Welcome

Readers write here

READERS MAY LOG IN AND CONTRIBUTE THEIR IDEAS HERE. WE WELCOME SUGGESTIONS AND CRITICISM. WE WANT TO GROW.

THOSE WHO WANT TO WRITE, ARE REQUESTED TO CONTRIBUTE IN THE SPACE PROVIDED. IT WILL HELP IF YOU CAN PLEASE MENTION YOUR E MAIL ID, SO THAT READERS CAN ALSO DIRECTLY COMMUNICATE WITH FELLOW PENSIONERS.

Name:
Email:
Website:
Subject:
Icon:
Message:
 
Antispam:
Sicherheitsfrage:Verification:
What is the opposite of big?
 

There are 857 entries available on

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 >

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 31-08-2015 20:42:

 W.P(C) 1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITE OFDELHI HIGH COURT,COURT CASE AT SERIAL NO 1B RELATES TO FAO(OS) 596/2009 IS REGULAR ON THE 17TH AUGUST 2015 IT MEANS THIS CASE HAS BEEN STARTED TO BE HEARD FROM THE DATED 17TH AUGUST,2015 ON COMPLETION OF THIS CASE THEN CASE ATSERIAL NO 1 W.P(C) 1030/2010 WILL BE HEARD .AFTER THESE TWO CASES WILL BE COMPLETED THEN OUR COURT CASE NO W.P(C) 1875/2013 WILL BE HEARD.
K.R.SAINI
 

Sudhir Suman Kumaria (Website) wrote at 31-08-2015 20:30:

 Pensioners’ Mail for the month of September 2015
We have uploaded the Chandigarh Circles’ Monthly Bulletin Pensioners’ Mail for the month of September 2015, which you can be view/download from SBI Pensioners’ Association (Chandigarh Circle) official website: http://www.sbipensionerschd.com/

Please note that we upload Pensioners’ Mail on 1st of every month for that month.

Jai Ram Gupta
General Secretary
SBI Pensioners' Association
(Chandigarh Circle)
 

k.v.lakshmanan wrote at 31-08-2015 20:07:

 7th BPS retirees
I fail to under stand why the courts are not giving priority for Senior citizen's case as their life span shrinks day by day and by the time they deliver judgement there will be none to take it. Is it not the clearcase of justice denied? Is not the courts accountable? The supreme Courtdirected the Delhi hHigh Court to dispose it off with in 6 months but the high Court even after nearly 2 years since the top Court directive the high Court is taking it's own time, is it not contempt of court? Who will punish the high Court? Is the way of functioning of courts in India? If high Court disrespects top Court order how ordinary citizens will respect Court orders?
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 31-08-2015 07:16:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT,THE ABOVE NOTED COURT CASE HAS BEEN LISTED ON THE 1ST SEPTEMBER,2015 AT SERIAL NO 1A AFTER SERIAL NO 1 AND 1B BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH NO 5.
K.R.SAINI
 

k.v.lakshmanan wrote at 31-08-2015 02:45:

 7th BPS retirees
In my last mail the name of the rtd.G.M. is Mr.P.P.RAMACHANDRA UPADYAYA and not as mentioned there in mistake is regreted.
 

k.v.lakshmanan wrote at 30-08-2015 16:47:

 7th BPS retirees
As per Bengal circle association the listed case of 1 has at last been taken up for final disposal by Delhi High Court and once it has been disposed our case listed 1A will be taken up for final disposal. Further a letter by shri P.P.Ramachandra Rupadyaya to the chair person of SBI contains undeniable strong points to enable her to act invoking the powers vested in her.If she fails to act it amounts dereliction of duty .Shri.P.P.Ramachandra Rupadyaya is a rtd G.M. of our Bank.
 

