Re: Digest for bankpensioner@googlegroups.com - 15 updates in 4 topics

[vaidya nathan]

Updation.. regulation.

Sir.

Minister said that thete is No Updation clause in Regulation.  Thete is No clause to Pay Exgratia in Regulation.  Then why the IBA paid it a Thing That was Not In Regulation.  It is Not Pick and Choose for a institution like IBA to decide as they please.  So  the payment od Exgratis is Nothing but a Part Payment of Updation. 

On Tue, Mar 10, 2026, 5:25 PM <bankpe...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

bankpe...@googlegroups.com

Google Groups

Topic digest
View all topics

• PENSION UPDATION- REPLY BY MOF IN PARLIAMENT 9th March'26 - 5 Updates
• February 25, 2026 Hearing Highlights by AI - 4 Updates
• NAKARA V. UNION OF INDIA (SC.1983) - 4 Updates
• 28.02.2026 circular.docx - 2 Updates

PENSION UPDATION- REPLY BY MOF IN PARLIAMENT 9th March'26

MOHAN P <moha...@gmail.com>: Mar 10 06:37AM +0530 Same old answer Cut & Paste!   By MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE (SHRI PANKAJ CHAUDHARY   "These regulations do not have provision for revision of pension. However, pensioners of PSBs are being granted dearness relief on pension and the same is being increased from time to time i.e. on half yearly basis. Also, as per the agreed terms of 12th Bi-partite Settlement / 9th Joint Note, monthly Ex-gratia is being paid by PSBs in addition to the pension / family pension to the pensioners / family pensioners, who became eligible to draw pension on or before 31.10.2022.   No proposal to revise the basic pension of retirees of PSBs beyond the existing provisions of the relevant Pension Regulations, is presently under consideration. "

Narayanan Venkateshwaran <seevi...@gmail.com>: Mar 10 09:47AM +0530 The minister of state for finance has mentioned in the parliament of Periodic da and exgratia given to bank pensioners as if act of benevolence. Sad indeed C V narayanan

JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com>: Mar 10 11:20AM +0530 Parliament question and reply does not in any way impact the right of the pensioners to demand updation, Minister gives status of issues as existed on the date and time of question. There are many inconsistencies and incorrect information in reply. For ex some time back DFS replied that "updation will be considered if a proposal is submitted by IBA". Maybe this question/answer is an attempt to create some support for bank's advocate who is supposed to argue the M C Singhla case on 12th.   On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 9:52 AM Narayanan Venkateshwaran <

JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com>: Mar 10 02:30PM +0530 When final argument date is just 2 days a ruling party MP voluntarily ask a question on updation and minister replies there is no provision for updation when DFS earlier replied will be considered if a proposal is submitted by IBA. is this stage managed to create an advantage for Mr.Mehta

Satyanarayana Rao <karna...@yahoo.co.in>: Mar 10 07:24AM The government has agreed that DA and Ex-gratia is paid in leiu of pension updation. Now the upcoming Supreme court verdict will clearly conclude that there is something that calls for justice and shall deliver positive judgement and updation shall take place.   Yahoo Mail: Search, organise, conquer On Tue, 10 Mar 2026 at 9:52, Narayanan Venkateshwaran<seevi...@gmail.com> wrote: The  minister of state for  finance has mentioned in the parliament of Periodic da and exgratia given to bank pensioners as if  act of benevolence. Sad indeedC V narayanan On Tue, 10 Mar, 2026, 6:38 am MOHAN P, <moha...@gmail.com> wrote:   Same old answer Cut & Paste! By  MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE (SHRI PANKAJ CHAUDHARY   "These regulations do not have provision for revision of pension. However, pensioners of PSBs are being granted dearness relief on pension and the same is being increased from time to time i.e. on half yearly basis. Also, as per the agreed terms of 12th Bi-partite Settlement / 9th Joint Note, monthly Ex-gratia is being paid by PSBs in addition to the pension / family pension to the pensioners / family pensioners, who became eligible to draw pension on or before 31.10.2022.  No proposal to revise the basic pension of retirees of PSBs beyond the existing provisions of the relevant Pension Regulations, is presently under consideration.  "   -- Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAMCbyDQPSu55VKTXvc%3DyMzDsS2c4sFTNRzzvZiMqiDP-Q2V%3D7A%40mail.gmail.com.       -- Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAJev%3Da9KTOgZoCwwOx-wtUfr6Mw%2BRYtvwTd8eGMb5svqsYAkJA%40mail.gmail.com.

