Readers write here


Was ist 6 plus 3?
What is 1 + 3 ?

There are 1304 entries available on

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 >

R Parthasarathy wrote at 21-10-2014 7:49 am:

 Pension updating process
There is a stalemate in respect of all issues relating to bank pensioners. IBA wanted the UFBU to present a revised proposal. We do not know whether any steps have been taken by the UFBU or the Retirees' Federations. The communication gap, as usual, is maintained. I had suggested that one post one pension rule be followed with suitable maximum caps so that comparatively bloated pensions and meager pensions are not caused to exist due to dates of retirement. Equitable distribution of resources is the key to social well being. This concept has been vitiated totally in our country through self seeking individuals and institutions in power. I request the UFBU and our own Federation to do out-of-the-box thinking.

Gopal Ji Tandon (Website) wrote at 20-10-2014 6:09 pm:

 Justice Delayed is justice denied

It is surprising that our case No.WP(c ) 1875 of 2013 which was transferred to Delhi High Court for disposal from Supreme Court on some technical grounds was listed for final hearing on 14-10-2014 but unfortunately it could not be heard before the close of court’s proceedings on 14-10-2014 & the next date for hearing has been fixed on 27th November, 2014. Earlier in the similar situation when our case No.WP(c ) 184 of 2011 was listed in Supreme Court on 26-2-2013 and the case could not be heard before the close of court’s proceedings it was heard on the next date i.e on 27.2.2013.
2- Although Our case No. WP(c) 184 of 2011 was completely heard in Supreme Court of India for one and a half year but the Bank and Govt. had succeed in getting it transferred to Delhi High Court on some technical grounds with a view to linger it on.

3- The Honorable Supreme Court in their order dated 27-2-2013 specifically mentioned as under:-
Since the pleadings are complete and the matter is pending before this Court for the last one and a half years we deem it proper to transfer the petition papers to Delhi High Court and request the learned Chief justice to assign the writ petition before a Bench of his choice for early disposal of the matter, at any rate within the outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of records.

Gopal Ji Tandon Retired Dy. Manager
Comment: Dear Shri Tandon,
We have edited some of the debatable comments from your post.. You had separately e mailed to us, seeking our views, about the uploading of your comments. We had promptly responded by saying that we would discuss the matter among ourselves, before giving our opinion about the propriety of uploading your comments. Hence our decision to edit some of the controversial comments.
We however share your feelings on the subject, We do not agree with your pessimism. Please do not lose hope.

S K MEHROTRA wrote at 17-10-2014 11:29 pm:

 Loan against pension and medical facilities
The reply of my queries raised on 4th October under head 'Readers write here' is still awaited
Comment: Dear Mr. Mehrotra,
We may please be excused for our delayed response to our queries. Please go back to your original message on medicines. We have replied there.
As regards loan against pension, we shall revert soon. For the time being, please note that no separate facility is available for Bank's pensioners for such loans. Pensioners' loans are available to all pensioners at commercial rates. There are different schemes. We shall give details to you, as well as to other pensioners on this website.

Udayan Dasgupta wrote at 17-10-2014 5:33 am:

 Delay in justice
We must claim 'special court' for Senior Citizens.

Rohit Sharma wrote at 16-10-2014 9:21 pm:

 Delay in Justice is Unjustice.
1. It is quite surprising to note that the matter listed at Ser.No. 24 before the Delhi Court was not heard and the reasons given is that the court could not finish the first 23 listed matter before the rising of the court in the evening.

2. As a matter of practice those cases for which delivery of judgement is scheduled are usually listed on every Monday and Tuesday and the case matter in context was listed on 14th Oct,'14 which being Tuesday. If in case the matter was not heard then such unheard matter are supposed to be listed for hearing on the next following Monday or Tuesday. Then how come the matter is now posted for hearing on 27th Nov, '14. This is quite ridiculous or was it that such was the preplanned understanding between both the counsels ?

