Thursday, May 30, 2013

The feedback of meeting with Secretary, Pension AR & PG on Pensionary Matters published by Confederation

The feedback of meeting with Secretary, Pension AR & PG on Pensionary Matters published by Confederation
MEETING OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF STAFF SIDE NATIONAL COUNCIL WITH SECRETARY, PENSION AR & PG ON PENSIONARY MATTERS.

CONFEDERATION OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES AND WORKERS.
First Floor, North Avenue Post Office Building
New Delhi. 110 001
Website: www.confederationhq. Blogspot.com.
E mail: confederation06@yahoo.co.in

Dated: 30th May, 2013.

Dear Comrade,

A meeting of the representatives of Staff Side National Council with Secretary, Pension AR & PG on pensionary matters was held on 28.5.2013. Staff Side was represented by S/ Shri S.G. Mishra and Rakhal Das Gupta (AIRF), Guman Singh (NFIR) and K.K.N.kutty and S.K.Vyas (Confederation)

Old Items

The following issues have been discussed

1. Ex-gratia Payment to SRPF / CPF beneficiaries who had voluntarily retired or medically invalidated. It has been decided to implement the Kerala High Court judgment in general and extend the benefit of exgratia payment to the meagre number of pre 1986 optees who retired voluntarily or on medical invalidation after rendering 20 years of service. The enabling orders are to be issued shortly.

2. Raising quantum of ex-gratia to CPF retirees on lines of SRPF.

In respect of SRPF retirees of the Railways, the rate of ex-gratia was raised from Rs. 600/- pm to Rs. 750/- pm to Rs. 3000pm with effect from 1.11.2006. The Govt. have now decided to revise the rate of exgratia in respect of CPF retirees at the above rates I. e. Rs. 750/- to Rs. 3000/- pm w.e.f. 1.11.2006.

3. Issue of Revised PPOs in favour of Pre 2006 retirees and others.

 In the case Civilian departments about 4 lakhs of cases reported pending on 1.8.2012, now only 1.30 lakhs are pending and these would also be cleared by 30.6.2013. In the case of Railways total pendency in August 2012 was 10.8 lakhs which has been brought down to 5.54 lakhs. Now when it has been decided that revised PPOs may be issued suo mottu by the Railway authorities, the entire pending is targeted to be cleared by 30th September 2013.In the case of Defence civilians, action is being taken to issue all pending PPOs by 30.9.2013.

4. Fixation of revised pension by multiplying pre-revised 1/3rd pension (in  respect of PSU absorbees) by a factor of 2.26.In the case the speaking order issued by the Govt. on 26.11.2012 that no further increase in pension of absorbee pensioners would be allowed has been challenged in CAT Hyderabad and the Tribunal has passed orders on 24.4. 2013. This order is under examination.

5. Commutation of Pension.
The Govt. have not agreed to reduce the period of 15 years to 11 years for restoration even in the cases where commutation has been paid at the rates prescribed in the New Table. The Govt. wanted that the matter may be raised before 7th pay commission.

6. Family pension to divorced / widowed / unmarried daughters –nomination for life time arrears by the family pension in respect of his / her daughter. This has not been agreed to.

7. Non payment of arrears of pension on account of Revision of pension w.e.f. 1.1.2006 in case of pensioner of Chandrapur. Now these arrears have been disbursed by all Banks.

New Items.

I. Equitable Gratuity  under Rule 50 of Pension Rules, 1972.

As recommended by IV CPC the following rates of Death Gratuity had been provided for :-
Sl. No.Length of ServiceRate of Death Gratuity
1. Less than one year 2 times emoluments
2.One year or more but less Then 5 years 6 times of emoluments
3.5 Years or more but less than 20 years 12 times emoluments
4.20 years or more half of emoluments for every completed 
six monthly period of qualifying service 
subject to maximum of 33 times of emoluments


Staff Side suggested the following amendment in Sl. No. 3 above which may be split as under :-
a) Five years or more12 times the emoluments but less than 11 years.
b) 11 years or more but less than 20 years20 times of emoluments

The Govt. has not agreed and have suggested that the matter may be raised before the next Pay Commission.

II.Extension of CS (MA) Rules, 1944 to Central Government Pensioners.

The Health Ministry has agreed to extend CS (MA) Rules, 1944 to Pensioners. In many cases which had gone to Court, it has been ruled that pensioners are entitled to full reimbursement of medical expenses incurred by them as per CS (MA) Rules 1944 which are applicable in the case of serving employees. The Department of Expenditure has not agreed to implement the above decision. The pensioners have to wait till the Medical Insurance Scheme is introduced.

