A cursory look on Pension in State Bank of India !


This reproduction is from a letter written to a friend of mine RO Shah, a veteran trade union letter highlighing the scenario obtaining on pension in State Bank of India. Since the subject matter is of interest to employees in general in banking industructy, this reproduction may be of some importance to them.

_________________ 

It was heartening talking to you over phone the other day.I quite realize I have not been able to keep in contact with you for a long time –the reason being that I couldn’t spare necessary time for the purpose which ofcourse can’t be a pertinent excuse I know. 

 You have been fighting virtually a lone battle on an issue like pension which otherwise is a matter connected with thousands and thousands of people all over the country. Your voice clashes the deaf ears in the channels that count for the purupose and only continues to remain sans any response from any quarter. I stopped taking whatever interest I used to take initially for the simple reason that before it could prove to be result oriented  it was likely to elicit misunderstandings only which situation I thought of avoiding as all my career I was most often most misunderstood a person on issues crucial and salient. I strongly felt and do feel the same way even on date that pension is an issue worth being pursued as potentially it is strong enough ingredients wise capable of generating necessary merit which the concerned authorities just can’t deny. Why the concerned authorities are themselves not taking necessary initiative is the question. Obviously why they should bother if the beneficiaries themselves are not showing the required interest. You will agree, as you yourself said earlier, that majority of pensioners find themselves well settled otherwise and they have no reason for any worry whether there is some increase in pension or it is not there. Those who are in the saddle are busy elsewhere, even pensioners organisatins in the circles and at the national level are confined to the level of just offering prayers for some thing to be showered on them and are not prepared to act as fighters. Fighting for a right cause is not a fancy, it is a spirit capable of not getting dithered with age or status. This spirit they lack, nay it is a sort of voluntary incapacitation on their part. 

If Unions with serving employees holding the reins are unable to deliver the goods, why the Unions with ex employees in the helm of affairs as leaders of the pensioners Association/Federation can’t play a decisively worked out strategy is the question. The serving people holding the reins being indifferent, the pensioners union being incapable of moving the channels involved and the pensioners, the likely beneficiaries of whatever improvement that could be cultivated, being themselves not so keen, what the few like you ofcourse with tremendous amount of spirit and enormous zeal can do is again a question. A few others who can do some thing but can’t do any thing for the risk of getting misunderstood naturally possess no potential for any orientation of some result or the other. Sounds pessimistic but this is the scenario after all is obtaining. I wish I am wrong in my estimation and finally the efforts you are making are capable of bringing the desired results. My circle General Secretary told me just a day before that as per information given to him by the Federation, some thing tangible may emerge within 2/3 weeks time. It is always better to hope for the best and I too would like to fall in line with it for an imaginable satisfaction atleast. I obviously owe you an all out acknowledgement and appreciation for your efforts in the matter. All the best.

Advertisements

1,412 thoughts on “A cursory look on Pension in State Bank of India !”

    1. Even now it is a serious concern because of mess created by the top officials.As the pay commission automatic revision for all bipartites is necessary.this is the court ruling as well.why the top officlas are so mean I fail to understand

      Like

    2. IF THE ASSOCIATION OF THE EMPLOYEES ARE INDIFFERENT TO THE ISSUES RELATING TO PENSIONERS WHY SHOULD THE TOP OFFICERS, WHO ARE AT THE VERGE OF RETIREMENT, NOT TAKE INTEREST IN THE ISSUED RAISED BY THE RETIRED EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION; BECAUSE, IF THEY DON’T TAKE INTEREST WHILE ON POST, THEIR SUCCESSORS WILL HAVE ENOUGH TO BE WORRIED OVER THE ISSUES; THUS A VAST TIME LAPSE WOULD MEAN A LOT FOR MANY OFFICERS IN DISTRESS AS OF NOW.

      Like

    3. regarding revision of gratuity i am surprised to note that while govt and other sector employees gratuity has been revised wef 1/1/6. even rbi/loc/coal india revised gratuity ceiling wef 1/1/6, ours not we are given effect from 24/5/10, this seems to be a discriminatiomn, as u r a old union veteran please look into the matter

      Like

  1. There are so many ex- union leaders now pensioners.I wonder why they are not taking a lead to fight the injustice done the the pensioners.the the employees retired after the 7th wage revision are still drawing the pension on the salary drawn prior to the 7th revision.The demand for pension at 50 per cent has been pending for a long time and it is time to make all out effort to grt the matter resolved by all possible means including approching the law makers.

    Like

  2. There are so many ex- union leaders now pensioners.I wonder why they are not taking a lead to fight the injustice done the the pensioners.the the employees retired after the 7th wage revision are still drawing the pension on the salary drawn prior to the 7th revision.The demand for pension at 50 per cent has been pending for a long time and it is time to make all out effort to get the matter resolved by all possible means including approching the law makers.

    Like

  3. You are very correct in your observation that there being a large number of pensioners but still they are unable to throw their weight to secure positive results. In fact the role is so assumed by the serving employees unions that a normal pensioner expects necessary goods to be delivered whereas actually nothing is happening and what is happening is just a matter of retrogate steps.Thank you for your comments.

    Like

    1. Neelkanth,this forum degrdes into 7th Bp advocacy slowly and all issues are discussed between a few old pensioners.They harp upon injustice which is a court matter.How injustice they don’t explain to all.Unless you strictly tell these people not to indulge in rosy advices without facts nothing will get into the heads of common pensioners.
      pl make the forum widespread in opinions restricting tautological repetitions

      Like

  4. Neelkanth,I agree that ,there are large number of pensioners but could not throw the required weight for their cause.The reason is that,we are not organised to bring pressure on govt/ bank by agitation like the working employees.In my view, our leaders like Godbole,Umedsingh,R .O.Shah and many others can make a case and present to the Top Management.They can also take help of the local MPs.They may also see whether we have any chance if we challenge to the Gove in the court of Law.(I think Pensioners’ Association had already gone in the court and the matter is being tossed between the high court and supreme court.I am not aware of the present status).
    I also understand that a small committee was appointed by the govt to look in to the pending issues including pension and they had already submitted their report to the govt.What happened to that report is unknown.Can you throw some light on that?

    Like

  5. IT IS VERY ASTONISHED TO POINT OUT THAT THE PENSIONERS RETAIED BEFORE 1-11-2002 HAD NOT BEEN PAID UNDER REVISED PENSION SCHEME BU THE THE LARGEST BANK IN ASIA – STATE BANK OF INDIA. SOME THE PENSIONERS WENT TO THE COURT ALSO AND WAITING FOR THE RESULTS SINCE THEN. ALL THESE PENSIONERS ARE SENIOR CITIZENS AND CANNOT WALK WITH OUT SOMEBODIES HELP. SOME TIME THEY HAVE TO SPEND LARGE AMOUNT FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES INCLUDING SPOUSE OF THESE POOR FELLOWS. NO SYMPETHETIC ATTITUDES DRIVEN TO THESE PENSIONERS BY THE MANAGEMENTS AND BY THE GOVERNMENT.
    PANICKER P.M.G.K

    Like

  6. Equality before law a constitutional right does it not apply to the SBI Pensioners ? An employee retired after 31-03-2001 gets more pension than VRS retirees.SBIis ready to wipe off losses resulting to several million crores in the name of OTS to bring down NPAs.But ignores several employees who served SBI several decades.
    A step motherly attitude is being shown to VRS employees in respect of Medical benefits,post retirement assignments etc.Why ?Is SBI aginst implementation of its own VRS ?programme ? Let it treat VRS employees and pre VRS on par with others without any discrimination

    Like

    1. you are partial….see so many officers have resigned from the association…the present pensioner’s association is not managed properly.Some vested interests are in the helm anre a disease

      You are encouraging a few fools who want litigation and

      “Words are like leaves and where they most abound
      Some furuit of sense is rarely found

      self prise you stats that is what you want useless blog

      Like

  7. I have also retired from SBI and drawing lesser pension based on 6th wage settlement. In the 7 th settlement one more stagnation increment granted but while claculating pension the bank has not taken into account this increment.
    They have calculated pension even for Special Assistants an out come of 7 th wage settlement for SBI employees by fixing amount equalent to Spl allowances of the 6 th wage settlement. Why the bank has failed to fix equalent increment of the 6 th wage increment amount to the stagnation amount also. The retirees are waiting for the out come fo the HYDERABAD court case filed by ex NCBE general Secretary Shri.P.Narasiah. Let the Government and particulary the Lawyer cum Hon.Finace minister take an early decision on pension which is a property right of pensioners.

    Like

  8. R.SIVAGYANAM, 08th March 2008
    13, Bakthavatchalam Street, Phone No: 044- 2479 4044
    Koyambedu,
    Chennai-600 107.
    To,
    The Trustees,
    IBI/SBI Employees Pension and Guarantee Fund,
    State Bank of India,Central Office,
    State Bank Bhavan, Madam Cama Road, Bombay – 400 021.

    Dear Sir,
    PENSION REVISION
    FOR VII TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT
    ********
    I have retired from service under VRS Scheme as per Chennai Local Head Office circular CIR.DO.VRS:4 Dated 11-01-2001.In this connection I have to inform you that as per circular my pension should have been revised based on VII th Bipartite settlement and pending revision my pension is paid on pre-revised pay (VI th Bipartite settlement).

    The pension revision for VIII th Bipartite implemented and also family pension for VII th and VIII th Bipartite settlements stands revised. It is unfortunate that my pension based on VII th Bipartite settlement not yet revised even after seven years. I have drawn additional stagnation increment as per VII th Bipartite settlement that has not been taken into account while fixing pension as per pre-revised pay scales The pension cannot be denied to stagnation increment drawn during my service as per VII th Bipartite settlement and it should be paid from the date of my retirement under VRS scheme.

    Our Supreme Court has categorically stated in several cases that the pension is neither a bounty, nor a matter of grace depending upon the sweet will of the employer but is a payment for the past service rendered. I am also entitled for revision of pension from the date of my retirement as per your VRS Circular and I request you to take early decision in the matter and effect payment of pension. It is high time the Bank, Both the Federations and Government should stop the round robin play tactics to delay/deny pension to VII th bipartite retirees. I earnestly request you to take positive quick decision on pension.

    Like

  9. vrsretiries are deprived of their rights.In fact they have created opportunities for recruitment and promotions.They havf taken vrs as per the scheme directed by the Govt. of India.Keeping prejudice against them for not giving their legitimate right of revised pension and Bank management’s inability to get approval is shameful.Mr. BHATT the Chairman should take this matter.

    Like

    1. Pl.demand for festival advance for retired employees which to deducted frm pension by monthly 10 the. equal instalments.also demand and request to the respected management honoured to the pensioners including VRS EMPLOYEES BY MEMENTO on the eve of 200 yrs. run of our bank where such employees rendered their service for the BANK.PL. COMMUNICATE WITH THE MANAGEMENT OF SBI.I’am confident the our management honour our i.e pensioners prayer.

      Like

  10. DEB KUMAR BHATTACHERJEE
    3382 MORNING STAR DRIVE,
    MISSISSAUGA,ONTARIO.
    L4T1X8, CANADA

    Telephone# 905 612 8550.
    dkb4325@rediffmail.com

    DatedJuly27,2008

    Dear Sir,

    I am writing this letter that might help you some where. I list the claims which I feel is legitimate to me.

    1.PENSION WEF 18.08.02 and interest on the pension wef 18.08.02 to date of finalization.

    2. Interest paid to me towards PF wef 19.08.02 to 31.03.05 was taken back,(which is evident from the letter of The Assistant General Manager, Kharaghpur Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 15:42:33 +0500 (IST) enclosed herewith,) while the sum was lying in the Institution. Therefore, interest on the entire sum Rs.7,66,636.00. wef 1.04.05 to 21.09.05 has to be paid. I fail to understand why I am deprived of the interest for the ensuing period wef:31.03.05 to 21.09.05

    3.The amount which was taken back has to be paid with interest wef.21.09.05 to date it is paid. The statement sent to me is: Further, I enclose a copy of the letter addressed to AGM, PPG in respect of the statement made by The Branch Manager SBI Khraghpur “Credited LHO, Kolkata with Rs.1,59,122.00 (to the amount of excess interest to the P.F. Account for the period from 20.08.2002 to 31.03.2005.) Since the money was with SBI why shall I not get the interest?

    Enclosing the letter from AISBOF:
    aisbof
    To:
    Subject: pf/pension fund
    Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 16:44:52 IST

    Dear Deb Kumar Bhattacharjee,
    This has reference to your written communication dated 21.02.2006 enclosing other related papers. The following are our observations.
    a) You have not furnished your date of birth anywhere in the representation. In view of this, we do not know, as on the date of retirement, whether you had completed 50 years of age or not;
    b) Secondly, we do not know whether you were dismissed or have left the bank service voluntarily;
    c) We assume that you have voluntarily left the services of the bank. We rely, in this connection, on letter no. PPG/3970 dated 7th November, 2005 sent to you by the PPG Department, Kolkata Local Head Office. In this letter, the AGM (PPG) has clearly stated that you have voluntarily left the services of the bank;
    d) To become eligible for sanction of pension one should complete 20 years of pensionable service irrespective of the age provided his resignation for voluntarily leaving the services of the bank was accepted and approved by the competent authority. In the instant case, Kolkata LHO letter says that you have voluntarily left the services of the bank. One is eligible for pension only on completion of 20 years of pension able service without taking into account the period on loss of pay;
    e) Regarding payment of interest for the delayed period on account of settlement of provident fund, we quote hereunder the relevant instructions contained in codified circular (PPG), current as on 30th June, 2002:
    The period of delay will be calculated from the date of application submitted for refund of provident fund or date of retirement whichever is later to the preceding day of actual payment is made. The rate will be the same as applicable to PF balance for respective pension with half yearly rests (vide Corporate Center Circular No. ADM/013596 dated 17th March, 1981). Overdue interest should be paid by debit to branch charges account. Every member is eligible to get interest on the PF contribution from the month following the month of credit to the Trustees Account. That is to say, the fund has to be settled within 30 days from the date of cessation of service.
    f) In the instant case, the period of delay is abnormal. Besides, there is a communication from Kolkata LHO that your request for payment of interest for the delayed period would be examined;
    g) The General Manager (Net Work-1) of Kolkata LHO is the competent authority to sanction interest for the delayed period. A Note has to be put up by PPG dept, Kolkata LHO, to the General Manager, obtain his sanction and convey the same to the branch which should be pay to you by debit to branch charges account.
    We are endorsing a copy of this message to the General Secretary, Bengal Circle together with the papers sent by you. You are requested to provide the required information to him for further needful action.
    SECRETARY
    AISBOF
    4.Payment of Leave encashment with interest wef 18.08.02 to date of finalization.
    5.Immidiately hand over the NSC which is liquidated in September2005 and interest on the same for delayed handing over.
    6.Interest on Commutation wef 18.08.02 to date of finalization of payment.
    With Best wishes.
    Yours Truly
    Deb kumar Bhattacherjee

    Shri Deb Kumar Bhattacharyya,
    3425, Morning Star Drive, APH #406, PPG/3970 7TH Nov. 05.
    MISSISSAUGA, ONTARIO,
    L4TIYI
    CANADA.

    Dear Sir,

    SBI Employees Provident Fund
    P.F. Index No 1684604, Date of Retirement: 19.08.2002
    Claim for overdue interest on delayed payment
    Kharagpur Branch

    We acknowledge receipt of your e-mail dated 20.10.2005 addressed to our Chief General Manager, Bengal Circle and telephonic discussions our AGM (PPG) had with you in the above matter. In this context, we have to advise that your application claiming overdue interest is being examined by us in the light of the extant rules of the SBI Employees’ Provident Fund and we shall advise you in the matter shortly.

    Further, as per our records, when you voluntarily vacated the Bank’s service w.e.f. 19.08.2002 you neither completed 25 years’ pensionable service nor attained the age of 50 years, and as such you are not eligible for pension in terms of SBI Employees’ Pension Fund Rules.

    Yours faithfully,

    For Chief General Manager

    WHEN I QUOTED THAT AFTER 20 YEARS OF SERVICE ONE IS ELLIGIBLE FOR PENSION THEN THEY WROTE:

    AGM(PPG)LHO Kolkata” | Add to Address Book | This is spam

    To: dkb4325@rediffmail.com

    Subject: Settlement of Terminal benefits

    Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2007 15:13:09 IST

    Note: To help protect your privacy, images from this message have been blocked.View images | What is this?

    Dear Shri Bhattacharjee,

    Please refer to your e-mail of 01.03.2007 in response to our letter dated 28.02.2007. We reiterate that your exit from the Bank, was not an usual retirement, but a voluntary vacation of service, with effect from 19.08.2002. You had been served with a notice dated 16.04.2004 in this regard which you duly accepted on 17.05.2004, after you had failed to resume duties despite repeated reminders. Had you retired from the Bank in the usual manner, and had your retirement been accepted and approved by the competent authority, the question of pension would have arisen upon completion of 20 years’ pensionable service.We hope that the matter has been suitably clarified.

    AGM PPG, Kol LHO

    17.03.2007

    NOW IF MY CASE WAS NOT ACCEPTED THEN HOW / WHY THEY PAID MY PF AND GRATUITY.
    THEY HAVE NEVER STATED THAT IF I LEAVE THE BANK’S SERVICE THEN I WILL NOT GET MY PENSION.
    THEY SHOULD HAVE MADE ME AWARE OF ALL THE SITUATION BEFORE .
    IT WAS BANK WHO STATED SINCE I AM UNABLE TO JOIN THEY PRESUME THAT I HAVE VACCATED MY SERVICE.
    AS PER RULE THEN THEY SHOULD HAVE APRISED ME OF THE FACT THAT I WILL NOT GET MY PENSION..
    FURTHER, I CAN’T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY SENT MY PENSION PAPERS TO FILL UP AND SEND IT TO THEM FOR ONWARD ACTION..LATTER THEY CAME WITH THIS DECISION.
    I WILL SEND OTHER PAPERS VERY SOON. PLEASE DO NOT FEEL OTHERWISE TO STATE THAT IF YOU THINK THAT THE CASE HAS NO MERIT.
    PLEASE SEND ME YOUR ADDRESS SO THAT YOU GET THE PAPERS.
    DEB KUMAR BHATTACHERJEE

    Like

    1. This refers to your post of 27.07.2008!While cruising thru’ this site with time to spare as I am visiting abroad, it appears that your query has,apparantly gone unresponded. My opinion is that the payments referred to by you relate to statutory provisions,hence paid to you.There is no other opinion contrary to that.Remember me!?Let me know whether I am right or wrong.Sujoy Ghosh

      Like

  11. I am a VRS retiree and one who strongly feel about the injustice meted out to the pensioners who were covered by the VIIth bipartite agreement. The matter has become so fluid that we are unable to guage where the mischief lies when the issue is so simple and equitable. Bank management’s indifference cannot be understood. Added to the insult, the Management feels that the VRS retirees had committed a gross misconduct as its subsequent attitude towards them indicate. VRS retirees despite their long association with the Bank were treated very badly at the time of their retirement. To quote my own displeasure, I took advantage of the VRS only because I had just two years’ of service left and there was nothing that I could look upon in the Bank even if I continued. And it was the Bank that formulated the Scheme. Only people like me opted for it for various reasons. But what was most condemnable on the part of the Bank was its total nonconcern to the retiring employees. A decent farewel to those who sweted for the Bank was not even organised. I feel totally betrayed by an Organisation which I so sincerely and faithfully served for nearly 4 decades.

    Wish Mr. Bhatt will do something positively in this respect.

    Like

  12. One aspect which has missed the serious introspection and fight by the Unions as well as Pensioners’ Association of State Bank of India is the plight of retired employees who retired with service of not less than 10 years and even more than 20 years for the simple reason that they entered service after 38 years. In the recent amendment of 5/4/2007 of the Pension Fund rules, the minimum service for eligibility of pension was reduced to 10 years and by the Bank taking a strange attitude confined it to only those who retired on or after 1/11/1993. Further the Retired Employees medical Benefit scheme was confined to only pensioners by an executive order and not extended to those who were denied Pension. Two retired employees by name N.Easwaran and N.Natarajan filed Writ Petitions before the Madras High Court in 1996 and 2000. The single judge without detailed analysis of the contentions dismissed the writ Petitions. But the Division Bench by its order dated 25/7/2007 struck down the cut off date of 1/11/1993 and directed that all retired employees irrespective of the dates of retirement are eligible for pension and thereby extended the much needed succour to those few employees who have been by sheer indifference left out the pension net. Those petitioners are now aged 85 and 76. Unfortunately, the Bank ignoring the golden opportunity to remedy the wrong has went in appeal to the supreme court and obtained interim stay. The Petitioners with no resources but fortunately assisted by Chennai Pensioners’ Association is fighting the case. It is to be observed that in the case of nationalized Banks and Associate Bank) the Government of India itself permitted payment of ex gratia pension to all those who retired before 1/1/1986 (the date from which pension was introduced in those banks as well as family pension to spouses of deceased retirees. The said directive stated that it did not extend to SBI as it has all along a pension scheme. The inference is that SBI would amend its scheme to extend similar benefits to all those who have no fault of their own denied pension. Unfortunately, SBI by putting a restrictive rule extending the benefits to employees who retired on or after 1/11/1993 left those who retired earlier high and dry. In nationalized banks, medical benefit by way of bearing hospitalization expenses was extended to all retired employees whether or not they were eligible for pension by providing that in the case of non pensioners, by one time payment of the last drawn one month’s pay they would be eligible for medical benefit. Even this salutary rule has not been followed. There is also Gen.Regulation 55(2)(e)of SBI General Regulations which provided the power in the Central Board of the Bank to grant pensions even in the case of those not covered by the extant schemes of the Bank. Even though the petitioners in those cases pointed out this in their writ petitions, there was no answer from Bank as to why the injustice wrought to them could not be undone by the exercise of that power. A representation from Sri.Easwaran has also been submitted to the D.M.D. as follows:-
    From
    Sri.N.Easwaran,
    Retired Record Keeper, SBI,
    4, State Bank Colony,
    Pammal,
    Chennai-600075
    19/4/2008
    To
    Smt. Bharati Rao
    Deputy Managing Director & CDO
    Corporate Centre,
    State Bank Bhawan,
    Madame Cama Road,
    Mumbai-400 021.

    Madam,
    I request you spare a few minutes of your valuable time to kindly go through this representation. I consider you as the personification of a mother to take care of her helpless children.

    I give below my personal particulars
    1. I was born on 25/1/24 and presently aged 84 years.
    2. I was appointed on 1/10/1962 as ‘Mattey” sort of a server in Class IV in the Pantry of the Bank for senior executives of the Bank
    3. I was confirmed in service on 1/10/1963
    4. I drew salary and other allowances as applicable to any other workman category in the Bank as per the Sastri, Desai Awards and subsequent bi-partite settlements between the SBI Staff Federation.
    5. I was promoted as “Record Keeper” a sort of clerical cadre in 1980
    6. I retired from Service on 31/1/1984 on completion of 60 years of age.
    7. My total period of service in the Bank is 21 years and 4 months.
    8. I was governed like any other employee of the Bank in respect of gratuity as per the Payment of Gratuity Act.
    9. Due to the rule then in vogue I having entered service after 38 years, I have been denied pension.
    10. It is matter of record that when the pension fund rules were amended on 26/3/1987 raising the age of eligibility for pension for entry into service from 35 years to 38 years, all persons irrespective of the date of their retirement, if they had entered service on or before 38 years were extended the pensionary benefits. I could not benefit out of the same as I was above 38 years when I entered service.
    11. After making lot of representations to the Bank and Government of India, I filed a writ Petition in W.P.No. 6691/1996 in the Madras High Court for a writ or suitable direction to extend to me the pension benefits as I had served more than 20 years in the Bank. In the said writ petition I also challenged the amendment dated 5/4/1997 in the pension fund rules which raised the upper age limit to 48 years and minimum service of 10 years for eligibility for pension and discriminating among the ex employees of the Bank by confining the said benefit to only those who retired on or after 1/11/1993. Further I contended that the Bank has enormous powers to remedy aberrations in the matter of grant of pension by invoking the Central Board’s powers under General Regulation 55(2) (e) of the SBI general regulations.

    12. I also challenged the 1996 Scheme introduced by the Bank for Retired Employees Medical Benefit where under only those who were in receipt of pension on payment of one month’s pension were made eligible for hospitalization expenses. My contention was that since it is a non-statutory scheme, the Bank cannot make discrimination amongst its retired employees by confining the scheme only to pensioners and denying the benefit to unfortunate few like me who have been by then pension fund rules were denied the benefit of pension.

    13. It is a matter of record that when nationalized Banks and Associate Banks introduced for the first time pension with effect from 1/1/1986, the said Banks were making ex-gratia pension with dearness relief to all those who retired prior to1/1/1986. This kind of taking care of those who have been left out of the benefit of pension has not been extended to persons like me on a crude logic that SBI has always a pension Scheme. The implication is that SBI can make necessary provision in their pension Scheme to take care of those who have been left out of pension benefit. In this connection I enclose the circular dated 16/5/2007 issued by State Bank of Travancore whereby the pension benefits were extended even to the spouses of employees who retired before 1/1/1986 irrespective of the period of service.

    14. It is also a matter of record that nationalized banks have extended the benefit of hospitalization expenses to pre 1/1/1986 retirees by requiring them to pay one month’s last drawn salary. You may please refer to Bank of Baroda in this connection. Unfortunately, our Bank which is the largest bank with huge resources has not thought fit to extend the scheme to an unfortunate few like me who due to the cold print left out of the pension net. It is also an irony that when en employee dies even after one year’s service, his spouse was extended the family pension, whereas due to the quirk of fate, people like me having put more than 10 years of service before normal retirement have been denied pension as well as medical benefit.

    15. Fortunately for me, the Madras High Court by its judgment dated 25/7/2007 in my Writ Appeal W.A.No.2822/2004 and another W.A.3939/2004 preferred by my colleague similarly situate found that the cut off date of 1/11/1993 for extension of pension benefit to all retirees has no rationale and ordered pension benefits to me and the other and all those similarly situate like me.

    16. I understand that the personnel department far from snatching the golden opportunity to remedy the historical and unintended wrong to a very few like me is attempting to prolong the agony by preferring appeal to the Supreme Court.
    17. I request you to kindly look into the injustice wrought to us in the matter of denial of pension as well as medical benefits and deter those in the Bank who unmindful of the human angle involved in the matter are bent upon spending resources of the Bank in engaging us in an unequal fight. The implementation of the Madras High Court judgment is a flea bite for the Bank.

    18. I don’t have the age, stamina or resources to defend the onslaughts of those in the Bank who unmindful of the human angle believe in engaging us in a wasteful and costly litigation. People like us who would benefit out of the judgment of the Madras High Court who fortunately survive are very few and may not even cross 100 or even 1000. By accepting with good grace the Madras High Court’s judgment and implementing the same will be bringing cheer to people like us who are in their 70s or 80s and not much time left to reap the full benefits.

    19. It is highly anachronic when the Government of India itself realizing the plight of senior citizens above the age of 60 has extended the benefit of pension irrespective of their employment, the Bank is considering in engaging in wasteful and debilitating litigation just to leave a few like us in the lurch and cold.

    I request you to immediately call for the papers from the concerned department and put a halt to the litigation happy of a few in the Bank, and bring cheer and succour to the unfortunate few like me who had given the best to the Bank while in service and have been left out uncared for, for no fault of us.

    I hope to have a soothing and life saving reply from you.

    Thanking you,
    Yours faithfully,

    (N.Easwaran)

    Encl. A/a.

    STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE
    (Associate of the State Bank of India)
    HEAD OFFICE :: THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
    FINANCE AND ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT
    PROVIDENT FUND, PENSION AND GRATUITY SECTION
    DGM AGM CM/BM Mgr./DM/AM Other Staff

    CIRCULAR LETTER TO ALL BRANCHES/REGIONAL OFFICES/ZONAL OFFICES/HEAD OFFICE

    ACCTS/PPG/01/07 16.05.2007

    GRANT OF EX-GRATIA TO SURVIVING SPOUSES OF PRE-1986 RETIREES: MODIFICATION TO THE EXISTING SCHEME
    Your attention is invited to circular letter No.ACCTS/PPG/02/2006 dated 6.10.2006. Accordingly, we have been paying an amount of Rs.1,000/- each as ex-gratia every month in respect of the spouses of the pre-1986 retirees ( ie., those who retired on or before 31.12.1985).
    We have now been advised by the Indian Banks’ Association that the Banking Division, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, have clarified that ex-gratia relief may be granted to the surviving spouses of the employees who died in service prior to 01.01.1986 irrespective of the period of service rendered by the employee before his/her death.The other eligibility criteria given in the circular letter mentioned in paragraph 1 above remain the same. The PPG Section at Head Office will arrange to effect the payment of the ex-gratia amount through the account opened for the purpose. The amount of ex-gratia payable is Rs.1,000/- per month. A format of the application form is enclosed (Annexure A).
    -2-

    The spouse should produce life certificate in the month of November every year. This certificate should be kept on branch record in the format enclosed (Annexure B). In case of death of the spouse, the same should be advised to PPG Section, F&A Department at Head Office immediately.
    Representations have been received from several beneficiaries for making the scheme effective from 13.09.2006, the date of notification by the Government of India instead of 20.10.2006, the date of approval of the scheme by the Bank. This has been favourably considered and the scheme has been made effective from 13.09.2006. The arrears in eligible cases are being remitted to beneficiaries’ accounts separately.
    Wide publicity may be given to the new dispensation. Please bring the contents of this circular letter to the attention of all the staff members. A copy of this circular letter may be placed on the notice board for information.

    GENERAL MANAGER (TREASURY)
    _______________________________________________________
    There is no reply to this letter till now.

    May I request all the serviving employees/officers’ Unions and pensioners take it up with the top management seriously the plight of the unfortunate few and get the historical wrong committed by the Bank remedied.
    J.Radhakrishnan, Advocate ( G.M.(Law) and Legal counsel(Retd.) of SBI, C.O.

    Like

  13. State Bank Officers’ Federation is going an indefinite strike from 20th October 2008. You may find details in their circular no.139 dated 8.9.08

    Like

  14. Even when the revised pension was announced along with pay revision in 2005 shri kakodkar raised moot points on the tv and other media with no avail. how long should it take to just implement what is legitimate for the officers/employees who worked for the bank and took vrs only formulated by the bank itself..it is highly embarrassing and disturbing to frequesntly raise this issue…trust sri o p bhatt who is a very nice person and efficient officer attends to this satisfactorily….

    Like

  15. Dear Sir, The organistion office bearers now are happy as they got the benefit. The Pensioners Fedaration & circle Units are shpowing lip sympathy only. Only few pensioners collectively fight for the justice in the court & get the benefit for the 7th Bipatite settlement pensioners also as now enjoyed by the 6th & 8th.Common fund can also moblised for this cause.

    Like

  16. All retired employees, though aggrieved, cannot be expected to agitate for revised pension, as even when in service, they only supported the association/union leaders,during agittions for various benefits. Pensioners Association should take up the matter strongly with Management/ Govt.

    Like

  17. I SUGGEST THAT ON ADD AS SUGGESTED BELOW CAN BE INSERTED IN
    LEADING ENGLISH DAILEES

    DO YOU KNOW?
    IN SBI PENSIONERS RETIRED BEFORE 1997 DRAW 50% OF THEIR
    LAST DRAWN PAY:&
    PENSIONERS RETIRED IN 2002 AND LATTER ALSO DRAW 50% OF THEIR LAST DRAWN PAY
    HOW ABOUT PENSIONERS RETIRED BETWEEN 1997 & 2002.
    THEY ARE DENIED 50% OF THEIR LAST DRAWN PAY.
    WHY?
    WE DONOT KNOW
    PERHAPS OUR FINANCE MINISTER KNOWS

    Like

  18. I SUGGEST THAT ON ADD AS SUGGESTED BELOW CAN BE INSERTED IN
    LEADING ENGLISH DAILEES

    DO YOU KNOW?
    IN SBI PENSIONERS RETIRED BEFORE 1997 DRAW 50% OF THEIR
    LAST DRAWN PAY:&
    PENSIONERS RETIRED IN 2002 AND LATTER ALSO DRAW 50% OF THEIR LAST DRAWN PAY
    HOW ABOUT PENSIONERS RETIRED BETWEEN 1997 & 2002.
    THEY ARE DENIED 50% OF THEIR LAST DRAWN PAY.
    WHY?
    WE DONOT KNOW
    PERHAPS OUR FINANCE MINISTER KNOWS

    Like

  19. Cogradulations Mr.Seshadri for winning a case for sbi pensioners. The Judgement delivered today (16/10/2008) by the honourable Chennai high court directing the bank to consider payment of pension within 3 months for VII Bipartiate retirees as per 50% of last drawn pay (1684 points)and also pay the arrears from the date of retirement.I once again congrdulate you sir.
    R.Sivagyanam (Former office bearer NCBE and Negotiating committee member III Bipartiate talks)
    Phone No: 044 2474044

    Like

  20. I ALSO JOIN IN CONGRATULATING MR.SESHADRI IN WINNING THE CASE
    FOR 7TH BIPARTITE PENSIONERS. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE FULL
    DETAILS OF THE JUDGMENT
    T.R.VENKATESAN

    Like

    1. I join in congratulate to Mr Seshadri in winning the case for the 7th bipartite pensioners. I would like to know the full details of the judgment. Please carryon the efforts. Rajkumarnegi

      Like

  21. I also join the many VRS retiress in congratulating Mr.Seshadri for his earnest effects.
    I will be obliged if you can kindly send me the details of the judgement and also let me know as to when the new pension will be effected
    thanks
    manju rajagopalan

    Like

  22. The biggest news before Diwali is the winning of the court case by Mr.Seshadri.Unfortunately,none of the circle level association have given this news to their members.We all wanted to know more about the court order and its likely implications.

    Congratulations to all the pensioners who were fighting court cases all over India and special thanks to mr Seshadri

    Like

  23. The Madras High Court in its Judgement dated 16-10-2008 has passed orders directing the Central Government to consider and approve the proposal dated 19-04-2006, submitted by the Bank to the Govt., immediately after the conclusions of the indefinite strike in April 2006 by the employees of the State Bank of India, for ammendmends to SBI Pension Fund Rules revising pension to the VII th. bipartite retirees.In this proposal the SBI has recommended to the Govt seeking approval for the revision of pension at 50% of Pay up to Rs.14,240/- + PQP and above this Pay at 40% subject to a minimum of Rs.7,120/- +1/2 of PQP and D.R over 1684 points with effect from 1-05-2005.Mr Seshdri and others filed four writ petitions praying for pension to all at 50% of pre-revised pay with a merger of 1616 points and D/R and commutation as per the VII th. bipertite Industry level settlement. All the four writ petitions were disposed by this common order. The Counsel of the SBI ,submitting to the Court a copy of its proposal dated 19-04-2006 pleaded that the SBI is not able to implement this proposal which is pending with the Government.Based on this proposal, the Madras High Court has passed the above order.

    The Government should honour this verdict and implement this order with out any delay.

    The implementation of this judgement will remove the anamoly caused to the VII th bipartite retirees and will make them on par with the VI and the VIII th bipartite retirees. It will not how ever help the retirees of the V th. Bipartite retirees, some of whom receive pension at 31.7 % of their last drawn pay only.It will not also ensure the revision of pension on actual salary revised from the date of reitement. It will continue the discrimination of payment of pension at 50% of Pay to some and at 40% of pay to the rest. Payment of pension at 50% of Pay to all the past pensioners would involve an additional amount of about Rs 100 crores only. Even then the Govt would not remove this discrimination.

    While the above anomalies would continue, the implementation of the Madras High Court’ Judgement would remove the discrimination caused to the VII th. bipartite retirees.

    Comment by P.P.S.Murthy

    Like

  24. I STAND CORRECTED IN THE LIGHT OF COMPREHENSIVE REPLY GIVEN BY
    SHRI.P.P.S.MURTHY AS RAGARDS THE RATE OF PENSION BEING PAID TO 6TH & 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. NONE THE LESS THE FACT REMAINS THE WORST AFFECTED PENSIONERS BELONG TO 7TH BIPARTITE: THAT TOO REGULAR PENSIONERS WHO RETIRED AT THE AGE OF 60. LET US HOPE THE GOVERNMENT MAY NOT DIRECT THE BANK TO FILE A REVIEW PETITION IN THE COURT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT.
    LET US ALL WISH THE NEW YEAR 2009 SHALL BRING HAPPINESS PROSPERITY & PEACE TO ALL PENSIONERS.

    T.R.VENKATESAN. (TRV)

    Like

  25. Congrats Mr.sheshadri. Sir you have done what the Pensioners’ association is not able to do.They simply talk and agitate and move around on Pensioners’ subscription. Pl help the poor pensioners of SBI.

    Like

  26. sbi top MANAGEMENT INCLUDING CHAIRMAN HAS NO COURTESY TO RESPOND TO THE LETTERS ADDRESSED BY ANY PENSIONER.

    IN MY CASE I AM FIGHTING FOR FAMILY PENSION TO THE DISABLED CHILD(AFTER DEATH OF BOTH PARENTS)UNDER THE BANKS SCHEME,since LAST 2 YEARS. SENT REPRESENTATIONS TO THE CHAIRMAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR.OP BHATT, IN PERSONAL NAME, ALSO TO MR.DESHPANDE, SPL. OFFICER AT C.O. FOR RETIREES, BUT NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE. NO BODY IS RESPONDING.
    WHAT SHOULD I DO NOW. I APPROACHED ALL THE CONCERNED DEPARTMENTS, OFFICES, VISITED PERSONALLY, PHONED, E MAILED , SENT COURIERS AND SO ON. BUT EVERYBODY KEEPS SILENCE.
    PL. ADVISE

    Like

  27. Congratualtions Sehadri…..What the associations are not doing you have done.But one PPS Murthy has commented agaist it.Is he an SBI officer privy to all decisions by Govt?

    Like

  28. Please forward this to at least links to Pensioners association in Bomabay …..or VD Deshpande retd officer in Indore or Shrikant Desai President of the Pensioner’s association at mumbai

    Like

  29. Request to Mr.A.Kumar,
    Regarding the sanction of family pension to the disabled children of the deceased parents, can you furnish the details in this regard by e-mail to murthypps65@yaho.co.in for taking up the matter with SBI.
    Regarding the observations of Mr.Rao dated 18-01-09, no comments were made by me in my observations placed in this site on 28-10-08. Only the facts of the judgement delivered by the Madras High Court have been placed for the benefit of the visitors to the site.An appeal has been made to the Government to honour this verdict. If the judgement is acted upon by the Government, it would place the Seventh Bipartite retirees of State Bank of India on par with the Sixth and Eight Bipartite Retirees of State Bank of India by enabling them to get pension at 50/40% of their actual salary.This appeal made to the Govt does only support the efforts of Mr.Seshadri.

    P.P.S.Murthy

    Like

    1. DEAR FRIENDS,
      IF SUCH ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IS PERSISTING, THERE IS CRIMINAL BREACH OF TRUST FOR NOT OBEYING THE MADRS HIGH COURT ORDER, I HAVE ,THEREFORE OF DOUBT WHETHER WE CAN CONTEMPLATE A CASE ACCORDINGLY AGINST BANKS AND THE GOVERNMENT.. UNLESS WE MOVE ON THESE LINE OF ACTION THE GOVERNMENT AND IBA WILL NOT HEAR OUR LEGITIMATE DEMAND . PLEASE ADVISE.

      Like

  30. Congratulation to all pensioners and Mr.seshadri for winning the case on seventh bipartiate pensioners. Please let me know when the judgement will be effected from as three months from the date of judgement has already passed.
    Why is government delaying the implementation.

    B.D.Giri/Darjeeling/02-02-2009

    Like

  31. I consider that Asociation should take up pensioners’ issues.At the time of retirement they have taken a lump sum to send brochures and also communications tot he pensioners irrespective of affiliations.but this has been thrown to the winds.
    Medical benefits are not enough.Banks’ diapensary doctors behave like vested interests.They compalin against the management and paucity of funds.they don’t do any medical work of a doctor.they demand prescription from outside doctors.They treat the pensioners shabily telling that it is Central office or DGM’s instructions.they should provide all resonable medicines required in old age.
    SBI boasts about with magazines like “Second innings” But real help is little.

    Like

  32. Pl go thru the judgment.there is no condition like that.they have directed SBI to consider only.SBI has planned to appeal further.
    The ills are creation of the greedy association bearers who neglected all other categories while accepting the increase in pension.
    If at all pension is increased it should be applicable to all surviving pensioners and family pensioners.Here association is going by bipartite to safe guard the time frame of officers benefit.Since they are greedy to get some benefits fir the retirees of the later bipartite they neglect the earlier ones.Reason is fund allocation.

    At least from now on the negotiations should be done by calculations for all pensioners totally.Then every increase will help the old pensioners as well.If the new pensioners are prepared to lose some benefits for the sake of old ones that is welcome and correct.After all the corpus is built by the old and not the new.Even the Bank should think in such terms.Old pensioners are getting reduced day by day by deaths.Let there be some respect for the seniors and also benefits.

    Like

  33. y earlier one was reply to thisM

    “It is learnt that the high court of Madras has directed to the sbi and the government to pay the pension @ 50% of the basic paylast drawn salary of the pensioners who retaired in VII the barppatite agreement with in 3 months of the date of the order. it seems that 3 months is already over but the payment has not been made so far. it is a voilation of the court order and a string action to be taken by the court agaisnt the sbi officials and government

    Comment by P.M.GOPALA KRISHNA PANIKER | February 6, 2009 “

    Like

    1. I am a pensioner since 1994.I get pesion as per the VI th BP Agreements. The revison as per the letter stated by H.Ganapathy say from @ 2000 must apply as arrears to the sixth Bipartite retirees.Bank should recalculate the pension applying proper DA rates and changes to calculate arrears.This is not done for those who don’t claim and live in far flung areas from the LHO making the pension payments.Further the centralised system shouyld be able to pay proper arrears by programming the old scales of pay and DAy and FPA and PPA..PQA was omitted in my case and still they have not included.You cannot expect aold pensioner to keep track of all these things.SBI should appoint retired employees and who were savvy in salary calculations etc (excluding the union amd association oriented persons) in the dept. Further medical schemes for retirees should be extended to all without discrimination of classes as VRS retirees or general retirees or super annuated retires etc.

      Like

    2. I am a pensioner since 1994.I get pension as per the VI th BP Agreements. The revision as per the letter stated by H.Ganapathy say from @ 2000 must apply as arrears to the sixth Bipartite retirees.Bank should recalculate the pension applying proper DA rates and changes to calculate arrears.This is not done for those who don’t claim and live in far flung areas from the LHO making the pension payments.Further the centralized system should be able to pay proper arrears by programming the old scales of pay and DAy and FPA and PPA..PQA was omitted in my case and still they have not included.You cannot expect aold pensioner to keep track of all these things.SBI should appoint retired employees and who were savvy in salary calculations etc (excluding the union amd association oriented persons) in the dept. Further medical schemes for retirees should be extended to all without discrimination of classes as VRS retirees or general retirees or superannuated retires etc.

      Like

  34. IT IS TIME FOR MR SESHDRI TO COME ON THIS BLOG AND EXPLAIN THE PRESENT STATUS. MAY I REQUEST SOMEONE CLOSE TO HIM TO CONTACT HIM AND MAKE HIM TO COME ON THIS BLOG TO EXPLAIN WHAT IS IN STORE FOR 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.

    Like

  35. IT IS TIME THAT MR SESHADRI COMES ON THIS BLOG AND EXPLAINS
    THE PRESENT POSITION SO THAT 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES CAN KNOW
    WHAT IS IN STORE FOR THEM & HOW LONG THEY HAVE TO WAIT. I SUGGEST THAT SOME ONE CLOSE TO HIM CAN TALK TO HIM IN THIS REGARD.
    T.R.VENKATESAN.(TRV)

    Like

  36. when every pensioners/family pensioners and working federations and bank management and hon’ble courts give verdict for payment of pension/family pension as per the pension rules why the govt has reservation in this area and the functionaries sitting there have developed personal animosity towards bank staff in general and pensioners in particular is not under stood by anybody and by any logic. most of the pensioners involved from 1997 to 2002 have reached the heavenly abode during the period of 10 years. sentimentally those left may feel happy from there is this issue is settled at least now.

    Like

  37. SO MANY PEOPLE SAY SO MANY THINGS. BUT WHAT IS THE REALITY NOBODY KNOWS. WHILE MANY PEOPLE CONGRATULATE MR.SESHADRI FOR HAVING WON THE CASE, NO ONE HAS BROUGHT HIM TO THIS LOG TO
    EXPRESS HIS VIEWS. I REITERATE MY REQUEST TO HIS CLOSE FRIENDS
    TO BRING HIM TO THIS LOG
    T.R.VENKATESAN (TRV)

    Like

  38. I see no reason in these comments.The Govt is not willing to consider even the court directions.Can anyone publish the court directions to SBI and Govt if any? I presume that this is not going to materialise…very soon.Association is struggling to bring in the new bipartite talks with so many conditions.The chacter of the work force of officers has changed in the sense they are now young and more task oriented.the recent IT boom and such people are now fully in the grip of the matter.Pensioners (old lot)have been forgotten.In olden days when award staff was twisting their muscles with more overtime earnings,officers suffered a lot stayin in the branches and offices working hard to balance the books.they tioled and moiled burning the midnight oil.Such pensioners are now in earlier bipartites without proper medical facilities and more expenses to fend for themselves.The wealth created by such hard work is standing SBI in good stead today with more efficient networks and customer base.Even SBI was the field of experimentation and stipulation of financial values for RBI.RBI learnt everything from the field of banking known as SBI.
    After all these The SBI dispensaries are not providing proper medicines and vested interest are operationg quoting rules and blaming the management.As a family of SBI veterans I am part of the old generation who worked for 18 hrs a day in the branches to keep the flag of SBI up.But now I feel all that was in vain…The Govt interference and non-chalance and stoogy behaviour of the management to Govt bosses for promotions etc have grown too much.
    I pity all the SBI pensioners who were pillars in the branches before computerisation.they were sandwitched between management and Award staff who got overtime without even working on a contract basis in some branches.
    The SBI management should be proper if not liberal to understand the old retired emplyees’ contribution and help them with honour dignity and facilities.The present day branch managers and staff don’t even recognise them despite circulars and behave and tret them as unwanted visitors while somebody has given a routine after retirement “visit The nearby SBI branch” as if it will regale the pensioner.
    This forum can take up such issues as medical facilities and dignified treatment of oldies who have done enough for the present lot to earn their salary by continuing a strong system whose foundation was laid by the pensioners.The chairman should lead the policy towards pensioners by example.

    Like

  39. I know Seshadri is not in pensioners Association ruled by PPS Murthi and he fought on his own.whether he has won the issue or not…the SBI Pensioner’s association has started claiming credit for it.this is nufair and the all India
    SBI pesioners should know the full story……….Let us rally behind Seshadri instead of this association

    Like

  40. by reading this blog and replies i am educated on issues in the right perspective.I heard from one retd.technical officer of the bank ie SBI who was also a classmate of Arun Ramanathan,finance secretary,that Mr. Chidambaram who is no more the Finance minister is in the way despite his not having any standing in finance ministry.It seems he still hold a consultative and pseduo-control on these issues and is opposed to the extension of 50% pension to 7th bipartite officers.
    Chidamabram is not aware that these officers and ealier ones were those who have brought the standing of SBI’worth in good stead even if he was not in Govt or not in any decision making capacity in earlier Govts.
    His policies would got skewed but for the communists and the earlier SBI associations who were really powerful to have influence on the policies of the bank.Somebody should make his political and legal brain to understand the need for dignity for pensioners who have raised the flag of SBI collectively.These old pensioners accepted computerization and even passed thru the phase of changeover without much increase in wages. Let him understand that he did not manage profitability of SBI and only these poor oldies.Instead of paying lip service let him extend a liberal attitude to the senior citizens and care for more medical facilities and arrange health camps for them.they have definitely worked more than the IAS officers and Govt officials silently under political pressure.Pl remind him of Poojari and even Sanjay Gandhi days.
    More than the present working officers the old pensioners have contributed more for the present day IIR of the banks particularly SBI.

    Like

  41. I see that many discriminations exist in treatment of pensioners by SBI.Further the medicines distributed from the dispensaries of SBI are said to be for common ailments for staff and family including pensioners.The stocks and categories stored are left to the discretion ofthe medical officer and the local HRD dept who are not aware of the needs of the old people.they stroe some eye drops which are not required at all.Further the they don’t find the generic names of the medicines and supply equivalent medicines.At least they should supply a list of medicines available at the dispensary and even stock position can be revealed by a chart to the staff and pensioners so that they can claim the equivalent.
    Once an officer gets ol retires what is the difference? some are treated as if they are in service and even rare medicines are purchased from outside and supplied.
    Common cataract medicines or drops are not stored. Doctors don’t see patients. insist on outside prescriptions for medicines.
    All these old dicta should be revised.All pensioners deserve equal treatment irrespective of their cadre of retirement.

    Like

  42. I agree with Ramadorai and Kumar.i think they write the facts and the nonchalance of officialdom has crept into the treatment of oldies.Once or ord officer.you are old why there should be discrimination as MD or Dymd or CGM o GM or Ord. officer.All live with one foot in the grave.Why denial of equality at that stage.This is a clear case of arrogance of the officers on top in the bank like SBI.

