS PENALTY FOR THE HISTORICAL BLUNDER COMMITTED BY THEIR OWN LEADERSHIP.  

THE IRONY PART OF IT IS ---

RECOVERY  WAS MADE RETROSPECTIVELY (together with interest )….

 BUT  PENSION WAS PAID WITH  PROSPECTIVE EFFECT ...."

CONSIDERING THE ABOVE FACTS....SECRET  & UNDER

HAND DEALINGS ARE NOT KNOWN TO ME AT ANY POINT

OF TIME ... INASMUCH AS THERE IS NO PLACE FOR SECRECY IN TRADE UNION PHILOSOPHY .... UNLIKE THOSE WHO INDULGE IN "TRADING UNION" !

FOR FULL DETAILS , CLICK THE FOLLOWING LINK.....

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yYPz0UgAq3XcfR9imF4Td 40PgF5T9QUn/view?usp=sharing

ALL ARE "SINNERS"....  NO "SAINTS"......  DEVILS  NOW SERMONING  VEDAS !..."POT CALLING KETTLE BLACK..."

 

“|| यतो धर्मस्ततो जयः ||”IS THE ULTIMATE......

I remain - Yours, దేవులపల్లి శ్రనివాస మూర్తీ        ి /Devulapalli Srinivasa Murti.                 

      NOVEMBER 17, 2020     

Ramavarappadu- Vijayawada  521108

9989318300

--

d s murti

 

 

 

 

bankpensioner PENSION UPDATION - FOLLOW UP ACTION IS NEED OF THE HOUR

Inbox

 

mohan p                                                                                                  12:26 (7

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   hours ago)

to bankpensioner Unsubscribe

Dear Friends,              

                          The present momentum gained to initiate discussions on Updation of Pension is specifically on the background of Hon.Finance Minister Mrs Nirmala Sitaraman’s interview with Hindu Businessline,dated 29^th Oct’20  and further in her talk in AGM of IBA on  10^th Nov 20 expressing her concern on unresolved issues of bank retirees.

^QUOTE:. Appreciating the dedicated work during the Covid period by bank employees, she said she has asked SBI to talk to the Indian Banks Association to sort out issues related to bank employees, their pension, family pension and pension for those who retired some time ago, whose pension is not commensurate with the pension of equal rank.

•               “I want bank employees to be given their due. A lot of pensioners are waiting for very long time. Yesterday, I had meeting with Rajkiran Rai of IBA. I spoke to him, too. We need bank employees to be attended to, particularly their families and the pension of retired employees,” she said.

§ The above concern of FM need to be translated to further actions, so as to get it implemented in its true spirit benefitting all retirees.

 

§ Since FM has conveyed the message to Chairman of

IBA, the ball is in the court of IBA now. It can be

implemented through individual Bank Managements only.In order to pass on necessary guidelines to Banks by IBA formal approval of scheme from MOF is inevitable.

 

 

 

§ Here the role of IBA is pertinent. IBA has  to seek approval of FM/MOF by submitting a suitable proposal with specific formula to be applied on Updation of Pension.

 

§ In case of RBI pensioners, updation of Pension was implemented up to year 2012 where merger of CPI points at 4440 took place.

 

§ In bank pensioners case we are at year 2020 and have XIth BPS/8^th JN  before us with merger points of CPI 6352 points. Hence bench mark would be at the current level.

 

§ Though FM has repeatedly expressed her concern on retirees issues, in last few days,since it is not an official order or Notification IBA need not necessarily act fast to submit an elaborate proposal to MOF to make shape the concern to a reality.

 

§ Since the matter pertains to post retiral benefits of serving employees along with past retirees naturally consensus to bearrived with them too on such proposal to be submitted.Retirees have no access to IBA right now.     

 

                             

•               Till this date IBA  has not found made any comments on FM’s  concern. Retirees Apex Organisation is as usual,is  in a letter writing process as    we know,which may not  bring desired result.

 

            AIBRF has not found responded on the subject so far.

 

•               Need of the hour is ,speedy follow up action.Apex Retiree Organisations should try to meet FM in person to follow it up of her concern with help of those office bearers  residing at New Delhi without loss of time.

 

•               As some of our friends pointed out Apex Retirees organizations should focus on major issue of Updation on Pension and need not further include DA related issue as if another demand since same will be automatically resolved once pension updation is implemented.

 

. As saying goes :Strike while the iron is hot. if Retiree

Organisations fail to pursue the matter at this point of time with all its capacity, it may be too late for retirees to place their decade old genuine demands at a later date.

 

In a political scenario change of persons may take place at any point of time. So till a proposal is submitted by IBA to MOF, as desired by FM,and an official approval on updation on pension is received from  

Ministry of Finance at the earliest  retirees may not have relief.

 

Let us look forward to that good day.

  

 

 

PENSION REVISION  BIPARTITE SYSTEM
 A MOCKERY ....????_

https://www.change.org/p/hon-ble-prime-minister-of-india-sri-narendra-modi-plight-of-the-bank-retirees-urgency-to-constitute-banking-pay-commission/u/28690052

JSOMA SHEKARA Canara Bank Retiree
Bengaluru
 jsomase...@gmail.com
 19 Mar 2021, 3:51 pm


 It is crystal clear that as long as IBA  and BPS exists pensioners will get nothing,

 A private club which can calculate arrears of 10 Lakh Bank employees in 15 days needs 10 years to collect data and calculate updation cost and still collecting data .


 This private club which is getting crores of Rupees to conduct BPS and have all infrastructure available in the world intentionally delays BPS for 40 months so that another private group can get 400 crores levy.

 In turn this private group agrees for status quo in wage revision increase and forego updation and other benefits .

 It is mutual understanding .

 Then this private group unleash its supporters who will blame Adani, Ambani, Trump etc for non revision of pension. .

 But Even Adani, Ambani could not prevent extracting 400 crores levy.

 During the last one year or so a number of MPs , EX PM and present cabinet ministers are taking up our updation issue with DFS but no union leader  has time to meet fM and present representation.


 Neither these leaders have sent reminders to BA to expedite the pension revision process .

 But this union within 2 hours of FM budget speech could make arrangements and chalkout strike call neglecting the 20 years old updation issue.

 When they have blocked updation how they will take up the issue with IBA.

 Unless DFS separates retirees issues from BPS and out of clutches of traders nothing positive will emerge.

 This govt has taken some out of box decisions.

 So it can do this .

 This is only our solution .

 How BPS is working for us

 1. 6th BPS gratuity anomaly

 2. 7th BPS- 5 year benefit, 1616-1684 animalies

 3. 8th BPS denial of 100% DA

 4. 9th BPS - excluding CRS  and other retirees from second Pension option

 5. 10 and 11th BPS denying Pension on special alloawnce .

 6. Recovering Commutation from DOR though it is paid 10-15 years after it is due.

 7. Not implementing even SC orders as directed .

 By this time both private club and Private group are in the drawing room to devise plans as to which benefit they can snatch from 12th PS retirees .

 This has been going on for the last 20 years.

 And will continue till the last pensioner die.

 All retiree associations are afraid of these leaders .

 They have no guts to ask these leaders why they are silent and not taking up the issue with IBA when the updation issue is pending since the last 4 months with IBA.

 Traders exchange benefits for money

 Trade Union(RBI) secure benefits for all.

--
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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKUBVvffQsAwBR8JtfazWiaQpanBFAR%2B%2BnaHcyTJ3Y5Q1Avu%2BQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--

d s murti

[Debasish Mukherjee]

Mr. Chhapia how could Govt.be involved or obligated in the bilateral matter or agreements between the IBA and employees union? At best the Govt.can instruct the Banks through IBA to implement updation in accordance with updation granted to the RBI pensioners in accordance with a provision in the Pension agreement in 1993. But if the Banks do not agree citing some constraints the Govt.cannot compel the Banks to implement. Only way possible if the Govt./ Finance ministry can allocate required funds to the Banks.

