Letter dtd12.04.2016 to the DAP

To
​The Director of Accounts (Postal)

​& Pension Disbursing Authority

​Manoranjan Complex – Near) Nampally Rly.Stn.

​Hyderabad 500 001

Dear Sirs/Madam,

​​​Sub:- Revision of Pension of Pre-2006 Pensioners under the provisions 

                                  of CCS (RP) Rules 2008 – Fitment Tables vide OM dated 30-08-

                                  2008 – Regarding. 

            ​​      Ref:- Pen-Min. OM No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A) Dated the 06-04-2016

​​​​​​​-o-​​

A copy of the O.M. referred to above is enclosed for ready reference.

Though the subject matter of the OM deals with the delinking of 33 years of qualifying service, there are other issues of ERNAKULAM CAT / High Court Judgements on the principles of Notional Fixation of Pay with reference to Fitment Tables prescribed vide Min. Fin. OM dated 30-08-2008.  The following operations of existing Drop-in Pension and Family Pension of Pensioners may kindly be gauged against and redressed simultaneously.

1. Allowing 50 % of LPD for all the Pre 2006 Pensioners also as per Para 6 of the OM dated 6.4.2016.  The concept of Average Emoluments may be applicable only for a few pensioners who happen to officiate in a higher post before retirement and and gets reverted/demoted on the last day of retirement. Please avert drop in pension allowed so far.   

2. Review and Revise the Pension of all the Pre-1996 Pensioners with reference to O.M. dated 28.01.2013 using the present Fitment Tables of 6th CPC vide paraibid. And also Family Pensions on the Revised consolidated Pay in Pay Band with Grade Pay against last served post of the Pensioner.

3. All the Pensioners having 10 years of qualifying service before superannuation and 20 years of service before retirement are allowed vide para 6 ibid to get revised monthly pension at the rate of 50% of the Last Pay Drawn in the last vacated post. All such cases may be reviewed and arrears paid early. 

4. Revised PPOs may also be issued accordingly for the Information of Pensioners, Family Pensioners and their dependants.

5. The Revision once being made now should have a bearing for the next smooth revision due from 1.1.2016 when implemented with the accepted recommendations of the 7th CPC. 

Thanking you, With Regards,

Hyderabad​​​​​​​​​Yours sincerely,

Dt. 12.04.2016.

No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A)

Government of India

Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions

Department of Pension & Pensioners' Welfare , 3rd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan

Khan Market, New Delhi-ll0 003.

Dated the 06 th April, 2016

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Sub:- Revision of pension of pre-2006 pensioners - delinking of revised pension from qualifying service of 33 years.

The undersigned is directed to say that as per Para 4.2 of this Department's OM of even number dated 1.9.2008 relating to revision of pension of pre-2006 pensioners w.e.f 1.1.2006, the revised pension w.e.f. 1.1.2006, in no case, shall be lower than 50% of the sum of the minimum of pay in the pay band and the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. A clarification was issued vide DoP&PW OM of even number dated 3.10.2008 that the pension calculated at 50% of the minimum of pay in the pay band plus grade pay would be calculated at the minimum of the pay in the pay band (irrespective of the pre-revised scale of pay) plus the grade pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale.

2. Several petitions were filed in the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi inter alia claiming that the revised pension of the pre-2006 pensioners should not be less than 50% of the minimum of the pay band + grade pay,corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which pensioner had retired, as arrived at with reference to the fitment tables annexed to Ministry of Finance, Department ofExpenditure OM No. 1I112008-IC dated 30 th August, 2008. Hon'ble CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi vide its common order dated 1.11.2011 in OA No.655/2010 and three other connected OAs directed to re-fix the pension of all pre-2006 retirees w.e.f. 1.1.2006 based on the Resolution dated 29.8.2008 of the Department of Pension & Pensioners' Welfare and in the light of the observations of Hon'ble CAT in that order.

3. Orders were issued vide this Department's OM of even number dated 28.1.2013 for stepping up of pension of pre-2006 pensioners w.e.f. 24.9.2012 to 50% of the minimum of pay in the pay band and grade pay corresponding to pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner retired. Para 5 of this OM provides that in case the consolidated pension/family pension calculated as per para 4.1 of O.M. No.38/37/08-P&PW (A) dated 1.9.2008 is higher than the pension/family pension calculated in the manner indicated in the O.M. dated 28.1.2013, the same (higher consolidated pension/family pension) will continue to be treated as basic pension/family pension.

