NCCPA MEMORANDUM TO BE SUBMITTED SOON
TO 7th CPC
THE DRAFT IS HEREUNDER:
NATIONAL
COORDINATION COMMITTEE OF PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION (NCCPA)
13-C, Ferozeshah Road, New Delhi -110001
Ph:- 9868244035
Email:- nccpa.hq@gmail.com
No.F1-VII/CPC/2014 July 29, 2014
Smt.
Meena Agarwal,
Member
Secretary,
VII
Central Pay Commission,
New
Delhi
Madam,
We submit herewith a
Memorandum on issues relating to Pensioners on behalf of Pensioners
Associations affiliated to National Coordination Committee of pensioners
Associations.
We fully endorse the
memorandum submitted by the Bharat Central Pensioners Confederation. This would
form Part – I of our memorandum. In part II we have submitted our views and
proposals on issues peculiar to Pensioners from some Departments like Postal,
DoT and Defence Civilian.
We request you to
consider our submissions and give appropriate recommendations thereon. We may
also kindly be permitted to tender evidence and explain our proposals to the
Commission.
Thanking you,
Yours
faithfully,
(S.K.Vyas)
Secretary
General
MEMORANDUM
TO 7TH CENTRAL PAY COMMISSION ON PENSIONERY BENEFITS OF CENTRAL
GOVERNMENT PENSIONERS
PREAMBLE
The
National Coordination Committee of Pensioners Associations (NCCPA) is a joint
platform of all Pensioners Associations and provides for joint consultations
and activities. The National Federations of Pensioners Associations are to be
affiliated with it. It is also organizing Coordination Committee of Pensioners
Associations at City /District level which in turn form state level
coordination committees. Such state Committees have already been formed in West
Bengal, Kerala, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Assam and Tamilnadu and
affiliated to the NCCPA.
The
total membership of the NCCPA is about 2 lakhs of Central govt. Pensioners.
After
wide consultation with Pensioners Associations, the National Coordination
Committee Pensioners Associations (NCCPA) the Bharat Central Pensioners
Confederation (BCPC) and Bharat Pensioners Samaj (BPS) have jointly finalized a
memorandum relating to pensioners which has already been submitted by the BCPC
to the 7th Central Pay Commission. This shall be the Part I of our
Memorandum.
PART - I
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. This is reproduced below:-
“Para 2.13: Part II: 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 an 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 nonproductive 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 We had a preliminary interaction with the
7th Central Pay Commission on
23rd July 2014. On New Pension Scheme the 7th Central Pay
Commission desired that we furnish detailed information relating to this New
Pension Scheme and PFRDA Act, 2013. We therefore submit as under:
BACK
GROUND
2.4 The Government of India in year 1998 set
up the Old Age Social & Income Security Project (OASIS) for devising a
pension scheme for the unorganized Sector.
2.5 The report given by the OASIS was
referred to the IRDA for studying the various aspects in the area of system of
pension to the unorganized sector suggested by the OASIS. The Government also
constituted a High Level Expert Committee headed by Shri B.K. Bhattacharya to
review the existing pension system for Central Government Employees. The
Department of Pension & Pensioners Welfare O.M. No.38/14/2001-P&PW (A)
dated 25.6.2001 constituting this High Level Expert Group laying down its Terms
of Reference is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure – I.
2.6 The major observations of the OASIS Project
Report, IRDA committees recommendations for reforms in nongovernmental /
unorganized sector and relevant recommendations of the High Level Expert group
on New Pension System for Central Government Employees are as under:-
2.7 The prime focus of the OASIS Committee
has been on the great mass of individuals who are working outside the pension
provisions that presently exist in unorganized sector. The OASIS Committee recommended
a pension scheme based on Industrial Retirement Accounts to be opened any-where
in India at a price of modest contributions through the working career of the
worker, and provision of benefit after the age of 60 by annuity providers. As
per the report, a minimum contribution of Rs.500 per annum was expected to have
an accumulation of around 2 lakhs at the age of 60 years , of which Rs.1 lakh
was to be used for buying an annuity beyond which one would be free to deploy.
2.8 The IRDA committee’s recommendations also
relating to workers in unrecognized
sector were, among other things, to establish a system based on privately
managed, individual funded defined – Contribution accounts with freedom to
invest in equities which leads to a tremendous enhancement over a long period
of time to the returns. These can be paid either in lump sum and / or annuity
on retirement actuarially determined on the fund available.
2.9 The High Level Expert Group headed by Shri B.K. Bhattacharya
submitted its report in February 2002. Chapter 10 of this report contains
summary and recommendations of this Group. We annex herewith paras 10.22 to
10.24 and para 10.28 of this Report (vide Annexure – II) which indicates that
for Government employees the Group had recommended a defined benefit
contributory Pension Scheme keeping in view the ruling of the Supreme Court
that Pension is a measure of sociao – economic justice and is an enforceable
right and the pension scheme has to ensure that the pensioner is able to live
free from want, with decency, independence and self respect.
2.10. As against this the Government imposed a
Defined Contribution Pension Scheme or government employees entering service on
or after 1.1.2004 which was recommended both by OASIS Committee and IRDA in
respect of unrecognized workers.
2.11 The Pension Fund Regulatory and Development
Authority Bill, 2005 was referred to the Standing Committee of Finance for
examination and report. As per the report of the Standing Committee on Finance
it sought to know from the Government whether:
i)
the employees covered
or subscribers of the NPS could be guaranteed a minimum pension amounting to at
least 50 percent of the last pay, as provided for under the prevailing Pension
Rules.
ii)
the Government would
actually be able to reap the benefit of consolidating or lessening the fiscal
stress on pension payments as the Defence Services were left out of NPS, and
the Government had to, in addition to meeting the liability on pension payments
of retired and service employees, also make a matching 10% contribution in the
case of new recruits covered by the NPS; and
iii)
the projected or
potential pension market of the unorgnized Sector justified the setting up of PFRDA as a statutory body.
2.12 The Government response to quarry No (i)
was that as per clause 20 (f) of the PFRDA Bill, there shall not be any
implicit or explicit assurance of benefits but market itself could provide
certain instruments for providing guarantee. It was also made clear that as of
now, there is clearly no intention to provide a guarantee on the pension under
this system. The Government also furnished certain illustrative calculations. From
these calculations in the case of an asset allocation involving 100% investment
in Govt. Securities, return assumption of 1.5% per year for Govt. Bonds, 3% on
Corporate Bonds and 5 % for equities have been computed – and terminal
replacement rates would range between 43% to 49%. On the other hand in case
involving 100% investment in equities, there placement rate was projected to be
in the range of 80 to 95%.
2.13 After about 10 years of operation of this
scheme, none of the promoters has generated options where the subscribers could
buy any guarantees and the projected replacement rate in the range of 80 to 95
% has not been realized. As a matter of fact the replacement rate is tending
below even 30%.
2.14 The answer to quarry no (ii) above has been
provided in High Level Expert Group Report according to which there is an
additional liability on account of 10% matching Contribution by Govt. in
respect of new entrants ranging from 155 crore in year 2004-05 and increasing
steadily to Rs. 2988 crores in year 2021-22 thereafter it starts reducing from
Rs. 2888 crores in 2022-23 to Rs. 596 crores in year 2037-38. The positive gain
of a switch over to Defined Contribution scheme will be witnessed only from
year 2038 – 39.
2.15 Regarding querry no. (iii) above as per
FICCI and CII the market size for pension funds in the uncovered sector of
workface would encompass 34.5 million
peoples involving a corpus of Rs. 28,770.2 crores. The reality is that even a
tenth of the above estimate has not been achieved.
2.16 From the above it becomes clear that the
scheme has been introduced by the Govt. and cleared by the Parliamentary
Standing Committee on the basis of false / inaccurate assumptions. Transition
from Defined Contributory Pension Scheme has virtually dismantled its social
Security character and has been made dependent on vagaries of market. Neither
the Govt. nor any promoter has come forward to offer a guarantee that the Pension
would not be less than what the statutory scheme is providing.