    Like

  43. I find the comments very relevant and thought provoking.Real current underneath is different and the top management of SBI is insensitive to the needs of the pensioners.In an organised way many associations in the name of puttin forward the needs of the pensioners are not doing so correctly.As a retd. senior officer I find that the pensioners who are the workers of yesteryears should be rewarded better as the banks’ present top brass cannot pretend the toil and moil of these pensioners in the “overtime” days when the lower order held the management to ransom and these poor officers who are decrepit and old shouldered the responsibilities even burning the mid-night oil by compulsion without compensation.It is unfair and atrocicious that outcries of somany pensioners remain unanswered by the benumbed officialdom which cares for its existence on a day to day basis.

    Like

  44. The Pensioners association is taking up the issues of oficer pesioners particularly senior officers’The Award staff retiree issues and the junior officer issues are left in the lurch.there is imbalance in the negotiations and management should be vary of this.

    Like

  45. I draw the attention of all concern the latest Circular No.53 dated 06.04.09 issued by AISBOF signed by Com.G.D.Nadaf regarding the discussion held with SBI Management on 4th and 5th April 2009. Regarding improvements in superannuation benefits and review of medical benefit scheme for retired employees the circular states:
    The matter of improvements in SBI Superannuation benefits will be followed-up with the Government at the highest level to resolve the issue as early as possible.
    Review of medical Benefit Scheme for retired Employees from JMGS-1 to V will be finalised shortly.
    Will the Bank review the medical Benefit Scheme for the retired Awar staff also. Are they think that the award staff pain and suffrings on account of illness is diffrent than officers. The so called improvements in superannuation benefits will be extended to 7 th Bipartiate retirees also. Both the live Organizations and Pensioners Federation should take up the matter effectively and donot fall a fray to Managements divide and rule policy among the retirees of officers and award staff.
    RSivagyanam. Phone No:044-24794044 Cell No 9789859810

    Like

  46. Yes, the issue really needs immediate attention. At the same time we are also supposed to get the revised structure in the Payment of Gratuity in comparison to the Govt. employees as per the recent amendment of the Pay Commission. I am also opted VRS from the Patna Circle in Jan.2007 and presently shifted to Hyderabad. Should anybody is able to advise if any favour is going to be in near future?

    Like

  47. It is unfortunate that despite clearcut directions to Govt. of India by Hon’ble High Court of Madras to consider the proposal of the Bank and approve the amendments to SBI Pension Rules as regards the payment of pension to 7th Bipartite retirees from 1-5-2005, the Government instead of compying with the order sleeps over the burning issue perhaps contemplating to file an appeal agaist the order belatedly after a lapse of about 10 months. On the side of the petitioners’ counsel Shri. Seshadri also, it seems no action by filing a contempt petition is thought of to set the ball in motion to see its logical end. If no contempt petition is filed at the earlist, the interests of the 7th Bipartite retirees are going to suffer. Since the High Court Judgement has come in handy and it is a silver lining in the dark clouds, it is the responsibility of the petitioners to take advantage of the situation and grab the golden opportunity. And time is running out for a contempt petition. As the claim of the 7th Bipartite retirees is justifiable and rightful, let there not be any fear of filing a contempt petition. If they fail to advise their counsel properly they will be commiting a great injustice not only to themselves but also to the other struggling lot. Justice delayed is Justice denied and they will be missing the bus for ever. Therefore it is my earnest request to all the petitioners to impress upon their counsel Shri. Seshadri to file the contempt petition withot losing time. This action only will sustain the appreciation earned by the counsel for the Petitioners,Shri. Seshadri.

    Like

    1. Seshadri should not follow the pensioner,s association advices.They play scond fiddle to the association and aother comercial schemes like running school and arranging tours etc.Even in earlier bipartites the present office bearers of the pensioners association were involved and worked to the detriment of the common cause.Everything is in the hands of O.P.Bhat and the ministry who are not favourably disposed.The higher officials try to increase their pension benefits and health schemes.We want a separate independent pensioners association with people like seshadri and very many others who are neutral and are not influenced by commercial motives but influenced by common good with a consensual approach to benefit all.the senior offfiers who are trying to corner all benefits must understand that even a dunnderhead would have worked in the position and passed on to superannuation.The results are due to all the hard work of the undemanding neutral staff without vested interests in their career.

      Like

  48. It is unfortunate that despite clearcut directions to Govt. of India by Hon’ble High Court of Madras to consider the proposal of the Bank and approve the amendments to SBI Pension Rules as regards the payment of pension to 7th Bipartite retirees from 1-5-2005, the Government instead of compying with the order sleeps over the burning issue perhaps contemplating to file an appeal agaist the order belatedly after a lapse of about 10 months. On the side of the petitioners’ counsel Shri. Seshadri also, it seems no action by filing a contempt petition is thought of to set the ball in motion to see its logical end. If no contempt petition is filed at the earlist, the interests of the 7th Bipartite retirees are going to suffer. Since the High Court Judgement has come in handy and it is a silver lining in the dark clouds, it is the responsibility of the petitioners to take advantage of the situation and grab the golden opportunity. And time is running out for a contempt petition. As the claim of the 7th Bipartite retirees is justifiable and rightful, let there not be any fear of filing a contempt petition. If they fail to advise their counsel properly they will be commiting a great injustice not only to themselves but also to the other struggling lot. Justice delayed is Justice denied and they will be missing the bus for ever. Therefore it is my earnest request to all the petitioners to impress upon their counsel Shri. Seshadri to file the contempt petition withot losing time. This action only will sustain the appreciation earned by the counsel for the Petitioners,Shri. Seshadri.- H. GANAPATHY

    Like

    1. Shri.Seshadri is contemplating to file a contempt petition at appropriate time and he will fullfill the aspirations of the 7th Bipartiate retirees. He is following the case on daytoday basis and also the move by the Govt. to file an apple against the order.He will also get the cooperation of all the people interested in implementation of the favorable order issued by The Hon.High Court Madras.I earnestly hope that everyone will work together in getting the pension for the 7th Bipartiate retirees.
      SIVAGYANAM.R

      Like

  49. THE JUDGEMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT IS SLEEPING
    IN THE HANDS OF ALL CONCERNED & MANY ELIGIBLE
    RETIREES IN THE MEANTIME LEFT THIS EARTH FOR THEIR
    ETERNAL SLEEP. GOD SAVE SBI & PENSIONERS
    T.R.VENKATESAN(TRV)

    Like

  50. DO NOT UNDER WHY THE FEDERATION AND THE MADRAS PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION ARE NOT TAKING FURTHER STEPS FOR THE RETIERESS UNDER 7TH AGREMENT. IT IS EAGER TO KNOW THE ACTUALS POSITION OF THE CASE. IF THE GOVERNEMENT HAS NOT GONE FRO APPEAL , WHY NOT FILE A CONDOMNED OF COURT WAITING FOR REPLY

    Like

  51. MANAA KI HARAA DIYA KISMAT NE PRITHVIRAJ CHAUHAN KO
    LARAA DESH KI KHATIR DIYA APNA BALIDAAN JO
    PAR ETNE BHI GUNEHGAAR NHI
    TO KYA NASIB NA HO APNE HI DESH KI MITTI PRITHVIRAJ KO
    PRITHVIRAJ CHAUHAN KYA ISKA BHI HAQDAAR NHI

    Like

  52. It is heartening to note that Mr. Seshadri is contemplating to file Contempt Petition against Government’s inaction over the directions of Hon’ble High Court of Madras to Government of India as regards the proposals of the Bank in the matter of pension for 7th Bipartite retirees. I wish him all the best in his endeavours to get the order of Single Judge is implemented at the earlist. This action of Mr. Seshadri will also pave way for the Government to settle the issue pertaining to 7th Bibartite retirees and set right things at least in the ensuing wage settlement of 9th Bipartite, if not in the court proceedings. I thank Mr. Seshadri for his earnest efforts towards this end. – H.GANAPATHY

    Like

  53. why union is not pressurise management and government to implement high court order otherwise union member should wear bangle and keep himself inside the door ?

    Like

    1. Earlier the association has agreed to this exclusion of the 7th bipartite retirees.How can they now pressurise.Further the persons in charge of pensioners’ associations are happy sitting pretty with more privileges with the subscription money.Wrong persons and old ideas and moribund thinking is on the fore

      Like

  54. I fail to understand that the M.P., M.L.A;s get their pension revised as per their will/wish and donot give a single notice on the rightful dermand of pensioners .it is a matter of disgrace on the part of sbi chairman sh O.P.Bhat not giving positive look on the demand of the pentioners even he himself will be retired from the bank within a short period. I once again request the government to enhance the pension of sbi pensioners upto 50% of the last drawn salary to all the pensioners including VRS retirees.

    Like

  55. Sir, With regards I wish to submit my say if the matter is not obsolete now. I retired at a basic of 15380 on 31-3-2002 after putting in 34 years of service. Basic pension 4250 only is paid.
    The points to ponder are:
    1. betrayal of the policy of making 50% of basic as pension
    2. the concept of maximum pension 4250 is bank’s own policy which is contrary to the ‘law of the land’.
    3. govt. employees get 50% without any discrimination,
    4. govt. has more pressure of managing funds for pensioner than sbi.
    5. the decision to make payment at 50% to those retired after nov.02 is not applicable to those retired before the date. Rules should be UNIVERSAL and not discriminatory.
    6. The serving employees in top positions are not doomed to face the situation because the rules have been framed favourably before their retirement. What, if they too would have faced the same conditions.
    7. The CONCEPT OF MAXIMUM PENSION needs to be reviewed in view of the justice to all on equal terms & conditions;
    8. government employees seldom face anomalies of such nature.
    9. Cann’t the bank synchronise with the policies of equality like the one prevalent in govt. has left the bank pensioner in a state that requires 150 to 175% of what is paid. A deplorable state of affairs in respect of the pensioners of the largest income generating company of India.

    Like

  56. SBI Pension Scheme did see some improvements through amendments to SBI Pension Rules gezetted in the year 1997, but the ceiling was increased only upto a certain level i.e. Rs. 4250 by modifying sub rule ( 2 ) of Rule 23 and inserting for the first time the Dearness Relief payable for various categories of retirees under sub rule ( 6 ) of Rule 23.

    However, during the year 2000, the Government Of India unilaterally brought amendments again by substituting sub rule ( 2 ) of Rule 23, thus introducing the formula of 5o% of Basic Pension for those who draw upto Rs. 8500 & 40% for those who draw above Rs. 8500 with a minimum of Rs. 4250 by means of a proviso specifying that w.e.f. 01/ 03 / 1999, the maximum amount of Pension for the members who retired / retire drawing subtantive salary in the Pay Scales effective from 01 / 11 / 1992 ( Award Staff } / 01 / 07 / 1993 ( Supervising Staff ) AND THEREAFTER shall be computed TILL AMENDMENTS in this regard. The Gazettee Notification of the year 2000 does not envisage any modification in the sub rule 6 ( iii ) of Rule 23 as regards Dearness Relief payable for those who retire on or after 01 / 11 / 1993.

    I am of the cosidered veiw that the amendment brought in the year 2000 has AN IN-BUILT STOP- GAP ARRANGEMENT in the matter of Adhoc Pension calculation based on the last drawn salary for those who draw the salary in the Pay Scales effective from 01 / 11 / 1997 ( Award Staff ) / 01 / 04 / 1998 ( Supervising Staff ) and so on until further amendments are made in veiw of the subsequent Wage Revisions. I feel that any short fall in the case of Award Staff on account of reduced percentage of Basic Pension ( Adhoc ) from 50% to 40% in the said stop-gap arrangement as regards payment on such calculations will be compensated to some extent by the Dearness Relief payable in terms of sub rule (6 ) (iii ) of Rule 23 and later on can be adjusted when the amendments are made subsequent to the relative Wage Revisions. It is pertinent to note that the words “THEREAFTER ” is omitted in the proposal of the Bank submitted before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras for further amendment as regards Maximum Pension for the 7th & 8th Bipartite Retirees. It is to be nored that the Dearness Relief payable are modified in said proposal for them..

    It is unfortunate that the Bank for reasons best known to them giving a go-bye to the spirit of the above amendment in question made in the year 2000, decided to pay pension calculated on the basis of the Pre- revised Scales of Pay against the laid down principles in this regard and Bank’s such wrong decision has caused huge loss not only in the Basic Pension but also in the Commutation ifor 7th Bipartite retirees till this moment and also 8th BP retirees until 01/ 05 / 2005.

    The 7th & 8th BP retirees are entitled to get Pension calculated on the basis of Last Drawn Pay from the date of their retirement even as per the existing provisions of sub rule ( 2 ) of Rule 23 read with sub rule ( 6 ) ( iii ). Therfore such of those retirees can take up the matter with the Bank to calculate their Basic Pension ( Adhoc ) on their last drawn salary quoting the existing provisions of sub rules ( 2 ) & ( 6 ) ( iii ) of Rule 23.and force the Bank to make legitimate payments until amendments are made in this regard. If the Bank fails, they can prefer individual claims with proper worksheet on arrears of such Adhoc Pension and also commutation, before the Labour Court under ID Act.

    Like

    1. I AGREE WITH THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY MR.GANAPATHY. BUT THEN WHO IS TO BELL THE CAT. WE CAN NOT EXPECT
      THE PENSIONERS’ ASSCN TO TAKE UP THE ISSUE AS THEY WOULD RATHER ALLOW DECADES TO PASS BY THAN ACCEPT THE 40% -50% DIFFERENTIALS. MANY PENSIONERS MAY FIND IT DIFFICULT TO CALCULATE THE ARREARS PAYABLE. I ALSO UNDERSTAND A FEW PENSIONERS HAVE ALREADY GONE TO THE COURTS ON THIS ISSUE.

      THERE MAY SOME VOLUNTEERS TO WORK OUT THE ARREARS PAYABLE TO 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. A GROUP OF PENSIONERS CAN JOIN TOGETHER AND PURSUE THE MATTER.
      IF WE WIN THE BENEFIT SHALL GO TO OTHER ELIGIBLE PENSIONERS. NOTHING IS GOING TO BE LOST IF WE LOOSE THE CASE AS WE ARE BY NOW MATURED TO ACCEPT ANY
      VERDICT

      Like

  57. SBI RETIRED EMPLOYEES MEDICAL SCHEME

    The latest amendment to the scheme also not covers the retirees under VRS & EXIT policy. The scheme provides Rs.7 lacks medical benefit for those who contribute Rs.62000 or pay the difference amount for those already members of any other scheme.
    The VRS retirees are eligible for medical benefits at that time if they have completed 30 years of service and become members of the scheme by remitting one month pension. This scheme provided equal benefit of 2 lacs even if they have remitted one month pension according to their eligible pension (lesser pension for sub-ordinate staff and higher pension for officers). Now in the amended scheme uniform amount of Rs.62000 is fixed after studying the viability and the scheme extended to all regular retirees.

    The question of excluding VRS retirees who are otherwise eligible as per VRS circular i.e. after completion of 30 years of service when uniform amount is fixed for joining the medical scheme. The Bank gives lame excuse that under VRS Scheme large number of members retired and hence the scheme nonviable. The scheme already excluded the VRS retirees below 30 years of service. The question of viability does not exist now after fixing a fixed amount of Rs.62000 for joining scheme irrespective of the cadre. The Bank can make the scheme more viable by allowing the VRS retirees to pay the difference amount who have opted for the scheme of 2 lacks after putting in 30 years of service by paying variable amount according to the cadre they belong. In the year April 2001 the amount of pension for JMG is around 8000 and they paid the amount and become members of the scheme and eligible for 2 lacs. Now to get the benefit of Rs.7 lacs they have to remit Rs.54000 extra and the Bank can permit them to get the benefit of the scheme. In the original scheme a JMG retiree paid Rs.4000 per lac and now he has to pay Rs.8850 per lack to get the benefit of Rs.7 lacs.

    The Bank should reconsider their decision and both the Award staff federation and Officers federation should impress upon the management to extend the benefit to all retirees. Being a welfare scheme the Bank should not shut the doors for the retired employees and what is the use in projecting itself to serve the society through community banking. The Bank should also realize that VRS retirees helped the Bank to rearrange the staff strength and the bank also gained by way of Medical bills, LFC bills ect. The Pensioners Associations also should take up the matter. The VRS retirees can also explore the possibility to proceed legally in the matter.

    Like

  58. I had taken up with the Trustees by email etc.on the VRS retirees inclusion in medical schemes.The scheme itself was was for shedding flab from manpower resource as Sivangyanam correctly says. Chennai personnel dept took up the matter to get a negative reply only.
    SBI considers all VRS retirees as taboo.They have forgotten the contribution.they honour officers and staff who plough the field without sowing the seed for results.
    Many VRS officers left the bank for personal reasons and mainly for the fact that he personnel policy of the Bank was defective and prejudiced and even lacked objectivity.Some left on health grounds.
    The present day bank is in such a state because of the doers from the VRS group.the present lot of higher ups are reaping the benefits.
    When an officer at GM’s level retires he is considered to be in service for medical benefits, while the working lot are left in the lurch.
    Let not the Chairman forget that the bank is in shape because of the doers from the VRS gang of officers.
    Let him be not discriminatory.

    Like

  59. It a matter of concern and shame that SBI present management is not increasing the pension of older folk.They release ADS”Bankers to the nation series”

    Who served all these big men and brought SBI to the present position? this they have forgotten.The rationality is low and lacks social perspective.The medical discrimination of VRS retirees and the non-increase of pesion to the Govt level tells upon the nature of SBI playing secon fiddle to Govt without pupose.
    They bask in old glory on paper and ADs without realising the contribution from the older folks.Injustice is flagrant and open and presen top brass are narrow minded and require good advisors.

    Like

  60. HELLO 7TH BIPARTITE SUPERANNUATION SURVIVING RETIREES!

    BE CHEERFUL & HOPEFUL TO GET PENSION ARREARS TO SUBSCRIBE THE ALL TIME ATTRACTIVE MEDICAL SCHEME & LIVE LONGER

    T.R.VENKATESAN.(TRV)

    Like

  61. The recalcitrant attitudes towards VRS retirees by the
    the bank and government are humiliated . I donot under stand that why such steps are being taken by the bank not to gve the medical benifit and penion. Are they being discharged from the bank ?. The vrs scheme was introdused by the bank and the government for benefit of the banks and government. Other wise nobody will go from the bank. One thng the bank and governemnt will understand that these employees sincere efforts to become the bank
    in number one position. at that time there was no computer also. Now all retiress are approching to death and have to spend more money towards medical expenses inadition to the rising prices of consumer items. their day to day living is difficult.
    as such my humble request is to treat the vrs retirees to be given the benefit along with others

    Like

  62. NOW THAT A MOU HAS BEENREACHED BY UFBU(WITH EXCEPTION OF SBI), WITH IBA.DETAILS ARE YET TO BE PUBLISHED!WHAT IS THE STAND OF SBI FEDARATIONS VISA VIS THE REVISION OF PENSION FOR THE 7TH BIPARTITE RERIRIES?
    ARE WE REACHING THE END OF THE TUNNELWITHOUT ANY HOPE ?
    THE NEWS IS THAT REMBS II SCEME IS EXTENDED TO ALL REPEAT ALL, WITG TTHE EXCEPTION OF SBIVRS,VRS RETIRIES ETC!
    IT IS REDICULOUS THAT a) a person WHO HAS PUT IN 38YRS OF SERVICEWAS TREATED AS ATTAINING PENSIONALBLE SERVICE& ADMITTED TO REMBS SCHEMEWITH A COVER OF RS 2LACS,IS NOW NOT ENTITLED TO THE NEW REMBS SCHEMEIITHOUGH HE IS WILLING TO CONTRIBUTEMORE TO ENHANCE THE LIMIT.
    THE CONTRIBUTION FROM THE CAPABLE PENSIONERS WILL STRENGTHEN THE CORPUS FUND.B) THE REMBS SCHEME BEING CONTRIBUTORY WHY IS THIS DESCRIMINATION!
    THIS ISSSUE IS MORE SERIOUS THAN THE PENSION ISSUE,AS THIS INVOLVESTHE HEALTHCARE OF SENIORCITIZEN BANK RETIRIES.
    IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THE PERSONS CONCERENED ARE EITH SLEEPING OR PRETENDING TO SLEEPING!

    Like

  63. Dear Comrades,

    It is gratifying to note that the Leadership of serving Employees’ / Officers’ Federations walked out of the Negotiating table at Industry level on 9th BP wage revision protesting against the raw deal in the case of State Bankmen.

    When the Pension benefit is extended to all the PF optees of other Banks by IBA at an additional cost burden of Rs.4200 crs on its side, why not IBA/GOI agree for the improvements in SBI Pension Scheme besides setting right the anomoly in the case of 7th BP retirees giving the due share to State Bankmen and permitting SBI to bear the additional cost at the same percentage?

    Are the State Bankmen not part of UFBU? Or Is the SBI not a member of IBA? It is a shame that the State Bank Management has also become a party to the MOU of 27th Nov. by signing the same and betraying the cause of their own employees / officers.

    When IBA/ GOI agreed to give while introducing Pension Scheme in other Banks in 1993/1995 its due share of 6% of the total establishment cost to State Bankmen for improving the SBI Pension also to some extent at the given point of time, why they now deny such share? Is it not an extension of 1993 settlement on Pension at industry level?

    Now both the Federations of serving Employees/ Officers are burdened with not only achieving the improvements in SBI Pension Scheme comparable with Industry level Pension Sheme but also satisfying serving employees who are the members of such organisations, by securing them some additional benefits as hitherto been settled in 6th & 7th BP wage talks.

    We, the pensioners are duty bound to applaud the courage and conviction of the leadership of the serving employees’ / officers’ Federations for their bold step & timely revolt in this regard. We should extend total support to their actions. We wish them all success in their endeavours. We also request the other partners in UFBU to come forward in supporting the just cause of State Bankmen.

    Like

  64. IT IS HEARTENING TO NOTE THAT OUR FEDERATIONS HAVE NOT SIGNED THE MOU FOR THE RECENT LY CONCLUDED WAGE SETTLEMENT.
    BUT THEN WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROMOTING AICOBO/AIBOC? WHO MADE CHOTTA BANKS TO CLAIM EQUALITY WITH SBI ?
    WHAT WE GAINED IN THE PROCESS? ONLY THE WRATH OF YOU OWN BROTHEREN WORKING IN OTHERBANK.S.

    DOES’T MATTER. THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN TREATING US AS BIG BROTHER. DON’T RELENT. THIS GOVT/IBA/OTHERS
    ARE NOT GOING TO LISTEN TOYOU NOR THINK RATIONALLY.
    STRIKE ONCE FOR ALL UNTIL THESE FORCES RELENT.CALL FOR AN INDEFINITE STRIKE IN SBI AND ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF SERVING AND RETIRED STAFF.VICTORY IS NOT FAR BEHIND.

    Like

    1. Yes. The leadership of the Federations in the yester years are only responsible in promoting AIBOC / NCBE, but it is only out of certain compulsion. Until 2nd BP, SBI was not a member of IBA. It was only during the period of Emergency only SBI was advised by GOI to join IBA. This necessitated the Federations to discuss with IBA on wage talks. Even after this also SBI men were able to get additional benefits such as higher increments in view of change over from middle class to working class index & computerisation, SCA, FPA etc. The Special Pay in SBI is still higher than the one existing in other Banks. There is a specific class in every wage settlement for the protection of certain special copensatory provisions and its further improvements accepted by all the negotiating unions. About two or three months back also a settlement was signed between SBI management and Award Staff Federation achieving cost of Petrol, financial benefits for late sitting of one hour etc. This is with regard to Award Staff.

      In the case of SBI Officers despite the implementation of Pillai Committee in the early seventies the Grades and corresponding Pay are fixed at higher level while compared to other Banks permitting the officers for automatic swich over.. SBI officers are placed in an enviable position in regard to the fringe benefits such as unlimited medical benefits, LFC even to fly upto London, higher rental housing accomodation, allowance for car maintenance, allowance for car shed, allowance for servantmaid, closing allowance, Provision of all types of Furniture, Cleansing materials, Petrol, brief case, curtain etc., etc.

      These benefits both to Award Staff & officers definitely quantify heavily in terms of cost compared to other banks. Indeed these are remarkable achievements of both the Federations even while promoting AIBOC/ NCBE.

      In the recent past, of course SBI Management have been luring the Federations to settle the wages separately as if they are magnanimous in their approach. The Premier Bank, SBI which celebrated its centenary celebrations, they did not even care to bother about its employees and officers. It is a shame on the part of SBI management to have signed the MOA on 29th Dec. in the absence of the leadership of both the Federations. If the intentions of SBI management to have separate negotiations on wages are genuine, it should have acceeded to the request of both the federations from keeping away of MOA on 29th Dec.. This didn’t happen because SBI management is playing a double role by remaining with IBA perhaps at the instance of GOI. One thing is certain that whatever that was secured all these years is not due to any gesture on the part of SBI management, but it was due to the collective bargaining strength of both the Federations.

      When every wage revision was over, for us as erstwhile serving employees of SBI our expectations were only high in securing some additional financial/ fringe benefits but not thought of the pension improvements at that time. It is quite natural for anyone to expect like that and no one either the leadership or membership of the serving employees” organisations can be blamed for this melody. Spearheading the National organisations viz. AIBOC & NCBE did not spoil the special status of SBI.
      Anyhow, it is heartening to note that the serving employees/ officers Federations are moving in a right direction with a veiw to secure their due share in overall cost and it is everybody’s fond hope and belief that they will sure to take care of the Pensioners’ interest as it had been thought of in 6th & 8th BP. – H. Ganapathy.

      Like

  65. My comments on SBI Pension issue sent during the first week of December 2009 and again thereafter on 9th December do not appear in this blog. – H. Ganapathy

    Like

  66. My comments on SBI Pension left on 2nd & 9th December 2009 in this blog do not appear thereat for some reasons. Please advise the reasons for the same. – H. Ganapathy.

    Like

    1. YOUR COMMENTS OF 2 ND & 9TH DEC DO NOW APPEAR ON THE BLOG.FRINGE BENEFITS SHOULD NOT STAND IN WAY WHEN WE ARE FIGHTING ON PRINCIPLE. YOU COULD HAVE
      CONCLUDED BY URGING THE FEDERATIONS TO CALL FOR AN
      INDEFINITE STRIKE-NOTHING ELSE SHALL BRING RESULTS.-ONLY EXTREME STEPS PAY DIVIDENDS IN THIS
      COUNTRY
      T.R.VENKATESAN(TRV)

      Like

  67. RSIVAGYANAM

    They walked out why? They are not prepared themselves. They have not done sufficient home work. The leadership should have discussed well in advance about the cost of pension by other Banks and the share by SBI with SBI management and also with other constituents of UFBU. They should have gone to the negotiating table after settling the pension issue with SBI management. In the past negotiations even Special allowances are settled with SBI management and will form part of the Industry level settlement.

    Everyone knows that IBA insisting that employees should bear the cost of Pension. In SBI cost of pension never taken into account since it is entirely born by the management. In fact by various settlement and court case the Contribution towards pension fund in SBI has been removed and the entire contribution for Pension is made by SBI management. The IBA has introduced contributory pension scheme for other Banks and now a new contributory pension scheme from 2010 onwards is going to be implemented.

    The AIBOC General Secretary Shri.Nadaf in his letter dated 9th Dec 2009 to Dy. Chief Secretary IBA writes as under:
    “we confirm having conveyed to you that we shall provide names of two representatives from AIBOC on 15th December 2009 for attending the work relating to finalizing the joint note. We are thankful for your agreeing to postpone the meeting proposed for today and tomorrow and to fix them after 15th Dec 2009.”
    Alas after this letter The IBA including SBI management representatives and UFBU (excluding SBI Federation) held discussions on 9th Dec and 10th Dec.2009. In that meeting IBA nominated three representatives for small committee and they proceeding with finalizing the wage settlement.
    The SBI federations should be firm and should not participate in any manner including nominating representatives for small committee unless until they settle pension issue in SBI and also should not agree for NEW PENSION SCHEME from 2010. The leadership should be firm and decesive.

    Like

  68. VRS retirees are two kinds.One is with golden handshake and the other ie the ealier ones are with normal pension route.How the normal VRS retirees who have not taken Golden handshake and who retires even before 1996 be excluded from the Medical schemes? this shows the utter careless management with selfish ends.while the CGMs are treated for medical scemes as if in service others are left in the lurch.this is atrocious and can be challenged in the courts
    the present SBI management are not visionary.They lack all perspectives.That is why not a single banker from SBI considered for any awards by the President of India.Even the Economic forum awards are stage managed and given by the CEOs and media who depend on SBI for loans and funds.This situation is very corruptive and shows the cheating nature of the directions and corrupting influence on the bankers particularly SBI.

    Like

  69. The earlier years of domination of officer’s association is gone.The association has enjoyed our patronage but could not get what pensioners’ want.VRS is a historical necessity and thrust on the bank because of computerization and other ills as vested interests and domination of a few officers from Bengal cadre.These bankers at the top made the appraisal subjective to suit the promotion process for a few oficers of Bengal cadre etc.
    The officers who ploughed the field without sowing the seed are now at the top as if they are strategic thinkers.They have clean forgotten the earlier days when the present vrs officers toiled and moiled to work in the branch without overtime payments. Even the award staff got payments of overtime as contact in some branches without any work for not disrupting the work of officers.these are facts.
    WE took vrs in the normal channel v3exed with the policies and atrocities of the staff who were patronised by the management leaving us to do all the work.thetop talks of tall HRD which is only a drama and vacant shell.
    If the discriminate the vrs retirees they don’t deserve any medical benefits from here now on as they are enjoying the benefits without work.
    Study the routine of the present top brass and ealier officers in branches.They really bask in the son and frame wrong policies

    Like

  70. The earlier years of domination of officer’s association is gone.The association has enjoyed our patronage but could not get what pensioners’ want.VRS is a historical necessity and thrust on the bank because of computerization and other ills as vested interests and domination of a few officers from Bengal cadre.These bankers at the top made the appraisal subjective to suit the promotion process for a few oficers of Bengal cadre etc.
    The officers who ploughed the field without sowing the seed are now at the top as if they are strategic thinkers.They have clean forgotten the earlier days when the present vrs officers toiled and moiled to work in the branch without overtime payments. Even the award staff got payments of overtime as contact in some branches without any work for not disrupting the work of officers.these are facts.
    WE took vrs in the normal channel v3exed with the policies and atrocities of the staff who were patronised by the management leaving us to do all the work.thetop talks of tall HRD which is only a drama and vacant shell.
    If the discriminate the vrs retirees they don’t deserve any medical benefits from here now on as they are enjoying the benefits without work.
    Study the routine of the present top brass and ealier officers in branches.They really bask in the son and frame wrong policies

    Like

  71. Central Govt employees are enjoying the higher ceiling limit for Gratuity Amount even though their productivity level are far less than Bank employee. Why trade union are silent in this regard?When the bill will be intoduced? I am in fear that due to pressure from industrial sector (in the guise of recession) Govt may not impliment it from 01/01/06 ( the date of Central Govt employees are enjoying now) Whether our prnsioners associations have taken this matter and submitted any memorandum to Labour minister of GOI If the ammendement to act brought in this regard and implimented from prospective date whether bank managements are ready to give the benefits to their emploees from 01/01/06 as in the case of central govt employees Whether Banks have made provision in this regard?I shall be much obliged if any body enlighhtened in this regard

    Like

  72. I introduce myself as JUNE 2009 pensioner.Never there was so much of confusion and uncertainty in the BANK wage revision during the earlier occasions.The concept of industry level wage revision is still to be properly understood.The cold war between SBI staff and other bank staff still continues.It is felt that bank level settlement for once atleast will put things in order.A premier bank and its staff union and officers association are not able arrive at an acceptable wage revision even after more than two years have passed .At this rate better start negotiations for the next revision due in 2011./2012.AND ATTEMPT FOR PROMPT IMPLEMENTATION OF 10TH BIPARTITE.The attitude of the GOVT. in the banks wage revision is puzzling.While non profit making GOVT.departments can get 40% or more as wage increase(though PAY COMMISSION recommendations are implemented once in 10years only)why cannot the banks pay a little more as their employees toil in tension to earn increasing profits every year.IT is either the GOVT. IS STEP-MOTHERLY OR we lack in proper ,convincing and emphatic representations.Please take up the matter of old pensioners with more vigour as their second twilight is fast entering the darkness.

    Like

  73. As a proud former staff of SBI for more than 40 years,i submit that” SURPRISINGLY”advertisement and the much publicised “PARIVARTHAN’ and follow up programmes have done more damage to SBI image than good.Any mammoth organisation like SBI , with record number of branches,staff and dealings of different nature due to social commitments and profit making intentions will have a few slips here and there.The fear of other banks overtaking SBI is unfounded.If only the bank thought that the performance should be improved ,it could have taken the above steps after a careful and analysis.I am sure no bank would have overtaken SBI in a short time.The performances of the so thought competitors are on the board for verification and study which proves that the fear of losing our market share is baseless..By acting with a little haste SBI has given room for sarcastic interpretation of the above referred programmes.All said and done , SBI is SBI .Let the top brass think twice before they implement such ideas to maintain SBI name and premier position which was,is and will never be, lost.

    Like

  74. Nothing is at sight on SBI Pension improvements from the discussions that are taking place between the SBI Management and Serving Employees’/ Officers’ Federations for the past two and half months after the walk out of both Federations’ leadership from the negotiating table on the day when the two MOAs signed between the IBA & UFBU pertaining to 9th BP wage revision.

    There is no concrete action on the part of the Petitioners to ensure the implementation of the direction given by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras on the proposals putforth by the Bank which is still pending with the GOI even after the lapse of one year.

    Both the GOI and the Bank who are respondents in another petition filed by a few aggreived pensioners before the same HC have successfully reduced the speed with which it moved by seeking adjournment after adjournment.

    The petitions filed before Andhra HC & Delhi HC and various High Courts are being listed periodically and getting adjourned.

    On the otherhand It is unfortunate to note that the aggreived pensioners are becoming older day by day and the life span of some are also not getting extended.

    The only solution now before the pensioners of SBI that they should agitate on their own strength unmindful of their age and more particularly their status in Bank’s service. It is a pity that in meetings and dharnas arranged earlier by the Association only a handful of its members (who were the erstwhile lower and middle level officers & Award Staff in their sevice) show their faces. Yet, Pensioners’Association and serving employees’/officers’ organisations are only blamed for the delay in getting the benefits.

    I suggest that all the erstwhile Top Executives who are now aggreived, instead of reposing faith and confidence only on the Management should rally round and give a lead to fight in streets for their legitimate pension. This will drive all the others irrespective of cadres in their past service in the Bank to join them in raising their voice against the adamant attitude of the Bank- GOI combine. I am sure and certain that this type of action only will receive the attention of the powers that be and this Bank- GOI combine knows only this language. I am compelled to say this due my past experience having been involved in Trade Union activities. Please ponder over. – H. Ganapathy.

    Like

    1. I COULD FORESEE THE DISAPPOINTMENT IN THE CONTENTS OF GANAPATHI’S LETTER. IF SERVING EMPLOYEES GIVE A CALL FOR INDEFINITE STRIKE FOR THE SAKE OF SBI PENSIONERS, THE GOVT WILL DEFINITELY YIELD. SBI MANAGEMENT KNOWS THE GENUINENESS OF THE DEMAND.
      WHY NOT PEOPLE CLOSE TO UNIONS/FEDERATIONS TAKE A LEAD TO PERSUADE THEM. ONE THING IS CERTAIN. IF YOU MISS THE BUS NOW, THAT IS THE END OF HOPE FOR 7TH BIPARTITE SURVIVING PENSIONERS.
      T.R.VENKATESAN.(TRV) 04.02.10. 4.15P.M.

      Like

  75. MY DEAR SHRI GANAPATHI I fully agree with what you have stated.It is a fact that the pensioners who have contributed their maximum for the BANK to reach no.1 position in the country and sustain the same,are given step motherly treatment when the proper and justified compensation due to them in the final twilight of their lives IS DENIED/ DELAYED..Regarding the 9th bipartite less said is better.I DOUBT IF ANY PRESENT STAFF MEMBER WILL KNOW WHAT THE 9TH BP WILL FETCH EVEN THOUGH IT IS OVERDUE FOR MORE THAN TWO YEARS.When that is the case it is too much to expect from the negotiators to take up our cause.IT is fully known that the pensioners will not resort to intensified actions on account of poor health and economic conditions.Hence the ignoring and luke warm treatment .The present leaders should realise that they are to join the PENSIONERS GROUP shortly.Any progress in this area is a saving and planning for their future too. For the present , let them atleast ensure that our DA pattern is revised from half yearly revision to quarterly ,so that there is a faint support against the GUINNESS RECORD , UNABATED INFLATION, for which nobody wants to take credit..Definitely the inflation will eat away the real value of wage revision arrears when(!)paid.OUR STRUGGLE AHEAD ,STRUGGLE AHEAD slogans have now more value now than in the past,of course without any succour visible in the near future.STILL HOPING FOR BETTER TOMORROW FOR THE PRESENT AND OLD BANK EMPLOYEES AS MAN THRIVES ON HOPES.

    Like

  76. i AM TOTALLY AGREE WITH THE MR. VENKIDESHAN
    VIEW. WHATMR. SHANTA RAJU IS DOING AS A CONVENER OF THE PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION IN THIS REGARD?

    Like

  77. Refer statements of H GANAPATHI&TRV.Anxieties and frustrations well understood and agreed 100%.At present the serving employees are in an unenviable position viz.a viz. their wage revision due from NOV.2007 which is yet to come to light.The delay in 9th BP Implementation is increasing while the 10th BP(?)IS FAST APPROACHING(?)But nothing noteworthy is achieved in pension revisions for those who have given their best during the best part of their life and are now passing out into darkness from their second twilight.With failing health and meagre pension they are struggling to make both end meet and the fact is well known to the GOVT. and BANKS.YET THEY ARE NOT CONCERNED.I beg to differ on one point.I very much doubt if the present employees will come out with a strike action for the pensioners cause as their own wage revision is neither implemented nor to their expectations.Stalwarts like Ganapathi ,Reddy ,Bala, Moses ,Dharmarajan,TVL and others who have many Trade union successes to their credits over the past 50 years can put their heads together and come out with a suitable action program as an alternative to strike which will definitely succeed.Please think over and act immedietly as the time is running out for the elderly pensioners who can be head counted as they are very few in numbers.WITH BEST WISHES TO SUCCESS Y.MANICKAM

    Like

  78. All said and done the bitter fact is the present bank unions and associations are still unable to settle for a decent and fair 9th bipartite which is overdue for more than two years. .The cause for this is still not known to anybody.It remains a RUSSIAN SECRET.It is a fact that the employees are unhappy and unsatisfied over this.Any strike call given by the leaders for the pensioners cause at this juncture is unlikely to succeed.Already our seniors are struggling to make both ends meet due to low pension and deteriorating health conditions.This fact is very well known to the GOVT. &THE BANK. The bank owes its number one position as on date to these great souls for their sincere and dedicated service when there was no computer ,no adding machine .no calculators etc. and every t hing was done manually.They never saw sunrise and sunset.They entered the bank with robust health and retired with a lot of pride for their prime service but with a poor health and compensation.It is now for SBI management to honour these left out few , as many have already left for their heavenly abode.The IMPERIAL BANK PENSION FUND may also be combined with SBI PENSION FUND so that the administration will be easy and the retirees will also be happy with a little more pension in the present days of sky rocketing inflation. There are many stalwarts in our group who have achieved a lot as TRADE UNION LEADERS during their active service which benefits are enjoyed by the present employees.I suggest our retired leaders come out of their lair ,put their minds together and chalk out action plans which will have a positive result.My comments may please be taken up in the true sense and i am definite our old guards will definitely succeed.

    Like

  79. i HAVE ALSO CONVEYED SOME OF MY FEELINGS TO THE PENSIONERS ASSN.PUNE AND THEY HAVE INFORMED ME THAT THE MATTER IS RELENTLESSLY BEING FOLLOWED.ACCORDING TO THEM THE GOVT. IS YET TO CONCUR WHICH, YOU STALWARTS MAY ALREADY BE AWARE OF.MY SINCERE REQUEST TO MY SENIORS IS PLEASE CHALK OUT A SUITABLE PLAN VIZ. A VIZ.OUR POSITION AS PENSIONERS, WHICH WILL PRODUCE POSITIVE RESULTS.I PUT FORTH THIS PROPOSAL BECAUSE YOU HAVE WON STILL CRITICAL AND COMPLICATED ISSUES DURING YOUR ACTIVE PERIOD AS EMPLOYEES CUM TRADE UNION LEADERS AND EVERY PRESENT BENEFIT ENJOYED BY EXISTING EMPLOYEES IS THE OUTCOME OF YOUR STRUGGLES OF YESTER YEARS.

    Like

  80. THERE IS NEWS ITEM CAPTIONED “SBIOA WANTS GOVT TO BETTER PENSION SCHEME WRITTEN BY ARINDAM SINHA IN INDIAN EXPRESS FINANCE DATED 16.2.10 2.25 AM-QUOTING G.D.NADAF IT READS “AMONG THE IMPROVEMENTS BEING DEMANDED BY THE AISBOF IN THE BANK’S EXISTING PENSION SCHEME THAT THE PENSION AMOUNT RECEIVABLE BY THE EMPLOYEES SHOULD BE 50% OF LAST EARNED BASIC PAY,THAT ALL OLD PENSIONERS FROM 1997-98 SHOULD ALSO BE BROUGHT UNDER THE FOLD OF THE IMPROVED SCHEME AS SUCH PENSIONS RELATE TO THE 199I PAY SCALE”
    I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THE PRESENT STATUS OF THIS DEMAND VISA VIS GOI RESPONSE-PLEASE UPDATE
    DEVELOPMENTS
    T.R.VENKATESAN.(TRV) 9.A.M.

    Like

  81. It is rather surprising that our old veteran warriors who have won several benefits for the bank employees in the past which are enjoyed by the present employees also, are not coming out with strategies for the pensioners cause.You can observe that the 9th wage revision has already entered the BANK WAGE REVISION history as a dark chapter.30 months out of the run period of 60 months have already elapsed. With the ambiguous wage deal still to be completed ,the present leaders present a very sorry figure.They seem to be afraid of giving a strike call , perhaps they have their own doubt on its success.The PENSION ISSUE has been conveniently or rather inconveniently given a good bye it seems. The sinking pensioners, who have given the best of their best during the best of the best of their best period, suffering unlimitedly, they only plead to the leaders PLEASE, PLEASE GET ATLEAST DA NEUTRALISATION AND QUARTERLY REVISON ON THE EXISTING BASIC PENSION , I REPEAT EXISTING BASIC PENSION which will reduce their sufferings to some extent at least. Pensioners, at this rate do not hope for anything more from the UNIONS AND ASSOCIATIONS ,PARTICULARLY TAKING UP THE STREETS ,AS YOU ARE NOW COMPLETELY OUT OF THEIR MIND AND FOCUS.I HOPE ALL MY SENIOR PENSIONERS WILL AGREE WITH ME AND COLLECTIVELY ACT TO APPROACH THE BANK-TOP,IBA, FINANCE MINISTRY AND THE FINANCE MINISTER FOR REDRESSAL.STILL WISHING YOU ALL A BETTER TOMORROW , AS MAN THRIVES ON HOPES.

    Like

  82. SBI PENSION SCHEME

    PRESENT STATE OF AFFAIRS

    STEPS TO BE TAKEN

    PREAMBLE

    The main and foremost demand of all concerned in SBI as regards improvements in SBI Pension Scheme are 50% of Last Drawn Pay and rectification of anomaly in Pension to VII Bipartite retirees.

    The demand for 50% of Last Drawn Pay is being raised from the expiry period of the V Bipartite as the ceiling of Rs 2400/- is far below the 50% of Last Drawn Pay at the given point of time.

    When the demand as above was forcefully negotiated upon during 1993, at the time of introduction of Pension Scheme in Nationalised Banks, the Government of India was not even willing to enhance the ceiling on Pension from Rs 2400/- to Rs 6500/- even though the settlement dated 29.10.1993 provided for improvements in SBI Pension Scheme in consultation with the Award Staff / Officers’ Organisations in SBI. From that period until now, i.e., up to 2010, the Government of India is not in a mood to accept the proposal for 50% of Last Drawn Pay but on the other hand attempts to thrust on VII Bipartite retirees even now, the VII Bipartite Wage Settlement provision on Pension. In the interregnum, GOI also adopted 50% – 40% formula by an amendment during 2000 for VI Bipartite retirees w.e.f. 01.03.1999 and again by a MOU during 2006 (with a view to end indefinite strike ) for VIII Bipartite retirees w.e.f. 01.05.2005. Thus the GOI is the stumbling block not only for 50% Last Drawn Pay as Pension, but also for rectifying the anomalies even on the lines of 50 – 40 formula for VII Bipartite retirees.

    The reason behind the adamant attitude of GOI is as follows:

    GOI wrote to Bank on 25.04.1994 as under;

    a) SBI Employees enjoy three superannuation benefits as against only two benefits in RBI and Other Nationalised Banks.

    b) The Cap on Maximum pension in SBI was intended to reduce the gap in superannuation benefits available to SBI Staff and RBI Staff.

    c) Further advantage given to SBI is difficult for GOI to accept.

    d) There was a consensus at the time of Negotiations in Sept – Oct 1993 to the effect that the disparity existing there in superannuation benefits should not be increased.

    e) It was only in this context, the SBI was kept out of 29.10.93 settlement on Pension introduction on other banks.

    f) Even the increase in quantum of ceiling is likely to create IR problem in RBI.

    g) GOI has decided as a matter of policy against Pension as 3rd retrial benefit.

    Notification on amendment of 1997

    Despite its firm policy, GOI approved the proposal for enhancing the ceiling on Basic Pension from Rs 2400 to Rs 4250 w.e.f. 01.11.1993 as a package for Technological up gradation (yet the Pension was restricted to 27.42% of Pay in the case of senior officers.).(GOI letter dated 23.02.1999

    Notification on amendment in 2000

    a) Due to pressure mounted on it from all quarters, the GOI unilaterally decided to introduce 50% – 40% formula, removing the ceiling on Maximum Basic Pension w.e.f. 01.03.1999 but fixing cut off in Pay as “upto Rs 8500 – 50% of Last Drawn Pay and above Rs 8500 – 40% of Last Drawn Pay” with a view to give relief for all senior officers who retired during VI Bipartite.

    b) The pattern of 50% – 40% formula is all set by GOI providing leeway for enhancing the cut off pay from Rs. 8500/- for the quantum of Pension in terms of subsequent Bipartite Settlements on wage revision by inserting the word “until further amendments made” in the proviso of Rule23(2) and at the same time adopted the said cut off salary provided therein i.e. Rs. 8500/- applicable to the retirees under subsequent Bipartite Settlements (i.e.) VII & VIII Bipartite Settlements until such time by inserting a word “thereafter” in the same proviso of Rule 23(2). .

    GOI letter referred in Bank’s proposal before Madras High Court says:

    After the VII Bipartite, GOI advised SBI on 06.02.2001 on a reference made by it, to modify the ceiling on cut off Pay as provided in VII Bipartite (VI Bipartite scale + 1616 points merger) which is far below the Last Drawn Pay emerged after merging 1684 points with a hike.

    GOI in its counter in 2003 before Andhra Pradesh High Court says:

    “When SBI intended to have certain modification in the formula (i.e. 50% – 40%) on 30.10.2002, i.e., on the date of expiry of VII Bipartite, the GOI examined the same and advised the Bank on 18.02.2003 to furnish certain information to enable it to consider the proposal.

    Indefinite strike demanding 50% of Last Drawn Pay as Pension & opposing 50% – 40% formula.

    The strike could achieve only a modification over the ceiling or cut off on Pay from Rs 8500 to Rs 21040 + FPP + PQP with the retention of 50% – 40% formula w.e.f. 01.05.2005 making it applicable only to VIII Bipartite retirees.

    Constitution of a Group to study the Pension Fund and its report on 21.09.2007 which says:

    a) On the plea of both Federations before the Group which included two top officials from GOI, insisting on 50% of Last Drawn Pay as basic pension, the Group clarified that this matter has already been negotiated and resolved in April 2006 (the period when the MOU was signed to end the indefinite strike) settlement and made it clear that the same cannot be reopened, but agreed to recommend the issue on VII Bipartite pension for Govt. of India’s consideration as De-Novo.

    GOI in its counter dated 15.02.2010 before Madras High Court says:

    a) On an assurance by the Group, SBI referred the proposals (?) to GOI on 25.02.08 and 16.10.08 for consideration, but since these were bereft of the plausible reasons for improvement in the extant pension regulations, these were duly considered by GOI and were rejected.

    b) SBI is not within its competence to grant its pensioners a benefit which goes against the grains of settlement.

    c) A further disparity in favour of SBI employees is neither conducive nor desirable for industrial harmony in the financial sector as the Pension is an additional retrial benefit to the SBI employees.

    d) Inspite of prescribing a ceiling on the maximum amount of pension prior to 01.03.99 and grant of the pension @ 50% up to a pay and if exceeding thereof then @ 40%, SBI had contributed around Rs 6000/- to more than 10% statutory contribution mandated in the pension fund over a period of time in contravention of the SBI Pension Fund Rules.

    e) Pension needs to be managed within the corpus of Pension Fund.

    f) There is no provision in SBI Pension Fund Rules that any shortfall in the Pension Fund would be contributed by the Bank on the basis of report of Actuaries on every 31st March as is obtained in the case of other Bank’s Pension Regulation.

    g) It is a misplaced notion that the matter for the revision of pension is under consideration of GOI and its approval is not yet received. As a matter of fact, the pension of retirees from 01.11.1997/01.04.1998 to 31.10.2002 and 01.11.2002 to 30.04.2005 were regulated in terms of the 7th and 8th Bipartites and there was hardly any point of consideration.