Rohit Sharma wrote at 30-08-2015 07:05:

 V.RS. scheme retirees.
Any layman can say that the section of saving clause in the recent pensions regulations can be invoked by the bank without the need to consult the G.O.I. and make the required amendments and remove the anomalies. Are the bank's law officer's dumb that they only suggest litigation just because they are would never become the pensioners of the bank.
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 29-08-2015 04:08:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITEOF DELHI HIGH COURT,THE ABOVE NOTED COURT CASE HAS BEEN LISTED ON THE31ST,AUGUST,2015 AT SERIAL NO1A AFTER SERIAL NO1 AND 1B BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH NO 5.
K.R.SAINI
 

SUBHASH CHANDRA HAZRA wrote at 29-08-2015 02:46:

 LETTER MAY BE SENT TO P.M. & M.O.F. BY EACH PENSIONERS
WE CAN SEND A WRITTEN MESSAGE REGARDING OUR
PENSION ANAMOLY AND FOR REVISION @50% OF
BASIC PAY WITH DA NEUTRALISATION TO P.M.
AND M.O.F. THE CONTEXT TO BE SELECT BY THE
PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION, FOR THEIR INFORMATION.
 

pmgkpanicker wrote at 28-08-2015 20:08:

 revision of the 7 th bp retirees KERALA HIGH COURT CASENO WA1903/2010
DEAR FRIENDS,
I HAVE TO MENTION THAT POINTS REAISED BY THE FRIENDS ARE INCLUDED IN OUR AFFIDAVIT RECENTLY SUBMITTED TO COURT.THE CASE ISON THE LIST AND WILL COME FOR HEARING. WE ARE VIGOURSLY FOLLOWING IT UP.
THE MAIN POINT WE HAVE POINTED ARE AS UNDER
A) NO NEED TO REFER TO GOVERNMENT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF PENSION AS PER THE CLUSE AND THE BANK IS THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY
B)COPY OF THE LETTER SEND BY THE BANK TO GOVERNMENT IS ALSO ENCLOSED WITH POINT THSAT THE BANK HAS ADMITTED ITSELF THAT ANNOMALY IN THE PENSION.THIS IS FOR INFORMATION FOR ALL








 

Anna (Website) wrote at 28-08-2015 12:31:

 Wochenende
I amwith a also of the strong view that the exixting provisions in Pension regulation is for 50% of the last drawn salary on which arrears also are paid. So the CC should and go forward in fixing the pension at 50% Of course with a ceiling as recommended.
 

Shripad Gudi wrote at 28-08-2015 06:38:

 Responding to Mr. Keshav Rai Saini's post of 28.08.2015
I reproduce Rule 23 of SBI EPF Rules. Computation of Pension. - (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-regulations (2)and (3), the pension payable under regulation 22 shall be the amount calculated at the rate of one-sixtieth part of every year's pensionable service of the average monthly substantive salary drawn during the last twelve months' pensionable service." This rule has not been amended. It is only the Bank's interpretation that pension is not automatically linked to salary revision and so on. If the wordings "salary drawn during the last twelve months' pensionable service" are kept in mind, the Bank's view cannot stand. In fact, the Bank in its letter dated 27.04.2015 addressed to the Ministry of Finance, GoI, has stated that "....our proposal for re-alignment of pension is not only for removing the pring anomalies in respect of certain categories of pensioners but also for moving a step forward towards adherence of Pension Regulations. To elaborate further, we invite a reference to the extant provision vide Regulation 23(1) of SBIEPFR ..." which I have reproduced in the beginning. I feel, we should be very clear about the provisions and fight for our legitimate pension instead of towing the line of the SBI which has tried to project a meaning to suit the payment now in force. The annexure III to the above letter also mentions in tabulated form recommended pension linked last drawn salary. Both PFR and SBI Act provisions have recently been thoroughly analysed by Mr.P.P.R. Upadhyaya according to which, seeking GoI permission has become only o/a tradition and not because of the provisions contained in the above Regulations and SBI Act. I have posted this with a view to share the splendid work done by Mr.P.P.R. Upadhyaya for the benefit of all the pensioners.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Gudi,

The provisions of Rule No 23(i) are clear. They provide for 50% of last drawn salary to be the pension. But you have not mentioned Rule 23(ii), which is detrimental to our interests, and which provides the Trustee to impose ceilings arbitrarily. This is the provision which we have sought to expunge on grounds of being ultra vires. This is to be decided by the Court.