The argument that this
scheme was to ensure lessoning of the fiscal distress is also not being
realized. As a matter of fact the fiscal distress is only to increase for
another 35 years from 2004-05 & the scheme has practiscally failed to
attract workers from the unrecognized sector for whose benefit it was primarily
launched.
2.17 We may also mention that 5 Members of
Parliament who were members of the Standing Committee (comprising of 15 members)
have totally opposed the PFRDA Bill and their note of dissent has been recorded
and form the part of this report. Copies of their notes of dissent are also
annexed herewith and marked as Annexure III to VI.
2.18 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.
2.19
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, whereby 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.”
2.20
The above study had submitted the following estimated pensionery outgo which
tends to increase during the period from 2004-2038. 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 Employee Pension Family Pension Total pension
pensionery
outgo Payout (in Rs Pay out (in
payout (in
Year
Crores) Rs.Crores) 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
2.21
The above study had also 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 2014-15 and remain at that level till 2024-25
after which they would decline as a percentage of GDP according to 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. According to 2011 census 62.8% are in the age group of 15 to
60 and only 8.2% are above the age of 60.
2.22 From the above projection it is very clear
that the benefit of NPS will commence only after 30 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.
2.23 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.”
2.24 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 of 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. We conclude by quoting the opinions of experts on
the future of market dependent pension Scheme.
Mr
Joseph Stiglitz (Chief economic advisor to former president of USA Bill
Clinton, former vice-chairman and chief economic advisor, World Bank, Nobel
Prize winner, Professor of economics, Columbia university) said that “Stock
market does not guarantee returns. It does not even guarantee that the stock
values will keep up with inflation. Privatization would not protect retirees
against the social security systems insolvency. Argentina’s privatization of
its pension system was at the centre of its fiscal woes”.
Mr Dean Baker (Co-director for centre for economic and
policy research, Washington) said “Privatisation means that you would not have
a guaranteed benefit that you have today. It would depend on how will your
investments do or how well they have done at the point you retire. He quoted the
collapse of NASDAQ and Enron. In Britain, Insurance companies could not honour
their promises and the Government had to compensate with 8 billion pounds”.
We
therefore submit that VII CPC may kindly critically review the National Pension
Scheme and recommend that the Scheme and the PFRDA Act be scrapped and Govt.
employees covered by this scheme may be brought back and covered by the statutory
pension Scheme and G.P.F. benefits. The amount recovered from them may be
credited to their GPF Accounts.
*********
CHAPTER
II-A
Pension
Act 1871
On the issue of Pension Act 1871, we have the
following submissions to make .
The
CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 were notified under the powers vested under proviso
to Art. 309 of the Constitution and not under the Pension Act, 1871.
The
Act is a legacy of the former colonial Government The Pension Act, 1871 is in
the Statute Book but has no relevance or reference to the pension format of the
Central Government employees. The Government is sticking to the archaic Act. It
is to be remembered that the Government, committed in the Parliament that it
will be revised and reflect the latest developments of social security. (refer Lok Sabha discussion on 10th
and 16th April 1981). Neither the Monitoring Committee of the
Parliament on Assurances nor the Government had taken any concrete steps in
revising 1871 Act.
The
Gajendragadkar Law Commission had advised the Government of India to change the
Pension Act, 1871 in 1972 but nothing was done.
S/Sri
V.N. Gadgil and Parulekar (the then, MPs) moved a substitute bill in the budget
session of Parliament in replacement of the Pension Act, 1871. The issue was
discussed on 16th and 30th of April, 1981 Shri P.
Venkatasubbiah, the then Minister of State for Home Affairs gave an assurance
of bringing in an amendment to the Pension Act. (Incidentally, 82 MPs had supported this move.)
Pensioners
Association had brought this matter to the notice of the Government of India
through SCOVA meeting.
The
Following sections of this Act violate the Constitution of India
(a) Section
– 4: No Civil Court shall entertain
any suit relating to any pension.
(b) Section
– 6: Shall entertain suit only on
receipt of a certificate from the Collector / Deputy Commissioner that the case
may be tried, but the court shall not make any order by which the liability of
Government to pension is affected.
The
Following go against the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972:-
(a) Section
- 5 :- The claim for pension to be made
to the collector / Deputy Coommissioner.
(b) Section
– 8:- The Pension payments to be made
by the Collector / Deputy Commissioner
(C) Section
– 15:- Confers powers to the Central Government to make rules only to provide
for nominations under Section – 12 A.
The
following are outdated / have no relevance to pension matters:
(a) Section
– 7:- Relates to pension for lands held
under grants in perpetuity.
(b). Section
– 9;- Relates
to saving of rights of grantee of Land revenue.
(c) Section
– 13:- Relates to Grant of reward equivalent to amount of pension to those who
inform about persons receiving pension fraudulently or unduly.
No
doubt, the subject “Repeal of Pension Act, 1871” comes within the purview of
the Law Commission. Two years ago, the Department of Pension and Pensioners
Welfare called for opinion of Pensioner s Associations on this, but it stopped
at that. Since this Act has been used by the Government to frame the “Payment
of Arrears of Pension (Nomination) Rules, 1983, exercising Power under Section
– 15 of this Act and since Section – 11 of the Act is also current on date, it
appears to be in the fitness of things that the VI CPC suo moto examine this
aspect and make suitable recommendations to the Government”
**********
Chapter –
III
Pension
Entitlement
Emoluments
for Pension:
3.1
The entire income in the 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 arbitrary. 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:
(a) Basic Pay
(b) Any Special pay or personal pay, or deputation
duty allowance.
(c) Dearness Allowance
(d) Non-practicing allowance in respect of Doctors
(e) 75% of the running allowance in respect of Railway
Running Staff retired after 4.12.1988.
3.2 There are persons who retire after having
served for full year since their last increment. The next increment which has
already accrued to them is however not added to their emoluments for purposes
of computing pension and other pensionary benefits. It is therefore submitted that
the Commission may kindly consider and recommend that if a person retire on the
day he has completed 12 months of service since his last increment, the
increment accrued to him may be added notionally to his basic pay and then the
pension computed.
3.3
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:
3.4
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 facilities and 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.
3.5 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
Majdoors 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.
3.6
Interruption causing forfeiture of service for pension: The existing provisions
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.
3.7
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 different
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.
3.8 There are certain employees who are in the
CPF / SRPF 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 and employees of autonomous
bodies applying central Rules may be extended Statutory Pensionery benefits.
3.9
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
have the qualifying service of 20 years. Therefore we have no further
suggestion to place before the Commission on this issue.
Paramilitary
retirees
The Service conditions
of paramilitary forces under CRPF, BSF, CISF etc are totally akin to military
personnel. But pension and other benefits extended to them is totally on the
basis of civilians. These Paramilitary Forces render their service in different
fields like maintenance of Law and Order, communal riots, Regional agitations, Border
Securities etc. There is nothing to compare their service to that of civil
services. They are on 24 hours service mostly. They are just like military
personnel. The military service personnel are eligible for full pension after
15 years of service. As the service conditions of the paramilitary forces are
totally identical to Military, we therefore request the VII Central Pay Commission to recommend
that the Paramilitary Personnel shall also be granted full pension after
rendering 15 years of qualifying service.
Rate of Pension:
3.10
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:
(i) Free from want, with decency, independence and
self-respect, and
(ii) 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.)
3.11
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 Last Pay Drawn or 10 months average emoluments, whichever is
more beneficial.
3.12. 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 Sri Lanka 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 year annual salary at retirement as pension
(Source: Sri Lanka Pension Department Circular No.3/2004 dated 16.01.2004); The
life expectancy in Sri Lanka at 60 is 20.2% which is 3.5% higher than India.