3. Is it because the 10th B.P. negotiations are on way and that the issue of the V.R.S. 2001 employees entitled for 50 % pension of the last pay drawn will be first settled and then the the issue of those employees retired in due course on superannuation after the implementation of the 7th B.P.seeking parity with the scale of pension of the V.R.S.-2001 will be decided upon finalization of 10th B.P whereby the amendment in the Bank's Pension regulation will be made for such latter employees who were not entitled for the special scale determined for the V.R.S.-2001. Can the competent office bearers of our esteemed pensioners federation can throw some light on this mystery.

Anirudh Kumar Sharma wrote at 16-10-2014 1:59 pm:

 Court case on Gratuity payable to retirees before 24.05.2010
Let us know the latest status of court case in this regard.

dhanabalan wrote at 16-10-2014 11:51 am:

 7th bipartite reirees plight
when the case was referred to delhi high court a direction was given that the case should be completed within six months. Nobody bothers except dyeing pebnsioners

Rajkumarnegi wrote at 15-10-2014 8:52 am:

 Annual Election 2014
in how many days the election process should be completed
1. from the date of executive body meeting to the voting and declaring the results.
2. Who is authorised to declare the date of election process ,filling of nomination papers , withdrawal and date of election.The General secretary or the Returning officer
3. After the declaration of the dated , Can the General secretary along with other office bearers can utilize the association funds for "A I R " Tickets ( Three main office bearers), when there is no provision in the bye laws of the association .
How many times the general secretary and other office bearers should be nominated/ elected, so that they can not misuse the association funds on "Air " tickets
As the present General secretary is f the habit to use the funds for himself and his co office bearers by 'A I R " only. there is a provision to appoint the internal auditor but for the last eight to nine years no internal auditor has been appointed.
What is the future of the S.B.I. Pensioners association Chandigarh circle in these circumstances.
We seek your guidance to make our association like your Circle association or like Bombay circle association. .

S.B.I Pensioners association Chandigarh Circle
Comment: Dear Shri Negi,
The issues referred to by you, for our observations, appear to be internal matters relating to Chandigarh Circle Association. It would not, therefore, be proper, on our part to comment on the propriety or impropriety of any action of the Association of its office bearers.
All that we can state, is that controversies and disputes are best sorted out, through direct discussions among the pensioners concerned, in keeping with the provisions of your Association's Bye Laws and Rules.
We wish you and your Association, all the best.

R.P. GUPTA wrote at 14-10-2014 7:47 pm:



Gopal Ji Tandon (Website) wrote at 14-10-2014 6:17 pm:

 7th Bp case at Delhi High Court
7th.BP Case at Delhi High Court
Please Let the pensioners know as to what transpire in our case No.1875 which was listed for final hearing on 14-10-2014.


SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 14-10-2014 2:30 pm:

 The big sell out-7th.BPs
Mr.Shripad Gudi-your post of 13.10.2014-- This was a trade off by the working unions for junking the pension rules for the benefit of the next settlement pensioners,which as we all know, the very substantial benefits they derived.and the other MP cohorts took advantage of that.After all, how much longer are the 7th.BPs. going to last. Sujoy Ghosh

suresh chhatre PF no 1330381 wrote at 13-10-2014 8:26 pm:

 10 th Bipartiates
UFBU met today in Banglore decided to conduct rallies/ demonstrations on 30 th Oct. inall state capitals and other centers, observe one day strike on 12 th Nov. followed by relay strikes, i.e. 2nd Dec. Southern region, 3rd Dec in Northern , 4th Dec in Eastern and Northeast region and 5thDec in western region followed by more strike actions including indefinite strike, circular follows , Murali, Convenor, UFBU
Comment: Dear Mr Chhatre,
Thanks for the information which has already reached our Association, directly. Our demands for removal of anomalies in pension, improved family pension, etc. figures in the charter of demands of UFBU. But we are not sure as to what extent our demands will be pursued, in the backdrop of the breakdown of the 10th Bipartite talks. Our Federation will have to decide on how the different Associations of pensioners will support the agitation programme planned by UFBU.

