| 01-12-2011 | All India Seniority List of Superintendent Central Excise for the period from 01.01.1998 to 31.12.2006 |
Saturday, 2 October 2021
PAYMENT OF AMOUNT OF EX-GRATIA LUMP SUM COMPENSATION TO THE FAMILIES OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT SERVANTS WHO DIE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF BONA FIDE OFFICIAL DUTY- PROVISION FOR NOMINATIONS REGARDING
(CLICK THE LINK BELOW TO VIEW)
https://documents.doptcirculars.nic.in/D3/D03ppw/1_7_2020_PPW_F_30092021ABBzp.pdf
Friday, 1 October 2021
All our friends know it very well that , our all India pensioners association of CBIC is not so much effective since it's creation. Without support from our Units and having zero balance, this association has been engaged with certain activities for betterment of our pensioner's friends,, which are mentioned below: first, two writt petitions have been filled in HC of Odisha by our Bhubanrswar unit along with AIACEGEO. One case is for enhancement of pay scale of inspector and another for increase of pay scale of Supdt from 01.01.1986. The General Secretary of Bhubanrswar unit, Shri Niranjan Pradhan is co ordinating the matter. Shri Pradhan is member of this group. Second issue is related to 7600 for direct recruit Inspectors and 6600 for direct recruit UDC/Stenographer etc in 3rd MACP. Our representation has been rejected for which we are planning to file a CAT case in Delhi along with AIACEGEO. Third issue is related to one increament to those retired in 30.6/31.12. In a peculiar situation, the SC issued a stay in a case of Railways, hence we requested our affected members to file representation and CAT case to avoid time bar of the case. Fourth as regards enhancement of pension from the date of 80 th birthday that is on completion of 79 years, as per our request, the secretary national JCM wrote to secretary and will make a JCM point in this matter. Fifth as regards arrears DA, as per our request national JCM wrote to secretary DOPT and agreed to make it JCM points. Sixth as regards solving the problems of CGHS, we have submitted representations and we are planning to meet CGHS authority along with the office bearers of the all India Association of CGHS Beneficiaries of CBIC.
Sunday, 5 September 2021
DRAFT LETTER TO BE SENT TO
THE FINANCE MINISTER
***************************************
CONFEDERATION OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEES AND WORKERS &
NATIONAL CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE
OF PENSIONERS ASSOCIATIONS
E mail: nccpahq@gmail.com.
Dated: 4th September, 2021
To
Ms. Nirmala Sitharaman,
Finance Minister,
Government of India,
North Block, New Delhi
Dear Madam,
Confederation of Central Government Employees and Workers and the Nationl Co-ordination Committee of Pensioners Association, representing the Central Government employees of the country and the Pensioners submit the following issues for your kind consideration and favourable response.
1. The Dearness allowance and Dearness Relief arrears.
In the wake of the emergence of the Covid 19 pandemic, in April, 2020, the Government decided not to release the DA/DR instalment that had become due on 1.1.2020 as also those that might become due on 1.7.2020 and 1.1.2021. The payment was deferred upto July, 2021. Accordingly, the allowance and relief that had become due had been restored in July, 2021. However, the arrears pertaining to 18 months have been held back or rather impounded. We submit that the decision of the Govt. to impound the arrears was sans any legal or moral ground. The employees and Pensioners, as you are aware, had responded to the Government’s appeal and had contributed one day’s salary/ pension to enable the Government to reach out to the covid affected people with financial assistance. The employees and Pensioners expected that the Government would give back the arrears . The Government is also aware of the fact that a similar order of the Government of Andhra Pradesh was subjected to judicial scrutiny by the A.P. High Court and the Court had come to the conclusion that the said decision of the A.P. Government was untenable. It may be pertinent to point out in this connection that quite a number of employees and pensioners were affected by the Covid virus and had undergone treatment costing lakhs of rupees. The release of the impounded arrears would be a great relief to the employees and pensioners.