Debasish Mukherjee.

Sent from RediffmailNG on Android

From: haresh chhapia <hsch...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sat, 20 Mar 2021 14:00:11 GMT+0530
To: "Dr.Dhananjaya Bhupathi" <doctordh...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Embezzlement of Pension Funds

Sirji ,

APPRECIATED GALLENT EFFORTS OF STERN ACTIONS AND FIGHT AGAINST ANY WRONGS DONE IN PENSION FUNDS.

PLEASE ACCEPT OUR COMPLIMENTS FOR YOUR WONDERFUL STRUGGLE ,HOW THIS COULD BE DARED ;;?

KINDLY KEEP IT UP IN CONNECTION WITH CONSTITUTIONAL OBLIGATIONS OF GOVT AND PSU EMPLOYEES MUST BE TREATED IN LINE WITH R B I UNDER MOU 29.10.93 UNDER EVEN IND DISP ACT 1947 AS ALSO MENTIOND IN JOINT MOU FOR WHICH IT IS OBLIGATORY ON PARTS OF GOVT TO JUSTIFY WITH SINCERITY WELL IN TIME.

HSC

[sastry n s]

Mr Prasad is requested to be more inclusive in accommodating the views of our brethren. All of us agree that we lose nothing if CAG Audit is ordered. Ultimately truth will prevail and let us not leave any stone unturned only to repent later. Personal opinions apart, after all democratic approach is the only solution. Let our friends explore all the possibilities. Let us not frustrate the efforts of others. Already precious time is lost in the life of every pensioner and step-by-step approach will result only in indefinite delay.

[Prasad C N]

Dear Sir,

This is the reason, I had stopped posting messages.  Please go through my mail again.  Please enlighten me, by accommodating views and assume that there is embezzlement,  please tell us in what way it is going to help us.  Even if CAG is appointed and if there is embezzlement is proved, in what way your pension is going to be updated.  We are giving one more ground to managements represented by Indian Banks Association to say that they need money to make good embezzled amount and therefore there is no money for improvement of pension.  Mr.Sastryji, what do you want, improvement in pension or enquiry into embezzlement of pension fund ?  In what way the affairs of conducting Pension Fund is going to help us ?

I have presented the outcome of all three possible situation and once again request you to go through completely.  

I have observed comments by intellectuals and warriors.  This group has become a dumping ground for some to post their prejudiced opinions.  With folded hands, I request and pray each one of those who are oozing venom to understand explain what would happen to any benefit extended without incorporating in a Bipartite Settlement and Banks do not extend the benefit.  When the Judgments and provisions of Settlements/Joint Notes are not extended, will the managements extend the benefit ?

Indian Banks Association, Banks and the Government are all part of the Managements.  Endeavors of all Managements are always is to ensure minimizing outgo and maximizing income.   Unless and until proposal is submitted by the Managements represented by Indian Banks Association, no improvement in pension would take place.  Officially, no Government orders submission of proposal.  Please find out what happened in RBI.   

We need to add friends.  We need support from every corner.  We cannot add friends by abusing.  There are very few who extend unsolicited help.  If so, will any one helps one who abuses.  We are obligated to the Government, Management and UFBU, in case they consider improvement, as we do not have any legal right to improvement in our pension.  Even in case of Government pensioners and also in respect of issue of OROP, improvement was not through courts.  Only in terms of 5th CPC actual improvement commenced, that too after signing of Pension Settlement.  Can we blame those who signed the settlement in 1993 to anticipate what would be the report submitted a few years later ?  On the date of signing Pension Settlement 5th CPC itself was not constituted.     

I would conclude by saying that writing here or elsewhere or writing letters with illogical, irrelevant and illegal issues, grounds, etc. would make people who are at the helm of affairs to ignore us.  Our standing and esteem come down.  Most of those who are writing here are senior officers.  They should be guiding younger and junior executives and people like us.  Unfortunately, I have found that to become a hero or a warrior, one should abuse UFBU, IBA, Govt., Retirees' Associations, certain individuals.  We are not even sparing Courts and Judges.  Where are we going ?

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards,

Prasad C N

--

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/c3a6ad47-c643-4d9c-b142-fa0eefb3547dn%40googlegroups.com.

[Prasad C N]

Dear Sir,

I have not paid even one rupee to the Pension Fund.  Except those who opted for pension in terms of second pension option, no one has contributed even one rupee.  Even those who opted for pension in 2010 and were employees did not contribute even one rupee, thereafter.  Much more than 56% contributed in 2010, commutation amount was paid.  In many case, many received arrears of pension, after adjusting the amount payable by them.  Therefore, please favour me by evidencing contribution of employees and pensioners to pension fund.  PF money transferred was not out of our contribution.  It was Managements' contribution.  

Please do not go by those who are misguiding.   This is what I have been saying, pensioners are not being take seriously by any one because of these irrational thinking.   

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards,

Prasad C N

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAEVYxa_OWjeDMpWu%3DvC4Z0QXNRsx%3DgTdbmLhs1uhT%2BAD_351JA%40mail.gmail.com.

[P. S. SATYANARAYANA]

Many retirees say there is a pension updation clause in Pension Settlement of 1993 which was not carried into Pension Regulations of 1995.  Let us realise that there is no updation clause in 1993 Settlement.

-- P. S. SATYANARAYANA. 

Virus-free. www.avg.com

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKUBVvcoRXTXOBJZseoY6dKL2f48wRv3EAAkqi8QgUEF4mVZaA%40mail.gmail.com.

Virus-free. www.avg.com

[Kalyanasundaram Subramaniam]

Please see the following: Memorandum of Settlement : Clause 12.

 Provisions will be made by a scheme, to be negotiated and settled between the parties to this Settlement by 31st December, 1993 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.

and also the following in the pension regulation 

(zb) “Settlement” means memorandum of settlement agreed between the management of the Bank represented by the association authorised by them and workmen of such Bank represented by trade unions authorised by them;  

We can conclude the following: 

Our pension regulation is based on the settlement reached. 

The Settlement provided for updation etc. as applicable for RBI. But this is not there in the Regulation. 

Regards.

S Kalyanasundaram

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

Rather than Pension Fund we should demand drastic changes in BPS system.

In the present BPS system only BANKS. IBA and Unions are benefitted, Employees and Pensioners are victims.

1. In this digital era when systems are fully automated there is absolutely no valid reason for dragging BPS for 40 months. This is intentionally done to gain unlawful advantage for all above three parties at the cost of Employees and Pensioners.

By Intentionally dragging BPS for 40 months.

a. Banks save hundreds of crores by way of interest by paying arrears after 40 months from due date without paying interest.

b. Unions earn a few hundred crores of levy by investing nothing. Even some banks are not earning such profit and are under loss.

c. For sheer inefficiency of dragging BPS  for 40 months which can be completed in 3 months IBA is being awarded 60-80 lakhs by Banks.

So it is win win situation for all above 3 parties.

For Employees

Same 15% wage revision as last year. No interest is paid on arrears. Load is only 2.5%.  Rest is treated as special allowance.

But how to console employees. Then continuously release circulars claiming 100-200 benefits. Then matter is over.

For PENSIONERS

pre-2002 pensioners Big ZERO

For pensioners after X BPS no pension on Special allowance.

Do we really need this BPS ?         

Both IBA and UFBU have not opened any channels for Pensioners and Employees for interaction. Because it is difficult to answer uncomfortable questions. Better to hide under absence of RTI excuse than facing pensioners.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1976722461.287543.1616317478306%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Narayanan Kasthurirengan]

Dear Prasadji,

While I do not want to enter into any arguement with regard to criticisms, I beg to differ with certainty about one point.  All the pension optees have certainly given up their management contribution of PF to get Pension.  The very fact that this was done with our explicit consent gets you what is obvious.  To say that first time optees sacrificed nothing for pension is travesty of truth.