Back to top

February 25, 2026 Hearing Highlights by AI

MOHAN P <moha...@gmail.com>: Mar 09 05:25PM +0530 Sir, The referred chart has been drawn and filed before court by ,Mr.P. K. Manohar Advocate for Resp. No. 5 <http://5.ie>,and not by IBA. I have posted copy of the file here,earlier. Regards Mohan.P     On Mon, 9 Mar, 2026, 9:55 am Narayanan Venkateshwaran, <

Mathew Pc <pazhe...@gmail.com>: Mar 09 06:25PM +0530 Can you attach the chart once again?   Thanks

JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com>: Mar 09 05:51PM +0530 For discussion on updation issue is subjudice. But While cases against denial of pension benefits on Special allowance are pending in HC and SC, IBA UFBU discussed special allowance and increased it there by further increasing loss for pensioners.

Niranjan Cn <niran...@gmail.com>: Mar 10 11:50AM +0530 Sirs,     The case is only for considering the Special Allowance for Pension in Courts and the court cases are nothing to do with the special allowances to working employees.   Hence the conclusion/comparison drawn by you may not be appropriate.       Niranjan   On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 9:52 AM JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com> wrote:

Back to top

NAKARA V. UNION OF INDIA (SC.1983)

JSOMA SHEKARA <jsomase...@gmail.com>: Mar 09 07:08PM +0530 Two factors that are making pre 2002 retirees suffer are 1. Commercialization of trade Unions 2. Utilizing funds meant for retirees to increase wage revision percentage. Leaders take up issues of employees who are paying subscriptions. They do not want to invest their time and\ money on retirees who are not paying subscriptions. Moreover those unions who seriously take up retirees issues like updation are barred from BPS. VIZ Befi and AIBOA. BEFI which issues lengthy circulars on Social justice, equality, protecting rights of workers etc etc stopped talking about updation from the very moment it was barred from BPS. Unions were afraid of permanent suspension from BPS and thereby losing membership and subscription. Just imagine even a Unions is having 2000 members and collecting monthly membership of Rs.100, the annual income of Unions is 24 lakhs per month + levy once in 5 years, If levy is just Rs.1000 for 2000 members total collections is Rs. 20 Lakhs. Total 5 years annual income is Rs.1.40 crores. Who will lose such an amount by taking up the issue of pre 2002 retirees and get barred from BPS? This is one of the reasons unions are accepting illogical reasons of Sub judice and avoiding discussions. 2. How the rule pension basic shall be fixed on last 10 months average emoluments.is being twisted Based on this employees retiring during 10th, 11th and 12th BPS should have got more pension as their Basic salary +DA+allowances and yearly increments are increased in every BPS. IBA/UFBU could not have straight away rejected proportionate pension on their average emoluments or 50% pension on last drawn salary as it violates pension rules. So the best way to reduce salary itself, by converting it as a special allowance and denying pension benefits on it.. So amounts saved by denying pension on special allowance, updation, merger of DA etc is used for increasing wage revision to 17%. Where is the guarantee that UFBU will not agree to increasing the special allowance to 50% and denying pension on it in 13th BPS. It is my strong wish that affected retirees win special allowance case and get arrears from their date of retirement So all Unions prefer to keep the right to negotiate on behalf of retirees and use it to get better perks for employees who pay subscriptions. So far no union leader has come out with the circular explaining why 100 % DA was denied to pre 2002 retirees, what is the actual cost of updation, why merger of DA not demanded,why ex gratia not reviewed, why Special allowance agreed denying pension benefits, the Medical agreement was signed making retirees pay 100% of premium there by keeping 80% of pensioners out of medical care. The reason is the above two factors mentioned.