4. Subsequently, in compliance of the order dated 1.11.2011 of the Hon'ble CAT, Principal Bench in OA No. 655/2010, order dated 29.4.2013 of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP (C) No. 1535/2012 and order dated 17.3.2015 of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 36148/2013, order were issued vide this Department's OM of even number dated 30.7.2015 that the pension/family pension of all pre – 2006 pensioners/family pensioners may be revised in accordance with this Department's O.M. No.38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 28.1.2013 with effect from 1.1.2006 instead of 24.9.2012.

5. In accordance with the order issued in implementation of the recommendation of the 6th CPC, the pension of Government servants retired/retiring on or after 1.1.2006 hasbeen delinked from qualifying service of 33 years. In OA No.715/2012 filed by Shri. M.O. Inasu, a pre-2006 pensioner, Hon'ble CAT, Emakulam Bench, vide its order dated16.8.2013 directed that the revised pension w.e.f. 1.1.2006 under para 4.2 of OM dated 1.9.2008 would not be reduced based on the qualifying service of less than 33 years. The appeals filed by Department of Revenue in the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala and in the Hon'ble Supreme Court have also been dismissed. Similar orders have been passed by Hon'bleCAT / High Court in several other cases also.

6. The matter has been examined in consultation with the Ministry of Finance (Department of Expenditure). It has now- been decided that the revised consolidated pension of pre-2006 pensioners shall not be lower than 50% of the minimum of the pay in the Pay Band and the grade pay (wherever applicable) corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale as per fitment table without pro-rata reduction of pension even if they had qualifying service of less than 33 years at the time of retirement. Accordingly, Para 5 of this Department's OM of even number dated 28.1.2013 would stand deleted. Thearrears of revised pension would be payable with effect from 1.1.2006.

7. 'Ministry of Agriculture, etc. are requested to bring the contents of these orders to the notice of Controller of Accounts/ Pay and Accounts Officers and Attached andSubordinate Offices under them for revising the pension of all those pre – 2006 pensioners who had rendered less than 33 years of qualifying service at the time of retirement in the manner as indicated above on top priority. Revised Pension Payment Orders in all these cases may also be issued immediately.

8. All pension disbursing offices / banks are also advised to prominently display these orders on their notice boards for the benefit of pensioners.

9. This issues with the approval of Ministry of Finance, Deptt. of Expenditure vide ID Note No. 2(9)/EV/2015, dated 15.3.2016

10. Hindi version will follow.

I.

,..""t

(S~

Deputy Secretary to the Government of India

To

1. All MinistrieslDepartments of Government of India. (as per standard mailing list).

2. All SCOV A Members

3. All identified Pensioners Association

Copy to (i) NIC Cell for uploading on the website of the Department.

(ii) AD (OL), DoPPW for Hindi Version

BPS Monthlong magazine for March 2016

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BharatPensionersSamaj/~3/xinL_4RiWC8/bharat-pensioner-monthly-magazine-march.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email

Minutes of the periodical meeting of JCM National Council held with the Secretary Pension Department on10.03.2016

The periodical meeting of  JCM National Council,  with the Secretary Pension was held on 10.3.2016 at the Conference hall of the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Sardar Patel Bhawan, New Delhi today i.e. 10.3.2016.  On behalf of the Staff Side the following representatives were present:

                

Com. Shiv Gopal Misra, Com.Guman Singh, Com. K.K.N. Kutty, Com. M.S. Raja and Com. Srikumar. 

The official side had the representatives from the Department of Pension, Personnel, Railways, Defence, Expenditure, health, Posts and Telecom. The meeting was presided over by the Secretary Pension.

After the initial comments from the Secretary Pension and the Secretary Staff Side, the items which had been subjected to discussion in the earlier meeting and the action taken statement thereon were taken up. The following were the issues that came up for discussion in the Action Taken Statement.

1.       Abnormal delay in the issue of revised PPO to pre 2006 retirees pensioners/family pensioners.  (as per the minutes of the JCM held on 26.02.20125). 

The following information was given at the meeting:

Ministry/Deptt.         Total cases.         Revised authority issued. PPOs yet to be revised.