2. Covid pandemic related problems.
(a) Death compensation: As mentioned earlier, number of employees and pensioners
died due to the covid some at Hospitals and others at home. Despite providing treatment costing lakhs of rupees, they could not be saved. Their family is in distress now. The entire savings have been eaten up for the treatment. Most of them suffer a debt burden of an unimaginable dimension. We know that in bigger Government department, a welfare fund is in operation. But in small department no such contingency fund exist. It is our request that the Government decides to help these unfortunate families by way of a compensation grant of not less than 15 lakhs.
(b) Reimbursement of hospital bills. The affected persons had to be admitted to the hospitals. In emergency cases, the employees and pensioners were taken to the nearby private hospitals. The Government as per the extant rules reimburse the expenses only when the employee/pensioner is admitted to a CGHS recognised hospitals. There are very few CGHS empanelled hospitals in the country. Majority of them do not provide treatment for covid. The employees and pensioners with meagre salary are not capable of paying the huge hospitalisation bills. We request that orders may be issued to reimburse the bills of the private hospitals irrespective of the fact whether they are recognised or not, raised in connection with the covid treatment.
(c) To provide vaccination facility in CGHS wellness centres/clinics/dispensaries.
Presently vaccination facility is not provided for in CGHS clinics/dispensaries. These clinics provide out-patient treatment to the Central Government employees/pensioners. Now that the lock out has been lifted, the employees are to attend offices and they must have priority in vaccination. The deficiency of vaccine is felt all over the country. The primary health centres and State Government/Local body run hospitals, experience huge rush and it takes hours to get vaccinated. There is also inordinate delay in getting the slots even after registration. It is, therefore, requested that the CGHS clinics/Dispensaries and wellness centres be made vaccination centres for CG employees/ pensioners.
(d) Compassionate appointments. Need for removing the ceiling. In 1990s, the Government imposed a ceiling on compassionate appointments in all Departments except the Railways. This was said to be to abide by a directive of the Supreme Court. However, no such directive in specific terms had ever been made by the Supreme Court. Despite the repeated plea made by the staff side in the forum of JCM, the DOPT stuck to their position. There are departments, where not a single case of death in harness occur in a particular . year. But in the subsequent year, there might have been a few cases. The ceiling of 5% of the vacancies is highly illogical and untenable too. But still it continued. The covid period has taken away a number of lives of the employees. Their family is in distress. The very scheme was conceived to provide relief to the suffering family members While it must go only to deserving candidates, this can never be the way to ensure that. In any case it has now become very necessary that the ceiling must be removed to ensure that the deserving wards of the employees who died in harness are given livelihood. We request that orders removing the ceiling may kindly be issued without further loss of time.
(e) Health insurance coverage for the pensioners residing in non CGHS areas.
Presently the pensioners who are residing in non-CGHS areas have no health scheme when they fall ill seriously. The paltry sum of FMA will not even meet the OPD requirements Oft repeated representation from this section of pensioners have gone to deaf ears. The Government feels that the expenditure would be enormous. The successive Pay Commissions have recommended for the health insurance scheme, which is yet to be considered by the Government. They feel highly discriminated sin as much as their erstwhile colleagues are able to treatment from recognised private hospitals. Insurance scheme, they know, may only be a poor substitute for the CGHS. But it is high time that the Government to take serious note of the issue and evolve a scheme. The Pensioners in the non CGHS areas had been the worst sufferers during the covid period.
3. Revise the pension entitlement of BSNL Pensioners and restore medical facilities.
(a).The pension revision of the absorbed BSNL Pensioners was due from 01-01-2017. The last pension revision was granted from 01-01-2007 with 30 per cent fitment recommended by the 2nd PRC. The 3rd PRC recommended 15 per cent fitment from 01-01-2017. Unfortunately, the government has not implemented the pension revision, linking it with pay revision in BSNL. The fact remains that the full liability of payment of pension and pensionary benefits to BSNL absorbed pensioners lies with the Government of India according to the agreement reached with the then recognised Federations of the employees and the Central Government and amendment made in the CCS( Pension) Rules, 1972. As such there is no justification for linking pension revision with wage revision of BSNL employees which is being delayed due to various reasons including bad financial condition.
