DFS Letter

[Ramesh Inamdar]

Bank Employees Pension Scheme was Gazetted in 1995. In case of any matter unclear in Bank Scheme, referance be had with Central Civil Services Pension Scheme.

In last 31 years, to my knowledge Central Government has not made any exception or non-applicability of any clause of Central Services Pension Scheme to Bank Pension Scheme. How for this letter will have weight as Evidence for our pension updation case, as Central Government has been periodically updating pention to its employees.

Open for pondering and debate.

Ramesh Y Inamdar 

[Niranjan Cn]

Sirs,

These are the initial observations on DFS letter to IBA dated 20^th May 2026.

 

1.     DFS letter is dated 20^th May 2026

2.     Letter is regarding HC dismissal judgement dated 04.12.2024

3.     Vide order 04.12.2024 – HC dismissed the petitions seeking reduction in restoration period.

4.     A SLP was filed in SC by pensioners against HC dismissal and SC dismissed SLP also in 07-04-2025.

5.     Really puzzling on the date of judgement by SC,  what IBA had written to DFS ?  Naturally – it should be regarding dismissal of the case at Supreme court.

6.     Strange that DFS has replied to IBA letter after one year – that after judgement for SC in the matter.

7.     DFS letter has not referred to the SC judgement – puzzling.

8.     There is no specific terms of reference to commutation in 8^th CPC – but only terminal benefits.

9.     Surprising – how DFS is so confident that CPC will take care of decision on restoration of commutation ? 

10.  The last sentence ‘3. This issues with the approval of competent authority.’   This is absurd as no decision is taken/conveyed in this letter.  The wordings are also questionable.

 

Language of the letter and contents right from the dates quoted – points /indicates as a fake/manufactured  letter – just to create a (sensational) news.  Any letter /information regarding pension has to be fact checked twice before believing.  Many youtubers/activists make videos/messages – exploiting the situation.

 

Niranjan

Ex Canara

--
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/CAJefmwXZ7e8Am21Od7ZL5SAXqqA1-RuWiDQx-dhFNsPPHRFHeg%40mail.gmail.com.

[nemmani sudhakara rao]

Dear sir 

First this letter with out date appeared in WhatsApp group based in Delhi on 6th July 2026.

When I pointed out that there is no date, then another letter with date is postponed. 

You can draw conclusions.

BOTH are attached.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWGEpQyTd9%3Du8h%3DL%3Dwo%2BvO8HvgfGxBci1-N-_bUw70EcRQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

Here the question is Bank Employees Pension Regulations, 1995, were drafted and adopted after wide discussions with AIBEA. Quantum of commutation and the period of recovery was also part of the aforementioned regulations.

If DFS can unilaterally decide the recovery period for commutation based on Pay Commission recommendations without consulting the unions, DFS can also decide on pension updation without asking IBA to send a proposal.

Is broadly based means selectively applying the same 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWGEpQyTd9%3Du8h%3DL%3Dwo%2BvO8HvgfGxBci1-N-_bUw70EcRQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Niranjan Cn]

Somashekar Sir,

You mean to say - we got pension because of AIBEA only.  Unfortunately, nearly 50% of our friends did't follow the suggestions of of AIBEA - to opt for pension.  Had everyone opted then itself (1995)- the present day problem would not have cropped at all.  Whom to blame sir ?? 

Niranjan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW3Q08-%2BbV6CxvKizJyoPJ%3DJRECDq%2BFkRA7BzLgat8aXNA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Ramani Konnayar]

When pension scheme was introduced, the interest rates on deposits were very high and even nationalised banks were offering as high as 15% p.a. Some reputed and long standing private sector industrial houses were offering even 18%

through their NBFCs. This made many employees opt to continue under CPF scheme. The option was intentionally given in order to divide the employees.

Why it was not made compulsory as done in the case of Government employees is not known. 

In my view, this decision by many to not opt for pension, is however, not the main reason for Pensioners not getting any benefit after retirement, updation in particular. Rather, the replacement of the BEPR by NPS for all new entrants from 1/4/2010 divided the employees further and Unions had to naturally take care of the interests of the majority of their membership under NPS resulting in their not only not showing any adequate interest in revision of pension but even accepting curtailment of the existing benefits through introduction of Special Allowance and increasing its share steadily in each wage revision.

K N RAMANI 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWHjMoxwQ%3D76jiHiEvMy2cKNmnW6BsiwWKovyPtbvdYkjw%40mail.gmail.com.

[JSOMA SHEKARA]

The 1993 agreement was signed by AIBEA and IBA. Clause No. 17 also states that any doubt will be resolved by consulting AIBEA. Banks also accepted in High Court that Clause No. 12 provides for updation subject to future negotiations. As DFS is admitting now it was also agreed in the 1993 agreement that our pension scheme is modelled on RBI pension structure.

Unfortunately these clauses were not included in Final regulations.

Taking advantage of clause No 17 AIBEA could have rectified this anomaly in 1995, soon after the draft regulations were provided to AIBEA. As the signatory to the 1993 agreement, it is AIBEA's moral and legal obligation to ensure that the agreement's provisions are not manipulated.

When Banks/IBA admitted that clause no 12  provides for updation subject to future negotiations how can they later claim there is no provision for pension updation,

Various retiree organizations and individual pensioners are raising questions about the non-inclusion of provisions from the 1993 agreement in the final regulations.

As a signatory to the 1993 agreement it is incumbent upon AIBEA to clarify doubts.

Silence is not golden here; it raises more doubts.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAAX%2BdWHjMoxwQ%3D76jiHiEvMy2cKNmnW6BsiwWKovyPtbvdYkjw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Chandrasekaran V]

THere are many clauses/benefits provided in CCS(pension) Rules which have not been extended to bank pensioners.  

it is NOT necessary that the Union Government should always hold negotiations with Unions to direct banks to make/amend  any provision in Bank Employees' (pension) Regulations.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bankpensioner/CAM%3DeiW2eTcSAwPyqa_gh44XAAyxoJy9ZZ0M3cfzmeWBd7CZfHQ%40mail.gmail.com.