Raghunathan.T wrote at 13-10-2014 3:57 pm:

 Wage Revision Talks.
Dear Admin,
How the following news item appeard in the Hindustan Times(Indore) will affect/benifit the pensioners particularly the 7th. BPS victims?

"NOBW, one of the constituents UFBU has abruptly demanded for scrapping BPS/Joint note mechanism and for setting up for Pay Commission ."


Shripad Gudi wrote at 13-10-2014 12:07 pm:

 The big sell out - 7th B.Ps
Mr. Sujoy Ghosh has rightly observed the reason for the plight of 7th B.Ps. However, what is important is that the SBI Pension Rules have Statutory status and cannot be altered by Bipartite Settlements. It was for the Bank to ensure this kind of legally untenable are not allowed to take effect

SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 13-10-2014 10:54 am:

 The big sell out-7th.BPs
Mr.Udayan Dasgupta-your post of the 11th.October 2014--Bipartite settlement is a settlement between two parties.But in the case of SBI three,possibly four parties are involved.SBI,RBI,GOIand the serving unions and possibly IBA.The settlements proceed beyond the implementation date and the next multi-party settlement negotiations get initiated.Thus the serving unions,in order to maximise the benefit of the next settlement works in collusion with the other three parties.That is my firm belief.Thus,the consent of the GOI is obtained for the implementation of the settlement-i.e 7th.MP(BP).But the anomaly having been noticed subsequently,the bank tried to set things right and took up the issue with the GOI,who took shelter under the 7th.MP(BP) settlement.If your or other's are of a contrary view it would be interesting to know that.Sujoy Ghosh

Rohit Sharma wrote at 12-10-2014 9:54 pm:

 Distinction between the V.R,S. emploees after the commencemnet of & B.P. and the normal due ciurse retirees after such promulgation of 7 th B.P.
1. The offer of 50 % was made applicable for those seeking V.R.S. and the rest who got retired in due course were subject to the prevailing pension rules.

2. Amendments in the Pension Rules as for V.R.S pensioners has had been made but no amendments were made for those retirees other than V.R.S. employees.

3. This is what is infer as is the distinction between the demand of the V.R.S. pensioner and the regular pensioners.

4. V.R.S. pensioner were given in writing that their pension would be given at pre-revised scale and later they would be regularized as per the V.R.S formula adopted by the Bank.

5. I just do not understand as why the pre-revised scale of the V.R.S.pensioners have not been regularized up till now.


Udayan Dasgupta wrote at 11-10-2014 9:42 pm:

 7thBPs Pension
Why would the Bank seek the consent of RBI/GOI for the fixation of 7th.BPs pension based on the last pay drawn when there is no any deviation from the normalcy??????

SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 11-10-2014 2:44 pm:

 The big sell out-7th.BPs
The above spells out the sell out by the working unions.Otherwise why would the Bank have to seek the consent of RBI/GOI for the fixation of 7th.BPs pension based on the last pay drawn, subsequent to the 7th.BP wage settlement.On the same lines,the Delhi High Court case salted for the 14th.October 2014 is likely to be dismissed outright because no discrimination is built up in the petition per se.Sujoy Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
Please do not jump to premature conclusions. Let us wait for the verdict of the Court.

SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 11-10-2014 2:26 pm:

 The big sell out
Like some others I had written to the new PM/FM and this is the reply I had got-...Pension Scheme in SBI is governed by SBI Emp.Pension Fund Rules which are framed in excercise of powers conferred by Section50 of the SBIACT(23 of 1955 by Central Board of SBI after consultation with RBI and with previous sanction of GOI.Unlike other nationalized Banks in SBI the amount of pension is not automatically linked to last drawn salary and after each bipartite settlement for wage revision Bank has to obtain sanction of GOI to index the pension to the revised salary.Proposal for alignment of pension based on last drawn salary under 7th.BP was not considered favourably by GOI.Sujoy Ghosh
Comment: Dear Sujoy,
This is indeed the official position. But, if the intention of the Govt is not malafide, a solution can emerge, even from this apparently hopeless situation. Decisions of the court can also create the desired pressure on the Govt. Please recollect that Family Pension in our bank was introduced on the basis of the verdict of Supreme Court in the year 1989, with retrospective effect from 1986. The arbitrary ceiling of Rs 1000 etc was also removed by the verdict of Supreme Court.