BSNL Pensioners were absorbed from Department of Telecommunications during the formation of BSNL with effect from 01-10-2000 and their counterparts , Central Government pensioners have got the pension revision from 01-01-2016 as per the recommendations of 7th Pay Commission.
Huge loss in Pension and pensionary benefits are being incurred by these section of BSNL Pensioners due to the denial of pension revision.
Further, the minimum pension and family pension of BSNL absorbed pensioners continue to be Rs.3,500 whereas they are entitled to draw Rs.9.000 once the pension is revised at par with Central government pensioners.
(b). Denial of medical benefits to BSNL Pensioners.
BSNL pensioners are covered under BSNL- Medical Reimbursement Scheme. (MRS) at par with the employees. But the retirees are not being paid the medical allowance in lieu of outdoor treatment from 01-04-2018. In the case of medical bills, both indoor and outdoor are pending from 01-04-2019. Naturally, the aged and ailing retirees are put in distress even without considering the pandemic situation. BSNL management is adopting a negative rather arrogant stand with the lame excuse of lack of funds.
4. Revision of Pension and medical facilities of Punjab National Bank employees;
The Indian Bank Association has commenced discussion with the Bank employees representatives to effect revision of the existing pension scheme. The employees are no doubt the future pensioners and they have an important stake in those discussions. However, Pension is the entitlement of the Pensioners. To exclude from the ambit of negotiation is totally an unjustified action. There are huge amounts accumulated in the pension fund of the Banks and these contributions have come from the present day pensioners when they were employees. We request you to kindly direct the IBA to hold discussions with the Punjab National Bank Pensioners Association and reach settlement with them
Medical facilities.
The Bank employees do not have a common health care scheme. The present health insurance scheme is highly discriminatory. In the case of the employees, the Banks take the responsibility of making over the premia due from them whereas the Pensioners are to remit the premium from their own meagre pension. It must be the responsibility of the IBA to make the premium payment in the case of pensioners too. After all the insurance scheme benefits more the Banks rather than the pensioners. This apart, there is discrimination also in the matter of the coverage of the scheme. While family members and dependents are entitled in the case of the employees, the benefit is denied to the pensioners. We request that the Banks and especially the IBA may be asked to hold discussions and bring about uniformity in the scheme both in respect of entitlement and contribution as also parity with the working employees.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
K.K.N. Kutty/ R.N. Parasar
Secretary General, Secretary General
NCCPA. & Confederation of CGE&W
RESOLUTION:
TO BE MOVED AND PASSED AT THE DHARNA MEETING.
This meeting of the Central Government employees and pensioners being held at the Dharna venue at …………………expresses its concern over the non settlement of certain important issues by the Governments. These issues have been brought to the notice of the Government on several occasions by the representatives of the Confederation and NCCPA.
The meeting appeals to the Government to take note of the serious discontent of the employees and pensioners over the non settlement of these issues and direct the concerned to bring in an amicably satisfactory settlement on these issues with out further loss of time.
1. Release the impounded DA/DR arrears.
2. Grant:
(a) death compensation for those who died due to covid;
(b) reimburse the hospital bills of covid patients;
© Vaccine facility at all CGHS wellness/clinic/dispensary centres
(d) remove the ceiling on compassionate appointments
(e) Health insurance scheme for pensioners who stay outside the purview of the CGHS;
3. Revise the Pension entitlement of BSNL Pensioners and restore their medl. Facilities
4 Revise the pension entitlement of PNB pensioners and grant uniform medical facilities to them.
FORMAT OF E MAIL TO BE SENT BY EACH INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEE AND PENSIONER TO THE FINANCE MINISTER on email fm@gov.in
Dear Madam,
Kindly refer to the joint letter of the Confederation of CTEs and National co-ordination Committee of Pensioners Association dated 4th September, 2021. I shall be grateful if you will kindly cause discussions thereon with a view to reach a settlement.
With greetings
Yours faithfully,
Name & designation.
