WITH BOUNTIFUL BLESSINGS FROM LORD BALAJI, THIS BLOG CARRIES NEWS THAT CONCERNS CLASS 1 PENSIONERS OF LIC. WE ADD A LITTLE PEPPER , A LITTLE MINT OR MIRCHI HERE AND THERE TO HELP US REJUVENATE , RECONCILE AND RELAX, AND LEARN TO LIVE IN PEACE

ya Evam Vedha

SATYAMEVA JAYATHE NAA ANRUTHAM

Welcome

CLICK ABOVE
AND REVEL IN
PEACEFUL BLISS

Light A Candle.

Light A Candle.

TIME IN CHENNAI

Time in Chennai:

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

G N Sridharan informs.

Day’s happening in Delhi HC

We sent a couple of SMS to a few and the detailed account follows as below.
Our case was listed in both Court No 6 and a Special Court. As soon as the Bench sat in the morning at 10.30 AM, our Advocate Shri Rajiv Garg and a senior counsel of one other petitioner mentioned this to Bench and sought indication as to when our case would be heard during the day. This was necessary since it was expected that a reconstituted Bench may be hearing our case as the companion judge J Sunita Gupta is reportedly retiring very shortly. Further the general view among counsels was that hearing on our matters will have to be taken up on a day-to-day basis over a short span, once a final date is fixed.
In the entire morning session and also more than 1 and ½ hours after lunch break, only other listed cases were taken up by J Sanjiv Khanna and a new companion Judge.  At close to 3 45 PM, the existing Bench retired and the erstwhile Bench hearing our case took up the case, obviously and as expected, to adjourn the matter to 8th Dec 2016.
It is therefore clear that a newly constituted bench (likely J Khanna and a new companion Judge) will hear the cases on and from 8th Dec 2016. I personally expect that 8th Dec 2016 will only a formal hearing will take place.  I am not ruling out a further adjournment beyond X-mas holidays.   

We are in touch with our advocates and are following up the matter.

With Greetings
GN Sridharan
Gen Secy Fed of Retd LIC Class I Officers Assns
Camp: New Delhi

PS: Please await (separately) details of the EC Meeting held at Thrissur on 28th instant (which will take a few days on my return to Chennai). 

Saturday, November 19, 2016

Reserve Bank of India /2016-17/140

RBI/2016-17/140
DPSS.CO.PD.No.1280/02.14.003/2016-17
November 18, 2016
The Chairman and Managing Director / Chief Executive Officers
All Scheduled Commercial Banks including RRBs / Urban Co-operative Banks /
State Co-operative Banks / District Central Co-operative Banks /
All Card Network Providers
Dear Madam / Sir,
Cash Withdrawal at Point-of-Sale (POS) - Withdrawal limits and customer fee/charges - Relaxation
A reference is invited to our circulars DPSS.CO.PD.No.147/02.14.003/2009-10 dated July 22, 2009, DPSS.CO.PD.No.563/02.14.003/2013-14 dated September 5, 2013 and DPSS.CO.PD.No.449/02.14.003/2015-16 dated August 27, 2015 on cash withdrawal at Point of Sale (POS) enabled for all debit cards/open loop prepaid cards issued by banks with specified per day value limits for different locations.
2. Following the withdrawal of legal tender characteristics of existing ₹ 500/- and ₹ 1000/- Bank Notes (Specified Bank Notes – SBN), the Reserve Bank of India had advised banks, vide circular DPSS.CO.PD.No.1240/02.10.004/2016-2017 dated November 14, 2016, to waive levy of ATM charges for all transactions by savings bank customers done at all ATMs, from November 10, 2016 till December 30, 2016, subject to review.
3. As another customer-centric measure, it has been decided that (i) the limit for cash withdrawal at POS (for debit cards and open system prepaid cards issued by banks in India) has been made uniform at ₹ 2000/- per day across all centres (Tier I to VI) for all merchant establishments enabled for this facility and (ii) customer charges, if any, shall not be levied on all such transactions.
4. The above shall come into effect from the date of this circular and shall be applicable till December 30, 2016, subject to review.
5. All other extant instructions in this regard shall remain unchanged.
6. The directive is issued under Section 10(2) read with Section 18 of Payment and Settlement Systems Act 2007, (Act 51 of 2007).
Yours faithfully
(Nanda S Dave)
General Manager

War on Black Money : An Interview with S.Gurumurthy (Economist)

Friday, November 18, 2016

A COMMUNICATION FROM G N SRIDHARAN.

A communication from 

G N SRIDHARAN.

ON THE RECENT HAPPENINGS. 


Dear shri Sury, 

your mails one re: shri Asthana's post on Mr Sreenivasamurthy and the other on Delhi HC order of 11/11.

Kindly bear with me for having delayed my response. 