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 28-08-2015 03:42:

 10TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT AND JOINT NOTE DATED 25.05.2015
AS PER 10TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT ,THE PENSION OF 10TH BIPARTITE RETIREES IS TO BE CALCULATED AS PER PENSION RULES/PENSION REGULATIONS IN FORCE.YOU WILL OBSERVE THAT UPTO NOW PENSION OF 10TH BIPARTITE RETIREES IS BEING PAID ON THE FORMULA OF PENSION FOR 9TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT,BECAUSE THE APPROVAL FROM THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT FOR REVISED PENSION TO 10TH BIPARTITE RETIREES IS AWAITED.AS SUCH BANK CANNOT TAKE DECISION OF ITS OWN TO REVISE THE PENSION OFITS EMPLOYEES.
K.R.SAINI
 
Comment: Dear Mr Saini,

We acknowledge your clarifications.

KESHAV RAISAINI (Website) wrote at 27-08-2015 22:19:

 PLIGHT OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES
IN THIS CONNECTION, I REITERATE THAT IN STATE BANK OF INDIA THERE IS NO DIRECT RELATION BETWEEN WAGE REVISION AND REVISION IN PENSION. WHENEVER WAGE REVISION TAKES PLACE AFTER BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT,THE REVISION IN PENSION DOES NOT TAKE PLACE AUTOMATICALLY/IMMEDIATELY.AS PER 7TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT,THE NEW PAY SCALES WERE GRANTED TO THE EMPLOYEES.HOWEVER,FOR THE PURPOSE OF CALCULATION OF PENSION,PAY SCALES AS PER 6TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT ARE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT AS NECESSARY SANCTIONS WERE NOT ACCORDED .AS SUCH FOR REVISION OF PENSION FOR 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES SANCTIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT IS REQUIRED.
K.R.SAINI
 
Comment: Dear Mr Saini,

Thanks a lot.

P K GOPALAKRISHNAN wrote at 27-08-2015 19:42:

 Website - correction of date & time in uploaded messages
Dear Sir,
The below given message of mine is actually uploaded on 28th Aug time 10.02
in the morning . But the website display is incorrect.Please arrange to rectify.

Thanks

P K gopalakrishnan
 
Comment: Dear Mr Gopalakrishnan,

Thanks for your advice. We shall rectify the position.

P K GOPALAKRISHNAN wrote at 27-08-2015 19:27:

 HAPPY ONAM
Dear Sir,

Through this web I wish all my Pensioner Colleagues of State Bank of India
within and outside A VERY HAPPY ONAM .

May the king emperor MAVELI bring to all of us Prosperity Peace of mind Health & Wealth in the days to come

Thanks & Regards

P K Gopalakrishnan
S B I Pensioner - KERALA CIRCLE
 
Comment: Dear Mr Gopalakrishnan,

We reciprocate your greetings, and wish that post Onam, happy days really come for the community of pensioners.

A.R.Vaidyanathan wrote at 27-08-2015 05:42:

 PLIGHT OF 7TH BPS RETIREES
Gentlemen

A FEW OF OUR MEMBERS FILED PETITIONS IN VARIOUS HIGH COURTS AND GOT VERDICTS IN THEIR FAVOUR IN THE DISPUTES ON THE CAPTIONED SUBJECT. OUR LEADERS STILL MAINTAIN THAT THEY WILL NOT COMMENT UPON ACHIEVEMENTS OF INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OR TALK TO/NEGOTIATE WITH BANK'S FUNCTIONARIES BASED ON SUCH JUDGEMENTS.