Udayan Dasgupta wrote at 11-10-2014 10:29 am:


Kolkata L.H.O. has denied me X-ray with above Barium meal though in our Clinical test List 'all type of X-ray 'is included.I request the proper forum to make it included in 'ALL TYPE OF X-RAYs' included as exray

Pasang Thendup Sherpa wrote at 09-10-2014 12:32 pm:

All other banks accepted the date of bipartite agreement 1.11.2007 as base date for payment of max.gratuity of Rs. 10 lacs except SBI which set a date 24.05.2010 as cut off date of retirement.Employees retiring during the intervening period missed on the benefit. I retired on 30.10.2009. Central Government employees and other bank employees were paid gratuity in arrears but not for me. I am in search of a suitable reason.
Comment: Dear Mr Sherpa,
Unlike other banks, gratuity in SBI is paid as per Gratuity Act, which was amended with effect from 24.05.2010. Hence the misfortune of SBI pensioners who retired between this period. A case is pending in Kerala high court. But we are not hopeful of a favourable verdict.
Hope we have answered your query. Do keep in touch.

Raj Kumar Negi wrote at 08-10-2014 3:40 pm:

 appointment of chairman for General election 2014
Sir, there i a general perception among the pensioners, for one point, will you please guide us in this aspect.
1. we have nominated one person/pensioner to conduct the election,as chairman and after a few days came to know that he is a co petitioner in Supreme court case filed by the federation jointly with one of the main candidate for the post of President/General secretary , should we change/replace the person or not, to avoid the further in between talks among the pensioners. What is the better solution , please guide us. Thanks.

Comment: Dear Shri Negi,
We do not know whether it will be proper on our part to furnish any comment on this issue. We will only say this much : that the only criterion to be checked is whether the pensioner in question is a bonafide member of your Association. His being a co-petitioner, should not be of any consequence. However, it occurs to us, that usually a Returning Officer is appointed by the Governing Body, for conducting an election. The existing President continues to preside over the General Meeting, and the Returning Officer conducts the election. But we do not know the provisions of your Bye Laws and Rules, which should offer the correct guidance in this regard.

dhanabalan a wrote at 08-10-2014 2:35 pm:

 pensioners plight
Recently a pensioners confedration cicular is under circulation which says among other things retirees are stum,blng block and that almost settlement is nearby whereas UFBU says that IBA is not agreeable to offer beyond 11%. Why I am referring this is to say that retirees benefit, updation of pensipon and 100% neutralisation are mingl3ed with wage settlement. Pensioners have the right to view any website and exchange information as long as their pay pocket is cut short by some vested interest. God save pensioners. We are no more to believe preaching . we expect action and result before it is too long

dhanabalan wrote at 08-10-2014 1:21 pm:

I got the answer from AIBRF circular under circulation among pensioners.

dhanabalan a wrote at 08-10-2014 5:04 am:

 pension updation
In the absence informaton sought by me on with whom u r fighting for updation I presume u r fighting with UFBU

SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 07-10-2014 4:29 pm:

 Bank's Dispeneries at Branches
The pensioners,by and large, are and dependent for life on some medicine or the other.The principal ailments that occur to me which are lifelong drug dependent are; blood pressure,enlarged prostrates,diabetes and may be a few others.Is it possible for the PenAss Bengal Circle to take up with the Circle authorities to stock at the dispensaries, such medicines on the basis of the prescriptions of the attending physician which would be submitted to the Med.Off. at such dispensaries?Sujoy Ghosh

