INCOME TAX PENSIONERS FEDERATION.
A2/95 RAJOURI GARDEN
MANISHINATH BHAWAN
NEW DELHI. 110 027.
PRESIDENT.
COM. UMESH MEHTA
SECRETARYGENERAL; COM KKN. KUTTY;
PHONE:
98110 48303
Dated: 30th
Novcember,2018
Dear
Comrades,
We send herewith the NCCPA Circular
letter and the memorandum to the Prime Minister. The programme of action
chalked out by the National Executive of the NCCPA at its Chennai meeting is
slated to commence from 11th December, 2018. The NCCPA has selected 12 centres to carry
out the programme. The date where the
programme is mounted at each Station is indicated in the enclosed
circular. We request all our affiliates
to ensure maximum participation of the ITPF comrades in this programme. Regarding the Post card campaign and the mass
fast programme at Delhi, we shall
discuss it elaborately at our Next National Sectt. meeting scheduled to be held
at Chennai on 9th
December,2018. All Secretariat
members are requested to attend the Chennai meeting on 9th and
inform their journey plans to the host Unit, the Tamilnadu Incometax Pensioners
Association immediately. The host unit
has made all arrangements for stay and the conduct of the meeting. The details of the venue etc.have already
been placed on the website.
With greetings,
Yours fraternally,
KKN KUTTY
SECRETARY GENERAL
NATIONAL CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE
OF PENSIONERS ASSOCIATIONS.
13-C Feroze Shah Road,
New Delhi.110 001
President:
Shiv
Gopal Misra: Ph:
9717647594
Secretary
General: K.K.N.
Kutty
Ph: 9811048303
Dated: 27th November,
2018.
To
The
Honourable Prime Minister,
Government
of India,
South
Block,
New
Delhi. 110 001.
Dear
Sir,
We submit herewith a memorandum
containing the demands, issues and grievances of the Central Government
Pensioners. We request your good-self to kindly cause consideration
thereof with a view to provide relief to them.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
K.K.N. Kutty
Secretary General.
Memorandum
On behalf of the community of pensioners who retired from various Central
Government establishments after putting in more than three decades of active
service, we submit the following for your kind consideration and necessary
direction to the concerned to evolve solutions to the issues raised
therein. Before we dwell upon the issues in detail, permit us to mention
sir, that NCCPA is the apex organisations of the Central Government
Pensioners Associations in the country. Our affiliates also include
associations of Pensioners of the Central Autonomous bodies. The
grievances of the Pensioners mainly arise from the non-settlement of the
following issues.
1. Implement
option No.1 as per the pension fitment formula as recommended by the 7th CPC
and grant MACP benefit with effect from 1.1.2006 .
The 7th CPC
in appreciation of the demand placed by the Central Pensioners
organisations jointly had recommended two distinct methodology of Pension
revision leaving it to the beneficiaries to choose whichever is beneficial to
them. The entire pension community was highly appreciative of the said
recommendation and pleaded for the acceptance thereof to the Government.
Unfortunately the Pension Department advised the Government not to accept
Option No.1 on the ground that it was not feasible to be acted upon. The
Government heeding to the said advice, accepted the recommendation and
issued notification in which it was specified that the acceptance of the
Government of the 7th CPC suggestion is subject to its
feasibility of implementation. The subjective clause in the
Notification was without precedence and appeared to be strange. In order to
meet out the objections from large number of Pensioners, a Committee
under the chairmanship of the Secretary of the same Pension Department was set
up. The Committee made the same recommendation to the effect that
the suggestion of the 7thCPC contained in Option No.1 was not
feasible. They however suggested to the Government an alternative
formulation to replace the recommendation of the 7th CPC.
This was primarily to benefit the officials in organised Group A service, where
career progression was time bound. In a written submission made to the
Committee, the Staff Side of the National Council JCM pleaded for offering all
the three alternatives so that the pensioner would be able to choose whichever
was beneficial to them. The Committee’s conclusion that option No.