While I felt that shri KMLA's post was a trifle harsh in language I should be honest in stating that I am in full agreement with the message that he has sought to convey Viz. Mr. murthy is anxious to see that LIC pensioners recognise him as the only leader working for their good. His anxiety is understandable and it is the natural for those who choose themselves as leaders. Mr. murthy broke away from our organisation as he was not happy that we were pursuing the issue of DR anomaly affecting the aged pre 97 lot and he would not settle for anything other than up gradation for all and nothing else. He was not receptive to our plea that upgradation was not thought of when we approached Delhi HC in late 2006 and our petition was numbered in early 2007.His hyper activity would appear to have had its own share of the 11/11 debacle. 

I fail to understand why he should be worried on what those who were hit by the denial of 100% DR neutralisation get or do not get. 

if he succeeds in getting at least a BIT more than what the established three representative organisations of LIC pensioners have been striving for, Mr. Murthy will deserve appreciation from all quarters. 

Enough on this for now.


As for Delhi HC order we surely had invited it.


 It should however be noted that some misconceptions are in the background of the negative verdict that has been handed down.

 Personally I feel  it would be only a futile exercise if we agitate by filing review, ,appeal etc.which  can also jeopardise the chances of achieving something on other issues pending before the court.

Our federation's Executive committee will decide on further steps when it meets this month end.

-regds 

GNSridharan

Friday, November 11, 2016

A note on Delhi HC Order.

  Delhi High court order of date

 We have just been informed that orders were pronounced by Justice Khanna of Delhi HC holding that the supreme court order on payment of 40% IR has been complied with by LIC.


It is indeed a disappointing situation for the pensioners. Some of us knowing the trend of thinking of judiciary on such matters have always cautioned against any over reliance on judiciary to solve all our problems .

This interim pronouncement on an issue blown out of proportion by self seeking 'Leaders' will unfortunately have repercussions on other issues still to be gone into by the High court. 

It is distressing one of such leaders has already started talking of going to supreme court. 


    We appeal to all members to re​m​ember that only on our initiative that the  IR arose and we are as competant as others it not more than others in  tackling such depressing situations, after we receive the copy of the order shortly. 


Meantime we hope that our members will not get unduly worried as we have other major issues to be solved.

 G.N. SRIDHARAN​
> ​​

ORDER DELHI HIGH COURT : SC ORDER HAS BEEN COMPLIED WITH BY LIC.

DELHI HIGH COURT HOLDS 

THAT THE SUPREME COURT ORDER HAS BEEN COMPLIED WITH BY LIC. 




AWAIT DETAILED CIRCULAR LATE IN THE EVENING.


FROM G.N.SRIDHARAN.

Thursday, November 10, 2016

DELHI HIGH COURT 11. 11.2016

11.11.2016 J-1 FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT (APPLT. JURISDICTION) COURT NO.6 

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA AT 2.15 P.M.

1. W.P.(C) 9440/2016 LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN VS. KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASTHANA ASHOK PANIGRAHI, SURAJIT & ORS. BHADURI, KUMAR GAURAV

2. W.P.(C) 9441/2016 KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASTHANA & ORS KUMAR GAURAV VS. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN INDIA & ANR. ASHOK PANIGRAHI,SURAJIT BHADURI

3. W.P.(C) 9442/2016 LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN & ORS.VS. KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASHOK PANIGRAHI, SURAJIT ASTHANA & ANR. BHADURI, KUMAR GAURAV

4. W.P.(C) 184/2007 FEDERATION OF RETIRED LIC CLASS I TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN OFFICER VS. UOI & ORS. ASHOK PANIGRAHI, SURAJIT BHADURI, ABHA MALHOTRA

5. W.P.(C) 3983/2016 MADAN LAL GANDHI AND ORS RENUKA SAHU, ABHA MALHOTRA VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN ASHOK PANIGRAHI, SURAJIT BHADURI

6. W.P.(C) 3984/2016 KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASTHANA KUMAR GOURAV, TUSHAR MEHTA, VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS DAYAN KRISHNAN, ASHOK PANIGRAHI SURAJIT BHADURI

7. W.P.(C) 4894/2016 RETIRED LIC CLASS I OFFICERS GOURAB BANERJI, SAURAV AGRAWAL ASSOCIATION HYDERABAD ASHISH TIWARI, M.SREENIVAS VS LIFE INSURANCE CORP. OF MURTHY, TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN INDIA AND ANR. KRISHNAN, ASHOK PANIGRAHI SURAJIT BHADURI, VIVEK GOYAL

8. W.P.(C) 5868/2016 ALL INDIA INSURANCE PENSIONERS NAG MOHAN DASS, SOM DUTT SHARMA ASSOCIATION & ORS TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ASHOK PANIGRAHI,SURAJIT BHADURI DEV. P. BHARDWAJ


9. W.P.(C) 5903/2016 ALL INDIA RETIRED INSURANCE NIDHESH GUPTA, R.K.SINGH, B.N. EMPLOYEES FEDERATION DUBEY, TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN VS LIFE INSURANCE CORP. OF KRISHNAN, ASHOK PANIGRAHI INDIA & ANR. SURAJIT BHADURI

DELHI HIGH COURT CAUSE LIST

11.11.2016 J-1 FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT (APPLT. JURISDICTION) COURT NO.6 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SUNITA GUPTA AT 2.15 P.M.