Raj Kumar Negi wrote at 07-10-2014 9:45 am:

 Medical facilities to V.R.S retirees 2001
in continuation of my E mail dated 5..10.2014 I may add that the officer got retirement under V.R.S In 2001 and there was no scheme for the enhancement of medical facilities for the V.R.S retirees from 2001 to till date. What is there fault. They have accepted the banks proposal for V.R.S and now facing difficulties.
There pension is Basic Rs,4250/- under n7th bipartite and they have been deprived from 50% pension from the date of their retirement. hardship to those retirees
now medical facilities only 30% , as two lacks facility has been enhanced to 7 lacks for others.
This is great injustice with them .please give your valuable comments.

Comment: Dear Shri Negi,
We fully agree that gross injustice was done to the 7th Bipartite retirees, not only regarding restricting their REMBS facilities within the ceiling of Rs 2 lacs, but also in calculating their pension on the basis of their pre revised 6th Bipartite salaries. The anomaly of 40% and 50%, is however applicable to all pensioners, not just the 7th Bipartite ones.

It is possible that these anomalies may be rectified through consolidated struggle for justice. Let us wait and see.

jwala prasad tiwari wrote at 06-10-2014 3:45 pm:

 transfer policy for women of state bank asper direction of finance ministary
Sir!finance ministry of India issued instruction to all banks in aug2014 to formulate transfer policy so that they may be posted as per their choice either their husband place or parents place .Is there any improvement banks showing in the matter.Thanks

Comment: Dear Mr Tiwari,
The issue is debatable, as to whether there should be a gender bias favouring ladies in the bank, or decisions should be taken on merit, irrespective of gender. A male officer might be so ill or having such disadvantages, that he ought to merit greater consideration than an able bodied lady officer.
However, we pensioners need not break our heads over this issue.

dhanabalan a wrote at 06-10-2014 2:50 pm:

It now comes to light that UFBU have cheated us by making us believe that they are taking up the matter of updation for the past one decade. No more cheating as they have done for the 7th bipartite retirees. Please let me know whether pensioners confederation has been recognised. If not with whom our federation is fighting for updation without any ceiling as suggested by Sr.R.Parthasarathy .

dhanabalan a wrote at 06-10-2014 11:20 am:

 updation of pension
I retired in 2000.As the payment of the above has been stopped from 1995 I did not know it. I could not expect either the federaton or UFBU to make it known to the ordinary members. Perhaps it was convenient for them. I expect at least now concerned organisation to make availble updation for all retirees.
Comment: Dear Mr Dhanabalan,
Only during the 9th and 10th Bipartite charter of demands of UFBU, have the demands of pensioners figured. But effectively, they have not done anything for pensioners so far. Even during the 9th bipartite, they had the scope of solving the problems of pensioners, with the Pension balancing Fund, but they chose to distribute the 6.4% as Special Allowance among the working employees.
Our Federation is fighting for not only 50% pension for all, but also for flat 30% Family Pension and automatic updation of pension. Let us hope for better days for pensioners.

Rajkumarnegi wrote at 05-10-2014 8:30 pm:

 Medical facility to 2001 retirees
I have received one quarry from one of our reader and that I am asking your guidance.He referred and just want to know the total amount payable to him under medical facility to pensioners.
He retired in 2001 and got two lacks medical facility by paying two months pensions He has some medical problem and has enquired from the banks approved hospital the cost of the treatment,The cost of heart problem treatment in 2001 was under Rs two lacks which has now gone more than Rs.five lacks.He has never claimed the medical bill from the bank for the last 13 years from the date of his retirement. Is the bank will pay him while calculating the inflationary effect on the present day cost of the operation.He was sincere to the Bank and now when he needs the money , what will be the total limit under the medical facility. the total limit should be enhanced with inflationary effect ,so that he can go for the operation. Please give me your guidance
Comment: Dear Shri Negi,
Those who had opted for the Rs 2 lacs plan of REMBS, (except the VRS optees) had been given an option to pay an additional sum and get covered by the enhanced limit of Rs 7 lacs. But the last date for exercising the option has already lapsed long back. Moreover, the option is not available for the VRS optees.
So unfortunately, your fellow pensioner will not be able to get any benefit in excess of the limit of Rs 2 lacs. The scheme is not dependent on sincerity and diligence exhibited during tenure of service.
Any pensioner in this situation, including those having no coverage, should arrange for Mediclaim facility individually.
Our Federation is however still trying to persuade the Bank to agree to extend the coverage of REMBS to all pensioners, irrespective of their mode of retirement.

