DRAFT MEMORANDUM ON PENSION AND OTHER RETIREMENT BENEFITS PLACED INVITING SUGGESTIONS / IMPROVEMENTS / MODIFICATIONS / ADDITIONS / DELETIONS IF ANY FROM ALL ORGANISATIONS / FEDERATIONS OF PENSIONERS
Your response is invited within one week and all your communications may be sent to the following E-Mail ID:
S.K.Vyas
Secretary General BCPC
Secretary General NCCPA
MEMORANDUM ON PENSION AND OTHER RETIREMENT BENEFITS
CHAPTER – I
Introduction
The Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of
Expenditure, Resolution No.1/1/2013-EIII(A) dated 28th February,
2014 in its Para 2(f) has included the following terms of reference of the 7th
Central Pay Commission:
“(f) To examine the
principles which should govern the structure of Pension and other retirement
benefits, including revision of pension in the case of employees who were
retired prior to the date of these recommendations, keeping in view that the
retirement benefits of all Central Government employees appointed on and after
01.01.2004 are covered by the New Pension Scheme (NPS).”
1.2 The principles
that should govern the structure of pension etc have to be evolved taking into
account the relevant constitutional provisions as well as judicial
pronouncements by the Supreme Court of India in this regard.
1.3 Article 366(17) of the Constitution of
the Country defines pension as under:
“ Pension: Pension means a pension whether
contributory or not, of any kind whatsoever payable to or in respect of any
person and includes retired pay so payable; a gratuity so payable and any sum
or sums so payable by way of the return, with or without interest thereon or
any other addition thereto, of subscription to a Provident Fund.”
From this what is to be inferred is that
the gratuity as well as commutation are also part of the pension as a whole.
These are also to be treated as pensionery benefits.
1.4 The IV CPC
went into the conceptual question of pension in detail. Some of the
observations contained in their report are relevant in understanding the
purport in the background in which the Central Government employees are placed
today.
“ Para 2.13: Part II: But the concept of ‘pension’ however old in its origin,
had the latent and real desire to provide for an eventuality – known and
unknown. The known eventuality was old age and probable reduction in earning
power, while the unknown eventuality was disability by disease or accident or
death. Its real purpose was security, even though the beginning was oblique,
indiscernible and faint. But the germ of an effort to provide security ran
through the provision and it is natural that it should have grown and flowered
with the development of human understanding and desire to look after and
provide for those who deserved it for man has constantly been seeking means by
which to enhance his economic security. But the extension of the pension
provision from military service to civilian public employment, resulted largely
from consideration for the employees and the pressure of their organisations.
Some benevolent employer goes to the extent of regarding pensions as an
absolutely indispensable complement of wages – a terminal benefit. That
however, is apart from another aspect bearing on pension – the social aspect.
The demographic structure of the population is changing because of the greater
expectation of life. Thus, those who are now in middle age are going to be
nearly twice as big as economic burden to their children as their parents are
to them. The problem in such cases, has been tackled as a social obligation, including social insurance for
citizens generally.”
“Para 2.17: In the
very nature of things, every employee, who lives long enough, reaches a stage
of diminished outturn of work or what may generally be called non-productive
years. That may, speaking generally again, be set to be the responsibility
of his employer for whom he has spent the best years of his life. In a
welfare state that may also be set to be the responsibility of the
Government (where he is not in his employment) and, in more modern society,
it may also be set to be the responsibility of the individual. So all
three namely, the employer, the Government and the employee or one or the other
of them, may be expected to contribute towards the pension according to the
social or administrative set up of the country or society where the individual
undertakes the service but the one common feature and object of pension is to
provide for the old age of the employee for the simple reason that time has
eroded his capacity to earn and he is unable to provide for himself. In a
country like ours, where we have solemnly resolved to constitute it into a
“Socialist” Republic and to secure to us all social and economic justice
(Preamble), it behoves the Government to take care of its employees by
providing terminal benefit like retirement pension when they become entitled to
them. We may refer to the directive principle of the State Policy enshrined in
Article 39 (a) of the Constitution that the State shall in particular direct
its policy towards securing that the citizens have the right to an “adequate
means of livelihood” ….. If, such a
citizen is an employee of the State, is it out of ordinary, and not as of a
Constitutional directive, that the State should appreciate its duty to provide
for him by means of a pension and/or other terminal benefits? (emphasis
added) …. The concept of pension, therefore carries within it the germ of
certainty, periodicity, and “adequacy”. ……. Ours is a Socialist State and
the fundamental aim of Social security is to give individuals and families the
confidence that their level of living and quality of life will not, in so far
as, be greatly eroded by any social or economic eventuality, including the age
of superannuation or oncoming disability”
1.5 The concept of
pension has been explained more precisely in the Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences, Vol.11 as under:
“administrators
and civic leaders interested in the improvement of Government services
formulated the idea of pension as an efficiency device necessary for the
orderly and humane elimination of superannuated and disabled employees no
longer able to function efficiently for the proper operation of the system of
promotions, for the attraction of better type of employees and for the
improvement of working morale”
1.6 On the
doctrinal approach the Encyclopaedia further states that:
“ A doctrine
recently advanced and more far reaching in its implications regard the Public
Service as the logical pioneer in the meeting of the old age problem as it
affects wage earner in modern society. This doctrine considers a pension as a
compensation paid to the employee for the gradual destruction of his wage earning
capacity in the course of his work. Retirement being a proper charge against
the employees, entire period of active service, the employer should make
contribution towards the employees eventual retirement during each year of
service of the employee, in a manner similar to that in which he annually sets
aside a reserve against depreciation and obsolescence of his plant and
machinery. Pensions, according to this doctrine, are an absolutely indispensable compliment of wages.”
1.7 In para 2.20
the IV Pay Commission has observed:
“but even
though the Government service pension scheme in our country is
non-contributory, it has been contended again by way of doctrinal approach,
that this is not really so and that some allowance is made for the missing
contribution while determining the salaries”
1.8 The Supreme
Court in their Landmark Judgment (which has been approvingly quoted by the 5th
CPC in D.S.Nakara and others Vs Union of
India (AIR 1983 SC 130) held
that Pension is neither a bounty nor a matter of grace depending upon the sweet
will of the employer. It is not an ex-gratia payment but payment for past
services rendered. It is a social welfare measure rendering socio economic
justice to those who in the hey-days of their life ceaselessly toiled for their
employer on an assurance that in their old age they would not be left in lurch.