1 was not feasible was flawed in as much as the document, which the
official side affirmed as the bare necessity to implement Option No. 1 was
available in the case of 86% of the pensioners, even according to the
Committee’s own finding. The Committee’s report was heavily one sided and
was conceived to favour a section of the pensioners, especially those who
retired from the higher echelons of the bureaucracy. If the third alternative ,
which was accepted and implemented had benefited pensioners who had retired
from the lower rungs of the hierarchy, it was incidental. Our submission
before your goodself is that the Government, having accepted the recommendation
of the 7th CPC must implement the same. The feasibility
or otherwise of the recommendation must be subjected to critical
scrutiny. The Committee’s finding that the Pay Commission’s
recommendation was not feasible had been made to enable them to put
before the Government the third alternative. There is no difficulty in
disproving the Committee’s findings on the question of
“feasibility”. A large number of pensioners would have been
benefited and the question of parity between the past and present pensioners
would have been properly addressed.
Another related issue is the date of
effect of the MACP Scheme. The recommendations of the 6th CPC
was implemented with effect from 1.1. 2006. However, while issuing the orders
the MACP was introduced from a different date i.e. with effect from.
1.09.2008. The matter went first to the Armed Forces Tribunal, where the
Govt. lost in as much as the Tribunal made it clear that the Government’s
decision to implement MACP from 1.09. 2008 was wrong. The Government
took up the matter before the High Court, where again they lost.
The matter went upto the Supreme Court,who also confirmed the position
taken by the Tribunal. Having reached a finality, the Government issued
orders making the scheme effective from 1.1.2006 but only in the case of
armed forces personnel, leaving out the Civilian employees and Pensioners from
the ambit of their latest order. This is despite many decision of
the Honourable Supreme Court that similarly placed personnel should
not be dragged to the court for redressal. The Staff Side of the National
Council, JCM had taken up this issue with the Government twice but are
disappointed as those communications have not been responded with till
date. We request that the Department of Expediture, Ministry of Finance
and the Department of Personnel may be directed to issue orders extending the
MACP Scheme effective from 1.1.2006 in the case of all civilian pensioners.
2.
Revise
the Pension of BSNL absorbed retirees with 15% fitment recommended by the
3rd CPC and approved by the Government from 1.1.1017
delinking the wage revision in BSNL.
When BSNL was formed in 2000, the
entire employees working in the Department of Telecommunications were absorbed
in BSNL with assurance of better prospects and pension from consolidated fund
of the government of India. Rule 37A was incorporated with the CCS (Pension)
Rules , 1972 to ensure them government pension and also their pay was upgraded
to IDA scales. The pension revision was given to them with 30% fitment ,
recommended by the 2nd PRC for the PSU employees from
01-01-2007. Later, they were also granted pension revision based on the 78.2%
IDA fitment at par with the working employees of BSNL. But both these revisions
were much delayed due to a condition of 60:40 stipulated by the government for
payment of pensionary benefits. However with much effors and struggles, this
condition was annulled by the Cabinet and the order issued vide
No.40-13/2013-Pen (T) dated 20-07-2016. It is stated in the order, Para 2 (b)
that “The liability towards pensionary benefits including family pension to the
BSNL employees (excepting those recruited after 01-10-2000), as per sub rule,
22 of Rule 37-a of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, lies with the government.”
The 3rd PRC has
recommended 15% fitment for the pay revision of PSU employees with effect from
01-01-2017 which has been approved by the government. The BSNL absorbed
government retirees are fully justified to get their pension revised with 15%
fitment from 01-01-2017 without linking to the wage revision of BSNL employees.
Wage revision of BSNL employees is being delayed due to the affordability
condition laid down by the 3rd PRC. The pension revision
of BSNL absorbed government retirees has nothing to do with the finance of
BSNL, as the entire liability lies with the central government. The Department
of Telecommunications, despite the assurance by the hon’ble Minister of
Communications for early pension revision, is adopting a negative approach and
their mindset , even after a series of discussions and struggles, is for the
pension revision only after pay revision of BSNL employees. The central
government pensioners have already got their pension revised from 01-01-2016 as
per the recommendations of 7th CPC. So it is a great injustice
being meted out to the BSNL absorbed government retirees by denying the due
pension revision, even after two years of their counterparts in central service
got their pension revision.
