Pay pension, gratuity to retd excise staffer acquitted of graft charges: HC

Pay pension, gratuity to retd excise staffer acquitted of graft charges: HC

TNN  Feb 26, 2025, 23:26 IST

Pay pension, gratuity to retd excise staffer acquitted of graft charges: HC

Bengaluru: Coming to the rescue of a 73-year-old retired central excise officer acquitted of corruption charges, the high court's Dharwad bench directed the release of his entire pension and gratuity within four weeks.

"In the event the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) and commissioner of central excise, customs and service tax, do not disburse the terminal benefits, the petitioner becomes entitled to an interest at 6% per annum, from the date of superannuation till date of its payment," Justice M Nagaprasanna observed while allowing the petition filed by Hanumanth N Karkun.

The judge also asked the authorities not to drive the septuagenarian to the court again.

A resident of Dharwad, Karkun was working as superintendent, in charge of central excise, range A, Hubballi division. In 2011, he was accused of demanding Rs 2,000 bribe from a person for issuing service tax registration certificate, and a CBI probe was initiated against him under Prevention of Corruption Act.

Karkun retired from service on Jan 31, 2012. A departmental inquiry found that the charges against him were not proved. But the disciplinary authority disagreed with it and on UPSC's advice, CBDT in 2023 withheld Karkun's 100% pension and forfeited his 100% gratuity as penalty.

In the interregnum, Karkun was acquitted in the criminal case investigated by CBI and, on the strength of the same, he moved the high court for quashing the order imposing the penalty.

After perusing the materials on record, Justice Nagaprasanna pointed out that apart from the inquiry officer exonerating the petitioner twice, even the trial court had acquitted him, holding that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. "Therefore, it can be safely said that it is not acquittal on the benefit of doubt, but due to lack of evidence and on merit," the judge pointed out.

He said what is envisaged under Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, is imposition of a maximum of 50% pension as penalty for a limited period or permanently, and there is no provision to withhold 100% of it. Gratuity can be withheld only if an employee is terminated for moral turpitude, but the petitioner was never terminated.

"The petitioner is now 73 years old. He has not seen the light of his terminal benefits, despite his retirement 13 years ago. He is left bleeding by the impugned penalty, which is worse than dismissal. If what the petitioner's counsel submitted is considered, the petitioner's ‘cup of sorrow' has come to the brim," Justice Nagaprasanna observed.

Withdraw decision to reduce pension of doctors who retired before 2009, association urges T.N. govt.

Withdraw decision to reduce pension of doctors who retired before 2009, association urges T.N. govt.

The Hindu Bureau

Chennai 26.02.2025

Terming it an “anti-labour” move, the Doctors Association for Social Equality (DASE) has urged the State government to withdraw its decision to reduce the pension of government doctors who retired before 2009. This will affect more than 850 doctors aged 70 and above.

In a statement issued on Tuesday, G.R. Ravindranath, general secretary of DASE, said the State government, in the name of revising pension, had taken steps to reduce the pension of retired government doctors. A circular to this effect was also issued. This was extremely shocking and condemnable, he said, adding that the retired doctors had expressed concern that this move would lead to a reduction of nearly ₹20,000 to their monthly pension.

Dr. Ravindranath said when the previous AIADMK government had tried to reduce the pension of retired doctors, Chief Minister M.K. Stalin, who was then Leader of the Opposition, had condemned the move and issued a statement. But now, it is worrying that the DMK government had taken up measures to reduce the pension, he said.

He urged the government to withdraw its decision immediately.

Family pension no bar on claiming relief: HC

 Family pension no bar on claiming relief: HC 

Vasantha.Kumar@timesofindia.com 09.02.2025

Bengaluru : Dharwad bench of Karnataka high court has ruled that a wife who receives family pension cannot be disentitled from making a claim for loss of dependency in an accident case. Justice Hanchate Sanjeevkumar made the observation recently while rejecting an appeal filed by the Oriental Insurance Company.

The insurance firm had challenged a 2018 order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in Gadag district in favour of one Sharada and her four sons. Her husband, Basavanneppa Gorawar, was a retired lecturer who died in an accident in 2012. After his death, Sharada was receiving ₹24,871 as family pension. Sharada and her sons claimed compensation stating that the deceased earned ₹60,000 per month as he was a book writer apart from being an agriculturist. 

The tribunal awarded ₹13.9 lakh under the head of “loss of dependency” out of ₹14.8 lakh compensation. It awarded 60% of the amount to the wife and a 10% share to each of the four sons. The insurance company challenged this arguing that the four sons were grown up, and since the wife was receiving ₹24,871 as family pension, she could not claim compensation under the head of ‘loss of dependency’.

Justice Sanjeevkumar pointed out, “Family pension is the result of service rendered by the employee to the employer. The employee spends his whole life towards the employer. Therefore, after superannuation, the employee will get pension as a matter of right.” The judge observed, “Just because the wife is receiving family pension due to the death of the husband, it does not amount to disentitling her to make a claim under the head of loss of dependency. Grant of family pension is not charity. It is a basic necessity of life enabling a person after retirement to lead a decent life.”

Government forms 3-member panel to study pension schemes

Government forms 3-member panel to study pension schemes

The Hindu Bureau

CHENNAI  05.02.2025

The Tamil Nadu government has constituted a three-member committee to study the Old Pension Scheme (OPS), the Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS) and the Unified Pension Scheme (UPS), and submit a detailed report with recommendations within nine months.