3.13
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%).
3.14
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.
3.15
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 pay as 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% basis of the last pay drawn or the 10 months average emoluments, whichever
is more beneficial to employee subject to the condition that the pension so
determined shall not be less than the minimum of the pay scale of the post held
by him at the time of his retirement.
Additional Pension
3.16
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.
3.17
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.
3.18
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.
3.19
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 of Pension admissible;
65 Years 70%
of L.P.D.
70 Years 75%
of LPD
75 Years 80%
of LPD
80 Years 85%
of LPD
85 Years 90%
of LPD.
90 Years 100%
of LPD
Note: L.P.D= Last Pay drawn or ten monthly average of
the pay drawn whichever is more beneficial.
Minimum Pension
3.20
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.
Dearness Compensation
3.21
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.
Merger of Dearness Relief with Basic
Pension
3.22
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.
3.23
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.
3.24
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.
3.25
The Central Government also taking undue advantage out of the recommendations
in the name of 6th CPC has been 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.
The
submission made in Staff Side Memorandum on this issue are reiterated with a
request that the commission may
submit a interim report recommending
that 100% of DR may be merged with the basic pay w.e.f. 1.1.2014
3.26
Compassionate Allowance
For good and sufficient
reasons, any Govt employee may be dismissed or removed from service; of course
after conducting disciplinary proceeding under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules,
1965.
Rule 41 of CCS
(Pension) Rules, 1972 provides that a Govt. servant who is dismissed or removed
from service shall forefeit his pension, gratuity. However in proviso to this
Rule it has been laid down that the authority competent to dismiss or remove a
Govt. employee from service may, if the case is deserving of special
consideration, sanction a compassionate allowance not exceeding 2/3 rd of
pension or gratuity or both which would be admissible to him if he had retired
on compensation pension.
It has been observed
that for want of guidelines, most of the competent authorities except in
Railways, do not sanction compassionate allowance to Govt. Servants dismissed
or removed from service.
This leaves dismissed / removed Govt. Servant without any
means of livelihood. In terms of fundamental right to live (Act 21 of the
Constitution of India) such govt. employees have to be granted Compassionate
Allowance taking into account the nature of misconduct etc for which he was
dismissed / removed from service.
We therefore request
the VII CPC to examine this issue and recommend certain guidelines according to
which competent authorities may sanction Compassionate Allowance to Govt.
servants dismissed / removed on such charges which are not to be treated as
grave misconduct of criminal nature or involving moral turpitude. Competent
Authorities while ordering dismissals / removal may be required to state that
they have considered the case for grant of Compassionate Allowance under Rule
41 of CCs (Pension) Rules, 1972 and passed appropriate orders.
Grant of Interim Relief
3.27
In Memorandum submitted by and on behalf of Staff Side of National Council
(JCM) on the above issue, 25% of basic pension as Interim Relief for Pensioners
and G D S of Postal Department has been demanded. VII CPC may consider this
demand and give an Interim Report to the Government recommending that 25% of basic pension may be
granted to all pensioners w.e.f. September 2013 when the Government had
announced the seting up of 7th Central Pay Commission.
Periodical Revision of Pensionery
benefits
3.28
We submit that there should be a system of periodical revision of pay / pension
structure. In Public Sector. It takes place after every five years. Pay and
Pension structure of Central Government employees should also be revised after
every five years. Present wage structure is based upon minimum which is lower
than Need based Minimum. Only through periodical revision it may be attaining
the fair wage and finally the living wage standard. Under Article 43 of the
Constitution, State has to endeavour to secure living wage to all workers. And
this is possible over a period of time. It is on these considerations that
revision of wage / pension has to be done every five year till the living wage
standard is achieved.
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 is
done away with. They do not draw vastly unequal pensions if they retire at
different point of time. 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 for 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 the element of
disparity 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
We therefore urge that pay of every pre-2014 retiree should be notionally
redetermined (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
5.1
At present the family pension is given at the rate of 30% of Pay last drawn.
However, family pension is equal to pay last drawn 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 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 for
life after the death of Pensioner / his / her spouse.
(iv) The disabled mentally retarded child of the
Government Servant.
5.3
We suggest as under:
(a) The VI CPC recommended enhanced family pension for ten years in the case of death in
harness only stating that a special dispensation is justified for them( Para-5.1.42 )and the
government accepted /implemented the same, thereby dividing a single class of Family Pensioners.
Earlier the enhanced family pension was for 7 years subject to ceiling of
58+7=65, / 60+7=67 years. The enhanced Family Pension on the death of the Head
of the family is intended for the family to stabilize the sudden drop in the
take home pay/pension. The distress due
to loss of bread winner whether it is the death in harness or pensioner’s death, is one and the same.
Making an artificial distinction is
unwarranted. There is, therefore, no need to
differentiate between the two ‘distress situations’ The Commission is
requested to recommend removal of this
disparity to enable grant of enhanced family pension uniformly in both the cases for 10 years keeping in view the
principle of social justice , equity and fair play.
(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 40% of last
pay drawn
(d)
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.
(e)
The family
pension is also to be extended to widowed daughter-in-law.
(f)
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 year
5.4
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) 40% of
last pay drawn or Minimum pension, whichever is higher, thereafter.
Additional Pension:
5.5
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 Additional
Quantum of Family Pension
65 Years 10%
of Family pension
70 Years 10%
of Family pension
75 Years 10%
of Family pension
80 Years 20%
of Family pension
85 Years 20%
of Family pension
90 Years 30%
of Family pension
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) should be:
“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 40%) 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.
“(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.
5.9.
Extension of Family Pension Under CCS (Pension) rule, 1972 to CPSU absorbees
who were compulsorily covered by the “Employees Family Pension Scheme, 1971 on
their absorption in Central Public Sector undertaking and to those absorbees
who were not eligible for family pension since they were drawing more pay than the prescribed limit for eligibility
under the scheme.
Central Government employees who were on deputation to
Central Public Sector Undertaking / Autonomous Bodies (AB) and who were
subsequently permanently absorbed in the CPSU / AB were compulsorily covered by
the ‘Employees Family Pension Scheme, 1971 framed under the Employees Provident
Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (Administered by the Provident
fund Commissioners), if the said scheme was in operation in the CPSU / AB in
which the Central Government employees was absorbed. And such of those
absorbees who were drawing more pay then the prescribed limit under the scheme
not for family pension under EFPS – 1971.
Government of India , Department of Pension &
Pensioners Welfare vide its O.M No. 1-18/86-P&PW (D) dated January, 1990
accepting the request of the Staff Side in the 29th ordinary meeting
of the National Council (JCM), revised the family pension entitlement of the
absorbed employees and allowed them an option to choose either Family Pension
Scheme of the Central Government (i.e. CCS (Pension) Rules) or by that of the
CPSUs /ABs (ie Employees Family Pension Scheme, 1971). These modifications to
family pension entitlements of absorbees were given effect to from the date of
issue of the O.M. ie 22.1.1990 and were extended to only such of those absorbed
employees who were in service on the said date and who were permanent and had a
qualifying service of not less than 10 years in the Government. all other
absorbees were compulsorily covered by the Employees Family Pension Scheme,
1971.
The Central Government Employees who were permanently absorbed
in CPSUs / ABs and who satisfied the conditions of qualifying service in the
Government, but had retired before 22nd January, 1990 could not opt
to come over to the Central Family Pension Scheme (CCS (Pension) rules, 1972)
and were compulsorily covered by the Emplyees Family Pension Scheme, 1971.)
As a result of the above, there are now 3 categories
of retired CPSU Absorbees. (1) Absorbees eligible for family pension under
Employees family pension scheme, 1971, (2) Absorbees who are eligible for
family pension under CCS (Pension Rules, 1972 and (3) Absorbees who are not
eligible for family pension under any Scheme.
