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:
What is ten plus 10 ?
 

There are 455 entries available on

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >

BS Chahal wrote at 19-05-2015 1:12 am:

 10 BPS
I HAVE COME TO KNOW THAT OFFICERS UNIONS ARE GOING TO SIGN FINAL AGREEMENTS WITH IBA WITHOUT ANY SETTLEMENT ON RETIREES DEMANDS IF SO WHAT IS OUR FUTURE COURSE OF ACTION
 
Comment: Dear Mr Chahal,

The 10th Bipartite, when implemented, will benefit only 10th Bipartite retirees. The plight of earlier retirees can only be improved by the Govt, through IBA either at the instance of the Courts, or otherwise.

TApan Tarafdar wrote at 18-05-2015 11:07 pm:

 publishid book about RABINDRANATH TAGORR
I have written one book about RABINDRA NATH name NANA RUPE KABIGURU. Intersted reader may contact Tapan Tarafdar phone no 9434077490.book hasbeen aprised by very renowend person.
 

Jayakrishnan T.V. wrote at 18-05-2015 10:14 pm:

 SBI PENSIONERS' FEDERATION-Delhi High Court-W.P.(C) 1875/2013

I mention hereunder the message received from Shri P.P.S. Murthy, General Secretary of SBI Pensioners' Federation:

Our case was not taken up today also (19th May 2015). Afternoon the bench is not sitting. Our case may be heard after 29th June 2015 when Delhi High Court reopens after vacation.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Jayakrishnan,

We are as disappointed as thousands of pensioners all over the country, including you, are. about this unfortunate development. To make matters worse, it is unlikely that this same bench will hear our case.

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 17-05-2015 11:50 pm:

 GOODWILL PACKAGE
FOR THE PERSONAL ATTENTION OF BANNERJI PRESIDENT PENSIONERS FEDERATION,
THE ABOVE ''GOODWILL PACKAGE'' WILL BENEFIT THE 5TH AND PART OF 6TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WHO RETIRED UPTO 1.07.1995 AND BANK HAD SENT A PROPOSAL TO GOVERNMENT IN SEPTEMBER 2013 FORI MPROVEMENT OF PENSION FOR5TH AND 6TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND NOW TAKE UP NWITH THEBANK TO GET THATPROPOSAL BE APPROVED BY THE GOVERNMENT SOTHAT ALL THE 5TH AND 6TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WILL GET IMPROVED PENSION.KINDLY DO FOR THE OLD PENSIONERS.
K.R.SAINI
 
Comment: Dear Mr Saini,

We have conveyed your message to Shri Banerjee. We however feel that the goodwill package, as the name suggests, is just a goodwill gesture of the Bank towards very senior pensioners who have crossed the age of 80 years. The improvement of pension, specially for the old pensioners, is a separate issue, which has to be resolved separately.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 16-05-2015 10:02 pm:

 DHC case-1875/2013
This site has repeated the contents on a wrong subject head.The DHC case is a silver lining in an otherwise very dark cloud hovering over the 7th.BPs. If the order is in favour of the PenFed and is effective from the dates of retirement,it would wipe out all the woes and tears of the 7th.BPs. Sujoy Ghosh
 

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 16-05-2015 9:57 pm:

 DHC case-1875/2013
Goodwill package-It is good as it goes,but a better arrangement would have been a medical package for the aged and the elderly because that is the need of the times with the rising medical expenses and the increasing needs of the ageing pensioners population.The bank could also consider setting up hospitals/nursing homes in the state capitals or to begin with at the four metro cities,of which 50% could be for the pensioners and such committee having pensioners's representatives by rotation.The geriatric population is ever increasing.Sujoy Ghosh
 
Comment: Dear Sujoy,

We appreciate and agree with the contents of your message, though the goodwill package or other such gestures are not linked with the Court case

Jayakrishnan T.V. (Website) wrote at 16-05-2015 4:00 am:

 SBI PENSIONERS' FEDERATION-Delhi High Court-W.P.(C) 1875/2013
The case is listed on 18th May 2015 as per Delhi High Court website - Regular Cause List of 18th May 2015. Let us pray for some positive and favourable development in our favour.
 