IAS officer Gagandeep Singh Bedi, and former Director of Madras School of Economics K.R. Shanmugam are its members. IAS officer Pratik Tayal would be the Member Secretary, a release said. The CPS was introduced for State government employees, who joined service on April 1, 2003. The National Pension System was introduced for employees of the Union government from January 1, 2004. However, the CPS was followed for the State government employees. There have been representations from the State government employees to resume the OPS, which was followed before April 1, 2003. The Union government issued a notification for the UPS on January 24, 2025.

Frederic Engels, State coordinator of CPS Abolition Movement, said it was a “betrayal” by the DMK government as only a year was left before the Assembly poll in the State.

8th Pay Commission: Will Central Govt Employees See 186% Jump In Salary? Know What's Expected

8th Pay Commission: Will Central Govt Employees See 186% Jump In Salary? Know What's Expected

Curated By :Namit Singh Sengar

News18.com

January 16, 2025, 15:52 IST

8th Pay Commission: If the government approves the fitment factor of 2.86, the minimum salary of government employees will shoot up by 186 per cent to Rs 51,480, compared with the current payout of Rs 18,000.

The central government on Thursday approved the constitution of the 8th Central Pay Commission

8th Pay Commission: The central government announced on Thursday the formation of the 8th Central Pay Commission, tasked with reviewing and recommending salary revisions for central government employees. The commission is to submit its report by 2026.

During a Cabinet briefing, Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw on Thursday said, “Prime Minister has approved the 8th Central Pay Commission for all employees of Central Government."

Vaishnaw further said the chairman and two members of the Commission will be appointed soon.

8th Pay Commission Minimum Salary Increase

According to some earlier reports, central government employees are expected to see a 186 per cent jump in their minimum salaries.

The employees currently get a minimum basic salary of Rs 18,000 per month under the 7th Pay Commission, which was increased from the 6th Pay Commission’s Rs 7,000.

Minimum Salary, Pension Under 8th Pay Commission

Shiv Gopal Mishra, Secretary (staff side) of the National Council of Joint Consultative Machinery (JCM), has said he expects a fitment factor of at least 2.86. It is 29 basis points (bps) higher as compared with 2.57 fitment factor under the 7th Pay Commission.

If the government approves the fitment factor of 2.86, the minimum salary of government employees will shoot up by 186 per cent to Rs 51,480, compared with the current payout of Rs 18,000, according to a Financial Express report.

Any further hike in fitment factor will lead to commensurate rise in the salaries.

A hike in the fitment factor raises both the pension and salaries of the employees.

Under the 8th Pay Commission, pensions are also expected to increase by 186 per cent to Rs Rs 25,740, compared with the current pension of Rs 9,000. This calculation holds true if the currently expected fitment factor of 2.86 gets through.

7th Pay Commission: When Was It Formed?

The 7th Pay Commission, which led to a substantial jump in government employees’ salaries, was formed in February 2014. Its recommendations were implemented from January 1, 2016. The key recommendations included raising the minimum basic pay from Rs 7,000 to Rs 18,000; revising the pay structure, allowances, and pensions; introducing a health insurance scheme for employees and pensioners; and revising the pension formulation for those retired before January 1, 2016.

Generally, a pay commission is formed every 10 years, though there is no legal provision for that. It is a practice.

Currently, there are over 1 crore central government employees and pensioners.

Odisha to give ₹20K pension to those jailed during Emergency

Odisha to give ₹20K pension to those jailed during Emergency

Ashok.Pradhan@timesofindia.com 15.01.2025

Bhubaneswar : In a move to honour those who resisted the Emergency in 1975, Odisha govt on Monday announced a monthly pension of ₹20,000 for those who were imprisoned during that period. The pension scheme would be effective from Jan 1. The scheme follows Odisha CM Mohan Charan Majhi’s Independence Day pledge to recognise them. The decision puts Odisha in league with several other states, including Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Rajasthan, and Assam, which already have similar pension schemes in place for Emer gency detainees. A home department resolution said the state govt will also cover all medical expenses for them. Eligible persons have to apply for the pension and medical benefits. All those arrested under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA), Defence of India Rules (DIR), and The Defence and Internal Security of India Rules during the national Emergency from June 25, 1975, to March 21, 1977, will be eligible to apply for the pension. Sources said more than 300 people in Odisha are eligible to apply, which would entail an annual expenditure of ₹8 crore. While most other states have different pension amounts for detainees depending on the period they spent in jails, Odisha has fixed the amount for all irrespective of the period of incarceration.

Cause Of Action For Claiming Family Pension Arises Only Upon Death Of Pensioner; Speculative Claims Not Valid: Delhi HC

Cause Of Action For Claiming Family Pension Arises Only Upon Death Of Pensioner; Speculative Claims Not Valid: Delhi HC

Pranav Kumar

7 Jan 2025 6:20 PM

Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna ruled that a claim for family pension requires a valid cause of action, which only arises on the death of the pensioner. The court allowed a revision petition filed against a suit seeking a mandatory injunction for the processing of family pension. It ruled that family pension under Rule 50 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021 is only triggered upon the pensioner's death, and speculative claims based on future uncertain events cannot constitute a valid cause of action.