LET OUR LEADERS ESPECIALLY MURTHY UNDERSTAND INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS MAKE CIRCLE ASSOCIATIONS AND CIRCLE ASSOCIATIONS TOGETHER FORM FEDERATION. LEADERS OF UNIONS/ASSOCIATIONS ARE NOT BOSSES OF MEMBERS; THEY ARE GUIDES, PHILOSOPHERS AND GUIDES OF GENERAL MEMBERS.

MOF IS SLEEPING OVER LETTER FROM SBI, CC DATED 27TH APRIL 2015. DELHI HIGH COURT IS OVERLOOKING OUR CASE'S SENIORITY AND DIRECTIVES OF SUPREME COURT OF INDIA. OUR LAWYERS DO NOT TELL OR TALK AGAINST THE UNDUE DELAY IN TAKING UP OUR CASE.

STILL "BRUTUS IS AN HONOURABLE MAN '.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Vaidyanathan,

Without undermining the efforts of individual pensioners who have succeeded in getting favourable verdicts from courts, it should be clear to all that all these decisions are still deadlocked. Moreover, the verdicts will not benefit all similarly affected pensioners, since the suits were not representative in nature.

RP Gupta (Website) wrote at 27-08-2015 05:05:

 PLIGHT OF THE 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES
THE INSTRUCTIONS ISSUED BY THE BANK'S MANAGEMENT TO ITS BRANCHES VIDE THE CIRCULAR NO. CDO: PM: CIR: 34 DATED 31/10/2000 WERE NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SBI EMPLOYEES' PENSION FUND RULED 1955 THEREFORE, NONE INCLUDING THE CENTRAL GOVT. HAS POWERS TO INSTRUCT THE BANK TO COMPUTE PENSION IN A MANNER OTHER THAN WHAT IS LAID DOWN IN THE SBIEPFR 1955.AND THAT IS WHY APPROVAL TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE BANK IS NOT FORTH COMING.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Gupta,

The king (Govt) can do no wrong. We live in India. Still we have to fight against all such injustice.

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 27-08-2015 04:37:

 100% D.A NEUTRALISATION TO PRE 2002 RETIREES
IN RESPONSE TO B.S.CHAHAL MESSAGE DATED THE 26TH,2015 I HAVE TO ADVISE THAT THE ABOVE NOTED ANOMALY EXISTS AT THE BANKING INDUSTRY LEVEL.AS A VERDICT BY MADRAS HIGH COURT IN FAVOUR OF PENSIONERS HAS BEEN DECLARED BY A SINGLE JUDGE IN 2012 IT ENVOLVES THE THREE BANKS BANK OF BARODA,I.O.B,AND CANANRA BANK THESE BANKSFILED A REVIEW PETITION AGAINST THIS JUDGEMENT BEFORE DOUBLE BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT WHICH GAVE THE VIRDICT IN FAVOUR OF BANKS AND AFTERWARDS PENSIONERS FILED THIS CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT AGAINST I.O.B AND CANARA BANK IN2013IN THE SUPREME COURT CONVERT THECASE INTO CIVILAPPEALS BUT NO HEARING TOOK PLACE AND ISPENDING ATSUPREME COURT.
K.R.SAINI
 
Comment: Dear Mr Saini,

Thanks once again for your clarification.

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 27-08-2015 04:01:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT ,OUR ABOVE NOTED COURT CASE HAS BEEN LISTED ON THE 28TH AUGUST,2015 AT ITEM NO 1A AFTER SERIAL NO 1 AND 1B BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH NO 5.
K.R.SAINI
 
Comment: Dear Mr Saini,

We understand that the matter against number 1(partly heard) has ultimately been taken up by the Court. This is good news for us, even though indirectly.