    Report dated 21.09.2007 of Group constituted by GOI consisting of two officials (Director and Under Secretary, Ministry of Finance) and three top ranking officials of the State Bank says:

    a) The requirement of additional contributions for each year beginning 2006-07 to 2045-46 at the discounted rate of 9% in the pension fund computes to Rs 286.75 crores.

    b) If the additional contribution to the Pension Fund is to be spread over a period of 14 years to make the Pension Fund sufficient to meet the pension fund sufficient to meet the pension to the existing employees, in that case the additional contribution is assessed to be Rs 525 crores p.a. from 2006-07 to 2019-20.
    (This is according to the valuation made by the Actuary from Mumbai.)

    OPINION

    1. In the above backdrop, we have to think of forcing the Bank to pay pension on Last Drawn Pay as per the SBI Pension Rules as amended up to 2000, through Court of Law. In this connection, I have earlier addressed a communication to the Pensioners Association on the relevant provisions of SBI Pension Rules u/r 23(2) read with Rule 23 (6) which in my opinion will enable the 7th Bipartite retirees and 8th Bipartite retirees who retired before 30th April 2005 to get better benefits than the quantum of pension as was received by them at present.

    2. My view is strengthened by the undernoted factors.

    a) Direction of the GOI vide letter dated 23.02.1999 which reads as under:

    “The matter has been examined and it has now been decided that wef 01.03.1999 the ceiling on full pension may be revised as follows:

    i) Employees/officers having
    Pay up to Rs 8500 p.m. 50% of the Pay

    ii) Employees/Officers having
    Pay exceeding Rs 8500 p.m. 40% of the Pay
    (subject to Min.
    of Rs 4250)”

    and further advised the Bank to send a proposal for making an amendment in the Pension regulations to the above effect.

    b) Accordingly, amendments were notified in 2000 as under

    Rule (23) – Sub Rule (2)

    “The maximum pension shall not exceed one half of the average monthly substantive salary, drawn during the last 12 months pensionable service….

    Provided ………

    Provided further that wef 01.03.1999 the maximum amount of pension for the members who retired/retire drawing substantive salary in the pay scales effective from 01.11.1992 (Award Staff) / 01.07.1993 (Supervising Staff) and thereafter shall be computed till further amendments in this regard as under:

    a) where the average of monthly substantive salary drawn during the last 12 months pensionable service is up to Rs 8500 p.m. 50% of the average of monthly substantive salary drawn during the last 12 months pensionable service (pro rata in the case of part-time employees): and

    b) where the average monthly substantive salary during the last 12 months pensionable service is above Rs 8500/- p.m., 40% of the average monthly substantive salary drawn during the last 12 months pensionable service, subject to minimum of Rs 4250 (pro rata in the case of part time employees).”

    c) The Madras High Court judgment dated 07.02.2006, in a case relating to SBI Pensioner of VI BP, the Division Bench observed that the petitioner is entitled to revised basic pension in terms of the revised basic salary, more particularly when he was paid the difference of basic pay after the settlement.

    d) The Madras High Court judgment dated 16.10.2008 in 167 petitioners case, the Single Judge observed that Rules provide for grant of pension on the date of his retirement. Payment of pension must be based upon Last Drawn Salary. It is further observed that for those who retired w.e.f. 01.11.1997/01.04.1998, there is no justification in payment of pension in the pre-revised pay of 1993.

    e) GOI in its counter before Andhra Pradesh High Court stated that till such time the rule is amended, the employees shall continue to get Pension and Dearness Relief thereon as per the existing provisions wherein all the employees/officers are governed by common formula and are entitled to pension as per rules.

    f) GOI in its counter before Andhra Pradesh High Court stated that as reported by SBI, the employees are being paid pension pending revision in the rules as per existing rules.

    g) The Bank before Andhra Pradesh High Court in its counter stated that pending revision in the pension rules, the employees are being paid as per the existing rules amended with the approval of RBI and GOI and accordingly they have not been subjected to any laws.

    The Bank before Madras High Court in its counter stated that the Basic Pension is fixed for all the retirees in the manner provided under SBI Employees Pension Rules.

    h) GOI in its counter before the Madras High Court stated that as long as the amendments are not carried out in SBI Pension Fund Rules, the retirees of SBI are governed by the extant rules and in terms of extant rules.

    Dearness Relief

    The extant rules of SBI Pension Scheme has three categories of pensioners for payment of Dearness Relief as mentioned in Bank’s circular No.PER/21 dated 14.02.1997.

    (i) the pensioners who retired prior to 01.11.1987

    (ii) the pensioners who retired from Bank’s service between 01.11.1987 and 31.10.1993.

    (iii) the pensioners who retired from the Bank’s service on or after 01.11.1993.

    The Bank while effecting the payment of Dearness Relief to the above pensioners visualized vide its circular PER 21 dated 14.02.1997 some shortfall /excess payment of Dearness Relief and therefore called for the details of all such cases i.e., those retired officers/employees, if any, for whom the Dearness Relief payable stands reduced and/or any amount is recoverable as a result of the payment advising to get an undertaking for any excess payment.

    5) After the Division Bench order of the Madras High Court, the SBi petitioner who retired on 01.03.1993 though received the maximum pension as per his Last Drawn Pay under VI Bipartite Scale with merger at 1148 points, he was paid Dearness Relief over 600 points as per the extant rules of the SBI Pension Scheme.

    Conclusion

    Therefore, a petition by the Pensioners Association before the Madras High Court, praying for invoking Rule 23 (2) read with Rule 23 (6) will bring temporary relief to all the petitioners who aspire for achieving their rightful claim of maximum pension.

    (H. GANAPATHY)
    PENSIONER, SBI

    Like

    1. DEAR SHRI GANAPATHI.
      THANK U FOR THE EXHAUSTIVE HISTORY OF PENSION ISSUE IN SBI.
      I WOULD LIKE TO WHETHER SBI PENSIONERS” ASSOCIATION HAD FILED A PETITION BEFORE THE MADRAS HIGH COURT AS
      MENTIONED IN THE LAST PARA OF YOUR LETTER.
      WHAT PREVENTED THEM FROM DOING THIS MUCH EARLIER? KINDLY THROW SOME LIGHT ON THIS DARK ISSUE. SINCE BEING CLOSE THE TRADE UNION, YOU CAN MAKE OUR LEADERS TO ACT FAST. THANK YOU
      T.R.VENKATESAN.(TRV) 8.15 A.M.

      Like

    2. Now that the GOVT. has agreed for pension to other banks also and is about to implement the NEW PENSION SCHEME shortly, which will apply to SBI future employees also i state that ( 1) The number of old pensioners/family pensioners is less in SBI and the PENSION FUNDS are sufficient to take care of increases to these few.As such payment of 50% of last drawn pay will be possible. (2) whether last drawn pay means periodical updation also o/a of subsequent wage revisions . (3) If JUDICIAL REMEDY, as suggested, is the only way out ,a meeting of pensioners can be called for immediately and if funds are required contributions may be sought for and none should grumble to pay amounts around a few hundreds say Rs.200/- to Rs.500/-considering the recurring increase in pension it will fetch.(4)It is surprising why this has not been thought of all these days.(5)As i am a new pensioner entrant i do not have much information on the earlier efforts including approach for judicial remedies ..It is now a matter of utmost urgency considering the fast decrease in the number of pensioners./family pensioners.Hence it is for our association to convene a meeting immediately ,explain the gravity of the matter,arrange for contribution for the just cause and go ahead with seeking legal remedy.It is now for our sincere ,senior ,experienced and knowledgeable ,old war horse leaders to act.My comments may also be published in the next issue of ELDERS VOICE as a swift means of communication.NOW OR NEVER —-THE MATTER HAS REACHED A CRUCIAL STAGE.IF NOT ACTED NOW LET US FORGET PENSION REVISION AND RESIGN TO THE FATE.

      Like

  83. It may please be observed from the reply sent by Govt. of India as far back in 1994 that Govt. of India seems to have taken a policy decision not to accept a proposal on Pension comparable with that of RBI and other banks and also adduced reasons for that.

    Subsequently, our Pension Scheme did see some improvements through amendments to our Pension Rules notified in the year 1997, but the ceiling was increased only upto a certain level i.e. Rs.4250/- by modifying sub rule (2) of Rule 23 and inserting for the first time the Dearness Relief payable for various categories of retirees under sub rule (6) of Rule 23.

    However, during the year 2000, Govt. of India unilaterally brought amendments again by substituting the sub rule (2) of Rule 23, thus introducing the formula of 50% of Basic Pension for those who draw upto Rs.8,500/- & 40% for those who draw above Rs.8,500/- with a minimum of Rs.4,250/- by means of a proviso specifying that with effect from 1.3.1999, the maximum amount of pension for the members who retired / retire drawing substantive salary in the Pay Scales effective from 1.11.1992 (Award Staff) / 1.07.1993 (Supervising Staff) and thereafter shall be computed till further amendments in this regard. The notification of year 2000 does not envisage any modification in the sub rule (6) (iii) of Rule 23 as regards the Dearness Relief payable for those who retire on or after 1.11.1993.

    I am of the considered view that the amendment brought in the year 2000 has an in-built stop-gap arrangement in the matter of Pension calculation based on the last drawn salary for those who draw salary in the Pay Scales effective from 1.11.1997 (Award Staff) / 1.04.1998 (Supervising Staff) and so on, in view of subsequent wage revisions until further amendments are made. Any short fall in the case of Award Staff on account of reduced percentage of Basic Pension in the said stop-gap arrangement as regards computation of Pension will be compensated to some extent by the Dearness Relief in terms of sub rule 6 (iii) of Rule 23 and later on may be adjusted when the amendments are made subsequent to the relative wage revisions. It is pertinent to note that the word “thereafter” is omitted in the proposal of the Bank submitted before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras as regards the Pension for 7th & 8th Bipartite Retirees and also note that the Dearness Relief Payable for them are modified.

    It is unfortunate that the Bank for reasons best known to them giving a go-by to the spirit of the above amendment in question made in the year 2000, decided to pay Pension calculated on the basis of Pre-revised Scales against the laid down principle in this regard and on account of which retirees have incurred huge loss not only in the Basic Pension but also in the Commutation.

    The amendments to sub rule (2) of Rule 23 of SBI Pension Rules in terms of the Notification 2000 may be studied and analysed in depth in true letter and spirit along with the proposal of the Bank submitted before the Hon’ble High Court of Madras.

    As the Pensioner’s Association has been demanding pension as 50% of the last drawn pay as in the case of other banks and also in view of the decision of the Apex Court during 1989, the Association may find it difficult to file a petition on the lines suggested by me, since it may dilute the long pending demand of all concerned i.e. 50% of the last drawn pay as pension.

    H.GANAPATHY
    Pesioner, Retd. SBI

    Like

    1. DEAR SHRI GANAPATHI
      THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. WHEN SERVING EMPLOYEES HAVE ACCEPTED 50% & 40% FORMULA,WHAT IS THE USE OF PENSIONERS’ ASSOCIATION STICKING ON A PRINCIPLED STAND OF 50% UNIFORMLY TO EVERY RETIRED
      EMPLOYEE. NEITHER THEY ARE GOING TO ACHIEVE THIS NOR
      A RETIREE SHALL SURVIVE-LIFE BECOMES MEANINGFUL ONLY WHEN COMPROMISES ARE MADE-LET US HOPE THE LEADERS AWAKEN TO GROUND REALITY
      TR.VENKATESAN(TRV)

      Like

      1. 7th B.Ps and Delhi High Court Case
        ge gksaxs dke;ko ,d fnu & ej.kksijkUr

        It has been observed from the developments taken place on
        17-4-2014 at Delhi High Court that the Bank/Govt. has succeed in their motive of lingering on the above case for un limited period. As our Federation has very correctly mentioned in their letter dated 18-4-2014 appeared on the website of SBI Pensioners Association Mumbai Circle (Pune) that our case which is listed on 25th September 2014 for Final Hearing will not be heard for the purpose as one of our colleague pensioner Shri Kiran Kumar Jaipuriar had filed a W.P. in Jharkhand High Court on 8.3.2010. With the consent of this pensioner/petitioner as per the order of Supreme Court in a transfer petition filed by our Bank was transferred to Delhi High Court & listed to be heard along with our W.P. In this way we will not get the decision of the above W.P.in our life time. It appears that our mighty employer SBI/as well as Govt. will always play the game of hide & seek and when the W.P will ripe for Final hearing they will play such type of games. It appears that our mighty employer – SBI has manipulated the things and motivated one of our colleague to file a flimsy W.P.in Jharkhand High Court for which Federation is already fighting.
        Friends our mighty employer SBI might play such type of games for lingering on our case for unlimited period I have already written an article in this regard in
        HINDI
        HUM HONGE KAMYAB EK DIN POSTHUMOUSLY 14-5-2013 which was placed as Image on Word Press.com as well as on Face Book.
        Since our Media is reluctant to highlight our Humane Agenda and mischief of our mighty employer and Government we have no alternative but to use Social Media.

        Like

      2. Thanks for the comment. I look forward to you to contribute suitably on this blog expressing your views and this can be of advantage to many of the other retiree pensions.

        Like

      3. THE CONCERN HIGHLIGHTED BY SHRI GOPALJI TANDON IS VERY CORRECT AND GENUINE. I TOO JOIN HIM IN HIS CONCERN, SIR

        Like

    2. Further to my earlier message I also feel that if the govt.blocks 50% pension on last drawn pay we may try to obtain the 50% and 40% formula already arrived at.This compromise may reduce our expectations but nevertheless there is an increase in the pension.Considering the plight of the pensioners ,SOME THING IS BETTER THAN NOTHING.LET THE FEW SURVIVING OLD PENSIONERS ENJOY SOME INCREASE DURING THEIR LIFE TIME FOR THEIR SELFLESS AND LENGTHY CONTRIBUTION TO THE BANK’S PRESENT NUMBER ONE STATUS TO THE LEVEL OF EXTENDING OPERATIONS IN CHINA.

      Like

  84. This forum is turning out to be unpredictable.There is sudden activity which is followed by a lull when something has to be frantically discussed and done.The way the 9th bipartite is moving is a cause for embarrassment to the present leadership who are not able to deliver the goods.So let us not expect anything for the pensioners from them now.The best they may be able to secure could be pension based on revised basic pay for those pensioners who were in active service on 01/11/2007,the date from which 9th BP IS LIKELY TO BE IMPLEMENTED.As always done the old pensioners will be let down with the usual promise to take up their matters with the SBI TOP and THE GOVT. Pending court cases will continue asand for ever ..Can our old war horses think of any other legal ways to represent the reasonable expectations of the few old living pensioners.?I do not know how many pensioners have left for their heavenly abode between my previous and present communication.While the accruing pensioners are taken care of in the new settlements ,only the dwindling JAMBHAVANS are neglected in their last part of their life.Hence i renew my requests to the senior pensioner leaders to take up the matter in the appropriate forum as they and they alone can deliver the goods and do justice in the matter.PENSIONERS AT THE PRESENT RATE, DO NOT EXPECT MUCH OR EXPECT VERY VERY LITTLE FROM THE 9TH BIPARTITE.

    Like

  85. Dear All,
    I joined sbi bank on 1-7-1981 and under suspension from april 2007 and dismissed from service during oct 2001. After appeal to tribunal they modified order into compulsory retirement order dated 25-1-2010
    I want whether i am eligible for pension?
    If yes from which date?
    How much pension am i eligible?
    From which date I will get arrears?
    I request anyone to clarify my doubts.
    thanks to all and this forum.

    Like

  86. Dear All,
    I joined sbi bank on 1-7-1981 and under suspension from april 1997 and dismissed from service during oct 2001. After appeal to tribunal they modified order into compulsory retirement order dated 25-1-2010
    I want whether i am eligible for pension?
    If yes from which date?
    How much pension am i eligible?
    From which date I will get arrears?
    I request anyone to clarify my doubts.
    thanks to all and this forum

    Like

  87. GLAD TO NOTE THAT SHRI.H.GANAPATHI HAS SINCE BEEN INDUCTED AS CONSULTANT IN PENSIONERS’ ASSOCIATION. THIS BRINGS ABOUNDING HOPES THAT 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE BOUND TO GET SOME RELIEF BE IT 40% OR 50%-THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE AT ALL- CONGRATS TO GANAPATHI
    WISHING HIM SUCCESS IN ALL HIS ENDEAVOURS.
    T.R.VENKATESAN.(TRV)

    Like

  88. Congrats GANAPATHIJI A person with solid legal acumen ,we expect a lot from you on solving the pension issue and we also know that you can deliver it. Please light up the candle in the poor old pensioners homes soon.Let there be at least a half smile in their faces after a long time. Y.MANICKAM

    Like

  89. Only one more day to go for implementation of NEW PENSION POLICY (from 01/04/2010).There is a message that the unions have approached the IBA with a request to keep introduction of NPS IN ABEYANCE TILL THE 9TH BIPARTITE IS SETTLED.Once the NPS is introduced ,the confusions and commotions created will take time to settle down.The prospects of some relief to the GOOD OLD, POOR ,AND NEEDY PENSIONERS will again be delayed /denied.Once again the matter will be back to square one.Again start from stage one and if at all there is going to be an improvement,how many old pensioners will be alive to enjoy the same ,based on the fast decline in the number of old pensioners?NOW OR NEVER is the present position.GOD ALONE CAN HELP AT THIS STAGE TO ENSURE PREVAILING OF BETTER COUNSEL.

    Like

  90. refer to the latest news dated31/03/2010.In view of the rigid stand of GOVT/IBA ON THE PENSION ISSUE,unions are said to have withdrawn all pension demands.A perfect ALL FOOLS DAY GIFT& treatment given to pensioners.The wage revision talks are still in conclusive.So nothing can be expected for the old pensioners at present.Due to the present position of the pensioners both health and monetary vise (BOTH POOR) ONLY NEUTRALIZATION AND QUARTERLY REVISION of DA can come to the rescue of pensioners and be of some help immediately.Who will bell the cat?pending pursuing of50%pension try to get at least neutralization and quarterly revision .All surviving pensioners will subscribe to this view definitely.I do not expect any immediate response from this FORUM as is my experience for a few of my earlier realistic comments .The GOVT.pensioners have been adequately taken care of.Therefore the suggestions on DA may be considered favourably, if approached. Y MANICKAM

    Like

  91. I have been harping on the DA neutralisation tune in several forums whenever i get a chance because i am of the firm opinion that this is a very reasonable proposition for the pensioners benefit.We have been fighting for better pension deal for quite a long time.,but the GOVT./IBA are holding a negative view.In the present 9th bipartite also pensioners are unlikely to get any benefit at all.To my frequent references to DA NEUTRALISATION i am advised that the matter may be taken up with individual banks quoting SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT IN THE CASE V.KASTHURI VS SBI AND CONSTITUTIONAL BENCH JUDGEMENT IN THE CASE OFD S NAHARA AND OTHERSVS UNION OF INDIA1983(1)SCC 305.Our legal experts and old guards can throw some light on this,and if feasible a try is worth with our pensioners assn .collectively approaching the bank on behalf of the pensioners.I have now set the ball in motion.What is the reply for this.Incidentally i am a new pensioner and the benefits of the 9th bipartite will flow to me automatically as i was in active service till JUNE 2009 STILL .I HAVE TAKEN UP THE MATTER ONLY FOR THE BENEFIT OF OLD, SENIOR PENSIONERS WITH WHOM I WAS FORTUNATE TO WORK WITH AND WHO HAVE GUIDED ME IN MY YOUNGER DAYS WITH A LOT OF AFFECTION AND LOVE. YMANICKAM

    Like

    1. Sir nicely represented. I took VRS from SBI after putting in 33 years of years in the month of April 2009. I want to clarify whether DA neutralisation is applicable to me.

      Like

  92. Today is the D-DAY and the shape of benefits to come for the pensioners in the ongoing 9th bipartite,should be known this evening provided the unions are transparent at least now.After the strong retaliations from the existing old pensioners ,retirees opting pension as 2nd option ,and future pensioners, the AIBOA,AIBOC&AIBEA HAVE HURRIEDLY COME OUT WITH CLARIFICATIONS which are still vague and ambiguous.The level of interest that they are having in pension revision matters and the extent they are able to achieve will be known shortly. I am sorry to state that as expected, my communication on DA NEUTRALISATION has been given a luke warm reception.If only moves have already been made on the suggested lines earlier,it can be communicated in this forum.The silence makes one feel that such sincere contributions are not seriously taken view of.The main problem with the present set of LEADERSHIP of serving employees is lack of transparency.Of course, a certain matters should be kept confidential in view of their sensitive nature,but not all matters.Perhaps with a little more transparency much could have been achieved for the present and future pensioners as also to the present employees through earlier conclusion of the 9th bipartite.Unfortunately this is happening in the case of pensioners also.Please communicate ,keep in touch with the pensioners regularly through such forums ,as we are very few in number and belong to a fast declining creed.FUTURE PENSIONERS ARE ADEQUATELY TAKEN CARE OF BY THE BIPARTITE,IT IS ONLY WE WHO HAVE PROBLEMS AND ARE STRUGGLING FOR SURVIVAL IN VIEW OF LOW PENSION.WE MUST HAVE THE STRENGTH TO WELCOME THE NEW PENSIONERS TO OUR FOLD AND GUIDE THEM.LET NOT OUR DIFFICULTIES FOR SURVIVAL BE PASSED ON TO THEM AS A LEGACY. FOR INFORMATION AND NECESSARY ACTIONS OF THE PENSIONER LEADERS.—–A HAPPY VISHU TO ALL MY SENIOR PENSIONERS WITH PRAYERS FOR MITIGATION OF THEIR HARDSHIPS AT THE EARLIEST AND A HAPPY ,HEALTHY AND WEALTHY PENSION YEAR, FOR YEARS TO COME. Y.MANICKAM

    Like

  93. The above reply ,i am unable to link to any of my doubts.I had asked if any presentations have been made to individual banks referring to the cases cited by me.MY contention and suggestion was a request to the pensioners assn .to take up the matter WITH INDIVIDUAL BANK MANAGEMENTS ( IN THIS CASE WITH SBI)collectively for the pensioners TO HAVE AN EMPHATIC ,UNITED ,TIMELY& STRONG REPRESENTATION UTILISING THE SERVICES OF PENSIONERS WHO HAVE STRONG AND SOUND LEGAL KNOWLEDGE.THE CAUSE IS A VERY VERY REASONABLE EXPECTATION FROM THE PENSIONERS WHICH EVEN A NEW BORN WOULD VOUCH FOR.LET THE 9TH BIPARTITE DEVELOPMENTS COME OUT.IF THE STALEMATE STILL CONTINUES WE WILL HAVE TO MOVE THIS COIN IN ALL EARNESTNESS. Y.MANICKAM

    Like

  94. I am exit optee of 2007 year and as per present Retired Employees Medical Benfit scheme I am not elegible Why the association is not demsnding the extension of the scheme to the VRS &Exit Optees also?Submission of memorandum is not suffecient We have to fight legally than only we may get the benefits from the bank.. Wheather VRS/Exit Optees are not being affected by seviour deceases? There should not be any descriminations among the pensioner atleast in respect medical benefits Please look into the matter and do something for the benefit of VRS/Exit Optees

    Like

  95. Dear Sir,acopy of the State Bank Of India Employees’ Pension Fund (amendment Rules 2005)(Hindi &English version) published in the Notification No CDO/PM/16/SPL/828 published in weekly Gazette Of India dated the 8th january 2010 under sub secton(4) of Section 50 of the State Bank of India Act 1955. I am of the opnion that this amend ment will cover 8th bipartee retirees only and 7th bipartee retirees will not be benifitted , however please clari fy me by email.thanks.

    Like

  96. As expected there is nothing in the 9th bipartite to cheer the pensioners.Their reasonable expectations have not been considered at all,it seems.It is a pity that the old pensioners are between the DEVIL & DEEP SEA.Health and wealth dwindling rapidly they continue to suffer with no proper representation.EVEN THIS FORUM HAS SUDDENLY BECOME SILENT FOR NEARLY A MONTH.HAVE WE GIVEN UP?HAVE OUR STALWARTS ALSO GIVEN UP THE HOPE?I once again request our Pensioners Assn.to take up with SBI management for some remedy based on the JUDGEMENTS already in our FAVOUR.INCIDENTALLY THERE WAS A MESSAGE FROM ONE OF THE OTHER BANK EMPLOYEES TO FORM A PENSIONERS ASSN.WITHOUT ,I REPEAT,WITHOUT SBI..THE BIAS &UNREASONABLE HATRED CONTINUES ,IT IS CLEAR..SO LET US PROCEED EXCLUSIVELY FOR OUR BENEFIT.WHY NOT CALL FOR AN ELDERS MEET AND DISCUSS THESE POINTS TO STRIKE THE IRON WHEN IT IS HOT.The promises of the present leaders to take up our cause after 9th BPS NEED NOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY.We have seen them struggle and inch towards finalisation of 9th pay revision.Now the anomalies and rectifications arising out of 9th BPS HAVE TO BE ATTENDED.SO THEIR CUP IS ONCE MORE FULL.Hence better our ASSN. takes up the matter seriously,as fortunately well informed and capable seniors are available with us.WITH PRANAMS TO ALL SENIOR PENSIONERS , Y.MANICKAM

    Like

  97. Dear Sir,Alarge number of pensioners from India’s largest bank,State Bank of India(SBI),continue to draw their pension at old rates.This has resulted in officers and staff getting pension that is lower than that of their counterparts who have retired in the same rank in recent years. While the bank’s regulations currently in force have fixed 50 per cent up to basic salary of Rs21040/and above 40 percent of the last drawn pay, staff retirng at different time prior to 31-10-2002 are getting pension fixed at different rates.Those who retired between November1,1987,and October31,1992 are getting 28.71 per cent of the last drawn pay,between November 1,1992 to October 31,1997 are getting 40 per cent and between November1,1997, toOctober 31 ,2002,about 30per cent.Different set of pension fixed for staff retiring on different times has resulted in apiquant situation and disparities.Such is the situation that a former SBI chairman,who retired in the 1990’s,is today getting pension that is less than that of a recently retired clerk of the same bank..Thepension of those who retired earlier should be revised bin accordance with rules applicable at present and be fixed at 50 per cent as isthe government norm.The SBI has maintained that the bank has written to the Central government to grant necessary approval for revision of pension rules.The clearance to adopt revised scale is still awaited.Anumber of pensioners have,infact,moved the high courts in several states for revision of their pension.In one recent judgement, the Madras High Courtdirected the Central government to approve the draft amendment for re-fixing pension of those affacted within three months. Pensioners,however, said despite lapse of one and half year,the court order was yet to be implemented.

    Like

  98. Dear Sir, SBI PENSIONERS RETIRED FROM THE PREMIER BANK DURING 1ST NOVEMBER AND 31ST OCTOBER2002 HAVE BEEN DENIED TO DRAW PENSION AT THE RATE OF 50% OF THEIR LAST DRAWN PAY IN CONTRAST TO OTHER PENSIONERS OF THE SAME BANK .ALTHOUGH PENSIONERS RETIRED DURING THE ABOVE PERIOD HAVE DRAWN SALARY AS PER 7TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT. THEY ARE BEING PAID 40%OF THE 6TH BIPARTITE SALARY WITHOUT ANY REASON OR RHYHF.THE PLIGHT OF SUCH PENSIONERS COUNTINUE FOR THE LAST 12 YEARS WITH NO BODY BOTHER TO GIVE SOLUTIONS.SEVERAL CASES FILED BY A FEW PENSIONERS HAVE BEEN PENDING IN VARIOS COURTS. ALL THE AFFACTED PENSIONERS ARE SENIOR CITIZENS WHO ARE COUNTING DAYS FOR HEAVEN ABODE AND ANY UNDUE DELAY WOULD RESULT IN FINCIAL AND MENTAL AGONY THROUGHT THEIR REST OF LIFE.WHAT SIN THE AGGRIEVED OFFICERS HAVE COMMITTED FOR THIS PLIGHT EXCEPT TYEY SERVED THE BANK LOYALLY AND FAITH FULL.?THE BANK IS SALIENT SPECTOR AND THE GOVERNMENT IS INDIFFERENCE SOLVING THE ISSUE MAKING THE PENSIONERS SUFFER HUMILITY FOR THEIR PERFORMANCE.THE PRESENT STATURE OF THE BANK HAS BEEN PARTLY BUILT BY PENSIONERS WHILE THEY WERE IN SERVICE OF THE BANK. IF STATE BANK CAN NOT FIGHT FOR THEIR PAST EMPLOYEES WHO CAN ELESE DO IT?

    Like

  99. Dear Sir,Pension (other than State Bank of India)as you are aware that as per Joint Note dated 27th April2010,With effect from 1st May 2005, the pension of officers who retired or died while in service during the period1st April 1998 to 31st october 2002 will be re-fixed based on the defination of “Pay” as defined in Clause 5 of the Joint Note dated 14th December 1999.Noarrears of pension and commuted value of pension will be payable on account of such re-fixing of pension.i shall be glad if you please advise me the fate of State Bank officers, why arrear will not be paid it should be paid w.e.f from their respective dates of retirements,why D.A to thease retirees has not been paid on the basis of 100 % neuteralisation and w.e.f 1-05-2005 ,however 8th bipartite retirees has been paid D.A on the basis of 100% neuteralisation why this discrimination.The retirees of 7th bipartite has already been suffering for the last 12years.Please clarify by email.Thanking you.

    Like

  100. I personally agree with mr.saini and know that the union leaders in the live union will first bargain for their own vote bank than the retirees, I also got VRS in 31.03.2001 with the hope to get the 50% pension on the last drawn basic ,and the union leaders specially Mr Amarpal the then president of the sbi supervising staff federation said openly in the meeting that they will get 50% of the last drawn but all our efforts anf hopes gone waisted. I donot depend upon the union leaders,the country is run by the votbank and we have no valuein this country.the only solution is to paralise the system,stop the functions of the ATM,and other banking needs of the people, rajkumarnegi 2190 sec 21 chandigarh

    Like

  101. RESPECTED SHRI NEELKANTH,LET US KNOW THE FATE OF PENSIONERS IN STATE BANK OF INDIA WHO HAVE BEEN RETIRED FROM 1-11-2007 TO 27-04 -2010 AND WHO WILL RETIRED AFTER 27-04-2010 IN OTHER WORDS THIER PENSION WILL BE REVISED ON THE BASIS OF 9TH BIPARTITE OR NOT OR THEY WILL GET PENSION ON THE BASIS OF 8TH BIPARTITE. PLEASE CLARIFY.

    Like

  102. Dear Sir,i am mentioning of papers laid on the table of loksabha on 23rd april of 2010 and also papers laid on the table of rajya sabha on 27th april 2010 and shall be glad to receive your comments on thease papers particularly comments onthe state bank of india employees’ pension fund (amendment)rules 2005 LOKSABHA 23RD APRIL 2010 :”A COPY OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND (AMENDMENT) RULES 2005 (HINDI AND ENGLISH VERSION)PUBLISHED IN THE NOTIFICATION NO CDO/PM/16/SPL/828 PUBLISHED IN WEEKLY GAZETTE OF INDIA DATED THE 8TH JANUARY 2010UNDERSUB SECTION (4) OF SECTION50 OF THE STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955.’ RAJYA SABH 27TH APRIL 2010 ‘A COPY (IN ENGLISH AND HINDI VERSION) OF THE MINISTRY OF FIANCE(DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES) NOTIFICATION NOCDO/PM/16/SPL/1176 DATED THE 2ND TO 8TH JANUARY 2010,PUBLISHING THE STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND (AMENDMENT) RULES 2005,UNDER SUB SECTION (4) OF SECTIN 50 OF THE STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955”

    Like

  103. SUB SECTION (4) OF SECTION 50 OF THE STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955 “EVERY REGULATION SHALL,AS SOON AS MAY BE AFTER IT IS MADE UNDER THIS ACT BY THE CENTRAL BOARD,BE FORWARDED TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT SHALL CAUSE A COPY OF THE SAME TO BE LAID BEFORE EACH HOUSE OF PARLIAMENT,WHILE IT IS IN SESSION,FOR TOTAL PERIOD OF THIRTY DAYS,WHICH MAY BE COMPRISED IN ONE SESSION OR IN TWO OR MORE SUCCESSIVE SESSIONS,AND IF,BEFORE THE EXPIRY OF THE SESSION IMMEDIATLY FOLLOWING THE SESSION OR THE SUCCESSIVE SESSIONS AFORSAID, BOTH HOUSES AGREE IN MAKING ANY MODIFICATION IN THE REGULATION OR BOTH HOUSES AGREE THAT THE REGULATION SHOULD NOT BE MADE, THE REGULATION THEREAFTER HAVE EFFECT ONLY IN SUCH MODIFIED FORM OR BE NO EFFECT,AS THE CASE MAY BE SO,HOWEVER,THAT ANY SUCH MODIFICATION OR ANNULMENT SHALL BE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE VALIDITY OF ANYTHING PREVIOUSLY DONE UNDER THAT REGULATION.” PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS ON THE AFORESAID NOTIFICATIONS PUB LISHED IN THE CENTRAL GAZETTE DATED 8TH JANUARY 2010.

    Like

  104. SECTION 50 OF STAE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955 “POWER OF CENTRAL BOARD TO MAKE REGULATIONS, THE CENTRAL BOARD MAY, AFTER CONSULTATION WITH RESERVE BANK OF INDIAAND WITH PREVIOUS SANCTION OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT (BY NOTIFICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE)MAKE REGULATIONS NOT IN CONSISTENT WITH THE ACT AND RULES MADE THEREUNDER TO PROVIDE FOR ALL MATTERS FOR WHICHPROVISIONS EXPEDIENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF GIVING EFFECT TO THE PROVISION OF THIS ACT” SECTION 50(2)(O) THE ESTABLISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF SUPERANNUATION PENSION,PROVIDENT FUND OR OTHER FUNDS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE EMPLOYEES OF STATE BANK OR THE DEPENDENT OF SUCH EMPLOYEES OR FOR THE PURPUSES OF THE STAE BANK AND GRANTING OF SUPERANNUATION ALLOWNCES ,ANNUATIES AND PENSION PAYABLE OUT OF ANY SUCH FUND.

    Like

  105. THERE IS NEITHER A CONTRIBUTION TO THIS BLOG NOR A RESPONSE FROM MR.GANAPATHY AFTER HAVING ASSUMED THE OFFICE OF A CONSULTANT. MEMBERS ARE WONDERING WHAT HAPPENED? IS HE GOING TO COME OUT WITH SOME GOOD NEWS FOR THE 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES?
    T.R.VENKATESAN (TRV) 7.30. A.M. 22.05.10

    Like

  106. RESPECTED NEELKANTH AND SHRI H.GANAPATHY RELIEF FOR LIC PENSIONERS THE LIC CLASS 1 ASSOCIATION, CHANDIGARH,HAS LOUDED THE JUDGEMENT PASSED BY THE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT,REMOVING ALL ANOMALIES FACED BY LIC PENSIONERS WITH REGARDS TO PAYMENT OF D.A AND PENSION.A RELEASE,ISSUED BY THE ASSOCIATION,SAID LIC OFFICERS,WHO RETIRED BEFORE JULY 31,1997, TOO WOULD GET BENEFIT OF100 PER CENT NEUTRALISATION,AS WAS WITH OFFICIAL RETIRING AFTER JULY 31,1997. IN S.B.I AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT WORKING STAFF AS WELL PENSIONERS OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE GETTING D.A ON THE BASIS OF 100PER CENT NEUTRALISATION W.E.F 1-05-2005 SIMILARLY WE SHOULD TAKE UP WITH MANAGEMENT OF SBI TO GRANT D.A ON THE BASIS OF 100 PER CENT TO ALL PENSIONERS W.E.F 1-05-2005 .IN VIEW OF FOREGOING PLEASE COMMENT ON STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND (AMENDMENT) RULES 2005 PUBLISHED IN THE WEEKLY GAZETTE DATED 8TH JANUARY 2010OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT.

    Like

  107. Dear Shri Venkatesh & Shri Keshav,

    Actually I am regularly going through the veiws expressed in this blog. As nothing is at sight from any quarters, I am extremely saddend on no developements. I am afraid that my comments at this juncture will be mistaken by all quarters.

    Now the 9th BPS is over, but I find that there is no specific provision for revision on pension in the case of those who retired/ retire on after 01/11/2007. The revised pension for those who retired/ retire on or after 01/05/2005 provided in 8th BPS was not modified in 9th BPS. Further the 9th BPS provides for DA only @ 0.18% i.e. over and above 2288 points ( which represents the merger points in 8th BPS ) for all those who retired/retire on or after 01/05/2005 which subtly means inclusive of those retired/retire on or after 01/11/2007. So I apprehend that the 9th BPS retirees of SBI also will face the same problem as that of 7th BPS particularly when the pension for other Bank Employees do not get revised under 9th BPS. But I could read a circular from AIBEA signed by its GS that the revised pension for 9th BP retirees of other Banks will take effect from 01/11/2007. I do not know how it will be possible without any provision in 9th BPS.

    Regarding the SBI pension issues whether it is for 7th BP or 9th BP retirees or the demand on 50% of the last drawn pay, it is only at fluid stage. The disposal of Balancing cost of Pension ( Approximately Rs.289 crs. ) for SBI men under 9th BPS is left to be decided only by SBI Management with the concurrence of GOI in terms of 9th BPS. SBI Pensioners feel that the said amount has to be apportioned only for the improvements of SBI Pension and I understand the Pensioners’ Federation has already taken up the matter with SBI & GOI towards this direction. It seems both serving employees/officers Federations are sore about this approach of Pensioners’ Federation as they are keen in getting additional financial benefits to the existing employees/officers.

    The reason behind is that the said amount is borne out of the wage load of 17.5% and they are deprived of that cost in the overall load. Further the fact remains that the wage load of 17.5% does not include SBI Pension Cost ( both Statutory and any Additional ) as the SBI Pension is non contributory from time immemorial. It is not the case in other Banks and in 7th, 8th & now 9th BPs the unions agreed for the load which is inclusive of not only the Statutory Contribution of 10% but also the additional contribution 8%, 9.25% & 13% of revised Pay respectively towards their Pension Fund.

    When the GOI comes to know of the differing views of these serving and retired employees’ organisations, GOI may sure to delay in taking a decision on the Balancing Cost Of Pension Rs.289 crs. The Bank also may not also come to anybody’s rescue. It is therefore required that all the three Federations should meet to form an unified veiw for taking a firm and final decision on the disposal of the Balancing Cost Of Pension for the benefit of all concerned. I firmly beleive that the leadership of the serving Employees/officers Federations will arrange for a meeting with a view to sort out the differences if any.

    With regard to to the 2005 Amendment in SBI Pension Rules reported to have been notified in 2010 as mentioned by Shri. Keshav, I am not able get it so far. It is better that Shri. Keshav throws more light on that. – H. Ganapathy

    Like

  108. RESPECTED SIRS,I AM VERY THANKFUL TO YOU FOR EXPLAING THE PRESENT POSITION OF PENSION IN SBI PARTICULARLY TO PENSIONERS OF 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES..NOW I AM MENTIONING OF PAPERSLAID ON THE TABLE OF LOK SABHA ON 23RD APRIL 2010 AND ALSO PAPERS LAID ON THE TABLE OF RAJYA SABHA ON 27TH APRIL 2010. LOK SABHA 23RD APRIL 2010. “A COPY OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND(AMENDMENT)RULES 2005 (HINDI AND ENGLISH VERSION)PUBLISHEDINTHE NOTIFICATION NO CDO/PM/16/SPL/828PUBLISHING IN WEEKLY GAZETTE OF INDIA DATED 8TH JANUARY 2010 UNDER SUB SECTION (4) OF SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955. SIMILARLY ON 27TH APRIL IN THE RAJYA SABHA “A COPY (IN ENGLISH AND HINDI VERSION)OF THE MINISTRY OF FIANCE(DEPARTMENTOF FIANCIAL SERVICES NOTIFICATION NO CDO/PM/16/SPL/1176 PUBLISHEDIN THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE 2ND JANUARY TO 8TH JANUARY 2010 PUBLISHING STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND (AMENDMENT)RULES 2005.AS YOU ARE AWARE AT PRESSENT BASIC PENSION AND DEARNESS RELIEF THEREON TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE BEING PAID ON AD-HOC BASISTO THSE RETIRED ON OR AFTER 1-11-2002.THIS PENSION WILL BE SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT IN RULE 23 OF SBI EMPLYEES PENSION FUND.. I PERSUME THAT BANK IS GOING TO RECTIFY THE POSITION BY ABOVE NOTIFICATION, HOWEVER PLEASE CONFIRM PARTICULARLY WHEATHER BANK CAN CARRY THIS AMENDMENT WITHOUT THE AMENDMENT OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES BECAUSE RULE 23 STATED ‘TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS’ APPLICABLE TO 7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. YOU CAN OBTAIN ABOVE NOTIFICATIONS FROM CORPORATE OFFICE BY USING YOUR GOOD OFFICES. ISHALL BE GLAD IF YOU WILL PLEASE CLARIFY.

    Like

  109. The Amendment which was referred to by Shri. Keshav is a news. So far I have not come across any Bank’s circular on this amendment. Since this 2005 amendment is reportedly notified in GOI Gazettee during the early part of 2010 belatedly according Shri. Keshav, I shall verify the same from the Govt. library and get a copy.

    However, I have a doubt that as to how this amendment could have been thought of in 2005 itself particularly when the Max. Pay for 50% pension and Min. Pay for 40% pension was raised from Rs. 8250/- to Rs. 21040/- only on 09/04/2006 with the approval of GOI in the presence of the then FM that too after our marathon indefinite strike.

    If the said information is found to be correct, I am of the firm view that such an improvement in pension should be made applicable to 7th BP pensioners also. I have the undernoted reason to express the above opinion.

    Everyone is aware that in 7th BPS, the pension in the case of other Bank employees who retired drawing the revised pay scales of 7th BP was fixed only on the basis of pre-revised pay ( i.e. on the basis of 6th BP pay scales with the merger of 1616 points as agaist 1684 ). Subsequently it was modified in 8th BPS to its original position in terms of their Pension Regulation 1995 ( i.e. 50% 0f the Last Drawn Pay ), but only to such of those employees who retired/retire on or after 01/05/2005 drawing the pay scale of 8th BP. Then a strong legal view was placed before IBA that any improvement in pension should be made applicable to the earlier retirees which IBA also agreed. Accordingly a separate minutes were signed by both IBA & Workmen Unions mentioning the existance of the said legal view refixed the pension based on the last drawn pay for 7th BP pensioners also, but only with effect from 01/05/2005. Since this legal view has universal application, it should automatically apply in the case of 7th BP pensioners of SBI particularly when an improvement is seen in the amendment cited by Shri. Keshav..

    Regarding the phrase ” until further amendments made ” as provided under Rule (23) in terms of SBI Employees Pension Fund ( Amendment ) Rules 2000, I request Shri. Keshav to go through my considered views expressed in this blog on 05/03/2010. – H. GANAPATHY

    Like

  110. RESPECTED SHRI H. GANAPATY JI, I AM VERY HAPPY TO NOTE YOUR COMMENTS ON STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND RULES.AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT AS PER JOINT NOTE DATED 27TH APRIL 2010 OF 9TH BIPARTITE PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE AND 8TH BIPATITE RETIREES ARE TO BE REFIXED OF OTHER BANKS EXCEPT STATE BANK OF INDIA W.E.F 1-05-2005 AS SUCH DATE 1-05-2005 IS IMPORTENT.FURTHER IN TERMS OF SUB SECTION (4)OF SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955 AMENDMENTS IN PENSION ARE TO BE CLEARED IN PARLIAMENT.INTHIS CONNECTION PLEASE GO THROUH MY VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THIS BLOG ON 19TH AND 21ST MAY 2010..MOREOVER THIS NOTIFICATION IS ORGINATED FROM THE SAME DEPARTMENT OF CORPORATE OFFICE BECAUSE THIS LETTER OF NOTIFICATION HAS THE SAME SEREIS AS OF APRIL 2006.IN VIEW OF FOREGOING PLEASE USE YOUR GOOD OFFICES AND KNOW THE EXACT POSION AND ISHALL BE GLAD TO KNOW YOUR VIEWS.THANKING YOU.

    Like

  111. sir
    i got crs with supper annuation benifit from sbi .yet bank not pay my right but bank have no idea what will thay .can iget pensin crs date 12-9-2009.pl.give guide about my right

    Like

  112. Central Govt. has raised the Gratuity Ceilings from Rs.3 lacs to Rs.10.00 lacs wef 01.01.2006 and has passed the benefit to its employees under 6th Pay Commission. But it is not in the mood to give the benefits to other PSUs and Banks from retrospective effect. Therefore, the sufferers will be the retirees who have been retired from the Bank’s service or PSUs’ during the period from 01/01/2006 onwards till March 2010. Now, the time has come to push the battle for compelling the Govt. to pass this hefty benefit (diff. Rs.3 lacs>Rs.10.00 lacs. I hope, we should be prepared to launch our fight in the court of law as the deaf & dump Central Govt. may hold to pass the benefit due to pressures exerted by Private Sector or Bank Employers.

    Like

  113. Central Govt. has raised the Gratuity Ceilings from Rs.3 lacs to Rs.10.00 lacs wef 01.01.2006 and has passed the benefit to its employees under 6th Pay Commission. But it is not in the mood to give the benefits to other PSUs and Banks from retrospective effect. Therefore, the sufferers will be the retirees who have been retired from the Bank’s service or PSUs’ during the period from 01/01/2006 onwards till March 2010. Now, the time has come to push the battle for compelling the Govt. to pass this hefty benefit (diff. Rs.3 lacs>Rs.10.00 lacs. I hope, we should be prepared to launch our fight in the court of law as the deaf & dump Central Govt. may hold to pass the benefit due to pressures exerted by Private Sector or Bank Employers.

    Like

  114. RESPECTED SHRI H.GANPATY JI,I HAVE TO ADVISE THAT AFTER THE HISTORIC STRIKE IN SBI IN APRIL 2006 BANK HAS RECOMMENDED REVISION OF THE CEILING OF PAY FOR DETERIMATION OF PENSION VIDE LETTER NO CDO/PM/16/SPL/29 DATED THE 19TH APRIL 2006.SIMILARAL LETTERS NO S ARE NOW LAID DOWN ON THE TABLE OF LOKSABHA ON 23RD APRIL 2010”CDO/PM/16/SPL/828 AND CDO/PM/16/SPL/1176. PLEASE NOW SUBMIT YOUR VIEWS ON THE SUBJECT.

    Like

  115. RESPECTED NEELKANTH AND SHRI H.KANPATHY JI,I HAVE TO ADVISE THAT IN 2006 AFTER THE HISTORIC STRIKE IN SBI BANK HAD RECOMMENDED TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE REVISIONOF CEILING OF PAY FOR DETERMINATION OF PENSION VIDE LETTER NO CDO/PM/16/SPL/16/.29 DATED THE 19TH APRIL 2006 AND NOW THE SAME DEPARTMENT AT CORPORATE OFFICE HAS TAKEN UP WITH FIANCE MINISTRY VIDE LETTER NO CDO/PM/16/SPL/828 LAID ON THE TABLE OF LOKSABHA ON 23-04-2010 PUBLISHED IN THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE WEEKLY ENDING 8TH JANUARY 2010. ISHALL BE GLAD IF YOU PLEASE GIVE YOUR VIEWS ON THIS NOTI FICATION. FIURTHER ON 27TH APRIL IN RAJYA SABH A THE FIANCE MINITRY DEPARTMENT OF FIANCIAL SERVICES LAID PAPERS OF CDO/PM/16/SPL/1176. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS ON THEASE NOTIFICATIONS/LETTERS OF CORPORATE OFFICE..THANKING YOU.

    Like

    1. 1.THANK YOU MR GANAPATHY FOR YOUR RECENT CLARIFICATIONS EXPLAINING THE GROUND REALITIES. I SUGGEST THAT MR KESAVA RAI SEND XEROX COPIES OF GOVT NOTIFICATIONS (IN THE GAZATTE) TO MR GANAPATHI, SO THAT A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING EMERGES FOR THE BENEFIT OF MEMBERS
      2.EARLIER I WAS WORRIED ABOUT CLASH BETWEEN SBI &
      OTHER BANKS TRADE UNIONS. I AM FURTHER SADDENED NOW TO UNDERSTAND THE RIFT BETWEEN WORKING STAFF FEDERATION & PENSIONERS FEDERATION.
      3. IN THE ENSUING ELDERS’ MEET WE SHOULD PATCH UP THE DIFFERENCES & STAY UNITED SO THAT WE CAN MAKE GOI TO ACCEPT OUR DEMANDS. THANK YOU
      T.R.VENKATESAN(TRV) 9.45A.M. 31.05.2010

      Like

  116. DEAR SHRI VENKATE SAIN, I AM VERY THANKFUL TO YOU FOR YOUR VALUEABLE SUGGESSION AS YOU KNOW UNION IS STRENGTH.FURTHER I AM UNABLE TO OBTAIN THE WEEKLY GOVERNMENT GAZETTE DATED 8TH JANUARY 2010, BUT IT IS A FACT THE ABOVE PAPERS WERE LAID DOWN ON THE TABLE OF LOKSABHA AND RAJYA SABHA ON 23RD AND 27TH APRIL 2010 AND YOU CAN OBTAIN THE COPY OF SAID GAZETTE FROM CONTROLLER OF GOVERNMENT PUBLICATION CIVIL LINE NEW DELHI. I AM OF THE VIEW THAT TIME HAS COME TO CALL THE MEETING OF CORDICATION COMMITEE IMEDIATLY AND DISCUSS THE PENSION ISSUE WITH SUPRVISING STAFF FEDRATION AND WORKMEN STAFF FEDRATION AND ALL THE ANOMOLIES IN PENSION SHOULD BE SORTED OUT ONCE FOR ALL..HOWEVER PLEASE ADVISE ME LATEST DEVELOPMENT IN THE MATTER.

