Pension for dismissed employees

1. A dismissed employee not entitled for any pension unless there is specific order to that effect in dismissal order.

2. However a dismissed employee is also not entitled for graduity. However entitled for accumilated provident fund with interest.

1) What are the types of Pension ? Ans:- Types of Pension are:- i) Retirement pension due to Superannuation/VRS/Resignation/ Dismissal/ Retrenchment ii) Disablement Pension iii) Widow/Widower Pension iv) Children Pension (two of the eldest sons or unmarried daughters, as the case may be till they attain the age of twenty five years or in the case of unmarried daughter till the date of her marriage, whichever is earlier.) v) Orphan Pension(two of the eldest sons or unmarried daughters, as the case may be till they attain the age of twenty five years or in the case of unmarried daughter till the date of her marriage, whichever is earlier.) Q.2) Who are eligible for Pension? Ans. All employees on Superannuation/Medical unfitness/VRS/ Resignation/Dismissal /termination after 1/4/94 and who have fulfilled criteria as per CMPS-98 and have completed 10 years of Pensionable service are eligible for Pension.

Please clarify and suggest

Whether PSU employee was EPFO subscriber No reply is feasible without this basic information

Whether PSU employee was EPFO subscriber No reply is feasible without this basic information

Employee comes under " Coal Mines Pension Scheme, 1998". And his monthly deductions towards pension head in salary slip is 2% .

what do the CDA rules of the company provide regarding dismissed employee?

whether employer also contirbutes to the pension fund.

Yes, employer also contributes. CDA rule : https://www.mahanadicoal.in/Vig/cda_rule.pdf Pension rule: https://cmpfo.gov.in/ If anyone help me in clearing above two questions that will be grateful.

With reference to various types of pension listed by Mr. Mahesh Kumar, there is only one type of pension, which we may call here 'basic pension'. Others are corollaries or extension of basic pension. Is a dismissed employee entitled for his pension? What is pension? One can say that it is an extension of salary or wages. One can call it deferred salary for services already rendered and completed. If an employee is dismissed, will he be eligible for pension? That is the question here? Dismissal is generally made as a punishment for some extreme grave wrong done. If an employee is dismissed for something grave done, should his salaries be with-held, or if salary has already been paid, should it be recovered back? Normal reply may be ’no’ to these questions. If we apply the same question to future dues, we may get different replies from different persons. One important thing here is modern concepts in crime and punishment says that good and bad do not cancel each other. If a person has given good and sincere service and he did something wrong, which was not related to his performance as a good servant, he can be dismissed if the prescribed punishment is dismissal. But the wages and pension earned by him are sacred and cannot be denied so easily . As for good and bad, let us take the case of Pachauri. His Department received Nobel Prize. He got Padma Vibhushan and so many other decorations. Then suddenly came the allegation by a junior colleague of s*xual harassment. Eventually he had to resign. Should the allegations against him be proven, should all the awards given to him be taken away from him? Then there was the case of K. P. S. Gill. He was an able police officer and he put down terrorism in Punjab with an iron hand. A lady colleague of Gill alleged, what one may call in today’s language, s*xual harassment at a cocktail party. Ultimately Gill had to pay a fine. Will this episode diminish the greatness of K. P. S. Gill. In matters of crime and punishment there should be no emotional approach as can happen in the case of trial by jury, which has been abolished in India. The employee should be given punishment proportionate to the crime or offence. But his entitlements of salary and pension earned by him should be conceded.

Every punishment should have a periodicity. A bank officer who served bank for 35 years of unstained service may get involved in financial irregularities and may get the punishment of dismissal . The forfeiture clause of Pension rule says that entire past service will be forfeited. But the question is entire past service of which period? What is the perfect and prudent explanation of this clause? Does it mean that the entire 35 years of service will be gone? That means his punishment will start from the day one of his service career! How comes, he was not involved in any wrongful deeds at that time. Then how the penalty will be slapped on him from then? Punishment cannot be given with retrospective effect, more particularly from that period when he has not done any punishable offence. Thus, due to the misconstruction of forfeiture clause, bank officers`pension are being snatched away every day. Pension Fund is a contributory fund. That bank officer has accumulated his due contribution for so many years. In one stroke it cannot be declared wholly as NIL. This is a sheer injustice. Same is the case in Leave Encashment of dismissed bank officers. He is accumulating the leave from DAY ONE of his Service. He was in no way involved in any wrongful job at that time. But due to the penalty after 35 years of service, his accumulated Leave is being snatched away and he is not allowed to encash it. I suppose murder is the gravest misdeed in the eye of law. In that case, also, the state does not snatch away the accumulated deposits of a murderer. But dismissed bank officers are being deprived regularly in that way. They are not being given Leave Encashment & Pension what to speak of Gratuity. I suppose the proper construction of the forfeiture clause should be the entire past service of the Suspension Period will be forfeited. For that period he will not get any Leave Encashment or Pension. In this forum, there are many law professionals with profound knowledge. Please ponder on those points, highlight in the Court of Law and save the bank officers from being deprived racklessly.

The forfeiture clause of Pension rule says that entire past service will be forfeited. But the question is entire past service of which period?

 

THIS FORUM HAS NO MANDATE TO CHANGE ANYH LAW.  YOU CAN CHJALLENGE THE LAW IF YOU FEEL T UNSJUTIFIED OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

What is the perfect and prudent explanation of this clause?

 

THIS FORUM CANNOT HAVE MANDATE TO JUSTIFY ANY LAW.  YOU CAN USE RTI AND SEEK COPIES OF THE DELIBERATIION LEADING TO THIS LAW OR DELIBERATIONS LEADING TO THE LAW ON WHICH THIS LAW IS BASED.

Does it mean that the entire 35 years of service will be gone?

 

UNFORTUNATELY YES.