G.venkatachalam wrote at 16-05-2015 2:13 am:

 goodwill package
After discussion with the corporate body in Jan 2015, it is very gratifying that they announced a goodwill package. Taking into consideration the low number of early/voluntary retirees, their exclusion from the good will package need re-consideration on compassionate grounds and also the fact there will be very low % of retirees beyond the age of 80/90, Let benevolent wisdom prevail at the giving Corporate Body.
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 15-05-2015 8:43 pm:

 DELHI HIGH COURT-FEDERATION CASE--W.P(C)1875/2013
IN RESPONSE TO SHRI V.S. SRINIVASON COMMENT DATED 15TH MAY,2015.ADVANCE CAUSE LIST DATED 18TH AND 19TH MAY,2015 THERE IS A NOTE''BEFORE THE MATTERS LISTED IN THE MAIN LIST(ADVANCE LIST) PASSED-OVER MATTERS IN THE SUPPLEMENTARY LIST WILL BE TAKEN UP''IT MAY BE POSSIBLE THAT OUR ABOVE CASE MAY REFLECT IN THE SUPPLEMENTARY LIST WHICH IS NOT REFLECTED IN THE WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT YET.
K.R.SAINI
 

v s srinivasan wrote at 15-05-2015 3:46 pm:

 Delhi High Court - Federation Case - 1875 of 2013
Sirs,

Advance cause list of Delhi High Court for 18th May 2015 & 19th May 2015 has been put up the Delhi High Court Web site. Our case do not find a place in the list. Whereas in last week the list per day contained nearly 200 pages, for this week list contains only 100 pages.

I think there are chances for additional list. If any of our colleagues come across any news, please inform. Let us hope for early hearing.
 

udayan dasgupta wrote at 14-05-2015 11:50 pm:

 why this goodwill package ???
In central Govt super seniors are rewarded full pension on attainment of their ages 90yrs and at their age of 80 yrs & 85 yrs provided pensions are 75% & 90%.
I think considering above facts our management is kind enough to provide us a goodwill package like this.thank u managemt!!
 
Comment: Dear Udayan,

Updation of pension every 10 years, if not at intervals of 5 years, and full pension at very senior age, is obviously a much better option. But a package, however delayed, and inadequate, is better than no package at all. Let us see how we can improve upon this package.

n.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 14-05-2015 6:17 pm:

 Good will Pacage.
For people retired from Bankin Industry how many are going to live for more than 80 years. You can just count them. Why this payment of lump sum depending on age. If they are alive that itself is a great thing and living more than 90 years will be really a blessing. Let the bank be magnanimous. Let the lump sum be Rs. 60000/ uniformly for all those who have crossed 80 years now as on the cut off date and rs.1.20 lac to all those who live beyond 90 years .Let the bank make the maximum entitlement under the package Rs. 1.20 lac. To explain if a retiree is in receipt of Rs60000 now after crossing 80 and live beyond 90 years he can be paid another Rs.60000/ This seems to be more reasonable. For the family pensioners the amounts can be fixed just half. The PENFED can take up the matter suitably with the Bank Management.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Subramanian,

Your proposed package is definitely better than the one offered by the Bank. But the Bank's package is an improvement on the NIL position prevailing till so far. Let us see how it can be further improved upon.

Sudhir Suman Kumaria (Chandigarh Circle) (Website) wrote at 14-05-2015 2:26 am:

 “GOODWILL PACKAGE” FOR SENIOR STAFF AND FAMILY PENSIONERS
The above package provides for the payment of a lump sum payment ranging from Rs.10, 000/- to Rs. 1, 20,000/- to pensioners aged 80 and above as on 1-07-2015 with varying amounts depending on their age. This package is also made eligible for family pensioners with a lump sum payment ranging from Rs.5, 000/ to Rs.60, 000/-.
The details of the above package made available can be view/download from SBI Pensioners’ Association (Chandigarh Circle) official website: http://www.sbipensionerschd.com/ Downloads.aspx
 
Comment: Dear Mr Kumaria,

Thanks for your update. The package is welcome, though very belated and inadequate, considering that is is a one time payment. But better inadequate and late, than never.