Also Read - Recovery Of Excess Pension Payments From Retired Class-III Employee Impermissible: Patna HC

Background

Ms. Kumkum Dania was a government school teacher from Delhi. She had joined the school before her marriage, and had already superannuated in 2018. Thereupon, she had continued working under re-employment terms.

Ms. Dania was married to Mr. Kulbhushan Dania since 1990. However, the relationship was strained from the outset, and they separated in 2008. Kulbhushan alleged that she deliberately failed to update her marital status and omitted his and their children's names from her school service records to deprive him of family pension. . benefits. He sought a mandatory injunction for processing the family pension and asked for an inquiry into Ms. Dania's alleged misconduct.

Also Read - Civil Court Has Jurisdiction To Pass Injunctive Relief In Industrial Disputes: Madras HC

However, Ms. Dania argued that her failure to update her marital status was unintentional and was rectified as soon as it came to her attention. She accused Kulbhushan of harassing her through repeated complaints and legal actions. However, the trial court dismissed her application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. Aggrieved, she filed a revision petition against the trial court order.

Arguments

Also Read - Pensionary Benefits For Contractual Period Before Regularization Must Include Annual Increments : Himachal Pradesh High Court

Ms. Dania argued that family pension rights arise only upon the pensioner's demise. For this reason, she submitted that Mr. Dania could not claim family pension under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972. She argued that the application must be dismissed as it does not disclose any cause of action.

However, Mr. Dania argued that Ms. Dania's failure to properly declare all her family members in the service records amounted to misconduct. He explained that to rectify this, he sought an injunction from the trial court to expedite the processing of his family pension. He argued that Ms. Dania's deliberate non-disclosure prevented him from being recognized as a family member who is eligible for pension under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972.

Also Read - Failure To Comply With Condition Not Specified In Recruitment Rules Or Advertisement, Can't Justify Rejection Of Candidate's Appointment: Chhattisgarh...

Court's Reasoning

The court considered the definition of “family pension” under Rule 50 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021. It explained that as per the rule, the entitlement only arises upon the death of the pensioner and provides benefits to the surviving family. . members. It clarified that during the lifetime of a government employee, only the employee is entitled to receive the pension and not his family.

Further, the court noted that the cause of action must be grounded in present and enforceable rights. Since Ms. Dania was alive and receiving her pension, it ruled that no actionable claim for family pension could arise. The court stated that speculative claims based on future uncertain events cannot constitute a valid cause of action.

The court rejected Mr. Dania's claim that not declaring family members in service records disallows them from claiming pension. It clarified that even if names are omitted, eligible family members can apply for pension benefits as and when provided by the pension rules.

Noting the broader context of the litigation, the court held Mr. Dania's repeated complaints and legal proceedings against Ms. Dania to be acts of harassment. Consequently, the court allowed the revision petition, set aside the trial court's order, and dismissed the suit.

Decided on : December 24, 2024

Neutral Citation : 2024 DHC 10038 | Kumkum Denmark v. Kulbhushan Denmark

Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. NK Kantawala and Mr. Amaya M. Nair

Counsel for the respondents : Mr. Naushad Ahmed Khan and Ms. Supriya Malik; Mr. Sumit Kumar Khatri and Mr. Parv Passi

Daughter Who Became Widowed/ Divorced After Death Of Govt Employee Parent Falls Outside “Family” Under Pension Rules: Rajasthan HC

Daughter Who Became Widowed/ Divorced After Death Of Govt Employee Parent Falls Outside “Family” Under Pension Rules: Rajasthan HC

Nupur Agrawal

10 Dec 2024 10:00 PM

Daughter Who Became Widowed/ Divorced After Death Of Govt Employee Parent Falls Outside “Family” Under Pension Rules: Rajasthan HC

Rajasthan High Court rejected a bunch of writ petitions filed by daughters claiming family pension pursuant to their respective parents' death who were government employees, on the basis of them attaining status of a widow or a divorcee, subsequent to their parents' demise.

The bench of Justice Dinesh Mehta ruled that the relevant date for determining family's right to receive family pension was the date of retirement or the date of death of the government servant, and accordingly, for a daughter to be eligible for father's pension, she must have a status of a widow or a divorcee on such a date. Her status subsequent to the father's death would not render her the right to claim family pension.

“since the Government servant had passed away on 20.09.2017 and on such fateful day, the petitioner was having a surviving matrimony and as she was obviously not a widowed daughter, she cannot be brought within the realm of definition of “family” defined under the Rule 66 of the Rules of 1996 by any stretch of statutory interpretation.”

The Court was hearing a bunch of writ petitions in this regard in which the case of Sarla Devi Acharya (“petitioner”) was taken as the lead case.

The Petitioner's father, who was a government employee, retired in 1982 and used to get family pension under the Rajasthan Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1996 (“the Rules”) till he passed away in 2017. At that time, the petitioner was married to her husband, however, her husband also passed away in 2023.

After her husband's death, the petitioner filed an application claiming family pension under Rules 66 and 67 of the Rules, which was rejected. Against this decision, the writ petition was moved before the Court.

It was the case of the petitioner that Rules 66 and 67 included widowed daughter which entitled her to receive the family pension. Furthermore, it was also submitted that a clarification dated January 16, 2023, (“the Clarification”) was also issued by the Pension and Pensioners Welfare Department which clarified that even if the daughter became a widow after the government employee's death, she was entitled to the family pension.