Second time optees lost additional amount because of the misdeeds of those who misguided them.

But then proper upkeep of pension fund is the concern of every bank pensioner since future pension payment depends on this pension fund.  Already the sword of privatisation is over our neck.

When PNB can transfer funds from pension fund just to show profit (while differing points are made about this, you and we are knowledgable enough to understand the obvious about this manipulation),  think of private  entities once banks go to their hands.  We may say courts are there  but then a straight case of total illegality took 15 years for a great fighter PALANI to get justice for retirees, that too against  public sector entities  what will happen after privatisation that too with a clue provided by PNB.  It is my humble opinion that in a democracy, noise does make sense because silence is taken to be an established weakness.

Please bear with me if I am wrong

K Narayanank

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1976722461.287543.1616317478306%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Mani B]

Mr Prasad,

Your hard work and dedication towards pensioners issues are highly appreciated and need a hearty salute. 

But at the same time many in this forum , including me, wonder, how vehimently you are of the opinion that pension fund is only belongs to banks and not thier pensioners.

(1) Please let me know why the management took a letter of undertaking for joining in pension scheme and authorisation to transfer the entire credit balance with up-to-date interestbin cpf account of individulal pensioners to pension fund, if that was entirely belonging to the banks.

(2) when cpf balance was maintained separately why the banks issued halfyearly statements to individual employees for information and for raising clarifications in case of wrong credits/lesser credits etc.

Both acts of bank are due to make the beneficiary staff to believe that the bank is so sincere in  maintaining individuals cpf acct so that it will be paid to him on super annuation, with up-to-date interest as per law in force. This is a commitment of the bank towards its employee.

When pension was introduced, all the cpf members have given authorisation letter to transfer all credits "Of this CPF account" with up-to-date interest to pension fund.

It is a precondition to the cpf optees to join the pension scheme.

If cpf belongs to bank why they did maintain individual account for each and every employee, instead of a bulk sum like pension fund.

When cpf account was in force, the bank is answerable to cpf account holders, individually, how after transferring the same into a single bluk amount called pension fund constituted exclusively for the then cpf members, how the bank is not answerable for questions raised on the pension fund?.

Almost 45% of cpf optees have accepted the offer of the bank and surrendered their CPF balances to pension fund and started drawing pension thereafter.

You may argue that almost 60% of cpf contribution were received back by individual pensioners and there is 40% of the cpf balance alone is left to service one's future pensions. As per statute, future pensions are to be paid out of future contributions (similar to that way they hv done hitherto) and out of the profits earned from the investments made from this fund. THIS IS A STATITORY OBLIGATION FOR THE BANK.

Though it is a fact, the opearating clauses of EPR says that bank has to provide adequate fund (like that they contributed to individual cpf accts, when cpf scheme was in force) to pension fund also. Further, actuarial valuation us to be done on adequacy of pension fund as at the end of every fin.year. 

Thus is a statutory obligation for bank as per the provisions of Banking companies acquision and untertaking Act 1979 & 1980 and as per the EPR clauses. (Since relevant clauses are known to every one in this forum, I did not specifically mentioned the same here).

So, the statutory duty of the is just changed with change of law, namely, banks have contributed to cpf account then under BCAU Acts then and now liability continue to exist as to contribute as per requirement of EPR. After constituting Pension fund banks are not devoid of contributing anything from P&L to pension fund.

Pension Regulations is very clear that debits to pension fund are to be made only for paying out pensions and for no other cause.

After transferring cpf balances, the relevant clauses of PF act cease to exist but simiultaneously  EPR clauses takes over seamlessly and bank is duty bound to answer 

NOW PLEASE SAY TO WHOM THE BALANCE IN THE PENSION FUND BELONGS TO.

THE PENSION FUND SO CONSTITUTED IS AN IRREVOCABLE FUND AND TUST SHOULD BE FORMED AS PER THE TERMS OF INDIAN TRUST ACT.

Indian Trust Acts says that if a trust happens to be dissolved, the fund available will be taken over by a similar trust only having the principles of same nature.

Thus neither the bank nor the pensioner can claim ownership if the fund but can claim rights over the amount in the form of pension / updated pension / family pension etc etc. The greater liablity rests with the bank as a contributior like that of a cpf contributor then as per then law in force.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Let us stop preaching that pension fund is not belonging to pensioners hereafter.

Bala

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1976722461.287543.1616317478306%40mail.yahoo.com.

[LakshmanRao Kantamsetti]

Prasadji the contributed pf amount was paid by the bank to the retired employee at the time of  retirement . Then the retired employee contributed  this amount from his pocket or account  for pension fund. Then it is the amount contributed by the retiree only . This is the logic of all others in this group . Kindly understand their point of view.

Regards 

KLRao 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1976722461.287543.1616317478306%40mail.yahoo.com.

[Debasish Mukherjee]

Mr.C.N.Prasad being from eSBM which being a Assiciate Bank of SBI had pension scheme as third retirement benefit much before introduction of pension scheme in the PSU Banks in 1995 and as such Mr.Prasad or SBI and its Assiciate Banks employees might not had contributed from their share of Banks contribution to employees P.F. to Pension fund A/c. In fact as in BOB I believe other PSU Banks employees who had opted pension w.e.f.1995 had also to give an undertaking agreeing to surrender and not to claim of their share of Banks contribution to employees P.F. and authorising the Bank to contribute the balance to pension fund.

Debasish Mukherjee.

Sent from RediffmailNG on Android

From: LakshmanRao Kantamsetti <contac...@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 15:54:35 GMT+0530
To: bankpe...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: bankpensioner Embezzlement of Pension Funds

To view this discussion on the web visit https:roups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/812337841.54224...@mail.yahoo.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CANgcvGm1r1NHQvjYuO0iF4Ds32hn2ASjRAs5k0zN+cU=m9z...@mail.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAEVYxa_OWjeDMpWu=vC4Z0QXNRsx=gTdbmLhs1u...@mail.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1976722461.2875...@mail.yahoo.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAFGan-q10_5qoHesa_+BneOY...@mail.gmail.com.

[Kalyanasundaram Subramaniam]

See the following in the Regulation: 

  7. Composition of the Fund:- The Fund shall consist of the following, namely:- (a) the contribution by the Bank at the rate of ten percent per month of the pay of the employee; (b) the accumulated contributions of the Bank to the Provident Fund and interest accrued thereon upto the date of such transfer in respect of the employees; (c) the amount consisting of contributions of the bank along with interest refunded by the employees who had retired before the notified date but who opt for pension in accordance with the provisions contained in these regulations;   .........

So as per regulation, all these are treated as Bank's contribution. Right?

S Kalyanasundaram 

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

There are two parties to the settlement dated 29.10.1993.

IBA representing Banks and AIBEA

Banks have argued before the court in the updation case CPW 6233/2008 as follows.

Civil Writ Petition No.6233 of 2008 (O&M)- 6 -Civil Services Rules or the Reserve Bank of India Pension Ruleswould apply was only to be taken when there existed some problemof interpretation. The respondents would claim that the settlementwhich had been effected in the year 1993 that gave rise to theregulation merely paved way for a negotiation for parties forcreating a scheme that could take note of payment of pension,commutation of pension and updation on the lines that were in forcein Reserve Bank of India and if the negotiations or talks did notyield to any specific provisions like the way the Reserve Bank ofIndia Pension Regulations provided for, they cannot have any vestedright to demand the pension regulations in the manner that they areapplied either for the Reserve Bank of India's employees or for thecivil servants.