The 5th CPC paying due respect to the above observation of the
Honourable Apex Court in Para 127.6 of its report has stated that the pension is the statutory, inalienable, legally
enforceable right of employees which has been earned by the sweat of their
brow. As such the pension should be fixed, revised, modified and changed in
ways not entirely dissimilar to the salaries granted to serving employees.
1.9 While
examining the goals that a pension scheme should seek to sub-serve, the
Honourable Apex Court held that “a pension scheme consistent with available
resources must provide that the pensioner would be able to live:
(i)
free from want, with decency, independence and self respect, and
(ii) at a
standard equivalent at the pre retirement level”
The Court
observed that we owe it to the Pensioners that they live, not merely exist.
1.10 From the above
observation of the Supreme Court it is clear that pension is payable by the employer
i.e., the Central Government to its retired employees which is their statutory
and legally enforceable right from which they cannot be deprived. That the
amount of pension must be enough to enable a pensioner to live free from want
with decency, independence, and self-respect and at a standard equivalent at
the pre-retirement level.
1.11 Keeping the
above observations and principles and judicial pronouncements in view, we
submit below our suggestions for restructuring the existing pensionery scheme
in appropriate chapters. We have made
our submissions only in respect of issues where we want Commission to consider
improvements in the existing provisions.
CHAPTER –
II
New Pension Scheme (NPS)
2.1 The
contributory pension system brought in by the GOI through their notification
dated 22.12.2003, now renamed as National Pension System under PFRDA Act, has
been imposed on Government employees who entered service on or after 1.1.2004.
2.2 This is an
illegal act in as much as the Supreme Court of India had held Pension as an
enforceable inalienable fundamental right. Therefore it should be scrapped or
at least not made applicable to Government employees. This has also divided the
CG employees into two categories and therefore it is discriminatory in respect
of persons who have entered service on or after 1.1.2004 who had been denied
the statutory pension. Any discriminatory scheme is illegal and ultravires of
Article 14 of the Constitution. On this count also the NPS cannot be made
applicable to the Government employees.
2.3 The Centre for
Economic Studies and Policy, Institute for Social & Economic Change,
Bangalore in a Study of Terminal Benefits of the Central Government Employees
sponsored by the VI CPC had also observed that Civil Services Pension is in the
nature of a deferred wage. It is well known that the principle guiding the pay package of
civil servants is one of intentionally spreading out the compensation over a
long period of time, thereby the wages paid out during the course of the work
tenure is kept low by design, and the pension payments made during the
retirement phase compensate for the low working wages.
2.4 The above
mentioned study under the heading “Arguments against pension reforms” states as
follows:
“Deferred Wage: In the context of civil
servant pension payments, it is argued that, the principle guiding the fixation
of pay package is one of intentionally spreading out the compensation over a
long period of time, where by the wages paid out during the course of work
tenure is kept low by design, and the pension payments made during the
retirement phase compensate for the low working wages. The Supreme Court of
India held that pension is neither a bounty nor a matter of grace depending
upon the sweet will of the employer. It is not an ex-gratia payment, but a
payment for past services rendered. It is a social welfare measure, rendering
socio-economic justice to those who in the heyday of their life ceaselessly
toiled for the employer on an assurance that in their old age, they would not
be left in the lurch.”
“Larry
Williams observes “Actually, civil service pensions, because they are not based
on contributions, are best described as deferred wages. Civil servants accept a
lower current wage in exchange for the promise of a pension in their old age.
If this pension were contributory, they would insist on a higher wage and
government would have to either increase taxes or borrow (issue debt) to pay
it. The real cost of civil servants is thus much higher than recorded under the
current system of cash accounting. A good reform would be to move to a system
of accrual accounting setting up at least a notional fund to pay these deferred
wages” (Larry Wilmore, 2004)”
“Public and private sector pay differentials: A comparison of
the public and private sector wages reveals that while the public sector wages
for the lower grades compares well with that of the private sector, the salaries
of the employees belonging to the higher grades are highly unfavourable to the
public sector employees. The post-retirement benefits that the government
employees are entitled to act as some incentive to retain them in government
sector.”
2.5 The above
study had pointed out that expenditure on pensions of civil servants of high
income OECD countries on an average is 2% of GDP (less than 1% in Ireland and
more than 3.5% in Austria*)(* Source: OECD Social Expenditure Database). But in
the 8 South Asian countries it is less than 1% of GDP (Source: World Bank Data
base). However, in India between 1964-65 and 2004-05 on an average pension
payments (Civil Service pension paid by Central Government) have constituted
0.51% share of GDP. The Pension liability would continue to increase and reach
0.54% level by 2019-20 and remain at that level till 2014-25 after which they
would decline as a percentage of GDP according the the same study conducted by Dr.Gayatri
at the instance of VI CPC. These figures argue themselves in favour of
continuation of the Defined Benefit Pension Scheme for all Central Government
employees instead of throwing a section of them to market based NPS.
2.5 The above
study had submitted the following estimated pensionery outgo which tends to
increase during the period from 2014-2038. It is only after 2043 that it starts
declining and will be reduced to zero only in 2088. The table is given below:
Table showing estimated
pensionery outgo
Year
|
Employee Pension
Payout (in Rs Crores)
|
Family Pension Pay out (in
Rs.Crores)
|
Total pension payout (in Rs.Crores)
|
2004
|
11300.69
|
2983.38
|
14284.07
|
2008
|
13532.84
|
3572.68
|
17105.52
|
2013
|
16549.07
|
4368.94
|
20918.02
|
2018
|
21862.54
|
5771.79
|
27634.33
|
2023
|
27723.68
|
7319.11
|
35042.80
|
2028
|
34076.27
|
8996.13
|
43072.41
|
2033
|
39321.68
|
10381.01
|
49702.69
|
2038
|
45164.50
|
11923.41
|
57087.90
|
2043
|
41747.23
|
11021.30
|
52768.53
|
2048
|
35011.92
|
9243.18
|
44255.10
|
2053
|
25405.44
|
6707.07
|
32112.51
|
2058
|
16303.15
|
4304.07
|
20607.22
|
2063
|
8179.51
|
2159.39
|
10838.90
|
2068
|
3159.88
|
834.19
|
3994.07
|
2073
|
800.68
|
211.34
|
1012.02
|
2078
|
110.26
|
29.17
|
139.43
|
2083
|
3.52
|
0.97
|
4.49
|
2088
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
0.00
|
2.6 From the above
projection it is very clear that the benefit of NPS will commence only after
44 years i.e. in 2044. And during the
period it will increase exponentially as because in addition to the Statutory
pension liability the Government will be contributing to the NPS also @ 10% of
annual salary bill of the CG Employees who have entered service on or after
1.1.2004.