    Like

  117. MR. VENKATESAN, HAVE YOU ANY NEWS ABOUT FILING OF PETITION IN THE SUPREME COURT UNDER SECTION 132 BY THEPENSIONER’S FEDERATION ?.
    KINDLY LET ME KNOW

    Like

  118. Back to square one.SBI pensioners are now in their same place from where they anticipated some progress in the pension matters.Alas ,no increase in pension but a decrease in the number of pensioners alive on date.Pathetic ,even after nearly 30 months in the 9th bipartite, the hapless lot are once again left unattended and uncared for.When enquired on the revised pension fitment for the retirees between NOVEMBER 2007and MAY2010 no one is able to give a reply.When that is the case, the plight of the old pensioners are well understood.We have already spent long time in difficulty .We will continue pinning our hopes on the increasing paltry DA twice in a year.Touch wood there is no blockage or damage to DA increase in future.

    Like

  119. DEAR SIR, AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT BANK HAS ALREADY ISSED INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE REVISED SCALES OF OFFICERS AND TO RELEVANT PROVISIONSOF JOINT NOTE OTHER THAN MEDICAL AID,PENSION AND HOSPITALISATION EXPENSES,WHICH MAY BE IMPLEMENTED IN OUR BANK FROM RESPECTIVE DATES AS MENTIONED IN JOINT NOTE SIGNED BY IBA& OFFICERS’ ORGANISATIONS, AND TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF SALARY PACKAGE.HERE I HAVE TO ADVISE BANK’S INSTRUCTIONS REGARDING REVISED PENSION TO THOSE RETIRED FROM 1-11-2007TO 27-04-2010 AND THOSE RETIRED AFTER 27-04-2010 IS SALIENT AND IT APPERS THAT PENSION OF 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES HAS NOT BEEN REVISED .HOWEVER PLEASE CLARIFY.

    Like

  120. SBI CHAIRMAN SHRI.O.P.BHATT ELECTED AS IBA CHAIRMAN FOR 2010-11. AS IBA PLAYS A VITAL ROLE TO CONVINCE GOI,LET US OUR CHAIRMAN WILL INITIATE TIME BOUND CORRECT MOVES TO RESOLVE ALL PENDING ISSUES OF PENSIONERS,ESPECIALLY THAT OF THE HELPLESS 7TH BIPARTITE PENSIONERS.
    T.R.VENKATESAN.09.06.10 8P.M

    Like

  121. I FURTHER SUGGEST THAT SHRI.H.GANAPATHY BEING THE CONSULTANT MAY SEEK AN APPOINTMENT ALONG WITH KEY FUNCTIONARIES OF PENSIONERS FEDERATION AND MEET SHRI BHATT,IBA CHAIRMAN,AND PRESENT A CONCISE NOTE-(NOT TOO LENGTHY) AND SEEK HIS INTERVENTION TO
    MAKE THE GOI UNDERSTAND, APPRECIATE AND RESOLVE THE AWES OF PENSIONERS.
    T.R.VENKATESAN 10.06.2010 12.45 P.M.

    Like

  122. DEAR SHRI T.R.VENKATESAN,THANKS FOR YOUR VERY GOOD SUGGESIONS .AS YOU ARE AWARE AS PER JOINT NOTE DATED 27TH APRIL2010FOR SALARY REVISION FOR OFFICERS, CLAUSE 19TH SAYS–PROVISION FOR STATE BANK OF INDIA——-THE DISPOSALOF THE BALANCING COST OF PENSION IN RESPECT OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ARISING OUT OF THIS JOINT NOTE SHALL BE DECIDEDBY THE STATE BANK WITH THE CONCURRENCE OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA. IN THIS CONNECTION I MAY ADD AS REGARDS OF SBI PENSION BALANCING AMOUNT,THE DISCUSSION OF WORKING STAFF FEDERATIONS WITH THE MANAGEMENT ARE IN PROGRESS AND THIS IS THE RIGHT TIMETO REPRESENT THE PENSION ISSUE IN SBI TO CHAIRMAN SBI SO THAT CHAIRMAN CAN RECOMMEND PROPERLY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.I AM OF THE VIEW THAT ACOMMITEE OF THREE UNIONS WORKING STAFF FEDERATIONS AND PENSIONERS FEDERATION SHOULD BE CALLED IMMEDIATELY. HOWEVER SUBMIT YOUR VIEWS AND ADVISE ME THE LATEST DEVELOPMENT .

    Like

  123. RESPECTED SIRS, AS YOUARE AWARE THAT OUR PENSION IS CALCULATED IN TERMS OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES AND RULE NO 23(2) SAYS THAT WITH EFFECT FROM 1-3-1999 THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF PENSION FOR THE MEMBERS WHO RETIRED/RETIRE DRAWING SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IN THE PAY SCALES EFFECTIVE FROM 1-11-1992(AWARD STAFF)/1-7-1993(SUPERVISING STAFF) AND THEREAFTER SHALL BE COMPUTED TILL FURTHER AMRNDMENTS IN THIS REGARD, AS UNDER——-(-a) WHERE THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWAN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE IS UPTO RS8500/ PER MONTH,50% OF THESUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN THE LAST TWELVE MONTH(b) WHERE THE AVERAGE MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWAN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS ‘PENSIONABLE SERVICE IS ABOVE RS8500/PER MONTH,40% OF THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVESALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELEVE PENSIONABLE SERVICE SUBJECT TO MINIMUM OF RS4250/. I SHALL BE GLAD IF YOU PLEASE FURNISH ME ON THE FOLLOWING POINTS( 1)in THE RULE 23(2) ”THEREAFTER’ MEANS AFTER 6TH BIPARTITE I.E FOR 7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE (2)till further amendments IN THIS REGARD.(3)WHEN IN THE RULES ARE MENTIONED FOR THE CALCULATIONS OF PENSION ON THE BASIS OF LAST TWELVE MONTHS THEN WHY SALARY IS TAKEN OF 1992/1993 WHICH WAS NOT THE SALARY OF LAST TWELVE MONTHS.(3)THERE IS AMENDMENT INTHIS RULE WITH EFFECT FROM1-05-2005 FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.(4)WHY THIS AMENDMENT OR ANY OTHER AMENDMENT IS NOT APPLICABLE TO 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.(5)THE DELAY OF MORE THAN 10YEARS IN NOT FRAMING THE RELAVENT AMENDMENTS WAS NOT ON THE PART OF EMPLOYEES. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR CLARIFICATIONS ON ABOVE POINTS.

    Like

  124. sirs

    Will anybody please let me know what we are further doing in connection with GRATUITY benefit to pensioners retired prior to 24/05/2010 and after 1.11.2006.
    Do we can hope for benefit ?
    To which authorities we have represented ?
    Do we need to file suit against ?

    Please let me know the progress made by we people in this connection .

    Like

  125. RESPECTED SHRI H.GANPATHY,REFFERING TO YOUR REPLY DATED THE 25TH MAY 2010, IN THIS BLOG,I CAME TO KNOW FROM PENSIONERS’ ASSOCIATION AT CHANDIGARH THAT AMENDMENT IN STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND(AMENDMENT)RULES2005 RELATES TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY,AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT AT PRESENT PENSIONS TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE BEING PAID ON AD-HOC BASIS SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT OF RULE23 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPOLYEES’ PENSION FUND RULES AND NOW BANK IS REGULARISING THE PENSION, BY THIS AMENDMENT IS BEING CARRIED OUT IN TERMS OF SUB SECTION(4) OF SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955 AND I SHALL BE GLAD IF YOU KINDLY GO THROUGH MY VIEWS DATED 19TH AND 20TH MAY 2010 IN THIS BLOG FOR SUBSECTION(4)AND SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955. THIS MEANS THIS AMENDMENT WILL BE PASSED IN PARLIAMENT IN MONSOON OR WINTER SESSION OF PARLIAMENT AND ACCORDING TO SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955 THEN THE AMENDMENT WILL BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE AND AFTER BTHAT BANK;S CIRCULAR WILL BE ISSUED. I SHALL BE OBLISED IF YOU KINDLY SUBMIT YOUR VIEWS ON THEASE PONTS AND ALSO SUBMIT YOUR CLARIFICATION ON THE POINTS RAISED BY ME IN MY BLOG DATED THE 14TH JUNE 2010. THANKING YOU VERY MUCH.

    Like

  126. RESPECTED SIRS, WHILE I AM AWAITING YOUR VIEWS /COMMENTS ON THE POINTS RAISED BY ME ON 14TH AND 16TH JUNE ,IN THE MEAN TIME IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED BY ME THAT W.E.F 1-05-2005 DEARNESS ALLOWANCE ON PENSION IS BEING PAID ON THE BASIS OF 100% NEUTERLISATION IN ALL BANKS INCLUDING SBI ,HOWEVER BEFORE THAT DA ON PENSION IS BEING PAID ON SLAB SYSTEM AN D LESS THAN 100% NEUTERALISATION, IT SHOULD BE PAID 100% NEUTERALISATION TO ALL PENSIONERS.HOWEVER PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/VIEWS ON THIS ASPECT. THANKING YOU. PLEASE GIVE YOUR VALUABLE SUGGESIONS ON ALL THE POINS MENTIONED ON 14TH AND 16TH JUNE 2010. WITH BEST REGARDS.

    Like

    1. Sorry. The DA arrears paid to all other Banks from May 2005 on account of 100% neuterlisation(from 1616 points to 1684 points) for the retired officers from1997 to 2002, except to SBI Officers. We are the losers for the past 6 years drawing less amonut of Pension. The retirees from 1997 to 2002 are the most affected Pensioners drawing the lowest Pension in State bank of India

      Like

  127. dear shri KESHAV RAI, I refer to your above message and very much doubt if 100%DA is being paid in other banks so much so in SBI.This is one of the main issues we are fighting for.The latest SAMVAD MAGAZINE (JUNE 2010) has a reference to the case on 100% DA payment pending before KARNATAKA HIGH COURT.However now that you have come out with a positive statement we shall fondly hope wish and pray that the matter is decided in our favour.GOOD LUCK.

    Like

  128. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM.Y ,I HAVE TO CLARIFY THAT DEARNESS RELIEF ON PENSION HAS BEEN PAID TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES W.E.F 01-05-2005 ON THE BASIS OF 100% NEUTERALISATION I.E AT THE SAME RATE AS IS APPLICABLE IN THE INDUSTRY I,E IN RESPECT OF EMPLOYEES/OFFICERS WHO RETIRED ON OR AFTER 1-11-2002 AND ON THE BASIS OF ONE SLAB AT THE RATE OF .18% OF THE BASIC PENSION IN ALL BANKS INCLUDING SBI FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY AND I HAVE MENTIONED THAT IT SHOUD BE PAID ON THE BASIS OF 100% NEUTERALISATION TO ALL PENSONERS WITH ONE SLAB AS IN THE CASE OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.HOWEVER, PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/SUGGESIONS.

    Like

  129. THANKS MR.KESHAV RAI YOU HAVE OPENED AN INTERESTING AND PUZZLING TOPIC FOR DISCUSSION.THE PRESENT DA IS 68.76% FOR 382 SLABS FOR RETIREES OF 8TH BIPARTITE.(I RETIRED FROM SERVICE ON 31/06/2009).FURTHER THERE IS A CASE PENDING IN KARNATAKA COURT ON THIS SCORE(COURTESY SAMVAD MAGAZINE,JUNE 2010 ISSUE, OF OUR MUMBAI ASSN.HOWEVER IF THE PARTICULAR CASE RELATES TO YOUR CONTENTION,IT IS JUSTIFIED AND REASONABLE BECAUSE INFLATION PRESSURE AND SUFFERINGS ARE COMMON TO ALL PEOPLE IN GENERAL AND TO THE HAPLESS PENSIONERS IN PARTICULAR.PLEASE CHECK UP ONCE AGAIN SO THAT I CAN CORRECT MYSELF IF IAM LESS INFORMED.NOW THAT YOU HAVE OPENED UP THE MATTER ,LET US FONDLY HOPE,WISH AND PRAY THAT THIS IS DECIDED IN OUR FAVOUR IMMEDIATELY TO GIVE SOME RELIEF ATLEAST TO OUR SENIOR SUFFERING PENSIONERS.WITH BEST WISHES

    Like

    1. THE VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THIS BLOG/CLARIFICATIONS SOUGHT DO NOT ATTRACT REPLIES FROM THE QUARTERS TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED.HENCE MEMBERS CAN SIMULTANEOUSLY WRITE LETTERS TO PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION & SEEK A REPLY. ALTERNATELY THEY MAY CONTACT THE THE CONCERNED OFFICE BEARERS OVER THEIR
      MOBILE/PHONE NUMBERS. FOR THIS PURPOSE THE MOBILE NUMBERS/PHONE NUMBERS OF OFFICE BEARERS CAN BE RELEASED IN THIS BLOG/PUBLISHED IN THE ELDERS VOICE REPEATEDLY
      T.R.VENKATESAN 22.06.10 9.15A.M.

      Like

  130. DEAR SHRI MANICKM.Y,THANKS FOR REPLYING ME PROMPTLY,IT IS CORRECT AT PRESENT D.A IS 68.76% FOR 382SLABS FOR RETIREES OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND SAME D.A IS PAYABLE TO WORKING STAFF OF 8TH BIPARTITE AND THIS IS ON THE 100% NEUTERALISATION THIS IS ALSO CORRECT A CASE IS PENDING IN KARNATKA HIGH COUR T FOR 100% OF D.A NEUTERALISATION TO ALL PENSIONERS.FURTHER PLEASE NOTE THAT 100% D.A NEUTERALISATION TO WORKING STAFF IS FROM 1-02-2005 AND TO PENSIONERS FROM 1-05-2005 FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY AND NOT FOR EARLIER RETIREES. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR VIEWS NOW.

    Like

    1. D EAR SHRI KESHAV RAI I AM ABLE TO UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT.HOWEVER YOUR REQUEST IS FOR THE EXTENSION OF 100%NEUTRALISATION FOR ALL PENSIONERS AS A WHOLE WHICH IS NOW IN THE COURT.SO OUR SENIORS ARE ALREADY FIGHTING IT OUT WITH ALL SINCERITY WITHIN THEIR LIMITATIONS.ONCE IN THE COURT, WE WILL HAVE TO WAIT WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT.AS OF NOW THERE NO EXTRA SETTLEMENT FOR SBI EMPLOYEES WITH SBI THE MANAGEMENT.,IT IS LEARNT.TO DAY I HAD BEEN TO A BRANCH FOR PERSONAL REASONS WHERE I MET SOME OLD AWARD STAFF EMPLOYEES WHO STATED THAT ON LAST SATURDAY(19/06/2010) A PACKAGE WAS SIGNED FOR AWARD STAFF.HOWEVER NOTHING HAS CRYSTALISED.IF THERE IS PROPER PRESSURE ON THE MANAGEMENT WE CAN GET ATLEAST A PART OF THE AMOUNT OF 720CRORES WHICH IS PRESENTLY WITH THE BANK EAR MARKED FOR PENSIONERS ,AND AS PER OUR G.S.SHRI PPS MURTHY THIS WILL MEET OUR DEMAND FOR 50% PENSION TO ALL PENSIONERS.THE PITY IS NEITHER THE ASSOCIATIONS NOR UNIONS ARE INTERESTED/ INCLINED TO TAKE UP OUR CAUSE SERIOUSLY.AGAIN LET US HOPE AND PRAY THAT OUR JUST DEMANDS ARE MET AT THE EARLIEST.

      Like

  131. DEAR SHRI T.R VENKATESAIN,WHILE I HAVE NOTED YOUR INSTRUCTIONS /ADVICES OF 22-06-2010 IN THIS BLOG, HOWEVEER, I ,SHALL BE OBLIGED IF SHRI H.GANPATHY CONSULTANT GIVE HIS CLARIFICATIONS/COMMENTS ON THE POINTS RAISED BY ME IN THIS BLOG DATED 14-06-2010 AND DATED 16-06-2010 KINDLY COPORATE ME. IN FUTURE I WILL TAKE UP THE MATTER AS SUGGESTED BY YOU. I WILL AWAIT YOUR REPLY EAGERLY.

    Like

  132. DEAR SHRI H.GANPATHY, I AM VERY THANKFUL TO YOU FOR GIVING US VALUABLE ADVICES/SUGGESTIONS ON PENSION ISSUE IN SBI, MOREOVER YOU ARE VERY HELPFUL TO PENSIONERS, FOR THIS REASONS I ALWAYS ADDRESSED TO YOU MY DOUTS ON PENSION IN SBI.FURTHER IAM OF THE VIEW THAT OUR PENSION REGULATIOS ARE WELL PROTECTED LEGALLY AT THE RATE OF 50% OF SALARY OF RETIRED EMPLOYEES AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT AS UNDER (1) STATEBANK OF INDIA ACT 1955 (2) THE HON’BLE SUPREME CURT BY ITS JUDGEMENT DATED 23-02-1989 IN THE CASE OF IMPERIAL BANK OF INDIA PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS V/S STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS(3) CONSTITUION OF INDIA ARTICLE 14—.AT THE TIME OF FORMATION OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES OF STATE BANK OF INDIA WERE GOVERNED BY RULE NO 18 AND RULE NO 20(1) OF IMPERIAL BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION AND GRATUITY FUND RULES AND REGULATIONS.THE MAXIMUM CEILING OF PENSION OF RS750/ PER MONTH AND RS 1000/ PER PER MONTH OF JUNIOR OFFICERS AND SENIOR OFFICERS RESPECTIVELY,WHICH WAS MUCH ABOVE THE 50% OF BASIC PAY AS SUCH ALL THE EMPLOYEES IN BANK WERE DRAWING 50% OF LAST DRAWAN PAY AS BASIC PENSION. RULE NO23 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA PENSION FUND FROM 1-1-1986 AS PER SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT DATED 23-02-1989. THE MAXIMUM PENSION SHALL NOT EXCEED 50%(ONE-HALF) OF AVERAGE MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE ORRS2400/ PER MONTH WHICH EVER IS LESS.IN VIEW OF ABOVE PENSION IS WELL PROTECTED LEGALLY AT THE RATE OF 50% OF SALARY AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT AS PER SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT DATED23-02-1989. (3) CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ARTICLE 14,EQUILTY BEFORE LAW– THE STATE NOT DENIED TO ANY PERSON EQUILITY BEFORE THE LAW OR EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAWS WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF INDIA.NO DISCRIMINATION CAN BE MADE EITHER IN THE PRIVILEGES CONFERRED OR LIABILITIES IMPOSED. WITH EFFECT FROM 1-3-1999 THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND STATE BANK OF INDIA MADE ARBITRARY DIVISION OF PENSIONERS INTO TWO CATEGORIES 50% AND 40% FOR PENSION PAYMENT IN CASES WHERE SALARY IS UPTO RS8500/ AND 40% WHERE IT EXCEEDS RS8500/ HOWEVER THERE IS DISCRIMINATION IN THE SAME CLAS I.E PENSIONERS ARE ONE CLASS AND BY CREATION TWO CATEGORIES OF PENSIONERS BY STATE BANK OF INDIA AND DENYING REVISED PENSION TO 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES BANK SHOUD FOLLOW THE ESTABLISHED NORMS OF PENSION BEING 50% OF SALARY LEVEL OF RETIRED EMPLOYEES AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT AND REVISE THE PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. SIR I SHALL BE GLD IF YOU PLEASE GIVE YOUR COMMENTS /CLARIFICATIONS ON MY WRITING OF 14-06-2010,16-06-2010 AND 24-06-2010.I HOPE YOU WILL GIVE US RIGHT GUIDANCE IN THE MATTER. THANKING YOU.

    Like

  133. The Pension issue widely discussed in this blog from Shri.H.Ganapathy’s comments dated February 3, 2010 to Shri.Keshav Rai Saini’ various points raised till June 24, 2010, I would like to submit the extract of the Judgement dated June 8, 2010 delivered by the The honorable Mr.Justice K.Chandru of Madras High Court. The petitioners are contemplating to file an appeal shortly.
    Extract of the Judment
    “W.P.No.27757 of 2008 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to revise the pension payable to the petitioners on the basis of the last drawn salary, i.e. the salary drawn by them at the time of opting retirement under the SBI voluntary retirement scheme and to implement the terms of the Cir.D.O.VRS:4, dated 11.1.2001 issued in this connection.
    W.P.No.27758 of 2008 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to revise the pension payable to the petitioners on the basis of the last 12 months average salary drawn by them at the time of opting retirement under the SBI voluntary retirement scheme and to implement the terms of the Cir.D.O.VRS:4, dated 11.1.2001 issued in this connection and consequently revise the pension to be made effective from 01.04.2001 and to further revise and give effect to the enhanced pension in terms of circular No.:CDO/P&HRD-PM/26/2006-07.
    W.P.No.8800 of 2009 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records on the file of the first respondent including the Finance Ministry relating to the impugned amendments/orders/proposals pertaining to Rule No.23 of SBI Employees Pension Fund Rules vide CDO/PM/CIR-8 of 21st May, 1997 and letter No.CDO/PH/16/CIR-34 of 31st October, 2000 together with the relevant proposals/amendments / recommendation on the same matter as disclosed in the connected MOU dated 25.2.2008/Minutes dated 16.10.2008 or otherwise submitted to the Ministry of Finance and vice versa till date, quash the same and to direct the respondents to discharge their statutory obligation to pay pension from the date of retirement on a single uniform percentage ceiling of 50% of “last drawn pay” avoiding multiple ceilings like 50% / 40% etc. together with monetary ceilings imposed and varied from time to time. “
    COMMON ORDER

    “In the first two writ petitions, a group of persons who are ex-employees of the State Bank of India have filed writ petitions, seeking for a direction to respondents 1 to 3 to revise the pension payable to the petitioners on the basis of last 12 months average salary drawn by them at the time of opting for retirement under SBI Voluntary retirement scheme by implementing the terms of circular, dated 11.1.2001 issued in this regard and consequently, revise the pension to be made effective from 1.4.2001 and also to give effect to enhanced pension in terms of the circular.
    2. In W.P.No.8800 of 2009, there are 72 petitioners, who are seeking to challenge the rule 23 of the SBI Employees Pension Fund Rules dated 21.5.1997 and letter, dated 31.10.2000 as disclosed in MOU dated 25.2.2008 and minutes dated 16.10.2008 and after quashing the same, to direct the respondents to discharge the statutory obligation to pay pension from the date of retirement on a single uniform percentage ceiling of 50% of last drawn pay to avoid multiple ceilings of 50% or 40%.

    9.Mr.K.Ashok Chakaravarthy, learned counsel for the first two writ petitions made an elaborate submissions and also relied on the following judgments:
    a)Imperial Bank of India Pensioners’ Association Vs. State Bank of India (1989 Supp (1) SCC 236).
    b)Chairman, Railway Board Vs. C.R.Rangadhamaiah (AIR 1997 SC 3828)
    c)V.Kasturi Vs. State Bank of India (AIR 1999 SC 81)
    d)Subrata Sen and others Vs. Union of India and others (2001 (7) Supreme 140; and
    e)U.Rabhavendra Acharya and others Vs. State of Karnataka and others (2006 AIR SCW 2676).

    10.These judgments have no application to the case projected by the petitioners. Admittedly, the SBI Employees’ Pension Fund Rules were framed under Section 50 of the SBI Act by the Central Board of SBI after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India and with the previous sanction of the Central Government. Therefore, any amendment also requires appropriate approval by the Central Government. Though the Bank has recommended the case of the petitioners, until such time the Central Government grants approval, the question of this court granting direction to the Central Government to grant approval will not arise.

    11.Section 50(2)(O) provides for estimation and maintenance of superannuation pension, PF and other funds and for the purpose of framing regulations, Section 50(1) obliges the Central Board to consult the RBI and only with the previous sanction of the Central Government and by a notification in the official Gazette can make regulations. The arguments of the petitioner was that there must be same percentage available to all retirees in the light of the judgment in D.S. Nakara v. Union of India, (1983) 1 SCC 305 and that they should be paid uniform percentage of 50% of last drawn pay.
    13.Therefore, in the present case, in the absence of any regulation in favour of the petitioners, they cannot seek for direction from this Court to the Government of India to accept the amendment proposed by the SBI. In fact, in the earlier set of writ petitions, this court had given a direction to consider the case. But, in the present case, seeking for positive direction on the basis of an alleged right glowing from Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and also on the basis of the Nakara’s case cannot be countenanced especially in the light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Indian Ex-Services League case (cited supra).

    14.In the light of the above, all the writ petitions will stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stand closed.”
    I have not made any comments but I would welcome any useful Judegments and any points in favour of our pension issue.
    R.Sivagyanam
    One of the petitioner in the above case.

    Like

  134. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM,I AM VERY THANKFUL TO YOU FOR PROVIDINME LATEST DEVELOPMENT OF PENSION ISSUE IN SBI PARTICULARLY OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. IT IS DESIRABLE TO NOTICE AND DISCUSS THE RELEVANT PENSION RULES. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF THE BANK,IN EXERCISE OF POWERS CONFERRED BY SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955(ACT23OF 1955)AFTER CONSULTATION WITH RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND PREVIOUS SANCTION OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT FRAMED RULES NAMELY STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES.OUR PENSION IS CALCULATED IN TERMS OF STATE BANK OF INDIA PENSION FUND RULES AND RULE NO23(2) SAYS WITH EFFECT FROM 1-03-1999,THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF PENSION FOR MEMBERS WHO RETIRED/RETIRE DRAWING SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IN THE PAY SCALE EFFICTIVE FROM 1-1-1992(AWARD STAFF) 1-7-1993(SUPERVISING STAFF)AND THEREAFTER SHALL BE COMPUTED TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS IN THIS REGARD. I AM NOT GIVING THE DETAILS AS YOU ARE AWARE OF THEASE RULES.HOWEVER I HAVE TO MENTION AN EXTRACT FROM CENTRAL OFFICE LETTER NO CDO/PM/16/CIR/34 DATED 31-10-2000 VIDE WHICH THEASE INSTRUCTION ARE CICULATED.PLEASE REFER TO PARAGRPH 6 OF THIS CIRCULAR WHICH SAYS”””””'”;WE HAVE TO ADVISE TGHAT SALARY AND ALLOWANCES OF THE EMPLOYEES HAVE BEEN FURTHER REVISED W.E.F 1-11-1997(AWARD STAFF/1-4-1998(SUPERVISING STAFF).ACCORDINGLY,SUITABLE REVISION IN AMOUNT OF SUBSTANTIVE SALARY FOR PAYMENT OF PENSIONOF 50%I.E RS 8500/ MENTIONED AT 2(!) AND SIMILAR REVISI IN 2(||) ARE REQUIRED,THE FORMULA AND RATE OF DEARNESS RELIEF PAYABLE ON PENSION, CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF REVISED OF REVISED PAY AND ALLOWENCES,IS TO BE REVISED,AND CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENTS ARE TO BE MADE TO PENSION RULES, BANK HAS TAKEN UP THE MATTER SUITABLY WITH THE GOVERNMENT AND RESERVE BANK OF INDIA.TILL WE GET NECESSARY APPROVAL, THE PENSION AND COMMUTATION TO EMPLOYEES,WHO HAVE,RETIRED/RETIRE DRAWING PAY AND ALLOWANCES IN THE REVISED SCALES,SHOULD BE COMPUTED WITH REFERENCE TO PAY AND ALLOWANCES WHICH THEY HAVE DRAWN IN THE OLD SCALE,HAD THERE VBEEN NO REVISION.”””””’IT SHOWS THERE IS COMMITMENT FROM BANK THAT PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WILL BE REVISED AFTER FROM GOVERNMENT/RESERVE BANK..FURTHER AT THE TIME OF 7TH BIPARTITE SALARY REVISION BANK HAS MENTIONED IN C.O LETTER NO CDO/IR/CIR/83 DATED 14-02-2000 I AM MENTIONING AN BEXTRACT FROM THIS CIRCULAR———-”THE EXCUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE CENTRAL BOARD HAVE ALSO APPROVED THE CONTINUATION PENSION AS PER EXISTING RULES”’ AT THE TIME OF SALARY REVISION AS PER 8TH BIPARTITE VIDE CO CIRCULAR NOCDO/P&HRD/17 DATED 7-7-2005 IAM MENTIONING AN EXTRACT FROM CENTRAL OFFICE CIRCULAR””'””’THE EXCUTIVE COMMITTE OF THE CENTRAL BOARD HAVE ALSO APPROVED THE CONTINUTION OF PENSION AS PER THE EXISTING RULES” FROM THE ABOVE IT IS CLEAR THAT SIXTH,SEVENTH, AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WERE BEING PAID PENSION ON THE BASIS OF SALARY AND ALLOWANCESW.EF1-11-1992(AWARD STAFF) AND 1-07-1993(SUPERVISING STAFF) AFTER THE HISTORIC STRIKE IN SBI IN APRIL 2006 THE EXCUTIVE COMMITTEE OF CENTRAL BOARD, PENDING AMENDMENTS IN STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES,HAS APPROVED OF BASIC PENSION AND DEARNESS RELIEF THERON ON AD-HOC BASIS TO THOSE WHO RETIRED ON OR AFTER 1-11-2002. THE REVISION OF PENSION WILL BE SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT IN RULE 23 0F SBI EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES VIDE CORPORATE CENTRE LETTER NO CDO/PM/16/CIR/26DATED 24-08-2006,CDO/PM/16/SPL/723 DATED 8-09-2006& CDO/PM/16/SPL/827DATED3-10-2006.NOW BANK IS GOING TO REGULARISE THE PENSION OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WITH THE APPROVAL OF GOVERNMENT WHICH MAY BE APPROVED IN MONSOON OR WINTER SESION OF PALIAMENT .UNDER THEASE CIRCUMSTANCES WE WE /PENSIONERS FEDERATION SHOULD MOBLISE THE SUPPORT OF M.P S SO THAT AMENDMENT OF RULE NO 23 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND SHOULD BE IMPLEMENT TO 7TH AS WELL TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.SIR,I SHALL BE GLAD TO RECEIVE YOUR COMMENTS.VIEWS ON THE POINTS RAISED BY ME.IN CASE YOU WANT THE EXTRACTS FROM THE CIRCULARS WHICH MENTIONED IN THIS BLOG ICAN SUPPLY TO YOU FPOR YOUR USE AT YOUR END. FOR THAT YOU CAN ADVISE ME THE ADDRESS ON WHICH I CAN SEND THESE EXTRACTS FROM CENTRAL OFFICE CIRCULARS,. THANKING YOU VERY MUCH.

    Like

    1. Thank you Shri.Keshav Rai Saini for your response.Please refer my write up in this blog dated March 9th 2008.I wellcome any material usefull to this case.The extract of any circular or judgements will not be usefull to be used in the court.The entire circular intact is required to so that it can be submitted as a document in the court.As far judegments are concerned the reference of law journal ect is enough that can be taken by our lawyers.Once againg I thank you and expecting your reply to the address given in the blog dated 09.03.2008.
      R.Sivagyanam-Phone No:044-24794044

      Like

  135. DEAR SHRI SIVAGYANAM,I AM THANKFUL TO YOU FOR REPLYING ME SO PROMPTLY, WHILE I AM GOING TO FORWARD ALL THE CIRCULARS MENTIONED IN THIS BLOG DATED 2ND JULY 2010. HOWEVER, I HAVE OBSERVED THAT ALMOST ALL THE CIRCULARS ARE ALREADY IN YOUR POSSESSION,ANY HOW IF YOU ARE IN NEED OFOF ANY INFORMATION/CIRCULAR I AM ALWAYS READY TO SEND YOU.NOW I AM MENTIONING SOME SUPREME COURT JUDGE MENTS WHICH MAY SOME HELP TO YOU. OUR PENSION RULES REMAINED ALMOST STATIC UPTO 1986,THE MAIN FEATURES OF THE OLD PENSION SCHEME PRIOR TO 1986 WERE LIKE THIS———RULE NO 20(1) THE MAXIMUM PENSION(EXCEPT IN CASES WHICH THE TRUSTEES IN THEIR DISCRETION MAY UNIMOUSLY CONSIDER SPECIAL) SHALL NOT EXCEED RS750/ PER MENSEM AND NO CASE SHALL EXCEED RS 1000/ PER MENSEM IN INDIA IN THE CASE OF SENIOR STAFF OFFICERS. IN 1987 A WRIT PETITION WAS FILED IN THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT BY BIBI PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION(DELHI CIRCLE) ON THE QUESTION OF REVISION OF PENSION AND GRANT OF FAMILY PENSION.THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT BY ITS JUDGEMENT DATED 23-02-2989 IN THE CASE OF IMPERIAL BANK OF ONDIA PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS V/S STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS HAS OBSERVED”’ PENSION IS A RIGHT AND NOT A BOUNTY.IT WOULD THEREFORE NOT BE PROPER TO LEAVE THE QUANTUM OF PENSION AT THE DISCRETION OF THE TRUSTEES IN EACH CASE AS DONE BY PROVISO TO RULE20(1).TO DO SO WOULD BE LEAVE THE EMPLOYEES AT THE MERCY OF THE TRUSTEES WHO WOULD NATURALLY EXERCISE THE DISCRETION IN ANY MANNER THEY LIKE IN THE ABSENCE OF GUIDLINES. THE SUPREME COURT THEREFORE SUGGESTED THAT PROVISO IN RULE 20(1)(A) SHOULD BE DELEATED.DURING THE PROCEEDING OF COURT BANK HAD PROPOSED ONE-HALF OF THE AVERAGE MONTHLY SUBSTANCES SALARY DRAWAN DURING LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE OR RS1300/ WHICHEVER IS LESS PROVIDED THAT THE LIMIT OF RS1300/ MAY BE RELAXED TO RS2400/ PER MONTH IN THE CASE OF OF OFFICFER EMPLOYEES,HOWEVER SUPREME COURT THINK THAT OUTER CEILING OF RS2400/ SUFFICE. THEY ,THEREFORE,OF THE OPINION THAT THE FIGURE OF RS1300/ IN THE PROPOSED RULE 20(1)(A)SHOULD BE BREPLACED BY THE FIGURE OF RS2400/ AND PROVISO SHOULD BE DELEATED.CONSEQUENTIAL CHANGES, WHEREEVER NECESSARY,SHOULD BE MADE.RULE 23 W.E.F 1-11986—– THE MAXIMUM PENSION SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE HALF OF AVERAGE MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SEVICE OR RS 2400/PER MONTH WHICH EVER IS LESS.PROVIDED THAT THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF PENSION SHALL BE INCREASED FOR THE MEMBERS WHO RETIRED RETIRE AFTER 1-11-1993 FROM RS2400/ TO RS 4250/AND FROM 1-3-1999 THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF PENSION FOR MEMBERS WHO RETIRED/RETIRE DRAWING SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IN PAY SCALES EFFECTIVE FROM 1-11-1992(AWARD STAFF)/1-7-1993(SUPERVISING STAFF) AND THEREAFTER SHALL BE COMPUTED TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS IN THIS REGARD.PLEASE TAKE UP THE PROTCTION OF SUPREME COURT VJUDGEMENT THAT THERE SHOULD BE ONE FORMULA THAT IS 50% OF THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE SHOULD BE TAKEN FOR PENSION AND SO FAR AMENDMENTS IN THE PENSION RULES ARE CONCERNED THEASE ARE NOW PLACED ON THE TABLE OF PALIAMENT ON 23TH APRIL 2010IN THE LOKSABHA AND ON27TH APRIL IN THE RAJYA SABHA. FOR DETAIL PLEASE REFER TO BMY WRITE UP DATED 29TH MAY 2010 IN THIS BLOG . ISHALL BE GLAD IF YOU PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS /OPINION AND ALSO ADVISE ME LATEST DEVELOPMENT ON PENSION ISSUE AND WHAT IS STATEBANK BOF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND( AMENDMENT) RULES WHICH ARE BEFORE PARLIA MENT . THANKING YOU

    Like

  136. Extremely sorry for the delay in reaching you in this blog particularly for the delay in responding to the veiws expressed by both Shri. Keshav Rai Saini & Shri. Venkatesan due to certain pre- occupation required to be attended by me outside Chennai.

    . Regarding the suggestion made by Shri. Venkatesn, I wish to point out that efforts are being made through the past & present leaders of the Award Staff Union/Federation to arrange for a meeting of all concerned to discuss the pension issue in the present situation after wage settlement. Unfortunately, the present leaders of the Award Staff Union/ Federation are deeply involved on certain serious issues confronting their existing membership both in Bengal & Chennai Circles. However, I am confident that they are keeping the pension issue in their minds for discussion at the appropriate time.

    Regarding the veiws expressed by Shri. Keshav Rai Saini on various aspects of the SBI Pension rules and other related matters, I am of the firm opinion that they are all logically sound, but could only be enforceable through court of law. When there is any improvement in the existing pension sheme either by way of enhancing the ceiling or by granting higher Dearness Relief i.e. 100% neutralisation, those improvements have got to be made applicable to the past pensioners also and this is the principle laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court interpreting the Judgement in Nakara’s Case. I am at loss to understand as to how this laid down principle has escaped the attention of the Madras High Court while delivering the Judgement very recently in the case cited by Shri. Sivagnanam in this blog.

    Recently Jaipur High Court reiterated this principle while passing the order in LIC Pensioners’ case. In this case the LIC Pensioners obtained a favourable verdict on updation of pension after every wage revision and also on 100% neutralisation. Further, the Judgement says that once the Central Board of LIC takes a favourable decision on the applicability of 100% neutralisation of Dearness Releif to its past pensioners, the GOI has no say in such a decision and the approval of GOI is not necessary. I presume that the proposal of our Bank on revision of pension to 7th & 8th BP retirees w.e.f.01.05.2005 as brought to light by Madras High Court in its Judgement dt. 16th October 2008 should have had the seal of approval by the Central Board of our Bank. Therfore, GOI has no locus standi either to reject or to withhold the said proposal other than simply notifying the same. This is my view.

    If any colourable excercise is found in GOI’s ultimate decision, it can be challenged only in court of law and finality of such a challenge can be seen only in Supreme Court. This process will take a very long period by that time most of the past pensioners may reach the heavenly abode without enjoying the fruits of the final verdict. Therefore, we’ll have to somehow or other take pains to convince the GOI about our side of the case as GOI is only SUPREME in this respect.

    Why the GOI is adament in our case particularly when there are laid down principles on pension matters enunciated by the Apex Court? This is a million dollar question. As far back in 1994 itself, the GOI wrote to SBI that it has taken a policy decision not to give approval for any improvement in SBI Pension Scheme in veiw of the fact that SBI employees / officers are enjoying three benefits and any favourable decision in this regard will only create problems in the Industry on account of possible imbalance in the terminal benefits between the employees of Nationalised Banks/ RBI and the employees of SBI. Yet, the GOI gave its approval for the enhancement of the ceiling from Rs. 2400 to Rs. 4250 at the instance of both the Federations in 1995 & then unilaterally adopted 50%-40% formula improving the pension for Officers during 2000. Subsequentky the improvement in pension enhancing the ceiling on Pay in its 50%-40% formula from Rs.8500 to Rs.20420 was possible only due to an indefinite strike in the year 2006.

    We therfore earnestly hope for a meeting of three federations at the earliest to arrive at a consensus on this issue with a view to convince GOI.

    Like

    1. THANK YOU MR GANAPATHI FOR YOUR RESPONSE TO MY SUGGESTION. MAY I NOW REQUEST YOU TO KEEP THE MEMBERS ADVISED PERIODICALLY ABOUT THE LIKELY RISE IN D.A. TO KNOW IN ADVANCE THE HALF YEARLY TRENDS. THAT IS ONLY THING WHICH SUSTAINS ELDERLY PENSIONERS.
      THAN YOU ONCE AGAIN.
      T.R.VENKATESAN. 9.30.A.M. 06.07.2010

      Like

  137. DEAR SHRI H. GANAPATHY, I AM VERY GLAD TO READ YOUR VALUABLE SUGGESTIONS.KINDLY REFER TO JOINT NOTE ON SALARY RVISION FOR OFFICERS AND FULL TEXT OF THE 9TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT-MEMURANDUM OF SETTLEMENT FOR WORKMEN.WHERE THERE IS MENTION OF PENSION(IN BANKS OTHER THAN STATE BANK OF INDIA). WHY STEPMOTHERLY TREATMENT WITH STATE BANK OF INDIA..PLEASE REFER TO CLAUSE NO7(2)(\) —– WITH EFFECT FROM 1-5-2005 THE VPENSION OF OFFICERS WHO RETIRED OR DIED WHILE IN SERVICE DURING THE PERIOD 1-04-1998 TO 31-10-2002 WILL BE REFIXED BASED ON THE DEFINATION OF PAY AS DEFINED CLAUSE NO 5 OF THE JOINT NOTE DATED 14TH VDECEMBER 19999(7TH BIPARTITE).NO ARREARS OF PENSION AND COMMUTED VALUE OF PENSION WILL BE PAYABLE (\\)WITH EFFECT FROM 1-05-2005 THE PENSION OF OFFICERSWHO RETIREDOR DIED WHILE IN SERVICE DURNG THE PERIOD 1-11-2002TO30-04-2005 WILLBE REFIXED BASED ON THE DEFINITION OF PAY AS DEFINED IN CLAUSE6 OF THE JOINT NOTE 2ND JUNE 2005(8TH BIPARTITE)NO ARREARS OF PENSION WILL BE PAYABLE ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH REFIXATION.SIMILARLY DEARNESS RELIEF FORMULA HAS ALSO BEEN MENTIONED IN THE JOINT NOTE DATED 27T APRIL 2010 SIGNED BETWEEN UNION S AND I.B. A HOWEVER THIS AGREEMENT IS APPLIUCABLE TO ALL OTHER BANKS AND NOT FOR STATE NBANK OF INDIA. HERE I HAVE TO MENTION THAT SBI HAS ALSO RECOMMENDED THE SAME FORMULA OF DEARNESS RELIEF FOR 7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES I.E AFTER MERGING OF 1684 P0INTS FOR 7TH BIPARTITE AND MERGING OF 2288 POINTS FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. THEN WHAT IS HURDLE GOVERNMENT IS NOT AGREEING TO THE REVISION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES IN SBI WHEN 7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE ARE GOING TO REFIXING OF PENSION AS PER 9TH BIPARTITE AGREEMENT.IN OTHER BANKS NOT IN SBI. I SHAL BE GLAD IF YOU PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/ CLARIFICATIONS ON THEASE POINTS

    Like

  138. DEAR SENIOR PENSIONERS ,THE ENTIRE MATTERS RELATING TO THE PENSIONERS BENEFITS IS STILL AT THE STARTING POINT DESPITE SO MANY ROUNDS OF COMMUNICATIONS AND EXCHANGE OF VIEWS.IT ALSO SEEMS WE MAY STILL HAVE TO WAIT FOR AN UN SPECIFIABLE LONG TIME BY WHICH TIME MANY OF OUR SENIOR DESERVING AND HELPLESS PENSIONERS WILL VANISH FROM THE SCENE.PERHAPS THE BANK MANAGEMENT,GOVT.AND OUR SO CALLED ASSNS. AND UNIONS ALSO WANT THIS TO HAPPEN, TO PUT A NATURAL END TO THE DEMANDS.IT IS EMERGING THAT THE SECOND PENSION OPTEES OF OTHER BANKS WILL BE GETTING MORE BASIC PENSION THAN SBI PENSIONERS.YET THEY FROWN AT US,FOR REASONS BEST KNOWN TO THEM.AN UNWANTED , UNREASONABLE ANTIPATHY DEVELOPED BY THEIR LEADERS SOLELY AND ABSOLUTELY FOR THEIR SURVIVAL.THE SBI LEADERS HAVE NO TIME TO TAKE UP OUR CAUSE AS OBSERVED FROM THE RECENT SETTLEMENT WHERE NEITHER THE COMMON AGREEMENT NOR THE PACKAGE(?) WITH SBI MANAGEMENT HAS ANY MENTION ON PENSION MATTERS EVEN BY MISTAKE.THEY ARE NOT FOR YOU AND ME.THERE FORE LET US BE REALISTIC AND ACCEPT THE FACTS THAT WE ARE NOT LIKELY TO RECEIVE ANY THING BETTER IN THE NEAR FUTURE UNLESS SOME MIRACLE HAPPENS.I AM BACK TO MY USUAL SLOGAN FOR EFFORTS TO GET 100%DA WHICH ALONE CAN BRING SOME IMMEDIATE RELIEF TO US.MY MESSAGE MAY BE TAKEN IN THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE AND NOT AS A DISCOURAGEMENT TO OUR EARNEST EFFORTS.SORRY SENIORS EXCUSE THIS JUNIOR IF IAM WRONG.

    Like

  139. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYNAM, WHILE I AM AWAITING YOUR COMMENTS/OPINION AND LATEST DEVELOPMENT ON PENSION ISSUE AS MENTIONED IN MY WRITE UP DATED THE THIRD JULY 2010 IN THIS BLOG.HOWEVER, WE SHOULD NOW DISCUSS THE JUDGEMENT DATED THE 8TH JUNE 2010 WHICH WAS DECLARED BY THE MADRAS HIGH COURT ON THE BASIS OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955 OR PENSION RULES PARTICULARLY RULE NO 23 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES.AS PER SECTION 50(2)(O) STATE BANK OF INDIA MANAGEMENT CANNOT REVISE THE PENSION OF RE1//WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND SECTION50(1)OBLIGES THE CENTRAL BOARD TO CONSULT R.B.I AND ONLY WITH THE PREVIOUS SANCTION OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT AND BY NOTIFICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTEE CAN MAKE REGULATIONS.IN THIS JUDGEMENT THERE IS REFERENCE OF ANOTHER JUDGEMENT DATED THE 16-10-2008 DECLARED BY THE SAME COURT WHICH HAD GIVEN DIRECTION TO CONSIDER THE CASE OF REVISION OF PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.THIS JUDGEMENT OF 8TH JUNE 2010 SAYS ONLY THAT COURT CANOT GIVE POSITIVE DIRECTIONS. HOWEVER THEY HAVE NOT OBJECTED TO EARLIER JUDGEMENT OF 16-10-2008.PLEASE THEREFOR REFERE TO SUB SECTION 4OF50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955 WHERE THE PROCEDURE OF OFFICIAL GAZETTE NOTIFICATION OF THE AMENDMENT OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPOLYEES PENSION FUNDIS LAID DOWN.AS SUCH REFER TO PAPERS LAID DOWN ON THE TABLE OF LOKSABHA ON THE 23RD APRIL 2010—- A COPY OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND (AMENDMENT) RULES 2005 ( HINDI AND ENGLISH VERSION) PUBLISHED THE NOTIFICATION NO CDO/PM/16/SPL/828 PUBLISHING IN WEEKLY GAZETTE OF INDIA DATED 8TH JANUARY 2010 UNDER SUB SECTION(4) OF SECTION 59 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955 .SIMILARLY ON 27TH APRIL 2010INTHE RAJYA SABHA—-A COPY IN(ENGLISH AND HINDI VERSION) OF THE MINISTRY OF FIANCE(DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES) NOTIFICATIONNO CDO/PM/16/SPL/1176 PUBLISHING STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND(AMENDMENT)RULES 2005 PUBLISHING IN THE GOVERNMENT GAZETTE 2ND JANUARY TO 8TH JANUARY 2010. YOU ARE AWARE AT PRESENT BASIC PENSION AND DEARNESS RELIEF TO8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE BEING PAID ON AD-HOC BASIS TO RETIRED ON OR AFTER 2002.THIS PENSION WILL BE SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT OF RULE NO 23 OFSBI EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND.I PERSUME THAT BANK IS GOING TO RECTIFY THE POSITION THROUH THEASE NOTIFICATIONS.HOWEVER CONFIRMPARTICULARLYWHETHER BANK CAN CARRYTHIS AMENDMENTWITHOUT THE AMENDMENT TO 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. ISHALL BE OBLIGED IF YOU WILL SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/CLARIFICATIONS ON THE ABOVE POINTS. THANKING YOU AND EXPECTING EARLY REPLY.

    Like

  140. The anxieties of the pensioners is increasing faster than the country’s inflation.The present wage revision seems to be ambiguous on the proposed revision on pension even for the retirees of the 9th bipartite period ,much so in the case of retirees of the early bipartites who are the worst sufferers.Despite several discussions we continue to be in level one.The expressions of our legal knowledge on various pension related matters time and again will not produce any results.Please arrange for an elders meet at the earliest so that we can discuss the matters thread bare.Please note that even in the gratuity area our assns. and unions have failed miserably in the case 9th biparite employees .This shows their dwindling bargaining power and i am sure they are not capable of any delivering anything better to you and me.EVEN THE EXTRA PENSION PROVISION WITH SBI MANAGEMENT FOR SBI EMPLOYEES REMAINS UNDISTRIBUTED—- A PART OF WHICH CAN VERY WELL BE DISTRIBUTED FOR PENSIONERS CAUSE TO HELP THEM.