Another party AIBEA so far nowhere has expressed its opinion in the matter

[Debasish Mukherjee]

No one is going to listen to our, the Bank retIrees cries. IBA has been turned to a  conspiracy Hub and all sorts of malpractices, conspiracy of Banks fund misappropriation etc.had been planned since 2012 when Mr.P.Chidambaram was the Finance minister. First diversion and misappropriation of pension fund had taken place in 2012 by the PNB with the consent of Mr.P.Chidambaram though PNB had projected as written off investments treated Bad and non realisable on account of pensioon fund investments in the PNB Balance sheet duly accepted and certified by the Auditor. Since IBA can easily be used as a safe place to locate for fund that can be utilized in case of any adversities and the ministers or Officials of DFS are ignorants about existence of the establishment as IBA is which can  easily provide information from where the Govt. can utilise and collect funds to cover up/manipulate the Govt's fiscal balancing. Irrespective of party all the miniysters will thus keep IBA alive and and in existence and the UFBU is taking this as their advantage to blackmail the Govt.and dictate the leaders their terms to shut mouth of the misdeeds of the Banks/Govt.

Debasish Mukherjee,

mumb...@rediffmail.com

Sent from RediffmailNG on Android

From: JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 15:49:51 GMT+0530
To: bankpe...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: bankpensioner Embezzlement of Pension Funds

Rather than Pension Fund we should demand drastic changes in BPS system.

In the present BPS system only BANKS. IBA and Unions are benefitted, Employees and Pensioners are victims.

1. In this digital era when systems are fully automated there is absolutely no valid reason for dragging BPS for 40 months. This is intentionally done to gain unlawful advantage for all above three parties at the cost of Employees and Pensioners.

By Intentionally dragging BPS for 40 months.

a. Banks save hundreds of crores by way of interest by paying arrears after 40 months from due date without paying interest.

b. Unions earn a few hundred crores of levy by investing nothing. Even some banks are not earning such profit and are under loss.

c. For sheer inefficiency of dragging BPS  for 40 months which can be completed in 3 months IBA is being awarded 60-80 lakhs by Banks.

So it is win win situation for all above 3 parties.

For Employees

Same 15% wage revision as last year. No interest is paid on arrears. Load is only 2.5%.  Rest is treated as special allowance.

But how to console employees. Then continuously release circulars claiming 100-200 benefits. Then matter is over.

For PENSIONERS

pre-2002 pensioners Big ZERO

For pensioners after X BPS no pension on Special allowance.

Do we really need this BPS ?         

Both IBA and UFBU have not opened any channels for Pensioners and Employees for interaction. Because it is difficult to answer uncomfortable questions. Better to hide under absence of RTI excuse than facing pensioners.

To view this discussion on the web visit https:roups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/812337841.54224...@mail.yahoo.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CANgcvGm1r1NHQvjYuO0iF4Ds32hn2ASjRAs5k0zN+cU=m9z...@mail.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAEVYxa_OWjeDMpWu=vC4Z0QXNRsx=gTdbmLhs1u...@mail.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1976722461.2875...@mail.yahoo.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM=eiW2ocr60Jz4w4Gdyn42-ZmogNn=mwAHt0Ffx...@mail.gmail.com.

[Sridhar Mandyam]

A simple calculation shows what we are getting as pension is much more than our purported sacrifices. Suppose we were to get our pension from what is available in pension fhnd, we wouldn't be getting half of what we are getting now.  Let us  remember we are entitled to get return on our contribution only,  irrespective of huge balance in pension fund, if we want to link our pension to pension fund 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CALz2HejiaqxwdZWBg5%3DC-LPhQaH_WeyuoPFv50sgU2btQ2_9Og%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraju Kakani]

Sairam, How such important messages reach the employees and Retirees/Pensioners.Where is the channel of communication with them. Why not we create. Why not we publicise through media, even if it is costly. As it stands, the message might have reached only fee hundreds,  say 800/900 members of this group only, when we are 6 lakhs and 10 lakhs Employees .The public interested in Banks and their welfare/ working are in chores as stake holders - depositors, borrowers, beneficiaries, leaving those above 3 namely BANKs ,UFBU, IBA. We have think how can we spread such important messages. 

With regards 

Nagaraju Kakani 

Hyderabad 

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW2ocr60Jz4w4Gdyn42-ZmogNn%3DmwAHt0FfxJ9tm_1hDdw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Prasad C N]

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards,

Prasad C N

On Monday, 22 March, 2021, 04:01:41 pm IST, Mani B <mani...@gmail.com> wrote:

Mr Prasad,

Your hard work and dedication towards pensioners issues are highly appreciated and need a hearty salute. 

But at the same time many in this forum , including me, wonder, how vehimently you are of the opinion that pension fund is only belongs to banks and not thier pensioners.

(1) Please let me know why the management took a letter of undertaking for joining in pension scheme and authorisation to transfer the entire credit balance with up-to-date interestbin cpf account of individulal pensioners to pension fund, if that was entirely belonging to the banks.

(2) when cpf balance was maintained separately why the banks issued halfyearly statements to individual employees for information and for raising clarifications in case of wrong credits/lesser credits etc.

It is because employee is forgoing right to receive bank's contribution.  An accrued right of receiving PF is exchanged with pension.  Therefore, consent is obtained.

Both acts of bank are due to make the beneficiary staff to believe that the bank is so sincere in  maintaining individuals cpf acct so that it will be paid to him on super annuation, with up-to-date interest as per law in force. This is a commitment of the bank towards its employee.

It is a contingent liability for the bank and Bank was liable to pay its share of PF, under certain conditions only.  That is it was payable under Provident Fund rules.  At the time of opting for pension that right to receive PF was exchanged with right to receive pension. 

When pension was introduced, all the cpf members have given authorisation letter to transfer all credits "Of this CPF account" with up-to-date interest to pension fund.

It is a contingent liability for the bank and Bank was liable to pay its share of PF, under certain conditions only.  That is it was payable under Provident Fund rules.  At the time of opting for pension that right to receive PF was exchanged with right to receive pension. 

It is a precondition to the cpf optees to join the pension scheme.

It is a contingent liability for the bank and Bank was liable to pay its share of PF, under certain conditions only.  That is it was payable under Provident Fund rules.  At the time of opting for pension that right to receive PF was exchanged with right to receive pension. 

If cpf belongs to bank why they did maintain individual account for each and every employee, instead of a bulk sum like pension fund., 

It is because PF in Banks is a 'Defined Contribution Plan'.  There is no uncertainty with regard to the amount.  The balance shown was payable to the employee is defined and payable in the event of certain event.  In case of dismissal, there was forfeiture of Management portion of PF only, but not that of employee.  If PF were to belong to the employee, even that amount should be paid.  There is uncertainty with regard to quantum (DR increase/decrease) and period (longevity) in respect of payment of pension.  It is only rules that defined.

When cpf account was in force, the bank is answerable to cpf account holders, individually, how after transferring the same into a single bluk amount called pension fund constituted exclusively for the then cpf members, how the bank is not answerable for questions raised on the pension fund?.

It is because PF in Banks is a 'Defined Contribution Plan'.  There is no uncertainty with regard to the amount.  The balance shown was payable to the employee is defined and payable in the event of certain event.  In case of dismissal, there was forfeiture of Management portion of PF only, but not that of employee.  If PF were to belong to the employee, even that amount should be paid.  There is uncertainty with regard to quantum (DR increase/decrease) and period (longevity) in respect of payment of pension.  It is only rules that defined.

Almost 45% of cpf optees have accepted the offer of the bank and surrendered their CPF balances to pension fund and started drawing pension thereafter.

It is not their contribution.  It is the contribution by the management and it is payable only under certain conditions.  To illustrate, one could withdraw employees' contribution of PF under certain conditions.  But, such a withdrawal is not possible in respect of management contribution of PF.