Sunday, 29 August 2021
ALL INDIA PENSIONERS’ ASSOCIATION OF
CBIC
PRESIDENT SECRETARY GENERAL A.K.Sharma Lokanath Mishra
Mob.9815300006 Mob.9437314941
ADDRESS FOR COMMUNICATION: JENA MATH LANE, PANCHU CHARU,
PURI-752001, ODISHA. Email jailoknathjee@gmail.com
To
The Hon’ble Minister of State,
I/C of DOPT,
New Delhi.
Sir,
Sub: One Notional Increment to those retired on 30th June after completion of 365
Days-Request for grant of notional increment for pension benefits-Reg.
As your good self are aware, the Honorable Apex Court through pronouncements in several of its judgements has said that the issue once decided should apply to all similarly placed persons. But in reality, the said policy is not being implemented properly. To quote, non-implementation of Honorable Madras High Court judgement inW.P.No.15732/2017 dt.15-9-2017(P. Ayyamperumal vs The Registrar, CAT,Madras & Ors),which has attained finality after Apex Court dismissal of SLP & RP filed by UOI to all similarly placed persons ( ie in REM) is a case on hand.
The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras, vide its Order dated 15.09.2017 in W.P. No. 15732 of 2017 (P. Ayyamperumal –Vs- The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras & Others) allowed the W. P. filed by a retired Central Government employee who retired on 30.06.2013. The Hon’ble Court directed the Central Government to grant him his annual increment for his service between 01.07.2012 and 30.06.2013, as he had completed one full year of service on 30 -06-2013 for the purpose of pension benefits and not for any other purpose, though he was no longer in employment on 01.07.2013. Refer: Document_1.pdf.
Against the above Order passed by High Court, Madras, Union of India filed Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.22283 of 2018. The Hon’ble Apex Court, after hearing the Appellant therein and perusing the above referred Madras High Court Order, dismissed the Special Leave Petition on 23.07.2018. Refer: Document_2.pdf. Also, Union of India filed Review Petition R.P.(C) No.1731/2019 in SLP(C) No.22008/2018. The Apex Court, after hearing the appellant therein and perusing the records, dismissed the review petition on 08-08-2019. Refer: Document_3.pdf
On perusal of the above referred Orders passed by the High Court , Madras as well as Apex Court, a good number of employees , retired on 30th June submitted representations to higher officials from the level of Principal Chief Commissioners to Asst Commissioners and sought to extend the benefits arise out of the above referred Judgments in their case also by revising their Pension and other terminal benefits by including annual increment at the rate of 3% of their pay in the pay band and grade pay while calculating pension and other terminal benefits.
After perusal of the above-mentioned representations, the higher officials rejected such requests, citing CBIC, New Delhi letter F.No. A-23011/36/2013-Ad II A dated 18-10-2019 that the Hon’ble High Court, Madras judgment in W.P.No.15732 of 2017 dated 15-09-2017 is in personam and not in rem. Therefore, CBIC has implemented the High Court’s order in personam after dismissal of review petition filed with the Supreme Court for petitioner only which would not be quoted as precedent in future. In view of the above the applicant’s request cannot be considered. Refer: Document_4.pdf
CBIC letter F.No. A-23011/36/2013-Ad IIA dated 18-10-2019 speaks interalia to deny grant of notional increment for pension benefits to officers in similar cases on the following grounds:
“4.1. In so far as P. Ayyamperumal case is concerned, it is stated that the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Madras is in personam.
4.2. Further, the case of Shri.M.Balasubramaniam referred by Hon’ble High Court in its judgment in P.Ayyamperumal case is related to Fundamental Rules of Tamil Nadu Government whereas P.Ayyamperumal case relates to Central Government Rules.