R Parthasarathy wrote at 05-10-2014 8:37 am:

 Pension updating process
Pensioners in the financial sector in our country have become acutely aware of the necessity for periodical pension revisions along with wage revisions, as done in the government sector. Perhaps, this awareness has come to us a little too late. IBA has refused to do this but has suggested that a revised but more cost-effective way is suggested to them. One rank one pension is the rule that is just and fair. Perhaps the Federations can suggest a maximum cap for basic pay or for DA attracting maximum pay so that justice is done to all. Otherwise, the disparity, already glaring, in the pension on the basis of age and date of retirement will become unreasonably huge and totally unjustifiable.
Comment: Dear Mr Parthasarathy,
You are right in expressing the concerns about the plight of pensioners in the bank, specially the older ones, who draw pitiable amounts as pension. We often wonder how difficult and painful it is for them to maintain their families. The only solution is automatic pension updation, with every Bipartite settlements, as is done for Govt pensioners, with every pay Commission implementation. General Managers of yesteryears get lower pension than currently retired clerks. This is a ridiculous anomaly. Let us see what the Federation can do for us.

dhanabalan a wrote at 05-10-2014 4:18 am:

Federation is trying in its own way to solve the problems of pensioners inclusive of 7th bipartite. I have hopes that ON 14TH they will aim at 50% of lAST DRAWN BASIC PAY WITH INTEREST FOR DELAYED PAYMENT WITHOUT DILUTING AND COMPROMISING FOR THE SIN CREATED BY SOME OF ELDERS FOR WHATEVER REASONS THEY OBLIGED THE EARLIER FINANCE MINISTER. DHANABALAN

S K MEHROTRA wrote at 04-10-2014 11:19 pm:

 R E M S Reimbursement of 1% of medical limit
I retired from bank's service in October 2005. During last 3 years have been undergone bypass surgery for heart and prostat. To keep heathy body i have to incur an expenditure of Rs5000/- pm on medicines.Further myself as well as my wife is suffering fron hypertension and her expenditure on medicine is seprate. The most of medicines prescribed by Apollo Hospial New Delhi are not dupplied by Bank's dispensary resulting these are purchase from market. Please guide me whether price of medicines purchased from market can be reimbrsed from Bank excluding 1% of REMS Reimbursement
Comment: Dear Mr Mehrotra,

Please forgive us for the delayed response. After we are all aged pensioners, trying to help each other, through this website. The Bank's instructions are clear, even if prima facie unjust. The Bank's Dispensaries provide 53 medicines as per list, that too, if stocks are available. Medicines not available in the Dispensaries, may be purchased externally, and reimbursement may be claimed under the category of Domicilliary treatment (1% per year of the REMBS limit).

S K MEHROTRA wrote at 04-10-2014 10:48 pm:

 Terms and condition on which demand loan is granted to pensioners
I retired from Bank's service in October 2005 and intend to avail demand loan against my pension. Please guide me on which terms and condition I can availed of demand/overdraft against my pension. My date of birth is 25th October 1945

R K TRIKA wrote at 04-10-2014 5:13 pm:

Please refer to my e-mail sent just now. Please read Nov. 2013 in place of Nov.2010. Error & inconvenience is regretted.