Anil k saxena wrote at 11-05-2015 8:42 pm:

  Continued - Latest Developments in respect of our W.P. No.1875 of 2013
continued
Order Dt.6-05-2015 passed by the court is given hereunder.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
W.P.(C) 1875/2013
FEDERATION OF STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS
 

Anil k saxena wrote at 11-05-2015 8:40 pm:

 Latest Developments in respect of our W.P. No.1875 of 2013
Federation has advised regarding our W.P.No.1875/2013, which is
being heard at Delhi High Court, that our application for change of
prayers made on the basis of SBI Employees' Pension Fund
Regulations 2014 has been allowed by the Hon'ble Judges at the
hearing held on 6th May 2015. The Advocates of the Union
Government, R.B.I and our Bank did not raise any objections on our
above application. The Judges have directed us to file an amended
W.P with our revised prayers within a week. There are no material
changes in our revised prayers. A copy of the order dated 6-05-2015 is
enclosed hereto for your information.
Our amended W.P will be filed by our Advocates within time limit
stipulated in the above order. Our W.P will continue to get listed under
Regular Matters for final hearing on every Monday and Tuesday. It
will be taken up within first five items, when Regular Matters are taken
up. After, the hearing of our above W.P. held on 8-04-2015 no Regular
Matter could not be taken up by the Judges as the Senior Judge was
engaged in the Special Bench daily in the afternoon. Although our
W.P would be listed on 11th and 12th of this month, our case may
not be taken up on these dates, in view of the time limit of one week
stipulated on 6-05-2015 for filing our amended W.P.
An important point which may be observed from the above order
dated 6-05-2015 of the Delhi High Court is the direction stating that
there is no need of counter affidavit because substantive
pleadings remain the same. We are therefore hopeful that our W.P
would be taken up for final hearing on 18th/19th/25th/26th of thismonth.
 
Comment: Dear Anil,

Welcome back to our website, after a long gap. We have given an update on this matter, giving the latest status of the case, on 6th May itself. You have added some more inputs. Thanks.

A.R.Chandrasekharan wrote at 11-05-2015 10:18 am:

 1875/2013 case at Delhi
Sir, as advised by you to Venkatachalam the Delhi High Court made it clear that Rule/Regulation No.23(1) is the base for calculation of pension and one example also worked out and accepted by the Bank through the advocate.(Shri Jaipuriar) It is very clear that Rule No.23(1) has been accpted by the Bank. Does this judgement not cover the prayer of 1875/2013. Secondly can the same judges give another Ruling on the same. Please advise.
 
Comment: Dear Mr. Chandrasekhasaran,

The case of the individual pensioner from Jharkhand, was for payment of pension to him alone, calculated on the basis of the average salary drawn. Our case is on a representative capacity, and covers pensioners of all Bipartites.

It is reasonably expected that the same Bench will also give a favourable verdict to us.

G>Venkatachalam wrote at 09-05-2015 10:44 pm:

 writ petition 1875/2013
I would request the administrator of this website,to put in a nutshell what is the prayer under this W.P and what is the effect on the SBI Pensioners.
 
Comment: Dear Mr. Venkatachalam,

The prayer made initially in Supreme Court, and due to be heard in Delhi High Court Div Bench, after being transferred from Supreme Court, is :
Pension to be paid @ 50% of last average salary drawn, s per Rule 23 (1) and deletion of Rule 23 (2) according to which different ceilings and different percentages ere being imposed.
This will benefit pensioners of all Bipartites and also those who are suffering on account of 40% and 50 % bifurcation.

