NOTIONAL ADDITION OF 5 YEARS FOR PERSONS WITH BROKEN PERIOD SERVICE

[hema]

Hello All

I am SN Hemalatha who joined Bank of India in Bangalore, as a clerk on
21-05-1981 and took SVRS from Bank on 15-01-2001 rendering a total
service of 19 years 7 months and 25 days. I was a original pension
optee and my pension was fixed taking my qualifying service as 20
years and I am getting pension on pro rata basis of 20/33. However
after supreme court decision on Mohandas Rao versus Bank Of India,
which cleared notional addition of 5 years to SVRS pension optees, I
was expecting that my pension will get enhanced in the ratio of 25/33.
Many of my friends in Bank who had completed 20 years qualifying
service ( not broken period) got their pensions refixed and got
arrears.

Based on the clarification from CN Prasad of this group who said any
body with 19 years 6 months and 181 days of service is treated as
having 20 years qualifying service for notional addition of 5 years, I
wrote to Bank Of India, Bombay to consider my case also.

I was shocked to hear that Bank has two qualifying services , 1)
Service of 19 years six months and above but less than 20 years is
eligible for 20/33 pension. 2) Any service above 20 years is eligible
for notional addition of 5 years. I was denied the benifit of 5 years
notional addition.

My question to you all is any such thing is prevailing in other
nationalised Banks. Any member in this group with similar service has
got this benefit. I also request members to suggest the future course
of action to similarly placed persons. If it is legal can we all join
and fight it out or wait for Pradeep kumars case.

For guidance in the matter.

SN Hemalatha

Mob 9481026304 Bangalore

[MOHANDAS RAO]

Dear Friends,

 

The supreme court judgement is attached for ready-reference to enable learned members to express their views and suggestions.

 

K. MOHANDAS RAO, SBM-SVRS 2001.

 

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group.
To post to this group, send an email to bankpe...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bankpensioner?hl=en-GB.

[pady nabs]

Madam, pl.visit bankpensioner.blogspot.com and select FAQS.  You find qualifying service for VRS optees, and notional service of 5 years also eligible subject to the maximum of 33 years service.  I have some more books. will clarify and let u know in a couple of days.   regards, padmanabhan. --- On Sat, 10/9/11, hema <chin...@gmail.com> wrote:

-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group. To post to this group, send an email to bankpe...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bankpensioner+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[lakshmanan shankarnaraynan]

Dear Friends,

 

As per the judgement I think only those who have completed 20 years of service are eligible for the notional addition of 5years of service. The irony is that SBM has denied this benefit even to those who have completed 20 years of service and are legally entitled to.

 

S.Lakshmanan(IB-VRS2001)

[Prasad C N]

Madam,

The interpretation of Bank of India is wrong and right.  Pension regulations have been amended so as to deny broken period benefit some where during 2005.  If they are paying pension for 20 years, certainly they are wrong.

Please take up the matter with retirees' organisation of yours.

 

Thanks, a Million.

With regards,
Prasad C N

---

From: hema <chin...@gmail.com>
To: bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, 11 September 2011 7:26 AM
Subject: bankpensioner NOTIONAL ADDITION OF 5 YEARS FOR PERSONS WITH BROKEN PERIOD SERVICE

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group.
To post to this group, send an email to bankpe...@googlegroups.com.

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bankpensioner+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[ABROA Unit: SBT]

As per Pension Regulations, 1995, a pension optee can retire voluntarily under Regulation 29 and receive proportionate amount of pension upto a maximum of 33 years provided he has completed 20 years of qualifying service as on the date of retirement. The additional qualifying service upto a maximum of 5 years is applicable only if the pension optee has completed 20 years and more but less than 33 years of qualifying service.

In your case, you have not completed 20 years of qualifying service and your retirement for the purpose of pension is under Regulation 28 (Superannuation) which was amended to pay pension for vrs pension optees who had completed 15 years and more but less than 20 years of qualifying service.Since your retirement for the purpose of pension was not under Regulation 29, I have a genuine doubt whether you would be eligible for the benefit of additional 5 years in computing your qualifying service. I understand that this has been clarified in K.Mohandas vs Bank of India case. You may, however, seek clarification from other retired officers who are more knowledgable on the issue

with regards

viswanathan 

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bankpensioner?hl=en-GB.