2.7 The final
conclusion of this study team has been as
under:
“Mainly given the fact that the
future liability although may be large in terms of the absolute size is not
likely to last very long and does not constitute an alarmingly big share of the
GDP which is also on the decline, it appears that pursuing the existing Pay As
you Go to meet the liability would be an ideal solution.”
2.8 Applying this
conclusion we may suggest that the NPS may not be made applicable to the
Government employees and all those who had been covered under NPS may be
reverted back to statutory pension scheme. The Government may be asked to study
the experiences of this scheme in several other countries in the world. In
Chile such a scheme has been reversed as because the return which the low paid employees
got out of the annuity purchased was not as good as 50% of LPD but as low as
20% of LPD. The UK Government had to pay out of the exchequer large amount by
way of subventions in order to ensure that that annuities purchased yield 50%
of LPD as pension. It is well known that in USA where there were similar
pension schemes dependent upon the market had collapsed during the financial
melt down from 2008 onwards. It is estimated that more than 3.5 trillion $
worth of pension wealth was lost. The workers not only lost their pension but
also their jobs. Our respectful submission is that taking into account the
demographic considerations the India which is a country of young do not need
any such market oriented pension scheme, particularly when the international
experience is that such schemes had failed and our country can afford to pay
pension to civil servants which stands at level of 1% of the GDP.
Chapter –
III
Pension
Entitlement
Emoluments for Pension:
3.1 The entire
income in form of basic pay, special pay or personal pay if any, deputation duty
allowance etc are the elements of pay proper and therefore confining the
emoluments to the basic pay as recommended by the IV and V CPCs is to be
undone. The Dearness Allowance is meant to restore the purchasing power of pay
is only an addition to pay. In many countries there is no system of DA.
Periodically the Pay is revised / indexed taking into account the rise in cost
of living. Here also there is a system of merging the DA as DP for purposes of
pensionery benefits. In respect of gratuity already the DA is being included
with Pay and therefore there is no reason for excluding the DA from the
emoluments. We therefore suggest that
the emoluments for the calculation of pension should include:
Basic Pay
Any Special pay or personal pay, or
deputation duty allowance.
Dearness Allowance
Non-practicing allowance in respect
of Doctors
75% of the running allowance in
respect of Railway Running Staff retired after 4.12.1988.
- Average emoluments:
3.2 The VI CPC has
already recommended that the ten monthly average emoluments or the last pay
drawn, whichever is more beneficial, should be the basis of computation of
pension. We have therefore no further suggestion to place before the Commission
on this issue.
Qualifying service for pension:
3.3 The VI CPC has
done away with the requirement of 33 years of qualifying service for full
pension. They have said that full pension may be granted to those who voluntarily retire from service having the
qualifying service of 20 years. Other employees who retire on superannuation with ten years of service are eligible for pension. We suggest that employees with five years of qualifying service also can be made eligible for pension in the background that many are regularised with less than ten years in government service.
Rate of Pension:
3.4 We should keep
in mind the observation of the Apex Court that the pension scheme must provide
so much that the pensioner should be able to live:
Free from want, with decency,
independence and self-respect, and
At a standard equivalent at the
pre-retirement level.
(The Court had further observed that we owe it to the pensioners that
they live; not merely exist.)
3.5 Therefore
taking into account that on superannuation an employee is left with a ‘two unit family’ generally and
therefore if he is to be enabled to maintain
a standard equivalent to the pre-retirement level, the rate of pension
should be 67% of the last pay drawn. We therefore suggest that full
pension should be at the rate of 67% of LPD or 10 months average emoluments,
whichever is more beneficial.
3.6 It is
pertinent to point out that several countries in the world pay higher rate of
pension to their civilian pensioners. France is paying 75% of last six months
average emoluments as pension; Belgium is paying 75% of last five years average
as pension; Cyprus is paying 67% of final salary as pension; Malta is paying
80% of average of best 15 years wages as pension; Our neighbour Srilanka which
is also in the lower middle income group of countries like India in South Asia,
is having a scheme called “Public Servants Pension Scheme (Defined Benefit
Scheme) established in 1901, as a mandatory scheme financed by the Government
budget is paying 85% to 90% (for 30 years of
service) of last one y ear annual salary at retirement as pension
(Source: Srilanka Pension Department Circular No.3/2004 dated 16.01.2004); The
life expectancy in Srilanka at 60 is 20.2% which is 3.5% higher than India.
3.7 In Pakistan
which is another neighbour and remains in the same lower middle income group of
countries is calculating pension on the following formula:
“Number of
years of service X Last Basic Pay X 7 and divided by 300. If an employee has
served 35 years of service and received last basic pay as Rs.10,000/- then that
employee shall get a pension of 8.167/- (i.e., 81.67%).
3.8 In Bangladesh
the retirement age is 57. The life expectancy at 60 in Bangladesh is 17.9 which
is same as in India. This country also remains in lower middle income group of
countries like India. But Bangladesh pays 80% of last pay as pension. In the
war devastated country of Afghanistan,,
pension is calculated on last 36 months average; for each year it is 2% and a
maximum of 80% is given as pension in that country.
3.9 From the above
comparison with some of the world countries of both European as well as our own
South Asian countries, it is clear that all those countries are paying better
percentage of pension to their Civilian employees. India appears to be one of
the less pension paying country despite its image of one of the faster
developing economies in the world. We therefore suggest that the basic pension
to be determined should be 67% at least on the basis of the last pay drawn or
the 10 months average emoluments, whichever is more beneficial to employee.
3.10 It has already
been well recognised that as the age after superannuation further advances, not
only the pensioner becomes weak in limbs but also becomes more susceptible to
various geriatric diseases. He will have to incur additional expenses for his
upkeep. There are also the social obligations and increased expenses on medical
treatment etc.