Civil Ministries           431,172                 425599.                                                 5573

Railways:                     984260                  984260                                                  nil

Posts.                            159675                  159675                                                  nil

Telecom.                      53126                    52284                                                    272

2.       Cashless treatment to CGHS beneficiaries by empanelled private hospitals. The health Ministry officials stated that since the budgetary provisions are made separately for each Ministry it was not possible to ensure cashless treatment to serving employees.  The concerned Department or Ministry has to enter into agreement with the hospitals. 

3.       Finalisation of Family pension cases within a specified period.

It was stated by the official side that the instructions have already been issued.  Regarding the complaint from the M.P. Circle of the Postal Department, the matter has been taken up with the concerned authorities on 6.2.2015.  The representative of the Postal Department said that the complaint has been attended to and the matter has been settled. 

Agenda Items for the meeting:

1.       Grant of Gratuity on retirement/death of a Central Govt. NPS subscriber. The representatives of the Pension department said that the Department of Expenditure has given their concurrence for the grant of Gratuity for the NPS subscribers on 8.1.2016.  The requisite amendment to the rules, they added were being processed and the consultation with the Law Ministry and the Labour Ministry have already been made.  They said that they would expedite the issuance of orders in the matter.   

2.       Extension of the benefits of full pension to pre-2006 pensioners who had completed more than 20 years of service but less than 33 years.   The Staff side said that despite series of judgements in favour of the pensioners, the Government has not yet issued the orders.  Recently the Nagpur Tribunal has issued a contempt notice to the Government.  They also alleged that the pensioners are being dragged to litigation.  The Representatives of the Pension Department informed that the Department of Expenditure had not agreed to extend the benefit generally to all which has resulted in filing appeal.  The representative of the Department of Expenditure stated that in the light of the view of the Department of legal affairs, the matter would be re-examined.  

3.       Delay in the finalisation of Family pension cases by the PCDA (Pension) Allahabad.  In response to the complaint the representative of the  Defence Ministry informed that only in a few cases, the finalisation has been delayed due to the documentation difficulties.  They assured to sort out the matter.

4.       Grant of modified parity to all those who retired prior to 1.1.2006 with reference to the upgraded post.  The Staff Side stated that the Department of Pension has taken a very narrow view of the matter and the cases are dragged to the courts of law.  The very spirit of the recommendation of the 5^th CPC to bring about atleast modified parity if not full parity has not been appreciated by the Govt.  The issue was discussed at length.  The official side pointed out the decisions of the Court in favour of the position taken by the Government in the case of K.S. Krishnaswany in CANO. 3174/3006, which has been upheld by the Honourable Gujarat High Court.  In reply the Staff Side pointed out that the said decisions quoted by the official side had come about due to the phrase employed while issuing the original order viz. corresponding replacement scale.  After some discussions, the Chairman agreed to look into the matter afresh and revisit the order of the Department of Pension in the matter. 

5.       The meeting also discussed the difficulties of Pensioners during the hearing of Pension Adalats.  The Staff Side pointed out the need to engage some knowledgeable person to assistant the complainants.  The official side said that there had been no prohibition in the matter.  The Petitioners are entitled to seek the assistance of another pensioner in presenting his case.  If specific complaint of denial of this facility is brought to their notice, the Pension Department  will issue the necessary instruction in the matter.  

The meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair

Recovery of wrongful / excess payments made to Government servants

F.No. 18/03/2015-Estt. (Pay-I)

Government of India

Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions

Department of Personnel & Training

New Delhi, the 2nd March, 2016

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Sub: Recovery of wrongful / excess payments made to Government servants.

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department’s OM No.18/26/2011-Estt (Pay-I) dated 6th February, 2014 wherein certain instructions have been issued to deal with the issue of recovery of wrongful / excess payments made to Government servants in view of the law declared by Courts, particularly, in the case of Chandi Prasad Uniyal And Ors. vs. State of Uttarakhand And ors., 2012 AIR SCW 4 742, (2012) 8 SCC 417. Para 3(iv) of the OM inter-alia provides that recovery should be made in all cases of overpayment barring few exceptions of extreme hardships.