B.S.Chahal wrote at 26-08-2015 23:59:

 Pension updation
I think we should seek the help of our Supervising and award staff association whoshould meet our Chairman and apprise her of our plight. I think she is still not aware of the exact position.She can at least take a decision of 100% DA neutrilisation.The court is not going to take any decision.If the court passed the judgement in our favour,the bank or goi will go for appeal in the SC and case will linger on for indefinite time by then majority of our pensioners will die.Why this thing cannot be explained by our lawyer to the court by filing a special appeal.After all judges are also human being and one has to listen to the persons who are on death bed.Lawyer should take a dying statement from one or two pensioners and produce before the court.:The court or the bank or the goi/mof will have listen to such persons who are sick or who have a short span of life,this should be explained by our lawyer and the Federations representatives spread over in whole country.Now please seek meetings with all decision making authorities and explain the conditions of the pensioners.I think these people have brains and will take some positive decision.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Chahal,

Please appreciate that despite the sincerest efforts of the Federation, our issues remain unresolved mainly because of the non cooperation of the Govt. The present Chairman has made special efforts to communicate with the Govt. but no concrete result has emerged till now.

Shripad Gudi wrote at 26-08-2015 23:28:

 Refer to my earlier post of date
Please read the last sentence as

This being the fact, there should not be any doubt in the minds of the authorities concerned in implementing payment of pension w.e.f. date of retirement to the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th (part period) Bipartite pensioners without any delay.
 

Shripad Gudi wrote at 26-08-2015 22:55:

 PENSION PAYMENT
"I reproduce two letters (one from GoI and the other the SBI) verbatim.
GoI letter No.4/8/6/2006 dt.31.03.2015
I am directed to refer to SBI letter No.CDO/PM/16/SPL/2082 dt.27.01.2015 on the subject mentioned above and to say that the matter has been re-examined in this Department and the same has not found favour with the Government.
2. SBI may adhere to the existing provisions of SBI Employees' Pension Fund Regulations."
3. This has the approval of the competent authority.

Paragraph 2 of the Bank's letter:
"In this, we advise that the Bank is strictly adhering to the provisions of SBIEPFR and our recommendations for re-alignment of pension ceiling are also in conformity with the extant provisions. As a matter of fact, our proposal for re-alignment is not only for removing prevailing anomalies in respect of certain categories of pensioners but also for moving a step forward towards adherence of Pension Regulations. To elaborate further, we invite a reference to the extant provision vide Regulation 23(i) of SBIEPFR."

This being the fact, there should not be any doubt to implement the Bank's recommendations.

Silence or status quo with anomalous now obtaining is not understable.
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 25-08-2015 23:00:

 PLIGHT OF THE 7TH BIPARTITE RETIIREES
IN RESPONSE TO SHRI R.P GUPTA WRITE UP DATED THE 25TH AUGUST,2015 IT HAS BEEN OBSEVED FROM YOUR COMMENT THAT BANK TOOK ITS OWN DECISION FOR PAYING PENSION TO 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ON THE BASIS OF 6TH BIPARTITE PAY SETTLEMENT WITHOUT THE SANCTION OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT AND 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE SUFFERING ,HOWEVER, BANK HAD SENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISION OF PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES W.E.F 1.03.1999 ON THE LINES SENT NOW ON 27.04.2015 AFTER PASSING RESULATION BY THE CENTRAL BOARD ON26.07.2000 AND GOVERNMENT DID NOT APPROVE CENTRAL BOARD RESULATION DATED 26.07.2000 AFTERWARDS IN APRIL 2006 BANK AGAIN HAD SENT THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISION OF PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES W.E,F 1.05.2005 THEREAFTER RECOMMENDATIONS HAD BEEN SENT IN 2007,TWO TIMES IN2008,TWO TIMES IN 2010 BUT GOVERNMENT DID NOT ACCORD THE SANCTION.
AS SUCH BANK WILL NOT TAKE ITS OWN DECISION. BANK WILL REVISE THE PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WITH THE APPROVAL OF CENTRAL BGOVERNMENT.
K.R.SAINI
 
Comment: Dear Mr Saini,

Thanks for clearing the confusion, and placing the facts.