On the contrary, the counsel for the respondents argued that since petitioner's mother had already passed away earlier, the family pension stopped immediately on the death of the father in 2017, and the petitioner could not claim her dependency on father and resulting revival of the pension because of subsequent death of her husband since she was married on the day of her father's death.

Furthermore, the counsel also submitted that the Clarification was contrary to the scheme of the Rules and therefore the latter would prevail. It was also pointed out that now, the Finance Department had also clarified that daughter of a government employee who became widow or divorcee after the employee's death could not claim family pension.

After hearing contentions from both sides, the Court framed the question to be answered as: “Whether a married daughter whose matrimonial ties are severed due to death of her husband or dissolution of marriage, that too on a date posterior to the death of the Government servant is entitled to pension under the Rules of 1996 or not?”

The Court opined that the relevant date to be considered for ascertaining family's right to family pension was the date of employee's retirement or death. It was held that in the present case the relevant date was the one in 2017 and if on that date, the employee had any widowed/ divorced daughter(s), she would have been entitled for the family pension. However, the petitioner's husband was alive in 2017 and passed away only in 2023 which brought her outside “family” as defined under the Rules.

“For a daughter to be eligible to earn pension under the Rules of 1996, she must have a status of widow or a divorcee' – her status subsequent to the death of the Government servant cannot clothe her with a right to claim family pension under the subject Rules.”

The Court further made a reference to the case of Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ratna Sarkar of the Calcutta High Court in which it was held that the legislative intent was never to include a daughter in the family pension, who was married at the time of the pensioner's death. Hence, a daughter who became widowed after the pensioner's demise, had no right to claim family pension.

Furthermore, the Court also rejected the Clarification relied upon by the petitioner, by making a reference to a division bench case of the Court, viz., Union of India & Ors. Vs. Smt. Hemlata Sharma & Anr. in which it was ruled that,

“By administrative circulars, a new class or category which otherwise was not included for the purposes of grant of family pension, could not be included as that would amount to supplanting the rules… None of the provisions contained in Rule 75 of the Rules of 1993 indicate that the rule ever sought to include a divorced/widowed daughter, who was otherwise leading a married life on the date of death of her father, the retired employee or even on the date of death of her widowed mother, who was getting family pension.”

In this light, the Court held that since the Clarification issued was completely contrary to the scheme of the Rules, it could not be given any credence.

Accordingly, the writ petitions were dismissed.

Title: Sarla Devi Acharya v the District and Sessions judge & Ors. and other connected petitions

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 391

Supreme Court chides govt for denying pension to wife of soldier who died on LoC

Supreme Court chides govt for denying pension to wife of soldier who died on LoC

AmitAnand.Choudhary@timesofindia.com 04.12.2024

New Delhi : A soldier, who was part of ‘Operation Rakshak’ and deployed near LoC in Jammu and Kashmir lost his life in extreme climactic conditions, while discharging his duty in the wee hours of a chilly January morning in 2013 but his widow was denied Liberalised Family Pension (LFP) despite getting order in her favour from armed forces tribunal in 2019 as the Centre moved Supreme Court and the litigation went on for five more years. 

Rejecting the plea of the Centre and defence ministry and ordering them to grant her LFP, apex court on Tuesday took strong exception of the govt for not taking a sympathetic view and dragging the widow in court for protracted legal proceedings to deny her rightful and imposed a cost of ₹50,000 to be given to her. LPF is given in case of death of an armed forces personnel under certain circumstances and eligible family is entitled to pension equal to reckonable emoluments last drawn.

 The govt denied LFP on the ground that it was a case of ‘physical casualty’ and not ‘battle casualty’ where LPF is granted to the family. After examining all the records and rules, a bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih said the govt had wrongly denied her the pension as death happened as a result of war-like situations and it comes within the ambit of ‘Battle Casualties’. “Thus, the death can be attributed to illness caused by extreme climatic conditions. Hence, as per clause 1 (g) of Appendix ‘A’ of the Army Order 1 of 2003, the case will fall in ‘Battle Casualties’. The reason is that the deceased was operating near LoC in extreme cli matic conditions. He was part of Operation Rakshak and was on duty near LC. The casualty caused by illness due to climatic conditions is covered by clause 1 (g). In this case, the respondent’s husband was a victim of illness caused by extreme climatic conditions. Therefore, the case of the deceased will fall in the category of ‘Battle Casualties’, the bench said.. “In our view, the respondent ought not to have been dragged to this Court, and the decisionmaking authority of the appellants ought to have been sympathetic to the widow of a deceased soldier who died in harness.

Therefore, we propose to impose costs quantified as ₹50,000/-, which will be payable to the respondent,”. the bench said.

 87-year-old widow wins 58-year battle for pension dues Chandigarh:

Anguri Devi’s husband Nater Pal Singh of Rajput Regiment died in a landmine explosion on the western front during the 1965 war with Pakistan. Her battle for a long-overdue recognition of her husband’s sacrifice began soon after — and continued for 58 years, reports Ajay Sura. Though initially granted a special family pension, she was excluded from subsequent policy benefits, including the liberalised allowance introduced in 1972 and a 2001 amendment enhancing financial support for families of operational casualties. Restrictive cut-off dates and administrative lapses compounded her struggle. After nearly six decades of perseverance, the 87- year-old war widow finally received her rightful pension benefits — thanks to a landmark decision by the Punjab and Haryana high court. HC judgment, made available Monday, marks a bittersweet victory for Anguri Devi and serves as a powerful reminder of systemic delays in implementing policies meant to honour India’s war heroes and their families.