4.3. It is relevant to mention here that in a similar matter, Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in year 2005, in C.Subbarao case, has inter-alia observed as under:
In support of the above observations, the Division Bench also placed reliance on Banerjee case (supra). We are afraid, the Division Bench was not correct in coming to the conclusion that being a reward for unblemished past service. Government servant retiring on the last day of the month would also be entitled for increment even after such increment is due after retirement. We have already made reference to all Rules governing the situation. There is no warrant to come to such conclusion. Increment is given (See Article 43 of CS Regulations) as a periodical rise to a government employee for the good behavior in the service. Such increment is possible only when the appointment is “Progressive Appointment” and it is not a universal and other allowances only when he is entitled to receive pay from out of Consolidated Fund of India and continues to be in Government service. A person who retires on the last working day would not be entitled for any increment falling due on the next day and payable next day thereafter (See Article 151 of CS Regulations), because he would not answer the tests in these Rules. Reliance placed on Banerjee case (supra) is also in our considered opinion not correct because, as observed by us, Banerjee case (supra) does not deal with increment, but deals with enhancement of DA by the Central Government to pensioners. Therefore, we are not able to accept the view taken by the Division Bench. We accordingly overrule the judgment in Malakondaiah case (supra).”
It is on record that the Union of India had set out grounds as above, as grounds in the applications for SLP and review petition. The corresponding paras are tabulated below.
Paras in CBIC letter
Paras in grounds of SLP
Paras in RP
2 & 4.1
6(1)
3(I)
4.2
5 C
3E
4.3
5D
3F
Refer: Document_5.pdf, received through RTI request by a 30th June retiree.
As SLP and RP filed by the UOI before Apex Court have respectively been dismissed on 23-07-2018 and 08-08-2019, it is evident that the grounds set out are rejected grounds by the Apex Court. So, the identical grounds in paras 4.1 to 4.3 of CBIC letter dated 18-10-2019 also merit rejection.
The fourth ground i.e., para 4.4. is about the denial of notional increment for pension benefits to the petitioner-K.Sundar in order OA/310/00309/2019 dated 19-03-2019 & 2 other similarly placed persons by Hon’ble CAT, Chennai Bench. Refer: Document_6.pdf
In deciding notional increment for pension purpose in order dated 19-03-2019, Hon’ble Tribunal has analyzed the points listed below.
1) Age on retirement date. Justification for allowing the extended period, if any.
2) Whether employee – employer relationship exists on the date of retirement.
3) Whether any statutory provision exists for grant of notional increment for pension purpose.
4) If not, any case laws available for grant of notional increment for the above purpose.
The applicant justifies as below point wise.
1. Age on retirement as on 30-06-2018: 60 years plus no. of days applicant permitted to continue till 30-6-2018. The age on superannuation at any given period for a Central Government Employee is as per the recommendations of the Central Pay Commission (CPC) and acceptance by the Government of India. The CPC takes cognizance of various parameters like life expectancy, age on superannuation prevailing in other countries, demand of the service association/union etc., and makes recommendations. This being so, in recommendations of the 3rd CPC in para 15 of chapter 60 it was recommended that the retirement of government employee should take effect from the afternoon of the last day of the month in which the employee attains the age of superannuation (58 years) instead of afternoon of the actual date of superannuation to facilitate simplifying accounting works in respect of calculation of pay and allowances, the average emoluments, qualifying service etc., to help speedy settlement of pension claims. This recommendation of 3rd CPC has been accepted by the Ministry of Finance vide serial No.40 of Annexure to Resolution dated 01-05-1974. Based on the said recommendations necessary provision has been inserted in Rule 56(a) of FR to cover up the extended period of days remaining in the month of retirement in which the employee attained 58 years of age. By virtue of the recommendations of 5th CPC, the age of superannuation was extended to 60 years vide para 128.16 of the report and accepted by the Government of India for implementation vide Amendment in Rule 56(a) of FR by Department Notification No.25012/2/97-Estt. (A) dated 13-05-1998 and 27-05-1998.
2. The role of employee-employer relationship during the extended period should be looked into, which is discussed below. An employee, who is working under an employer (in the instant case the controlling authority designated by the statute and other officers down his rank, having supervisory control over the employee), if he happens to attain age of superannuation in the middle of a month, continues to perform the same works during the remaining period, till his relief from duty on the last day of the month. The works done by him (employee) on account of statutory compliance and the allotted works by the employer are closely monitored by the employer. In doing so, if there is any irregularity noticed by the employer, or comes to his knowledge he would endeavor to correct him and if warranted may even initiate disciplinary proceedings, which are possible on account of employee-employer relationship only. Thus, the employee-employer relationship continues to exist in the extended period also.