    Like

  141. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM.Y, THANKS FOR TAKING INTERST FOR WELFARE OF PENSIONERS,WELL SAID THE VIEWS SO EXPRESSED BY YOU DESERVE AN IMMEDIATE CONSIDERATION.I AM SUBMITTING MY COMMENTS ON YOUR WRITE-UP DATED THE 7TH AND 9TH JULY 2010,ONE IS ON DEARNESS RELIEF TO PENSIONERS AFTER 100% D.A NEUTERALISATION AND THE SECOND AMOUNT TO BE DISBURSEDE BY THE STATE BANK WITH THE COSULTATION OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT. SO FAR 100% D.A NEUTRALISATION IS CONCERNED AS YOU ARE AWARE THIS HAS BEEN PAID TO TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES W.EF 1-05-2005AND NOT TO PAST RETIREES.IN CASE WE WANT 100% D.A NEUTERALISATIONTO ALL PAST PENSIONERSWE HAVE TO NEGOTIATE WITH I.B.A AS OTHER BANKS PENSIONERS ARE VALSO GETTINGD.A AT 100% NEUTRALISATION WEF1-0502005AND NOT PAST RETIREESIN CASE IT MATERLISEES WITH THE CONSENT OF I.B.ATHEN RATE OF DEARNESS RELIEFPAYABLE TO PENSIONERSWHO HAVE RETIRED PRIOR TO 1-111987ANDBETWEEN1-11-1987AND31-10-1993WILL BE AT THE RATEOF 538.68%ON BASIC PENSIONAND DEARNESS RELIEFPAYABLE TOTO PANSIONERS WHO HAVE RETIRED ON OR AFTER 1-11-93 TO 31-10-2002 WILL BE AT THE RATE OF 233.45%OF BASIC PENSION AND DEARNESS TO PENSIONERS WHO RETIRED ON OR AFTER 1-11-2002 WILL BE 68.76% OF BASIC PENSIO N . THEASE RATES OF DEARNESS RELIEF IS WITHOUT THE REVISION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND IN CASE THERE WILL BE REVISION OF PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES THEN DA TO SEVENTH BIPARTITE RETIREES ON THE BASIS OF 100%DA NEUTRALISATION WILL BE 127.92% ON BASIC PENSION OF RS7400/ TORS 7500/(REVISED PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES) REGARDING YOUR SECOND POINT ADDITIONAL AMOUNT SPECIALLY MEANT FOR SBI STAFF HAS ALREADY PAID TO AWARD STAFF IN ADDITION TO TO JOINT NOTE DATED27-04-2010(9TH BIPARTITE) AND THE CORPORATE CENTRE AT MUMBAI HAS SINCE BSUBMITTED ITS RECOMMENDATION TO THE GOVERNMENT FOR PAYMENT OF ADDITIONAL AMOUNT SPECIALLY MEANT FOR SBI STAFF.ARREARS THEREOF SHALL BE DISBURSED AFTER RECEIPT OF GOVERNMENT APPROVAL.KINDLY SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/VIEWS ON THEASE POINTS AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE.

    Like

    1. The SBI package for award staff alone has been cleared.There is no sign of any such package for officers,who have to be content with the IBA settlement only.I am sure the award staff are not paid the entire extra pension provision.Even a small portion of the amount will be enough to meet the pensioners demands to a satisfying extant.But who will bell the cat?you and i, or for that matter any pensioner or pensioner organisation,has the required opening/authority/recognition, to enter into any talks with the SBI MANAGEMENT/IBA/GOVERNMENT.Only the recognised assn/unions can do this.But they will not do this ,going by their actions so far.The frustrations of the existing employees o/a the recent wage revision galore and the leaders are desperate to maintain their position,so no point in expecting them to take up our cause.If as per your statement100%DA neutralisation is already available in other banks,why not in SBI?it is an easy matter for the present leaders to get at least a portion of the extra provision but will they do?it is a sore and shameful matter that the old pensioners are treated like unwanted parents by their children forgetting the toil and sufferings they underwent to bring them up to a LEVEL in the life.HOPE THE HORN PLAYED WILL OPEN THE EYES OF THE CONCERNED.STILL WITH THE HOPE TOMORROW WILL BE HAPPY FOR PENSIONERS.

      Like

  142. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM.Y, I AM VERY THANKFUL TO YOU FOR YOUR PROMPT REPLY, IN THIS CONNECTION I HAVE TO ADVISE THAT I HAVE NOT MENTIONED THAT OTHER BANKS PENSIONERS ARE GETTING D.A ON THE BASIS OF 100%NEUTERALISATION ONLY 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY GETTING 100% NEUTERALISATION D. A WEF 1-05-2005I HAVE MENTIONED LIKE THIS AND IN CASE THIS ISSUE OF 100% DA NEUTERALISATION TO BE SOLVED THEN THERE WILL BE AGREEMENT WITH I.B.A OF ALL BANKS INCLUDING SBI FOR PAST PENSIONERS IE EARLIER THAN 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. PLEASE CORRECT THE POSITION AT YOUR END. THANKING YOU.

    Like

    1. DEAR SHRI SAINI, the fact remains that the SBI has still the provision of pension of the 9th bipartite at its disposal.The award staff have already been given a package deal over & above the 9th bipartite.Even though the details are not known there is something more than what has been settled at industry level.However the reasons for no such package for officers till date is not known.Even now the associations of officers can get a part of the balance amount for the pensioners,provided they do it with sincere intention and are really interested, of course subject to the formalities.AS this will not attract separate fund allocation this is the better and best way to get some benefit for the pensioners.Will they do it?what are the reasons for the present leaders to be indifferent to the pensioners? do i sound sensible?can my veteran leader friends like GANAPATHI,SIVAGNANAM , ANDPPS( MY FORMER AGM @TIRUPUR)throw some light on why this has not been moved or tried till date please.May be these avenues have already been tried but i would like to be enlightened .This junior pensioner wants the old and dwindling lot of pensioners to get better living conditions at least during the final part of their lives as i have had the fortune of working with these admiring their sincereity&,dedication towards both the INSTITUITION AND CO WORKERS. Y MANICKAM

      Like

  143. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM, Y.,AS YOU KNOW HOPE SUSTAINS LIFE AND WE SHOULD NOT LOOSE HEART.IN THIS CONNECTIONI AM ADVISING AN EXTRACT OF LETTER DATED 10TH MAY 2010 ADDRESSED BY THE FEDRATION PRESIDENT TO THE SECRETARY FINANCIAL SERVICES GOVT OF INDIA NEW DELHI.——–PENSION ISSUESOF STATE BANK OF INDIA RETIREES——-WE HAVE BEEN MAKING FERVENTREPRESENTATIONS TO TO THE STATE BANK OF INDIA AUTHORITIES AND THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA FOR RESOLVING THE LONG OUTSTANDING PENSION ISSUES OF THE STATE BANK PENSIONERS.THE MOST IMPORTANT OF THEM ARE——a) FIXATION OF PENSION FOR THE SEVENTH BIPARTITE RETIREES(IST NOVEMBER1997 TO 31ST OCTOBER 2002) ON THE BASIS OF SALARIES THEY RECEIVED AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT.PRESENTLY THEY ARE BEING PAID PENSION ON THE SALARY OF SIXTH BIPARTITE. b)PAYMENT OF PENSION TO ALL ELIGIBLE RETIREES AT 50%OF THE PAY THEY RECEIVEDAT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT. WE ARE GIVEN TO UNDERSTAND THYAT THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA HAS NOT SO FAR GIVEN THE APPROVAL TO THE PROPOSALAS OF STATE BANK OF INDIAQIN THIS REGARD IN VIEW OF THE FOLLOWING PRECEPTION.—–1)THAT A REVISION IN THE PENSIONBENEFITS WOULD INVOLVE HUGE OUTLAY OF FUND AND WITH THE PERCENTAGE OF CONTRIBUTION TO PENSION FUND PROVIDED FOR IN THE RULES,IT WILL NOT BE POSSIBLE TO SUSTAIN SUCH INCREASE IN PENSION PAYMENT BY THE BANK. ——2)THAT AN INCREASE IN THE PENSION IN STATE BANK WOULD HAVE REPERCUSSION AT THE INDUSTRY LEVEL AND WOLD LEAD FOR HIGHER PENSION FOR OTHER BANKS.——WE HAVE TO SUBMIT THAT THE ABOVE STAND OF THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT BASED ON REALITY. THE FUND REQUIRED FOR MAKING THE AFORESAID IMPROVEMENTS MAY NOT BE MORE THANRS200 CRORESIN YEARWHICH STATE VBANK OF INDIA CAN EASILY AND COMFORTABLY AFFORD TO PROVIDEEVEN A SMALL PORTION OF THE’PENSION BALANCING”COST ESTIMATED(600 CRORES PER ANNUM)AND PROVIDED FOR IN THE RECENTLY CONCLUDED BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT WOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH TO BRING RELIEF TO THE SBI PENSIONERS WHO HAVE BEEN SUFFERING FOR LONG ON THE ABOVEMENTIONED TWO COUNTS.WE FEEL THAT THERE CANNOT BE ANY REPERCUSSIONS IN THE INDUSTRY LEVEL AS THERE IS NO GROUND FOR RAISING ANY LEGIMATE DEMAND FOR HIGHER PENSION IN OTHER BANKS BECAUSE ALL THE PENSIONERS(INCLUDING 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES)IN ALL THOSE BANKS HAVE BEEN RECEIVING PENSION@50% OF THEIR RETIRING SALARIES WITH EFFECT FROM 1-05-2005 WHICH IS NOT SO IN THE CASE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA.FURTHER,AS THE 9TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENTS HAVE PROVIDED FOR CONTINUATION OF CONTRIBUTORY PROVIDENT FUND IN THE STATE BANK OF INDIA,THIS CANOT STAND IN THE WAY OF BRINGING SOME LONG DUE IMPROVEMENTS IN THE STATE BANK PENSIONS.,,WE THEREFOR,APPEAL TO YOU FOR RESOLVING,AT LEAST THE AFORSAID TWO BURNING ISSUES AND PROVIDE SOME RELIEF TO STATE BANK PENSIONERS.IN OUR VIEWS,THIS IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE TIME FOR SETTLING THESE ISSUES WHEN IMPORTANT CHAGES ARE TAKING PLACE IN THE BANKING INDUSTRY SUCH AS PROVIDING ONE MORE OPTION FOR PENSION AND INTRODUCTION OF NEW PENSION SCHEME. –WE WOULD ALSO REQUEST YPU KINDLY GIVE US AN OPPORUNITY TO MEET YOU AND SUBMIT OUR VIES ABOUT THE PENSION ISSUES AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE.THANKIN YOU AND LOOKING FORWARD TO RECEIVING YOUR KIND RESPONSE.LETTER ON SIMILAR LINES HAS ALSO BEEN SENT TO CHAIRMAN SBI.NOW WE SHALL BE GLAD IF YOU PLEASE ADVISE ME ABOUT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE GOVT AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT DATED 16-10-2008. I WILL WAIT YOUR REPLY EAGERLY. THANKING YOU

    Like

    1. Dear Keshav Rai Saini.
      In response to your query on July 10th 2010 thSBI employees pension fund rules amendments tabled before the parilment is only a formality.In the latest copy of the SBI Employees Pension Fund Rules available in the Bank shows that the pension in respect of 8th Bipartite retirees amended rules are incorporated.The question of 7th Bipartite pension revision the stand of the Government is it has been rejected and SBI Management still maintains even before High court that matter is pending with the Govt.
      In response to the Management the Government replies in the court that the Bank recommends the revision of pension for 7th bipatite retirees under pressure.All the pension fund rules and SBI act qutated in this site is placed before the court and the court says the approval of Government is necessary to amend the pension fund rules as provided in the SBI pension rules.

      Like

  144. the vies expressed by mr saini and others are respectable and in the interest of the pensioners. the whole blog in for the information of pensioners. I agree with mr saini that 100% D>A> should be given to all the pensioners , the old pensioners are getting less D.A. than the retirees of 2002, why the old pensioners are penalised for nothing, D.A. means the inflation,in the prices and not the compensation, then why there is discrimination. The rise in thge price effects the seniors in the same manner as it effects the retirees of 2002 . My humble request is to the Bank and IBA to consider this anomily favourably as soon as possible. thanks for the updates by the readers and the the persons showing the interest to read the comments. Raj kumar negi 2190 Sec 21C chandigarh

    Like

  145. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM, THANKS FOR COMMENTING MY WRITE -UP DATED 8TH JULY 2010, HOWEVER I HAVE TO ADD THAT SBI EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND (AENDMENTS)RULES2005 TABLED BEFORE THE PALIAMENT IS NOT ONLY A FORMALITY BUT IT IS REQUIRED AS PER SBI ACT 1955.IN OTHER WORDS LAW REQUIRES SO.FURTHER THE EXCUTIVE COMMITEE OF THE CENTRAL BOARD PENDING AMENDMENTS IN STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES HAS APPROVED RELEASE OF PENSION AND DEARNESS RELIEF THEREON ON AN AD-HOC BASIS TO THOSE EMPLOYEES WHO RETIRED OR AFTER 01-11-2002. THE REVISION IN PENSION WILL BE SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT IN RULE 23 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES VIDE CORPORATE CENTRE CIRCULAR NO CDO/PM/16/CIR/26/DATED 24TH AUGUST 2006.IN THIS CONNECTION PLEASE REFER TO PARAGRPH 10 AND 11 OF YOUR JUDGEMENT DATED 8TH JUNE 2008 OF MADRAS HIGH COURT.ACCORDING TO THIS JUDGEMENT, FOR FRAMING REGULATIONS SECION (1)OF SECTION 50 OF SBI ACT OBLIGES CENTRAL BOARD TO CONSULT RBI AND ONLY WITH THE PREVIOUS SANCTION OF THE GOVERNMENT AND BY NOTIFICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE CAN MAKE REGULATION.PLEASE NOTE THERE IS PROCEDURE FOR NOTIFICATIONOF ANY AMENDMENT IN STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND THIS AMENDMENT GOVERNMENT IS CRRYING UNDER SUB SECTION (4) OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955. FOR DETAILED SECTION(4) OF 50 PLEASE GO THROUH MY WRITE UP DATED 19TH MAY 2010.WHICH SAYS THEASE PAPER S IN PARLIAMENT WILL REMAIN FOR 30DAYS AND IF MEMBERS OF PALIAMENT WANTS ANY MODIFICATION OR NOT WANT TO IMPLEMENT AS CASE MAY BE SO IT WILL BE PASSED IN MONSOON SESSION OR WINTER SESSION THEN AMENDMENT WILL BE CARRIED OUT BY THE BANK.UNDER THEASE CIRCUMSTANCES PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/VIEWS/CLARIFICATIONS ON MY ABOVE POINTS. PLEASE REPLY EARLY AS POSSIBLE AS I WANT TO HELP YOU IN THE MATTER.BY GIVING MY IDIAS/VIEWS.THANKING YOU

    Like

  146. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM,I SHALL BE GLAD IF YOU PLEAS REFER TO WRITE UP OF SHRI H.GANPATH DATED THE 25TH MAY 2010 IN THIS BLOG WICH CAN HELP YOU IN APPEAL ALSO REFER TO JOINT NOTE DATED 27TH APRIL 2010 FOR 9TH BIPARTITE WHERE IN OTHER BANKS PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES HAS BEEN REFIXED AFTER MERGER OF 1684 POINTS ON THE BASIS OF SALARY DRAWN FOR 7TH BIPARTITE HOWEVER WEF 1-05-2005 I AM OF THE VIEW THAT SOMETHING IS THERE IN SBI EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND (AMENDMENTS)RULES 2005 WHICH IHAVE CITED IS PENDING IN THE PARLIAMENT.PLEASE TEREFORE USE YOUR GOOD OFFICES AND LET US KNOW THEASE AMENDMENTS .THIS CAN BE INQUIRED FROM CORPORATE OFFICE BY MENTIONING NOTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION(4)OF SECTION 50 OF SBI ACT1955.PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/CLARIFICATIONS.THANKING YOU

    Like

  147. DEAR SHRI SIVAGYNAM,AS YOU ARE AWARE DURING THE YEAR 2000 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA BROUGHT AMENDMENT BY SUBSTITUTING THE SUB RULE (2) OF RULE 23 OF SBI EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES,THUS INTRODUCING THE FORMULA OF 50% OF BASIC PENSION FOR THOSE WHO DRAW UPTO RS8500/ &40% FOR THOSE WHO DRAW ABOVE RS8500/ MINIMUM OF RS 4250/ BY MEANS OF A PROVISO SPECIFYING THAT W.E.F01-03-1999,THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF PENSION FOR THE MEMBERS WHO RETIRED/RETIRE DRAWING SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IN THE PAY SCALE EFFECTIVE FROM 01-11-1992(AWARD STAFF)/01-07-1993 (SUPERVISING STAFF)AND THERE AFTER SHALL BE COMPUTED TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS IN THIS REGARD. HERE WE HAVE TO NOTE EACH WORDS OF THIS RULE ,THE PHRASE ”THERE AFTER MEANS 7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES”BECAUSE SCALE WEF 1-11-1992(AWARD STAFF)/1-7-1993(SUPERVISING STAFF) IS OF 6TH BIPARTITE RETIREES THIS MEANS THIS FORMULA IS FOR 6TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND THEREAFTER 7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.FURTHER PLEASE NOTE THE PHRASE ‘TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS IN THIS REGARD””HOWEVER AFTER THE STRIKE IN APRIL 2006 IN STATE BANK GOVERNMENT RAISED THE AMOUNT OF RS8500/TO RS21040/ AND 40% ABOVE RS 21040/ IE THE SAME FORMULA 50%/40% FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY AND REVISED THE PENSION WEF1-05-2005.BUT THIS REVISION WAS ON AD-HOC BASIS SUBJECT TO AMENDMENT OF RULE 23 OF SBI EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES. HERE PLEASE NOTE THIS TENTMOUNT TO AMENDMENT ALTHOUGH ON AD-HOC BASIS WEF 1-05-2005,NOW REFER TO JOINT NOTE DATED 27TH APRIL 2010 FOR 9TH BIPARTITE WHEREIN OTHER BANKS PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES HAS BEEN REFIXED AFTER MERGER OF 1684 POINTS ON THE BASIS OF SALARY DRAWN FOR 7TH BIPARTITE SCALES.IN THE JOINT NOTE DEARNESS RELIEF FOR 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES HAS ALSO BEEN MENTIONED ,PLEASE NOTE WHEN THE PENSION OF OTHER BANKS HAS BEEN REFIXED FOR 7TH BIPARTITE BUT WEF 1-05- -2005 ONLY.THEN WHY GOVERNMENT IS NOT AGREEING THE SBI PROPOSAL FOR REVISION OF PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES IN SBI .MOREOVER THIS PROPOSAL IS SIMILAR TOTHE 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES OF OTHER BANKS IE WEF 1-05-2005AND THE SAME DEARNESS RELIEF FORMULA AFTER MERGER OF 1684POINTS.PLEASE TAKE PROTECTION OF THEASE POINTS IN YOUR APPEAL OF JUDGEMENT DATED 8-06-2010.IN THE MEANTIME I SHALL BE OBLIGED IF YOU PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/CLARIFICATIONS ON MY POINTS CITED ON 11TH 12 AND 13TH JULY IN THIS BLOG. THANKING YOU.

    Like

  148. On the above, the latest message i got is, on implementation of second option in other banks, pension will be based on revised basicpay@50%.In SBI it will be the pension now being paid only.It is not being refixed on revised basic pay..So for the same basic pay other bank pensioners will receive more pension than SBI pensioners.When questioned on this i was told that SBI employees are receiving PROVIDENT FUND contribution from the BANK(SBI) .One thing is certain that let not we expect any change for the better in near future on pending pension matters.Court cases are long drawn processes and once we resort to it we may have to wait for a long time and we may not be able to see any progress in our life time.So let our VETERAN act fast and lead us by exploring the other avenues open to us .Iam also happy that our friends like SHRI SAINI ARE SHOWING GREAT INTEREST IN OUR MATTERS ,ESPECIALLY IN THE MATTERS OF 7TH BIPARTITE PENSIONERS.THE GOOD INTENTIONS WILL BE SOON REWARDED,LET US HOPE.

    Like

  149. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM.Y, I AM THANKFUL TO YOU FOR VERY GOOD SUGGESTION, HOWEVER IN THIS CONNECTION I HAVE TO MENTION THAT IN OTHER BANK S ,IT IS TRUE THAT PENSION IS PAYABLE@50% OF THE LAST 10MONTS OF PENSIONABLE SERVICE,BUT FOR REFIXING OF PENSION OF 7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES YOU HAVE TO REFER TO JOINT NOTE DATED 27TH APRIL 2010 FOR 9TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT WHICH SAYS–PLEASE REFER TO CLAUSE NO 7 IE PENSION(OTHER THAN SBI)PLEASE SEE CLAUSE 7(2)(i)WITH EFFECT FROM1-05-2005THE PENSION OF THOSE OFFICERS WHO RETIRED OR DIED WHILE IN SERVICE DURING THE PERIOD1-04-1998 TO 31-10-2002 WILL BE REFIXED BASED ON THE DEFINATION OF PAY AS DEFINED IN CLAUSE 5 OF THE JOINT NOTE DATED 14TH DECEMBER 1999(7TH BIPARTITE).NO ARREAR OF PENSION AND COMMUTED VALUE OF PENSION WILLBE PAID ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH REFIXING. SIMILAR THERE IS MENTION OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES MENTIONED IN CLAUSE 7(2)(iI)OF THE JOINT NOTE AND ALSO RATE OF DEARNESS RELIEIF AFTER MERGING OF 1684POINT S FOR 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND AFTER MERGING 2288POINTS FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN THIS JOINT NOTE.UNDER THEASE CIRCUMSTANCES I SHALLBE GLAD IF YOU PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/CLARIFICATIONS.THANKING YOU

    Like

  150. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYNAM, I HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES , NOW REFER TO COMPUTATION SHEET FOR PENSION AND YOU WILL FIND THAT WHERE IT HAS BEEN WRITTEN MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST 12 MONTHS’ PENSIONABLE SERVICE FROM TO (LAST 12MONTHS OF PENSIONABLE SERVICE) HOWEVER YOU WILL FIND THAT SALARY OF LAST TWELVE MONTHS HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN HOWEVER SALARY OF 12MONTHS OF 1993 WHICH YOU WERE NOT DRAWING AT THE TIME OF YOUR RETIREMENT. HOW IT IS SO WHEN YOUR LAST TWELVE MONTHS SALARY IS DIFFERENT. RULE 23(2)HAS ALSO SAYS LAST TWELVE MONTHS(SEE CONCLUDING PARAGRPH OF RULE 23).FURTHER OUR SALARIES ARE FIXED BY BIPARTITE AGREEMENTS AND WE ARE DRAWING SALARY AS PER 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT. MORE OVER RULE 17 SAYS PENSION SHOULD BE FROM DAte of retirement.RULE NO2 HAS DEFINED SUBSTANTIVE SALARY FOR RETIREMENT.I AM OF THE VIEW THIS PENSION COMUTATION SHEET SHOULD BE MAKE AS DOCUMENT IN YOUR APPEAL AS THERE IS FLAW IN THIS SHEET SHOWING THE PERIOD OF LAST TWELVE MONTHS AND SHOWING DIFFERNT SALARY WHICH WAS NOT PAYABLE AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT .I KNOW YOU KNOW BETTER THAN ME EVEN THEN IN CASE YOU L IKE MY SUGGESTION PLEASE DO SO AND REFER TO PPO OF EACH PETITIONERS AND MAKE THIS AS DOCUMENT.PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/VIES/CLARIFICATION.THANKING YOU.

    Like

  151. Despite the fact that there are a number of points favourable to us like the NAKARA CASE and THE LIC CASE where the court rulings were in favour of of pensioners ,we are unable to understand what was the reason for the CHENNAI HIGHCOURT to disallow our reasonable claims and contentions.What is going to be our next step, going on an appeal which means again a lot delay going by the backlog of cases in the courts ?It is more unfortunate that the BANK TOP MEN who can take up the matter with the GOVT.for an early positive settlement , are indifferent and unhelpful.As there is provision in the 9th bipartite o/a second pension option the bank needs no separate provision once again.A part of the amount available is enough to take care of the old, senior pensioners.Why the present leaders moulded by the veterans in our fold are turning a NELSON’S EYE one fails to understand.I APPEAL TO OUR SENIORS TO ACT ON THIS AS THEY ALONE CAN PUT THINGS IN THE PROPER PLACE.PLEASE COME OUT ONCE AGAIN WITH YOUR EARLIER VEHEMENCY AND ZEAL FOR THE SAKE OF THE OLD PENSIONERS.

    Like

  152. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM.Y, AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT OUR GRIEVANCE IS THAT DELAY IN PAYING PENSION ON THE BASIS OF REVISED PAY SCALES EFFECTIVE FROM 1-11-1997(AWARD STAFF)/1-04-1998(SUPERVISING STAFF)ON THE GROUND THAT GOVERNMENT APPROVAL IS NOT YET RECEIVED.IN TERMS OF SECTION 50(2)(O) OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955 ,CHAIRMAN OF STATE BANK OF INDIA HAS NO POWER TO REVISE THE PENSION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.SECONDLY ALL THE PENSIONERS ARE NOT GETTING100%NEUTERALISATION OF D.A ON BASIC PENSION ONLY 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE GETTING 100%D.A NEUTRALISATION ON BASIC PENSION W.E/F 01-05-2005.THIS 100%NEUTRALISATION OF D.A SHOULD BE PAID TO ALL PAST PENSIONERS.THIRDLY PENSION SHOULD BE PAID AT THE RATE OF 50% OF THE LAST PAY DRAWN AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT NOT50%/40% UPTO SPECIFIC PAY.AS PER SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENTS IT IS LAID DOWN THAT A PENSIONER CANNOT BE DENIED ADDITIONAL BENEFITS(100%D.A NEUTERALISATION)ON THE GROUND THAT HE HAD RETIRED PRIOR TO THE DATE(1-11-2002/01-05-2005)ON WHICHTHE AFORESAID ADDITIONAL BENEFIT WAS CONFERRED ON ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE SAME CLASS OF PENSIONERS.FURTHER AS PER SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT DATED 23-02-1989 IN THE CASE OF IMPERIAL BANK OF INDIA PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS V/S STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERSTHAT MAXIMUM PENSIONSHALL NOTEXCEED ONE-HALF OF THE AVERAGE MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE.THUS PENSION SHOULD BE 50%OF LAST DRAWN PAY AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT.NOW I AM COMMENTING UNDER THEASE CIRCUMSTANCES WHAT IS GOING TO BE OUR NEX T STEP .AS YOU KNOW COURT CASES ARE A LONG PROCESS AND VERY DIFFICULT METHOD TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM..WE SHOULD NOW CALL THE MEETING OF ALL THE THREE FEDERATIONS I.E SUPERVISING,AWARD STAFF AND PENSIONERS FEDRATION AND HAVE A MEETING WITH BANK MANAGEMENT AS WELL WITH GOVT OFFICIALS.WE SHOULD MOBLISE THE SUPPORT OF M.PS. OF THE BOTH HOUSES SO THAT SUITABLE AMENDMENTS IN SBI PENSION RULES FOR 7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES SHOUD BE PASSED IN PARLIAMENT.FOR THAT I HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED NOTIFICATIONS AND WE SHOUD KNOW THEASE AMENDMENTS AND PENSIONERS FEDRATION ACT ACCORDINGLY..HOWEVER DELAY OF MORE THAN 12YEARSIS NOT FRAMING(AMENDING)THE RELEVANT RULES WAS NOT ON THE PART OF EMPLOYEES AND FOR THAT THEYARE SUFERRING A LOT AND ALSO BECOMING OLDER BY DAY BY DAY SO MUCH SO SOME OF THEM ARE ABOVE 72YEARS OLD. GOD HELP THEM AT THIS STAGE.PLEASE CONVINCE THE GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.I SHALL BE GLAD IF YOU PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/IDIAS.CLARIFICATION ON ABOVE NOTED POINTS.IN THE LAST I UNDERSTAND THAT BANK HAS RECOMMENDED TO GOVT ADDIONAL BENEFITS TO SBI STAFF BUT APPROVAL FROM GOVT IS AWAITED. PLEASE TRY TO KNOW WHAT ARE THEASE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS. THANKING YOU

    Like

    1. Dear Keshv Rai Saini,
      In reply to your writup dated 15th July 2010 I reproduce a portion of my original affidavit which has taken care of all your points and also your earlier views expressed in this Blog is already taken care of by the lawyers. I am not having in my possession only the copies of the Gazette notifications which you have mentioned.
      Extract from the Affidavit:
      6) “I respectfully submit that at the time of retirement under the SBIVRS I was drawing a salary (Basic Pay:10880/-Special Allowance:1213/-Personal Qualification Allowance:278/- CCA component of 30/- and increment portion of Fixed Personal Allowance380/-) (vide 7th Bipartite Wage Settlement) qualifying for superannuation benefits amounting to Rs.12781/- per month and the last 12 month average worked out to be Rs.12781/–. I further state that I am eligible for pension on this amount. The reckonable emoluments which are the basis for computation of pension are to be taken on the basis of emoluments payable at the time of retirement.” This has been clearly demonstrated by the Apex Court judgment in “Chairman, Railway Board Vs C.R.Rangadhamaiah “. Whereas the Bank is paying me pension pending revision on the pre-revised (6th Bipartite Wage Settlement) scale of pay (Basic Pay:6420/-Special Allowance:786/-Personal Qualification Allowance:180/- CCA component of 30/- Personal/Special Pay 140/- and increment portion of Fixed Personal Allowance230/-), qualifying for superannuation benefits amounting to Rs.7786/- and the 12 month average worked out to be Rs.7786/–. In accordance with the Circular No.Cir.D.O.VRS:4 dated 11-01-2001, paragraph – 2 pending revision, I am being paid the pension in the pre revised pay. But the bank continues to pay at the same rate even after the pay scales were further revised (8th Bipartite Wage Settlement) and consequently the pension is also revised based on the 8th Bipartite Wage Settlement and this revised pension is effected only to those who retired in the new scales(8th Bipartite Wage Settlement). The bank in response to my letter dated 11-02-2008 seeking revised pension informed me vide their letter CHE/PPG/2063 dated 18-03-2008 para 2 extracted reads as:
      “2. Bank is taking up the legitimate aspirations of 7th Bipartite Wage Settlement retirees with Government of India. Till such time pension will continue to be paid as per the rules prevalent at the time of your retirement.”

      11) “I further state that the fixation of family pension is dependant on the basic pension. It is strange that the bank chose to revise the family pension for the 7th bi-partite retirees without revising the main pension and the revised family pension circulars were issued. The family pension is universally, in any sector is calculated as a certain percentage of the basic pension. Here the bank revised and issued the circulars with regard to the family pension of the 7th bi-partite settlement without revising the main pension which is unknown in the history of pension payments in India in any organized sector and is totally against the principals of natural justice and clearly depicts the biased, unfair and prejudiced intension of the bank.”
      13) “It is humbly prayed that I have no other alternative, except approaching this Temple of Justice, for an effective and expeditious remedy in the form of this petition, to direct the respondents to revise the pension in accordance with law and pay the difference in pension and consequential terminal benefits from the date of voluntary retirement,” ……….

      All the points and entire case cannot be discussed through Blog. The Gazette notification is as per SBI Act section 50 (1) “[by notification in the official Gazette]” to accord permission to make regulations by the SBI Board and the same is now tabled before the parliament for approval. The Government approval to the Bank to make regulations in SBI Employees Pension Fund Rules by way of Gazette notification is accorded and now the Govt has to complete the legal procedure for which it requires parliament approval. All the matters placed before the parliaments are already approved by the Government by way gazette notifications to make regulations by SBI for their pension fund rules.

      Now our only issue is non revision of pension for 7thBipatiate retirees and for that the approval of the government is required. The question of payment of pension on the basis of pre-revised pay (as per 6th Bipartite Pay) is legally correct and under what rules it is paid and how long it will take to regularize or for ever it will be an unauthorized payment without any provision of SBI Employees Pension fund Rules. Is their legally any provision/judgments to make the government to accept the regulations recommended by the Board in consistent with the provisions of SBI Act?

      Like

  153. To day there is a news item on the proposed salary hike for MPs and ministers in north eastern states,a small hike to Rs.85000/- or near ,an increase of only about 300%,other facilities not included. At the same time an increase of around Rs.2000/- to Rs.3000/- for poor pensioners is strongly being denied with the sounding of all guns.It is now survival v/s luxury but the second one is given priority.The reply would be as usual” The banks cannot pay”and bla bla bla.This will also be supported by the present set of leaders.A small justified demand is being rejected, a morsel of food is being denied for a section of people while four score meals is offered to others who are already suffering from indigestion.Ironically both will lead to population reduction which may perhaps be the hidden agenda .Wither pensioners?At this rate we may have to change our prayers from “For a long life”to ———–(under stood,i do not want to mention).Sorry seniors, this junior is only able to sympathise on your plight.Still let us continue to hope that tomorrow is ours,as you have taught me that any hardship suffered presently for an honest ,reasonable cause will make tomorrow ours.

    Like

  154. respected sir I have gonethrough the whole blog and have to know that Sh keshav Rai Saini has written very valuable comments and suggestions for the guidance of the general retirees, I have just read in the blogt that M.P.:S and M.L.A:s of south east have increased their sallary and allowances 300% for nothing. We daily read in the nerwspaper as well as we see on the T.V. that most of the time these people fight with eachother or sit on Dharna and waist the precious time and get the reward in shape of increase in the pay bt 300% but donot have the time to think about the retirees (pensioners) What we can hope on these M.P:s ,they think for themselves and not for the public..Ashame on their part.Atleast they must raise the question in the parliament, why their is discremination in the pension. The inflation rate is much higher than our breath.God may save INDIA . Rajkumarnegi 2190 Sec 21C chandigarh

    Like

  155. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYNAM,IN REPLY TO YOUR WRITE UP DATED THE 20TH JULY 2010, I AM VERY THANKFUL TO YOU THAT YOU ALWAYS ENLIGHTENED ME ABOUT YOUR COURT CASE AND ALSO CLARIFIED MY EVERY POINT MENTIONED IN THIS BLOG. NOW TIME HAS COME THAT I SHOULD OBTAIN YOUR GUIDANCE AS MY ISSUE IS ALSO SIMILAR TO YOU ,PLEASE GUIDE ME WHAT SHOULD I DO NOW.I RETIRED AS CHIEF MANAGER ON 28THFEBUARY 2001 FROM STATE BANK OF INDIA AFTER COMPLETING 60 YEARS OF AGE(NORMAL RETIREMENT). IN REGARD TO MY PENDING ISSUE,THE REVISION OF PENSION TO THOSE RETIRED BETWEEN1-11-1997 AND 31-10-2002NEEDS TO BE ATTENDED TO IMMEDIATLY AND URGENTLY,AS THE RETIREES OF THIS PERIOD ARE WORST AFFACTED BECAUSE THE RETIREES OF THIS PERIOD ARE STILL BEING PAID PENSION ON PRE-REVISED SALARY OF 1993 SCALES OF PAY.I AM ALSO ONE OF THIS CATEGORY OF PENSIONER.THOSE RETIRED BEFORE THIS PERIOD AS ALSO THOSE RETIRED AFTER THIS PERIOD ARE BEING PAID PENSION CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF ACTUAL OF SALARY PAID TO THEM AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT.THE PROPOSAL SUBMITTED BY STATE BANK OF INDIA ON 19-04-2006 TO THE GOVERNMENT FOR REVISION OF PENSION TO PENSIONERS OF THIS PERIOD(1-11-1997TO 31-10-2002) HAS NOT YET BEEN APPROVED.DESPITE MY CONSTANT REQUEST TO CHAIRMAN STATE BANK OF INDIA AND UNION FIANANCE IN THE LAST SEVEN YEARS,I HAVE NOT BEEN PAID MY REVISED PENSION AND ARREARS FROM MY DATE OF RETIREMENT W.E.F 1-03-2001.THIS IS UNNESSARY HARASSMENT TO SENIOR CITIZEN AGED 69AND HALF YEARS OLD.FURTHER I AM WRITING THE CONTENTS OF FIRST LETTER WHICH I GOT FROM CORPORATE OFFICE IN 2003 AND ALSO WRITING THE CONTENT OF LAST LETTER WHICH I RECEIVED FROM CHANDIGARH LHO IN 2010 AND ALSO GOT OF NUMBER OF LETTERS FROM CHANDIGARHL.H.O FROM THE YEARS OF 2007-TO 2010 .HOWEVER I AM MENTIONING ONLY TWO LETTERS FOR PERSUAL SO THAT YOU CAN GIVE ME GUIDANCE. LETTER NO CDO/PPG/RA/650 DATED 17-09-2003 RECEIVED FROM PENSION .PROVIDENT FUND &GRATUITY DEPARTMENT COPORATE CENTRE MUNBAI ””WITH REFERNCE TO YOUR LETTER DATED 04-09-2003,ADDRESSED TO THE OUR CHAIRMAN,WE ADVISE THAT THE PENSIONS ARE AT PRESENT CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF PRE-REVISED PAY SCALES AND NOT ON REVISED SCALES.THE CLEARANCE TO ADOPT REVISED SCALES IS AWAITED FROM GOVERNMENT OF INDIA’ LETTER NO PPG/RKA/270 DATED 26-03-2010 RECEIVED FROM CHANDIGARH LHO ‘WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR COMPLAINT RECEIVED THROUGH MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NEW DELHI WE ADVISE THAT AS PER EXISTING SBI PENSION FUND RULES YOU ARE NOT ELLIGIBLE FOR REVISION OF PENSION AND REVISION OF PENSION FALLS UNDER THE PREVIEW OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.AS SUCH,AS AND WHEN THE SAME WILL BE ACCEPTED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,YOU WILL BE ADVISED ACCORDINGLY.PLEASE TEREFORE,AVOID FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE IN THIS REGARD TILL SUCH TIME,YOUR COPORATION WILL BE HIGHLY APPRECIATED.” FROM THEASE TWO LETTERS IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED THAT GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IS ADAMANT AND BIAS FOR REVISION OF PENSION OF WE PEAPLE. PLEASE DO REPLY ME

    Like

    1. DearKeshav Rai Saini,
      I request you to forward the letter No.CDO/PPG/RA/ 650 dt 17.09.2003 and Letter No PPG/RKA/270 dt 26.03.2010 to me or xerox copies duly attested to me.
      I will consult my lawyers and advise you further.
      R.Sivagyanam,13.Bakthavatchalam Street, KOYAMBEDU, CHENNAI- 600 107.

      Like

  156. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM.Y,AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT A LARGE NUMBER OF PENSIONERS FROM INDIA’S LARGEST BANK,STATE BANK OF INDIA(SBI),CONTINUE TO DRAW THEIR PENSION AT OLD RATES.THIS HAS RESULTED IN OFFICERS AND STAFF GETTING PENSION THAT IS LOWER THAN THAT OF THEIR COUNTERPARTS WHO HAVE RETIRED IN THE SAME RANK IN RECENT YEARS..STAFF RETIRING AT DIFFERENT TIME PRIOR TO 2002 ARE GETTING PENSION FIXED AT DIFFERENT RATES.THOSE WHO RETIRED BETWEEN NOVEMBER 1,1987,AND OCTOBER 1992,ARE GETTING 28.71 PER CENT OF THE LAST DRAWN PAY, BETWEEN NOVEMBER1,1992,TO 31OCTOBER 1997,ARE GETTING 40PER CENT AND BETWEEN NOVEMBER1,1997,TO OCTOBER 31,2002 ABOUT 30 PER CENT. DIFFERENT SET OF PENSION FIXED FOR STAFF RETIRING ON DIFFERENT TIMES HAS RESULTED IN PIQUANT SITUATION THAT A FORMER SBI CHAIRMAN,WHO RETIRED IN THE 1990s,IS TODAY GETTING PENSION THAT IS LESS THAN THAT OF A RECENTLY RETIRED CLERK OF THE SAME BANK.WE HAVE BEEN DEMANDING THAT PENSION FIXATION BE RATIONALISED SO THAT PEOPLE RETIRING IN THE SCALE GET THE PENSION ON THE BASIS OF SCALE ON WHICH THEY RETIRED. AND PENSION SHOULD BE FIXED AT 50 PER CENT AS IS THEGOVERNMENT NORMS ALSO EMPLOYEES OF OTHER BANKS ARE GETTING PENSION AT THE RATE OF 50% OF LAST DRAWN PAY AT THE TIME OF RETIRENMENT. FURTHER D.A SHOULD BE AT 100%NEUTRALISATION. WE WANT PENSION DISPAITIES REMOVED.PERHEPS YOU KNOW AT PRESENT HIGHEST OFFICER OF THE BANK IE DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR IS GETTING PENSION RS 13000/TO RS16000/PER MONTH THOSE RETIRED PRIER TO 31-10-2002 AND RETIRED AFTER 31-10-2002 IS GETTING PENSION ABOUT RS 25000/PER MONTH. THIS IS THE POSITON OF PENSION IN SBI.DEPUTY MANGING POST IS THE HIGHEST POST IN THE BANK AS MANAGING DIRECTORS AND CHAIRMAN HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNMENT.PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/CLARIFICATIONS/YOUR IADIAES ON MY ABOVE NOTED POINTS.

    Like

  157. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYNAM, WHILE I HAVE NOTED TO FOWARD THE PHOTO COPIES OF THE LETTERS IN THIS WEEK AS DESIRED BY YOU, IN THE MEANTIME I AM GIVING THE DETAIL OF STATUTORY ORDERS LAID ON THE TABLE OF LOKSABHA ON 23RD APRIL 2010 SERIAL NO 1 NUMBER ASSIGNED TO ORDER/DATE OF PUBLICATION–CDO/PM/16/SPL/828/8-02-2010. BRIEF SUBJECT OR DESCRIPTION—–THE STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND(AMENDMENT)RULES 2005.DATE ON WHICH LAID ON THE TABLE OF LOKSABHA 23-04-2010. PERIOD FOR WHICH ON THE TABLE OF LOKSABHA= 30DAYS PERIOD UPTO WHICH MOTION FOR MODIFICATION CAN BE MADE=BEFORE THE EXPIRY OFTHE SESSION IMMEDIATLY FOLLOWING THE SESSION IN WHICH THE SAID PERIOD OF 30 DAYS COMPLETED. REMARKS——PUBLISHED IN GAZETTE OF INDIA PART!!! SECTION 4. HERE PLEASE NOTE THAT THE PERIOD OF 30 DAYS WILL NOT BE COMPLETED IN THE LAST SESSION.IN OTHER WORDS THIS NOTIFICATION WILL BE PASSED IN THIS SESSION OR WINTER SESSION IF THERE IS NO MOTION OF MODIFICATION.YOU AND I DONOT KNOW THIS MODIFICATION ,HOWEVER YOU CAN USE YOUR OFFICES AND KNOW THE CONTENTS OF ABOVE LETTER WHICH IS FROM CORPORATE OFFICE. IN CASE IT RELATES TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND PASSED IN THE PARLIAMENT IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO MODIFY LATER. UNDER THEASE CIRCUMSTANCES PLEASE CONTACT THE THREE FEDERATIONS AND MOBLISE THE SUPPORT OF MPS TO CARRY THE NOTIFICATION TO BE IMPLEMENTED (AMENDMENT) BOTH OF 7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE.PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/CLARIFICATION /YOUR IDEAS IN THIS MATTER IMMETIATELY AS AS THE PARLIMENT SESSION HAS ALREADY BEGIN. THANKING YOU.THIS MODIFICATION IS UNDER SUB SECTION 4 OF SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1055.

    Like

  158. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM, IN CONTINUATION OF MY WRITE UP DATED25TH JULY 2010 I AM GOING TO CLEAR MORE THAT YOU SHOULD KNOW THE CONTENTS OF LETTERS NO CDO/PM/16/SPL/828 AND CDO/PM/16/SPL/1176 BOTH THE LETTERS ARE ISSUED BY CORPORATE OFFICE MUMBAI AND FROM THE SAME SERIES WHICH HAS BEEN MENTIONED IN YOUR COURT CASES IE LETTER OF 19-04-2006 ,I DONOT KNOW THE DATES OF AVOBE LETTERS HOWEVER PLEASE REFER TO THE GAZETTE OF INDIA DATED 8-02-2010 PART !!! SECTION 4. PLEASE ACT ACCORDINGLY. THANKING YOU.

    Like

  159. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM,PLEASE NOTE THAT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE GAZETTE IS 8–01-2010 AND NOT 8-02-2010 AS MENTIONED IN MY WRITE UP DATED 25-07-2010 IE NOTIFICATION CDO/PM/16/SPL/828 WITOUT DATE IE DATE NOT KNOWN OF THE LETTER. THANKING YOU.

    Like

  160. i havegonethrough the ideas and vies expressed by Mr.Keshav Rai Saini are very valuable. It is very clear the Mr saini has done much home work in the matter. He is a lobourious Retired officer and gives the whole picture of the effected pensioner. In all the Departments the retirees are getting the pension “@50% but only in banking industry it is from 26% to 40% . The most effected are the retirees of 1997 to 2002. ,getting r.6000/ less than their other retired officers from 2002 onward. It is really pitty on the Bank as well as the associations. The price rise is the same for all the officers, then why this disparity is there. Please give some adhoc to the retirees of this period…Raj Kumar Negi 2190 Sec 21C Chandigarh.

    Like

  161. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM,PLEASE NOTE THAT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN THE GAZETTE IS 8-01-2010 AND NOT 8-02 -2010 AS MENTIONED IN MY WRITE UP DATED 26-07-2010, AS I HAVE ALREADY ADVISED THAT THIS NOTIFICATION WILL REMAIN ON THE TABLE OF LOKSABHA FOR 30DAYS AND PLACED ON THE TABLE ON 23-04-2010 AND THE PERIOD UP TO WHICH MOTION FOR MODIFICATION CAN BE MADE IS BEFORE THE EXPIRY OF 30DAYS THE SESSION IN WHICH THE SAID PERIOD OF 30 DAYS COMPLETED. IN OTHER WORDS THIS NOTIFICATION MAY BE PASSED IN THIS SESSION OR WINTER SESSION AND IF WE WANT ANY MODIFICATION PLEASE PROCEED ACCORDINGLY IMMEADIATLY AS THE SESSION HAS ALREADY STARTED AND ENDS ON 27TH AUGUST 2010 AND WE HAVE LITTLE TIME TO MOVE ACCORDINGLY AS WE WANT.PLEASE ADVISE THE LATEST DEVELOPMENT IN THE MATTER.ALSO REFER TO SUB SECTION 4 OF SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955. THANKING YOU.

    Like

  162. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM AND SHRI GANPATHY, I UNDERSTAND THAT STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND (AMEND MENT ) RULES 2005 IS FOR REGULARISATION OF PENSION OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND THE AMENDMENT WILL NOT AFFACT 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ,IN OTHER WORDS THERE WILL BE NO REVISION OF PENSION OF 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND GOVERNMENT HAS SUCCEEDED IN HIS PLAN TO REVISE PENSION ONCE IN TEN YEARS AS IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED THERE IS NO REVISION OF PENSION OF 5TH,7TH,AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AS A RESULT OF WHICH DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR CARRYING HIGHEST POST OF THE BANK IS DRAWING MAXIMUM BASIC PENSION OF RS 2400/ WHO HAD RETIRED BETWEEN 1-1-1986 TO31-10-1993AND BASIC PENSION OF DEPUTY MANGING DIRECTOR WHO HAD RETIRED BETWEEN1-11-1993 TO 28-03-1999 IS RS 4250/ AND FROM 1-03-1999 TO31-10-2002 IS 40% OF THE SUBSTANTIVE SALARY OF 1993 WHICH IS ABOUT RS6400/ AND BASIC PENSION OF THE SAME HIGHEST OFFICER OF THE BANK IS RS 14000/(ESTIMATED) THIS IS THE FATE OF A DEPUTY MANGING DIRECTOR OF THE BANK WHAT TALK OF OTHER OFFICERS IN THIS TIME OF HIGH INFLATION.FURTHER NOW GOVERN MENT AND BANK HAVE USED THE SAME WORDS”AND THEREAFTER’ AND TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS IN THIS REGARD.WHILE CARRYING THIS AMENDMENT .UNDER THEASE CIRCUMSTANCES PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/OPINION/VEIWS AND ALSO ADVISE ME FURTHER DEVELOPMENT IN THIS MATTERAS YOU KNOW GOVERNMENT IS ADAMANT AND BIAS IN REVISION OF PENSION OF SBI EMPLOYEES.PLEASE DO REPLY ME. THANKING YOU

    Like

  163. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM,AS YOU ARE AWARE OUR PENSION RULES ARE STATIC FROM 1955 TO IST JANUARY 1966 AND PENSION RULES HAD BEEN AMENDED AFTER THE DECISION OF SUPREME COURT IN 1989 AND PENSION HAD BEEN INCREASED FROM RS 750/RS1000/FOR SENIOR OFFICERS TO RS 2400/I.E 50% OF THE SALARY OF DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR W.E.F. 1-1-1986 THIS CEILING OF RS 2400/ HAS BEEN INCREASED TO RS 4250/W.E.F 1-11- 93 I.E50% OF THE SUBSTANTIVE SALARY MAXIMUM RS 4250/PER MONTH AND WITH EFFECT FROM 1-03-1999GOVERNMENT IMPLIMENT THE FORMULA OF 50%/40% UPTO RS 8500/ OF SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IT IS 50% AND ABOVE RS 85OO/IT IS 40%.NOW BANK/GOVERNMENT ARE GOING TO AMEND THE RULES WITH EFFECT FROM1-05-2005 IE UP TO RS 21040/AS SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IT IS 50% AND ABOVE RS21040/ IT IS 40%AND USING THE SAME WORDING AS FOR 6TH AND 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND IT APPEARS GOVT DONOT WANT TO REVISE THE SALARY OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AT ALL..IN THIS CONNECTION REFER TO SUB SECTION(4) OF SECFTION 50 OF SBI ACT 1955.I AM WRITING IN THIS BLOG WITH SOME PURPOSE I KNOW YOU KNOW MORE THAN ME.THERE IS PROVISION TO MOVE MOTION FOR MODIFICATION IF THE MEMBERS OF PALIAMENT SO WANT.AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT ALL THE MATTER PLACED BEFORE PARLIAMENT ARE ALREADY APPROVED BY THE GOVERNMENTBY PUBLISHING OF GAZETTE NOTIFICATION TO MAKE REGULATION BY SBI FOR THEIR PENSION RULES THEASE PAPERS WILL REMAIN ON THE TABLE OF LOKSABH FOR 30DAYS(PLACED ON 23-04-2010)AND SUBJECT TO MODIFICATION IF ANY BEFORE THE EXPIRY OF 30DAYS IS COMPLETED.I SHALL BE GLAD IF YOU CONTACT THE ALL FADERATIONS IMMEDIATELY OTHERWISE THIS AMENDMENT WILL BE PASSED BEFORE 15-08-2010 AND IF THERE IS NO MODIFICAION MOVED IT WILL BE PASSED AS HAS BEEN PUT BEFORE PARLIAMENT AND IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO CHANGE THE LEGISLATION AFTERWARDS PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/CLARIFICATION. WITH BEST REGARDS

    Like

  164. I do agree with Mr.Keshav Dev Saini that before thye amendment in the pension law the M.P. should be approached to incorporate the pending amendment th to give the benefit of revision of pension to the 7th bipartite settlement to the pensioners of 1997 to 2002 Mr Saini has given you a very correct logic to do the right thting at the right time . otherwise after passingthe amendment it will not be possible to amend it again. thanks. Raj Kumar Negi 2190 Sec 21 C CHANDIGARH

    Like

  165. Dear Friends
    All of you know the injustice faced by the retirees between 1.1.2006 to 23.5.2010 regarding GRATUITY Amendment orders passed by the labour ministry .