E. Additional
Pension
3.11 The Government of India has accepted and
implemented the 6th CPC recommendation of age-related additional
pension beyond the age of 80. However the 6th CPC did not recommend
any addition to the pension for a period of 20 years after superannuation at
the age of 60. Their argument was that every pensioner gets increase in his /
her pension after 15 years when the commutated portion of his pension is
restored. This is not at all a valid ground. Even during these 15 years the
Dearness Relief is calculated on his gross pension and not on his net pension
after commutation and he earns interest on commuted value of pension. Therefore
there is no increase in pension on account of restoration of commuted pension
after 15 years.
3.12 In our opinion this needs certain
revision. According to SSO survey (2007-08) 7.5% population only is above the
age of 60. Naturally this may reflect among the pensioners also. Life
expectancy at 60 is only 17.9 and at 70 it is only 11.8 (Source: Sample
Registration System O/o the Registrar General India). This means a Government
servant is receiving pension for 18 to 22 years. In the age group of 60 to 79,
in Rural areas 5% and in Urban areas 5.5% is confined to bed. In the same age
group 22.4% in Rural areas and 20.2% in Urban areas is confined to home due to
physical immobility (Source: National Sample Survey, 60th Round,
2004). After retirement, their income from pension is nearly 1/3rd
of their gross salary at the time of retirement. But they have to spend more on
medical care. This age-group therefore also needs some relief by way of
additional pension. Incidentally Afghanistan which is one of the low income
countries in Asia, is having a retirement age of 65 with a formula of grant of
additional pension at the rate of 3% for each year after 65 years of age and
the maximum 80% additional pension is paid.
3.13 Therefore we seek the 7th
CPC to consider addition to the pension after granting 67% of last pay drawn (LPD)
/ Average of emoluments as full pension on superannuation at 60 years of age as
under, because of prevailing life expectancy of Indian Citizen Age is 69.6
(assessed during the year 2011-15) and the old pensioner who is also considered
to be senior citizen has to wait for a period of twenty years on his retirement
to get an increase at his age of 80 maintaining his health from disease burden.
On
attaining Age
|
Increased to the % of LPD* / Average Of 10 months
emoluments
|
65 Years
|
70
|
70 Years
|
75
|
75 Years
|
80
|
80 Years
|
85
|
85 Years
|
90
|
90
Years
|
100
|
E.Minimum Pension
3.14 Though the
concept of minimum pension and the method of computing it have not been
explained by any of the pay commissions or the Government, it is clear that the
Minimum Pension is 50% of the Minimum Wage. The rationale behind the percentage
has nowhere been explained. We however
think that in order to ensure that it is adequate, 100% of the minimum wage
should be the Minimum Pension. The very concept of Need Based Minimum Wage
is that this is a level of wage below which a worker’s family cannot subsist /
survive and remain capable to perform. That being the concept of minimum wage,
it should also apply in the case of Minimum Pension on the premise that any pension lower than the Minimum pay is insufficient to enable a pensioner / family
pensioner to live or survive.
F. Dearness Compensation
3.15 We have no
suggestions for improvement of this issue except that Pensioners may be paid
the same dearness compensation viz., at the same rate as it is being paid to
the serving employees. It should be periodically merged with the basic pension
so that deficiency in the 100% neutralization in the cost of living is
partially compensated.
G. Merger of Dearness Relief
with Basic Pension
3.16 As on 01.01.2014, the Dearness Relief compensation
stands at 100%. The suggestion for
merger of DR to partially compensate the erosion in the real pension was first
suggested by the Gadgil Committee in the post 2nd Central Pay
Commission period. The 3rd
CPC had recommended such merger when the cost of Living Index crossed over 272
points i.e. 72 points over and above the base index adopted for the pension
revision. In other words, the
recommendation of the 3rd CPC was to merge the Dearness Relief when
it crossed 36%. The Government in the national council JCM at the time of
negotiation initially agreed to merge 60 % Dearness Relief and later the whole
of the DR before the 4th CPC was set up. The 5th CPC merged 98% of DR with
pension.
3.17 The methodology adopted
for compensating the erosion in the real value of pension in the interregnum
period had always been through the mechanism of merger of a portion of Dearness
Relief. The 5th CPC had
recommended that the Dearness Relief must be merged with basic pension as and
when the percentage of Dearness compensation exceeds 50% accordingly even
before the setting up the 6th CPC the Dearness Relief to the extent
of 50% was merged with pension.
3.18 It was totally ironic
to note that deviating from all other Pay Commissions, the 6th CPC
had made a reversal and recommended that no Dearness Allowance / Dearness
Relief should be merged with the Basic Pay of employees / Basic Pension of
Pensioners. The recommendation had dealt a severe blow below the belt as this
recommendation denied everyone from having any cushion against the erosion
caused in the real value of pension in between two pay commissions. Had the
recommendation of V CPC been continued, there would have been two automatic
mergers of Dearness Relief by this time as V CPC recommended such a merger
automatically whenever the dearness relief index crosses 50% mark.
3.19 The Central Government
also taking undue advantage out of the recommendations in the name of 6th
CPC, stiffly denying any such merger of DA/ DR. This issue requires course
correction and we suggest that the 7th CPC should recommend for
automatic merger of DA / DR as and when the index crosses the 50% mark and
before setting up another Pay Commission entire DA should be merged with pay as
was done by the V-CPC.
CHAPTER –
IV
Parity
Between Past And Future Pensioners
4.1 The Government
have recently announced that ‘One Rank
One Pension’ shall be implemented in respect of Armed Forces so that the glaring disparity between the persons of
equivalent rank and status do not draw vastly unequal pensions if they retire
at different point of time is undone. Already there is a complete parity in
pension among the Judges of Supreme Court, High Court and the Comptroller and
Auditor General of India, irrespective of the date of their retirement.
4.2 In so far as
the Civilian Employees are concerned the principle of parity in pension between
the past and the future pensioners was implemented by the Government as had
been recommended by the V CPC. The V
CPC recommended that “as a follow up of our basic objective of parity we would
recommend that the pension of all pre-1986 retirees may be updated by notional
fixation of pay as on 1.1.1986 by adopting the same formula (Revised Pay Rules)
as far as the serving employees. This step would bring all the past pensioners
to a common platform on to the 4th CPC pay scales as on 1.1.1986.