It is pertinent to point out In order OA No.170/00165/2019 dt 13-11-2019 (R.Kanakarajan vs UOI &Ors) of CAT, Bangalore Bench the existence of employer -employee till last day of retirement month followed by date of birth of retiree is established.(para 8 to10 of page no.59&60 of decision), which is extracted below,
“8 The resultant position is that under FR 24 a Govt servant employee gets the following rights
i. Even though his superannuation date may be any day of a particular month, since during the course of that entire month his services are utilized by the govt ,is being paid salary & for any infraction which occur during the period of the month following the actual date of birth of the Govt employee also to be held responsible & held to be a Govt employee till the end of the month .Then there cannot be any justice or logic in saying that notionally it should be taken that he would have retired on the actual date of birth falling due.
ii. Since by the juncture of the Govt & through their significant presence only the provision regarding retirement at the end of the month had been brought out. Then, the prejudice of which, if at all any cannot fall on the shoulders of the Govt employee.
9. Therefore, these are declared as significant factors to be considered in granting of increment under FR 24 & a judicial declaration is hereby issued.
10. Therefore, as a consequence it is declared as mandated that all persons who have completed 365 days in a year will now become eligible for the next increment on the completion of that year, even though the increment may notionally fall on the next date.” Refer: Document_7.pdf
1. Rule 10 of CCS Pay Rules 2008 relates to grant of increment on 1st July of every year on completion of one year of service but without any inbuilt provision therein for grant of notional increment for pension purpose only. But in some States’ Pension Rules, necessary provision exists for grant of notional increment for pension purpose.
“Andhra Pradesh Revised Pension Rules 1990 (Under Rules 31 & 32)”. Refer: Document_8.pdf
Where an employee’s date of increment falls due on the day following retirement, he/she may be given the benefit of increment notionally purely for the purpose of pensionary benefits. With effect from 27-10-1998 vide G.O. Ms.No.235 F& P dated 27-10-1998.
In the case of State of Tamil Nadu, no provision existed earlier in FR to sanction annual notional increment to government servants, who have rendered one full year of service and retired on superannuation on the last date of completion of one year and the increment due fall on the next day of superannuation. But based on the Pay Grievance Redressal Cell recommendations contained in G.O.Ms.No.311 dated 31-12-2014, grant of notional increment for pension benefits was implemented prospectively and later on extended to the earlier period also vide Government of Tamil Nadu Finance (Pay Cell) Department G.O.Ms.No.140 dated 25-04-2018.Also for this purpose Rule 26 -A of FR was inserted. Refer Document_9.pdf
2. In the case of P. Ayyamperumal Vs UOI and others the decision dated 15-09-2017 by High Court, Madras is that “The petitioner had completed one full year of service on 30-06-2013 but the increment fell due on 01-07-2013, on which date he was not in service. In view of the judgment of High Court, Madras (reported in CDJ 2012 MHC 6525 passed in similar circumstances on 20-09-2012), naturally he has to be treated as having completed one full year of service, though the increment fell on the next day of his retirement and the petitioner should be given one notional increment for the period from 01-07-2012 to 30-06-2013 for pension benefits. (Para 7 of the decision).
Against High Court, Madras decision dt 15-9-2017, the SLP & RP filed in Apex Court have been dismissed. But it is a fact on record that after filing contempt petition - CP No.1875/2018 in WP No.15732/2017 by Sri P. Ayyamperumal, CBIC, vide letter F.No. A-23011/36/2013-Ad II A DT 30-8-2019 has been issued, in which in para 3, it has been stated that since the Apex Court has dismissed the RP of the Dept no recourse seems available &order dt 15-9-2017 of High Court, Madras in WP No.15732/2017, directing to grant one notional increment to petitioner retiring on 30th June needs to be implemented. Further stated in para 4 that direction to grant one notional increment for pension benefits to petitioner only to avoid contempt proceedings.
Refer Document_10.pdf
Now, the issue before UOI is whether the order is in personam or in REM, in the light of several judicial pronouncements by Apex Court.