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 09-05-2015 5:22 am:

 W.P(C) 1875/2013
THE ABOVE NOTED COURT CASE HAS BEEN LISTED ON 11.05.2015 AT SERIAL NO 102 AT DELHI HIGH COURT AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT.
K.R.SAINI
 
Comment: Dear Mr Saini,

As we have already explained in our update on the matter, it will continue to figure in the Daily List, till it is heard.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 07-05-2015 10:29 pm:

 7th.BPs
Mr.Gopalakrishna Iyer-your post of the 6th.May 2015-The 7th.Bipartite settlement interalia signed by Mr.L Balasubramaniam as a member of the NCBE statesas under 'Restructuring Existing Pension Scheme'--....With effect from 01.11.19.1993,rise in pension ceiling from Rs.2400/ per month to Rs.4250/-per month after adjustment of DA..... .There is no mention of last 12 months basic pay wagera wagera.Thus after the sell out,the Bank/RBI/UOI in their wisdom are sticking to this epoch making 7th.Bipartite agreement.'Be Happy Don't Worry'In the normal course of attrition life will peter itself out!!Cheers,be cheerful and Hopeful and Be Happy.Sujoy Ghosh
 
Comment: Dear Sujoy,

Thanks for your post. You must be aware that the 7th Bipartite fiasco was initially an issue concerning all banks, but later all banks except SBI corrected the issue, though with effect from 1st May, 2005. Only our bank's pensioners are still suffering, for the last 13 years
Now that a favourable verdict has been pronounced in an individual case of a 7th Bipartite pensioner, by the same Div Bench of Delhi High Court, which is hearing our collective case, we are very hopeful of a favourable verdict which will benefit over 30,000 pensioners all over the country.

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 07-05-2015 9:43 pm:

 7th.BPs.DHC-2353/2014-Jaipuriar case.-increase in pension-fitment
M.Tandon and Mr. Parthasarathy--Yourposts of the 7th.May 2015-Admin has reiterated the issue.The Banks lawyer will forward the DHC- Jaipuriar order thru' the LHO to Corporate Center who will the submit their reco. to the RBI and UOI after vetting by the Legal Dept. at Corp.Center.The Bank's Lawyer having conceded is one issue and the views of the Bank/RBI/UOI are another story.We do not know the background situation of the Bank's Lawyer's brief given by the Bank.Was it on the spur of the moment or did he have the Bank's sanction to concede or was it his legal interpretation.Let us wait and see.And the PenFed case at DHC and then SC will determine what is in store for us.Sujoy Ghosh
 

Gopal Ji Tandon (Website) wrote at 07-05-2015 7:36 pm:

 Revision of Pension


I appreciate the suggestions of Sri R Parthasarthi wrote on 6-5-2015. Since the Bank has already been conceded in Delhi High Court in case No.2353/2014 all the affected 7th bipartite pensioners can write to the Bank for revision as is done in the normal course. It is right time to claim our rites rite now.
 
Comment: Dear Mr Tandon,

Bank will not be able to pay without Govts concurrence. Govt will not yield without Courts direction. The bench which has given a favourable order in the individual case, is also hearing our collective case. Let us wait for the court to give a verdict. Letters to the bank will not help.

udayan dasgupta wrote at 07-05-2015 6:18 pm:

 commutation factor
I retired on 31st January 2007.As the Factor for Commutation was only 6.6.& strikingly low it has been revised to 9.81 in 9th Bipartite.Whether it will be applicable to 8th bipartite retirees too of course including me ?
 
Comment: Dear Udayan,

The commutation formula in our Bank is very unfair to the pensioners who wish to commute. Unfortunately, the factor prevalent at the time of retirement, will be applied to arrive at the commutation amount.