Satyanarayana Rao <karna...@yahoo.co.in>: Mar 10 05:56AM The negotiating UFBU has become puppets of IBA and playing in the hands of IBA. They neither have commitments to trade union ethics not have the bargaining skill. They started singing on dotted lines. .   Yahoo Mail: Search, organise, conquer On Tue, 10 Mar 2026 at 9:52, JSOMA SHEKARA<jsomase...@gmail.com> wrote: Two factors that are making pre 2002 retirees suffer are1. Commercialization of trade Unions  2. Utilizing funds meant for retirees to increase wage revision percentage.    Leaders take up issues of  employees who are paying subscriptions. They do not want to invest their time and\ money  on retirees who  are not paying subscriptions. Moreover  those unions who seriously take up retirees issues like updation are barred from BPS. VIZ  Befi and AIBOA.  BEFI which issues lengthy circulars on Social justice, equality, protecting rights of workers etc etc  stopped talking about updation from the very moment it was barred from BPS.  Unions were afraid of permanent suspension from BPS and thereby  losing membership and subscription. Just imagine even a Unions is having  2000 members and collecting  monthly membership of Rs.100, the annual income of Unions is 24 lakhs per month + levy once in 5 years, If levy is just Rs.1000 for 2000 memberstotal collections is Rs. 20 Lakhs. Total 5 years annual income is Rs.1.40 crores. Who will lose such an amount by taking up the issue of pre 2002 retirees and get barred from BPS?This is one of the reasons unions are accepting illogical reasons of Sub judice and avoiding discussions.2. How the rule  pension basic shall be fixed on last 10 months average emoluments.is being twisted    Based on this employees retiring during 10th, 11th and 12th BPS should have got more pension     as their Basic salary +DA+allowances and yearly increments are increased in every BPS.     IBA/UFBU could not have straight away rejected proportionate pension on their average emoluments or 50% pension on last drawn salary as it violates pension rules.    So the best way to reduce salary itself, by converting it as a special allowance and denying pension benefits on it.. So amounts saved by denying pension on special     allowance, updation, merger of DA etc is used for increasing wage revision to 17%. Where is the guarantee that UFBU will not agree to  increasing the special allowance to 50% and denying pension on it in 13th BPS.   It is my strong wish that affected retirees win special allowance case and get arrears from their date of retirement   So all  Unions prefer to keep the right to negotiate on behalf of retirees and use it to get better perks for employees who pay   subscriptions.  So far no union leader has come out with the  circular explaining why 100 % DA was denied to pre 2002 retirees, what is the actual  cost of updation, why merger of DA not demanded,why ex gratia not reviewed, why Special allowance agreed denying pension benefits,  the Medical agreement was signed making retirees pay 100% of premium there by keeping 80% of pensioners out of medical care.    The reason is the above two factors mentioned.     On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 3:18 PM Ramani Konnayar <knra...