R K TRIKA wrote at 04-10-2014 5:05 pm:

My wife is diabetic for the last 20 years. In 2009, she was diagnosed liver cirrhosis & is already listed for liver transplant in a Govt. Medical & Research Centre, Chandigarh. She has also developed other related problems - ulcer, hernia etc. In last five years, she remained admitted five times for liver problem; last time in Nov. 2010 for OLT; now waiting for a suitable donor. She is under numerous costly medication. As a pensioner's wife, is she eligible for reimbursement beyond Rs.7,000/-. Thanks

meysam (Website) wrote at 03-10-2014 11:22 pm:

I enjoy looking through your web site
Comment: Dear Sir,
We enjoy receiving such compliments. Thanks a lot. Please send your future posts, mentioning your name, so that we may address you by name. Hearty Dassehra greetings.

suresh chhatre.PF 1330381 wrote at 03-10-2014 4:31 pm:

Shaanti rastu, Pushti rastu.Tushti rastu,

Let there be Peace, Prosperity, Contentment in your life !!
Comment: Dear Suresh,
Bahut bahut shukriya. Aap sab ko Dassehra ka shubh kamnaayen.

Shripad Gudi wrote at 03-10-2014 11:32 am:

 Transfer Petitions at Supreme Court
In response to Mr. Sujoy Ghosh's enquiry, the petitions slated for disposal on 22.09.2014 was delisted. The next date is not known as yet.

TUSHAR KUMAR MUKHERJEE wrote at 03-10-2014 10:34 am:

Amar sokol pensioner bondhuder janai Suvo Bijoyar antorik priti, suvechcha o abhinandan. Sobai bhalo thakun.
Comment: Dear Tushar,
Why did you rob the Nabami ? Anyway, please accept our sincere Bijoya Dashami greetings.

SujoyGhosh (Website) wrote at 03-10-2014 10:32 am:

 Transfer petitions at Supreme Court
Transfer petitions(Civil) nos.750-752/2013and T.P(C) 753-754/2013and T.P.(C)no.755-758/2013.These relate to Madras High Court on the applications filed by SBI for the transfer of the cases to Supreme Court and relate to the single judge bench orders reg.7th.BPs.It was listed on the 22nd.September 2014.Can anyone update the position? It is before the Registrar of Supreme Court of India-Sri M K Hanjura. Sujoy Ghosh

dhanabalan a wrote at 02-10-2014 3:13 pm:

 Pensioners Plight
due to technology improvement and pensioners bringing out their difficulties in various websites and due to the upsurge of youngsters movement and critical websites blocked facilities like 7th bipartite being cheated by our own elders and signing agreements by blocking one years da merger each time and not being transparent eg now it is said IBA was agreeable for benefits upto Scale III level. However I am for benefit to every one . Now it is known through Shri Shripad Gudi that SC Judgement dt 23.2.89WP Civil 305/1987 enabled bank pensioners to receive 50% of last pay as pension. In the ircumstances each federation may place in their website all developmentsm then and there with tranbsparencytransparency

PRADIP KUMAR BASU wrote at 02-10-2014 2:09 pm:


In reply to KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 02-10-2014 by 10:57 am On family pension---
IF it is @15% as told by Sainisaheb, then it is extremely pitiable condition of our family pensioner vis a vis Indian Women of State Bank (actually it can be told as "BHIKCHHA") which must immediately eradicated and make it @50% as proposed. There is sufficient rational behind it.
Comment: Dear Mr Basu,
Family Pension at present, is calculated at 15%, 20% or 30% of the last average salary of the deceased pensioner. 40% or 50% is the rate of pension.