You may argue that almost 60% of cpf contribution were received back by individual pensioners and there is 40% of the cpf balance alone is left to service one's future pensions. As per statute, future pensions are to be paid out of future contributions (similar to that way they hv done hitherto) and out of the profits earned from the investments made from this fund. THIS IS A STATITORY OBLIGATION FOR THE BANK.

It is not 60%.  Some of the second pension optees have recived pension, without paying any amount.  In erstwhile Associate Banks, many officers who got second pension option got more amount of pension as arrears, much more than the amount what was payable/refundable by them.  Please calculate in your own.  What was the amount transferred towards pension and the amount of pension received.  In my case, the commutation payable at the time of my retirement in 2001 was Rs.2.50 lakhs, bu the PF balance was Rs.2.23 lakhs.  How much I have contributed ?     

Though it is a fact, the opearating clauses of EPR says that bank has to provide adequate fund (like that they contributed to individual cpf accts, when cpf scheme was in force) to pension fund also. Further, actuarial valuation us to be done on adequacy of pension fund as at the end of every fin.year. 

AS 15 mandates such provision, even in PF account.  As explained earlier, like in NPS, PF was/is a defined contribution plan, where there is certainty to payment of  PF.  But, pension is only a defined benefit plan , which means pension payable is not based on the balance, but in terms of pension regulations

Thus is a statutory obligation for bank as per the provisions of Banking companies acquision and untertaking Act 1979 & 1980 and as per the EPR clauses. (Since relevant clauses are known to every one in this forum, I did not specifically mentioned the same here).

So, the statutory duty of the is just changed with change of law, namely, banks have contributed to cpf account then under BCAU Acts then and now liability continue to exist as to contribute as per requirement of EPR. After constituting Pension fund banks are not devoid of contributing anything from P&L to pension fund.

In respect of EPF, obligation to pay any further beyond what is credited to PF after retirement is certainly nil.  but, Pension grows.  Therefore, unlike pension funds, there is further contribution to Pension fund.

Pension Regulations is very clear that debits to pension fund are to be made only for paying out pensions and for no other cause.

After transferring cpf balances, the relevant clauses of PF act cease to exist but simiultaneously  EPR clauses takes over seamlessly and bank is duty bound to answer 

NOW PLEASE SAY TO WHOM THE BALANCE IN THE PENSION FUND BELONGS TO.

In Private Bank there is no Pension Fund, but there is Provident Fund.  Then tell, where is the pension fund.  Please calculate your own Provident Fund liability Vs. Pension including commutation received.  Then you will understand that you have already received far more than what was transferred from your PF account.  Still, do you believe that your money is still there.

THE PENSION FUND SO CONSTITUTED IS AN IRREVOCABLE FUND AND TUST SHOULD BE FORMED AS PER THE TERMS OF INDIAN TRUST ACT.

Indian Trust Acts says that if a trust happens to be dissolved, the fund available will be taken over by a similar trust only having the principles of same nature.

That contignecy does not arise as there will not be any balance left, when the last pensioner dies.  They will not make any provision, in case of that contingency

Thus neither the bank nor the pensioner can claim ownership if the fund but can claim rights over the amount in the form of pension / updated pension / family pension etc etc. The greater liablity rests with the bank as a contributior like that of a cpf contributor then as per then law in force.

This fund is not owned by the Bank.  Even the PF is also not owned by the Bank.  Both are owned by Trusts.  Banks contribute as per defined formula to PF and further liability ceases.  but, in Pension, liability of the banks continue as per regulations.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Let us stop preaching that pension fund is not belonging to pensioners hereafter.

This is the bane of pensioners.  How much of money contributed by those who have joined the Bank after 01.03.1995 to the Pension Fund ? 

Bala

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAJR4tp%2B9fMjKUUQsjtmnZq9i8A%2BV%2BgWSbVp%2BWYq5XsMK5%2BFvgg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Nagaraju Kakani]

Sairam, Whatever mentioned above is super 1993 Settlement but not as per Pension regulation. Let all come together and draft suitable point wise problem, clauses in the settlement/ pension regulation supporting the demand and the question to raised by the MPs to be raised in the Parliament to get suitable reply from FM OR through RTI from DFS OR Bank Msngement. 

With regards 

Nagaraju Kakani 

Hyderabad 

[Sridhar Mandyam]

Income from this amount does not cover even half of pension we are getting now.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/89ab3df7-2081-4039-8b7c-6f6b08bebc4dn%40googlegroups.com.

[Mohandas Rao K]

Friends,

Even after Sri C N Prasad had clearly explained how and why the Pension Fund in the banks does not contain the retiree's contribution, some are continuing their argument. If it is for argument sake, no problem. But, the fact is a fact that a retiree did not contribute a single rupee to the Pension Fund.  

The Pension Scheme of the SBI is a little different, where the bank's contribution of PF along with his/her own contribution is being refunded with accrued interest to the retiree and they are being paid pension also. Their pension is a little lower when compared to the other PSBs, because of some ceiling. Their pension is popularly known as a 'third benefit'. The Pension Scheme of other PSBs and of e_Associate Banks are similar. For the pension optees, their own contribution to PF is only refunded with interest when retired. Bank's contribution to PF is kept in the Pension Fund. It is not the money belonging to the retiree, but it is of the bank, due to a statutory provision. Then how one can claim that their money [own PF already refunded when retired] is lying in the Pension Fund?

For the PF optees, their own contribution to PF is being refunded with interest when retired. Bank's contribution to PF with interest is also being refunded. Their contribution to the Pension Fund is nil, either directly or indirectly. This was so for all before the introduction of the Pension Scheme in 1995, except for the SBI.

Finally, the amount lying in the Pension Fund belongs to the respective banks, being the bank's contribution of PF to the fund and periodical replenishment to the fund to meet the statutory Pension Payment Obligation of that particular bank. Any shortfall in the fund would be taken from the earning of the bank. 

In this connection, the following popular sentences are worth recalling: "He who knows not, and knows not that he knows not, is a fool - shun him. He who knows not, and knows that he knows not, is a child - teach him. He who knows, and knows not that he knows, is asleep - wake him. He who knows, and knows that he knows, is a wise man - follow him."

K. MOHANDAS RAO

Virus-free. www.avast.com

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKxG0JWvSFxZp7jOsvQyznpeH08QxM8XeYM20eKzqzBXuUqBHg%40mail.gmail.com.

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

Thank you Mr.Mohandas Rao for clarification,

Rather than pension fund what is bothering pensioners is why even after 4 months of FMs green signal no positive news is emerging from IBA/UFBU side regarding updation. Since Nov 30 many MPs have raised questions in Parliament and many more MPs have met and submitted memorandums to FM. Retiree organizations almost every alternative day, meeting MPs, Speaker, Ministers etc.

However it is certain that only after a proposal is submitted by IBA FM can take a decision.

Is it too much to ask sri Soumya Dutta and Sri.CHV to remind IBA to call a joint meeting of officers and workmen associations to further discuss and finalize updation?

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CADV-LEhMpfjgdmV6LpRGQp%2BDQCPoH9%3D0my_PTuWNHnkyW%3Duteg%40mail.gmail.com.

[P. S. SATYANARAYANA]

This is in response to the post of Sri Narayanan Kasturirengan Sir of 22nd March. 

With utmost respects to him, I write the following at the cost of repeated repetition of what Sri C. N. Prasad has been untiringly explaining always.

In fact, while reading the post of Sri Narayanan Sir, I did not want to respond. But his remark at the end of his post "noise does make sense because silence is taken to be an established weakness", made me feel the need to confirm the views of Sri C. N. Prasad.

NO RETIREE HAS CONTRIBUTED ANYTHING IN MONEY TERMS TO PENSION FUND, EXCEPT A PART OF HIS PAST SERVICE (Pension being Deferred Wage). (I am not talking of excess amount paid under Second Option).