2. The issue has subsequently come up for consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab & Ors vs Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc in CA No.1152 7 of 2014 (Arising out of SLP(C) No.11684 of 2012) wherein Hon’ble Court on 18.12.2014 decided a bunch of cases in which monetary benefits were given to employees in excess of their entitlement due to unintentional mistakes committed by the concerned competent authorities, in determining the emoluments payable to them, and the employees were not guilty of furnishing any incorrect information / misrepresentation fraud, which had led the concerned competent authorities to commit the mistake of making the higher payment to the employees. The employees were as innocent as their employers in the wrongfiil determination of their inflated emoluments. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in its judgment dated 18th December, 2014 ibid has, inter-alia, observed as under:

“7. Having examined a number of judgments rendered by this Court, we are of the view, that orders passed by the employer seeking recovery of monetary benefits wrongly extended to employees, can only be interfered with, in cases where such recovery would result in a hardship of a nature, which would far outweigh, the equitable balance of the employer’s right to recover. In other words, interference would be called for, only in such cases where, it would be iniquitous to recover the payment made. In order to ascertain the parameters of the above consideration, and the test to be applied, reference needs to be made to situations when this Court exempted employees from such recovery, even in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. Repeated exercise of such power, “for doing complete justice in any cause would establish that the recovery being effected was iniquitous, and therefore, arbitrary. And accordingly, the interference at the hands of this Court."

“10. In view of the afore-stated constitutional mandate, equity and good conscience, in the matter of livelihood of the people of this country, has to be the basis of all governmental actions. An action of the State, ordering a recovery from an employee, would be in order, so long as it is not rendered iniquitous to the extent, that the action of recovery would be more unfair, more wrongful, more improper, and more unwarranted, than the corresponding right of the employer, to recover the amount. Or in other words, till such time as the recovery would have a harsh and arbitrary effect on the employee, it would be permissible in law. Orders passed in given situations repeatedly, even in exercise of the power vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, will disclose the parameters of the realm of an action of recovery (of an excess amount paid to an employee) which would breach the obligations of the State, to citizens of this country, and render the action arbitrary, and therefore, violative of the mandate contained in Article 14 of the Constitution of India." 

3. The issue that was required to be adjudicated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court was whether all the private respondents, against whom an order-of recovery (of the excess amount) has been made, should be exempted in law, from the reimbursement of the same to the employer. For the applicability of the instant order, and the conclusions recorded by them thereinafter, the ingredients depicted in paras 2& 3 of the judgment are essentially indispensable. 

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while observing that it is not possible to postulate all situations of hardship which would govern employees on the issue of recovery, where payments have mistakenly been made by the employer, in excess of their entitlement has summarized the following few situations, wherein recoveries by the employers would be impermissible in law:-

(i) Recovery from employees belonging to Class-III and Class-IV service (or Group 'C' and Group 'D' service).

(ii) Recovery from retired employees, or employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery.

(iii) Recovery from employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued.

(iv) Recovery in cases where an employee has wrongfully been required to discharge duties of a higher post, and has been paid accordingly, even though he should have rightfully been required to work against an inferior post.

(v) In any other case, where the Court arrives at the conclusion, that recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of the employer's right to recover.

5. The matter has, consequently, been examined in consultation with the Department of Expenditure and the Department of Legal Affairs. The Ministries / Departments are advised to deal with the issue of wrongful / excess payments made to Government servants in accordance with above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in CA No.11527 of 2014 (arising out of SLP (C) No.11684 of 2012) in State of Punjab and others etc vs Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc. However, wherever the waiver of recovery in the above-mentioned situations is considered, the same may be allowed with the express approval of Department of Expenditure in terms of this Department's OM No.18/26/2011-Estt (Pay-I) dated 6th February, 2014. 

6. In so far as persons serving in the Indian Audit and Accounts Department are concerned, these orders are issued with the concurrence of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

7. Hindi version will follow.

sd/-

(A.K. Jain)

Deputy Secretary to the Government of India

NEWS Flash: PENSIONERS WIN ANOTHER BATTLE

---

PENSIONERS WIN ANOTHER BATTLE Contempt Petition - Government agrees to implement within one month the judgement of the CAT for full Pension to Pre 2006 Pensioners after 10/ 20 years of Service  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B9sR0hMxnBjbamNTSTJzRlN6SzQ/view?usp=sharing