III. Grant of modified parity with reference to the Revised Pay Scale corresponding to pre revised Pay Scale of the post from which an employee had retired. The Govt. cited the decision of Supreme Court in K.S. Krishna Swamy Vs UOI (C.A. no.3173-3174/2006 and 3188-3190/2006). According to this the benefit of up-gradation of post subsequent to their retirement would not be admissible to pre 1996 / pre 2006 retirees.

The Staff Side pointed out that the result of this clarification is that a retiree is now being compared with the pay scale of an employee two stages lower and subordinate to the post from which an employee has retired. If V IV CPCs have consciously upgraded certain posts it is established that pay scales granted for these posts were in adequate and only therefore the up-gradation has been recommended by them. On what ground the benefit of up-gradation even in determining the modified parity be denied to them when it is established that they retired from a pay scale which were inadequate.

However Govt. did not agree to reconsider this matter.

The meeting ended with a vote of thanks.

With greetings,

Yours fraternally,

M.Krishnan
Secretary General
Source: http://confederationhq.blogspot.in/
[http://confederationhq.blogspot.in/2013/05/meeting-of-representatives-of-staff.html]

Increase retirement age of central government employees to 62-Sixty two

Increase retirement age of central government employees to 62-Sixty two

On 21st March 2013, there was an unstarred question in Rajya Sabha, about whether there was a proposal to increase the retirement age of Central government employees. The relevant MOS answered there was no such proposal. That’s not quite true, because there is such a proposal floating around and it went to Cabinet sub-committee and an in principle decision to implement was taken by Department of Personnel and Training (DOPT). One should not mix up existence of a proposal with a decision about implementing it. Evidently, a decision has now been taken to increase the age from 60 to 62 years, the last time such an increase took place was in 1998, when there was an increase from 58 to 60 years. Whenever such a decision is taken, debates centre on the big picture. What are arguments for? First, life expectancies are increasing. There is a shortage of good people within government. Let’s tap this expertise. Second, in any case there are extensions in “exceptional circumstances”. But that’s arbitrary and can be shot down by the Appointments Committee of Cabinet (ACC). Why not formalize the system by allowing extensions to everyone? The trouble with this argument is that there will be no finality about 62 either and there will be “exceptional circumstances” beyond 62.

Third, there should be parity. Professors now retire at 65. High Court judges retire at 62, Supreme Court judges retire at 65. The counter-arguments of the big picture are also obvious. India is a young country, young need employment opportunities. Promotional avenues of existing civil servants get blocked. Often, in the private sector, people retire at 60 and there are extensions, with the qualification that extensions are at consolidated monthly emoluments, with no perks. An increase in retirement age occurs with all perks. Therefore, there are significant fiscal costs. While these big picture arguments and counter-arguments are important, my problem is that such decisions aren’t taken because of logical coherence. They are ad hoc decisions, driven by myopic motives. First, increase in retirement age postpones the one-time superannuation burden of severance payments by around Rs 5000 crores. For a government that has drawn up red lines on deficit numbers, that’s a desirable objective, even though it is myopic because it increases fiscal costs on future governments. Second, there’s a clear political cum electoral motive. Outright, if we include Defence, we are talking about 1.5 million Central government employees.

In a broader sense, we are talking about something like 6 million, excluding State governments and quasi-government, all urban. This is therefore a significant component in that 65 million urban household figure. These two points will also be made when the 62 decision is announced. But the one that bothers me most is a third element, one that is invariably never talked about. Such ad hoc decisions are taken because of specific individuals. There is one particular individual whom government wishes to place in one particular position. Once he is placed there, government wishes him to benefit from increase in retirement age. But to ensure he is placed there, one needs to ensure those who are senior to him get out of the way first. After all, supersession is not desirable. Hence, announce the decision after some people have retired at 60 and exited. This is the way decisions are taken. At one level, there is no point complaining, because we have accepted corruption of institutions and systems as fact of life. But when this 62 decision is announced, as it soon will, let us not pretend there are any big picture considerations involved.

Source : www.blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com
[http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/policypuzzles/entry/increase-in-government-retirement-age-to-62]

Now Trending

Holidays to be observed in Central Government Offices during the year 2020

Holidays to be observed in Central Government Offices during the year 2020 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT HOLIDAY LISTS 2020 F.No.12/1/20...

Disclaimer:

All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy of the content on this blog, the same should not be construed as a statement of law or used for any legal purposes. Our blog "Central Government Staff news" accepts no responsibility in relation to the accuracy, completeness, usefulness or otherwise, of the contents. Users are advised to verify/check any information with the relevant department(s) and/or other source(s), and to obtain any appropriate professional advice before acting on the information provided in the blog.

Links to other websites that have been included on this blog are provided for public convenience only.

The blog "Central Government Staff news" is not responsible for the contents or reliability of linked websites and does not necessarily endorse the view expressed within them. We cannot guarantee the availability of such linked pages at all times.

Any suggestions write to us
centralgovernmentnews@gmail.com