R.Parthasarathy wrote at 07-05-2015 5:35 pm:

 7th bipartite pensioners vis-a-vis Delhi HC case 2353/2014
Dear Mr.Sujoy Ghosh,
The Delhi HC judgment clearly says that the Bank's lawyer has conceded that the basic pension of Mr.Jaipuriar has to be revised on the basis of the revised pay as per the 7th bipartite settlement in respect of his last moth of service. When such a revision has been conceded, it is logically applicable to all the affected pensioners. The Bank will not appeal since it has already conceded. There is no ground for appeal since the Bank has conceded. Hence, we can write to the Bank asking for the revision enclosing a copy of the Judgment and our pension fixation letter. The request may be routed through the Concerned branch/Regional Office and may be addressed to the LHO (PPG Dept).
 
Comment: Dear Mr. Parthasarathy,

We feel and believe that letters to the Bank will not yield any result, and only a direction from the Court to the Govt. to give clearance to the Bank, can resolve the stalemate. The Bank cannot decide on its own, without the concurrence of the Govt.

Gopal Ji Tandon (Website) wrote at 07-05-2015 3:26 am:

 Delhi High Court case No.1875/20123
Delhi High Court Case W.P. 1875/2013
Please let us know as to what transpired in the above case on 6th & 7th May 2015
 
Comment: Dear Shri Tandon,

Hearing has not commenced in our case, on 6th May, but our amended prayer in view of the change of Pension Fund Rules into Regulations, has been accepted by the Court The matter will continue to figure in the Daily list, till it is heard.

Please go to the Current News page of this website, where we have already posted an update.

Jayakrishnan T V wrote at 07-05-2015 3:04 am:

 LIC CASE AT SUPREME COURT - 07/05/2015
I am sure that members are aware that LIC Pensioners' have filed a case against LIC regarding discrimanatory in payment of DA to them. They have got favourable orders at Rajasthan, Punjab and Haryana and Delhi High Court. As usual LIC management went on appeal to Supreme Court. After a long, very long wait it was heard today. Supreme Court ordered for payment of 20 % to all the affected persons with in a period of six weeks, irrespective of the fact whether they were petitioners or not. Full details will be known only when the written order of the court is released which is expected any time now.

It may also be noted that,the back ground of LIC pensioners case before Hon. SC is different and the above case need not have relevance to SBI Pensioners' demands
 

Sujoy Ghosh (Website) wrote at 06-05-2015 10:06 pm:

 7th.BPs- DHC - Jaipuriar case.2353/2014
7th.BPs-Mr. R.Parthasarathy--Your suggestion of the 6th.May 2015 is well said.On this I have shared with some others such as mr.Srinivasan,Mr. Pannicker and others of the neighbouring Circles that the Bank is unlikely to take a decision without the consent of the UOI/RBI, whether to comply or to appeal.Thus a wait of about 3 months may be necessary.You may like to offer your opinion on this.Sujoy Ghosh
 

M. Gopalakrishna Iyer wrote at 06-05-2015 5:27 am:

 INCREASE IN PENSION FOR 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES
Dear friend,

This has reference to the letter of Shri R.Parthasarathy in these columns. I voluntarily retired from Ernakulam Zonal Office on 30.04.1998. At that time my basic pay was Rs.15,000/- in the revised scale and Rs.9700/- in the previous one. Accordingly my basic pension should have been Rs.7,500/- as the agreement was effective from 01.04.1998. But I am still drawing a basic pension of Rs.4250/- and D.P. thereon. To get the revised basic pension whom should I contact. I retired from zonal ernakulam, then under chennai LHO and presently the zonal office is under Kerala LHO. Kindly enlighten me as to whom I should put up a claim. Also let me know what are the supporting documents to be produced.

Yours very sincerely,

M.Gopalakrishna Iyer
 
Comment: Dear Mr Iyer,

You belong to 7th Bipartite, and hence you have, like 33,000 other fellow pensioners, suffered. It is mainly about this, that our Delhi High Court case is deliberating on.
Please wait for the outcome.