3. Revise
Pension of Central Autonomous Body pensioners.
There are more than 600 Central
autonomous bodies. Thousands are employed in these institutions.
These institutions were created as special vehicles to deliver certain
goods and services for public benefit. Most of these institutions have
adopted Govt. of India rules and regulations and service conditions. Some
time back, the Govt. issued an executive fiat making it obligatory for
these institutions to generate own funds and be self reliant. The said
fiat as pointed out by the Managements of these institutions, were
impracticable unless the user charges are increased manifold putting the public
at large into unbearable financial burden. After the 7th CPC’s
recommendations, most of these autonomous bodies revised the wages of the
working employees and officers, but chose to punish the pensioners. In quite a
number of cases, the pension revision has not taken place. Even the
entitled dearness relief was not sanctioned in certain cases. It is
our ardent plea to your goodself that the pension revision in the case of
retirees from the autonomous bodies may be directed to be undertaken
immediately and the funds required for the purpose being made available to
these bodies.
4. Provide
notional fixation of pension under Option No.3 on
the basis of the pay scale/grade pay/pay level from which the pensioner
retired. Provide fixation of pay in the case of all pre 2006 pensioners on the
basis of the grade Pay/pay level/pay scale of the post or cadre from which
one has retired as per the judgements of the court.
It is the interpretation of the
Department of Expenditure that led to the denial of the legitimate quantum of
pension in respect of some of the pensioners, who could not avail the benefit
of pay scale revision during their service. The issue had been the subject
matter of judicial scrutiny and the judgements were clearly against the
interpretation of the Department of Expenditure Instead of
accepting these court verdicts, the Govt. had been dragging the poor pensioners
to higher courts denying them what is legitimately due to them. While the
serving employees are given the benefit of revision of pay scale or grade pay,
the same is denied to the Pensioners. In some cases, the Govt. has
implemented the decisions of the tribunal denying the benefit to the other
similarly placed personnel. The attitude of the Department of Expenditure has
only led to the increase in the number of cases in the court apart from placing
unbearable financial burden on the pensioners. This is also clearly
against the principle/policy announced by the Government while setting up the
administrative tribunals to the effect that the Govt. would abide by the
decisions of these tribunals with a view to speed up the delivery of
justice. It has now become a common practice for the Govt. to approach
the High Court and Supreme Court whenever the decisions of the tribunals go
contrary to the position taken by the Govt. We request you to kindly direct the
Department of Expenditure to reverse their untenable interpretation in the
matter and render justice to the Pensioners.
5 &
6. Extend the benefit of CS(MA)
rules to all pensioners who are not covered by CGHS. Increase the FMA to Rs.
2000 pm as has been granted to PF pensioners. Introduce the health insurance scheme as suggested by the 7thCPC.
CGHS came into existence
decades back in consideration of the dire requirement of addressing the health
cared needs of the Central Government employees. It commenced its operation in
a few stations initially and was later widened to cover 26 important towns of
the country including almost all metro cities. It received
wider appreciation from the employees and Pensioners. However, its
expansion was arrested in the post 1991 period, especially after the report of
the Expenditure Reform Commission was submitted to the Government. Its
service was curtailed and the budget allocation was drastically reduced.
The number of empanelled hospitals at certain points of time got reduced.