1. W.P.(C) 9440/2016 LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN VS. KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASTHANA ASHOK PANIGRAHI, SURAJIT & ORS. BHADURI, KUMAR GAURAV

2. W.P.(C) 9441/2016 KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASTHANA & ORS KUMAR GAURAV VS. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN INDIA & ANR. ASHOK PANIGRAHI,SURAJIT BHADURI

3. W.P.(C) 9442/2016 LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN & ORS.VS. KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASHOK PANIGRAHI, SURAJIT ASTHANA & ANR. BHADURI, KUMAR GAURAV

4. W.P.(C) 184/2007 FEDERATION OF RETIRED LIC CLASS I OFFICER VS. UOI & ORS. ASHOK PANIGRAHI, SURAJIT BHADURI, ABHA MALHOTRA 
TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN 

5. W.P.(C) 3983/2016 MADAN LAL GANDHI AND ORS RENUKA SAHU, ABHA MALHOTRA VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN ASHOK PANIGRAHI, SURAJIT BHADURI

6. W.P.(C) 3984/2016 KRISHNA MURARI LAL ASTHANA KUMAR GOURAV, TUSHAR MEHTA, VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS DAYAN KRISHNAN, ASHOK PANIGRAHI SURAJIT BHADURI

7. W.P.(C) 4894/2016 RETIRED LIC CLASS I OFFICERS GOURAB BANERJI, SAURAV AGRAWAL ASSOCIATION HYDERABAD ASHISH TIWARI, M.SREENIVAS VS LIFE INSURANCE CORP. OF MURTHY, TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN INDIA AND ANR. KRISHNAN, ASHOK PANIGRAHI SURAJIT BHADURI, VIVEK GOYAL

8. W.P.(C) 5868/2016 ALL INDIA INSURANCE PENSIONERS NAG MOHAN DASS, SOM DUTT SHARMA ASSOCIATION & ORS TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN KRISHNAN VS. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ASHOK PANIGRAHI,SURAJIT BHADURI DEV. P. BHARDWAJ


9. W.P.(C) 5903/2016 ALL INDIA RETIRED INSURANCE NIDHESH GUPTA, R.K.SINGH, B.N. EMPLOYEES FEDERATION DUBEY, TUSHAR MEHTA, DAYAN VS LIFE INSURANCE CORP. OF KRISHNAN, ASHOK PANIGRAHI INDIA & ANR. SURAJIT BHADURI

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

LIVE PROGRAMME


TODAY U AND I HAVE NO OTHER GO EXCEPT TO SIT AT HOME AND WATCH THE TV. RELAX AND ENJOY THE DANCE PROGRAMME. 
LIVE

Monday, November 7, 2016

Pension matters.




Pension matters

One view based on long experience is that nothing dramatic may happen, through judiciary or otherwise, on our pending genuine problems unless and until parallel situations affecting Bank pensioners are finally dealt with by IBA/GOI, .one way or the other. We are therefore naturally keeping in touch with friends in the banking sector who are fighting for justice to their pensioners. The one identical problem is the denial of 100% neutralization on DR, the only difference being the date on which the discrimination arose. 

Also, the issue affecting the pensioners of SBI alone calls for our close watch. In SBI those who retired after the seventh bipartite settlement was effected still receive their pensions based on the earlier 6th bipartite settlement. This is something similar to the case of retired of the period 1/8/92 to 1/4/93 for whom the judiciary has already handed down a verdict favourable to the pensioners in MC Jain's case. The writ petitions both by a group of individuals and the Assn. are coming up in Delhi HC (before the same bench hearing our cases)  on 8/11/ 2016. Meantime it is learnt that very recently by a division bench of the Delhi HC itself has allowed an individual's writ on the very same matter (Jaipuriar's case) and a review petition by SBI management stands dismissed. Further a single judge of the Madras HC (Madurai bench) relying on an earlier Division bench judgement of the same high court has clearly held that when once an issue common to a group is decided on an individual's petition the benefit of the same should be extended to all similarly placed persons without driving them to file several cases separately.

We are more than worried in view of the fact 23 years had gone by and a rough estimate could be half the affected pensioners are no more to receive their legitimate dues. With such repeated judicial pronouncements, pursuing the matter once again with the new Chairman in charge of LIC may help us. We shall be doing it once our EC meeting on 28/11 and the Delhi HC hearing on 30/11 are over. 

Coming back to our pension discrimination matter, the optimistic view is that a final verdict in our favour will set the bureaucracy in motion towards a permanent solution of the nagging problem. 

Meantime we appeal to all our members to understand that the long writings in circulation have no worthwhile value.

With Greetings,

GN Sridharan 
Gen. Secretary
Federation of Retd.LIC class1 officers' Assns