CAT, Allahabad Bench, while deciding OA No.330/00146/2020 dt 26-2-2021 (Pravesh Chandra Gupta & 11 Ors vs UOI), taking into consideration various decisions of Apex Court, discussed therein has ordered in paras 23&24 of page nos .13 &14 as follows:
“23.In wake of law laid down in above cited judgements/orders, it cannot be said that the judgement passed by Hon’ble Madras High Court in the matter of K. Ayyamperumal (supra) is a judgement in personam & not a judgement in rem .Moreover, all the matters relating to pay fixation ,like present one under consideration , are governed by uniform policy of the Govt & therefore ,any judgement in these matters are always judgement in rem & cannot be interpreted as judgement in personam.
24. In view of above discussion, the Tribunal is of the opinion that the DOPT letter dt 18-10=2019 is definitely in teeth of all the above cited judgements. In wake of the undisputed fact that all applicants have completed one year of service before their retirement on 30th June, although in different years, all the impugned orders rejecting the claim of the applicants for release of the increment are quashed & set aside”. Refer Document_11.pdf Appeal filed by UOI against the said decision has been disposed of in High Court, Allahabad decision in WA No.7911/2021 dt 28-7-2021. Refer Document_12.pdf
In view of the above also, High Court, Madras decision dt 15-9-2017 in P.Ayyamperumal case is implementable in REM.
Several judgements on the matter of grant of notional increment to those central govt employees have been pronounced by High Courts of various States/CATs of various Benches, all primarily based on High Court, Madras decision In Ayyamperumal case. Against certain High Court decisions, the SLPs filed with Apex Court are pending decision & in those cases mostly stay granted. In one case, the Apex Court has dismissed SLP(C) Dy No.6468/2019 dt 29-3-2019—UOI vs Sakha Ram Tripathy on grounds of delay, keeping all questions of law open. In another case, against High Court, Delhi decision in WP (C) No.10509/2019 dt 23-1-2020, SLP DyNo.13959/2020 filed in Apex Court has been duly dismissed after hearing counsel for petitioners on 13-10-2020.
Refer Document_13.pdf. This is a 3-member Bench decision.
Taking into consideration that two SLPs dismissal orders in Ayyamperumal case &Gopal Singh case & one RP dismissal order against Ayyamperumal case, there is no reason to drag the issue without allowing notional increment for pension benefit to 30th June retirees in REM.
It is to be pointed out in recent letter F.No.19/2/2018-Estt (pay-I) dt 3-2-2021, DOPT has interalia reiterated the contention of earlier letter dt 18-10 2019, also citing SLP dismissal order on question of delay in Sakha Ram Tripathy case & advised to defend in various court cases in this matter. Refer Document_14.pdf
In the said DOPT letter, the APEX Court decision in Ayyamperumal case & Gopal Singh case are conspicuously absent.
In similar circumstances, in the matter of grant of MACP benefit, effective from 1-1-2006 to PBORs, even after appropriate decision by Apex Court for non-implementation of the decision the Court has come down heavily on Govt & dismissed the case in CA No. /2018 (arising out of DY No.8754/2018) dt 24-4-201—UOI vs Prithwi Singh & ors. Refer Document_15.pdf
This has prompted DoLA to evolve a procedure to constitute a Committee to identify /review all pending as well as fresh civil appeals/SLPs in which the issue involved has already been settled by the Courts vide No. J-12012/5/2016-Judicial (Part) dt 4-7-2018 r/w27-7-2018. Refer Document_16.pdf
It is pertinent to point out that if the spirit of said Apex Court decision dt 24-4-2018 has been followed, then, in view of dismissal orders in existence, as stated herein before, in Ayyamperumal & Gopal Singh cases, there is no possibility that SLPs pending cases now in notional increment issue have arisen.
We kindly request that taking into consideration all submissions as above, for a tangible action at appropriate level, which would pave way for dismissal of all pending SLPs in notional increment issue & facilitate grant of notional increment to 30th June retirees in REM.
Yours faithfully
(A.K SHARMA)
PRESIDENT