@gmail.com> wrote:   Dear Sir, In my opinion, pre 1/11/2002 retirees are definitely eligible for 100% DR neutralisation retrospectively from 1/2/2005 as otherwise, there was no need for specifically incorporating a clause in the relevant MOU entered into between IBA and UFBU that no arrears would be paid and the implementation would only take prospective effect from 1/10/2023. In all probability, the arrears were not paid only to cut/save costs. These retirees had abandoned all hopes after losing SLP in the Supreme Court and so even the prospective effect was an unexpected bonanza for them. The organisations representing them too did not bother to raise the issue of arrears, perhaps because this group consists of less than 15% of the total number of pensioners. To preclude the possibilities of any claim for arrears in future, the MOU - agreement route was specifically chosen. Though the sanctioning of 100%  DA as above preceded the 12th BPS, it was very much incorporated in that BPS along with the sanctioning of Ex-gratia to all those who retired prior to 1/11/2022. However, while Ex-gratia was given retrospectively from 1/11/2022, 100% DA was not given retrospective effect even  from 1/11/2022. As a consequence, the ex-gratia for the pre2002 retirees was calculated on the basis the tapered DA paid to them in October 2022 and the loss is around ₹700 - 800 per month.This anomaly continues till date although UFBU assured as early as in April 2024 to get it rectified. In short, among all the pensioners, those who retired prior to 1/11/2002 are the worst sufferers and justice is repeatedly denied/delayed to them. K N RAMANI    On Mon, 9 Mar, 2026, 10:00 am RAMAKRISHNAN R P, <ramakri...@gmail.com> wrote:     On Fri, 6 Mar, 2026, 18:20 RAMAKRISHNAN R P, <ramakri...@gmail.com> wrote:     ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: RAMAKRISHNAN R P <ramakri...@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 6 Mar, 2026, 12:22 Subject: NAKARA V. UNION OF INDIA (SC.1983) To: <bankpe...@googlegroup.com> Cc: RAMAKRISHNAN R P <ramakri...@gmail.com>     Dear Friends,We should know how our DFS , is doing INJUSTICE to Pre 2002 Retirees in comparison with 2002 post Retirees.  Pre 2002 Retirees were not given 100  % D.R  from 01.05.2005 to 30.09.2023 and from 01.10.23 onwards only this 100 % D.R Neutralization have been implemented by DFS not with Restropective but  with prospective only. As per NAKARA Case, and as per our Supreme court judgement on NAKARA,Case, Pensioners form one Homogeneous Class and Artificial Division based solely on retirement dates violets equality. Date based discrimination held arbitrary. Even if regulations or silent , constitutional equality prevails. Administrative interpretation cannot defeat beneficial legislation. Whether DFS has RIGHT  TO GIVE THEIR OWN VERDICTION BY DENYING RETROSPECTIVELY  AGAINST  PROSPECTIVELY , IS MY QUESTION. IS IT NOT 10 AMOUNTS TO ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRETATION AGAINST THE LEGISLATION. I welcome if any of you clear my doubts !!! Due to  this , you all know how much arrears we are lestimately to RECEIVE. With best regards, Ramakrishnan RP, VRS Retiree.       -- Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CACpU%3DyTKZv3YQj5K-ApwYO-x1wB925nZULNgRGeUxfmw3g4d0w%40mail.gmail.com.       -- Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAKcPo_yTKeaHXe1Mtu78b8UROc6-YOYLCW4tGof4d2ihKAJvcQ%40mail.gmail.com.       -- Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW2uqAWV7UPo6TgW0nn9if7VdDM_o-%3Do9OYa9rkRV%3D9kgg%40mail.gmail.com.