Thereafter, all pensioners who have been brought on the 4th CPC pay
scales by notional fixation of pay and those who have retired on or after
1.1.1986 can be treated alike in regard to consolidation of their pension as on
1.1.1996 by allowing the same fitment weightage as may be allowed to the
serving employees”. They further recommended that “the consolidated pension
shall not be less than 50% of the minimum pay of the post as revised by the CPC
held by the pensioner at the time of retirement”. The V CPC further said that “this
attainment of reasonable parity needs to be continued so as to achieve complete
parity over a period of time”. However the VI CPC totally ignored these recommendations
of the V CPC and has reintroduced by not adopting the same formula for post
1996 retirees, and by not recommending the same fitment benefit and other
recommendations liberalising the pension rules in respect of pre-2006 retirees.
Thus a huge disparity between pre-2006 and post-2006 retirees has been created
by the VI CPC.
4.3 The VI CPC had
however recommended a modified parity between them which has also actually been
slashed down by the Government interpreting it as the Pay Band instead of ‘Pay in
the Pay Band’. Honourable Courts have however directed the Government that
the formula of modified parity may
be implemented as recommended by the 6th CPC and was accepted by the
Government initially.
4.4 We therefore
urge that pay of every pre-2014 retiree should be notionally re-determined
(corresponding to the post from which he or she retired and not corresponding
to the scale from which he or she retired) as if he or she is not retired and
then the pension be computed under the revised liberalised rules which are to
be applicable to the post-2014 retirees.
CHAPTER – V
Family
Pension
Family Pension
5.1 At present the
family pension is given at the rate of 30% of Pay last drawn. However, family
pension shall be equal to 50% (67% as proposed by us) of pay last drawn or
twice the rates given above, whichever is less and the amount so admissible
shall be payable from the date following the date of death of the Government
Servant for period of 7 years or for a period up to the date on which the
deceased Government Servant would have attained the age of 67 years had he
survived / 10 years in case of death in harness. The family pension is not less
than Minimum Pension.
5.2 The above Rule
is applicable to a Government Servant who is not governed by Workman
Compensation Act, 1923, if he dies while in service, after having rendered not
less than 7 years of continuous service.
5.3 The prescribed
period for which the family pension is payable is as under:
(i)
In the case of a widow or widower,
up to the date of death or remarriage
whichever is earlier.
(ii) In the case of a Son until he attains the age of 25 years.
(iii) The unmarried / widowed / divorced
daughter.
The
disabled mentally retarded child of the Government Servant.
5.4 We suggest as
under:
(a) The period of 7 years may be raised to
10 years / 15 years in case of death in harness. The period of 7 years is
inadequate for stabilisation of a family after the death of a Government
Servant.
(b) The quantum of family pension for the
period of 10 years should be equal to the pension of the Government Servant was
entitled as per Rules.
(c) After the expiry of the above 10 years
period, the family pension may be reduced to 75% of full pension or 50% of last
pay drawn whichever is higher.
(d) In case of a Son, the family pension may
be allowed up to the age of 28 years. This is suggested because the recruitment
age has been raised in certain cases to 28 years.
(e) The concession extended to a disabled
mentally retarded child to receive family pension until his / her death is
subject to the condition that the said disability should have manifested before
the death of Government employee. We suggest that this condition may be
removed.
5.5 A Government
Servant retired on medical invalidation after rendering less than 10 years of service ( 5 years as per our
proposal) gets no pension. We suggest that he should be granted full notional
pension (i.e., 67% of his emoluments / Minimum pension, whichever is higher. On
death of such a Government Servant his family should get:
(a) Full
notional pension / Minimum pension during first 10 years after his death.
(b) 75%
of the above or Minimum pension, whichever is higher, thereafter.
Additional
Pension:
5.6 In the case of
family pensioners also taking into account their solitude and inability to earn
and the ever rising cost of living etc we request for the enhancement of the
family pension at the following rates:
On attaining age of
|
Increase
in % of family pension
|
65 years
|
20
|
70 years
|
40
|
75 years
|
60
|
80 years
|
80
|
85 years
|
90
|
90 years
|
100
|
Extra Ordinary Pension
5.7 The 5th
CPC in Para 135.17 of its Report has recommended that regulation of
compensation or disabilities categorized under (b) and (c) follows:
“II – Cases
of disability (100%) resulting in discharge from service”
“Normal
pension and gratuity admissible under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, without
insisting on the requirement of minimum service of ten years plus Disability
Pension equal to the normal Family Pension, i.e., 30% (as per our proposal 50%)
of the basic pay”.
5.8 The Department
of Pension & Pensioners Welfare, while issuing orders on acceptance of the
recommendation vide OM No.45/22/97-P&PW(C) dated 3.2.2000 (incorporated in
Appendix-3 of Swamy’s Pension Compilation) the well-meaning recommendation has
been altered as follows:
“III – Disability Pension – for cases covered under
categories ‘B’ and ‘C’.
5.9 Extra Ordinary
Family Pension:
“(1) Normal
pension and gratuity admissible under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 plus –
Disability Pension equal to 30% of basic pay for 100% disability.”
This has resulted in a Group ‘D’ employee with 6 years’
service, who has been invalidated (with 45% disability) and boarded out of
service not getting the minimum pension towards ‘Service element’. This injustice
is required to be set right.
CHAPTER – VI
Gratuity
And Commutation Of Pension
Gratuity
6.1 Retirement Gratuity is paid at ¼ of
basic pay for each completed six monthly period of qualifying service subject
to a maximum of 16.5 times of the emoluments. There is also a monetary ceiling
of 10 lakhs. This is applicable to all Government Servants who retire on
completion of 5 years of service. However, if a person dies in harness his family is granted the gratuity at
certain prescribed rates:
6.2 We
suggest that the gratuity may be calculated on the basis of 25 effective days
as against 30 days in a month. We make this suggestion because the Government
Servant should not be paid at a rate lesser than what is admissible under the Gratuity
Act.
6.3 The
ceiling of 16.5 times should also be removed. This is because under existing
rules gratuity is reduced in the case of a Government Servant who has put in
less than 33 years of service. In the banking industry there is no such ceiling
of 16.5 months’ salary but the retiring bank employees are getting at the rate
of ½ a month salary for every year of service even over and above 33 years of
service. Therefore, it is but logical that for a service span exceeding 33
years, the gratuity should be higher and the above ceiling be withdrawn.
Commutation of Pension and its Restoration
6.4 Central Government employees are
permitted to commute up to 40% of their basic pension. We have no suggestion to
make in this regard.