Recovery of commutation: Ex-forest officials move CAT .‘Officers Knew Rule When They Opted For Scheme’

Recovery of commutation: Ex-forest officials move CAT .

‘Officers Knew Rule When They Opted For Scheme’

SagarKumar.Mutha@timesofindia.com 29.11.2024 

Hyderabad : A group of retired chief and principal chief conservators of forest department along with a few retired senior bureaucrats approached the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), urging it to direct the central govt to stop recovering commutation amount from their pension every month. 

Telangana high court has been passing orders directing the state govt to stop recovery the moment it completely gets back its amount. Dealing with a batch of petitions filed by retired tahsildar Bobbadi Appa Rao and others, the AP high court too has issued an interim direction to the state to stop recovering the amount since the state has already recovered the commutation amount. In fact, AP has directed its treasury wing not to deduct the commutation portion of pension from all those pensioners who have completed 11 years and three months till furter orders. A division bench of Telangana high court comprising Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Namavarapu Rajeshwara Rao heard a petition filed by MV SN Acharyulu and 11 others. It noted their contention that interim protection from recovery was already granted by high courts of Punjab and Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir, Kerala and Allahabad and passed a restraint order directing the state to stop recovery in all the deserving cases. “No recovery can be made henceforth without the permission of this court,” the bench said in its recent order. 

CAT bench in Hyderabad, however, cited the order of the Supreme Court and refused to grant any interim protection to the central govt employees. The CAT bench of judicial member Lata Baswaraj Patne and administrative member Shalini Misra said that applicants before it belong to All India Services who knew the rule position when they opted for commutation of pension. “This commutation is purely voluntary and optional and there is no compulsion that they should avail it at the time of retirement,” the tribunal bench said.

After opting for the commutation of pension and after enjoying the benefit up to certain years, the principle of estoppel should prevent them from raising the objections to the existing rules at a later stage, the bench said. The bench also said that mere reference to the orders of the high courts, without considering the rules and the law laid down by the Supreme Court in similar cases, is of no use. “If the applicants are aggrieved by the action of the central govt, they should first approach the competent authority,” it said. Instead of doing that, they straight away came to the tribunal. They challenged the rules without exhausting the available remedies.

Wait finally over! Retd official to get pension after 12 yrs

Wait finally over! Retd official to get pension after 12 yrs

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 28.11.2024

Bengaluru : “Ours being a constitutionally ordained welfare state, the govt should conduct itself as a model employer,” the high court observed recently while coming to the rescue of a 73-yearold retired civil servant fighting for unpaid salary and pension arrears. 

“It pains us that this is not the first case where a pensioner was put to untold hardship and cruelty at the hands of the govt, which extracted his sweat, if not blood, for more than 33 years of service. All this cannot go scathefree,” a division bench comprising Justices Krishna S Dixit and CM Joshi observed in its order while allowing the petition filed by one Sadashivappa of Bengaluru. The authorities have now been directed to sanction and release regular pension and all terminal benefits to the petitioner within two months, with interest at the rate of 1% per month from the day the sum was withheld. “The rate of interest should stand altered to 2% in the place of 1% per mensem with retrospective effect if the delay exceeds two months.

Further, the respondents should pay a cost of Rs 50,000 to the petitioner,” the bench added. Sadashivappa, a Karnataka Municipal Administration Service officer, retired from service in Feb 2012. However, citing a pending inquiry into certain allegations against him, his retirement benefits were withheld despite him submitting several representations. He approached the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, which, however, on Feb 6, 2024, rejected his petition. He moved the high court. 

His main contention was that the pension payable to a retired employee is his right, constitutionally guaranteed under Articles 21 and 300-A of the Constitution. On the other hand, the govt advocate submitted that upon certain audit objections, the auditor general had directed the recovery of Rs 3.1 lakh from Sadashivappa, and the same is permissible under Karnataka Civil Service Rules (KCSR). 

The bench noted that the payment of retirement benefits of nearly Rs 9.5 lakh was withheld from the petitioner. “We repeatedly asked the govt advocate about the particulars of ‘pending inquiry’ and no material was produced before us to show that any disciplinary inquiry of the kind was ever instituted against him,” it said.

Offends petitioner’s fundamental right to life

“The fact remains that till date, no inquiry has been instituted against the petitioner, who demitted his office on Feb 29, 2012, on attaining the age of superannuation. Now he is in the evening of his life. No inquiry can now be instituted for the alleged lapses because of the fouryear limitation enacted in the provisions of Rule 214(2)(b)(ii) of KCSR. Since a retired employee holds his body and soul together with the periodic pension regularly paid, withholding the same at times amounts to suspending the means of livelihood and therefore, offends the Fundamental Right to life constitutionally assured under Article 21 in the light of the Supreme Court’s decision in the Olga Tellis case,” the high court bench further noted in its recent order.