R.Parthasarathy wrote at 06-05-2015 4:13 am:

 7th bipartite pensioners vis-a-vis Delhi HC case 2353/2014
Revision of pension on the basis of the last drawn pay has already been conceded by the Bank in Delhi HC case 2353/2014. As such, it is suggested that all the affected 7th bipartite pensioners write to the Bank requesting for revision as is done in the normal course. In case the Federation gets us 50% instead of 50/40% (unsure prospects in terms of final judgment and further duration), we shall welcome it. Already thousands of pensioners have perished. It will be better if we claim our rights right now.
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 06-05-2015 2:43 am:

 REVISION OF PENSION
SIR ,THANKS FOR REPLY GIVEN BY YOU OF THE QUIRY RAISED BY SHRI VENKATACHALAM ON 5.5.2015.I SHALL BE GLAD IF YOU KINDLY ADVISE US THE PRESENT STATUS OF BANK'S PROPOSAL TO M.O.F BECAUSE THIS WAS THE REPLY OF THE BANK ON 22ND JANUARY 2015 WHEN STRUCTURED MEETING WAS HELD ON 22.1.2015 AT HYDERABAD.
K.R.SAINI
 
Comment: Dear Mr Saini,

We shall update information in this regard, as soon as it is available to us.

Jayakrishnan T.V. wrote at 05-05-2015 10:08 pm:

 /DELHI HIGH COURT CASE - SBI PENSIONERS' FEDERATION vs UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS - W.P. 1875/2013
Application for change of prayers alone being taken up today (6th May 2015). Final arguments will not commence today. FULL DETAILS AWAITED
 
Comment: Dear Mr Jayakrishnan,

Additionally, it is learnt that our case will continue to figure in the daily list, and will be taken up by the Bench, as soon as it is able to.

G>Venkatachalam wrote at 05-05-2015 9:14 am:

 revision of pension
Under latest news in SBI Pensioners Assn Mumbai website there is a news item appearing for the pas8/9 months of proposal by Central Board of the Bank increasing the 5th abd 6 th bipartite pensioners to Rs3775 and 50% and 40% on Rs 8500. xan anyone exlain the correctness of yhis itrm ?
 
Comment: Dear Mr Venkatachalam,
The Bank has sought clearance from the Govt. for removal of anomalies affecting pensioners of 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th Bipartites. Certain clarifications sought for, by the Govt, have since been furnished by the bank. This is in keeping with the assurances given by Corporate Centre, recently, at the structured meeting with our Federation.

ROSHAN LAL wrote at 05-05-2015 7:58 am:

 MEDICAL REIMBURSEMENT TO THE VRS/RESIGNEE RETIREE
SIR,
PLEASE CLARIFY THAT ANY SCHEME FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF MEDICAL BILL IS AVAILABLE FOR VRS/RESIGNEE RETIREE.
 
Comment: Dear Shri Lal,
If such a pensioner has been a member of EMWS, then only he or she is entitled to get reimbursement of medical bills under the scheme. However, such pensioners are not entitled to REMBS, except for the Rs 2 lacs scheme, available for the VRS optees of 2000-01.

udayan dasgupta wrote at 05-05-2015 4:43 am:

 UPDATION OF PENSION-COURT DECISION
I AM SURE THAT TOMORROW OR IN NEAR FUTURE
I.B.A. & GOI WILL CRY()
TO LOSE THE MATCH '"THE UP DATION OF PENSION" &
WE RETIREES WILL WIN THE MATCH & LAUGH ()
 
Comment: Dear Udayan,

Hopefully, things will brighten up in the days to come.

B.S.Chahal wrote at 05-05-2015 3:01 am:

 pension updation for 7th BPS
Can anybody confirm if anything cocrete is going to be decided reg. 100% DA and pension updation and if so what is expected time
 
Comment: Dear Mr Chahal,

Pension updation is a demand in the entire banking industry. But this is dependent upon acceptance of UFBU of Bipartites at intervals of 10 years, instead of 5 years.
100% DR neutralization is expected for pre Nov 2002 retirees, after the implementation of 10th Bipartite settlement.