PENSION WAS GIVEN TO US AS A SECOND BENEFIT IN LIEU OF MANAGEMENT CONTRIBUTION TO PROVIDENT FUND. THE MOMENT WE OPTED FOR PENSION, WE LOST OUR RIGHT ON THE BALANCE IN MANAGEMENT CONTRIBUTION TO P.F. ACCOUNT.  SINCE THIS BALANCE WAS NO LONGER REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED IN THAT ACCOUNT, BANK TRANSFERRED IT TO PENSION FUND.

OUR RIGHT TO PENSION AND FAMILY PENSION STEMMED OUT OF PENSION REGULATIONS, AS A DEFERRED WAGE FOR OUR PAST SERVICE.

PENSION FUND IS ALWAYS MAINTAINED AT ADEQUATE LEVEL AS PER ACTUARIAL VALUATION DONE ON THE BASIS OF PENSION REGULATIONS PRESENTLY IN FORCE ONLY. IT IS BANKS' STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITY. 

IF ANY IMPROVEMENTS COME IN PENSION REGULATIONS IN FUTURE, ACTUARIAL VALUATION GOES UP BY THAT EXTENT; AND NECESSARY FURTHER PROVISION WILL HAVE TO BE MADE FROM P & L ACCOUNT ONLY.

OUR DEMANDS FOR UNIFORM FAMILY PENSION RATE AND UPDATION/REVISION OF PENSION ARE ORGANISATIONAL DEMANDS, BASED ON EQUITY AND JUSTICE.

IF WHAT IS REVERSED FROM PENSION FUND BY SOME BANKS (like PNB) IS ON ACCOUNT OF REVALUATION, BANKS ARE PERFECTLY IN ORDER.

PRIVATISATION AND ITS EFFECTS AND ILLS IS A DIFFERENT MATTER ALTOGETHER, WHICH IS DEBATABLE. 

Thanks for allowing me to express my views. Any of the above points is open for debate/correction on convincing reasons and merits. -- Peeyes.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CALz2HejiaqxwdZWBg5%3DC-LPhQaH_WeyuoPFv50sgU2btQ2_9Og%40mail.gmail.com.

[Prasad C N]

Dear Mr.Mohandas Rao,

We have some intellectuals and warriors who, despite repeated requests continue to post and comment which do not pass touchstone of law.  I do agree, despite lengthy explanation duly providing documents do not convince.  They do not know the harm they are inflicting upon.  They would continue, even if bank pensioners become laughing stock.

I am providing the formats submitted while opting for pension during 2010, wherein those who opted themselves have stated that '.  .  irrevocably authorise the bank to transfer the entire contribution of the Bank along with entire interest accrued thereon .  .  .  '.  I am aware even this simple sentence in English may bring in a lot of inventions.   

One can take horse to the water, but you cannot make it drink

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards,

Prasad C N

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CADV-LEhMpfjgdmV6LpRGQp%2BDQCPoH9%3D0my_PTuWNHnkyW%3Duteg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Debasish Mukherjee]

Pension fund was built initially out of contributions by way of surrendering the employees shares in CPF and there was agreement between the AIBEA and IBA that every year the Banks would contribute to pension fund equal amount of Banks contributions to employees P.F. as the pension optees had already authorized the Banks to transfer their shares in CPF to pension fund and they would not claim from CPF. Also an agreement was entered between the said parties that the Banks would invest pension fund in Govt.Bonds and Govt.securities to yield good returns and also prohibited any speculative investments. From the records of pension funds with the Banks it will be revealed pension fund could generate handsome surplus after meeting all liabilities till the Banks observed Govt./ RBI stipulations and avoided speculative investments. But possibly from the year 2012 the Banks became defaults in contributing to pension fund and there was incident of diversion/misappropriation of pension fund in PNB in 2012 with the consent of the then finance minister. Further from the year 2015 with the permission of the Finance ministry the Banks invested pension fund in stock markets with the expectation of getting good returns. But returns did not come as expected. Surprisingly, in spite of some of the UFBU constituents raising objection for this speculative and undesired investment of pension fund by the Banks the AIBEA leaders, claiming the champion of introduction of pension scheme did not raise their voice. Pension fund balance with the Banks would have touched to a robust amount to nearly Rs.3 lacs crores by today had there not been any misappropriation or insufficient return due to speculative investments. Entire responsibility for any misdeeds or even erosion of value of pension fund will lie upon the Banks and finance ministry only and the retirees or employees are in no way responsible.

Debasish Mukherjee,

mumb...@rediffmail.com

Sent from RediffmailNG on Android

From: Sridhar Mandyam <mandy...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:46:35 GMT+0530
To: bankpe...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: bankpensioner Embezzlement of Pension Funds

Income from this amount does not cover even half of pension we are getting now.

On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 9:49 AM Kalyanasundaram Subramaniam <1952...@gmail.com> wrote:

See the following in the Regulation: 

  7. Composition of the Fund:- The Fund shall consist of the following, namely:- (a) the contribution by the Bank at the rate of ten percent per month of the pay of the employee; (b) the accumulated contributions of the Bank to the Provident Fund and interest accrued thereon upto the date of such transfer in respect of the employees; (c) the amount consisting of contributions of the bank along with interest refunded by the employees who had retired before the notified date but who opt for pension in accordance with the provisions contained in these regulations;   .........

So as per regulation, all these are treated as Bank's contribution. Right?

S Kalyanasundaram 

On Monday, March 22, 2021 at 3:54:32 PM UTC+5:30 K.L.Rao, Amnesty International Member wrote:

Prasadji the contributed pf amount was paid by the bank to the retired employee at the time of  retirement . Then the retired employee contributed  this amount from his pocket or account  for pension fund. Then it is the amount contributed by the retiree only . This is the logic of all others in this group . Kindly understand their point of view.

Regards 

KLRao 

To view this discussion on the web visit https:roups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/812337841.54224...@mail.yahoo.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CANgcvGm1r1NHQvjYuO0iF4Ds32hn2ASjRAs5k0zN+cU=m9z...@mail.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAEVYxa_OWjeDMpWu=vC4Z0QXNRsx=gTdbmLhs1u...@mail.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1976722461.2875...@mail.yahoo.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/89ab3df7-2081-4039...@googlegroups.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAEVYxa8fOVGOOewPqgeaTGqt...@mail.gmail.com.

[Prasad C N]

Dear Sir,

Associate Bank Pensioners are also covered under Regulation, 1995.  I am one of the petitioners/respondent in Palani's case and subsequent contempt petition.  I fear that many of the messages/mails sent may also be based on such wrong notion

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards,

Prasad C N

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1616412454.S.4543.autosave.drafts.1616413907.25799%40webmail.rediffmail.com.

[Debasish Mukherjee]

Mr.Prasad, you have mentioned the retirees opted pension in 2010 i.e. under second option of pension offered when actually a majority number were already retired and they had to refund to the Bank Bank's contribution to P.F. they received at the time of their retirement. As per my knowledge employees need not had to opt for pension in 2010 since they were already covered under pension scheme in lieu of CPF for those employees & officers joined the service after 01.7.1995 at least that's what the BOB stated. But for us those opted pension in 1995 itself had to give in writing to surrender our share of CPF with the undertaking not to claim CPF in future and also had to authorize the Banks to transfer our balance in CPF and all future contrtributions to Pension fund.

Debasish Mukherjee.

Sent from RediffmailNG on Android

From: "'Prasad C N' via bankpensioner" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, 24 Mar 2021 09:29:53 GMT+0530
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: bankpensioner Embezzlement of Pension Funds

Dear Mr.Mohandas Rao,

We have some intellectuals and warriors who, despite repeated requests continue to post and comment which do not pass touchstone of law.  I do agree, despite lengthy explanation duly providing documents do not convince.  They do not know the harm they are inflicting upon.  They would continue, even if bank pensioners become laughing stock.