    I appeal to all the effected persons to get united and raise the voice against this injustice.
    Please come forward

    Like

  166. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM,PLEASE MAKE THE CORRECTION IN MY WRITE-UP DATED 30TH JULY 2010 PLEASE READ AS JANUARY 1986 INSTEAD OF JANUARY 1966 IN SECOND LINE AND READ AS REVISE OF PENSIONOF 7TH BIPARTITE INSTEAD OF REVISION OF SALARY OF 7TH BIPARTITE IN LINE13 AND 14.. KINDLY SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS ON MY WRITE-UPS IN THIS BLOG AS YOUR COMMENTS ARE VALUABLE.WITH BEST REGARDS.

    Like

  167. We have been representing for a decent revision of pension for the few retirees of 7th bipartite famous for its SBIVRS and the pelmel still successfully continuing.Despite being fully aware that a small percentage of pension funds already lying with the SBI will be enough to take care of the need of the suffering pensioners THE BANK AND GOVT. are simply not interested to come to the help of poor pensioners.Simply for reference LIC seem to have settled for a better wage deal this time, going by the latest news.We seem to have lost on the GRATUITY REVISION, PENSION REVISION /UPDATION and our fate is to accept only the SIX MONTH DA INCREASE which GOD only knows how far it is correct.SAD that the present leaders have not been successful in getting something for the pensioners from the PACKAGE/PENSION FUNDS already available.With judicious and proper handling of the PENSION ISSUE, the court cases and the consequent unavoidable delays, numerous petitions,counter petitions etc resulting in a lot of spending by the have not pensioners to fight for a reasonable cause could have been prevented.WILL WISDOM DAWN AT LEAST NOW ?SENIORS YOUR PLIGHT MAKES ME DOUBT THE VERY EXISTENCE OF THE ALMIGHTY,FOR IF THAT IS TRUE HE WOULD MADE THINGS BETTER FOR YOU LONG LONG AGO.WITH GREETINGS

    Like

  168. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM.Y,WE MUST TRUST IN GOD AND GOD IS GREAT AND GOD WILL DO EVERY THING TO OUR BEST ,DONOT WORRY AT ALL. BUT WE SHOULD BE ALERT. AS YOU KNOW TODAY FINANCE MINISTER INTRODUCED THE BILL FOR PASSING ‘STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT(AMENDMENT)2010 AND IN HIS SPEECH HE HIGHLIGHTED THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF STATE BANK OF INDIA IN THE PARLIAMENT AND SPEAKS OF HIGH OF STATE BANK OF INDIA . IN THIS BILL GOVERNMENT CAN REDUCE ITS SHARES TO 51% AND YOU WILLBE SURPRISED THIS BILL HAS BEEN PASSED TODAY IN THE PARLIAMENT.SIMILARLY STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES ‘ PENSION FUND (AMENDMENT) RULES 2005 WILL BE INTROCED IN PALIAMENT FOR ANY MODIFICATION IF ANY IN THIS SESSION AS 30 DAYS IS GOING TO COMPLETE IN THIS SESSION BECAUSE PAPERS OF THIS AMENDMENT ARE PLACED ON THE TABLE OF LOKSABHA ON23-04-2010 FOR 30 DAYS FOR ANY MODIFICATION OTHERWISE IT WILL BE PASSED AS IT IS PRESENTED TO PARLIAMENT SOME OF THE MPs SHOULD RAISE THE VOICE FOR IMPROVEMENT OF PENSION OF 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AS THEY ARE NO T GETTING PENSION ON THE BASIS OF THE PAY AT THE TIME OF THEIR RETIREMENT .IN OTHER WORDS THEY ARE GETTING PENSION ONTHE BASIS OF 6TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE AGREEMENTS. INTHIS CONNECTION PLEASE REFER TO SUB SECTION(4)OF SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/CLARIFICATION.WITH REGARDS. THANKING YOU

    Like

  169. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT THE SERVING ASSOCIATIONS ARE NOT TAKING INITIATIVE TO TAKE UP THE ISSUE RELATING TO THE PENSION OF THE 7 TH BIPARTITE RETIRE WITH THE GOV. AND BANK. WHAT OUR FEDERATION IS DOING IN THIS REGARD?
    ANY ONE KNOWS ABOUT THE PRESENT POSITION OF DELHI HIGH COURT CASE? PLEASE LET ME NOW..
    MR. KESHAV, I READ YOUR COMMETS ON2ND. IF IN THAT CASE WHY OUR FEDERATION IS NOT GOING TO THE COURT FOR A STAY OF SUCH AMENDMENT. LET ME KNOW

    Like

  170. The SAINI GUN has not boomed for the past one week. It appears that this forum is once again back into the shell. SIR,can you clear the doubts rising on the recent DA INCREASE proposed from AUGUST 2010?.The increase is 27 slabs,i.e.40.80%.whereas the DA UPTO July2010 is 68.76%.By applying this we will only be losing.Take my case for example, my basic pension is 10950/- and D A thereon AT 68.76% UPTO JULY2010 is Rs.7529.22(0..18)Come August DA will be Rs.4467.60(0.15) on the same basic which means LESS Rs.3061.62.MIND YOU, SBI PENSION DOES NOT STAND REVISED IN THE 9TH BPS & we continue to draw earlier non revised pension only.Therefore our D A should be on the pre revised rates only that is ABOVE 68.76% .For an ignorant pensioner like me this is a puzzle.Sorry to note that neither our SBI or the assn./union have not given any clarification on this.Losing on all fronts till now with GRATUITY REVISION MEETING WITH A SILENT DEATH AND A UN CEREMONIOUS SECRET BURIAL, COURT /GOVT./SBI/IBA not sympathising with the pensioners genuine problems,the half yearly D A increase is the only,assured slight&light RAY OF HOPE(?)for the pensioners.So the powers that be ,please do not let the pensioners further down. By the way, is the above matter concerned with SBI only ? I am sorry this blog is reduced to the level of seeking clarification on DA from the noble task of seeking justice for the reasonable and just demands of the pensioners.Please forgive me ,my respected SENIORS.

    Like

  171. Dear Manickam.y,i am clearing your dout on the recent D.A increase w.e.f 1-08-2010 the increaSE is 27slabs i.e 73.62% whereas d.a up to july 2010 is 68.76% thus there is increase of d.a is 4.86% from august 2010 and you will get d.a increase of rs 533/w.e.f 1-08-2010 please note your d.a is calculated on the basis of .18% i.e 18p per slab and for 9th bipartite it is .15% i.e 15p per slab thier D.A will be 40.80%.in other words in case their pension will be revised they will get D.a 40.80% and they will get pension upto rs 29700/@50% and above rs 29700/ 40% this is only rough estimate donot take it final as pension of 9th bipartite retirees have not been revised yet.,however it is sure that you will get d.a @73.62%w.e.f august 2010.kindly submit your comments and your views on my write- ups of july 2010 as iam not hearing from any one for the last about one month .thanking you.

    Like

  172. Thanks Mr.Saini. There is a message that in a recent PARLIAMENTARY debate encomiums were showered on SBI for its contribution to the country’s economy ,a fact that can never be disputed.But when it comes to the redressing of grievances of the old guards responsible for this ,nothing is done.The ears of the concerned are automatically shut or become deaf and no news is available on the points raised by you.The active seniors may be following the matters but unless some concrete development is there ,you cannot expect any message now .Let us hope there is no mere lip sympathy from the GOVT.this time and something worthwhile is done for our senior pensioners.

    Like

  173. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM.Y, PLEASE GO THROUGH MY WRITE UP DATED 23RD JULY 2010 AND SEE THE DISPARITIES IN PENSION OF DIFFERENT GROUP OF PENSIONERS RETIRED DIFFERENT TIMES ,AS YOU ARE AWARE DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR IS THE HIGHEST POST OF THE BANK WHILE MANAGING DIRECTOR AND CHAIRMAN HAVE BEEN APPOINTED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND YOU WILL SURPRISE THAT A DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR WHO HAD BEEN RETIRED BEFORE 31-10-2002 IS GETTING PENSION PER MONTH TO THE TUNE OF RS13000/TO RS 16000/ WHICH IS LESS THAN A SPECIAL ASSISTANT WHO HAS RECENTLY RETIRED AFTER 31-10-2002 FURTHER NOW DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR WHO RETIRED AFTER 31-10-2002 IS GETTING PENSION RS26000/(ESTIMATE) THIS IS FATE OF DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR AND YOU CAN SEE THE FATE OF OTHER OFFICERS.SIMILARLY IN CASE OF D.A YOU WILL FIND DISPARITY FOR EXAMPLE THERE IS 100% D.A NEUTERALISATION IN CASE4 OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES,HOWEVER EARLIER RETIREES ARE GETTING 67% NEUTERALISATION. FOR EXAMPLE IN CASE THERE IS INCREASE OF D.A OF RS 300/ EARLIER RETIREES WILL GET RS 200 AS D.A BUT INFLATION IS SAME FOR ALL RETIREES AND GAP OF PENSION FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WILL BE INCREASING HALF YEARLY AND THIS TIME EARLIER RETIREES WILL GET MAXIMUM D.A INCREASE OF RS 365/ PER MONTH.PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS AS I ALWAYS LIKE YOUR COMMENTS .THANKING YOU.

    Like

  174. Fine and thank you.The manner in which you are vehemently putting forth the cause of old pensioners for justice is commendable.If only you had the necessary powers things would have been set right long long ago.I only feel that our pensioner seniors are trifle unlucky in this regard.But one thing i am unable to understand, what the old MD/DMD PENSIONERS are doing in this regard. They were managing the affairs of this mammoth organisation with aplomb and their contacts with the GOVT./MINISTRY should have been closer and cordial.They could have easily sorted out these matters with their proximity and closeness to the dealing govt.machineries which could have also avoided the communication gaps.Any lay man will understand the absurdity in an MD /DMD,or for that matter any senior receiving less than the junior in the form of subsistance allowance,here called PENSION,more so when it comes with a direct link to inflation.Cost increase is common to all and it is also true that full compensation is never possible ,and if anybody promises that he is taking us for a ride.But a reasonble,realistic compensation, is it not possible for the GOVT,to approve across the board?Do we need any ECONOMIC PAPER PRESENTATION to explain this?What are we asking for,a decent morsel of food and not a square meal thrice a day.The argument against this will be that there are hundreds of people who do not have even this facility.Yes,accepted but why you increase the salaries of the MPs from RS.16000/- to Rs.80000/- an increase of nearly 500%. will their argument not apply to this?Our seniors have toiled for more than 30years day and night ,giving their best of the best during the best part of their younger days.In fact the present BANKING STRUCTURE IN INDIA is stongly built on their sweat and blood.No second opinion on this.To day SBI is opening office in CHINA.

    Like

  175. CONTINUED—- SBI is also exploring possibilities of business expansion in INDONESIA.who has made this possible,our seniors.What do they get in return,neglect and discard and nothing else.With a seasoned ECONOMIST heading the country with tremendous growth towards INDIA becoming a SUPER POWER very soon, OUR SENIOR PENSIONERS REQUIRE A BETTER TREATMENT AT LEAST FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIVES FOR WHICH THEY ARE VERY MUCH ELIGIBLE.I HAVE SPELT MY FEELINGS PENT UP FOR A LONG TIME. I MAY BE PARDONED FOR ANY IMPERTINENCE ON MY PART.

    Like

  176. DEAR SHRI R .SIVAGYANAM,WHILE I AM AWAITNG YOUR REPLY OF MY PERSONAL PENSION ISSUE WHICH I HAVE SENT YOU PHOTOCOPIES OF LETTERS AS DESIRED BY YOU ,PLEASE ARRANGE TO REPLY ME.NOW I AM WRITING ABOUT YOUR COURT CASE,THIS IS VIOLATION OF SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT AS IN THE CASE OF FAMOUS JUDGEMENT OF D.S NAKARA V/S UNION OF INDIA(AIR1983 S.C130) AND ALSO OTHER SIMILAR JUDGEMENTS THAT HAD OBSERVED THAT PENSION IS PAYMENT OF PAST SERVICES RENDERD AND DIVISION OF PENSIONERS BY PUTTING CUT-OFF DATE FOR LIBERALISED PENSION BENEFIT IS VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 14OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA..ALSO STATED IN THE JUDGEMENT THAT ONE CAN CONFIDENTLY SAY THAT IF PENSIONERS FORM A CLASS,THEIR COMUTATION CANNOT BE DIFFERENTFORMULA AFFORDING UNEQUAL TREATMENT ON THE GROUNDS THAT SOME RETIRED EARLIER AND SOME RETIRED AFTER.THIS JUDGEMENT HAS BEEN SUPPLIMENTED MANY OTHER JUDGEMENTS AND LATEST ONE IS SPC BAINES CASE OF 9TH SEPTEMBER 2008.IN YOUR CASE PENSIONERS FORM A CLASS AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WERE GETTING THE PNSION ON THE SAME FORMULA THAT IS ON THE BASIS OF 1993 SCALES BUT AFTER THE STRIKE IN SBI IN APRIL 2006 GOVT/BANK HAD REVISED THE PENSIONOF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES W.E.F 1-05-2005AND FIXED THE CUT -OFF DATE AS 1-11-2002. IN OTHER WORDS THOSE RETIRED ON 1–11-2002 OR AFTER THEIR PENSION HAD BEEN REVISED AS YOU AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WERE PLACED IN THE SAME SITUATION AND NOT REVISING THE PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES IS NOT JUSTIFIED AT ALL. PLEASE CONSULT YOUR LAWERS AND FILE AN APPEAL IN THE COURT.MEANWHILE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS AS I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM YOU FOR THE LAST 15DAYS .ALSO ADVISE ME LATEST DEVLOPMENT OF PENSION ISSUE.WITH REGARDS.THANKING YOU.

    Like

  177. At lost some good hearted pensioners are there to voice for justice for 7th BP Pensioners. Our bank is silent and doing nothing for senior pensioners and awating for the final settlements in heaven for that too Govet approvel is necessory.

    Like

  178. YES,GOOD NEWS FOR PENSIONERS/ FAMILY PENSIONERS———-IBA COMMUNICATES OFFICIALLY TO MEMBER BANKS———- MINIMUM PENSION 50% OF LAST DRAWN PAY FOR RETIREES AFTER 2007,AND IMPROVEMENT IN FAMILY PENSION AND MINIMUM PENSION(REPORTEDLY FOR OTHER BANK PENSIONERS/FAMILY PENSIONERS,NOT FOR SBI STALWARTS,PERHAPS).THE CHENNAI COURT HAS VACATED THE STAY ON 2.8TIMES RECOVERY,THUS APPROVING THE 9TH BPS ON PENSION SECOND OPTION RELATED RECOVERY. THIS WILL ENABLE ATLEAST THE OPTEES OF PENSION WHO ARE AGREEABLE FOR THE RECOVERY,TO HAVE THEIR BALL ROLLING AND RECEIVE THE PENSION.WELL WHAT FOR SBI PENSIONERS/FAMILY PENSIONERS?WHEN THE MINIMUM PENSION IS RAISED FOR OTHER BANK PENSIONERS AND FAMILY PENSIONERS IS IT NOT APPLICABLE TO OUR BANK PENSIONERS ALSO,ESPECIALLY OLD PENSIONERS PLEASE CLARIFY.LET US NOW SEE HOW FAR THE LIP SYMPATHIES OF OUR PRESENT LEADERS AND MANAGEMENTS ARE TRUE,WHEN THERE IS AN OPENING NOW FOR THESE SO CALLED SYMPATHISERS TO MAKE USE OF ,TO IMPROVE THE PENSIONERS /FAMILY PENSIONERS CAUSE.IF NOTHING IS DONE THEN THESE PEOPLE ARE ONLY TAKING OUR HAPLESS SENIOR PENSIONERS FOR A RIDE.LET US HOPE AT LEAST NOW THEY WILL MAKE HAY WHEN THE SUN SHINES AND MAKE AMENDS FOR THE DELAY AND INJUSTICE SO FAR CAUSED TO OUR SENIOR PENSIONERS/FAMILY PENSIONERS.MIND YOU THE LATEST POSITIVE DEVELOPMENTS MAY RELATE ONLY TO OTHER BANKS,AND NOW IT HAS TO BE EXTENDED TO OUR BANK ALSO BY IMMEDIATE ,PROPER , TIMELY ,APPROPRIATE,AND CORRECT,I REPEAT CORRECT ACTION.NOW MISSED THE TRAIN WILL NEVER BE CAUGHT.GOOD LUCK TO ALL.

    Like

  179. I am much pleased to read the omments by our seniour retired offier Sh Keshav Rai Saini and it looks that he is a labourious retired officer He is enrihed with knowledge and suh offiers are muh helpful for the old pensioners. The D.A. formula adopted by the I.B.A is bad .the inflation rate is the same for every individual but the inrease in the DA. differs at every stage. what a shame on the part of I.BA. The govt must realise the patheti onditions of the old pensioners The retirees before 2002 are much effeted. their basic pension maximum is rs4250/ what a shame on the govt and the banking industry the offiers whomhave given their blood to the institution have been ignored god may give the power to the ontrollers as well as govt to do justice to them. I as one again thank ful to the organisors for giving us the plateform to show our suggessions thanks. Raj Kumar Negi 2190 Sec 21 C HANDIGARH

    Like

  180. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM.Y,I AM VERY GREATFUL TO YOU FOR UPDATION OF MY KNOWLEDGE REGARDING PENSION ISSUE AND YOU ARE REQUESTED TO WRIT- UP ONCE A WEEK IN THIS BLOG AS I LIKE YOUR WRITE UPS VGERY MUCH. I AM THANKING YOU AGAIN. BEST REGARDS.

    Like

  181. THE IBA COMMUNICATION ON PENSION REVISION FOR RETIREES AFTER 01/11/2007 IS CONVEYED TO THE AFFILIATES OF AIBOC VIDE CIRCULAR NO.115 DATED 06/08/2010 SIGNED BY NONE OTHER THAN SHRI G.S NADAF (FROM SBI) PRESENT GENERAL SECRETARY.NOW A STRAIGHT QUESTION—- WHO IS IN A BETTER POSITION TO HELP OUR BANK SENIOR PENSIONERS -SHRI NADAF OR THE FEW HAVE NOT PENSIONERS FIGHTING FOR THE ENTIRE SBI PENSIONER COMMUNITY WELFARE WITH LIMITED RESOURCE BUT WITH UNDYING SPIRIT DESPITE NO SUPPORT EXTENDED.WHO CAN DELIVER THE GOODS WITH EASE ,PLEASE DECIDE .SHOULD THERE BE ANY OTHER OPENING FOR THE PRESENT LEADERS TO SUCCEED IN THE MATTER?BUT WILL THEY DO?REFER MY COMMUNICATIONS OF 02/08/2010 AND 09/08/2010 IN THIS REGARD ESPECIALLY ON EXPENSES OF LITIGATION.REGARDS

    Like

  182. As posted in allbankingsolutions.com

    “Mr N Pradeep Kumar, Advocate Supreme Court of India has informed that the next date of hearing of his Writ Petition [Writ Petition (civil) 25 of 2005], which prays among others, for “Upgradation of Pension” will be 27th August, 2010. This is listed on that date for Final Disposal on that date.

    We wish him good luck. The decision can be historic and benefit thousands of retired bankers.”

    Like

    1. CAN SOMEONE THROW MORE LIGHT ON THIS CASE COMING UP FOR FINAL JUDGMENT IN SUPREME COURT ON 27TH AUGUST, WITH SPECIFIC RELEVANCE TO 7TH BIPARTITE SBI PENSIONERS
      T.R.VENKATESAN 17.08.10. 11.15A.M.

      Like

  183. DEAR SHRI,MARICKAM.Y,THANKS FOR YOUR WONDERFUL COMMENTS DATED2-08-2010 AND09-08-2010,I RETIRED AS CHIEF MANAGER IN FEBRUARY 2001 AFTER COMPLETING OF 60YEARS AGE(NORMAL RETIREMENT) AND WAS SHOCKED TO SEE MY PENSION AT ABOUT 26% OF MY LAST DRAWN PAY OF RS 16880/BUT FOR PENSION PURPOSE BANK HAS TAKEN MY SALARY OF RS11000/ WHICH I HAD DRAWN IN 1993I.E 8YEARS EARLIER ON THE .BASIS OF 1993 SCALES .AS PER THE NORMAL NOURM IN OTHER GOVT DEPARTMENT AND AS WELL IN OTHER BANKS SHOULD HAVE GIVEN PENSION OF50% OF THE LAST DRAWN PAY TO ALL THE PENSIONERS FOR PAST AS WELL OF 8TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE BANK IS THAT PENSION HAS NOT KEPT PACE WITH THE INCREASE IN SALARY SINCE THE FORMATION OF SBI IN 1955.I HAVE ALREADY WRITTEN TO THE CHAIRMAN SBI AND LETERS HAVE ALSO BEEN ADDRESSED TO THE FINANCE SECRETARY.,UNION FINANCE MINISTER,PRIME MINSTER TO ENABLE THEM TO TAKE SUITABLE ACTION AND YOU WILL SURPRISE TO NOTE THAT I AM WRITING LETTERS SINCE 2003 I.E FOR THE LAST 7YEARS BUT NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE SO FAR. IN 2003 I GOT THE REPLY THAT PENSIONS ARE CACULATED ON PRE-REVISED SALARY AND BANK HAS TAKEN UP THE MATTER WITH GOVT AND APPROVAL STILL AWAITED AND IN 2010, I HAVE GOT THE SIMILAR REPLY.NOW THERE IS NO HOPE FOR REVISION OF PENSION AS NOW I AM 69 AND HALF YEARS OLD.UNDER THEASE CIRCUMSTANCES I SEEK YOUR BLESSINGS. IN THIS CONNECTION PLEASE REFER TO MY WRITE UP DATED 22-07-2010.PLEASE GUIDE ME WHAT I SHOULD DO NOW .REGARDS .THANKING YOU

    Like

    1. Dear Shri SAINI, I admire your spirit to take up the pension matters with all the top offices( PM/FM/FMO/FINANCE SECTY./CHAIRMAN SBI) untiringly and at least one could have initiated some move in the matter.I am much junior to you to bless but how i wish I cultivate your perseverance and die hard spirit.As already stated , the pensioners are badly in need of support financially&this is known to all the powers that be, including the PRESENT SET OF LEADERSHIP.As the pensioners are spending on litigation it does not mean they are wealthy.A few of them join together with the aim to achieve something better for ALL THE PENSIONERS, I REPEAT,ALL THE PENSIONERS.I know many of them as active unionists in their prime days ,who got the present benefits for the SBI CLAN,which is still viewed by others with jealousy.With an SBI MAN as AIBOC GENERAL SECRETARY,we expected a reasonble increase for the long suffering pensioners.But there is nothing mentioned in the 9th BPS for us,pensioners.Now again there is something for other bank pensioners, and nothing for you and other seniors.No longer will the 3 BENEFIT/2 BENEFIT argument hold water.With the NEW PENSION SCHEME introduced, all seem to be equal.NOW LET THE POWER S THAT BE MAKE OUR PENSIONERS /FAMILY PENSIONERS EQUAL TO OTHER BANK PENSIONERS, WHICH SHOULD BE EASY FOR THEM BY MAKING USE OF THE OPENING MADE BY THE GOVT/IBA .EQUALITY SHOULD FLOW FROM BOTH SIDES.I AM AGAINST MY SENIORS SPENDING WHAT LITTLE THEY HAVE IN GOING TO THE COURT WHEN NOW IT HAS BECOME THEIR RIGHT TO GET MORE ,WHY A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.REGARDS TO ALL SENIORS AND MY EXCUSES FOR FRANK AND DRASTIC COMMENTS

      Like

  184. I feel sorry to note that the comments written by me are not inorporated by you in the blog ,The period to watch and waite for the increase in pension by our serving union leaders is a matter of shame for them the 7th bipartite has gone but nothing has been given to the pensioners. the 8th bipartite has aalso gone and something has given to them now 9th bipartite is in the proess but nothing has been given to the old retirees. The pathetic position is of the 7th bipartite retirees, who are getting the pension of 1993 scale . Jago leaders Jago ,they will be benefitted after their deaths.only 4250/ is the maximum pension for them irrespect of the basic they were drawing in the running scale while in the service. shame on the govt and the IBA.please do write to the M.P and all political party leaders for the injustie done by the IBA and the Banks.Please advise me the oeriod they have to waite for the inrease in their pension. RAJ KUMAR NEGI 2190 SEc 21C CHANDIGARH

    Like

  185. DEAR SHRI MANICKAM.Y,I HAVE TO CLEAR THAT THE PENSION PAYABLE BY OTHER BANKS HAS BEEN REVISED ON 9TH BIPARTITE PAY SCALES W.E.F 01-11-2007 AND DEARNESS RELIEF OVER 2836 POINTS.THE PENSION ON 9TH BIPARTITE PAY HAS NOT BEEN REVISED BY SBI.THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY A.I.B.OC IS FOR OTHER BANKS.PENSION SCHEME ONLY AS THE PENSION SCHEMEOF SBI NOT COVERED BY THE I.B.A SETTLEMENT .WE.NEED TO EXPRESS OUR ANXITY ON THE LACK OF CONCERN ON OUR BANK AND THE SERVING FEDERATIONS FOR NOT TAKING UP OUR PENSION ISSUES ADEQUITLY,APPROPRIATELY AND PERSISTENTLY WITH THE GOVERNMENTBY MAKING OUT STRONG JUSTIFICATION FOR RESOLVING THEM WITHOUT FURTHER LOSS OF ANY TIME.THE OTHER BANKS HAVE RESOLVED THE LONG PENDING PENSIONISSUE OF PROVIDING ONE MORE OPTION TO THEIR EMPLOYEES.THIS IS THE RIGHT OPPORTUNITY TO FIND DURABLE SOLUTIONS TO ALL OUR PENSION ISSUES.WE TRUST ALL CONCERNED WOULD DISPLAY SUFFICENT WISDOM AND UTILIZE THEIR RICH EXPERIENCE IN FINDING JUST AND IMMEDIATE SOLUTIONS TO MOST OF OUR PENSION ISSUES. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS. WITH REGARDS .THANKING YOU

    Like

  186. DEAR SHRI H.GANPATHYY AND R.SIVAGAYANAM, I AM NOT RECEIVING ANY FEED BACK FROM THEASE TWO FRIENDS FOR THE LAST ABOUT ONE MONTH I SHALL BE OBLIGED IF YOU PLEASE EXPRESS YOUR VIEWS AFTER GO THROUH THE WRITE -UP IN THIS BLOG FOR THE MONTHS OF JULY AND AUGUST 2010.THIS IS MY HUMBLE REQUEST AND YOU ARE REQUESTED AGAIN TO GIVE YOUR VALUABLE VIEWS ON PENSION ISSUE IN SBI.WITH BEST REGARDS. THANKING YOU.

    Like

  187. Mr H Ganpathy and R Sivagayanam ,I feel sorry to bring to your knowledge that all my omments on this blog has been deleted, tyhe reason best known to you people .I once again want to say that upto 6th bipartite the pension was increased ,but inthe 7th bipartite nothing has been given to the old pensioners, again on 8th pipartite something has been given to the retirees, but again on 9th pipartite nothing has been given to the retirees. what is the falt of old pensioners those retired in the year up to 01052002 the worst effeted are the retirees of 2001, they have given the scale of 1992. the D.A.formulas is also old, with the result they are getting 5s 6000/ less pension as compare to the new pensioners. this is a great insult of the union leaders as well as the I.B.A. who is looking after the banking affairs.please take up with the politial parties leaders and give them the details to put the question in the parliament for the sake of old pensioners.thanks. Raj kumar Negi 2190 Sec 21 C Chandigarh

    Like

  188. Dear Saini
    Regarding Pension revision for 7th Bipartite retirees of SBI various court cases were filed and we have to wait for the outcome the cases.The two federations are silent and we have to hear from them what steps they are taking regarding pension revision for 7th & 9th Bipatite retirees.
    Sivagyanam

    Like

  189. The official organ of AIBOC ,COMMON BOND issue of JUNE2010 has given an elaborate message on the 9TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT viz.WAGE REVISION,PENSION SECOND OPTION etc.There is also an information on GRATUITY REVISION which they have ACHIEVED (OF COURSE,W.E.F 24/05/2010 ONLY)and no message on the progress towards back dating ,the details of correspondence in this regard etc.IT SEEMS GRATUITY REVISION HAS SUFFERED A SILENT DEATH AND SECRET BURIAL. For the present nothing can expected by the latest group of pensioners,who were hopeful of some additional benefit in the form GRATUITY IMPROVEMENT.Regarding the pension revision, even after microscopic search i have found nothing to help the pensioners in the 9thBPS .Refer shri SIVAGNANAM”S comments of 15/08/2010 .The FEDERATIONS alone can do something in this regard, but they are inactive. There is no point in our pensioners going to the court spending their humble savings on this, which according to me is waste of PRECIOUS MONEY&TIME Also why our pensioners association is not proceeding further as a representative organisation of pensioners by taking up with the management citing NAKARA CASE AND KASTHURI CASE,is still a mystery. Can a little more light be thrown on this?

    Like

  190. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM, THANKS FOR YOUR PROMPT REPLY, I ADVISE THAT SHRI G.D NADAF GENRAL SECRETARY ALL INDIA STATE BANK OFFICERS FEDRATION HAS MENTIONED IN HIS CIRCULAR NO 82 DATED 13TH AUGUST 2010 ” WE WILL CONTINUE TAKE UP THE ISSUE OF IMPROVING ON THE PENSION SCHEME WHICH INCLUDES REVISION OF CEILING TO 50% OF THE LAST DRAWN PAY AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT,IMPROVED COMMUTATION ETC FOR THE SERVING PEOPLE AND FOR THOSE WHO HAVE RETIRED EARLIER APPROPRIATLY RELIEF AS PER OUR EARLIER DEMAND.”’HOWEVER THERE IS MUCH DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ,SAYING OR MENTIONING AND DOING SOMETHING AS SHRI NADAF GENERAL SECRETARY OF A.I.B.O.C IS AWARE THAT IN OTHER BANKS PENSION ISSUE OF 7TH ,8TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES HAVE BEEN SETTLED AND THEY ARE GETTING PENSION @50% OF THE PAY LAST DRAWN AT THE TIME OF THEIR RETIREMENT ,MOREOVER THEY ARE GETTING D.A 100% NEUTERALISATION W.E.F 1-05-2005 FOR 8TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.ALSO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS IN THIS REGARD.KINDLY ALSO REPLY ME ON MY PERSONAL PENSION ISSUE AS ALREADY KNOWN TO YOU. WITH BEST REGARDS .THANKING YOU.

    Like

  191. DEAR SHRI PMGKPANCKER, YOUR VIEWS ARE QUITE REAL AND CORRECT, SERVING FEDERATIONS AS WELL AS PENSIONERS FEDRATION ARE NOT SERIOUS TO SOLVE THE PENSION ISSUE IN SBI AS YOU ARE AWARE IT IS NOW MORE THAN 12YEARS OLD PROBLEM AND NO HOPE OF ANY SOLUTION,THIS CAN BE SOLVED BY REVIVAL OF INDEFINIT STRIKE BY SERVING FEDERATIONS AND THEY WILL NOT GO ON STRIKE NOW AND THEY ARE SATISFIED WITH THEIR 9TH BIPARTITE SETTELMENT.IT IS MY EXPERIENCE THAT OTHERWISE NO USE OF TAKING UP THE MATTER BY LETTERS TO GOVERNMENT/BANK BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN WRITING A NUMBER OF LETTERS FOR THE LAST 7YEARS AND IN THIS CONNECTION GO THROUGH MY WRITE UPS DATED25-04-2010,2-08-2010,AND 22-07-2010 AND 15-08- 2010 ALSO GO THROUGH MY WRITE UP FOR THE MONTHS OF JULY AND AUGUST 2O10 AND SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS.THANKS.

    Like

  192. ALERT
    KINDLY GO TO allbankingsolutions.com site and read a news item
    captioned as GOODNEWS which says updation of pension case-(civil
    case no25/2005 )is coming up for final disposal before Supreme Court
    on 27th August. Members having updates are requested to share in this blog
    T.R.VENKATESAN 17.08.10. 1P.M.

    Like

  193. DEAR ALL MY FRIENDS OF THIS BLOG,IT IS ALWAYS BETTER TO HOPE FOR THE BEST AND I TOO WOULD LIKE TO FALL IN LINE WITH IT FOR AN IMAGGINABLE SATISFACTION AT LEAST. I OBVIOUSLY OWE YOU ALL OUT ACKOWLEDGEMENT AND APPRECIATION FOR YOUR EFFORTS IN THE MATTER.IF UNIONS WITH SERVING EMPLOYEES HOLDING THE REINS ARE UNABLE TO DELIVERTHE GOODS.IT APPEARS THATTHE SRVING PEOPLE HOLDINGTHE REINS BEING INDIFFERENT.IN THIS WRITE- UP I AM TRYING TO EXPLAIN ALL MY FRIENDS,HOW STEPMOTHERLY TREATMENT IS BEING MET WITH SBI EMPLOYEES BY THE GOVERNMENT/OUR BANK..AS ALL OF YOU AWARE THAT THE PENSION SCHEME COMES INTO EFFECT FROM 01-11-1993 IN OTHER NATIONALISED BANKS,YOU WILL NOW SURPRISE TO NOTE THAT AS ON 1-11-1993AN OFFICER(J.M.G.SCALE-1)OF STATE BANK OF INDIA IS ELIGIBLE TO GET OF BASIC PENSION OF RS4250/ AND IS CONTINUING TO GET THE SAME BASIC PPENSION OF RS 4250/PER MONTH. WHERE AS BASIC PENSION OF OF AN OFFICER(J.M.G.SCALE-1)OF OTHER BANK S IS RS4650/PER MONTH AS ON 1-111993.,AT THIS STAGE I DONOT KNOW THE EXACT D.A ON THEASE BASIC PENSION OF SBI OR OTHER BANKS OF 1-11-1993.THIS THE POSION OF 6TH BIPARTITE .NOW I AM COMPARINGTHE PENSION OF SBI OFFICER(J.M.G.SCALE-1)V/SOFFICER J.MG.SCALE -1)OF OTHER BANKS FOR THE MONTH OF JULY 2010 FROM 7TH TO 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND YOU WILL FIND HOW STATE BANK OFFICERS ARE TREATED AS STEPMOTHERLY TREATMENT BY THE GOVERNMENT/SBI, PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES FOR THE MONTH OF JULY 2010 IS ABOUT RS 13000/(ESTIMATE)IN SBI.HOWEVER OF PENSIONOF OFFICER(J.M.G.SCALE-1)OF OTHER BANKS OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ,PENSION IS RS14987/PER MONTH AND NET DIFFERENCE OF RS 1987/THEY ARE GETTING MORE THAN THEIR COUTERPART OF SBI OFFICER(J.MGRADE SCALE-1)PENSION OF8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES(JMG,SCALE-1)IN SBI PENSION IS RS18564/(ESTIMATE)HOWEVER IN THIS CASE PENSION IN OTHER BANKS IS ALSO AS IN SBI BECAUSE UPTO THE SCALE- 1 IN SBI THE RATE OF PENSION IS THE SAME I.E50%OF THE LAST PAY DRAWN AS IN OTHER BANKS.HOWEVER ,SENIOR OFFICERS OF SBI IS GETTING LESS PENSION THAN OF OTHER BANKS BECAUSE THE FAULTY FORMULA AT THE RATE OF PENSION@40%OF THE BASIC SALARY AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT.,MOREOVER IN SBI 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE GETTING PENSION SAME PENSION AS OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.HOWEVER PENSION OF 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES IN OTHER BANKS PENSIONIS RS23125/(ESTIMATE)THUS THEY ARE GETTING RS 5661/ MORE THAN THEIR COUTERPART IN SBI.IN NUT SHELL THAT IN THE BANKING INDUSTRY RETIREES OF 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIRES IN SBI ARE THE MOST SUFFERER AND GREAT INJUSTICE HAS BEEN DONE TO THEM AND BOTH THE SERVING FEDRATIONS,BANK,GOVERNMENT ARE SILENT.DO YOU KNOW THAT APENSIONER OF SBI OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES IS GETTING PENSION LESS THAN THE SALARY OF A POEN OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT AND LESS THAN A SPECIAL ASSISTANT OF SBI WHO RETIRED RECENTLY.WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO GOVERNMENT/BANK, ONLY GOD KNOWS WELL.PLEASE NOTE I HAVE MENTIONED THE COMPARISON OF PENSION OF AN OFFICER J.MG SCALE-1 AND SENIOR OFFICERS ARE GETTING MUCH LESS PENSION IN SBI THAN THEIR COUTER PARTS IN OTHER BANKS.I DONOT KNOW WHEN THE DISPARITY WILL BE RMOVED IN SBI.PLEASE PRAY TO GOD AND ONLY GOD KNOWS. PLEASE ALSO GO THROUGH MY WRITE -UP DATED 28-07-2010 AND SUBMIT COMMENTS/FEED BACK IN THIS BLOG TO ENCOURGE THE SPRIT OF OUR SENIORS. WITH BEST REGARDS. THANKING YOU

    Like

  194. DEAR SHRI T.R VENKATESAIN, IT IS ADVISEABLE AND READ IN ALLBANKING SOLUTIONS.COM WRIT PETITION IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FOR UPDATION OF PENSION(UPLOADEDON03-05-2010) NOTE GIVING THE DETAILS OF WRIT HAS FILED IN THE SUPREME COURT. THANKING YOU .SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS ON MY WRITE-UP DATED 17-08-2010.WITH REGARDS.

    Like

  195. DEAR SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM,SHRI H.GANPATHY,KINDLY GO THROUGH MY WRITE- UP DATED 17TH AUGUST 2010AND ALSO GO THROUGH MY WRITE-UP DATED 18TH AUGUST 2010 AND SHALL BE OBLIGED IF YOU KINDLY GIVE ME YOUR FEED BACK IN THE MATTER,I HAVE TO ADVISE THAT BANK HAS INCORPORATED THE CLAUSE OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES IN THE STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THAT GOVERNMENT/BANK ARE ADMANT AND BIAS IN IMPROVING THE PENSION OF SBI EMPLOYEES AND THERE IS LITTLE SCOPE OF REVISION OF PENSION OF 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES UNLESS SERVING FEDERATIONS DO SOMETHING.PLEASE REFER TO RULE NO23(2)WHERE FOR 7TH BIPARTITE REETIREE PHRASE IS”PROVIDED FURTHER THAT WITH EFFECT FROM1-3-1999 THE MAXIMUMAMOUNT OF PENSION FOR THE MEMBERS WHO RETIRED/RETIRE DRAWING SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IN THE PAY SCALES,EFFECTIVE FROM 1-11-1992(AWARD STAFF)/1-7-1993(SUPERVISING STAFF)AND THEREAFTER SHALL BE COMUTED TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS INTHIS REGARD” SIMILARLY NOW BANK HAS INCORPORATED THE PHRASE FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES’PROVIDED FURTHER THAT WITH EFFECT FROM01-05-2005 THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF PENSION FOR THE MEMBERS WHO RETIRED/RETIRE DRAWING SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IN THE SCALESEFFECTIVE FROM 1-11-2002 AND THEREAFTER SHALL BE COMUTED TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS’AND YOU WILL FIND THAT THE WORD THEREAFTER MEANS THAT PENSION FORMULA FOR 6TH AND 7H BIPARTITE RETIREES IS SAME AND SIMILARLY THEREAFTER MEANS FORMOLA OF PENSION IS THE SAME FOR 8TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND GOVERNMENT AND BANK HAVE SUCCEEDED FOR NOT GIVING THE PENSION TO7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SCALES ON WHICH THEY RETIRED.PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS ON THIS RULE OF PENSIO.WITH BEST REGARDS.THANKING YOU.

    Like

  196. NO ONE THINKS OF PENSION WHILE IN SERVICE-AS A RESULT
    IT HAS BECOME CONVENIENT FOR GOVT/BANK TO SETLLE
    ALL WAGE REVISIONS WITHOUT COMMITING ON PENSION.
    NOTHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN UNLESS & UNTIL LEADERS CALL FOR AN INDEFINITE STRIKE- THIS IS ALSO NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. KEEP HOPING & HOPING.
    T.R.VENKATESAN.18.08.10 6.45.PM

    Like

  197. I was wathing the .tv.proceedings for the enhanement og sallaries by the M.P.s fom rs16000/ to 80001by all the members of the parliament.specially by the lallu parshad yadav. We do favour the increase in the sallary should be given to them but with one condition the perks and the sallary given to them will be taxed as per incometax rules. All the itizens of india ,the sallary and the perks are taxed at the rate of 30% above the eiling of rs500000/ then why these M.Ps are not taxed. their properties have gone to many folds in the last one decade . the only thing which I want to stress ,why the M.Ps havenot gone through the request of the old pensioners, They are being paid pension from the 01.11.1992 the same basic pension of rs4250/maximum why they are ignorent about the agony of the old pensioners. they have said that they are the servant of the public and the grievances faced by the public ,they have to project in the parliament.why they are sleeping on this increase Either they feel they will not get the suffecient votes from the pensioners.M.Ps are the public servants and they must realise the pain and the pathatic conditions of the old pensioners.the retirees of 1992have gone to the god, and rest are waiting the call from the god.they have already waited for 18years but no result . Let the god should give the power to controllers , Union leaders, I.B.A. and the public and also the M.Ps to safeguard the interest of the old pensioners retired after 01.11.1992 to 01 11.2002.

    thanks. Raj kumar Negi 2190 Sec 21C CHANDIGARH

    Like

  198. the laksabha tv gives the live proceedings and sometimes we are ashamed to see the condut of our M.Ps . they fight with each other like small kids in the streets. If they feel they are to look afterthe public and their discomforts, then I request them to please contact the office bearers of the pensioners association at any station, and ask them to aloborate the difficulties they are faing in the pension. why the pensioners are gettingthe samebasic pension ffrom 1992onwards and why there is no change in their basic pension, I may add that upto 1992 sallary inrease there was no dispute for the pension but after that they divided in to 50% or 40% or 26% , the logic behind it is not understood. they rise in the price is the same for every itizen then why the pension is different at avery level. the govt must follow one pattern for the pensioners. must give at least 50% of the last drawn sallary as pension and 60% to those who have gone above 70 years of age . there needs are much more,like medical exp,transportation and other misc exxxxxp. I one again request to the Union leaders, I.B.A and the M.Ps and all well wishers of the pensioners to press the govt to give the reasonable pension to the old pensioners ,so that they can live their remaining life in good condition.thanks.

    RAJKUMARNEGI # 2190 SEC 21 C CHANDIGARH.

    Like

  199. Dear Keshav Rai Saini,

    Sometime back you referred to two Notifications in GOI Gazettee, bearing no. CDO/PM/16/SPL/828 & the other bearing no. CDO/PM/16/SPL/1176 reported to have notified and tabled before Parliament. Now I find in GOI Gazettee Notification dated 3rd October 2009 kept in Connemara Library that an Amendment to Sub Rule (2) of Rule 23 & Sub Rule (6) of Rule 23 of SBI Pension Rules enhancing the cut off salary from Rs. 8500 to Rs. 21040/+PQP+FPP for the purpose of computing Pension under 50%-40% formula and corresponding Dearness Relief @ 0.18% with effect from 01/05/2005 for those who retired / retire on or after 01/11/2002 vide Ref. No. CDO/PM/16/828 dt.9th Sep. 2009. So it is not dated 8th January 2010 as you mentioned. Regarding the other notification bearing No. CDO/PM/16/1176 reportedly published according to you could not be verified due to the absence of GOI Gazettee Notifications from Jan. 2010 to this date.

    From the above it is evident that the Pension Computation for 8th BP retirees is officially notified by the GOI on the recommendation of SBI. This position makes it abundantly clear that after the direction given by the Hon’ble High Court Of Madras to GOI on 16th October 2008, SBI reframed its proposal submitted on 19th April 2006 and forwarded the same to GOI on 9th Sep. 2009, leaving the 7th BP retirees in lurch, perhaps at the instance of GOI. Now the GOI may try to tell the court in the event of any contempt petition is heard, that the earlier proposal has been modified subsequently by SBI and the same was considered and approved. SBI has two faces one before the court and another before GOI.

    The 7th BP retirees are getting their Pension under Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 23 amended as on 27th July 2000 and paid DR under Sub-Ruel (6) (iii) of Rule 23 amended as on 14th GFeb. 1997, The Basic Pension which they and part of 8th BP retirees receive(d) under the above Rule is computed “till further Amendments are made in this regard”. At present, the Rule is amended, but giving the benefit only to those pensioners retired between 01/11/1002 and 30/04/2005 and not the 7th BP retirees.

    The Bank has not acted as they committed in the abovementioned 27th July 2000 Amendment. This is highly discriminatory as the 7th BP retirees are affected adversely by the Amendment in question notified on 03/10/2009. It is also a breach of trust as the 7th BP retirees were given an impression at the time of their retirement that the Pension which was computed for them was only “until further amendments made in this regard”. Their expectation is belied by the arbitrary and atrocious act of the Bank,

    When similar modification was agreed in 8th BPS for those who retired/ retire on after 01/05/2005 as regards ‘ PAY ‘ for the purpose of Pension between IBA & Workmen Unions in the case of other Bank employees, the concerned parties discussed and recorded on the same day of the signing of the 8th BPS that since this is an “improvement” by the above modification and ” in veiw legal decisions”, the ‘ PAY ” (i.e. 6th BP salary merged with 1616 points instead of 1684 points) for the computation to 7th BP retirees and also those who retired between 01/11/2002 & 30/04/2005 are to be refixed. Accordingly, the Pension was refixed w.e.f.01/05/2005. The leaders of serving employees’ Federations of SBI who are also the signatories representing the NCBE & AIBOC in the record/minutes, while agreeing for similar modification to end the indefinite strike firmly beleived that the above principle viz. ” the element of improvement in pension scheme ” and ” legal decisions ” will be applied mutatis mutandis in the case of 7th BP retirees of SBI. That is why, the Bank also unhesistantly put up a modified proposal for both 7th & 8th BP retirees on 19/04/2006 which was produced before High Court of Madras and also the court got convinced of the principle to give a favourable direction. Unfortunately, the Bank now back stabbed the 7th BP retirees by framing a proposal only for 8th BP just after around one year of the Judgement dt 16/10/2008.

    Let us hope that those who are now waging legal battle will forcefully put forth the above views, if convinced – H. Ganapathy.

    Liked by 1 person

  200. sir, we are writing many viewes in this blog but it has no impact on the govt or the bank . Today we has seen that the enhancement of M.Ps sallary and allowqances to more than 300% i,e, an increase about rsmore thanone lac per month . the real servant of the nation are befooling the general public. if our leaders and the m.ps are honest they should pay the income tax on their sallaries and perks as per income tax rules. .today we haVE COME TO KNOW That the bank pensioners getting basic pension of rs 4250/ will get increase in D.A neaqrly rs 350/ what a joke with the retireess the M.Ps are getting about rs 100,000/ more in the total increase in their sallary and perks and the poor pensioners are getting only rs 350/ p.m/. We should pledge that the we should bycote the M.ps of the area and also send the message to them through some lettter/sms/telephone /or through aggitation that the country is our and not your, you people are looting the country and egnoring the genuine demand of the old pensioners . the pension given in the year 1992of rs maximumrs4250/- should be amended to atleast rs 35000/- while seeing the increase in the prices. the effect of rfise in price is not effecting to the govt pleaders/leaders but it has the effect on the general public. you can well imagine the position of the poor pensioners. GOD GIVE THEM THE POWER TO THINK . THANKS. RAJKUMARNEGI #2190 SEC 21C CHANDIGARH.