Unknown wrote at 03-05-2015 2:01 am:

 second Innings
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 02-05-2015 8:01 pm:

 W.P(C)1875/2013
RECTIFICATION
KINDLY READ DATE OF LISTING AS 6TH MAY,2015 INSTEAD OF 6TH APRIL,2015 WRONGLY MENTIONED IN MY PREVIOUS MESSAGE.I REGRET THE INCONVIENCE CAUSED TO READERS IN THIS REGARD.
K.R.SAINI
 

KESHAV RAI SAINI (Website) wrote at 02-05-2015 7:34 pm:

 W.P(C) 1875/2013 AT DELHI HIGH COURT
AS PER WEB SITE OF DELHI HIGH COURT ADVANCED CAUSE LIST DATED 6TH APRIL,2015 THE ABOVE NOTED CASE HAS BEEN LISTED ON 6TH APRIL,2015 AT SERIAL NO 3 IN THE DELHI HIGH COURT BEFORE A DOUBLE BENCH.
K.R.SAINI
 

Ravindra Kumar. syal wrote at 02-05-2015 12:47 am:

 Medical facility
I a for reply of my my massage of 21-4-2015. Enhancement in M.W.S. amount from Rs.2000/- to Rs. at least Rs.4000/-Because , those are not getting medical facility they should be provided the Medical facility to all the pensioners, whatsoever be the reason. Because Every person has the right to alive. Thanks.
 

Sudhir Suman Kumaria (Chandigarh Circle) (Website) wrote at 01-05-2015 7:50 am:

 Pensioners’ Mail for the month of May 2015
We have uploaded the Chandigarh Circles’ Monthly Bulletin Pensioners’ Mail for the month of May 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)
 

manotosh Samajpati wrote at 30-04-2015 12:17 am:

 up-dation of Main menu topics
It is observed that some topics of main menu, like 'STOP PRESS','COPIES OF IMPORTANT LETTERS' were not updated for long time.please look into the matter.
 
Comment: Dear Manotosh.

Thanks for trying to keep old people like us, on our toes. We do need to be pushed, at times. We will try to follow your advice. Please keep in touch.

jwala prasad tiwari wrote at 29-04-2015 9:57 pm:

 htm portal not responding when new password used
Changed pass word in pensioner portal not effective in openining plz advise in the matter THANKS
 

RAM . M wrote at 27-04-2015 10:41 pm:

 CUT OFF POINT FOR PENSION
IN 'E' CIRCULAR NO. P&HRD SL.NO.57/2008 - 09==CDO/P&HRD-PM/8/2008-09 DATED 03/05/2008, IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN PARA 3 AS FOLLOWS:
" IT IS FURTHER CLARIFIED THAT IN RESPECT OF RETIREES COVERED BY 8TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT WHO WERE DRAWING SALARY ABOVE RS.21,040/-+FPP+PQP WOULD BE AS UNDER:
40% OF AVERAGE BASIC PAY + 1/2 OF PQP(IF ANY) + 1/2 OF FPP (SUBJECT TO A MINIMUM OF RS.10,520/- + 1/2 OF PQP (IF ANY) + 1/2 OF FPP )"
BASED ON THE SALARY DRAWN THE CUT OFF POINT IS ARRIVED AT AND PENSION CALCULATION IS DONE ACCORDINGLY.
WILL ANYBODY TELL ME THE UPDATED POSTION IN RESPECT OF 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND THE CIRCULAR NUMBER ALSO.
 

n.Subramanian (Website) wrote at 27-04-2015 5:21 am:

 Updation
My view is that let UFBU take up the issue reg Updation of pension for every 10 years the first such thing to be from the date of implementaion of the 10th BP agrrement and pension updation every 10 years thereafter. Let the wage settlement every 5 years remain. Why can't they take up with IBA the matter of updation on these lines.
 