6.5 In
the light of Supreme Court decision, commuted value of pension is restored on
completion of 15 years or on reaching 75 years of age whichever is later. Most
of the State Governments are restoring full pension after 12 years or on
reaching 70 years of age. We, therefore, propose that full pension be restored
after 12 years, or on reaching the age of 72 years, whichever is earlier. From
the old table given below it will be seen that the entire commuted value gets
repaid to the Government by the Pensioners within 12 years.
Sl.No
|
Details
|
Age next birth day =
61 years
|
1
|
Commutation factor
|
9.81
|
2
|
Amount commuted
|
Rs. 100
|
3
|
Commuted value
received
|
Rs.11,772
|
4
|
Amount recovered in
12 years
|
Rs.14,400
|
5
|
Amount recovered in
15 years
|
Rs.18,000
|
6
|
Excess recovered in
12 years
|
Rs. 2,628
|
7
|
Excess recovered in
15 years
|
Rs. 6,228
|
6.6 Now when the commutation factor has
been reduced and is applicable after 2008, the restoration of commuted pension
should be after 10 years. It will be seen that entire commuted value gets repaid
within 10 years as could be clear from the table given below.
Sl.No
|
Details
|
Age next birth day = 61 years
|
1
|
Commutation factor
|
8.194
|
2
|
Amount commuted
|
Rs.100
|
3
|
Commuted value received
|
Rs.9,833
|
4
|
Amount recovered in 12 years
|
Rs.12,000
|
5
|
Amount recovered in 15 years
|
Rs.18,000
|
6
|
Excess recovered in 12 years
|
Rs.2,167
|
7
|
Excess recovered in 15 years
|
Rs.8,167
|
6.7 Taking all these factors we suggest that
the commuted pension may be restored on completion of 10 years or reaching the
age of 70 years, whichever is earlier.
CHAPTER –
VII
Medicare
7.1 The following
landmark judgments of the Supreme Court of India have held that the enjoyment
of highest attainable standard of health is recognized as a fundamental right
of all workers / pensioners in terms of Article 21 read with Article 39, 41, 43
and 48 of the Constitution:
Consumer
education and Research Central and others Vs Union of India (AIR 1995 Supreme
Court 922)
Laxman
Thammappa Kothagiri Vs General Manager Central Railway & Others [2005(1)
SCALE)
Indian
Medical Council Vs V.P.Shantha & Others (1995(6) SCC651)
Therefore improvements
in the existing Medicare systems are absolutely essential.
7.2 Nursing Homes / All India Private Hospitals
/ Diagnostic Centres to cater for the CGHS beneficiaries should be
increased in such a way that they will be nearer to the residence cluster of
the beneficiaries. While selecting great care should be taken that no
beneficiary is required to travel more than 2.5 KMs to obtain treatment. In
Delhi, the recent approval for hospitals has been done without keeping the
extent of beneficiaries residence localities. Some areas have been completely
forgotten and some points have been given more than one referrals. This appears
well on paper and satisfies the Ministry but in practical terms it is more a
punishment for the beneficiaries.
7.3 CGHS: We wish to invite attention of 7th
CPC to the recommendation made by the V CPC as detailed in Para 140.11 of their
report regarding extension of CGHS. Unfortunately, the well intentioned
recommendation has remained still as recommendation only. Under some plea or
the other, there had been practically no expansion whatsoever in this regard,
which is regrettable. A number of proposals had been forwarded to the
government by the All India Central Confederation of Pensioners Associations,
Delhi and others but have been kept in cold storage. The 7th CPC is
requested to reiterate this important recommendation, suggesting opening
opening of new CGHS dispensaries as per prescribed norms securing clearance
from Planning Commission, wherever necessary.
7.5 Discrimination to P&T
Pensioners: The
Central Government Pensioners, whether they were beneficiaries or not while in
service, are permitted to join CGHS on retirement. However the Ministry of
Health & FW had issued an order dated 1.8.1996 according to which all
P&T Pensioners who were not participating in CGHS while in service have
been debarred. This in itself is a very grave discrimination, which is not
permissible under Article 14 of the Constitution. This was therefore was
challenged in Courts and the latest position achieved is that the Courts have
held that the P&T Pensioners may be permitted to participate in CGHS or
alternatively covered under CSMA Rules, 1944.
P&T Dispensaries: In the meantime, following the recommendations
of the V CPC and VI CPC, 19 P&T Dispensaries in 12 CGHS Cities have been
merged with the CGHS. Instead of now allowing all P&T pensioners
irrespective of the station they live, only those who are living in these 12
Cities have been allowed to participate in the CGHS. This is also
discriminative because all other Central Pensioners are permitted to join CGHS
irrespective of the fact where they are living. It is therefore urged that the
7th CPC should recommend that the above discrimination is put an end
to and all P&T Pensioners may be allowed to participate in CGHS.
Smart Cards to Pensioners: Smart Cards may be issued to all
Pensioners from all Department (including Postal Pensioners) and their
dependents for cashless and hassle less medical facilities across the country
in all Government hospitals; all NABH accredited Multi Super Speciality
Hospitals which have been allotted land at concessional rates or given any
other aid or concession by any Government; all CGHS, RELHS and ECHS empanelled
Hospitals.
Hospital Regulatory Authority: We suggest that a Hospital Regulatory
Authority shall be set up to ensure that the hospitals provide reasonable care
to Smart Card holders. This Authority can undertake periodical revision of CGHS
approved rates for several kinds of medical treatment as well as for lab tests
in consonance with the prevailing market conditions so that no crisis develops
like refusal of treatment by empanelled
hospitals.
Fixed Medical Allowance: The Government fixed the rate of FMA
as 300/- per month to the Pensioners not covered under CGHS etc. Several
appeals for revision of this amount in a realistic manner to suite the
conditions prevailing on counts like Doctor’s fees, cost of medicines, rate of
lab tests etc went in vain as the Government stoutly refused to enhance this
FMA in a reasonable manner. It can be seen that the Employees Provident Fund
Organisation under the Central Government’s Ministry of Labour was paying a
monthly FMA to its employees at the rate of 1200/- prior to 6th CPC
when the other Central Government employees were drawing only 100/- per month.