    Like

  201. DEAR SHRI H.GANAPATHY,FIRST OF ALL I AM GREATFUL TO YOU FOR GIVING VALUABLE FEED BACK ON MY WRITE -UP DATED THE 18TH AUGUST 2010,IN THIS CONNECTION I ADVISE THAT FOR NOTIFICATION NO CDO/PM/16/SPL/828,PLEASE REFER TO LOKSABHA BULLETIN-PART-| AND LOKSABHA BULLETIN PART-|| UNDER LOKSABHA PROCEEDINGS DATED 23-04-2010 SIMILARLY NOTIFICATION NOCDO/PM/16/SPL/1176 PLEASE REFER TO RAJYA SABHA JOURNAL DATED 27-04-2010..ANY HOW NOW WE SHOULD NOT DISCUSS THEASE NOTIFICATIONS AS GOVERNMENT /BANK ARE SUCEEDED IN THEIR AIMS AND WE CAN NOW REPENT ONLY ON THEASE NOTIFICATIONS.NOW I AM WRITING SOME POINTS/CLARIFICATIONS ON THE PENSION RULE 23(2) AND SHALL BE GLAD IF YOU KINDLY SUBMITYOUR VIEWS/FEED BACKON THEASE POINTS.I WANT CLARIFICATION ON THE PHRASE USED IN THIS RULE”AND THEREAFTER SHALL BE COMPUTED TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS IN THIS REGARD.” EARLIER THIS PENSION RULE23(2) WAS APPLICABLE TO 6TH, 7TH.AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES UNTIL AN INDEFINIT STRIKE IN SBI IN APRIL 2006,I MEANS TO SAY BEFORE THE STRIKE IN SBI ALL THE RETIREES OF 6TH,7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WERE GETTING THE PENSION ON THE SAME FORMULA BUT AFTER STRIKE FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES FORMULA FOR CALCULATION OF PENSION HAS BEEN MODIFIED AND REVISION OF PENSION FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES IS EFFECTED W.E.F 1-05-2005.HOWEVER UPTO NOW THEY ARE GETTING PENSION ON AD-HOC BASIS NOW WITH MODIFICATION IN THIS RULE(AMENDMENT)THE PENSION OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES HAS BEEN REGULARLISED AND THE SAME PHRASE WAS INCORPORATED IN THE AMENDMENT”AND THEREAFTER TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS.”.THIS MEANS THAT THERE WILL BE NO REVISION OF PENSION IN THE CASE OF 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREE.THERE IS DIFFERENCE OF THE PHRASE BECAUSE FIRST PHRASE WAS APPLICABLE TO 6TH,7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND NOW THERE ARE AMENDMENTS.HOW PARTIAL AMENDMENDMENT CAN BE MADE TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.IN THIS CONNECTION ,I HAVE TO MENTION HERE THAT 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES SIMILARLY PLACED IN ONE CLASS LIKE THOSE WHO RETIRED ON 1-11-2002 OR AFTER 1-11-2002 AND WHEREAS 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES HAVE BEEN DISALLOWEDTHE BENEFIT(REVISION OF PENSION) BUT OTHERS ARE SIMILARLY SITUATED HAVE BEENP ROVIDED WITH THE BENIFIT OF REVISION OF PENSION ONLY ON THE GROUND THAT THEY HAVE RETIRED ON OR AFTER 1-11-2002.FURTHER AS PER RULE 23(2)PENSION TO BE CALCULATED AS PER ACTUAL SALARY PAID TO 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES(DURING TGHE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE)PRIOR TO THEIR RETIREMENT HOWEVER BANK IS PAYING PENSION ON THE BASIS OF 1993 SCALES WHICH IS ARTIFICIAL/ NOTIONAL SALARY BECAUSE THIS IS NOT THE SALARY OF LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE HOWEVER IN THE CALCULATION SHEET BANK IS MENTIONING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS SHOWING THE DIFFERENT SALARY WHICH IS NOT THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS SALARY THIS PROPOSITION IS NOT JUSTIFIED AT ALL MOREOVER 6TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE DRAWING THEIR PENSION ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SCALES AT THE TIME OF THEIR RETIREMENT THEN WHY 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DRAW THEIR PENSION ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SCALES AT THE TIIME OF THEIR RETIREMENT.KINDLY SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/VIEWS/CLARIFICATION ON THEASE POINTS .WITH BEST REGARDS I AGAIN THANK YOU..

    Like

  202. our humble request to the govt/ Union leaders of supervising staff and the award staff and the IBA.to please stop befooling the pensioners of 7th bipartite. the poor pensioners are getting the basic pension of 1992 settlement and getting maximum pension Rs4250/ after the period of 18 years they are being given the assorances that their pension issue has already been taken with the govt/IBA . this is unjustice with them. the least pension should be given to the pensioners should not be less than Rs35000/ . the inflation in the country is not by the pensioners but by the govt and the govt should compensate them accordingly, The rising index should be taken into co
    nsideration while fixing the pension. We should forger about 5% or 40%. the pension should be for the maintenance of the standered of the officer who is retired with grace and reputation in the market, when he goes to the market with down head we can well imagine the pathatic condition of the pensioner.God shoud give the power of wisdom to the Govt /IBA/Union Leaders and also the general public. RAJKUMARNEGI #2190 SEC 21C CHANDIGARH

    Like

    1. VOLTE FACE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA MANAGEMENT ON PENSION

      Notwithstanding the demand on 50% of ‘LAST DRAWN PAY’ as Pension placed by our Pensioners’ Association / Federation and also the serving Employees’/ Officers’ Federations before the powers that be, the pensioners of 7th & 8th (those retired between 01/11/2002 and 30/04/2005) have been getting only a raw deal even under the Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 23 framed by the Bank on 27th July 2000 which reads as under and now the 9th Bipartite retirees joined the bandwagon under the latest amendment notified on 3rd October 2009 2000:

      “(2) The maximum pension………………………….
      ……………………whichever is less:

      Provided that the maximum amount of
      pension ……………………..Base 1960= 100:

      Provided further that with effect from 01/03/1999 the maximum amount of pension for the members who retired/”retire” drawing substantive salary in the Pay Scales effective from 01/11/1992 (Award Staff)/ 01/07/1993 (Supervising Staff) and “thereafter” shall be computed “till further amendments in this regard”, as under:-

      (a) where the “average of monthly subtantive salary drawn during the last twelve month’s pensionable service” is upto Rs.8500/- per month, 50% of the “average of monthly subtantive salary drawn during the last twelve months’ pensionable service” (pro-rata in the case of part-time employees); and

      (b) where the “average monthly subtantive salary drawn during the last twelve months’ pensionable service” is above Rs.8500/- per month, 40% of the “average of monthly substantive salary drawn during the last twelve months’ pensionable service” subject to minimum of Rs.4250/- (pro-rata in the case of part-time employees)”.

      Soon after the above amendment, the 7th Bipartite wages were settled and arrears paid with effect from 01/11/1997. Despite revision of wages the Bank vide its Circular issued on 05/12/2000 instructed to pay pension to those employees who retired between 01/11/1997 and 31/10/2002 in terms of the following lines:

      “Accordingly, the pension of the employees retired after 01/11/97 (Award Staff)/ 01/04/98 (Supervising Staff) but prior to 01/03/1999 shall be calculated as per “pre-revised pension rule” from the date of retirement till 28/02/1999 and from 01/03/1999 onwards as per “revised rules”. However, the pension shall be computed on the basis of the “pre-revised pay and allowances”. The pension of the employees retired after 01/03/1999 and retire hereafter shall be calculated on the basis of the “revised pension rules” but with reference to “pre-revised pay and allowances”.

      Thus the employees retired between 01/11/97 and 31/11/2002 are being paid pension only on the basis of pre-revised pay and allowances and the Bank assured such retirees that their pension will be revised after getting the approval of GOI. Various proposals were reported to have been put up by the Bank to GOI which in turn either sought clarifications/ additional information on the said proposals or rejected the same.

      In the meantime, 8th Bipartite wage revision was settled and accordingly the 7th Bipartite pay scales were revised and arrears were paid w.e.f 01/11/2002, but for such category of retirees also pension was paid only on the basis of 6th Bipatite pay scales, but not even on 7th Bipartite pay scales leave alone the revised scales of pay. Thus there emerged three different categories of pensioners who were covered under Sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 amended/ revised and notified on 16th September 2000.

      (i) Whether there is any specific provision in the SBI Employees’ Pension Fund Rules to calculate pension on the basis of the pre-revised scales of pay ?

      (ii) If not,whether the GOI gave instructions to the Bank to effect payment of pension on the basis of the pre-revised scales of pay ?

      (iii) If the answer is ‘NO’ to both the above questions (i) & (ii), whether the Bank is right in paying the pension on the basis of the pre-revised scales of pay ?

      Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 23 specifically provides that subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), the pension payable under Rule 22 shall be the amount calculated at the rate of one-sixtieth part of every year’s pensionable service of the “average monthly substantive salary drawn the last tweve months’ pensinable service”. Sub-rule (2) also lays emphasis on the “average monthly subtantive salary drawn during the last twelve months’ pensionable service” subject to certain monetary ceiling amended from time to time i.e. from Rs.750/- to Rs.4250/- at the maximum, but definitely not on pre-revised wage & allowances as decided by the Bank.

      Even when the maximum ceiling was removed by the amendment to sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 by Notification on 16th September 2000 introducing a different formula of 50%/40% with a minimum of Rs.4250/-, the pension is sought to be calculated only on the “average monthly subtantive salary drawn during the last twelve months’ pensionable service”, but not on pre-revised wages & allowances.

      Further both Bank and GOI in their counter affidavits filed before various High Courts averred that the aggrieved pensioners i.e. 7th Bipartite retirees and those retired between 01/11/2002 and 30/04/2005 after receiving 8th Bipartite wage scales are being paid pension as per the extant Rules and Regulations of SBI Employees Pension Fund Rules.

      In the light of the above, the Bank denying pension on the basis of the average monthly substantive salary drawn during the last twelve months’ pensionable service from the date of retirement in terms of sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 is not justified and this aspect was also observed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in its Judgement delivered on 16/10/2008.

      Sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 clearly spells out the formula on the calculation of pension w.e.f. 01/03/1999 to those who retired drawing the subtantive salary in the pay scales effective from 01/11/1992 and also to those who retire ” thereafter ” i.e. retirees drawing the substantive salary under subsequent wage revision settlements, but that too “till further amendments in this regard “.

      Since above mentioned Rule guarantees an amendment in future to benefit such of those retirees drawing subtantive salary under subsequent wage settlements, in the event of any rise in the ceiling of pay for the application of 50%-40% formula as may be decided by the Bank with the prior approval of GOI. Therefore, whenever an amendment to the sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 is framed and notified, the Bank is bound to honor the above guarantee envisaged in the said Rule and such future amendment(s) in this regard can only be to the benefit of the past retirees.

      The employees /officers of the Bank besides aggrieved pensioners had been hoping against hopes that the Bank will sure to frame the amendment to the said Rule for the rectification of anomaly, of course with the prior approval of GOI. When this process is getting delayed, the serving employees’/officers’ have become restless.

      In the meantime, the 7th Bipartite Settlement at Industry level redefined “PAY” for the purpose of calculation of pension in the case of other Banks, thus providing pension much less than 50% of the substantive salary drawn under the 7th Bipartite settlement i.e. pension based on the pre-revised scale of pay merged with a reduced points of 1616 as against 50% of the last drawn pay after the merger of 1684 points coupled with significant hike in the Basic pay, deviating from the provisions of earlier settlements in this regard. Under the 8th Bipartite settlement, it is agreed to modify and improve the pension to 50% of last drawn pay in terms of earlier provisions to benefit those who retired/retire on after 01/05/2005. The 8th Bipartite settlement did not modify and improve the pension of not only the 7th Bipartite retirees but also those who retired between 01/11/2002 and 30/04/2005 drawing revised pay scales under the settlement.

      On the otherhand, IBA and Workmen Unions & Officers’ Associations held discussions in the matter of above modification and improvement in pension under 8th Bipartite settlement and recorded the note of such discussions which reads as under:

      – “Pay for Pension in respect of an employee retiring on or after 01/05/2005, “average emoluments” as defined in Pension Regulations for the purpose of pension, be calculated reckoning ‘pay’ last drawn during the last ten months of the employees’ service in the Bank.

      – Since this is an improvement over the existing provisions, in view of the legal decisions obtaining in the matters, the pension of retirees of the period 01/04/1998 to 30/04/2005 is to be re-fixed w.e.f. 01/05/2005 reckoning actual ‘Pay’ drawn by them prior to retirement i.e. during the last ten months of service in the Bank.

      – Accordingly, the pension of retirees of the period 01/04/1998 to 31/10/2002 will be re-fixed w.e.f. 01/05/2005 as ‘Pay’ defined in clause 6 of 7th Bipatite settlement dated 27th March 2000 and Note under clause 5 of the Joint Note dated 14th Decembeer 1999.”

      This record of discussions paved way for setting right the pension to the tune of 50% of Last drawn Pay in the case of 7th Bipartite retirees and those who retired between 01/11/2002 and 30/04/2005 in other Banks.

      Even after this above development, SBI did not take steps to rectify the anomaly in the case of its pensioners and this attitude of SBI forced the serving employees/officers Federations to launch an Indefinite Strike. The Bank & GOI ultimately had to discuss with the serving employees/officers Federations on the 7th day of the Indefinite Strike and agree to amend the sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 by raising the ceiling of ‘Pay’ for pension from Rs.8500/- to Rs.21040+PQP+FPP for the purpose of calculating pension under 50%-40% formula w.e.f 01/05/2005 for those who retired on or after 01/11/2002. Accordingly the Bank was also advised to frame the rules on the above lines on the day of the agreement reached between the GOI & SBI on one side and serving employees/officers Federations on the other side.

      The leaders of the serving employees/officers Federations who were also signatories to the above mentioned Record of Notes at the industry level for improvement of pension in other Banks, naturally believed or rather gained an impression taking the clue from the said record of Notes that the understanding reached with the Bank in the presence of Hon’ble Finance Minister and officials of Finance Ministry of GOI on the 7th Day of the Strike will be extended to the 7th Bipartite retirees also applying the principle viz. Extention of improvement in Pension scheme to past retirees and also the legal decisions obtaining in the matters as spelt out in the Record Note of Discussions signed at the industry level.

      The reasonable expectation of the leadership of serving employees/officers Federations were not belied as the SBI Management unhesistantly put up a modified proposal on 19/04/2006, framing an amendment to sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 to benefit not only 8th Bipartite retirees but also 7th Bipartite retirees within ten days from the date of the understanding reached between the both the Federations and Bank on the seventh day of the Strike. Since the GOI delayed approval of the said proposal, the Bank chose to produce the same before the Hon’ble High Court Of Madras along with the said Record Note of Discussions held between IBA and Workmen Unions & Officers Associations in the matter of Pension and informed the Court that its above proposal is pending with GOI.

      The Hon’ble High Court Of Madras having perused the noting of the above Record Note of Discussions and having observed the fact that the GOI approved the modification in improving the pension for 8th Bipartite retirees of SBI w.e.f. 01/05/2005 as in the case of other Banks, gave directions to GOI to consider the proposal of SBI Lr.No.CDO/PM/16/SPL/29 dt.19/04/2006 and approve the draft for amendment for re-fixing of pension for retirees between 01/11/1997 (in the case of Award Staff)/01/04/1998 (in the case of Officers) and 01/11/2002 within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Hon’ble Court further directed to consider the proposal of the Bank in respect of DA merger of 1684 points index and to pass appropriate orders within the above mentioned period.

      While the petitioners have been persuing the matter of non-implementation of the above directions of the court, it is shocking and surprising to note that an amendment to sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 & sub-rule (6) of Rule 23 of SBI Employees’ Pension Fund Rules raising the ceiling from Rs.8500/- to Rs.21040+PQP+FPP for the purpose of calculating pension under 50%-40% formula and corresponding Dearness Releif @ 0.18% w.e.f. 01/05/2005 for those who retired/retire on or after 01/11/2002 vide SBI Lr. Ref.No. CDO/PM/16/828 dt. 9th Sep. 2009, is notified in the GOI Gazette on 3rd Oct.2009.

      From the above it is evident that the pension calculation for 8th Bipartite retirees is officially notified by GOI on the fresh proposal submitted by the Bank. It is abundantly clear that after the direction of by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras to GOI on 16/10/2008 and before it is considered by GOI in terms of the above order, SBI re-framed its proposal submitted on 19/04/2006 and forwarded the same to GOI for notification on 9th Sep.2009, leaving the 7th Bipartite retirees in lurch. SBI has given a room for GOI to tell Hon’ble High Court Of Madras that the earlier proposal is modified subsequently by SBI and the same was considered and approved. SBI by reversing its earlier stand betrayed the cause of its own pensioners, despite a favourable direction by the Hon’ble High Court Of Madras. Moreso, the Bank & GOI did not even care to whisper on the fresh proposal dated 9th Sep.2009 and consequent amendment notified on 3rd Oct.2009, leave alone suppressing this information to its own emloyees/officers/pensioners by means of its routine circular.

      The 7th Bipartite retirees are getting their pension under Sub-rule (2) of Rule 23 amended as on 27th July 2000 and paid Dearness Relief under Sub-rule (6) (iii) of Rule23 amended as on 14th Feb.1997. The Basic Pension which they and a part of 8th Bipartite retirees receive(d) under the said amended Rule is only “till further amendments in this regard”. The Bank by amending the Rule 23 as notified on 3rd October 2009, failed to honour the spirit of the phrase “till further amendments in this regard” and the implied guarantee enshrined in the pre-amended Rule dt. 27th July 2000. By amending the sub-rule(2) of Rule 23 by a Notification on 3rd October 2009,the Bank extended the benefit only to those aggrieved pensioners retired between 01/11/2002 and 30/04/2005 who have been receiving pension on the basis of 6th Bipartite pay scales and not to those similarly placed retirees of 7th Bipartite.

      The Bank discriminated the 7th Bipartite retirees who are now affected adversely by the highly discriminatory action of the Bank in extending the benefit to one section of the aggreived, notwithstanding a certificate given in the Notification dt. 3/10/2009 by the Bank in this regard. The Bank now back stabbed the 7th Bipartite retirees by framing a fresh proposal only to benefit the pensioners who retired between 01/11/2002 and 30/04/2005 drawing subtantive salary under 8th Bipartite settlement.

      There is a clear case to be fought against the Bank with reference to the latest amendment for its discriminatory treatment, for giving a go-bye to the principle of extending the improvement to the past aggrieved pensioners, for scant regard over the legal decisions cited in Record Note of Discussions, for not honouring the implied commitment in the relevant Rule and above all for its volte -face over the pension issue.

      Let us hope that those who are waging legal battles will forcefully put forth the above views, if convinced.

      H. GANAPATHY

      Like

  203. DEAR RAJ KUMAR NEGI,INDIA SHINING BUT MPs WHINING. THE INDIA STORY IS SHINING AS DEMONSTRATED WHICH HIT THE SHARE MARKET A 30 MONTHS HIGH LAST WEEK.THE SPOILER OF THIS STORY MAY WELL BE OUR LEADERS.LAST WEEK OUR MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT,BE CONSIDERED TO BE ROLE MODELS FOR OUR SCHOOL CHILDREN,TOOK PETULANCE TO A NEW HEIGHT.THEY DISTRUPTED PROCEEDINGS IN THE HOUSE BY SHOUTING THEM DOWN,OUTBIDDING TWIST IN ASKING FOR MORE,MORE FOR WHAT?FOR WALKING OUT OF HOUSE IN A SIGNIFICANTLYT LARGE NUMBER OF SESSIONS?FOR WHAT DO BADLY BEHAVED MPs FEEL THEY WANT A BIGGER HIKE TO THE TUNE OF 500%?ON THE OTHER SIDE THERE IS TERRIBLE WRONG INDEED WITH THE EXISTING POLCY ON THE STATE BANK PENSION.STATE BANK PENSIONERS HAVE BEEN RUNNING FROM PILLAR TO POST FOR THE LAST MORE THAN 20 YEARS. BUT ABOUT THE POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT IN REGARD TO THE PENSIONERS OF STATE BANK OF INDIA?IT HARDLY REFLECTS AN ENLIGHTENED DEFINATION OF PENSION SCHEME. THERE IS NO SOCIO-ECONOMIC JUSTICE BUT HUMILATION ALL THE WAY FOR THOSE WHO ONCE CEASE LESSLY TOILED AND GAVE THEIR BEST TO THE SYSTEM/BANK.ONE OF THE ESTABLISHED RULES IS THAT EVERY ONE SHOULD BE GETTING PENSION EQUIVALENT TO 50% OF HIS OR HER LAST DRAWN SALARY.BUT THERE ARE DIFFERENT GROUPS OF RETIREES ARE GETTING PENSION ON DIFFERENT FORMULAES SO MUCH SO SOME GROUPS ARE GETTING PENSION AT THE RATE OF ABOUT 27% OF THE LAST PAY DRAWN AT THE TIME OF THEIR RETIREMENT.AS AGAINST 30% FOR ALL CATEGORIES OF PENSIONER AS FAMILY PENSION THE GOVERNMENT REVISEDW.E.F 1-05-2005WHICH ENVISAGES PAYMENT AT YHE RATE OF 15.20.30 PER CENT IN DIFFERENT CATEGORIES. ALSO BENEFIT OF 100% D.A NEUTERALISATION EFFECTIVE FOM MAY 2005 HAS NOT BEEN EXTENDED TO OLD RETIREES.THERE IS NO RULES FOR UPDATION OF PENSION WHEN THERE IS REVISION OF SCALES AFTER EVERY 5YEARS .THIS IS POSITON OF STATE BANK PENSIONERS AND THEY ARE GETTING MEAGRE PENSION WHERE THEY SHOULD TELL THEIR FATE .

    Like

  204. sir please comment prefer 1988 death cases in sbi employees with 13 years service in sbi without pension ..
    ofter 1-11-1993 retirees 10 years service with pension but what about before retired and death cases prefer 1993

    Like

  205. RESPECTED H.GANAPATHY,I HAVE GONE THROUGH YOUR WRITE-UP DATED 22-08-2010UNDER THE HEAD”’VOLTE OF STATE BANK OF INDIA MANAGEMENT ON PENSION”.I AM VERY MUCH IMPRESSED WITH YOUR VIEWS AND YOU HAVE FULL CONCEPTION ON PENSION ISSUE IN SBI AND WHAT A WONDERFUL NOTE ON THE PENSION ISSUE IN SBI.YOU HAVE CONVINCING POINTS WHICH ARE VERY USEFUL TO PENSIONERS AND PETITIONERS AND I REQUEST ALL THE PENSIONERS AND PETIONERS SHOULD MAKE USE OF THEASE POINTS IN CONTESTING THEIR COURT CASES.I WANT YOUR PERSONAL FAVOUR IN MY PENSION ISSUE WHICH I HAVE ALREADY ADVISED IN THIS BLOG ON 22-07-2010 ADDRESSED TO SHRI R.SIVAGYANAM,PLEASE GO THROUGH IT AND GUIDE ME WHAT REPLY I MAY GIVE TO THE BANK.I KNOW NOTHING WILL BE GAINED BY WRITING LETTERS TO BANK,HOWEVER,I WANT YOUR GUIDANCE FOR MY SATISFACTION. FURTHER, I WANT TO EXPRESS MY VIEWS ON THE 7TH ,8TH, 9TH BIPARTITES FOR YOUR VALUABLE VIEWS.AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT 7TH BIPARTITE JOINT NOTE HAS BEEN SIGNED ON 14-12-1999 AND THE EXCUTIVE COMMITTEEOF CENTRAL BOARD IN THEIR MEETINGHELD ON THE 10TH FEBRUARY2000 HAVE RESOLVED TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF SALARY PACKAGE CONTAINED IN 7TH BIPARTITE.THE EXCUTIVE COMMITTEE OF CENTRAL HAVE ALSO APPROVED THE CONTINUATION OF THE PENSION AS PER EXISTING RULES.AT THAT TIMETHE MAXIMUM PENSION SHALL NOT EXCEED 50% OF THE AVERAGE MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE OR RS4250/ PER MONTH.FOR THE MEMBERS WHO RETIRED/RETIRE ON OR AFTER 1-11-1993-..PLEASE REFER TO C.O LETTER NO CDO/IR/CIR/83 DATED 14-02-2000.ANDE ARREARSOF SALARY ON ACCOUNT 7TH BIPARTITE WAS PAID IN MARCH/APRIL 2000 BEFORE THE DATE OF 27-07-2000. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF BANK AT THEIR MEETING HELD ON 27TH JULY 2000FRAMED THE RULE 23(2) WITH EFFECT FROM 1-03-1999 WHICH WE ARE DISCUSSINGAND SBI PENSIONFUND HAS ADOPTED THE AMENDMENTS VIDE CORPORATE CENTRE LETTER NOCDO/PM/16/CIR/34 DATED 31-10-2000PLEASE REFER TO PARAGRAPH 6 OFTHIS CIRCULAR,YOU WILL FIND THAT BANK HAS COMMITTED SUITABLE REVISION IN AMOUNT OF SUBSTANTIVE SALARY FOR FOR PAYMENT OF 50%I.E RS 8500/ MENTIONED AT (2)(a)IN THE RULE 23(2)AND SIMILAR REVISIONIN (2)(b)IN THE RULE 23(20.BANK HAS TAKEN UP THE MATTER SUITABLY WITH THE GOVERNMENT AND RESERVE BANK OF INDIA. SIMILARLY FOR 8TH BIPARTITE THE EXCUTIVE COMMITTEE OF CENTRAL BOARD IN THEIR MEETING HELD ON 7TH JULY 2005 HAVE RESOLVED TO IMPLEMENT THE PROVISIONS OF SALARY PACKAGE OF 8TH BIPARTITE .THE EXCUTIVE COMMITTE OF CENTRAL BOARD HAVE ALSO APPROVED THE CONTINUATION OF BPENSION AS PER EXISTING RULES.PLEASE BREFER TO C.O CIRCULAR NO CDO/P&HRD-IR/17 DATED 7-7-2005 FOR 9TH BIPARTITE, THE EXCUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE CENTRAL BOARD HAS ACCORDED ITS APPROVAL TO THE REVISIED SALARY SCALES OF OFFICERS AND RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF JOINTE NOTE DATED 27-04-2010OTHER THAN PENSION .PLEASWE REFER TO CIRCULAR NO CDO/P&HRD-IR/11/2010-2011 DATED 8-06-2010.PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/VALUABLE VIEWS. WITH BEST REGARDS. THANKING YOU

    Like

  206. DER SHRI GANAPATHY, YOU HAVE WELL EXPLAINED THE PENSION RULES EVEN THOUGH I AM WRITING THIS WRITE -UP FOR CLEARING MY DOUBTS ON PENSION ISSUE .IN TERMS OF RULE 2 OF EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND”MEMBER”MEANS ANY PERSON IN THE SERVICE OF THE BANK WHO HAS BEEN ADMITTED TO THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE FUND AND SALARY OR SUBSTANTIVE SALARY SHALL INCLUDE OTHER EMOLUMENTS OR SUCH PORTION THEREOF OF AMEMBER AS MAY FOR TIME BEING BE PERMITTED BY THE BANKTO RANK FOR SUPERANNUATION BENEFITS UNDER THE RULES OF SERVICE APPLICABLE TO THE MEMBER.I HAVE MENTIONED THEASE TWO WORDS MEMBER AND SUBSTANTIVE SALARY BECAUSE THEASE WORDS WILL BE USED IN RULE NO 23 WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT SO FAR CALCULATION OF PENSION..RULE NO 17 SAYS PENSION SHALL BEGIN TO ACCRUE ON THE FIRST DAY SUCCEEDING THAT OF RETIREMENT AND SHALL BE PAYABLE MONTHLY TO THE BENEFICIARY I AM OF THE VIEW THAT PENSION SHOULD BE REVISED FROM DATE OF RETIREMENT.RULE22(|)A MEMBER SHALL BE ENTITLED TO APENSION UNDER THEASE RULES ON RETIRING FROM BANK’S SERVICE.NOW WE SHOULD COMMENT ON THE MAIN RULE 23(|)WHICH IS VERY IMPORTMENTFOR CACULATION OF PENSION OF EVERY PENSIONER.ACCORDING TO RULE23(|)SUBJECT TO ROVISIONS OF SUB RULE(2)THE PENSION PAYABLE UNDER RULE 22 SHALL BE THE AMOUNT CALCULATED AT THE RATE OF ONE-SIXTIEST PART OF EVERY YEAR’SPENSIONABLE SERVICE OF THE AVERAGE MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELEVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE.ACCORDING TO RULE 23(2)——-PROVIDED FURTHER THAT WITH EFFECT FROM1-3-1999THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF PENSION FOR MEMBERS WHO RETIRE/RETIRE DRAWING SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IN THE PAY SCALES EFFECTIVE FROM 1-11-1992(AWARD STAFF)/1-7-1993(SUPERVISING STAFF)AND THEREAFTER SHALL BE COMPUTED TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS IN THIS REGARD AS UNDER.(a)WHERE THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE IS UP TO RS8500/P.M50%OF THEAVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE.(b)WHERE THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE IS ABOVE RS8500/PER MONTH PENSIONIONABLE SERVICE THE RATE OF PENSION IS 40% SUBJECT TO MINIMUM RS4250/ NOW WE NOTE EACH AND EVERY WORDS OR PHRASE OF THIS RULE 23 AND WE FIND THAT IT CLEARLY SAYS PENSION WILL BE CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF AVERAGE MONTHLY SUSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LASTTWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE WHATEVER BE THE FORMULA .IN RULE NO 23(2)(a)AND RULE NO 23(2)(b) HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE FORMULA FOR PAYING THE PENSION AND IN RULE NO 23(2) HAS SHOWN TO WHOM THIS FORMULA WILL BE APPLICABLE AND THE WORDS THERAFTER IN THIS RULE MEANS SUBSEQUENT PAY SCALES AFTER 1992/1993.AND TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS MEANS INCREASING THE THE MAXIMUM AS ABOVE REFERRED TO THE PAY SCALES(INCREASING THE LIMIT OF RS8500/) WHEN THE MEMBERS ARE IN THE SCALE OF 1997/1998 BANK IS PAYING PENSION ON THE BASIS OF 1992. /1993PAY SCALES.PAYMENT OF PENSION MUST BE BASED UPON T HE LAST PAY DRAWN AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT.I AM OF THE VIEW THAT OUR PENSION RULES ALSO SAYS LIKE THIS THEN WHY THIS ANOMOLY .PLEASE CLARIFY ME ON THEASE POINTS. WITH BEST REGARDS. THANKING YOU.

    Like

  207. DEAR SHRI GANAPATHI

    AT THE FIRST INSTANCE, MY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS FOR THE EXCELLENT WRITEUP. AS THE UP-DATION OF PENSION ISSUE COMES UP FOR FINAL JUDGEMENT TODAY, I JUST WONDER WHY OUR PENSIONERS’ FEDERATION WITH RESOURCES IN THEIR COMMAND WASTED MANY VALUABLE YEARS WITHOUT PURSUING THE MATTER LEGALLY BY ENGAGING EMINENT LAWYERS AND PERMITTED A FEW INDIVIDUALS TO SPEND THEIR HARD EARNED MONEY &FILE CASES, WHILE SOME WINNING HALF WAY THROUGH, A FEW OTHERS LOSING THE BATTLE AND A FEW MORE STILL WAITING TO SEE THE SILVER LINING IN THE CLOUD.IT IS HIGH TIME, YOU PLAY AN ACTIVE ROLE, BEING A CONSULTANT, TO URGE THE FEDERATION TO FILE A CASE IN SUPREME COURT. I KNOW IT IS TIME CONSUMING: BUT IT IS ALSO A FACT MANY VALUABLE YEARS ARE LOST BY TRUSTING MANAGEMENT/GOI.
    PEACOCK DOES NOT SHED A FEATHER JUST FOR THE ASKING:ONE HAS TO BE BOLD TO PLUCK IT.
    T.R.VENKATESAN.
    27.08.2010 7.00A.M.

    Like

  208. DEAR SHRI T.R.VENKATESAN,I AM FULLY AGREE WITH YOUR VIEWS ,OUR PENSION ISSUES REMAIN UNRESOLVED DUE TO THE ADAMANT STAND BEING ADOPTED BY THE GOVERNMENT.THE PRESENT PERCEPTION OF THE OFFICIALS OF THE FINANCE MINISTRY NEEDS TO BE CHANGED.THIS PERCEPTION ENTERTAINED BY VARIOUS OFFICIALS DEALING WITH OUR PENSION ISSUES OVER THE MORE THAN 20 YEARS IS UNFORTUNATELY PASSED ON TO THEIR SUCCESSORS..OUR PENSIONERS FEDRATION HAS MAKING ITS APPEAL TO THE GOVERNMENT/BANK FOR RECONSIDERING AND REVIEWING ITS ADMANT STAND..NO DECISION OF THE GOVERNMENT AND ITS MACHINERIES SHOULD RESULT IN THE VIOLATION OF THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF ITS SENIOR CITIZENS.A DUTY IS THEREFORE CAST ON THE OFFICIALS CONCERNED AT THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE OF GOVERNMENT AS ALSO OFFICIALS OF OUR BANK TO HAVE FRESH AND UNBIASED LOOK INTO OUR PENSION ISSUES AND RESOLVE OUR PENSION ISSUES WITHOUT ANY LOSS OF TIME.

    Like

  209. I do agree with T R Venkatesan and also with Mr saini that we should not waste the time in writing or criticising each other, we have also lost much time .I retired in 2001 and was given the assorance to get 50% of my last drawn salllary and now is 2010 , about ten years have gone ,nothing has come out.If I have got RS 3000/less than mu actually pension per month ,it means I got Rs36000/per year less pension and after ten years which have already gone I have been deprived of Rs 360000/ ,what to talk of third benift, the IBA is sleeping on this issue . I was watching the increase in the D.A slab for the month of August in which the Family pensioners have been given the increase in the pension as compared to old pensioners, what was the basic of the ioncrease when the original pensioners have not got a single penny, the IBA must think on this and give the increase in the pension to the pensioners. The inflation in much high, pensioners cannot run their family with this pension. RAJKUMARNEGI #2190 SEC 21C CHANDIGARH

    Like

  210. LEGAL RECOURSE MAY BE A GAMBLLE. BUT IT IS WORTH FIGHTING WHERE CONVICTIONS ARE STRONG. FIGHT WITH CONFIDENCE, COURAGE & CONVICTION. VICTORY IS OURS, IF NOT TODAY, LET OUR POSTERITY BE PROUD OF OUR STAND.
    T.R.VENKATESAN. 28.08.2010 9.A.M.

    Like

  211. DEAR NEGI AND VENKATESAN, LET ME ADVISE ME WHAT HAPPENED IN THE SUPREME COURT JUGEMENT DATED 27-08-2010 FOR UPDATION OF PENSION AS BOTH OF YOU KNOW MUCH THAN ME.FURTHER SHRI NEGI FOR IMPROVMENT OF PENSION IN SBI, I.B.A HAS NO ROLE AT ALL BECAUSE CHAIRMAN,OF SBI HAS NO POWERS TO GIVEN EVEN RE1/ EXTRA TO A PENSIONER AS UNDER SECTION50(2)(O)OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955,ALL THE POWERS ARE VESTED WITH GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.AND PENSION ISSUES ARE PENDING FOR THE LAST MORE THAN 20 YEARS. GOVERNMENT HAS ACTED IN A SUCH A WAY THAT THEY HAVE SUCCEEDED IN THEIR PLAN FOR NOT MAKING ANY IMPROVMENT IN THE PENSION OF S.B.I EMPLOYEES.GOVERNMENT HAS NOT REVISEDTHE PENSION OF 5TH,7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. IN OTHER WORDS 5TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE GETTING MAXIMUM BASIC PENSION OF RS2400/PER MONTH NOT ON THE BASIS OF THEIR SALARIES AT THE TIME OF THEIR RETIREMENT. SIMILARLY 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE SUFFERING A LOT AND THEY ARE GETTING PENSION ON THEIR PRE -REVISED SALARYIES I.E ON THE BASIS OF 6TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE SCALES BUT THEYRETIRED WITH SCALES OF 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE AGREEMENTS.. WE NEED TO EXPRESS OUR ANXIIETY ON THE LACK OF CONCERN ON THE PART OF OUR BANK AND THE SERVING FEDRATIONS FOR NOT TAKING UP OUR PENSION ISSUES ADEQUATELY,APPROPRIATELY AND PERSISTENTLY WITH THE GOVERNMENT BY MAKING OUT A STRONG JUSTIFICATION FOR RESOLVING THEM WITHOUT FURTHER LOSS OF TIME..THE OTHER BANKS HAVE RESOLVED THE LONG PENDING PENSION ISSUE SO MUCH SO ALL THE PENSIONERS OF 6TH ,7TH, 8TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE GETTING PENSION @50%OF THEIR PAY AT THE TIME OF THEIR RETIREMENT.THEY HAVE ALSO ACHIEVED ONE MORE PENSION OPTION TOTHEIR EMPLOYEES. WE DONOT KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO SBI AND WHEN OUR PENSION ISSUE WILL BE SOLVED.

    Like

  212. It is heartening to note that in spite of so much discussion took place through this forum but no comments from aiboc in this regard I am not understanding why the AIBOC is keeping silent in this regard? Now the 9BPS is over and it can take up this issue with GOI and settle the things amicably at the earliest. It is my humble request to AIBOC

    Like

  213. HOW POWERLESS/ HELPLESS IS SBI CHAIRMAN Mr O P BHATT.

    By his own admission, he cannot afford to retire on the pension of SBI. “I need to work to support my family,” he says rather humbly over coffee in his rather spacious 18th floor office in Mumbai’s central business district — Nariman Point.”

    If the chairman cannot live on his pension, then forget the fate of the low level poor pensioners. Only God can save them, for now even the God is looking the other way.

    ALL IS NOT WELL………………

    Read more: I am the least-paid Fortune 500 CEO: Om Prakash Bhatt – India Business – Business – The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/I-am-the-least-paid-Fortune-500-CEO-Om-Prakash-Bhatt/articleshow/6448681.cms#ixzz0xvv2M0km

    Like

  214. DEAR FRIENDS,MY FRIEND HAS RIGHTLY EXPRESSED HOW POWERLESS/HELPLESS IS SBI CHAIRMAN SHRI OP BHATT ,IN THIS CONNECTION PLEASE REFER TO TIMES OF INDIA DATED 28-08-2010 WHERE SHRI BHATT ANSERS ALL THE COURSE OF TWO HOUR LONG CHAT WITH CORRESPONDENCES OF TIMES OF INDIA AND I AM MENTIONING SOME EXTRACTS FROM THIS TALK AND YOU WILL FIND THAT ALL THE POWERS ARE VESTED WITH GOVERNMENT AND HOW SBI CHAIRMAN IS HELPLESS AND HAVE NO POWERS TO IMPROVE THE FATE OF HIS STAFF, HE HIMSELF IS SUFFERER TO SOME EXTENT.THE STATE BANK OF INDIA BROKE INTO THE FORTUNE 500 CLUB DURING SHRI BHATT’S CURRENT FIVE YEAR TENURE AS CHAIRMAN-SURELY SOMETHING TO CELEBERATE.HOWEVER ,THERE IS SOMETHING ABOUT THAT LIST WHICH BOTHERS HIM.HE POINTS OUT THAT HE IS THE LOWEST PAID CEO ON THE FORTUNE500 LIST.(THE SBI CHAIRMAN’S COMPENSATION IN THE LAST FINANCIAL YEAR WAS RS27 LAKH,WHILE ON AN AVERAGE A FORTUNE500 CEO EARNS MORE THAN $10MILLION OR RS 47 CRORE A YEAR).BY HIS OWN ADMISSION,HE CANNOT AFFORD TO RETIRE ONTHE PENSION OF SBI””I NEED TO WORK TO SUPPORT MY FAMILY”.HE SAYS RATHER HUMBLY OVER COFEE IN HIS RATHER SPACIOUS18TH FLOOR OFFICE IN MUMBAI’S CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT-NARIMAN POINT”.I SPEND ABOUT 40% OF MY TIME ON STAFF AND SPEND TIME WITH THEM,AT TIMES FOR DAYS.I BROUGHT IN A SPECIALLY DESIGNED MODULE CALLED”PARIVARTAN”WHICH HAS INCREASED EFFICIENCY.SMALL ARE DARIDRA NARAYAN AND WE ARE HAPPY TO SERVE THEM” SAID BY SHRI BHATT.FURTHER SHRI BHATT SAID, ONE HAS TO UNDERSTAND THAT SINCE SBI IS A GOVERNMENT COMPANY,HE DID NOT HAVE LUXURY OF PAYING ANYONE ANYTHING EXTRA,GIVE BONUS OR OFFER AN OUT OF TURN PROMOTION.SO,HE HAD THE UNENVIABLE JOB OF KEEPING THE EMPLOYEES MOTIVATED AND GROW THE BANK WITHOUT OFFERING ANY THING TANGIBLE,EXCEPT THE PASSION OF IT ALL.DEAR FRIENDS YOU CAN READ HIS FULL TALK IN THE NEWS PAPER TIMES OF INDIA DATED 28-08-2010 ON THE PAGE OF TIMES BUSINESS.FROM THIS TALK OF CHAIRMAN WE FIND THAT OUR PENSION ISSUE CANNOT BE SOLVED WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNMENT.

    Like

  215. The views expressed by S B I Chairman sh O P Bhatt that he himself is low paid CEO and cannot efford my family with the present pension,What to talk of others, The Govt should resign who cannot lookafter the Chairman of the bighest Bank of India i,e STATE BANK OF INDIA . When the chairman is not happy with the present pension how the M PS have got hugh increase in their sallary,when they do nothing except fight in the parliament ,It is a matter of shame on their part,they say they are the servant of the public but they have never realised the difficulties of the pensioners. They must have readthe statement of the chairman of state bank of india,if not somebody should give them the cutting to read the pathetic condition of the pensioners. The retirees of 1992 are getting basic pension Rs2400/ and the retirees of 2001 are getting basic pension Rs4250/ .It is a matter of shame for the govt /M pS and the financeminister and specially the leaders of the area to which they represent. So much has been written on this blog but no response from th e Leaders ,IBA IBOC AIBOC or govt. MayGOD GIVE THEM THE WISDOM TO READ THIS BLOG and do the justice with them RAJKUMARNEGI #2190 SEC 21 C CHANDIGARH

    Like

  216. MY DEAR NEGI, AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT THE STATE BANK OF INDIA,THE FIRST PUBLIC SECTOR BANK IN OUR COUNTRY WAS TAKEN OVER BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA THROUGH STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1`955.IN THIS WRITE UP I WILL TRY TO TELL YOU HOW WE HAVE LOST OUR PLACE AND OUR OFFICERS OF YESTERYEARS, GOVERNMENT,AND OUR UNION LEADERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PUTTING THEIR FOOT DOWN BEFORE BUREAUCRACY. FURTHER THE NOBLE AIMS AND OBJECTIVES OF THE CONSTITUTION THE JUSTICE HAS BEEN ACCORDED THE HIGHEST PLACE TO SECURE SOCIAL,ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL JUSTICE TO ALL ITS CITIZENS..JUSTICE SHOULD NOT BE DENIED TO ANY CITIZEN BY REASON OF ECONOMIC OR OTHER DISABILITIES.,HOWEVER IN OUR CASE THERE IS NO NAME OF JUSTICE AND WE ARE CRYING FOR JUSTICE..MY FRIENDS WE SHOULD PRAY TO GOD FOR JUSTICE.

    Like

  217. THIS HAS BEEN UPDATED ON AND COPIED FROM ALLBANKINGSOLUTIONS.COM

    “Update for the Case Relating to Pension in Supreme Court – listed for 27th August, 2010

    We have been receiving numerous queries about the latest update on the case filed by Mr Pradeep Kumar in Supreme Court. This was Listed for Final Disposal on 27.08.2010, and it prays, among others, “For Updation of Pension”.

    Now we have been informed by Mr Pradeep Kumar that he had sought a fresh date due to certain technical reasons and wish that the whole case should be heard in detail on a single day itself. He has informed that he is likely to discuss more than 16 Judgements of Hon’ble the Supreme Court of India, which categorically and unequivocally say that, “If an Employee, at the time of his Retirement, in any Organization / Establishment is Entitled to Eligible and Improvement in Pension Computation Formula is Introduced in that Organization / Establishment”, “Such Improvement in Pension Computation Formula has to be extended to all the Pensioners in that Organization/Establishment”, “Irrespective of their Dates of Retirement”, Pension”, for Improvement in Pension Computation Formula is Introduced in that Organization / Establishment”, “Such Improvement in Pension Computation Formula has to be extended to all the Pensioners in that Organization / Establishment”, “Irrespective of their Dates of Retirement” etc. etc.

    Accordingly, a new date will be announced soon. The date is likely to be towards the end of September or early October, 2010 “

    Like

  218. DEAR PENSIONERS,

    ONLY WAY LEFT WITH US IS TO WRITE INDIVIDUAL LETTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER TO BRING THE NOTICE TO HIM FOR THE INJUSTICE GIVEN TO THE 7 TH BIPARTITE PENSIONERS.THE FEDERATION SHOULD THINK IN THIS LINE AND TAKE SUCH STEPS.
    THIS IS MY PERSONAL OPINION.

    PLEASE ADVISE

    Like

  219. Sir may I know who is to amend the Rule 23(2) of the provident fund in which 50% or 40% pensioned is mentioned. The state bank of india (2) Govt of India. (3) the I B A (4) The supreme court of India ( or ) any other agency. We should approach them to amend the rule so that every body at any level and should get the 50% pension of his last drawn sallary. athe pensioners retired in 1992 are getting basic pension of Rs2400/ and the persons retired after 1993 are getting 4250/ and even retired in 2001 are getting basic pension 4250/ . So please think on this , what is the solution, who is to amend the clause o d23(ii) of the Provident fund to make every one at Par , the rising in the prices are effecting the pensioners much The recent strike in the country has shown that the people the working class is much effected by the rising in the prices. At present none can purchase the house which has gone out of reach from the general servicemanand also the cost has gone above Rs 50/ lacs.unrealistic ,thanks. Rajkumar negi 2190Sec 21C Chandigarh

    Like

  220. There is a case in New Delhi High court WP no1931of2002 Smt Premavathi Bagga vs Union Govt of India and the case is hearing stage from Feb2010 and no further developments in this regard I am not understanding why the case is not moving forward and Why pensioners federation is not helping the petitioner in this regard Further any body enlighten me about the case Further Officers federation in its latest circular stated that they are pressing the management for 50% pension for all and and also for the satirizing the injustice to the pensioner who are retired after 1993 and before 01/0/2002 But latest developments not known in this regard Let us hope for good news shortly

    Like

  221. thanks for giving me the information, the case in New Delhi High Court wp no 1931 of 2002 smt paremawati
    Bagga vs Union Of India and the case is hearing stage from Feb 2010 and there is no further development in this regard, the union, (officers federation, Award staff federation) should jointly take over the case and should fight unitedly, as they have much funds at their command, moreover the retirees have also contributed to their funds as and when they were in the service. it is now their moral dutyto help the old parents (old retirees are the parents) .I hope they will do the justice with the old pensioners and move the case in the Supreme court effectively and on war footing, it is the duty of the Law Ministry to see that the Case is pending since long in the Supreme court why the long delay ,M.Ps have never waited for the enhancement in their sallaries and got it in this session but they cannot see that the poor pensioners are waiting for the justice since long,It is a matter of shame on the govt,Bank and the union leaders. Please do help the old pensioners thanks. RAJKUMARNEGI #2190 SEC 21C CHANDIGARH

    Like

  222. THE ONLY NOW LEFT WITH US TO WRITE TO MRS. SONIA GANDHI AND THE PRIME MINISTER TO GIVE THEIR KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE CASE AND FOE FAVOURABLE ORDER. THIS IS THE ONLY SOLUTION NOW LEFT WITH US AS THINK

    Like

  223. DEAR PMGKPANICKR,WITH REFERENCE TO YOUR WRITE UP DATED 8TH AND 10TH SEPTEMBER 2010 ,PLEASE REFER TO MY WRITE -UP DATED 22-07-2010, THE CONTENTS OF WHICH IS SELF EXPLCITE,BECAUSE I HAVE ALREADY HAS DONE THIS EXERCISE WHICH YOU HAVE SUGGESTED IN YOUR WRITE -UPS AS MENTIONED ABOVE PLEASE GO THROUH MY WRITE -UP DATED 22-07-2010 AND GUIDE ME. WITH REGARDS.