The
VII Central Pay Commission is requested to recommend removel of the disparity
existing between the 3 categories of CPSU Absorbees stated above by extending
the provisions of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 to all the Absorbees uniformly
making them eligible for family pension.
*********
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 and the quantum limit of Rs. 10 lakhs 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 is 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 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 10 years Rs.12,000
5 Amount
recovered in 15 years Rs.18,000
6 Excess
recovered in 10 years Rs.2,167
7 Excess
recovered in 15 years Rs.8,167
6.7
Taking all these factors into account, 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:
(i) Consumer
education and Research Central and others Vs Union of India (AIR 1995 Supreme
Court 922)
(ii) Laxman
Thammappa Kothagiri Vs General Manager Central Railway & Others [2005(1) SCALE)
(iii) Indian
Medical Council Vs V.P.Shantha & Others (1995(6) SCC651)
Therefore
improvements in the existing Medicare systems are absolutely essential. “Health
is not a luxury”and “not be the sole possession of a privileged few”. It is a Fundamental Right of all present and
post Employees. The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is
recognized as a fundamental right of all workers in terms of Article 21 read
with Article 39 for a 41, 43, 48A and all related Articles as pronounced by the
Supreme Court in Consumer Education and
Research Centre & Others vs Union of India (AIR 1995 Supreme
Court 922) The Supreme court has held that:
“the right to
health to a worker is an integral facet of meaningful right to life to have not
only a meaningful existence but also robust health and vigour. Therefore, the
right to health, medical aid to protect the health and vigour of a worker while
in service or post retirement is a fundamental right-to make life of a worker
meaningful and purposeful with dignity of person. Thus health care is not only a welfare measure but is a Fundamental Right”.
Medical Facilities [CGHS/CS(MA)
Rules]
7.2 The Departmental Related Parliamentary Standing
Committee on Health & family Welfare has submitted their Seventy First
report on the functioning of CGHS of Ministry of Health & Family Welfare to
the Rajya Sabha on 06.08.2013. In this
report existing deficiencies in the functioning of the CGHS have been discussed
and very important suggestions to remove these deficiencies have been
given. The VII-CPC may ask the
Government to produce the Action Taken Note on this report to enable the
commission to make their appropriate recommendations.
7.3 . One of very significant recommendations of this
Committee is that separate Super Speciality Hospitals exclusively for CGHS
beneficiaries, on the lines of Ministry of Railways, Defence & ESIC, one in
each metro city, where a considerable number of CGHS beneficiaries are residing
alongwith their families, should be established so that the CGHS beneficiaries
can avail treatment in these hospitals .
7.4. The
employees & Pensioners Association have demanded that such Hospitals should
be set up. The Govt. have, however,
rejected this saying that the Planning Commission has not agreed to provide
funds for this and that the Govt. is likely to introduce Health Insurance
Scheme. For more than 5 years now, the proposed Health Insurance scheme is being talked about, without any tangible
result. The VII-CPC should recommend
that the above recommendation of the Parliamentary Standing Committee may be
implemented. The health insurance scheme
if at all introduced, should be made
optional for the beneficiaries.
7.5. At present
it is only in 26 cities where CGHS dispensaries are located. CGHS should be expanded to cover all the
major/important cities where employees are working & pensioners are
residing.
7.6. There is
acute shortage of Doctors, Specialists, para medical staff etc. in all
dispensaries. This has affected the
quality of services rendered to the beneficiaries by the wellness Centres of
the CGHS. Particularly the availability
of specialised doctors in the CGHS viz. ENT, Heart, Ortho etc. has to be
ensured. Pending their recruitment, the
specialist from the Private recognised Hospitals may be requested to examine the
beneficiaries in wellness centers atleast for a day or two in a week. Sufficient number of chemists should be attached to different wellness
centers so that medicines are supplied on the day these are prescribed by the
Doctors.
7.7. At present
the beneficiary has first to consult a specialist and it is only on reference
by him that he could opt a Private Recognised Hospital for indoor
treatment. When such a specialist is not
available in the wellness centre the beneficiary has to go to State Govt.
Hospital to get Specialist consultation which is not only time consuming but
inconvenient procedure too. Sometimes
the beneficiary even fails to obtain such a consultation. Specialists in Rajasthan State Hospitals have
even refused to examine any CGHS beneficiaries.
To obviate this difficulty it is suggested that the in-charge of
wellness centres should be authorized to refer any beneficiary for indoor
treatment in any Private Recognised Hospital chosen by the beneficiary.
7.8. CGHS should
attach Poly clinics and commence Ayurvedic, yoga, Homeopathic & Unani
centers in each wellness centre. Each wellness Centre should be equipped with
latest ECG machine, Glucometre, x ray machine etc. as these are basic requirement of any dispensary.
7.9. For indoor
patients the entitlement of wards is discriminatory. The Officers in PB-3 are entitled for private
wards whereas those in PB-2 are entitled to semi private/general wards. The entitlement of ward should be on the
basis of seriousness of ailment and not on the basis of the status of the
beneficiaries. This discrimination
should end.
7.10.CS(MA)Rules:
There is presently a ceiling limit for the Head of the Department to sanction
the reimbursement of medical expenses of the employees. In organisations other than Railways, the
said ceiling is Rs. 200,000. This may have to be raised to Rs. 500,000 taking into account
charges to be incurred for hospitalisation, cost of medicine etc. . At
present the CS(MA) Rules have not been made applicable to ex-employees. We request that for those who are not living in
CGHS cities, the indoor/outdoor treatment may be allowed under the CS(MA)Rules.
7.11 We
suggest that, all the pensioners, irrespective of pre-retiral class and status,
be treated as same category of citizens and the same homogenous group. There
should be no class or category based discrimination and all must be provided
Health care services at par. We also request the commission to recommend to
govt. to make preventive health care an essential ingredient of all health care
schemes for retired Persons. CGHS and RELHS should be expanded and improved. Also
CSMA Rules 1944 be extended to pensioners residing outside CGHS Area.
7.12
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 distance 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.
7.13 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
many pensioners Associations but have been kept in cold storage. The 7th CPC is
requested to reiterate this important recommendation, suggesting opening of new
CGHS dispensaries as per prescribed norms in all major cities / towns securing
clearance from Planning Commission, wherever necessary.
Medical facilities to Pensioners:
7.14 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.
No
referral should be insisted in case of medical emergencies. For the purpose of
reference for hospitalization & reimbursement of expenditure thereon other
than in emergency cases Doctors/Medical officers working in different
Central/State Govt. department dispensaries/health units should be recognized
as Authorized Medical Attendant.
7.15 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 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 CS (MA) Rules, 1944.
7.16
Postal 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.
7.17
The Department of Post running its Postal (formerly P&T) dispensaries in 45
cities for outdoor treatment to its working and retired employees. Out of them
19 dispensaries in 12 cities have been merged with CGHS where CGHS and Postal
dispensaries co-existed, by Ministry of Health & Family Welfare vide
Notification dated 9.7.2013. Now there remains 33 dispensaries in cities
namely, Vadodara, Agra, Moradabad, Saharanpur, Varansi, Gorakhpur, Aligarh,
Bareilly, Behrampur, Cuttack, Siliguri, Jalpaiguri, Trichurapalli, Triunelveli,
Ambala, Silchar, Dibrugarh, Guntur, Nellore, Rajmundri, Vijayawada,
Vishakhapatnam, Ajmer, Jodhpur, Kota, Dhanbad, Gaya, Muzzafarpur, Chapra,
Raipur, Amritsar and Jallandhar. In fact in these Postal Dispensaries only
outdoor treatment is given for serving and retired employees, but for working
employees indoor medical is given through either CS (MA) Rules or by
authorizing private hospitals like CGHS, (NO INDOOR FOR RETIRED EMPLOYEES).