Court: Withholding pension is cruelty at hands of govt

Court: Withholding pension is cruelty at hands of govt 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 28.11.2024 

Bengaluru : Terming the withholding of salary dues and pension benefits over a pending departmental inquiry ‘cruelty at the hands of the govt,’ Karnataka high court has ordered the release of arrears to a 73-year old retired municipal administration officer within two months. Sadashivappa, from Bengaluru, retired in Feb 2012, but his pension and salary arrears were withheld while awaiting the report of an inquiry into certain allegations against him. After exhausting his options, he approached Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, which rejected his petition on Feb 6, 2024. He moved HC. 

A division bench of Jus tices Krishna S Dixit and C M Joshi ordered the govt to pay Sadashivappa ₹9.5 lakh in dues, with 1% interest from the day the amount was withheld. “The rate of interest should be increased to 2% per month, instead of 1%, with retrospective effect if the delay exceeds two months. Further, the respondents should pay a cost of ₹50,000 to the petitioner,” the bench added. The govt advocate submitted that, following certain audit objections, auditor general had directed the recovery of ₹3.1 lakh from Sadashivappa, which is permissible under Karnataka Civil Service Rules (KCSR).

Pensioners struggle as app to submit life certificate down

Pensioners struggle as app to submit life certificate down 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK  26.11.2024

Hyderabad : Pensioners in the state are in a quandary as the T App Folio for submitting their annual life verification certificates has been down since the start of Nov. Every year, the option to submit a life certificate is enabled from Nov 1. The Telangana All Pensioners and Retired Persons Association (TAPRPA) said that despite officials assuring to fix it by Nov 15, it was still not working.

 “We tried multiple times to submit my father’s life certificate, but we are getting an error. My father is becoming very anxious about not being able to submit it,” said A Sai Krishna. To give life verification in the virtual mode, pensioners log in to the T App Folio, click a photo and submit. Though there are other modes such as Mee Seva, banks etc., to submit the certificate, the T App Folio has been the preferred mode as it doesn’t ask for fingerprints. 

“Most pensioners prefer to submit through the app as they can do so from the comfort of their homes. Also, the process is much simpler than going to MeeSeva or submitting through a bank,” said G Ashok, a pensioner. TAPRPA general secretary Palakurthy Krishna Murthy said: “We are getting many calls from pensioners complaining about the issue. We have spoken to the directorate of treasuries and accounts and they assured us that the app will run smoothly in the next week or so.” They also said that they are fighting for their pending DA, PRC and arrears, and are hopeful that the govt will release them at the earlies

Pensioners can submit digital life certificate at home through postal staff from Nov. 1

Pensioners can submit digital life certificate at home through postal staff from Nov. 1

The Hindu Bureau

MADURAI 31.10.2024

Pensioners of the Central and the State governments, Armed Forces, Employees Provident Fund and other pensioners who were required to submit life certificate from November 1 can do so from their home through the local postal employees.

To avoid the hassle of submitting life certificate in person, the India Post Payments Bank under the Postal Department has made arrangements for the postal employees to collect digital life certificate (Jeevan Pramaan) using biometric or FACE RD application methods directly from the home of the pensioners for a service charge of ₹70 to be paid to the postal employee.

The pensioners who wish to avail themselves of this service can contact the nearest post office or the local postal employee. They can also register the request through the website: https://ccc.cept.gov.in/ServiceRequest/request.aspx or by downloading the ‘Postinfo application’. For further details, people can contact 0452 2534499.

Special camps

Special camps will be organised in all the post offices from November 1 to provide this service and pensioners can submit their Aadhaar number, mobile phone number, PPO number and pension account details to the postal employee to submit their digital life certificate, according to a press release issued by the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Madurai Division on Wednesday.

Pension benefits to ex-servicemen apply from date of discharge: HC Chandigarh :

Pension benefits to ex-servicemen apply from date of discharge: HC Chandigarh : 

15.10. 2024

In an order having wide ramifications for pension cases of military veterans, Punjab and Haryana HC has made it clear that pensioners will be entitled to benefits from the date of discharge from service, not from the date of a court/tribunal order awarding the pension benefits, reports Ajay Sura. Allowing a plea by ex-serviceman Jaspal Singh, a division bench quashed an order by Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), Chandigarh, awarding pension benefits to the petitioner from the date of its order (April 5, 2019). The bench ruled that the petitioner was entitled to service pension “from the date whereon the same accrued to him, along with 7% interest per annum”.

Govt extends OPS benefits to 60k employees in state

Govt extends OPS benefits to 60k employees in state 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 07.10.2024

Gandhinagar : The state cabinet, which met on Sunday afternoon, granted an in-principle approval to extend the benefits of the old pension scheme to 60,245 govt employees appointed on fixed pay before April 1, 2005. State govt spokesperson Rushikesh Patel said that a notification in this regard will be issued shortly.

 The decision will cost the state exchequer Rs 200 crore, he added. Patel said that the decision was taken after a three-member committee of ministers held several rounds of talks with employee unions over the past weeks. “The appointment orders of fixed pay employees appointed before April 1, 2005, clearly said that they were not eligible for benefits for the first five years of their service and that the period of benefits will commence after completion of five years. The govt has adopted a sympathetic approach and has decided to provide them benefits according to the old pension scheme (OPS),” Patel said. 