RP Gupta wrote at 25-08-2015 04:19:

 PLIGHT OF THE 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES
Respected Madam,
PLIGHT OF THE 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES
I joined the Bank in the year 1964 and served the Bank for 37 Years. Since then I had never seen that our Bank has any time have taken any discriminatory decision, affecting its Staff. Only in the year 2000 on receiving administrative instructions from the MOF, the Bank issued instructions to its LHO’s that the Pension of all the 7th Bipartite retirees be fixed on the pre-revised salary of the 6th Bipartite retirees. Those instructions of the MOF and those of the Bank don’t have the force of Law and are in violation of the SBI Employees Pension Fund Rules, 1955 (now known as SBI Pension Fund Regulations-2014) and in violation of the provisions of the SBI Act. The provisions of the art. 300 of the Constitution of India are also violated by issuing the aforesaid unconstitutional instructions.
2. In terms of the SBI Act our Central Board is fully empowered to take decisions as to the payment of pensions as stipulated in the Act and the Regulations and the Pension Fund Rules. The Act does not empower the C.G./MOF in that behalf. The Act also does not empower the C. G./MOF to interfere in to the day today affairs of the Bank and those in respect of its staff, except only where Public interest is involved. The C.G./MOF approval is required for establishment and maintenance of the Pension Fund. By the Bank’s unnecessarily seeking approval/permission of the CG/MOF, they have assumed extra-constitutional authority and unwarrantedly interfering where they are not empowered to by the Act.
4. I hope the matter may kindly receive your personal attention and you may kindly initiate steps, if required by consulting the Bank’s Solicitors; to rectify the aforesaid mistakes done in the past, as early as possible, so that the justice is done to the Pensioners in the age group of 71 to 80 years, counting the last days of their life.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Gupta,

Sorry for the delay in responding. Thanks for your advice.

Lakshmanan K.V wrote at 25-08-2015 00:04:

 7th BPS retirees
Why our federation leaders are si!lent regarding the supreme Court judgement in case #1123/2005 referred to by sarvasri.Krishna Kumar Agarwal and Venkatachalam.
 

k.v.lakshmanan wrote at 24-08-2015 06:15:

 7th BPS retirees
Pl. What is case no 1123/2005 referred to by shri.Venkatachalam in his mail.
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 24-08-2015 03:14:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI NIGH COURT,THE ABOVE NOTED COURT CASE HAS BEEN LISTED ON THE 25TH AUGUST,2015 AT SERIAL NO 1A AFTER SERIAL NO 1 AND IB BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH NO 5.
K.R.SAINI
 

G.VENKATACHALAM wrote at 23-08-2015 23:58:

 pension issue-S C judgement onCA 1123 dt 10702915.
according to the above judgement pension is wage to retirees and along with wage revision pension should be updated. No question of inability to pay and no litigation for litigation.Why our reps are not taking up this matter with Corp cen for fast implementation.
 

RP Gupia (Website) wrote at 22-08-2015 05:49:

 MEDICAL SCHEME FOR ALL THE RETIREES
UNDER THE 10TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT TO WHICH SBI WAS ALSO A PARTY A HEALTH INSURANCE SCHEME FOR WORKING STAFF AS WELL AS FOR THE RETIREES HAS BEEN FINALIZED AND THE OTHER BANKS HAVE STARTED THE PROCESS OF ITS IMPLEMENTATION. WHAT ABOUT ITS IMPLEMENTATION IN OUR BANK? OR THE EXITING MEDICAL SCHEMES WITH CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS FOR ALL THE RETIREES IS RECEIVING CONSIDERATION AT CENTRAL BOARD LEVEL.
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 22-08-2015 04:23:

 W.P(C) 1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT,THE ABOVE NOTED COURT CASE HAS BEEN LISTED AT SERIAL 1A AFTER SERIAL NO 1 AND 1B ON THE 24TH AUGUST,2015 BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH NO 5.
K.R.SAINI
 

G.Venkatachalam (Website) wrote at 21-08-2015 22:01:

 50 % last drawn pay as pension
I amwith a also of the strong view that the exixting provisions in Pension regulation is for 50% of the last drawn salary on which arrears also are paid. So the CC should and go forward in fixing the pension at 50% Of course with a ceiling as recommended.
 