From working employees no contribution is realized whereas yearly contribution
is realized from pensioners, on the other hand, in CGHS there is no such
discrimination between and retired employees with regard to treatment and
contribution both. IT IS BE NOTED THAT CGHS AND POSTAL DISPENSARIES BOTH WERE
FORMED UNDER THE CS (MA) RULES, THEN WHY THIS DISCRIMINATION EXISTS BETWEEN
CGHS AND POSTAL DISPENSARIEAS. The department of Posts is required to amend its
rules / instructions, so that the facilities / contribution is made available
to pensioners at per working employees alike CGHS.
The
VII CPC may kindly consider the above state of discrimination between serving
Postal employees and Pensioners and recommend that Postal Pensioners may also
be provided indoor treatment under CS (MA) Rules.
7.18
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.
7.19
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 various 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 upwardly revise this FMA , which is presently at a lowest level of
Rs.300/- per month which everyone knows is totally inadequate to the medical
needs of a pensioner’s family. When pressed the Government have stated that as
this allowance was introduced by the V CPC, the enhancement of its rates will
have to be considered and recommended by another pay commission. 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.
7.20
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 world-famous “Kasturba
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. “The benefit of the liberalised orders bearing No. OM
No.S-11011/7/99-CGHS(P) dated 27-4-20110f the MoH&FW can not be availed by
all pensioners living in non-CGHS areas as the order pre supposes possession of
a CGHS card by such pensioners.
7.21
Several cases of claims for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by
pensioners living in non-CGHS areas have been decided in favour of pensioners
by the CATs and even the High Court of Gujrat at Ahmedabad. “All the SLPs ( 34
in all ) filed by the government of India in this connection have been
dismissed by the Supreme court of India on 3-4-2012 and Government of India had
to issue orders directing all concerned to allow reimbursement of the medical
claims of pensioners concerned living in non-CGHS areas /Stations.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.
7.22
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 and Dearness Relief and Fixed Medical Allowance to be net of Income
Tax.The purchase value of pension gets reduced day by day due to continuous
high inflation and steep rise in cost of food items and medical facilities.
Retired persons / Senior citizens do not enjoy fully public goods and service
provided by Government for citizens due to lack of mobility and many other
factors. Their ability to pay tax reduced from year to year after retirement
due to ever-increasing expenditure on food, medicines and other incidentals.
Their net worth at year end gets reduced considerably compared to the beginning
of the year. Inflation, for a pensioner is much more than any tax. It erodes
the major part of the already inadequate pension. To enable pensioners, at the
fag end of their lives, to live in minimum comfort and to cater for ever rising
cost of living, they may be spared from paying Income Tax on Pension and the DR
– as recommended by 5th Pay Commission in para 167.11 of their
report.
8.2
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 is made 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.
8.3
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 2 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.
After
retirement, most of the pensioners spend the time on spiritual activities. They like to visit important religious places
in the country. The Commission’s
attention is drawn to the fact that Government of Punjab is granting Travel
Concession to all its pensioners by paying one month’s Basic Pension for every
block of 2 years. It was introduced from
1/1/1989 and the payment is made in January every two years (Source: Punjab
Government letter No.1/15/89-IFP-II/8078 dated 31/8/1989). In the past 25 years
the cost of everything has gone up. The Commission is requested to
recommend to the Government to pay 3 months Basic Pension as Travel concession
and the facility may be extended once in 2 years to all those pensioners/Family
Pensioners including family Pensioners other than spouse, who are at present
not getting travel facilities as departmental advantage.
8.4
In the last decade, the social fabric has undergone a drastic change. The Indian Parliament had to enact a law for
the kith and kin to look after their parents.
After the death of a pensioner, cremation/burial has to take place in an
honorable manner. Each religion has got
its own custom and rituals and the cost is very high. It is to be noted that Andhra Pradesh
Government is granting an amount of Rs.10,000/- as ‘Death Relief’ to its
pensioners, Family pensioners (Source: AP Govt. G.O. MS.No.102 Finance (Pen.I)
Department dated 6/4/2010 & G.O. M.S. No.136 dated 29/6/2011). The Commission is requested to recommend an
amount of Rs.10,000/- as ‘Death Relief’ in the event of death of pensioner,
pensioner’s spouse or Family Pensioner.
8.5
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.
8.6
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 he 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 on all 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
“The OM No. 44013/2/2010-Coord dated 25-3-2011 issued
by the Department of Pension & Pensioners’ Welfare is required to be
amended suitably.
8.7
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 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 to nominate any
representatives from any pensioner Associations. 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. The SCOVA may be renamed as Joint National
Council of Pensioners Organisations. It should be a two tier system one at
National level and other Departmental Level.
8.8 Improvement of ex-gratia to CPF/SRPF (C)
retirees and their families:-
Ex-Gratia payment to CPF / SRPF (C) pre 1.1.2006
retires and their families / dependent children was sanctioned earlier as
follows:-
CPF/SRPF (C) retirees Rs.600pm
+ Dearness relief from 1.11.1997
Widows and dependent
Children of deceased Rs.
605 pm + Dearness relief from CPF/SRPF (C) retirees 1.11.1997
Subsequently these have been revised as follows:-
CPF/SRPF (C) retirees at time of retirement EX- Gratia
Group “A” Service Rs.3000
pm + DR
Group “B” Service Rs.1000
pm + DR
Group “C” Service Rs.750
pm + DR
Group “D” Service Rs.650
pm + DR
Effective date: 1.11.2006
SRPF (C)
4.6.2013
CPF
Widows and dependent
Children of deceased Rs.645
pm + DR
CPF/SRPF (C) from
4.6.2013
Dearness
ex-gratia as above is reckoned before applying dearness relief.
These
amounts are utterly inadequate even for hand to mouth living in the resent
scenario of high cost of living and spiralling inflation. Request were earlier
made to grant one more pension option to the surviving CPF/SRPF (C) retirees or
to grant them 1/3 rd pension as given to PSU absorbees, but the same have not
been agreed to.
8.9 We submit that VII CPC may consider our
following suggestion
Period
for service for granting ex-gratia in their cases should be brought down to 10
ears as in the case of eligibility for pension. They should be granted one time
option for pension as recommended by the IV CPC . Minimum ex-gratia to the
beneficiary well as the family should be equivalent to minimum pension / family
pension of the grade in which they retired as revised from to time. It need to
be appreciated that they also had rendered satisfactory service to the
government. they worked in more arduous circumstances when the country was
relatively undeveloped with low salaries, incremental rates and promotional
avenue. They and their families should not be condemned with low rates of
ex-gratia and denial of several benefits extended to pensioners / family
pensioners for error of judgment on their part in not opting for pension when
options were extended because of their inability to foresee the development of
the country and the vast changes that have been taking place after their
retirement. They are a fast disappearing category and grant of full benefits on
par with pensioners will not cause any undue financial burden to the government.
in addition to revision of ex-gratia rates on par with pensions and family
pensions, they have also to be extended benefits such as same rates of DR
granted from to time, ex-gratia to their dependent unmarried / widowed /
divorced daughter above 25 years of age, fixed medical allowance, widow passes
to the families of deceased SRPF beneficiaries etc. India is a welfare state
and the discrimination going on against them all these years is against the
very letter and spirit of constitution of India and the concept of welfare
state embedded in the directive principles of state policy.