--
Associate Banks' Retired Officers' Association Unit: State Bank of Travancore

[Prasad C N]

Dear friends,

I feel that my good friends have not understood in right perspective.  Here, issue why the retirees who have served fro more than 19 years and six months are eligible to treat the service as 20 years and consequently addition of 5 years of service, notionally, under Regulation 29.

The definition of broken period in Regulation 18 is reproduced, hereunder :

18. Broken period of service of less than one year  -

If the period  of  service of an employee includes broken period of service less than  one  year,  then if such broken period is more than six months, it shall  be   treated as one year and if such broken period is six months or less  it shall be ignored. 

On account of this definition, 19 years and 183 days of service means, 20 years of service.  This issue is settled by Honourable Supreme Court in Indian Bank Vs Venkataramni's case. For information of each of you, I am attaching a copy of the Judgement.    The Regulation 29 (1) is reproduced hereunder :

1)  On  or  after the 1st day of November, 1993 at any  time  after  an  employee  has  completed twenty years of qualifying service he  may  by  giving notice of not less than three months in writing to the competent   authority retire from service:

By applying what is provided in Regulation 18 and Regulation 29(1) is read with Regulation 18, an employee who had served for a period more than 19 years 6 months,  service should be treated as 20 years and since minimum service required is 20 years for notional addition of 20 years, the employee is retired under regulation 29 and is entitled to notional addition of 5 years of service.Our Bank, State Bank of Mysore, is paying Pension for only those who had put in 20 years of service. Consequent to said Judgement, Our Bank is paying pension to all those who had served more than 19 years 6 months, under regulation 29.  Therefore, if 5 year benefit is extended in the Bank, all of them will get the benefit.

In the meantime, non-Associate Banks have amended Regulation 18, by adding :

“Provided that provisions of this regulation shall not apply for determining the minimum service required to make an employee eligible for pension.”;

 

This has no relevance to the present case, as this is applicable to ascertaining eligible to receive pension.

Thanks, a Million.

With regards,
Prasad C N

---

From: perumal maruthu <perumal...@yahoo.co.in>
To: "abro...@gmail.com" <abro...@gmail.com>
Cc: "mohand...@gmail.com" <mohand...@gmail.com>; "cn_pr...@yahoo.com" <cn_pr...@yahoo.com>; "sures...@gmail.com" <sures...@gmail.com>; kaliappan <kalia...@dataone.in>
Sent: Monday, 12 September 2011 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: bankpensioner NOTIONAL ADDITION OF 5 YEARS FOR PERSONS WITH BROKEN PERIOD SERVICE

Dear Viswanathan Sir,

Thanks for your view. I also hold similar view. Otherwise, granting 5 years benefit (to those who have 15 years and above but less than 20 years) would amount to double benefit. In order to avoid double benefit only, MOF instructed IBA to deny 5 years notional weightage to those who have got relaxation of 5 years in eligibility criteria . Unfortunately, IBA misinterpreted it and  tried to guillotine all SVRS optees. If 5 years benefit can be now so generously inpterpreted, then there is no need for our brethren in SBM to fight so long.  SC verdict is very clear and categorical that 5 years notional weightage is available under clause29 and it can not be unilaterally denied without amending the relevant pension regulation. It has also observed that the special benefits offered in the SVRS2000-2001 is not intended to deny the existing benefit in the Pension scheme.

M.Perumal

CB-SVRS

From: ABROA Unit: SBT <abro...@gmail.com>
To: bankpe...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, 12 September 2011 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: bankpensioner NOTIONAL ADDITION OF 5 YEARS FOR PERSONS WITH BROKEN PERIOD SERVICE

As per Pension Regulations, 1995, a pension optee can retire voluntarily under Regulation 29 and receive proportionate amount of pension upto a maximum of 33 years provided he has completed 20 years of qualifying service as on the date of retirement. The additional qualifying service upto a maximum of 5 years is applicable only if the pension optee has completed 20 years and more but less than 33 years of qualifying service.