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 02-10-2014 10:57 am:

 family pension

PRADIP KUMAR BASU wrote at 02-10-2014 9:17 am:

Regarding family pension why after husband's demise the bereaved family will get only 30% of the main basic pension drawn by her late husband ? This means that she will wore 30% Clothes , will eat 30% diet etc. etc. Again while we were in service, the management allowed medical facility for our spouse @75%, now 'OVERNIGHT' how their pension after husband's demise settled at @30% and we accept it silently ? Such 'TORTURE' against our "INDIAN WOMEN" must not be tolerated and must be protested in the proper Forum. How it has come down to 30% . Let us we all unite alongwith our elder brother's bereaved family and will move to the Court or to the IBA or to the Federation, which suits the present protest and proper Forum.
WE all say our wife as 'ARDHANGINI', So is it not legally correct to settle their pension @ 50% in connection to their husband's pension. Again while fixing the pension to an employee, Bank takes care of the pensioner's wife (Also makes a provision of percentage in PF's Contribution) i.e what amount of pension settled to the pensioner will be survived by the two persons, not lavishly but any how, in this Colossal "VAMPIRE PRICE RISE' ERA".
So cutting short of Legitimate 50% share in the family pension and make it 30% is a clean Torture to the Women in this India, which should be stopped forthwith and violently protested.
Our Leader while debating and discussing on the matter often set examples of other institutions and escaped out but never accept that this was their or their senior's mistake which should be rectified forthwith, now this should be taken care and get protested and to be nipped in the bud. Thank you my all Pensioner Brother. Shuva Maha Astami.
This "REGARDING FAMILY PENSION" statement is dedicated to our bereaved Boudi on the eve of "MAHA ASTAMI" who needs our proper attention by this time.
LikeLike ·

Sudhir Suman Kumaria (Chandigarh Circle) wrote at 30-09-2014 8:51 pm:

 Pensioners’ Mail for month of October 2014‏‏
We have uploaded the following file, which you can be view/download from SBI Pensioners’ Association (Chandigarh Circle) official website: http://www.sbipensionerschd.com/

1. Chandigarh Circles’ Monthly Bulletin Pensioners’ Mail for the month of October 2014.

With Regards,

Sudhir Suman Kumaria
Email: - s_kumaria@hotmail.com

On behalf of General Secretary, SBI Pensioners’ Association (Chandigarh Circle)

Syed wrote at 30-09-2014 1:29 pm:

 Gross injustice
:right infront of all concerned injustice done to a section of retires whereas Union and association reps were silent spectators even during eighth and nineth bipartite settlements. They have moral as well as obligation to their own erstwhile loyal members. High time they act transperantly.

Shripad Gudi wrote at 30-09-2014 12:37 pm:

 In response to the "Comments" to Mr. Dhanabalan's anguish on behalf of 7th B.P. Pensioners dtd. 30.09.2014
Everything stated therein is correct. But the Pensioners' Federation went on delaying the issue by not approaching the judiciary immediately on noticing the denial of pension at 50% of the actual salary drawn by those who retired between 1.2.1984 and 31.12.1985. Please read the SC Judgment dated 23.2.1989 in W.P.(Civil)No.305/1987. Had the issue been raised by the SBI Pensioners' Federation pointing out against the diluted implementation right then, no SBI pensioner leave alone 7th B.P. all the pensioners including 8th B.P., 9th B.P. etc would have had to suffer partial holding of pension restricted to previous scales or 40% of the substantive pay. The past is past. I ardently hope that the Federation will at least be now transparent, share all the developments from time to time and take all steps with all the energy at its command to ensure that the settled laws on pension are honoured by the SBI without leaning on to three retiral benefits etc. Please do not raise hopes among the pensioners about up-datation etc. The existing provisions if implemented without dilution will bring considerable relief to all the pensioners. I wish all the best to the Federation.

dhanabalan a wrote at 30-09-2014 12:32 pm:

 7th bipartiteretirees
It is not my intention to blame anyone excepting ourselves. Earlier I have expressed the same opinion. I appreciate the commentator for having brought to light how we have been cheated. My only apprehension is that no more expectation from such organisation. I am not misusing the forum for my personal benefit. Views and criticism are not well taken. All the best

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27 >

go to top