As an Alternative which we may suggest is that the
ex-gratia rates must be improved now, at least to the following extent, that
is, equal to the minimum pension group –wise for CPF / SRPF (C) beneficiaries,
corresponding to the “group representative” pay scales indicated below:- (refer
Deptt. of Pension O.M. dated 28.1.2013 for “minimum Pension” figures)
|
Group ‘A’
|
Pay Scale (Working Pay Scale)
Minimum Pension
Ex-Gratia
|
15600 PB+6600 GP
12,600
12,600
12,600
|
|
Group ‘B’
|
Pay Scale
Minimum Pension
Ex-Gratia
|
9300 PB + 4800 GP
9375
9375
|
|
Group ‘C’
|
Pay Scale
Minimum Pension
Ex-Gratia
|
9300 PB+4200 GP
8145
8145
|
|
Group ‘D’
|
Pay Scale
Minimum Pension
Ex-Gratia
|
5200 PB + 1800 GP
3685
3685
|
Admissibility of Ex-Gratia to widowed
/ divorced / unmarried daughters
Family
pension under CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 is being paid to eligible widowed /
divorced / unmarried daughters beyond the age of 25 years for life if they
continue to be eligible for payment of family pension. But in respect of the
dependent widowed / divorced / unmarried daughters of CPF / SRPF beneficiaries,
payment of family pension is stopped when they complete the age of 25 years.
Hence it is requested that the VII CPC my please recommend extension of the
benefit admissible to the above category of Central family pensioners to the
dependent of CPF / SRPF beneficiaries also.
8.10. Representations
in various committees :
As recommended vide Vth CPC report Vol III para
141.30 Pensioners’ representatives should be included in various committees
& other Fora of Govt where issues relating to the welfare of pensioners are
likely to be discussed & debated :
Discussing
and deciding the matters relating to Pensioners, with representatives other
than those of pensioners, is unfair & against the Rules of ‘Natural
Justice’. At present various Committees like National Anomaly Committee (NAC)
and JCM (on Pensioner matters), are there, wherein matters / policies relating
to pensioners’ welfare are discussed and decided, but they do not have
pensioners’ representatives with the result their viewpoints, hardships &
anomalies are not properly represented. As pensioners are a homogenous class,
there is an urgent need to constitute separate Committees for pensioners
wherein matters / policies / anomalies relating to pensioners of all Groups,
categories & departments may be discussed.
8.11. Lingering Litigation on Pensioners matters due
to uncalled for Appeals by Government: Govt. should not indirectly pressurize
courts by appealing again & again to get judgments reversed in its favor & must implement all court judgments
in case of all similarly placed
persons.
Fifth CPC recommended in para 126.5 that any Court
Judgment involving a common policy matter of pay/pension to a group of
employees/pensioners, should be extended automatically to similarly placed
employees/pensioners without driving every affected individual to the Courts of
law. This recommendation is never followed by GOI, with the result Pensioners
in the evening of their life, are forced to approach the legal forums, seeking
the same relief. This in turn, bulges court dockets.
The Commission is requested to recommend to the
Government to strictly follow the provisions on “filing of appeals in the
National Litigation Policy document dated 26.3.2010 issued by the then Hon’ble
Minister for Law.
Seventh
CPC is requested to look into this matter once again and to issue suitable
guidelines as deem fit and necessary.
8.12 Uniform format of PPO – It is observed that
different Ministries/ Departments have prescribed different forms of PPO. It is
suggested that there should be a uniform format of pension payment order for
all Central Government pensioners,
irrespective of their departments and all old PPOs should be replaced by the
proposed uniformed format. This also should provide the particulars of
prospective eligible family members, their dates of birth etc.
Festival
grant
8.13 India
is the country of religious national and regional festivals and during festive
days the pensioners / family pensioners who are depending upon pension facing
unusual conditions for want of money. The serving employee may enjoy festive
days by receiving various grants / bonus and others. Therefore, it is proposed
that the 7th CPC should consider one month pension as festival
grants for the pensioner/ family pensioner and this is not a new concept
because some of the state Govt. have already implemented the same. The 7th
CPC should think over the issue.
********
PART – II
RELATING
TO PENSIONERS OF VARIOUS DEPARTMENT
Chapter IX Pensioners Benefit to Postal Retirees
9.1 The Postal Department is the third largest Central
Government Department following Indian Railways and Defence. Naturally the
Postal Pensioners segment is the third largest amongst the Central Government
Pensioners. There are more than 2,00,000 Pensioners on the rolls of the Postal
Department’s pension roaster. While the common issues of Postal Pensioners are
identical to that of the entirety of Central Government Pensioners, there are
certain issues and demands peculiar to Postal Pensioners. This Sectional
Memorandum is an attempt to place those issues before the 7th CPC
for objective consideration.
Discrimination on grant of Medical
treatment
9.2 The Postal Pensioners who are not covered under CGHS
(Central Government Health Scheme) are like their counterparts are granted FMA
(Fixed Medical Allowance). But those pensioners who want to become
beneficiaries of CGHS (Central Government Health Scheme) are facing
discrimination at the hands of the Health Department for years. Those
Pensioners who were already CGHS beneficiaries while in service alone are
admitted into the CGHS after their retirement. The other pensioners are
precluded from joining the CGHS. The CGHS is a scheme wherein every beneficiary
is paying at the prescribed rates set by the CGHS. Therefore there is no logic
or justification to deny admittance to any pensioner as a beneficiary in CGHS.
The Pensioners of various Central Government Departments irrespective of their
being a CGHS beneficiary or not while in service are admitted into the CGHS
Scheme. The Postal Pensioners alone are denied the privilege of joining CGHS.
9.3 The reason attributed for this non-admittance in CGHS is
the existence of one or two Postal Dispensaries in the particular State. The
Postal Dispensaries (erstwhile P&T Dispensaries) were recommended to be
merged with CGHS by the V CPC. The Government did not act on that
recommendation. The VI CPC also recommended similar merger of Postal
Dispensaries with CGHS. The Government had subsequently merged only 19 Postal
Dispensaries in 12 Cities on the plea that only in those 12 Cities there is
CGHS in existence and therefore the merger is feasible only in those cities.
This is causing a serious problem because no Postal Pensioner in a particular
State where even one Postal Dispensary is existing in any District of the
State, to join CGHS. The Postal Pensioners residing under the jurisdiction of
the Postal Dispensary in that particular district alone can be catered by that
Postal Dispensary. Therefore there is no logic or justification for persisting
with the stand that no Postal Pensioner will be allowed to join CGHS, just
because there is one or two postal dispensaries in existence in that State.
9.4 The non-admittance of Postal Pensioner alone into CGHS is a
clear discrimination being perpetrated against the poor pensioners of Postal
Department. The Central Government was brought to notice of this issue by the
Staff Side National Council JCM as well several Pensioners Organisations had
raised this issue in the SCOVA forum also for remedy. Instead of solving this
very important issue of Postal Pensioners, the Government is taking shelter
under matter pre-judice clause since some aggrieved pensioners had already
moved the Courts in different places. A recommendation by the 7th
CPC will sort out this age old problem and help the thousands of senior
citizens who are in dire need of medical needs at their fag end of life.
9.5 It is not out of place to mention that the Pensioners were
given a favourable verdict in the Central Administrative Tribunal of Kerala and
upheld by the Honourable High Court of Kerala (Annexure –I) also under
which the Postal Pensioners residing outside the CGHS area in the entire State
of Kerala are permitted to become the beneficiaries in CGHS. Though the Central
Government had filed SLP against this judgment, the Postal Pensioners of Kerala
State are admitted into CGHS even though they reside outside the jurisdiction
of CGHS city and irrespective of the fact as to whether they were beneficiaries
of CGHS while in service or not. The benefit of Court Judgments in Kerala
should be extended to all Postal Pensioners in other States as well.
Merger of all Postal Dispensaries
under CGHS
9.6 The stand of the Government as against the recommendations
of both V and VI CPCs for merging the P&T Dispensaries with CGHS is very
negative. Lukewarm response was shown after VI CPC recommendation and after
dilly dallying the question for years, the Governmetn ultimately came forward
to merge only 19 Postal Dispensaries with CGHS. The Government could have
easily merged all the remaining Postal Dispensaries also by converting those
infrastructures of Postal Dispensaries into CGHS infrastructure with additional
expenditure not unmanageable by the Central Government. There is no meaning in
some dispensaries in the name of Postal Dispensaries while a centralized CGHS
can cater to the medical needs of all CG Employees and Pensioners in a much
better manner. The Postal Pensioners covered under the existing Postal
Dispensaries are not considered for treatment of hospitalization facilities is
a clear case of discrimination amongst the same category of Central Government
Pensioners. A welfare state cannot justify its act on any grounds including on
the ground of financial burden to deny the medical needs for one section of
Government Pensioners while the same is granted to majority of CG Pensioners.