A.R. VAIDYANATHAN wrote at 21-08-2015 17:38:

 DELHI HIGH CIURT CASE No.1875/2013
This is with reference to the opinion of K.K.Agrawal on the 20th. The issue of 6 months time limit granted by the Apex Court to DHC has been mentioned in this site by so any other persons. For reasons better known to our leaders, nothing happens to accelerate the pace of our case.

2. A letter addressed to MOF by CC Bombay still remains to be replied. I showed a copy of that letter alongwith a copy of SBI Employees Pension Fund Regulations who, after going through both these, opined that in so far as the above said recommendation of the bank is in conformity with the provisions of the regulations the Bank can do well to implement its recommendations without waiting for the clearance of MOF.
 

KRISHNA KUMAR AGRAWAL wrote at 20-08-2015 21:45:

 impact of S.C. Judgment in Civil Appeal No.1123 of 20015 on IBA and MOF
I do not find any comment from any quarter in respect of Supreme Court land mark pronouncement in respect of pension in Civil Appeal No. 1123 of 2015. Has even the verdict of S.C also fallen on deaf ears IBA and MOF if so what further course is left to be taken by our leaders. please let me know whether our federation has written to them for compliance. What has been their reaction. If there is no response whether federation will consider initiation of contempt of court proceedings?
 
Comment: Dear Shri Agrawal,

Despite the obvious violation of Supreme Courts advice to dispose of our case within 6 months, there is no plan, according to our information, for our Federation to file any contempt of court petition before Delhi High Court. It is the considered opinion, that our main case will only get delayed further.

S. K. Misra ( Lucknow Circle ) wrote at 20-08-2015 07:53:

 Saturday Closure got clearance from Government
Long outstanding issue resolved today and suitable instructions have been issued by DFS in regard to Saturday (2nd & 4th) as closure days.
 
Comment: Dear Shri Misra,

According to newspaper reports, the revised Saturday closure norms will be effective from September, 2015.

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 20-08-2015 03:34:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT ,THE ABOVE NOTED COURT CASE HAS BEEN LISTED AT ITEM NO 1A ON THE 21ST AUGUST,2015 AFTER SERIAL NO 1 AND 1B BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH NO5.
K.R.SAINI
 

Shripad Gudi wrote at 19-08-2015 20:59:

 SAMVAD - WEBSITE
In response to Mr. V.K. Arora's enquiry, I furnish the web access to Samvad

sbipensionerspune.org
 

v k arora wrote at 19-08-2015 18:42:

 SAMVAD---WEBSITE
Pl. provide website address of mumbai Association
 
Comment: Dear Mr Arora,

You may search for it in the Google search engine. It will appear easily.

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 19-08-2015 04:55:

 W.P(C) 1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT,THE ABOVE NOTED COURT BCASE HAS BEENLISTED ON THE 20TH ,AUGIST,2015 AT ITEM NO 1A AFTER SERIAL NO 1 AND 1B BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH NO 5.
K.R.SAINI
 

Dinesh Kumar Panwar wrote at 19-08-2015 03:24:

 Pension related
Please let me receive the updates on pension issues.
How the deduction of EPF and Bank's contribution will be refunded. Should we apply for refund or Bank will refund the accumulation on its own.


 

G.Venkatachalam wrote at 18-08-2015 21:26:

 Pension issue
I request all readers to go through the August issue of SAMVAD---SBI Mumbai Pensioners ASSn Magazine which contains correspondence between GOI and the Bank dated27th Jan, 31 Marchg 27th April and 6th July and one or two letters of SBI Pen ass, Fromthis one can conclude THAT cORP CENTRE OF SBI is trying to solve the issues.
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 18-08-2015 03:55:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT,THE ABOVE NOTED COURT CASE HAS BEENN LISTED AT SERIAL NO 1A ON THE 19TH AUGUST,2015 AFTER SERIAL NO 1 AND 1 B BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH NO 5.
K.R.SAINI
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 17-08-2015 03:28:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT ,THE ABOVE NOTED court case HAS BEEN LISTED AT SERIAL NO 1A ON THE 18TH AUGUST,2015 AFTER SERIAL NO 1 AND 1B BEFORE A double bench no 5.
k.r.saini
 