Shripad Gudi wrote at 27-04-2015 2:25 am:

 In response to the "Comments" to Mr. Dhanabalan's anguish on behalf of 7th B.P. Pensioners dtd. 30.09.2014
Both under the extant SBI Pension Fund Rules 1955 and SBI Pension Fund Regulations 2014, we are not eligible for updation of pension.
 

dhanabalan wrote at 27-04-2015 2:02 am:

 pension updation
I request any one to inform whether we are eligible for updation of pension as per either pension act or regulation. If so section number please. With regards
 
Comment: Dear Mr Dhanabalan,

As of now, we are not eligible for updation of pension. It is there for Govt employees, where in every Pay Commission wage hikes, the pensions are also increased But IBA will consider it only if UFBU agrees to Bipartites at 10 year intervals.

Jayakrishnan T V wrote at 27-04-2015 1:57 am:

 INSURANCE POLICIES - EFFECT OF NOMINATION - NEW LAW
Shri Perumal Maruthu, Canara Bank Pensioner, has posted the following message in Facebook. Whether it is applicable only for LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES or applicable to General Insurance Policies also (i.e) Personal Accident Policies - is not known.
In the new insurance law, if an immediate family member such as spouse is made the nominee, then the death benefit will be paid to that person and other legal heirs will not have a claim on the money. This is good because it makes the nomination process more meaningful and clear. A policyholder knows that the immediate family member nominated by him will get the benefit. This will be applicable for all insurances that have a maturity date after March 2015
 

M. Gopalakrishna Iyer wrote at 25-04-2015 9:16 pm:

 PENSIONERS' GENUINE GRIEVANCES
Dear Friend,

There are two main issues lying before the Government of India for their stamp of approval and they are:-

1. Improvement in the case of 7th BPA retiring where pension will be paid @ 40% extra for basic pension above Rs.4w50/-. This is pending before the goverment since September2013.

2. Nutralisation of DA @ 100% to all pensioners.

We must arrange to have a permanent Liaison Officer posted at Delhi, preferably one among us with legal qualification and background like a retired law officer to follow up the matters with officials of the finance ministry at regular intervals.
 
Comment: Dear Mr. Iyer,

Thanks for your suggestions. Actually, the basic demands of pensioners can be classified as follows.
1. Pension at 50% of last average basic salary drawn, for pensioners of all Bipartites. The court case in Delhi High Court Div Bench, is in support of this basic demand, and will benefit all pensioners.
2. Dearness Relief neutralization @ 100 % for all pensioners, including those who retired prior to 1st Nov, 2002. Those who retired after that, i.e. from 8t Bipartite onwards, are already getting DR at 100%.
3. Automatic updation of pension, like Govt. pensioners.
4. Family pension at 30% for all family pensioners.

suresh chhatre pf 1330381 wrote at 22-04-2015 5:47 pm:

 REMBS
Whether Ayurvedic treatment in hospital is reimbursable under the scheme(Hospitalization for Ayurvedic treatment, just like Shri Kejariwal)
 
Comment: Dear Suresh,

Ayurvedic treatment or Unani treatment is not covered under REMBS for pensioners.

MENINO FURTADO wrote at 22-04-2015 7:39 am:

 hi
I appreciate the reasoned "comments" made explaining the correct position and the expectations in the Court cases and other matters without getting into any controversies or biting the baits thrown by some. Very clever, well read / informed and matured person who is making these "comments". Congrats to him and wish him well.
 
Comment: Dear Menino,

Thanks once again, for your reasoned appreciation. Encouragement, honest criticism and appreciation are the only food that keeps us strong and energetic.

Ravindra Kumar Syal wrote at 21-04-2015 11:05 pm:

 Medical facilityr
Will u pl. refer to my request dot. 10-4-15',I am sure u will be equally worry about the provision of medical facility to all the pensioners, what soever be the case. Because every pensioner is pensioner , there should not be ant discrimation.However, pl. try to get Rs.4000/- instead of Rs.2000/- because basic treatment has gone up, which is insufficient amount Rs.2000/-. Pl. look into it. Thanks.e
 

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >


go to top