The same EPF Organisation came forward to enhance the said FMA from 1200/- to
2000/- per month w.e.f. 1st March, 2013 for the serving employees,
EPF pensioners and family pensioners. When an organisation under the same
Central Government has taken steps to suitably enhance the Fixed Medical
Allowance in consonance with the market conditions, there is no justification
whatsoever for the Central Government to adamantly refuse to keep this FMA at a
lowest level of Rs.300/- per month which everyone knows is totally inadequate
to the medical needs of a pensioner’s family. We suggest that the 7th
CPC recommend for refixation of FMA @ 2000/- per month plus DA thereon. In
addition this FMA shall be permitted to those pensioners who want to undergo
only Unani or Ayurveda or Homeopathy type of treatments even though they live
in areas covered by CGHS.
CS (MA) Rules 1944: In the interregnum period of
permitting all pensioners into the CGHS without any discrimination, the CSMA
Rules, 1944 should be extended to pensioners living in non-CGHS areas and
stations, which are at present not covered by CGHS. As recommended by V CPC,
vide Para 140.18 of their report, benefit of CS (MA) Rules, 1944 should be
extended to pensioners in non-CGHS areas at least to the extent of full
reimbursement of expenses incurred for hospitalization in a Government hospital
or hospitals recognized under CS (MA) Rules for the serving employees or those
hospitals recognised by State Governments for such purposes for their
employees. To cite examples, in the City of Mysore, a number of hospitals have
been recognized under CS (MA) Rules, 1944 for serving Central Government employees.
But Pensioners cannot avail the benefit merely because there is no CGHS
dispensary there. Similarly, in Udupi though the work-famous “Kaasturba
Hospital” is recognised under CS (MA) Rules, 1944 for serving employees, the
Pensioners do not get the benefit merely because there is also no CGHS
dispensary available.
Several
cases of claims for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by pensioners
lving in non-CGHS areas have been decided in favour of pensioners by the CATs
and even the High Court of Gujrat at Ahmedabad. 7th CPC is therefore
requested to make suitable recommendation in this regard in order that even if
CGHS dispensaries are not opened, for whatever reasons they may be, the Central
Government pensioners may avail medical in-patient facilities (in hospitals
recognized under CS (MA) Rules, 1944 for serving employees) and get
reimbursement of expenses from the departments to which they belong.
It
is a fact that ESIC medical scheme caters for more than 35 millions of
beneficiaries in the private factory employment sector. If the ESI System with
a network of 144 hospitals, 42 Annexes, 1400 dispensaries and tie up with 2041
private medical practitioners besides with a
large number of Super Specialty Hospitals can provide medicare, why
should not CGHS / CSMA cater for the medicare needs of more than 40 lakhs of
employees and more than 30 lakh of pensioners spread all over the country like
the ESIC beneficiaries? The 7th CPC may kindly examine the
feasibility of improving the present CGHS / CSMA formats to ensure Medicare to
all Central Government employees and Pensioners. There is no need absolutely to
scout for alternate method. The recommendation of the 5th CPC for
suitably amending CS (MA) Rules, 1944 for providing indoor medical attention to
a very small segment of Central Government Pensioners residing in non-CGHS
areas should not pose any insurmountable hurdles. It is fortunate that the
nodal Ministry viz., Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, has accepted the
need for Medicare to 60 plus retired personnel that they should not be deprived
of the medicare and the Judiciary have taken cognizance of this principle,
there should be no hesitation in amending the CS(MA)Rules, 1944 for providing
in-door attention to the retired employees.
CHAPTER –
VIII
Miscellaneous
8.1 Pension should
be net of income tax. Such a recommendation was made by the V CPC in Para
167.11 of their report but the Government did not accept it. It should
reiterate with emphasis this demand for reconsideration.
8.2 Casual Labour / Contingent Paid Employees:
At present Casual labourers / Contingency paid employees are allowed to count
their service towards pension @ 50% of the total period falling between
acquiring the temporary status and regularization and full service thereafter.
The above benefit is also subject to further condition that such employees
should be regularized and absorbed against a regular post. The operation of
this condition is so harsh that there are many cases in which the entire
service rendered non pensionable because the employee may be retired /
retrenched / die before such regularization. We therefore propose that the 50%
of service before acquiring temporary status and full service after acquiring
temporary status irrespective of whether he / she was regularized or not should
count towards pension. Similarly these employees have to remain for long
durations without any regularisation and are deprived many amenities which a
regular employee gets. Not to treat their service pensionable for a
considerable period leaves them with very meagre pension and in some cases with
no pension. This is against the principle of social justice and therefore our
above suggestion should be considered by the 7th CPC.
8.3 Pensionable service of Casual and GDS: Recent
judicial pronouncements have directed the Government to take into account the
date of entry in the service as a casual labourer or a temporary status Mazdoors
etc into criterion and not the date of regularisation to determine as to
whether he or she is to be brought under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 or under
the NPS. Therefore we propose that all casual labourers, Gramin Dak Sewaks in
the Department of Posts etc are to be brought under the Defined Benefit Pension
Scheme under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 for grant of pension on their
regularisation in the services, even though they are getting regularisation
after 1.1.2004 because they should be treated as having entered the services
before 1.1.2004 as per the judgment of Court. We therefore propose that entire
service rendered as a casual labour irrespective of the fact whether he was
granted temporary status or ultimately regularised should be treated as
pensionable service and the service rendered as GDS in Department of Posts also
should be treated in the similar fashion.
8.4 Interruption causing forfeiture of
service for pension: The existing provisos defining interruptions in
service causing forfeiture of past service for purposes of pension are quite
antiquated, unnecessary and unreasonably harsh, which should be removed from
the statue book. In formative years when the British Authorities were
recruiting Indians in their Administrative Services, it was noticed that during
sowing and harvesting seasons, a large number of employees used to go back to
the fields without any regular leave etc. As a deterrent, the rules regarding
interruption in service had been legislated then. Since most of the employees
have now lost their rural roots, such frequent and recurring interruptions are
no longer there. Interruption as and when rarely caused is due to reason mostly
beyond the control of an employee. We therefore, propose that instead of
treating interruption to cause an automatic forfeiture of past service for
pensions, it should be dealt with under CCA Rules. The provision causing
forfeiture of service for pension purposes on account of interruption may,
therefore,, be deleted.