In a city like Mumbai, where number of Central Government employees and
pensioners is huge, at some point of time, there had been only one or two
empanelled hospitals. The health insurance scheme, which was one of the
recommendations of the 6th CPC, did not take off. The
health care has now become abysmally poor. While this is the case of the
employees and pensioners in the CGHS covered areas, the situation in
other moffusil stations is precarious. While the working employees have the
old CCS(MA)system whereby they could get the expenses reimbursed, the poor
pensioners are given a pittance of Rs. 1000 p.m.to meet out the health
related expenses. Most of pensioners, being at the advanced age, require
hospitalisation for continuous treatment of the ailments. Therefore, the
demand for the extension of the CCS(MA) Rules had been raised continuously and
persistently for many years. The Government has not responded to this
demand positively. Rather on many occasions, the Govt. has expressed
their inability to consider this demand fearing the huge financial
outflow. We request your goodself, to kindly get the matter seriously
examined from the humane angle and pending a decision thereon, kindly direct
the Department of Expenditure of the Ministry of Finance to increase the FMA
toRs 2000 p.m to the pensioners.
Incidentally, we may also
bring to your kind notice that the 7th CPC had recommended for introduction of
a health insurance scheme. This is an alternative worth considering
by the Government as the insurance scheme will obviate the financial outflow
from the exchequer. The Departments of Pension and expenditure may be
asked to consider this recommendation seriously and evolve a scheme which would
go a long way in addressing the health related problems of the pensioners to a
very great extent.
7. Raise
the minimum pension to 60% of the Minimum wage i.e. Rs. 10800pm.
Minimum Pension is presently computed
as half of the minimum wage determined by the Pay Commissions. One
is entitled for full pension on completion of the specified number of
years of service. Pension is computed as 50% of the last pay drawn. It
is, therefore, discernible that the computation of Minimum pension at 50% had
been based on the assumption that pension is normally calculated as half of the
last pay drawn. This appears to be not based on any sound principle.
Minimum pension is related to Minimum wage. Minimum wage is the wage
determined on the basis of the minimum basic and essential requirement of
a person’s existence. As per the agreed formulations as early as in 1957, the
basic essential requirement is considered to be the requirement of the family
of a person. Family is defined as “Husband, wife and two children” treating
this as three units. The formula stipulates and provides one unit for the
bread earner, 0.8 units to his spouse and 0.6 unit for each
children. The point at issue is that the minimum pension cannot be
less than the minimum wage. Minimum wage being the least below
which a person may not be able to live on, the same analogy must apply to the
pensioner. Minimum pension is the need based requirement of a pensioner,
whose family includes his spouse who is fully depended upon his pension
income. However, taking into account the fact that the
superannuation age of retirement being 60, no pensioner in the normal
circumstances may have dependent children. The logical conclusion
that emerges is that the minimum pension must not be less than 60% because the
family of the pensioner shall have 1.8 units which is just 60% of the
family units of a working employee. We request therefore, that the
concerned may be advised to determine the minimum pension at 60% of the minimum
wage, which will work out to Rs. 10,800 p.m.
8. Restore
the commutation value of pension after 10 years.
The restoration of the commutation
value of pension is made after 15 years. The 5th CPC had pointed out that
the period of 15 years is too large in as much as the Government recovers the
advance with interest in less than 11 years. Accordingly the 5th CPC
recommended restoring the commuted value on completion of 12 years, so that
full pension is restored. After the subsequent revision of the
commutation value factor, the period by which the government could recover the
full amount with interest has further been reduced to 10 years. The
recommendation of the 5th CPC was not accepted by the
Government. With this decision, the Government is presently recovering almost
one and half times of the commuted value along with interest, interest being
charged on fictional amount of principal. There is absolutely no
justification for the stand taken by the Government in the matter. The
Pensioner community feels that the Government is behaving like a cruel and
parsimonious money lender. At no point of time, the Finance Ministry has
been able to advance any logical argument in support of their reluctance to
reduce the period from 15 to 10 years. This apart, quite a number of
pensioners will not be able to receive the benefit of restoration as they may
not be able to live even up-to 75 years. We, therefore, request you
to kindly direct the Finance Ministry to issue orders for the restoration to 10
years.
9.
Provide
increased rate of pension on attainment of 70 years of age.