Harish Midha <harish...@gmail.com>: Mar 10 10:05AM +0530 And above that one of our Honourable member in this group will continuously keep on harping on the interpretations showing all negative views and meanings of every comes, semi colon, full stop etc etc without even touching on even a single word as nicely put forth by Somasekhra ji. Very unfortunate.   On Tue, 10 Mar, 2026, 09:52 JSOMA SHEKARA, <jsomase...@gmail.com> wrote:

Ramani Konnayar <knra...@gmail.com>: Mar 10 10:40AM +0530 Dear Sir,   There cannot be a more analytical and exhaustive reply than this, and I always keep wondering at your patience to think over and write such long letters.   I opine that more than the absence of any subscription from pensioners, concern about the future of their majority members under NPS is the reason for the Unions' disinclination and apathy towards pension updation. We can very well afford to pay a subscription of even Rs.100 p.m. to them if they would fight and secure updation.   K N RAMANI       On Tue, 10 Mar, 2026, 9:52 am JSOMA SHEKARA, <jsomase...@gmail.com> wrote:

Back to top

28.02.2026 circular.docx

Satyanarayana Rao <karna...@yahoo.co.in>: Mar 09 02:43PM Yes Sri Somashekara ji. Very valid questions . Every pensioner knows that the UFBU and IBA nexus have cheated the veterans and committed a fraud delebrately and suppressed the pension updation and pension regulations. The judges have understood that there is something that calls for justice and natural justice and jurisprudence shall be ensured. We will get favourable verdict and justice shall prevail.   Yahoo Mail: Search, organise, conquer On Mon, 9 Mar 2026 at 15:18, JSOMA SHEKARA<jsomase...@gmail.com> wrote: 30 years have passed since BEPR1995 adopted and also became a legislation. If 35/1 does not give us updation why UFBU, IBA, retirees association did not try to rectify it? Regulations could have been amended at any time by iBA and UFBU.during the last 30 years. Pensioners have misunderstood 35/1. But UFBU leaders and other  veterans and legal eagles. They have understood Reg 35/1 like the back of their hand.Then why no attempt is made to amend regulations? Why were the minutes of 08.03.2024 abandoned?RBI Unions and retiree associations did not bother about pension rules or funds. They consistently launched struggleleaving the job of finding funds to management. Continuous pressure forced DFS to take a decision.IBA is not experiencing any pressure from  Unions instead Unions leaders have become spokesperson of IBAclaiming no funds.Pensioners are asking forget 35/1 and implement updation like DFS approved in RBI.   On Mon, Mar 9, 2026 at 9:57 AM 'Satyanarayana Rao' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com> wrote:   Sri Somashekara ji. Your observations are emphatically justified and we shall win the case and celebrate too.   Yahoo Mail: Search, organise, conquer On Thu, 5 Mar 2026 at 9:25, JSOMA SHEKARA<jsomase...@gmail.com> wrote: Most of the High court verdicts set aside by the Supreme Court.  In M C Singla case before examining the existence of rules if any for pension updation, HC Judge straightaway dismissed the claim of updation stating that disparity between  a set of two persons retired in different dates is not a discrimination.  But the Hon.SC judge has directed parties to submit charts to examine if there is disparity in pension. The Hon.High court judge did not go into detail the claims of updation on RBI lines as per small committee resolutions dated 26.03.94 but relied only on  one sided statements of Banks/IBA like "RBI also has not implemented updation."Now the situation has changed and DFS which is also a party to the Singhla case  has approved the  updation for RBI pensioners. This factor also has been brought to the notice of SC judge through a copy of DFS notification.In HC petitioners have stressed the point that management and Unions have not addressed the grievances of the pensioners.While directing petitioners to approach the authorities for better benefits, Hon Judge should have also directed management to negotiate the issue with litigants.Further IBA and UFBU have signed minutes on 08.03.24, agreeing to discuss amending pension regulations to provide for  periodical updation in every settlement.So Hon Judges hearing  M C singla case may take consideration of developments post HC verdict.   On Wed, Mar 4, 2026 at 9:41 AM Niranjan Cn <niran...@gmail.com> wrote:   Sirs, Sorry to say, most of the points are factually not correct.  Most of the issues - already High Court Judgements have pronounced.  Unfortunately, he never quotes the judgements already pronounced in the matter, Niranjan   On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 9:57 AM RAMANI NV <ramani...@gmail.com> wrote:   Letter from Mr.C.N.Venugopalan. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: viswanathan ch <ch.visw...@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 1 Mar, 2026, 4:28 pm Subject: 28.02.2026 circular.docx To: NV Ramani <ramani...@gmail.com>       https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1p8o7AWp3WsUk46OycKnzhyH-KOHB5wWQ/mobilebasic   Sent from my iPhone   -- Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAHrpQL3w5BKqcqz6Y0RWv4-9X_BRCfW%2B3Vg0BoWu73X5oKCsJA%40mail.gmail.com.       -- Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWFb02G82%3DSYyH1%2BrUyAFNCK%3DCBFoZV9PBscDTafv6PkKA%40mail.gmail.com.       -- Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW0mSaSyMNeRAccNq0pZPidd0PkH-2UoU4WzsQ9eW5hSMQ%40mail.gmail.com.     -- Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/1103487111.3456427.1772858995101%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 visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW3b8TKDRYdtDAvxWjt%2BBF0H%2BANYYV14dWo1Hi239jk47g%40mail.gmail.com.

Ramani Konnayar <knra...@gmail.com>: Mar 10 09:58AM +0530 Shortest possible answer is "replacement of BEPR 1995 with NPS with effect from 1/4/2010."   On Mon, 9 Mar, 2026, 3:18 pm JSOMA SHEKARA, <jsomase...@gmail.com> wrote:

Back to top

You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com.