7th CPC recommendation : Pay determination in the case of Pre 2016 pensioners : Option No. I Examination of feasibility : NC JCM Staff Side
Shiva Gopal Mishra
Secretary
Ph.: 23382286
National Council (Staff Side)
13-C. Ferozshah Road, New Delhi 110001
Mail : nc.jcm.np@gmail.com
NC-JCM-2016/7th CPC (Pension)
October 17, 2016
The Secretary,
Department of Pension & Pensioners Welfare,
Govt. of India,
Sardar Patel Bhawan, New Delhi.
Dear Sir,
Sub: 7th CPC recommendation. Pay determination in the case of Pre 2016 pensioners. Option No. I Examination of feasibility.
Ref: Minutes of the meeting of the Committee in F.No.38/37/2016 P&PW(A) Dated 10th October, 2016
We
refer to the discussions held On 6.10.2016 in matter of feasibility Of
acting upon the 7thy CPC recommendations (Option No. I) in the matter of
pension computation and the minutes circulated under cover of the
letter cited. At the outset, we would like to slate that the members of
the Staff Side, Who were associated with the discussions, gained an
impression that the Pension Department would not like to implement the
recommendation of the 7th CPC concerning Option No.1 provided to the
pensioners in determination or the revised pension. As has been pointed
out by us during the discussions on 6t October, the Government has
accepted the said recommendation with a rider of its feasibility of
implementation. The attempt, therefore, must be to explore the and means
of implementing the said recommendation, which benefits a large number
of retired personnel, especially those retired prior to 1996. It is,
therefore. highly doubtful how any alternate proposal in replacement of
the accepted recommendation would be tenable.
We have
the matter considered by various Pensioners Associations as also the
Federations of the Serving employees. We enumerate here under the feed
back we have received:
Even according to the exercise
carried out by the Pension department, only in of the cases, the service
Books are reported to have been available. Conversely it means that in
82% of the cases the records are available to operationalize Option
No.1. Besides, we find that on the basis of a random scrutiny that only
40% (Percentage varies from Department to Department depending upon the
then prevailing career prospects) generally will opt to have pension
fixation under the provisions of option No.I. It Will work out to hardly
7% of the cases, where Service Books might not be available. As has
been pointed out in the last meeting Gradation/Seniority list is
maintained for each Cadre by the Concerned Department, where the date of
promotion to the cadre inter alia is indicated. The said gradation list
will reveal many other details viz the date or birth, dale of entry
into government service, date of promotion to the cadre, whether
eligible for next promotion, due or superannuation etc. This apart there
are other documents maintained by the Department, which will come in
handy for verification of the clam, viz, the pay bills. Establishment
files containing promotion orders etc. In other words it is possible to
the claim of my individual pensioner or family and take appropriate
decision. In other words, there is no infeasibility question at all. It
was also pointed out by many organisations that retention period of
Service Books in all major Departments or the Government of India is 5
years after the death of the Pensioner/Family Pensioner and not 3 years
after retirement as indicated by the Official side at the meeting. This
apart, it may also he noted that the option has to be exercised by the
concerned individual pensioner and he has to make a formal application
to the concerned authorities. He is bound to substantiate his claim with
documentary proof, whatever that is available with him.
As
was pointed out by some of us in the last meeting, the implementation
of an accepted recommendation on the specious plea of infeasibility will
pave way for plethora of litigation. Apart from the administrative
difficulties, the Pension Department would be saddled With if such
litigation arise, it would be sad and cruel on the part of the
Government to compel the pensioners to bear huge financial burden to
pursue their case before the courts of law.
In view of
this the Staff side is of the firm view that the Government issue orders
for implementation of Option No.I as there is no room for stating that
recommendation is impossible to be implemented for those who are
benefited by the said option.
We are aware that certain
anomalies are bound to arise on implementation of option No.I.
Anomalies have arisen in the past too. What is needed is to examine
those anomalies and ensure that those are genuinely addressed.
It
may be noted that even under the present dispensation, no two
Government servants are entitled for the same pension despite they being
retired on from the same grade on the same day. The promotion in lower
cadres especially Group B, C and D had been and between a decade back in
many departments and continues to be the situation in certain
organisations or the Government of India. The vacancy based promotion
system, one must admit, operates in a fortuitous manner. For no fault of
the individual employee, he/she may retire without getting a whereas
his colleague due to sheer luck might get the promotion at the fag end
of the career.
The case of those employees retired
prior to the advent of ACP or MACP is really pathetic. That had to
remain in certain departments in the same cadres for years together.
They are in receipt of a paltry amount of pension though there is
nothing distinguishable in their service careers for such deprivation.
To deny them the benefit provided by the 7th CPC on the specious plea
that the relevant records are not available with the Government may not
only be unreasonable but also will not stand the test of judicial
scrutiny.
As have stated in the meeting, the
alternative suggestion put forth by the official side is a welcome
feature , for it might be step in the right direction to remove the
anomaly pointed out by the official side when Option No-I is implemented
and will benefit those pensioners who got their promotion the end of
their career. It is also likely to bring about certain extent of parity,
if not full, between the old and the pensioners. However it cannot be
in replacement of the recommendation in respect or Option No.1 made by
the 7th CPC. The alternate suggestion of the Pension Department may be
offered as another option to the pensioners who are not benefited either
by Option No.1 or 2 recommended by the 7th CPC. Such an option will
eliminate to a great extent the anomalies that might arise from the
implementation of option No.1.
In fine, we request that:
The Pensioners/family pensioners may be allowed to choose any one of the following three options;
(a) 2.57 time of the pension if that is beneficial.
(b) Option No.1. Recommended by the 7th CPC, if that is beneficial for them.
(c) To determine the Pension on the basis of the suggestion placed by the Pension Department on
6.10.2016
i.e. extension of the benefit of pension determination recommended by
the 5th CPC (viz. arriving at notional pay in the 7th CPC by applying
formula for pay revision for serving employees in each Pay Commission
and consequent pension fixation) to all pre 2016 Pensioners/family pensioners, if that becomes beneficial to them.
Yours Faithfully,
sd/-
(Shiva Gopal Mishra)
Secretary
Source: http://ncjcmstaffside.com/