He added that these benefits will also be applicable for employees whose recruitment process was completed before April 1, 2005, but whose appointment was delayed because of administrative reasons. Patel said that employee unions also made demands to implement higher travel allo- wance at the time of transfer and retirement as per the 7th Pay Commission. Additionally, representations were received to provide charge allowance, currently given at 5% or 10% of the basic pay, according to the 7th Pay Commission, to revise the rates of travel and daily allowances, and to increase the amount of retirement and death gratuity. “All these demands have been given inprinciple approval,” Patel said. 

The Congress said that the state govt has been forced to announce the benefits for fixed pay employees. Party spokesperson Manish Doshi said that the Congress has been demanding that the fixed pay system should be abolished, as it amounts to financial exploitation of employees. “Govt employees are being exploited under the garb of fixed pay and contract systems,” Doshi said.

An opportunity to rethink India’s pension system

An opportunity to rethink India’s pension system

T.T. Sreekumar

Professor, The English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad

The HIndu Hyderabad 27.09.2024 

The pension system in India has undergone a significant transformation over the years with three major schemes, the Old Pension Scheme (OPS), New Pension Scheme (NPS), and the proposed Unified Pension Scheme (UPS), marking the different phases of government policy. Each scheme impacts retirees in different ways, with the OPS often being viewed as a more secure system compared to the NPS, which ties retirement funds to volatile market conditions. As the world witnesses a retreat from neoliberal policies, the debate around welfarism is being reignited. In this context, the UPS requires considerable rectification to ensure that it serves the interests of retirees effectively.

A shift with greater individual risk

The OPS, prevalent before 2004, guaranteed a defined benefit pension to government employees. In this scheme, the pension amount was fixed and determined by the last drawn salary, and the government was solely responsible for disbursing the pensions. The OPS provided stability and ensured that retirees were insulated from any financial market risks. The reliance on a fixed percentage of the last drawn salary for pensions meant that employees could plan their retirements with a sense of financial security, knowing that they would have a guaranteed income stream throughout their post-retirement years. The OPS reflected the government’s commitment to social security by excluding the market from the equation and offering guaranteed pensions.

In 2004, the Government of India replaced the OPS with the New Pension Scheme (NPS). Here, the shift was from a defined-benefit model to a defined-contribution model, wherein employee and the government contributed towards a pension fund, which was then invested in financial markets. The pension payout under the NPS is linked to the performance of these investments, meaning retirees’ incomes are now subject to the fluctuations of market forces.

The shift from OPS to NPS represents the neoliberal tendency to reduce state involvement in welfare provisions and transfer risk to individuals. The NPS left retirees vulnerable to market volatility, effectively placing their futures at the mercy of speculative market conditions. The NPS has drawn criticism because the security once provided by the state under OPS has been eroded. During periods of economic downturn, retirees may face reduced returns, undermining their financial stability.

This market-driven pension model has also fuelled wider concerns about the commercialisation of public welfare programmes and the weakening of the state’s social responsibility.

A return to welfarism

Globally, the era of neoliberalism that dominated economic policy for the past few decades is showing signs of a retreat. The 2008 financial crisis exposed the risks associated with excessive market reliance, leading to calls for stronger social safety nets and a return to welfarism. The COVID-19 pandemic further amplified these demands, as governments worldwide were compelled to intervene in unprecedented ways to protect the health and livelihoods of their citizens. India, too, is experiencing a similar shift, with demands for the return of state-backed welfare provisions.

The UPS, as proposed by the Narendra Modi government, emerges in this context as an attempt to provide universal pensions while balancing state involvement and market participation.

While the U-turn of the Modi government, as pointed out by the Opposition, aims to address the issues raised by the NPS, the UPS is still in its nascent stages and requires significant rectification before it can be seen as a viable alternative to the NPS. Critics have already pointed out that the UPS promises retirement payouts but offers reduced returns compared to the OPS and exposes retirees to the risks of uncertain market-based assets. The requirement of 25 years of service for a full pension is a disadvantage for those who join late, while potential underfunding raises concerns about future pension delays or corpus depletion.

Moreover, the scheme only covers Union government employees, excluding many public sector workers such as teachers, and may disincentivise further pay commissions. One of the critical aspects of the UPS that needs attention is the need for greater state intervention to ensure that retirees are not left vulnerable to market forces. While the UPS offers a universal framework, its structure should incorporate safeguards against market fluctuations, possibly by providing a minimum guaranteed pension similar to the OPS.

Issue of government contribution

Another area that needs reform is the level of government contribution. The UPS hybrid model would not completely mitigate risks associated with market reliance and may fail to offer a balanced pension system. Further, ensuring the inclusivity of the UPS across all sectors, including informal labour, is critical. India’s vast informal workforce currently lacks adequate pension coverage. The UPS must broaden its scope to provide pension security to all citizens, and not just to government employees, aligning with the broader return of welfarism that is gaining momentum globally.

The comparison of the OPS, the NPS and the UPS illustrates the tension between state-backed welfare and market-driven policies in India’s pension system. While the OPS provided a stable and predictable pension income, the NPS shifted retirees’ financial futures into the volatile realm of market investments, creating uncertainties and vulnerabilities. The retreat of neoliberalism and the return to welfarism worldwide, although on a limited scale or even notionally, provide an opportunity to rethink India’s pension system and strike a better balance between state responsibility and market participation. The UPS, if properly restructured, could become an important tool in protecting the financial security of retirees and addressing the shortcomings of the NPS, ensuring that India’s retirees are not left to the mercy of market forces but are supported by a robust welfare system.