In your case, you have not completed 20 years of qualifying service and your retirement for the purpose of pension is under Regulation 28 (Superannuation) which was amended to pay pension for vrs pension optees who had completed 15 years and more but less than 20 years of qualifying service.Since your retirement for the purpose of pension was not under Regulation 29, I have a genuine doubt whether you would be eligible for the benefit of additional 5 years in computing your qualifying service. I understand that this has been clarified in K.Mohandas vs Bank of India case. You may, however, seek clarification from other retired officers who are more knowledgable on the issue

with regards

viswanathan 

On 11 September 2011 09:40, Prasad C N <cn_pr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Madam,

The interpretation of Bank of India is wrong and right.  Pension regulations have been amended so as to deny broken period benefit some where during 2005.  If they are paying pension for 20 years, certainly they are wrong.

Please take up the matter with retirees' organisation of yours.

 

Thanks, a Million.

With regards,
Prasad C N

[ABROA Unit: SBT]

 
Dear Prasad

Two things need to be clarified:

1. Was the retirement of the employee under Regulation 29 (Voluntary Retirement) or Regulation 28 (Superannuation)? If it were under Regulation 29, the employee is eligible for additional service of 5 years and not otherwise.

2. Can an employee who has completed 19 years and 183 days and another one who has completed 20 years 182 days be treated as having put in the same number of years of service (20 years) for the purpose of pension and be given the benefit of additional service of 5 years?

[anil jain]

Dear Sir,

As on 2001 when hem lata retired. BOI has taken a correct decision to pay the pension 20/33 as per regulation and amendment at the time of SVRS when the period of 20years was reduced to 15 years to enable the SVRS optees to get the pension.

As for as 5 year addition is concerned , it is high handedess of banks not adding -5- years. as per Supre Court Judgement the addition of -5- year has been granted. please check up.

anil jain

From: Prasad C N <cn_pr...@yahoo.com>
Sent: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 23:54:30
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: bankpensioner NOTIONAL ADDITION OF 5 YEARS FOR PERSONS WITH BROKEN PERIOD SERVICE

Madam,

The interpretation of Bank of India is wrong and right.  Pension regulations have been amended so as to deny broken period benefit some where during 2005.  If they are paying pension for 20 years, certainly they are wrong.

Please take up the matter with retirees' organisation of yours.

 

Thanks, a Million.

With regards,
Prasad C N

To post to this group, send an email to bankpe...@googlegroups.com');" target=>bankpe...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com');" target=>unsub...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bankpensioner?hl=en-GB.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group.
To post to this group, send an email to bankpe...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bankpensioner?hl=en-GB

Treat yourself at a restaurant, spa, resort and much more with Rediff Deal ho jaye!

[Prasad C N]

Dear Mr.Vishwanathan,

I have extracted following two paras from Judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohandas's case :

18. The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that employees are entitled to add a period of qualifying service not exceeding five years in terms of the Regulation 29(5); the total qualifying service rendered by an employee seeking voluntary retirement in any case shall not exceed 33 years. With regard to the amendment in Regulation 28, Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that by the said amendment, the provision contained in Regulation 29(5) of the Regulations does not get affected so as to disentitle the employees the benefit provided therein.

41. Even if it be assumed that by insertion of the proviso in Regulation 28 (in the year 2002 with effect from September 1, 2000), all class of employees under VRS 2000 were intended to be covered, such amendment in Regulation 28, needs to be harmonized with Regulation 29, particularly Regulation 29(5) which provides for addition of qualifying service by five years for the optees who had put in 20 years service or more subject to the condition that total qualifying service rendered by such employee shall not in any case exceed 33 years. This would be in tune and consonance with the explanatory note appended to the amendment in Regulation 28 wherein it is stated that the amendment with retrospective effect would not adversely affect any employee or officer of the respondent-bank. That would also meet the test of fairness. 

These paragraph clearly stipulates that both Regulations have to harmonised. Since, the pensioners is retired under SVRS from Bank of India (same bank as that of Mr.Mohandas) and she is receiving pension calculated for 20 years, only regulation 29 is the applicable regulation.

Whether it is 1st of Jan to 31st December or 1st of July to 30th June, it is a period of one year.  This logic is applicable to all pensioners.  I will give my example : I had put in 20 years 8 months at the time of retirement and I am getting pension for 21 years.  For sombody who has put in 21 years 5 months and 30 days will also get pension for 21 years. 

 

Thanks, a Million.

With regards,
Prasad C N

From: ABROA Unit: SBT <abro...@gmail.com>
To: bankpe...@googlegroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, 13 September 2011 7:31 AM