It is recognized by one and all that the Government was spending from its own
exchequer towards running the P&T Dispensaries for the benefit of Postal
and Telegraph workers without any contribution from employees goes to show that
the Medicare is a social welfare measure on the part of the Government towards
its work force. Therefore the CGHS though contributory in nature cannot be
fully considered as a contributory scheme as it is also a welfare measure
towards the CG Employees and CG Pensioners. We appeal to the VII CPC to
recommend for total merger of Postal Dispensaries with CGHS without exemption
so that all Postal Pensioners can be benefited without any discrimination.
Rent free BSNL landline Phone to
Postal Pensioners
9.7 The Postal Department was segregated from the combined
P&T Department on 31st March, 1985. The Telecom Department later
converted into BSNL is granting rent free land line phones to all Telecom and
BSNL Pensioners and also to Postal Pensioners who have worked in the combined
department of P&T for more than 20 years at the time of bifurcation. This
means only those employees who were in P&T department in the year 1965 or
before are entitled to get this concession. The cut off time fixed by the BSNL
is unjustified. Most of today’s Postal Pensioners were employees of combined
P&T department entered in service only after 1965. Some such pensioners have
approached courts and got a favourable judgment and based on those judgments
got the concession extended to them by the BSNL. The general guideline of the
Honourable Supreme Court of India that all similarly placed persons should be
extended the same justice held out to any other person is ignored by the
Central Government. This issue is continuously being discussed in the forum of
SCOVA but the burden of decision is left on the BSNL which is dilly dallying
the question for years together. We fervently appeal to the 7th CPC
for a recommendation to the Central Government for grant of rent free land line
phone from BSNL to all Postal Pensioners who were recruited when the department
was combined one irrespective of number of years’ service put in by them in the
P&T department.
Allotment of Postal Staff Quarters
for Pensioners
9.8 There is a tendency amongst the employees of Postal
Department to not to seek for residential accommodation in the Postal Staff
Quarters for various reasons including owning of their own houses and not
suitable to their work spots etc. Many such Postal Staff quarters were left
unoccupied causing slow damage to the structure of the building itself. Instead
of keeping the Postal staff quarters unoccupied, it would be welcome to allot
them to the Postal Pensioners who opt for such quarters. The analogy for
serving employees who live in Staff Quarters is recovering HRA besides a
standard license fee. In the case of Postal Pensioners the vacant staff
quarters according to the entitlement of the cadre in which they retired may be
allotted to them on payment of standard license fee only as a token of served
the department for a number of years. Similar concession may be extended to
family pensioners also. We seek the kind recommendation of 7th CPC
in this regards.
Free Postage facility to Postal
Pensioners
9.9 Various Central Government Pensioners like the Pensioners
of Railways and Defense are offered special privileges like Railway Pass and
Defense Canteens. The Postal Pensioners shall be extended some such concessions
by the Government as is available to Pensioners in Australia. The Australian
Postal Department (Australia Post) has implemented a scheme called “My
Post Concession Account” in which postal concessions are offered to
sections like Pensioners holding Pensioner Concession Card etc. The Postal
Pensioners should be granted such facilities for free postage in a year.
Gramin
Dak Sewaks and Casual Labourers
Extension of Defined Pension Scheme
to Casual labourers on retirement
9.10 The new entrants on or after 1.1.2004 in the Central services are not covered by
the Defined Pension benefit scheme but attached to NPS only. However, if any
Casual labourer like the temporary status Mazdoors etc are regularized even
after 1.1.2004, they should be treated as entered in service prior to 1.1.2004
only as per the judicial pronouncement of Honorable High Court of Madras. In a
recent judgment of Central Administrative Tribunal of Chennai and a subsequent
judgment of the Honourable Madras High Court
have held that 16 temporary status Mazdoors who were regularized in the
Kalpakkam Atomic Energy Department after 1.1.2004 should be brought under
Defined Benefit Pension Scheme and not under NPS by virtue of their entering
the services as a Casual labourer well before the cut of date of 1.1.2004.
9.11 In the background of the above judgment we submit that there
are thousands of casual labourers with or without temporary status in the
Department of Posts without any scope of regularization for years. Therefore
when they get the opportunity to be regularized, they should not be placed
under the contributory NPS Scheme but should be brought under the
CCS(Pension)Rules, 1972. We request the 7th CPC for a positive
recommendation to the Government in this issue.
9.12 Due to wrong interpretation of the DOPT as well as the
Department of Posts, hundreds of Casual labourers who have become eligible to
be considered for grant of temporary status Mazdoors as per the scheme worked
out by the DOPT in line with the Supreme Court of India’s directive are
deprived of the benefit. The DOPT order facilitates grant of temporary status
to those casual labourers who have entered into the service as a casual
labourer on or before the cut-off date viz., 10.09.1993. This temporary status can be conferred to the casual
labourers who complete 240 days of service in a year (206 days in the case of
casual labourers working in administrative offices). The wrong interpretation made by the DOPT /
DoP being that only those casual labourers who have completed 240 days of
service on the cut-off date itself viz., 10.09.1993 will be entitled for the
grant of temporary status and that the scheme is not a running scheme for those who completes the eligibility on a
subsequent date to the cut-off date. This is not only an arbitrary
interpretation against the spirit of the Supreme Court directive as well as the
very Government Order itself but also against regularization of casual
labourers themselves in the services. The
stipulation of not a running scheme should be restricted to only for the entry
into service before 10.09.1993 and not for gaining the eligibility criteria
of number of mandatory days of employment in a year.
9.13 The
Clarificatory Orders of the DOPT further causes a discrimination between those
Casual Labourers who have been granted temporary status for casual labourers
who complete 240 days eligibility criteria after 10.09.1993 and other casual
labourers on the same footing. The Orders of the DOPT O.M.No. 40011/6/2002-Estt( C )dated 6 June, 2002 stipulates that
the status of temporary status should not be stripped from anyone who were
conferred with the status on the assumption that it is an ongoing Scheme. It
only says don’t confer the same status to any more casual labourers unless
they have not only entered the service on or before 10.09.1993 but also
rendered 240 days service (206 days in administrative offices) before the
cut-off date. This causes a glaring discrimination between one set of casual
labourers and another.
9.14 This above mentioned wrong interpretation is aimed at
diluting the Supreme Court directive as well as the original orders of DOPT for
grant of temporary status to Casual labourers as per the directive of Supreme
Court. We request that the Government should be advised to follow the correct
interpretation by the 7th CPC. As otherwise many casual labourers
will not be able to be granted temporary status and hence could not be
regularized. Without regularization they will not be able to be made eligible
for the defined benefit pension as discussed in the foregoing paragraph vide
the judgment in the temporary status casual labour case of Atomic Energy
Department, Kalpakkam.
9.15 We request the 7th CPC for a recommendation for
set righting a glare injustice to pave way for regularization of all eligible
casual laborers as well as reckoning the period of casual nature as entry in
service prior to 1.1.2004 for facilitating them to be brought under CCS Pension
Rules, 1972 and not under NPS.
Extension of Defined Pension Scheme
to GDS Promotes on retirement
9.16 There are roughly three lakhs of Gramin Dak Sewaks in the
Department of Posts who were recommended by the Justice Talwar Committee for
the grant of pension by the Government by treating them as civil servants. This
was not accepted yet by the Government. Meanwhile as per the analogy of the
judgment of the Honorable Madras High Court, which directed to treat the period
of casual nature rendered by the temporary status Mazdoors regularized after
1.1.2004 as employees entered in service prior to 1.1.2004, these Gramin Dak
Sewaks also are to be treated as entered in to Postal Services before 1.1.2004
even though they get regularized in the posts of MTS / Postman / Mail guard etc
after 1.1.2004 by virtue of their long
service as GDS that gives them the eligibility to regularization.