Give pension hike benefit to staff from the day they are 80

Give pension hike benefit to staff from the day they are 80 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK 26.09.2024

Bhopal/Jabalpur : The MP high court has held that a retired govt employee should get the benefit of a 20% increase in pension as he enters into the 80th year of his life and not on completion of 80 years of age. In its decision on a petition filed by an 87-year-old retired professor of a govt engineering college, the single judge bench of Justice Vishal Mishra said that his pension should have been increased by 20% as soon as he entered into his 80th year rather than on completion of 80 years of age. Dr Laxmi Chandra Jain from Jabalpur in his petition, said that he retired as a professor from a govt engineering college, Jabalpur on June 30, 1998. 

According to the notification of the state govt, there is a provision for an increase of 20% in pension to a retired employee between the age of 80 to 85 years. The state govt, however, increased his pension by 20 percent after he completed 80 years of age and got into his 81st year. He should have been given 20 percent more pension as soon as he entered the 80th year of life. Advocate Aditya Sanghi, appearing for the petitioner, argued that his client is in the last leg of his life. He should have got the benefit of increased pension when he completed 79 years of age and got into his 80th year. The notification provides for an increase in pension between the age of 80 to 85 years. After hearing both sides, the court decided the case in favour of the retired professor

Starting early: Pension a/cs for children

Starting early: Pension a/cs for children 

TIMES NEWS NETWORK  19.09.2024 

New Delhi : Now parents can start planning for the long-term financial security of their children, setting the foundation even for their retirement. Implementing the FY25 Budget announcement, finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Wednesday launched the NPS Vatsalya, a pension scheme for minors. The scheme was launched simultaneously at 75 locations throughout the country, and over 250 PRANs (permanent retirement account numbers) were handed over to minor subscribers.

 FM said NPS Vatsalya is a significant step in govt’s endeavour to promote longterm financial planning and security for all citizens. Besides securing the future of subscribers, the scheme is based on the principle of intergenerational equity by providing cover to older and young members of the family. “My appeal to all parents is that when you attend a child’s birthday party, you can take cakes or other gifts, but money to invest in NPS Vatsalya will also be a form of gift. It will be a lifelong contribution to the child’s future,” 

Sitharaman said. the scheme will inculcate the habit of savings among young subscribers, and large wealth can be accumulated through the power of compounding. She asserted that the scheme will allow a dignified life to people in their old age. Nagaraju Maddirala, secretary, department of financial services (DFS), urged all stakeholders, including banks, for effective implementation and outreach of the NPS scheme. He said efforts are being made to include more workers from the informal sector into the pension fold. Deepak Mohanty, chairperson, PFRDA, said for pensions, an early start is a head start: small amounts squirrelled away could yield a substantial corpus by harnessing the power of compounding.

Employees, pensioners in Punjab and Haryana dismiss UPS, call for implementation of OPS

Employees, pensioners in Punjab and Haryana dismiss UPS, call for implementation of OPS

Government employees from across the country gathered at the Ramlila Maidan to demand the restoration of the OPS. File photo

Vikas Vasudeva

CHANDIGARH  27.08.2024 

Several State government employees and pensioners in Punjab and Haryana, who have been demanding restoration of the Old Pension Scheme (OPS), have dismissed the Union government’s latest Unified Pension Scheme (UPS)

In Punjab, where the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) government announced the restoration of the OPS in 2022, its implementation is yet to see the light of day.

As the delay in the release of standard operating procedures (SOPs) following the OPS notification continues, employees and pensioners under the banner of the Old Pension Scheme Restoration Sangharsh Committee have expressed their anguish on different occasions. With the Centre’s UPS announcement, employees have only grown more anxious. Employees currently under the National Pension System (NPS) have asked the State government not to consider implementing the UPS, and instead, implement the OPS in Punjab without further delay.

‘Not in our interest’

“We are against the Centre’s UPS as it is not in the interest of the employees or pensioners. We urge the AAP government to not consider the UPS. In fact the Punjab government had in 2022 announced the restoration of the OPS, but we are still waiting for its implementation. The State government issued the OPS notification in 2022. Later, it constituted a committee to formulate the SOPs for implementing the OPS, but it’s going to be close to two years now and yet the Punjab government has not come out with the SOPs or details about the scheme,” Jasvir Singh Talwara, State convener of the joint employee-pensioners’ front, told The Hindu.

“To step up our struggle, we will stage a march towards Punjab State Assembly on September 3, during the ongoing session of the Assembly. We want the AAP government to immediately implement the OPS,” Mr. Talwara said.

In neighbouring Haryana, where the Assembly election is due on October 1, the restoration of OPS for government employees has emerged as a key poll issue. Members of the Pension Bahali Sangharsh Samiti (Haryana) are travelling across the State in support of their demand to restore the OPS. They too have dismissed the latest UPS.

“We are against the UPS and it’s only the OPS that we want to be restored. We are going across the State in a phased manner with our OPS Tiranga march and are urging people and political parties to extend support to our demand of restoring the OPS,” Vijender Dhariwal, president of the front, said.