I am providing the formats submitted while opting for pension during 2010, wherein those who opted themselves have stated that '.  .  irrevocably authorise the bank to transfer the entire contribution of the Bank along with entire interest accrued thereon .  .  .  '.  I am aware even this simple sentence in English may bring in a lot of inventions.   

One can take horse to the water, but you cannot make it drink

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards,

Prasad C N

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM=eiW2ocr60Jz4w4Gdyn42-ZmogNn=mwAHt0Ffx...@mail.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKxG0JWvSFxZp7jOsvQyznpe...@mail.gmail.com.

Virus-free. www.avast.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CADV-LEhMpfjgdmV6LpRGQp+DQCPoH9=0my_PTuWNHnkyW=ut...@mail.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1699376604.12310...@mail.yahoo.com.

[Ramarao Velagapudi]

I think we are jumping to conclusions without understanding subject

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/812337841.542241.1616138539747%40mail.yahoo.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CANgcvGm1r1NHQvjYuO0iF4Ds32hn2ASjRAs5k0zN%2BcU%3Dm9zZAw%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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAEVYxa_OWjeDMpWu%3DvC4Z0QXNRsx%3DgTdbmLhs1uhT%2BAD_351JA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Narayanan Kasthurirengan]

Dear Sri Sathyanarayana

Thank you for your mail.

First you say we contributed nothing, then you affirm that we gave up management share of our PF to get pension.  

If one has to agree with you,

You have to agree that your money lying with someone for some period is not your money.  

Second, you say acturial valuation and resultant provisions are as per statutory provisions and hence done by banks accordingly.  I understand you missed a communication in this blog itself which states that one PSB, while responding to an RTI application has replied that they have not done actuarial valuation  for the period as demanded in the appln.

Third, by NOISE I never meant to hurt anybody but to insist that what had been raised in respect of pension fund is a required Check and unless people keep asking such pertinent questions  banks may try to short circuit the entire process to somehow show profit and pension fund is a potential source for that.

If a person raises an issue  I don't understand how it will derail other issues After all, he is an individual and the issue he has raised is based on INPUTS as provided by even a frontline primary leader of the UFBU, which is a respectable grouping for the welfare of the retirees.  No bank or for that matter no organisation will derail any process based on such individual action unless there is fear of exposure.   Why we should react so assiduously to such individual actions after all it seeks to establish the truth.

Can you make commitment on behalf of banks that they do not manipulate .

If yes, I am sure  you will explain what happened in the financial year ending March 2014.  While I do not have details about all banks, one PSB in which i was working declared an unbelievable dividend of 65% -to comfort one govt they declared an interim dividend of 35%,  could not escape the clutches of a new govt and declared final dividend of another 30%.  See this bank was so healthy and rich that it could declare 65% dividend.  You may react sharply as to what has this to do with pension fund.  The link is one bank which was to declare loss manipulated pension fund to declare profit and I am amused that people are creating panic that if you question this we will be derailed and doomed(could be a typical management voice?).

If you have a different  perception that is understandable but then do not trivialise others perceptions  when they quote facts and figures. 

K Narayanan

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1326658495.1329725.1616508962480%40mail.yahoo.com.

[P. S. SATYANARAYANA]

Sri Kalyanasundaram Subramanian Sir!

"Provisions will be made by a scheme, TO BE NEGOTIATED AND SETTLED between the parties to this settlement by 31st December, 1993 ....."

Has that settlement ever happened?  

Does mere intention of the parties to make a settlement in future amount to making a settlement, when no such settlement ever took place?

--P. S. SATYANARAYANA.

Virus-free. www.avg.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKxG0JUVry6yP1jCftxEWeGRWN1mxSn-%2BBeE8%2BQOYZMRwReO-g%40mail.gmail.com.

[Kalyanasundaram Subramaniam]

To Mr Satyanarayana

I do not have definite answer for your question as I do not have means to verify old circulars. 

But I presume the following: 

The pension scheme which has been brought under regulation is the  negotiated one. 

The clause in the  MOU (29 10 1993) provided for negotiated settlement but the guiding principle is 'on the lines of pension in RBI'. 

There can be only improvement from the RBI scheme in the negotiated scheme.

I request members to enlighten me with any understanding/MOU etc. after signing of settlement dated 29th October 1993. 

Regards.

S Kalyanasundaram 

[P. S. SATYANARAYANA]

Kalyanasundaram Sir,

1. Till March 2019, even RBI pensioners did not have revision.

2. In RBI, in 2019 also, what they got is only a 'One-time revision', which is not automatic for future wage revisions.

3.  In RBI also, I do not think their Pension Regulations are modified to provide for automatic pension revision with every future wage revision based on some agreed scientific formula, which we are now discussing our Pension Regulations to be not having. 

3.  Shortly and hopefully, there are bright chances of bank pensioners basic pension getting revised almost on the same lines as in RBI.

4.  This is only a discussion for our mutual benefit of understanding issues; and not to have any controversies. We are all open to learn from senior and knowledgable friends. -- Peeyes.

[Debasish Mukherjee]

What Mr.P.Satyanarayana mentioned is there in the pension regulations dt.29.10.1993 but as far as my information goes no further discussion had taken place in that respect. I can recollect some members of Officers Associations particularly AIBOC & BOB officers Assn. raised this point with the leadership but the leaders could not enlighten in this regard. Though Mr.Tarakeshwar Chakraborty was alive that time but he did not reply queries in the matter possibly because he was busy in convincing the BEFI leadership to accept the pension scheme. Even if some discussion had taken place either that was not disclosed to the members by union or the Banks did not circulate any understanding or agreement had at all been executed.

Debasish Mukherjee.

Sent from RediffmailNG on Android

From: Kalyanasundaram Subramaniam <1952...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 16:10:12 GMT+0530
To: bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: bankpensioner Fwd: Embezzlement of Pension Funds

iWe couldn't verify the sender of this email.

 I vividly explained in my letter dated October 22, 2018 ,  the ill-conceived antecedents on the part of the Bank Managements/IBA/MOF combine,  leading to such a glaring discrimination much detrimental to the lamenting lot of our  fraternity - devoid of justice and fair play:

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ljq6GJacEBhJyyQxQiwrP1lfxgmByKuG/view?usp=sharing

 A TEST FOR ENDURANCE:  

 Last But Not the Least  - Our long-drawn legal battle/s have been proved to be A FORMIDABLE TEST FOR OUR ENDURANCE AT THIS EVENING HOURS OF OUR LIVES......A TEST FOR ENDURANCE: 

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RO_iv9wM1pa8QP2m1Fzy5o9b7zxfmeIb/view?usp=sharing

Earnestly soliciting your support, 

I remain - Yours ,

d s murti.

...

[Message clipped]  View entire message

--

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKxG0JUVry6yP1jCftxEWeGR...@mail.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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/db4c81f7-84b6-42ea...@googlegroups.com.

[NSS]

Friends

In pursuance of the clause in pension settlement, two small committees were formed with members from both sides to finalise the Pension Regulations. It was agreed between the parties that updation will be done in line with the RBI formula. I have extracted the relevant portion of the minutes of the Small Committee.

The draft circulated was mutually accepted by the parties. The following points were further discussed and accepted:

2.     Formula for updating pension should be on the lines of the same given in the Reserve Bank pension scheme. Any change therein should be introduced only after mutual agreement.   

However this clause and the clause in the Pension Settlement 1993 relating to DA as per RBI formula were not included in the Regulations. P&H HC did not accept our claim  that the minutes of the small committee is final agreement. Court termed the minutes as parleys before agreement and treated the Regulations as final agreement. Fortunately we have new evidence that Govt. has treated the minutes of the Small Committee as binding. In Sanjeeva & others V Union of India,( WP 25913, 25914 of 2002, Judgment dt.23/11/2004, Karnataka High Court ) Govt. has in its reply quoted the binding nature of the minutes. Appeals against the P&H HC judgment are pending in the Supreme Court and this evidence will be produced in hearing.