9.17 In some cases there are judicial pronouncements (Annexure
–V) to the effect that if there is any shortage of service in a
regularized post for the eligibility to pension (10 years’ service) to those
employees who were promoted to those posts from the cadre of Gramin Dak Sewaks,
then the shortage should be adjusted from the long service rendered by them as
GDS. The above judgment has not been extended to all similarly placed employees
resulting in them retiring without any pensionery benefit. This is totally
unjustified and against the legal pronouncements. We therefore suggest that the
7th CPC may recommend to the Government for allowing such retirees
to get pension by treating their shortage if any in the qualifying service from
the long service rendered by them as GDS in the past.
Grant
of Pension and GPF benefits to Gramin Dak Sewak of Postal Department
9.18 Supreme Court in his Landmark judgment on
22.4.1977 ordered Extra Departmental Agents as holder of the Civil Posts and
they are not Agents but directly appointed with some prescribed rules at par
with a regular employees and are controlled by the Civil service conduct Rule
at par with the regular employees. A copy of the said judgment marked as
Annexure – A is enclosed for ready reference. That is why they are entitled to
proportionate wages and all other allowances, benefits and pension as
admissible to Govt. Employees.
9.19 The report of Justice , Charanjit Talwar
was submitted on 30.4.1997 which recommended scale of pay leave, pensionery
benefits at par with regular employees. A copy of the report of chapter IV
under the caption “Social Security” is enclosed marked as Annexure – B for
ready reference. The contention of the Department of Post that the ED Employees
number being more than three lakhs it would be very difficult to maintain and
to record the service particulars as required under CCS (Pension) Rules – 1972
as the existing infrastructure not in a position to manage the huge service
book etc. apart from this as the ED employees have their other source of income
they are not eligible to get pension. This argument of the Department of posts
is not tenable. The railway Department is maintaining the service book of more
than 15 lakhs, the Defence Ministry maintaining more than 10 lakh, what is the
difficulty of maintaining of 6 lakhs employees. This arguments is not at all
convincing. Regarding shortage of working hours on the grounds that EDAs are
not performing 8 hours work Hence, they cannot be brought under the preview of
the CCS (Pension) Rules-1972. The HRD Ministry who are controlling primary and
secondary teachers their duty hours are less than 8 hours and most of them are within 5 hours
but they are being granted pensioners as per CCS (Pension) Rules 1972.
Similarly the Government Doctors who are earning money beyond their duty hours
by private practice having other source of income are being granted pension
under CCS (Pension) Rules – 1972.
We, therefore propose
that the 7th pay commission will kindly study the above report of
Talwar Committee give some positive recommendations granting pension and G.P.F.
benefits to GDS Retirees.
*******
Chapter
X
BSNL
/ MTNL Pensioners
10.1 DoT employees who had been absorbed in MTNL
/ BSNL are being given the benefit of defined benefit pension scheme by
amending the CCS (Pension) Rules – 1972 providing an amended rule as 37 A. But
this facility is denied to the new recruits who are recruited after 1.10.2000.
They are being governed by EPF Scheme this is
discriminatory and in violation
of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
We therefore propose
scrapping of EPF scheme and the all the BSNL recruits be brought under the CCS
(pension) Rules-1972. In many of the Public Sector Undertaking like Tea board
Corporation, Damoder Valley Corporation, Steel Authority of India, Coal India,
Airport Authority of India, Port and Dock workers are all under the purview of
CCS (Pension) Rules – 1972. Hence, justification to BSNL new recruits is quite
valid.
10.2 Pension revision of BSNL pensioners should
be made mandatory whenever wage revision is implemented in BSNL. Before the
formation of BSNL on 1.10.2000Rule – 37A was incorporated to the CCS (Pension)
Rules – 1972 to ensure pension to the BSNL absorbed DOT employees from the
consolidated fund of Government of India. Subsequently this position was
ratified by the Secretary, Department of Telecom vide his D.O. letter dated
15.5.2005. That in respect of employees who have been absorbed in BSNL. BSNL is
liable to pay the pension contribution in accordance with FR-116 and liability
on amount of pension payable will of Government of India. Surprisingly DOT issued
another letter on 15.6.2006 reversing its earlier decision and linked payment
of pension with receipt of revenues from BSNL. This being most dangerous and
certain to problem in future for payment of pension. The Union took up the
issue seriously and the DOP was compelled to issue another letter stating that
the contents of the letter dated 15.6.2006 will not be insisted. But in the
abseebce of cancellation / nullification of the controversial letter of dated
15.6.2006, whenever the pension revision issue of BSNL pensioners is initiated
hindrances / roadblocks are raised not only by DOT but also by other department
like expenditure, law and public enterprises on the basis of the above letter.
This has happened when pension revision of pre 2007 BSNL pensioners was
initiated and now for pension revision on 78.2% IDA merge. This position should
not be allowed to continue and the BSNL pensioners should be treated at par
with central government pensioners as they are covered under the 37 A of CCS
(Pension) Rule – 1972.
10.3. Department of Telecommunications vide their
OM No.4-12(11) 2012-PAT dated 20.2.2014 have extended CGHS facilities to
retired BSNL employees who are in receipt of Central Civil pension / Pro rata
pension from Central Civil Estimates in consulation with the Ministry of Health
& Family Welfare. BSNL retirees have been given an option to choose either
CGHS or BSNL – MRS as per their convenience.
BSNL also vide its
letter No. BSN / Admn/14-15.09(pt) dated 2nd April, 2014 addressed
to all the Chief General Managers, has asked them to give wide publicity and to
assist the willing retired employees by forwarding their applications to the
respective CGHS units for admission to CGHS.
But the Ministry of
Health & Family Welfare does not seem to have issued any clear order in
this connection. Hence in the absence of necessary order from the nodal
Ministry, the facility is not being extended to BSNL retirees. Hence immediate
necessary action in the matter needs to be taken by MOH & FW.
Further, since the Dot
O.M. dated 20.2.2014 stipulates that the retired BSNL employees who opt for
CGHS “would have to pay the requisite fee to CGHS as applicable to Government
retirees”. DoT must now fix the rate of monthly contribution payable by the
pensioner. It is to be noted that the contribution payable by the Government
retirees is fixed on the basis of the Grade Pay that they would have drawn had
they been in service whereas in BSNL there is no element of Grade Pay to fix
the rate of contribution on par with government retirees. The ward entitlement
of Government retirees is also determined on the notional pay in pay Band.
Hence, BSNL will have to evolve a new dispensation on contribution and ward
entitlement in respect of BSNL retirees which must be in conformity with the
rates applicable to CGHS beneficiaries.
********
Chapter
XII
Issue
relating to Civilian Pensioners of Defence Department
12.1 CSD Canteen Facility to Defence Civilian
Pensioners
Defence civilian
employees are provided with CSD Canteen Facility when they are in service. But
the same is stopped after their retirement. Several representations made
earlier regarding extension of the facility to pensioners have not been
fruitful. Commission is requested to recommend CSD canteen facilities to
Defence Civilian retirees.
12.2. Grant of Indoor Hospital Treatment at
Command Hospital under the control of Ministry of Defence to the Defence
Civilian Pensioners.
We propose that the
Facilities as available to Railway Hospital to railway Pensioners be extended
to Defence Civilian Pensioners to obviate the difficulties now being faced by
the Defence Civilian Pensioners.
***********
ANNEXURE TO NCCPA MEMORANDUM
The Annexure to NCCPA Memorandum is available for download
- Please go to the following site and download the Annexure:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/235383424/Annexure-of-NCCPA-
Memorandum
