Denial of medical, pensionary benefits to VRS optees
rkchopra
(Querist) 07 October 2008
This query is : Resolved
IFCI (having its registered office at 61,Nehru Place ,New Delhi-110 019),a Public Financial Institution, originally established as a statutory corporation by an Act of Parliament in 1948(15 of 1948) and the first Government Institution converted into a company at the threshold of liberalization by another Act of Parliament i.e. The Industrial Finance Corporation (Transfer of Undertaking and Repeal) Act,1993, No 23 of 1993 is for all practical purposes an instrument of the Government Of India(GOI has recently directly extended IFCI loans/grants amounting to more than Rs. 5000 crores spreading over 2002/03 -2010/11)
The Section 8 of the above said Repeal Act explicitly protects the service conditions of the employees. The position was reaffirmed by the then Honorable Finance Minister of India on the floor of Lok Sabha on 3rd July, 1998 in reply to an Unstarred Question No 2786
Now IFCI in gross violation of three decades old policy of following Industrial Development Bank of India (IDBI) in relation to pay scales, pension and other service conditions, by shifting the cut-off date of revision of pay scales , has deliberately denied its 286 retirees their revised due pension, outstanding wages, medical and other related benefits.
Under the circumstances and based on above facts, what VRS optees (who are mostly senior citizens) can do so that they can get releif in a shortest period without incurring much expenditure. For any further informaion pl contact Mr Handa at 9868338030
H. S. Thukral
(Expert) 07 October 2008
They can file a writ petition in the HC
rkchopra
(Querist) 08 October 2008
How much time it will take in decion by High Court?
Management after decision may appeal in Supreme Court that will also consume much time by that time most of retirees would be in Heaven.
Is it possible to file PIL in Supreme Court or any other legal way in which decision can be taken in 2/3 months.
The Supreme Court in case No 395/2008 (writ petition civil)has decided to look into the alleged discrimination between pensioners who retired from public sector banks between1987-97 and those who did so after 1998.
Perusing the PIL filed by an aggrieved employee of one such bank, E K Varghese, the Bench of Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan on Thursday sought the response of the Finance Ministry and the All-India Bank Employees Association.
The PIL, filed through advocate N R Shonker, claims that those who retired before 1998 were denied the benefit of revision of pension. The petitioner urged the Court to declare that denying revision of pension benefits to pre-1998 pensioners while granting them to post-1998 retirees was arbitrary and illegal and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
Varghese has also alleged that there are considerable anomalies in the pension payment made to retired employees of public sector banks and those who retired from other government services.
His petition stated that when the Central or state governments extend an increased dearness allowance to their employees, the same is extended to their pensioners as well. However, in the banking sector, even though the DA is revised for working employees on a quarterly basis, it is revised only half-yearly for pensioners. This, he again alleged is arbitrary and violates the Constitution.
The case of IFCI retirees is similar to above as the management of IFCI has denied revision in pension besides medical benefits and they want now :
a) Reference / Contact Nos of Mr. N R Shonkar, Advocate of Petitioners, and
b). As their pention has also not been revised since introduction of Pension Scheme as in Banks, Can they also join with the petioners as co-applicants, if so what is procedure
c). Who can be approached by retirees for making a party to the case.
Murali Krishna
(Expert) 11 October 2008
Law with regard to cut off date as ennunciated in Nakara's case has been changed drastically.
Reasonable classification theory apply in your case and hence comparision with pre 1998 retirees may not come to your rescue.
Whether service conditions mentioned in Sec 8 includes pension is doubtful.
You have anticipated this long back and has been seeking some relief since 1998 through parliament questions - It indicates that you are a class apart not entitled for the benefits.
However, as suggested by Harbhajan Thukral, file a Writ Petition. Since you are all senior citizens, you can pray for a time bound disposal of the case.