BS chahal wrote at 17-08-2015 02:47:

 Pension updation
I will request the Fed.representative to please apprise us whether there is any chance of our pension demands being fulfilled in near future.Please tell us after talking to our lawyer who can smell or forecast the courts feeling on the basis of their past experience.If DHC judgement passed in our favour what can be next legal action available to the bank or GOI to create legal hurdle in the courts judgement.Will this problem can be continued for indefinite time or there is some time fixed by the law to finish the entire case. Please throw some light for the satisfaction of the entire pension community.Pension updation of the RBI pensioners has been declined by the MOF.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Chahal,

It is not on the basis of smelling, but considering the trend of court proceedings, we are hopeful of a speedy solution to our pension, once the matter is taken up by the Div bench.

S.V.Mani wrote at 16-08-2015 21:43:

 pension
While our Case 1875 is not moving an inch forward despite a Top Court ruling that the Case should be decided within 6 months, there is an addition in the listing 1b in addition to 1, 1A. The alternative path that DMD's recommendations to GOI have fallen on deaf ears. Only God will save the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th Retirees
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 15-08-2015 00:56:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
OUR ABOVE NOTED CASE CONTINUES TO BE LISTED AT SERIAL NO 1A,ON THE 17TH AUGUST,2015 BEFORE A DIVISION BENCH NO 5.UNLESS PARTLY HEARD MATTERS AT SERIAL NO 1 AND SERIAL NO 1B ARE DISPOSED OF,IT IS UNLIKELY THAT OUR CASE WILL BE TAKEN UP.WE ,HOWEVER UNDERSTAND THAT ONCE IT IS TAKEN UP FOR FINAL HEARING,THE MATTER IS LIKELY TO BE DISPOSED OF AFTER CONTINUOUS REGULAR HEARING AND WE ARE HOPING ON A DAILY BASIS.
K.R.SAINI
 
Comment: Dear Mr Saini,

Thanks once again. Fellow pensioners all over India, are waiting simultaneously , with hope.

MENINO FURTADO wrote at 14-08-2015 20:17:

 HAPPY INDEPENDENCE DAY
Thousands laid down their lives so that

Our country can celebrate this day

Never forget their sacrifices..

Our life is full of colours.

I hope this 15th August will add more colours to your life.

Happy Independence Day to all my colleagues and their loved ones.
 
Comment: Dear Menino,

Happy Independence Day to you and all fellow pensioners.

S.V.Mani wrote at 14-08-2015 17:55:

 pension
We are helpless and God only save the %,6,7,8th BS Retirees.s
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 14-08-2015 03:35:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
ALTHOUGH THE ABOVE NOTED CASE HAS BEEN LISTED ON THE 17TH AUGUST,2015 AT ITEM NO 1A FIRST FIVE CASES BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH NO 5 AS USUAL.HOWEVER AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT ANOTHER COURT CASE NO FAO(OS)596/2009 IST FIVE CASES HAS BEEN MENTIONED AT SERIAL NO 1B AFTER SERIAL NO 1 BEFORE OUR ABOVE NOTED CASE.IN OTHER WORDS CASE NO 1 ,1B,AND 1A.
K.R.SAINI
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 13-08-2015 03:40:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT,THE ABOVE NOTED COURT CASE HAS BEEN LISTED ON THE 14TH AUGUST,2015 AT SERIAL NO 1 A BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH NO 5.
K.R.SAINI
 
Comment: Dear Shri Saini,

Thanks for your regular updates, though we continue to feel frustrated at our case not being taken up. We have no option but to wait patiently.

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 >


go to top