Taking into account, the increased
financial requirement of a pensioner, the earlier Pay Commission had
recommended to raise the pension by 20% on attainment of age of 80. This
recommendation was implemented. Many of the pensioners are compelled to
spend huge sums of money on health related problems and other debilities once
they attain the age of 70. The Pensioners Associations had represented
before the 7th CPC to increase the pension by 20% on attaining
the age of 70 and a periodic rise to reach 100% on attaining the age of 90.
The CPC however, on obtaining the opinion from the Defence Ministry
turned down this request, even though the Pension welfare department had suggested
to increase the pension on attainment of the age of 75. On such a
crucial issue, it was unfortunate that the Pay Commission instead of arriving
at an independent decision relied upon the opinion of the Defence
Ministry. We are not aware of the circumstances under which the Defence
Ministry came to such an unhelpful conclusion. Over the years, as your
goodself is aware, the Government had been reducing the rate of interest
on fixed term deposits, which had adversely affected the Pensioner community as
most of the Pensioners have chosen to invest their retirement benefits on these
instruments. While the constant reduction of interest rate by the RBI and
consequently by the Financial institutions may be in consonance of
the sound macro economic policy matters, there is no way the
pensioners could compensate for their reduction in monthly income. They face a
piquant situation in as much as they face reduction of their income and an
increase in their financial requirement simultaneously. At the advanced
age, there is no cushion for them to absorb the unanticipated
expenditure. Having recognised the fact that the advanced age poses
problems it would be in the fitness of things, that the pensioner is granted a
small increase in their pension income. We, therefore, request that the
suggestion put forth by the Pensioner Community to increase the pension as
suggested above may please be accepted.
10. Withdraw
the contributory pension scheme and restore the defined benefit pension to all
Central
Govt. employees.
The main objective of introducing the
new contributory pension scheme in 2004 was stated to be to arrest the
financial outflow on account of the constant increase in the pension liability
of the Government. The IMF had earlier advised the Government to do so as a
measure to contain the fiscal deficit in the Union Budget. The employees
organisations had been consistently opposing this move and had been presenting
the obvious fact that the pension liability of the Government would not be
abated by this move, rather it would only register an increase. The 6th CPC
set up a Committee to go into the matter headed by Dr. Gayatri. The
Committee’s conclusion was akin to what the employees organisations were all
along making. The matter came up for the consideration of the 7th CPC
again as by that time the new scheme had been in operation for more than
a decade. The Commission received many complaints and suggestions
from the stake holders. These had been enumerated in their
report. Instead of making any recommendation, the Commission
suggested to the Government to set up a Committee to go into these complaints
and take remedial measures. Govt. set up such a committee under the
Chairmanship of the then Secretary, Pension, who heard the presentations made
by the Service organisations and the Pensioners Associations. One
of the suggestions made before the committee was to guarantee a minimum pension
or a minimum return for the investments being made by the employees during
their service career. It is reported that the Committee has submitted its
report to the Govt. But the same has not come to the public domain so
far. The Pensioners are, rightly so, apprehensive of the continuation of the
present defined benefit pension system, they enjoy. The employees, who
are recruited after1.12004 are highly agitated as the new scheme guarantees no
mimum annuity nor does the projection made by the PFRDA gives them any hope for
a decent return for the contribution they make every month which is presently
10% of their Pay + DA. The facts now available with the
Government over the financial outflow from the exchequer both in respect of the
Pension liability of the employees who were recruited prior to 1.1.2004 and the
contribution the Government is to make under the new contributory scheme must
convince that the decision taken to introduce the new scheme in replacement of
the erstwhile defined benefit scheme had been flawed. If that be so, the
scheme requires to be scrapped lock stock and barrel as it has not benefitted
the Govt, nor the subscribers, i.e. the employees. The discontent over
this ill advised decision is growing day by day and the younger generation of
workers and officers have become highly critical. We, therefore, request
you to kindly cause a revisit with a view to bring back the defined benefit
pension scheme for all Central Government employees.
K.K.N.KUTTY
Secretary General
No comments:
Post a Comment