Regards

N.Sankarasubramanian 

[Debasish Mukherjee]

Sent from RediffmailNG on Android

To view this discussion on the web visit https:roups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKxG0JUVry6yP1jCftxEWeGRWN1mxSn- BeE8 QOYZMR...@mail.gmail.com.

[KUNAL SINGH KHARAYAT]

Now there is no move for Updation of pension.

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: NSS
Sent: 26 March 2021 16:20
To: bankpensioner
Subject: Re: bankpensioner Fwd: Embezzlement of Pension Funds

 

Friends

--

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 on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/4ef3bad3-199e-470a-8558-b24fbc50207fn%40googlegroups.com.

 

[Chandrasekaran V]

Very Good effort by NSS.  Let us hope that the Supreme Court appreciates this evidence favourably.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/605dc926.1c69fb81.a79ab.3a71SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING%40gmr-mx.google.com.

[harinarayana sarma nandivada]

Sir, It will be highly appreciable if the Judgment of 2004 of Karnataka High Court wherein the acknowledgment by  Govt. is available be put  on this blog.  

NHarinarayana Sarma

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKAEprzao4N5thiFB-GOgsjOr%2Bf5ceYh%2BLdc623fk%3Dp-MyCRKA%40mail.gmail.com.

[NSS]

Sir

The Judgment runs to 101 pages and the google groups software does not permit uploading of files of such size. I have enclosed pages 53,54 and 55. You can download the file from Karnataka HC website.

Regards

N.Sankaraasubramanian

[Prasad C N]

Dear Sir,

Partly extracting from a judgment does not help us.  One cannot construe that the Govt. of India has accepted the minutes.  The Govt. of India has only stated that as discussed in the meeting, pension regulations have been framed as existed in RBI & GOI.  There is no dispute regarding the same.

Hon'ble P&H High Court has also discussed this issue and has only decided that even in terms of the minutes of the meeting, if the Banks are unwilling to implement updation as implemented in RBI ipso facto, then this has to be negotiated with unions/associations.  Is there any change in the stand of unions/associations, govt and banks ?

Creating false hopes based on wrong or in parts is more dangerous.  Still, many say UFBU should not discuss.  

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards,

Prasad C N

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/e017e6ed-8c97-4d08-a5d3-81d8708b8882n%40googlegroups.com

.

[harinarayana sarma nandivada]

 OK Sir. Thanks a lot for the gesture.  

NHN Sarma

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/e017e6ed-8c97-4d08-a5d3-81d8708b8882n%40googlegroups.com

.

[NSS]

Dear Mr.Prasad

I have not created any false hopes. On the other hand you are creating a false impression that P&H HC has decided that IBA and Unions can negotiate an settle the issue. No where the Court has said anything like that. Court while referring to the decision of the single judge had presumed that the clause no.17 in the settlement had impelled the single judge to observe that it would be open for the appellants to make a demand for parity if so advised and use their bargaining powers. The Court (two Judge Bench) had decided that the minutes of the small committee are only parleys before agreement and the final agreement came in the form of Regulations. Now in the Appeals we have to prove that the minutes of the small committee are the final agreement. Coming to the Karnataka HC judgment, Why should Govt. refer to the Small Committee  and its terms of reference i.e. to formulate regulations to be adopted by individual boards. It is only to establish  that the Regulations were framed after discussions and consensus among IBA and Unions. Govt. has stated in its reply that the Regulations which was framed after agreement among the parties stipulate a cut off date and option has to be exercised before the expiry of the cut off date. Certified copy of the Govt's reply when obtained will throw more light on this . 

I have not said that this judgment will win the case for us. All I have informed was that we have since obtained some supporting evidence. Where is the question of giving false hopes or relying on  part judgments?

Please refer to the discussion on the binding nature of settlements in the Karnataka HC judgment. Court has discussed number of judgments where it has been decided  that settlements are binding on the parties. Where is the question of Govt. approval for settlements when they are binding the parties?  Were these settlements entered into on the pre condition that they are subject to Govt. approval?

Regards

N.Sankarasubramanian

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

Whatever may be our preferences we have to accept reality.

"It is absolutely true that our updation case has to be discussed in BPS, by UFBU and IBA, a consensus has to be arrived at and IBA has to send a proposal to DFS".

This was the reality in 2001, even today and will be the same in 2030.

But the question is why they are not discussing it and giving lame excuses like cost is high, cost to be studied and data to be collected since the last 10 years.

Banks are paying lakhs of Rupees to IBA every year to conduct BPS. IBA has all infrastructure available to it. In spite of this why IBA has not been able to collect data and calculate updation cost since the last 10 years?

We agree that IBA is not a decision maker and the final decision rests in DFS. But who is preventing IBA from collecting data, presenting updation cost in BPS and starting preliminary discussion. Now we all know that FM in her inaugural speech on Nov 30th expressed support for OROP in Banking Industry i.e updation.

Now DFS is waiting for proposal from IBA

But two were meetings held in DEC which created more confusion than clarifying matters. Since then we have only been getting messages regarding development from unconfirmed sources but both IBA and UFBU are silent.

We agree that only UFBU has power to negotiate retirees issues? But that power was silent when IBA rejected a 5 years benefit, 50% Pension from DOR, 100% DA to pre 2002 retirees and pension to CRS. That power failed to ensure that IBA issued uniform guidelines to Banks in implementing SC verdict.

However still we expect that power to do justice at least now and secure us updation as per RBI formula for all eligible pensioners without discrimination.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/53580756.1763686.1617048778416%40mail.yahoo.com.

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

What Mr.Prasad said is true. Court actually made a passing remark that " why petitioners have come to court instead of pressing better rights through negotiations"

I am reproducing here relevant portion of judgment. Entire judgment copy also attached.

****************************

It is set out through the written statement itself that
the decision was communicated in the year 2005, but the
writ petitions came to be filed more than 3 years in CWP
No. 6233 of 2008 and more than 5 years later in the
batch of writ petitions in CWP No. 12211 of 2010. No
explanation has been given in the petitions as to why the
petitioners had not immediately approached this Court. I
am merely stating this in the passing that the petitioners
could not have come to the High Court for enforcement
under Article 226 when they could have only pressed for
better rights through negotiations in the manner that the
settlement talks provided. It would be open for the
petitioners to make the demands for parity if they are so
advised and use their bargaining skills through their
associations and press for the reliefs though the
mechanism provided under the Industrial Disputes Act.
There existed no vested right now for the petitioners to
claim the benefits in the manner sought.
11. All the writ petitions are consequently dismissed,
however, subject to the above observations.”

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/c72536b8-1373-476b-a2e6-153be3770ac2n%40googlegroups.com.

[NSS]

Dear Mr.Somasekara ji

You are quoting from the judgment of the single judge. This judgment was merged into the Judgment of the Two Judge  Bench. Keeping aside the technicalities, the single judge  had stated that the petitioners have no vested right to get updation and therefore they should not have approached the Court.  He had suggested that the petitioners can make a demand for parity if so advised and use their bargaining skills through their Associations. We seek Court intervention when we feel that we have a vested right. As both the benches have ruled that there is no vested right for updation, the pensioners have approached the Supreme Court and will try to establish that the right for updation has accrued through the minutes of the small committee. Court had not stated that if the Banks decline to implement the terms of the minutes then it has to be negotiated with Unions/Associations. Court is of the opinion that the minutes are not agreement and therefore cannot give us right for updation.

Regarding using our bargaining skills for getting updation, you have been repeatedly writing in this forum that the Unions/Associations have not shown any eagerness  to clinch the issue. 

Regards

N.Sankarasubramanian