8.5 Housing: Central Government employees
in occupation of Government Staff Quarters on retirement are constrained to
hire private accommodation at exorbitant and prohibitive rental. They are per
force to spend a sizable portion of the pension on rent alone. While in
services, though they are entitled to get house building advance etc, most of
them are unable to avail the facility and construct house for the salary income
they earn is incapable of making the both ends meet. It is therefore necessary
that a provision for reserving a percentage of the number of residential units
constructed by the State / Central Housing Boards and Corporations, for
outright purchase of allotment on instalment basis to pensioners. We therefore
suggest that 10% of the total units constructed by the State Housing Boards,
Central Housing Corporations etc to be reserved for pensioners. Similarly quite
a number of staff quarters sometimes lie vacant without occupation by serving
employees and such quarters may be allotted for pensioners on payment of just
licence fee only. In addition, dormitory type single room tenements with common
dining hall, library, cultural centre, auditorium, basic medical facility etc
may be constructed at the outskirts of the cities and allotted to pensioners on
payment of a reasonable amount. Until such schemes are accepted and worked out,
HRA may be granted to the Pensioners on the same rates as is given to serving
employees.
8.6 Travel Concession: Senior Citizens on
attaining the age of 60 years (Males) and 58 years (females) are given fare
concession in Railway travel at the rate of 40% and 50% respectively. We
suggest that retired Government Servants may be allowed the facility of travel
concession once in 4 years to any place inside India from their place of their
residence. We point out that the purpose of granting LTC to serving employees
has an in-built advantage of encouraging tourism development, which is helpful
to the economy in several ways. Similarly any travel concession granted to
Pensioners will also boost the tourism development in the country besides
bringing happiness at their old age.
8.7 Resignation as retirement: Resignation
is tendered by a Government Servant in varying circumstances. It is felt,
therefore, that resignation need not always result in forfeiture of past
services (Rule 26 of Pension Rules) and denial of Pension. An objective view is
required to be taken by the appointing authority in the case of all those who
tender resignation after completion of 20 years of service. Such resignation
may be treated as voluntary retirement and benefits extended accordingly. In
this connection we may cite the following decisions of the Judiciary:
(a) CAT Mumbai full
bench OA No.1384/1985 decided on 8.7.1997
(b) CAT Ahmedabad OA
No.498/2002 decided on 18.03.2004
(c) CAT Jabalpur O.S
No.623.1991 decided on 13.10.1995
(d)
Bombay High Court WP No.615/1996 and WP No.2586/1997 decided on 28.02.2002.
Even 5th CPC in Para 133.79 had recommended that
terminal gratuity at difference rates be paid to those who resign after putting
in certain years of service and resignation after 20 years of service may be
treated as voluntary retirement and pension may be paid accordingly. We,
therefore, request the 7th CPC that the above recommendation may be
reiterated.
8.8 There are
certain employees who are in the CPF Scheme but could not opt for the Pension
Scheme in the year 1986. These are mostly women employees employed in Atomic
Energy Commission etc who could not make up their mind as to whether they could
render the requisite number of service necessary for grant of full pension. In
certain autonomous bodies while options for Pension scheme have been obtained,
this is not being granted. They may now
be allowed to revise their option. Our suggestion is that CPF / SRPF retirees
may be granted Minimum Pension.
8.9 Death Relief to Pensioner’s families: The serving personnel of Union Government are
now granted death relief of Rs.10000/-Immediately on their death for meeting
funeral expenses. Even State Governments like Andhra extend such benefit to
Pensioners’ families. Such a benefit may, it is suggested, be extended to
Pensioners and family pensioners of the Union Government as the latter are also
facing such similar contingencies as in case of serving employees for a sudden
need of the money for spouse or legal hairs of the pensioner on his death.
Similar relief may be extended in cases where spouse of the Pensioner
predeceases the Pensioner.
8.10 Family Security Fund:
The family of the Pensioner shall be granted a lump sum of 1,00,000 on the
death of the Pensioner by introducing a scheme for Family Security Fund with
the arrangement for contribution by the pensioners. At present such scheme is
in existence in states like Tamilnadu, where the Pensioner is contributing a
monthly contribution of 80/- and in the event of his / her death, the spouse is
given a sum of Rs.50,000 as family security fund. Therefore the 7th
CPC is requested to examine this proposal for framing such a scheme for
facilitating payment of at least 1,00,000 rupees on the demise of the pensioners to their spouses.
8.11 Pension Adalats: The system of Pension Adalat was
introduced initially by Department of
Pension and Pensioners Welfare and later on adopted by Railways, Defence,
P&T Departments. The V CPC in Para 139.17 had recommended that this system
is very effective in finalising disputed cases of pensions and should be
introduced in all the departments. These adalats should also function for
settling the cases of field formations and meet at least once in quarter. The
representatives of the Pensioners Associations should be allowed to present the
cases of the concerned pensioner who may not be conversant with the rules. The
above recommendation which were not mandatory has not been implemented. We
therefore request 7th CPC that it should be made mandatory onall the
Ministries and Departments of Indian Government to conduct these Adalats
periodicaly and without fail. We also suggest that these Adalats may be
conducted at different levels with the following frequency:
i)
Divsional level Once
in 3 Months
(ii)
Zonal / Regional level Once in 6 Months
(iii)Head quarter level
Once in a Year
(iv)Ministerof State in DOPT level Once
in 2 years
8.12 SCOVA:
The forum of SCOVA (Standing Committee of Voluntary Associations) is
facilitated by the Central Government for interaction with the Pensioners’
Organisations for discussing the issues of pensioners. This forum has no
statutory authority as like the negotiating forum founded for negotiating
issues of Central Government employees viz., the National Council JCM with
mandatory facility for compulsory arbitration and other benefits like National
Anomaly Committee to sort out the anomalies arising out of implementation of
Pay Commission reports etc. Similarly there is no system of granting
recognition to representative organisations of Pensioners and at present it is
at the pleasure of the Central Government some of the Pensioners Organisations
are invited to SCOVA as Members on a rotational basis only. The number of
central government pensioners belonging to various departments is no doubt in
great numbers and therefore there is necessity to establish a forum with formal
authority for discussing and negotiating issues of pensioners. It can be seen
that there are hundreds of pensioners’ federations, associations, organisations
in the country like mushroom growth and there is no orderliness amongst them
and each and every pensioner organisation is raising its own demands. There is
no orderliness in this system. Therefore, we suggest, that the VII CPC may
recommend to the Government to upgrade the status of the SCOVA like the other
forum of National Council JCM with separate Rules framed for granting
recognition to Pensioners Organisations to give them representation in the
SCOVA. All the All India Pensioners
Associations/Federations may be accorded recognition & extended such
facilities as have been granted to the serving employees
Association/Unions/Federations.
