Dk 24 dated 23.5.2020 from Federation.

FEDERATION OF RETIRED LIC CLASS I OFFICERS' ASSOCIATIONS          

President :    N.P. Bali 705, Sur, Veena Saaz, Thakur Complex, Kandivali (East), Mumbai - 400 101 Mob : 9820324213 Email Id - npbali@hotmail.com

General Secretary :    D Krishnan No.6/1, Sreshta Riverside Apartments, Wood Creek Road, Nandambakkam, Chennai - 600089 Tel : 9176635967 / 044 42850049. Email Id - dkrishnan1@gmail.com

E circular No.DK/24                                        23-05-2020

Friends,         

1.  More Disasters in the List .....

2.   United Bank DR case

We seem to be passing from one catastrophe to another, as a Nation.  The recent havoc caused by the cyclone Amphan, in West Bengal and Odisha have added to our cup of woes, which was already overflowing with the Covid 19,  Pandemic, not abating in the least.

The response from our Associations to the call for liberal donations to PM CARE Fund has been pretty encouraging indeed. We are yet to get information from all Associations, as of now. But from what we have known, the inputs are quite promising. Ernakulam has collected 2 lakhs, Chennai 50,000, Odisha 1 lakh, Trivandrum 1 lakh, Kolkata around 2 lakhs, Bengaluru over 1 lakh. These amounts are either already transferred in some cases, or are being transferred to the Federation Account shortly.

Trivandrum has contributed to the State Relief Fund of the CM, an amount of 1.81 lakhs and Odisha too has made a significant contribution to the state CM's Relief Fund. These are of course in addition to the above figures quoted for the PM CARE Fund.

There is now a suggestion from some quarters that from out of these collections already made, whether the Federation could remit a part of it to the Relief Funds of West Bengal and Odisha, towards the Disaster caused by cyclone Amphan, without making a fresh call for collections towards these. We are yet to take a call on this as of now.

In another matter, the Curative Petition for 100% DR for retirees of United Bank of India, in the SC, has again fallen through, as it happened in their earlier Appeal in the SC. Just to recap on their historical path, I am reproducing what Sri M. Arunachalam says on this: 

1.  The united bank case (Kolkata) was strongly allowed in Kolkota HC in 2017 by Single Judge and DB - wholly on DR as ours.

 

2.  Similar case in Madras HC was more strongly allowed by Single Judge, but was reversed by Division Bench on certain grounds 

 

3.  Both cases were connected.

 

4.  These cases were decided (rejected) more on  technical grounds than on merits of equity, because the DR formula followed the Award with workmen on  acceptance and agreement by both sides, and after availing the Award benefits, workmen cannot single out one aspect alone and agitate thereon. This was in mid-2018.

 

5.  Our original Petition was on DR and we modified that to add updation; the case was being heard in DHC. 

 

6.  It is interesting to note that the SC Judgement  was not cited at all by any advocate of LIC although the matter was one and the same at least on DR.

 

7.  On Kolkata case, there was review petition on SC verdict, which went against them. I think Madras case also had a review for negative order. The curative petition of Kolkota met with the same fate.

 

8.   It is wrong, both,  time and strategy wise, for two reasons.

 

9.   While updation was on its way (only numbers were to be discussed) Corona disrupted. It is a technical pause.

 

10.              Even if updation was not to come, by a remote chance, parity in DR was favoring acceptance.

 

11.              This is one reason, we wait to press for our SLP, also as something which is getting delayed will have to be decided and it is a matter of time. I do not think government will disturb the mood of bank men.

 

12.               If you have time, read the SC Judgement and Curative Order of 15th instant, enclosed.

13.              Bank retirees are not getting even the faulty DR (On DHC Verdict) that is paid to LIC retirees.

 

14.               IBA while announcing half- yearly DR rate, have also mentioned once that the DR rates are ad hoc till further decision. It is a clear indication that the rates are bound to be redefined.

 

15.               While that be the case, the smart Kolkata bank  retirees, could have been patient, a bit more.

16.              That is the reason that the retirees federation had found fault with the petitioners expressed similar opinion as  in 15 above
 

So, rushing to the SC for the Case being Heard, does not necessarily guarantee the result which we desire. In the United Bank Case, the pivotal point of making the decision was that the earlier Retirees were governed by an Agreement which was a stipulated package, and picking out individual aspects of such past Agreement, as good or bad, cannot now be done to alter the package.

 Of course, according to me what should have weighed with the SC is the fact that the earlier retirees too are currently positioned in the same market as the post 2002 retirees, and their being governed by a principle of DR which is not the same, does put the earlier Retirees at a disadvantage in a market, that does not recognize the technical difference,  and is therefore patently unfair. But it is the SC Decision that counts.

 

As I conclude, I would like to place on Record  our heart-felt  Sympathies to all those families that have lost their near and dear due to the marauding Covid Pandemic,  and more recently the huge losses of life and property due to the Cyclone Amphan in West Bengal and Odisha.  

 

Expecting to come back on next communications, under better and improved conditions in the country. 

 

D.Krishnan.