    Like

  224. MY DEAR NEGI,AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT A WRIT PETITION WAS FILED IN THE DELHI HIGH COUR T ON 8-3-2002 IT IS CALLED WRIT PETITION NO 1931 OF 2002 AND AS ON DATE THERE IS NO RESULT(JUDGEMENT) NOW I WILL TELL YOU WHAT IS THAT WRIT PETITION AND YOU WILL FIND THAT IT COVERS ALL PENSION ISSUES IN SBI.WRIT PETITION IS LIKE AS UNDER—(a)ISSUE WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT,ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHING THE IMPUGNED LETTER DATED23-02-1999 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT-1/UNION OF INDIA IN THE MINISTRY OF FIANANCE,DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS(BANKING DIVISION)WHICH MADE THE ARBITRARY DIVISION OF PENSIONERS INTO TWO CATEGORIES OF 50% AND 40%. (b)ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS,ANY OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION QUASHYINGTHE ORDER DATED31-10-2002 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT-3/BANK CREATING AN ARTIFICIAL DIVISION OF PENSION CEILING OF 50%FOR PENSION PAYMENT IN THE CASES WHERE THE SALARY LEVEL IS UPTO RS 8500/AND 40%WHERE IT EXCEEDS RS8500/ (c)ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS,ANY OTHER WRIT,ORDER OR DIRECTION TO RESPONDENTS TO FOLLOW THE ESTABLISHED NORM OF PENSION BEING 50% OF SALARY LEVEL OF RETIRED EMPLOYEE AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT AND 30%THEREOF AS FAMILY PENSION FOR ALL PENSIONERS AS A CLASS (D) ISSUE A WRIT MANDAMUS,ANY OTHER WRIT,ORDER OR DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENTS FOR RECALCULATION OF PENSION BASED ON 60 YEARS OF AGE W.E.F 1-11-1993 EVEN FOR PRE 1-11-1993 PENSIONERS SUCH AS THE PETITIONERS AND TO PAY THE ARREARS OF PENSION DUE TO THE PETITIONERS. (e)ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS,ANY OTHER WRIT,ORDER OR DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENTS TO REVISE AND RECALCULATE THE DEARNESS RELIEF PAYABLE TO PENSIONERS/PETITIONERS AT THE RATE OF 100% NEUTRALISATION AND ABLOSH THE DISCIMINATORY CATEGORISATION SINCE 1-11-1987.AND TO PAY THE ARREARS OF THE RECALCULATED PENSION AS ADMISSIBLE TO THEM. (f)ISSUE A WRIT VOF MANDAMUS,OR ANY OTHER WRIT,ORDER OR DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENTS 1,2 AND 3 FOR A CORRESPONDING UPWARD REVISION OF PENSION/FAMILY PENSION IN TUNE WITH EVERY REVISION IN SALARY STRUCTURE IN FUTURE ALSO,FOLLWING THE PRINCIPLES LAID AND THE ASSURANCES GIVEN BY RESPONDENT-3/BANK IN THE CASE OF IMPERIAL BANK OF INDIA PENSIONWERS ASSOCIATION 1989 SUPPL(1) SCC236(=JT1989(1) SC 383) (g) GRANT THE COSTS OF PETITION IN FAVOUR OF PETIONERS AND AGAINST THE RESONDENTS.(h) PASS ANY OTHER OR FURTHER ORDER AS MAY BE DEEMED FIT AND PROPER BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE OF THE PETITIONERS AND IN THE INTREST OF JUSTICE.MR NEGI THIS IS THE COURT CASE WHICH HAS NOT BEEN DECIDED SO FAR FOR THE LAST 8 YEARS AND IN CASE IT IS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF PENSIONERS THERE WILL BE REVIEW PETITION, CONTEMPT OF COURT, AND APPEAL IN THE SUPREMECOURT.OUT OF 7 PETITIONRS 4 HAVE ALREADY DIED THIS IS THE FATE OF COURT CASES. COURT CASES ARE NEVER ENDED IN ONE’S LIFE.

    Like

  225. Thanks to Sri Keshavrai Sahi for the use full information given in this regard in response to my write up of 09/09/2010 Further It is a pity to know that the case is dragging for last 8 years and not known still how many days it will take to get the final judgment in this regard Even the case is civil type with 7 petitioners (unfortunately now only 3 are alive) but the judgment is benefiting large number of pensioners(if it is in favour of petitioner). Hence I feel such type of case should be considered under speed track and should be settled within 1 to 2 years and all trade union and pensioners association should take up the matter with government to consider such cases under speed track in the courts Trade union leaders, please give your attention & do something in this regard which may help large numbers of retired&aggrieved employees

    Like

  226. Gratuity Act: In recent circular no 82 of sbi officers federation the said benefit extended to sbi employees w.e.f 24/ 05/10 and further mentioned in the said circular that the matter was being persuaded with the management to extend it to retired persons from 01/01/06 but no fruitful results in this regard Hence we may presume that working employees’/officers unions/association are not interested in this regard as the scheme has been implemented w.e.f 24/05/10 hence existing employees have benefited. Hence only pensioners association have to fight in this regard but I have not noticed any single protest/memorandum submitted any pensioners association. May I know the reason for this silence from pensioners associations. Baby gets milk only if it cries. Hence we have to put proper demand before Govt and Labor Minister in this regard to get our dues in respect of gratuity
    Otherwise we will loose this forever May I know the response of SBI pensioners federation in this regard

    Like

  227. DEAR FRIENDS,UNDER SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955,THE CENTRAL BOARD MAY,AFTER COSULTATION WITH RESERVE BANK OF INDIA AND WITH THE PREVIOUS SANCTION OF CENTRAL GOVERNMENT(BY NOTIFICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE) MAKE PENSION/PROVIDENT FUNDS REGULATIONS.PERHEPS ALL OF YOU KNOW THAT THIS OFFICIAL NOTIFICATION HAS ALREADY BEEN MADE BY THE BANK/GOVERNMENT AS ”STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND(AMENDMENT)RULES 2005 BY INCORPORATING THE ONE ADDITIONAL CLAUSE IN THE PENSION RULE 23(2) FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY AND IT WILL NOT AFFECT 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND THEY WILL GET PENSION ON PRE -REVISED SCALES OF PAY I.E ON THE BASIS OF 6TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE AGREEMENTS. FURTHER CHAIRMAN,OF SBI HAS NO POWERS TO GIVE EVEN RE1 EXTRA TO A PENSIONER AS UNDER SECTION50(2)(O) OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955.ALL THE POWERS ARE VESTED WITH GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.OUR PENSION ISSUES REMAIN UNRESOLVED DUE TO THE ADAMANT STAND BEING ADOPTED BY THE GOVERNMENT. YOU WILL SURPRISE TO NOTE THAT AFTER EVERY REVISION FROM 1987 ONWARDS BANK HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED THAT PENSION SHOULD BE AT 50% OF ACTUAL PAY AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT.HOWEVER THIS HAS NEVER BEEN APPROVED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.THE RESON FOR NON-APPROVAL WAS NOT ADVISED EVEN TO THE BANK.ONLY IN DISCUSSION, WE ARE TOLD THAT WE ARE ENJOYING THREE BENEFITS(1)PENSION (2)PROVIDENT FUND(3)STATUTORY GRATUITY (FROM 1972)ONWARDS.NOW THERE IS NO OPTION OTHER THAN KNOCKING THE DOORS OF THE SUPREME COURT IS LEFT WITH US.HOWEVER,I AM OF THE VIEW THAT GOING TO SUPREME COURT WITH A WRIT IS ALSO LIKE HANDLING A SHARP TWO EDGED WEAPON,BECAUSE NOW A DAYS SUPREME COURT DOES NOT ENTERTAIN SUCH WRIT PETITIONS EASILY.THIS BEING THE POSITION.IF OUR PETITION IS NOT ADMITTED FOR SOME RESON,IT COULD MEAN END OF ROAD TO US.THEREFORE I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE WRIT BE EXAMINED BY SOME EMINENT COUNSEL BEFORE IT IS FILED. SECOND OPTION IS THAT OUR SERVING FEDERATION S SHOULD DO SOME THING FOR THE BENIFIT OF THIER ELDERS. THIRD OPTION IS TO CONVINCE THE GOVERNMENT FOR SORTING OUT OUR PENSION ISSUES.MOST IMPORTMENT OPTION IS TRUST IN GOD AND FAITH IN GOD AND EVERY THING WILL BE ALL RIGHT.PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS ON MY THIS WRITE-UP. WITH BEST REGARDS .THANKING YOU.

    Like

  228. I agree with Shri. Keshav Saini that there is no option left to the aggreived pensioners, other than to knock the doors of the Supreme Court seeking a remedy on SBI pension issue. At the same time, Shri. Keshav Saini expressed his apprehension as to whether this attempt will be fruitful as the Apex Court nowadays, according to him, doesn’t entertain petitions on Service matters under Art. 32. In this respect, I hold a different view.

    I wish to point out that in terms of Art. 226, of course, the concerned High Court has the power to issue directions, orders or writs for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution or for any other purpose to any person or authority or any Government, but only within those territories in relation to which the concerned High Court excercise jurisdiction. The High Court also excercises such power though such person or authority or Government is seated outside its territorial jurisdiction, but only in appropriate cases wherein the cause of action arise within its jurisdiction.

    The provision is very clear that the excercise of power by the High Courts under Art. 226, strictly speaking, will be made applicable only within its jurisdiction wherein the petitioner(s) are located or suffered on account of a cause of action arises in a particular State. This means that the aggreived person(s) in Tamil Nadu & Puducherry can approach only High Court Of Madras, so also similarly placed in other States to the concerned High Courts of their jurisdiction against any person or authority or Government. They can also seek remedy by approaching different High Courts, if they are affected on account of a particular cause of action arises within the jurisdiction of the concerned High Courts.

    When such is the remedy available to the citizen of our country under Art. 226, the Supreme Court may not entertain petitions from the above category of aggreived exclusively from one particular State under Art. 32. In the case of aggreived from more than one State on account of a cause of action arises due to arbitrary and illegal decisions of any person or authority or Government, the position is different and theSupreme Court may not hesitate to entertain such petitions under Art. 32 straightaway for the excercise of its writ jurisdiction.

    If the SBI pensioners from different States either in a group or under an umbrella of an organisation, instead of from a particular State, approach the Supreme Court by filing a single petition seeking a remedy under Art. 32, the Supreme Court, in my opinion, may not dismiss such a petition at the initial stage itself directing the petitioners of different States to exaust the avenue available under Art. 226 as such a proposition of approaching all the High Courts by the petitioners of different States on the same issue will be impracticable. The Supreme Court will sure to appreciate this impracticability and also the urgency in settling the issue as it pertains to senior citizens. I welcome an early decision by the Pensioners’ Federation towards this direction for speedier redressal of greivances of the aggreived pensioners of SBI. Let us be optimistic and positive. – H. GANAPATHY

    Like

    1. Yes. I agree. In this connection, please refer my comments
      on 28th Aug in this blog. The articles appearing in Elders Voice make me feel that our Federation is not serious in the matter and entertaining apprehensions of winning the legal battle. I join with Mr.Saini in hoping, hoping, hoping.
      T.R.VENKATESAN 14.08.10. 3.30.P.M.

      Like

  229. TO ALL READERS,

    TODAY KERLA HIGH COURT HAS GIVEN A FAVOURABLE ORDER TO THE PENSIONERS. PLEASE CONTACT TO
    SHRI T.R. VIJAYAN IN HIS CELL NO9447818024. APARTY

    Like

  230. Congrats to Sri T.R VIjayan for having won the case in Kerala High Court I am requesting Shri.T.R.Vijayan to provide the information about the case as it may help others who are facing the same type of treatment from their past employer

    Like

  231. The pension issues are genuine and our top brass should not yield to govt dictats on the basis of 3-benefits theory.The law officers of the bank who are also mebers of association should take considerate views and not endorse the views of the Govt by presenting the facts in humane and employment oriented manner and not as a wayward local streetwise legal tangle.

    Apart from this the main issue is discrimination of the exit- optees from the medical schemes which the top brass of the bank and our HRD experts are doing.Our federation bosses are not able to sort it out with the management. How can be expect winning legal battles?
    The medical benefits for which SBI is wellknown havwe been diluted for exit optees by the present management of the bank in the schemes formulated by them. Most of the exit optees got out the bank because of the computerisation and rural development and wrong postings.Even favouritism shown in promotions by subjective trait based zone of selection policies…The performance was a facade for appraisals,,,,Hence if we analyse the performance and the gains for the bank because of the voluntary retiement exit-optees the scale will tilt in their favour in terms of contribution.The prensent top brass may have remained for long years upto super annuation by ploughing the field withouit sowing and seed for performance except its own selfish ends.This antipathy of the present topmanagement towards all pensioners is born out of their lackadaisical and selfish approaches to the problem.
    All the pensioners associationa and federations should bring in all exit-optees inside medical schemes such as RDBEMS ? etc.This will bring in relief to many exit optees say 70% of them as they left the bank because of wrong promotion policies with splendid performance and even achievements,,,They are entitled to prorata-benefits even from the natural justice angle.
    All pensioners assoications and officers federations should take up this issue immediately

    Like

  232. The pension issues are genuine and our top brass should not yield to govt dictats on the basis of 3-benefits theory.The law officers of the bank who are also members of association should take considerate views and not endorse the views of the Govt by presenting the facts in humane and employment oriented manner and not as a wayward local streetwise legal tangle.

    Apart from this the main issue is discrimination of the exit- optees from the medical schemes which the top brass of the bank and our HRD experts are doing.Our federation bosses are not able to sort it out with the management. How can be expect winning legal battles?
    The medical benefits for which SBI is wellknown havwe been diluted for exit optees by the present management of the bank in the schemes formulated by them. Most of the exit optees got out the bank because of the computerisation and rural development and wrong postings.Even favouritism shown in promotions by subjective trait based zone of selection policies…The performance was a facade for appraisals,,,,Hence if we analyse the performance and the gains for the bank because of the voluntary retiement exit-optees the scale will tilt in their favour in terms of contribution.The prensent top brass may have remained for long years upto super annuation by ploughing the field withouit sowing and seed for performance except its own selfish ends.This antipathy of the present topmanagement towards all pensioners is born out of their lackadaisical and selfish approaches to the problem.
    All the pensioners associationa and federations should bring in all exit-optees inside medical schemes such as RDBEMS ? etc.This will bring in relief to many exit optees say 70% of them as they left the bank because of wrong promotion policies with splendid performance and even achievements,,,They are entitled to prorata-benefits even from the natural justice angle.
    All pensioners assoications and officers federations should take up this issue immediately

    Like

  233. DEAR SHRI H.GANAPATHY.THANKS FOR YOUR FEED BACK FOR FILING A WRIT PETION ON PENSION ISSUE IN THE SUPREME COURT.IN THIS CONNECTION I UNDERSTAND THAT PENSIONERS ‘FEDRATION HAS DECIDED TO FILE A SUIT IN THE SUPREME COURT AND THEY ARE ENGAGING A EMINENT COUNSEL AND PREPARING A PLAINT TO QUASH RULE 23(2) OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES AND REQUEST TO THE HON’ABLE SUPREME COURT TO DIRECT THE GOVERNMENT/BANK TO PAY PENSION @50% TO ALL PENSIONERS I.E TO 5TH ,TO 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. IN CASE YOU HAVE ANY KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT PLEASE ADVISE ME AS YOU ARE IN A BETTER POSITION TO KNOW THE DEVELOPMENT AS ADVISOR TO PENSIONERS ‘FEDERATION. YOUR WRITE UP IN THIS BLOG IS VERY USEFUL TO READERS AND FEDRATION .WITH BEST REGARDS..THANKING YOU AGAIN.

    Like

  234. The information given by Shri. Panickar is correct. It is gathered that the Kerala High Court pronounced only a partial order favourable to 7th BP pensioners. It seems that the direction is only to the Bank to adopt its administrative instructions given in regard to pension for 8th BP retirees in the case of 7th BP pensioners.. There is no direction to GOI. If this information is correct, it is nothing but the same verdict as that of given by Madras High Court on 16th October 2008. In such a position, the Bank will sure to plead helpless for want of GOI approval by filing an Appeal before the Bench. Anyhow, let us wait for the full text of the verdict.

    Shri. Keshav Saini is also right in conveying about the petition likely to be filed by the Pensioners’ Federation before Supreme Court. I really wonder that Shri. Keshav Saini posseses lot of information taking keen interest in the matter and closely following the developements around us. For obvious reasons, I am not revealing any further information on this until the petition is filed. Hope I will be excused for this and trust my decision will be well taken and appreciated by the readers of this blog. – H. Ganapathy.

    Like

    1. DEAR SHRI GANAPATHI & KESAV,
      IT IS QUITE INTERESTING TO READ YOUR VIEWS ON THIS BLOG.
      I AM GLAD TO NOTE YET ANOTHER HIGH COURT HAD GIVEN A FAVOURABLE JUDGEMENT
      REGARDING FILING A CASE IN SUPREME COURT SEEKING TO QUASH RULE 23(2) AND SEEKING A UNIFORM 50% FOR ALL APPEARS TO BE TOO RIGID. THE GOI MAY NOT ACCEPT THIS,AS THE RULE HAS BEEN IN FORCE FOR LONG. AT BEST WE CAN ASK FOR THE SAME SETTLEMENT REACHED FOR 8TH BIPARTITE WHEN WE WENT ON AN INDEFINITE STRIKE AND THE GOI CAME DOWN TO A NEW FORMULA 0F 40% & 50% – I SHALL BE GLAD TO HAVE YOUR ADVICES ON THIS ISSUE
      T.R.VENKATESAN.15.09.10 8.15P.M.

      Like

  235. DEAR SHRI H.GANAPATHY, THANKS FOR YOUR RESPONSE SO PROMPLY AND YOU HAVE FULL KNOWLEDGE OF PENSION ISSUE IN SBI, AS YOU KNOW PENSIONERS ARE ONE CLASS THERE SHOULD BE NO DIVISION OF 50% AND40% IN THE SAME CLASS I.E MESSENGER TO DEPUTY MANGING DIRECTOR IS APENSIONER AND FORM ONE CLASS AND FOR PAYMENT OF PENSION THERE SHOULD BE ONE FORMULA OF 50%.HOWEVER I AM AGREE WITH THE VIEWS OF SHRI T.R.VENKATESAN DATED 15-09-2010.IN THIS CONNECTION PLEASE REFER TO MY WRITE-UP DATED 11-09-2010 AND OUR FEDRATION SHOULD COVER ALL THE POINTS MENTIONED IN WRIT PETITION NO1931 OF DELHI HIGH COURT WHICH IS PENDING WITH HIGH COURT SHRI GANPATHY GO THROUH MY WRITE -UP DATED 11-09-2010 FOR WRIT PETITION 1931 AND SUBMIT YOUR VIEWS/IDEIAS AND ARE YOU AGREE THAT ALL THE POINTS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AND SHRI VENKATAESAN SHOULD ALSO COMMENT..WITH BEST REGARDS THANKING YOU AGAIN.

    Like

    1. DEAR SHRI KESHAV RAI SAINI

      AT THE OUTSET, I ADMIRE YOUR COMPREHENSIVE KNOWLEDGE ON OUR PENSION ISSUE. I FEEL IT IS TOO RIGID TO SEEK TO QUASH RULE 23(2) & DEMAND UNIFORM PENSION TO ALL FOR THE SIMPLE REASON THE RULE IS IN FORCE SINCE LONG AND I AM NOT SURE WHETHER OUR TRADE UNION LEADERS SUBSCRIBED THEIR SIGNATURE TO THE FORMULA OF 50% &40% AT ANY POINT OF TIME IN THE PAST AGREEMENTS.HENCE THE ENTIRE HISTORY AS WELL AS ALL THE AGREEMENTS REACHED IN VARIOUS BIPARTITES,OTHER RELEVANT AGREEMENTS BETWEEN BANK AND TRADE UNIONS NEED TO BE PLACED BEFORE AN EMINENT SUPREME COURT LAWYER FOR TAKING A REALISTIC VIEW. FUNDING THE EXPENSES SHOULD NOT A PROBLEM, AS PENSIONERS ARE TOO WILLING TO CONTRIBUTE,LEAVE ALONE THE RESOURCES AT THE DISPOSAL OF THE FEDERATION. IF FEASIBLE WE CAN REQUEST THE SERVING EMPLOYEES FEDERATIONS ALSO TO JOIN US IN THIS ISSUE.
      PENSIONER IS A PENSIONER IRRESPECTIVE OF CADRE SOUNDS LOGICALLY CORRECT,BUT THE LIFESTYLE FAILS TO ACCEPT THIS LOGIC.
      T.R.VENKATESAN. 16.09.10. 8.45 A.M.

      Like

  236. All of you are beating around the bush on impossible issues of longterm duration. Please build the issues brick by brick.Even within the schemes Exit-optee medical benefits have been denied.Exit optee pensioners will not join your chorus if you brush aside that solvable problem,Further you should publish what all opine instead of opinions of a few who dominate the issues and belong to 7th bipartitie only,Moderator should publish all round problems and not only of a few souls. TR Venkatesan motivates in the direction but without contribution on all directions

    Like

  237. Shri. Venkatesan raised a pertinent question as to whether our Trade Union leaders subscribed their signatures earlier to 50%-40% formula. I wish to mention in this regard that this 50%-40% formula was imposed by the GOI in the beginning of 1999 and initially it is the brainchild of GOI only. Later on, out of compulsion, our Trade Union leaders unfortunately adopted the said child by signing an MOU during midnight in presence of FM & GOI officials, just before withdrawing the Indefinite Strike in the year 2006. However, we can argue that the said MOU is not a settlement at all under ID Act and also put forth before court that as far as SBI is concerned, pension has never been improved by means of any settlement between the serving employees/officers Federations except in 1st BP in the year 1967.

    Soon after Justice Desai awarded in the year 1962 that only 80% of Basic Pay was to be taken into account for pension calculation in the case of clerical cadre and 75% in the case of sub-staff, Principal Rules for the first time were framed during 1965 in terms of Desai Award by the Bank in consultation with RBI and with prior approval of GOI giving effect to the Rules from 01/07/1955. Then discussions were held between AISBISF & SBI on this lower pension and it was agreed by means of 1st BPS that pension is to be calculated on the basis of 100% of Basic Pay. This settlement provision on pension is valid even today as far as Award Staff is concerned. The only question is to be answered as to whether there can be any discrimination between the pensioners as they form one class and there can not be a class within a class. Hope I have clarified the position.

    As regards Kerala Court Case, I received further information that the Court went by the adminisrative instructions on pension for 8th BP retirees and directed the Bank to adopt such instructions in the case of 7th BP retirees also. The Court did not stop with this, but further directed the Bank that if there is any difficuty in carrying out the above direction, then the Bank will have to withdraw its administrative instruction on pension for 8th BP retirees and recover the excess paid to them. I do not know as to why both the Bank & GOI did not even wisper about the official amendment notified during Oct. 2009 in the GOI Gazette on pension for 8th BP retirees w.e.f. 01/05/2005. I think, perhaps, had the said GOI Notification been brought to light before the court, the GOI & Bank might have thought that it would give scope for the court to give a direction to extend the revised pension liberalised for 8th BP retirees, to the past retirees more particularly the 7th BP retirees as per the principle laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Nakara Case & Army officer case which Madras High Court cited very recently to dismiss a batch of petitions of SBI pensioners who prayed 50% uniform for all. It is also not understandable as to why the Bank did not choose to issue a circular till date on the abovementioned amendment, but paying pension to 8th BP retirees in terms of its above earlier administrative instructions. Hope it will be interesting to read the judgement of the Kerala High Court. – H. Ganapathy.

    Like

    1. The lack of administrative will on the part of the Bank and the dirty game being played by GOI in the matter of 7th BPS pensioners only reflect the shameful manner in which one set of SBI Pensioners is placed against the others. Shame on SBI and GOI for meting out such an illtreatment to the senior citizens.

      Like

    2. H ganpathi,you have given the details of Kerala High Court Judgement ,now it is the duty of the bank to implement it, The bank have seen the crual injustice done by sbi with their retiries,and now this is the time to put some heeling touch,.All the big bosses of the bank are going to retire in the near future and if they cannot think for the old retirees ,how they hope that the others will lookafter their affairs.The Chairman of the bank has already mentioned that he cannot efford his family with this pension, the govt or the senior officers feel that the court casehas given some relief to the effected persons,should implement the increase or give something to the old pensioners. thanks. RAJKUMARNEGI 2190 SEC 21C CHANDIGARH

      Like

  238. DEAR SHRI H.GANAPATHY,I AM VERY GREATFUL TO YOU FOR GIVING VERY USEFUL AND DETAILED INFORMATION OF PENSION ISSUES IN SBI REALY YOU ARE VERY NICE PERSON AND YOUR ARGUMENTS ARE BASED ON TRUTH AND ALL THE READERS SHOULD OBTAIN BENIFIT FROM THEASE CLARIFICATIONS.IN THIS CONNECTION I HAVE TO MENTION THAT I HAVE RECEIVED A LATEST COPY OF THE STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND RULES FROM PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION AT CHANDIGARH AND ON PERUSAL OF THEASE RULES IT APPEARS THAT BANK HAS ISSUED NEW RULES BY AMENDMENT RULES 2005BY NOTIFICATION IN THE OFFICIAL GAZETTE.NOW I WILL TRY TO EXPLAIN HOW RULE NO23(2) AND RULE NO 23(6) HAVE BEEN AMENDED IN RULE NO 23(2) THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPH HAS BEEN ADDED WITH–OUT DISTURBING THE EXISTING RULE—————-PROVIDED FURTHER THAT WITH EFFECT FROM 01-05-2005 THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF PENSION FOR THE MEMBERS WHO RETIRED/RETIRE DRAWING SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IN THE PAY SCALES EFFECTIVE FROM 01-11-2002 AND THEREAFTER SHALL BE COMUTED TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS IN THIS REGARD AS UNDER–(a)WHERE THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE IS UP TO RS21040/=+PQP+FPP P.M,50% OF THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS’PENSIONAble service(.b) WHERE THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE IS ABOVE RS21040/+PQP+FPP 40% OF THE AVERAGEOF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE SUBJECT TO MINIMUM OF RS10520/PLUS HALF OF PQP+HALF OF FPP WHEREVER APPLICABLE.HERE WE HAVE TO NOTE IN THESE RULES SAME LANGUAGE HAS BEEN USED AS FOR 6TH AND 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND FROM THIS IT APPEARS THAT THERE WILL BE NO REVISION OF PENSION OF 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WHICH IS A GRAVE INJUSTICE TO 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND ONLY GOD KNOWS WHAT IS THE REMEDY.SIMILARLY IN RULE NO 23(6)FROM1TO 7 DETAIL OF DEARNESS RELIUEF TO DIFFERENT TIME OF RETIREES INCLUDING DEARNESS RELIEF W.E.F.01-05-2005 HAVE BEEN MENTIONED IN OTHER WORDS D.A FORMULAS AS MENTIONED IN D.A CIRCULAR HALF YEARLY. HERE I REQUEST SHRI H.GANAPATHY TO GIVE HIS VALUABLE IDEAS AND GUIDE US SO THAT PENSIONERS CAN MOVE IN APOSITIVE DIRECTION.WITH BEST REGARDS .THANKING YOU AGAIN AND HOPING EARLY REPLY.

    Like

  239. It is more than a decade since the 7th Bipartite agreement
    was signed and it is a shame that we are getting pension
    under 6th Bipartite pay scales. All our appeals to the management and the Government have melted into thin air,
    now the only course left is to pray to God to give the mandarins
    of the Finance Ministry a good,loving and caring heart so that
    they change their minds and do justice to our right and legitimate demands.

    Like

  240. DEAR SHRI H.GANAPATHY,PLEASE REFER TO YOUR WRITE-UP DATED 20-08-2010 REGARDING NOT FINDING THE DETAIL OF NOTIFICATION NO CDO/PM/16 /SPL/1176, I AM GOING TO GIVE YOU MORE INFORMATION FOR YOUR ACTION AT YOUR END——PAPERS LAID ON THE TABLE OF RAJYA SABH ON 27-04-2010 BY SHRI NAMO NARAIN MEENA (MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE) ”A COPY(IN ENGLISH AND HINDI VERSION)OF THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF FINAANCIAL SERVICES) NOTIFICATION NO CDO/PM/16/SPL/1176THE STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND (AMENDMENT)RULES 2005PUBLISHING 2ND TO 8TH JANUARY GAZETTE UNDER SUB SECTION(4)OF SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955.KINDLY USE YOUR GOOD OFFICE AND YOU CAN KNOW THE CONTENTS OF THIS NOTIFICATION FROM CORPORATE CENTRE. WITH BEST REGARDS. THANKING YOU.

    Like

  241. Only Talk, NO ACTION.
    These are out trade union leaders, following the footsteps of our national leaders who are fleecing the country.

    UFBEU to continue demand to update bank employees pension
    PTI | 07:09 PM,Sep 19,2010

    Vadodara, Sep 19 (PTI) General Secretary of the National Confederation of Banks Employees (NCBE), S A Kadri today said United Forum of Bank Employees Unions (UFBEU) will continue to pursue its demand to update pension of the retired bank employees. NCBE, consisting nine unions representing more than 10 lakh bank employees, was one of the constituent of the UFBEU which was signatory to the ninth bipartite settlement between IBA (Indian Banks Association) and UFBU. Kadri was here to attend the triennial conference of State Bank of India Employees Union affiliated to NCBE. “The 17.5 per cent hike in salary of bank employees after signing of nine wage revision settlement between UFBU and The Indian Banks Association (IBA) a couple months ago, has disappointed thousands of retired bank employees as it has not benefited them as the Central Government has been adopting double standards on this issue,” he told PTI. “If the retired employees of Central Government can get the benefit of new pay structure after revision of wage structure of its employees, then why were the retired employees of government-owned banks denied such benefits?” Kadri asked. The pension scheme of the bank is entirely funded by the bank and unlike the pension scheme of government employees, it is not a burden on the exchequer, he said. PTI COR.

    GOD SAVE THE COUNTRY, SBI AND IT’S PENSIONERS.

    Like

  242. DEAR MY FRIENDS,IN THIS WRITE-UP I WILL TRY TO EXPLAIN PENSION SCHEME IN SBI FROM 1-07-1955 TO DATE—FROM 1-07-1955TO 1-01-1986 PENSION REMAIN STATIC I.E EARLIER THERE WAS A MAXIMUM CEILING OF RS750 /P.M& RS1000/P.M INB ASIC PENSION OF JUNIOR OFFICERS AND SENIOR OFFICERS RESPECTIVELY,WHICH WAS MUCH ABOVE THE 50% OF BASIC PAY OF TOP-MOST EXECUTIVE OF THE BANK.AS SUCH,ALL EMPLOYEES IN BANK WERE DRAWING50% OF LAST DRAWN PAY AS BASIC PENSION..WITH THE ADVENT OF BI-PARTITE SYSTEM IN BANKING INDUSTRY,THERE WAS A SUBSTANCIAL INCREASE OF BASIC PAY OF EMPLOYEES AND OFFICERS.HOWEVER ,THE PENSION CEILINGS REMAINED CONSTANT AT RS750/ AND RS 100,0/WHICH RESULTED IN EROSIN OF CONCEPT OF 50% OF PAY.MANY SENIOR OFFICERS STARTED DRAWING PENSION MUCH LESS THAN 50% OF LAST DRAWN PAY.THIS CREATED MUCH HEART- BURN .THE I.B.I PENSIONERS’ ASSOCIATION APPROACHED THE HON’ABLE SUPREME COURT FOR RELIEF,WHICH HEARING PETITIONERS GAVE A DIRECTION ON23-02-1989 TO THE BANK TO ENHANCE THE PENSION CEILING TO RS 2400/.P.M W.E.F 1-1-1986.IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE THAT WHEN THE SALARY SCALES WERE CONSTRUCTED AT 332 POINTS OF CONSUMER PRICE INDEX,THE MAXIMUM BASIC PAY OF SENIOR MOST EXCUTIVE(DY.MD) WAS AT RS4800/P.M.THE COURT HAS UPHELD THE CONCEPT OF 50% AS PENSION.AS PENSION UPTO THE LEVEL OF DY MANAGING DIRECTOR.SUBSQUENTLY.WHEN THE SALAR REVISION TOOK PLACE W.E.F 1-11-1987,BASED ON MERGER OF 600 POINTS OF C.P.I,THE SPIRIT OF HON’ABLE SUPREME COURT SHOULD HAVE BEEN KEPT IN MIND AND PENSION CEILINGS HAVE BEEN RAISED TO RS4250/P.M THIS RESULTED REDUCTION OF BASIC PENSION FROM50% TO 28.23% THIS IS FATE OF 5TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AS THEY ARE GETTING BASIC PENSION OF RS2400/PM . AND THIS SHOULD BE MAXIMUM RS4250/P.M IN THE NEXT WAGE REVISION WITH MERGER OF 1148 POINTS OF C.P.I WHICH WAS EFFECTIVE FROM 1-11-1992,THE PENSION CEILINGS WERE REVISED WITHOUT TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE ACTUAL SALARY SCALES DRAWN BY OFFICERS.THE HIGHEST BASIC PAY OF EXCUTIVE WAS AT RS 14800/ P.M.IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT SENIOR EXCUTIVE WERE DRAWING MUCH LESSER PENSION A LEGAL NOTICE WAS SERVED O N BANK/RBI/GOVERNMENT THEREFORE IN FEBRUARY1999 BROUGT THE CONCEPT OF 40% OF THE LAST DRAWN B.P AND ABOVE RS8500/ WITH MINIMUM OFRS 4250/WHICH CEILING IS CONTINUING TILL DATE.THE PENSION CEILING OF 4250/ B.P W.E.F 1-03-1999 IS APPLICABLE TO ONLY THIOSE RETIRED AFTER 31-10-1993. AS PER 7TH BIUPARTITE D.A UP BTO 1684 POINTS WAS MERGED WITH B.P AND BASIC PENSION WAS NOT REVISED RESULTING IN FURTHER EROSION IN BASIC PENSION AND THEY ARE GETTING PENSION LESS THAN29% OF THE LAST DRAWN PAY .FOR 8TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE PLEASE REFER TO MY WRITE UP DATED 17-08-2010 INTHIS BLOG .PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS .WITH BEST REGARDS THANKING YOU..

    Like

  243. MY DEAR RAMACHANDRAN NAIR AND MY OTHER FRIENDS,PLEASE NOTE THAT DIRTYGAME BEING PLAYED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA NOT ONLY WITH 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND THEY HAD (MOVED) IN APLANNED MANNER AND THERE IS DISCREMINATION IN THE CASE OF 5TH,7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES, INCASE OF 5TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ALTHOUGH THEY ARE GETTING PENSION ON THE SCALES ON WHICH THEY WERE RETIRED,HOWEVER THEY ARE GETTING PENSION @50% MAXIMUM RS 2400/INSTEAD OFMAXIMUM OFRS4250/AND IN THE CASE OF 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE GETTING PENSION ON PRE-REVISED SCALES ON THE BASIS OF 6TH AND 8TH BIPARTITE PAY SCALES HOWEVER THEY RETIRED INPAY SCALES OF 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE SCALES.WITH BEST REGARDS.

    Like

  244. mr. ramachandran nair and t.r. venkiteshan have you got the kerala high court order? if not let me know your e.mail id so that sent copy of the judgment.

    Like

  245. DEAR SHRI NEGI AND MY OTHER FRIENDS,TODAY,NO OFFICIAL HAS THE COURTSY TO ATTEND TO”RETIRED PERSONNEL”IRRESPECTIVE OF THEIR STATUS,OFTEN THEY ARE TREATED AS ALIEN BECAUSE THEY DONOT WIELD THAT AUTORITY WHICH THEY HAD DURING SERVICE..EVERYONE HAS TO RETIRE ONE DAY.WE MUST HAVE DUE RESPECT FOR THE RETIRED PERSONNEL AND LEAD OUR JUNIORS BY EXAMPLE.SO FAR OUR PENSION ISSUES ARE CONCERNED , ALL OF YOU ARE AWARE THAT BANK HAS NO POWERS TO REVISE THE PENSION AND ALL THE POWERS ARE VESTED WITH GOVERNMENT.AS YOU KNOW GOVERNMENT IS ADAMANT TO REVISE THE PENSION OF THE AGGRIEVED PENSIONERS.YOU CAN OBSERVE FROM THE JUDGEMENT OF MADRAS HIGH COURT WHICH IS NOT IMPLEMENTED FOR THE LAST TWO YEARS. NOW POSITION OF REVISION OF PENSION HAS BEEN WORSONED BY AMENDING PENSION RULES W.E.F 01-05-2005 ,NOW 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE ALSO AFFACTED THEY ARE ALSO GETTING PENSION ON THE BASIS OF 8TH BIPARTITE PAY SCALES. WITH BEST REGARDS.

    Like

    1. MUCH HAS BEEN SAID BY MANY EMINENT & KNOWLEDGEALE PENSIONERS. NOW FEDERATIION IS EXPECTED TO KNOCK AT THE DOORS OF SUPREME COURT. GOI HAD CLOSED ALL DOORS & MAY EVEN TRY TO QUASH OUR PETITION TO SUPREME COURT. IT HAS THE POWER TO SO.
      AS SERVING OFFICERS OF SBI ARE ALSO AFFECTED NOW, IT IS THE RIGHT TIME TO CALL FOR AN INDEFINITE STRIKE TO SEEK 50/40% UNIFORMLY TO ALL PENSIONERS BASED ON THEIR LAST DRAWN PAY. IT IS ALL THE IMPORTANT THAT THE STRIKE IS NOT WITHDRAWN HALF THE WAY SIMPLY BECAUSE GOI AGREES TO CONSIDER THE CASE FOR 9TH BIPARTITE. THIS IS HOW THE GOI CHEATED US LAST TIME WHEN WE WENT ON INDEFINITE STRIKE.
      STRIKE STRIKE STRIKE TILL THE END
      WILL OUR TRADE UNION LEADERS GIVE A CALL? LET US SEE.
      T.R.VENKATESAN.26.09.10. 7A.M.

      Like

    2. MR KESHAV RAI SAINI I DO AGREE WITH YOUR WRITEUPS DATED 17.9, 18.9, 21.* AND 25.9.2010 ANDREQUEST THE EFFECTED PERSONS TO MOUNT PRESSURE ON THE OFFICERS FEDERATION TO GO ON INDEFINATE STRIKE AS THEY HAVE NOW EFFECTED BY THE *9TH BIPARTITE .iNINDIA THERE IS A FOOLS GOVT, THEY CONSIDER THE CWGAMES ONLY WHERE THOUSANDS OF CRORES HAVE BEEN SPENT FOR 10 DAYS GAMES BUT GOVT ARE NOT GETTING THE TIME TO THINK ABOUT THE MOST RESPECTABLE BANK OFFICERS PENSION , IF THE GOVT WOULD HAVE TOLD THEM THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO GIVE YOU THE PROPER PENSION,AND IF YOU CAN YOU SHOULD EARN THE MONEY BY ANY MEANS AS THE GOVT OFFICIALS DO . PLEASE DO THE JUSTICE RAJ KUMAR NEGI

      Like

  246. In this site you tal;k all nitty-gritty theoreticlly.Even if you win the case SBI and Govt have veto power in the clauses of the SBI act and RBI supervision and advisory fuction can thwart all your efforts.
    Instead of going after many pensioner issues which the Govt will consider like medical benefits you are trying to beat around the bush.While in service the snme voices were silent.Who is the moderator?I hear from my friends pensioner that you encourage the mutual admiration societies of Venkatesan Negi,Saini etc

    Like

  247. DEAR SHRI T.R .VENKATESAN AND SHRI R.K.NEGI,AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT VARIOUS STEPS WERE TAKEN BY THE PENSIONERS’FEDERATION IN THE MATTER OF PENSION REVISION.EFFORTS MADE THROUGH SHRI E.K THAKUR,EX MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT WHO SUBMITTED A MEMORANDUM SIGNED BY 104M.PS TO THE FIANANCE MINISTER AND PRIME MINISTER.STAGE A DHARNA AT JANTER MANTRA NEW DELHI ON 29-09-2008 AND SUBMITTED A MEMORANDUM TO BANKING DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF FINANCE AT NEW DELHI.EFFORTS MADE THROUGH V,Y PRABHUNE,MEMBER FROM KARAD(DISTT SATARA)TOMEET SHRI PRITHVIRAJ CHAVAN,MINISTER OF STATE AT PM’S OFFICE FOR PENSIONERS GRIEVENCES.EFFORTS MADE THROUH SHRI SHANTARAM NAIK,M.P RAJYA SABHA AND SUBMITTED A MEMORANDUM TO SHRI PRANAD MUKHER JEE FIANANCE MINISTER.ALL THEASE EFFORTS DID NOT YIELD ANY FRUITS,SO FAR.BESIDES THISVARIOUS MEETINGS WITH THE MANAGEMENT AND FIANANCE OFFICIALS IN THE PAST TO SOLVE THE OUTSTANDING PROBLEMS.NOW FEDERATION HAS TAKEN A DECISIONAFTER CONSULTING VARIOUS EMINENT LAWERS,TO GO IN THE SUPREME COURTWHICH REQUIRE HEAVYEXPENDITURE AND I FULLY AGREE WITH THE VIEWS OF SHRI VENKATSAN BECAUSE WRIT PETITION BY SUPREME COURT MAY OR MAY NOT BE ADMITTED FOR ONE RESON OR OTHER.MOREOVER IT IS A VERY LENGTHY PROCEDURE AS MOST OF THE PENSIONERS ARE ROUND ABOUT 70 YEARS OR MORE EXCEPT V.R.S RETIREES WHO ARE ALSO ABOVE 65 YEARS OLD.I AM OF THE VIEW THAT WE SHOULD CONVINCE THE GOVERNMENT TO SORT OUT OUR PENSION ISSUES.WE SHOULD ALSO REQUEST THE DELHI HIGH COURT FOR EXPPEDITIOUS HEARING OF THE WRIT IN VIEW OF ADVANCING AGE OF SEVEN PETITIONERS OUT OF WHICH 4 HAVE ALREADY DIED.AS YOU KNOW AT PRESENT SERVING FEDRATIONS ARE MORE SERIOUS IN THE DISBURSEMENT OF SBI BALANCING FIGURE RATHER THAN IMPROVEMENT IN PENSION.IT IS VERY DIFFICULT THAT BOTH SERVING FEDERATIONS WILL GO ON SUPERANNUATION IMPROVEMENT PARTICULARLY FOR 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES REVISION OF PENSION . WITH BEST REGARDS .THANKING YOU

    Like

  248. The last resolt of all these discussions and writeups is to approach some T.V.channels and should have live discussion on the pension issue. there are many offices of T.V. news in NOIDA and Delhi pensioners can approach them for the discussion on T.V. I haver seen many important issues are being discussed by Ms Barkha Datt, Mr.Pranab Rai and some times by India T.v Channel. THe T.v Channel People are also human beings and I hope they will think sympathatically and will give time to relay the discussion on the T.V. Govt I deef and Dumb , All our efforts as mentioned by Mr Keshav Rai Saini in his writeup dated26.09.2010 that 104 M.Ps have sighned on the memorandum which was submitted to the Finance minister Mr Pronab Mukarjee, as foras I know Financeminister is a Gentleman and if some good approach is made to him ,he will deffinatelylook into it.and will instruct the I>B>A to incrtease the pension of the old retirees. thanks. RAJKUMARNEGI

    Like

  249. DEAR SHRI NEGI, I FULLY AGREE WITH YOUR VIEWS ,BUT YOU WILL SURPRISE TO NOTE THAT I HAVE USED ALL THE METHODS FOR REVISION OF PENSION AS YOU ARE AWARE I HAVE ALREADY GOT PUBLISHED NEWS ITEM IN A PROMINENT NEWSPAPER OF THE AREA BEFORE TWO DAYS EARLY OF GENRAL ELECTION IN MAY 2009, BUT OF NO USE.I HAVE ALSO TAKEN UP THE MATTER WITH TWO FIANANCE MINISTERS AND PRIME MINISTER BUT IN VAIN.THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE EXISTING POLICY ON BANK PENSION.THE FEDERATION OF SBI PENSIONERS HAS BEEN RUNNING FROM PILLAR TO POST FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS FOR JUSTICE.ONE OF THE OLD TRADITIONS FOR WHICH INDIA HAS BEEN KNOWN THE WORLD OVER IS RELATED TO THE VALUE WE ATTACH TO THE AGED AND OLD,THOSE WHO HAVE GIVEN NEW GENERATIONS SO MUCH TO BUILD ON AND ENJOY IN LIFE.THE CONCEPT OF PENSION FOR EMPLOYEES AFTER THEIR RETIREMENT FROM ACTIVE SERVICE CAN BE VIEWED AS A DERIVATIVE OF THIS TRADITION.AS APTHY OBSERVED BY THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA WAY BACK IN1982”PENSION IS NEITHER A BOUNTY NOR AMATTER OF GRACE DEPENDING UPON THE SWEET WILL OF THE EMPLOYER,NOR AN EX GRATIA PAYMENT.IT IS A PAYMENTFOR THE PAST SERVICE RENDERED.IT IS A SOCIAL WELFARE MEASURE RENDERING SOCIO ECONOMIC JUSTICE TO THOSE WHO IN THE HEY-DAYOF THEIR LIFE CEASELESSLY TOILED FOR THE EMPLOYER ON AN ASSURANCE THAT THEIR OLD AGE THEY WOULD NOT BE LEFT IN LURCH.”BUT WHAT ABOUT THE POLICY OF THE GOVERNMENT IN REGARD TO PENSIONERS OF THE STATE BANK OF INDIA? IT HARDLY REFLECT AN ENLIGHTENED DIFINATION OF PENSION SCHEME.THERE IS NO SOCIO-ECONOMIC JUSTICE BUT HUMILIATION ALL THE WAY FOR THOSE WHO ONCE CEASELESSLY TOILED AND GAVE THEIR BEST TO THE SYSTEM.SHRI NEGI YOU ARE REQUESTED TO USE YOUR GOOD OFFICE TO COVINCE YOUR ASSOCIATION TO FOLLOW YOUR SUGGESTION .HOWEVER I AM OF THE VIEW THAT EVEN OUR SO CALLED INDEPENDENT AND FAIR FOURTH ESTATE CARES A FIG.THE MEDIA HAVE THEIR OWN SOCIAL OBLIGATIONS TO VOICE A HUMANE AGENDA.BUT DID WE HAVE SO FAR ANY NEWS ITEM ON THE PENSIONERS’ CASE IN ANY OF OUR PRESS AND T.V CHANNELS|

    Like

  250. II GIVE BELOW THE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT GIVEN BY THE KER IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

    WP(C).No. 27929 of 2003(Y)

    1. T.R. VIJAYAN, 50/1701, THAREPARMBIL,
    … Petitioner
    2. GEORGE MATHEW, MULLAMKUZHIYIL HOUSE,
    3. AMBIKA GOPALAKRISHNAN, ‘ARATHI’,
    4. ALICE SEBASTIAN, KONTHURUTHY HOUSE,
    5. A.K. SOMAN, VAZHAKOTTU PARAMBU,
    6. V.N.KESAVAN NAIR, ‘DHANYA’,
    7. R. MADHUSUDANAN NAIR, FLAT NO.2/3,
    8. V.G.JOSEPH, VALIARUMPETH, V.T.NADA.P.0.
    9. O.K.VIJAYAN, ‘GITANJALI’, KUNNUMPURAM,
    10. XAVIER.M.R., MANTHRA HOUSE,
    11. P.M.GOPALAKRISHNA PANICKER,
    12. K.C.SOMANATHAN, ‘KRISHNARPANAM’,EXCELL P
    13. V.N.SHANMUKHAN, 35/585 A,
    14. K.A. JOSEPH, ‘ZION’, 35/527, KEERTHI
    15. T.V.PRABHAKARAN, 8/1596 HARISREE,
    16. K.V.KURIAN, KANJIRATHINKAL HOUSE,
    17. K.PYTHAMBARA, 35/2181, SINDHU COTTAGE,
    18. P.SIVADASAN, 37/619, KOIPURAM,
    19. A.K. SIVAPRAKASAN NAIR, ‘ANUGRAH’,
    20. JOHN.T.J., MANIKATH HOUSE,

    Vs

    1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY
    … Respondent

    2. THE EXECUTIVE TRUSTEE,

    3. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS

    4. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA,

    For Petitioner :SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)

    For Respondent :SRI.D.SOMASUNDARAM, ADDL.CGSC

    The Hon’ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

    Dated :14/09/2010

    O R D E R
    S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
    ==================
    W.P.(C).No. 27929 of 2003
    ==================
    Dated this the 14th day of September, 2010
    J U D G M E N T

    A section of retired employees of the State Bank of India has

    filed this writ petition, with a complaint that they are being

    discriminated in the matter of payment of pension by restricting

    payment of revised pension only to some of the retired employees on

    the basis of dates of retirement. The facts are a little complex. In view

    of the fact that the petitioners now restrict their prayers, for the

    present, for the same benefit as in Ext.P4 order issued by the Bank in

    favour of some other retired employees, I am not going into the details

    of the facts, on the basis of which, other contentions are raised.

    Presently, the petitioners would contend that they are also entitled to

    the benefits given in Ext.P4 to the persons, who have retired on or

    after 1.11.2002. According to the petitioners, by Ext.P4, pending

    amendment to the State Bank of India Employees’ Pension Fund Rules,

    the employees who have retired on or after 1.11.2002, have been

    given enhanced pension benefits, as provided in Ext.P4, subject to

    amendment of Rule 23 of the State Bank of India Employees’ Pension

    Fund Rules. According to the petitioners, there is no logic in restricting

    such enhanced benefit only to persons who have retired on or after

    1.11.2002 and the same should be uniformly made applicable to all

    retired employees of the State Bank of India, without reference to any

    w.p.c.27929/03 2

    cut of date based on the date of retirement.

    2. The answer of the respondents to the same is that the

    pension in the State Bank of India to the employees of the State Bank

    of India can be paid only in accordance with the State Bank of India

    Employees’ Pension Fund Rules framed under the State Bank of India

    Act. They would, therefore, contend that the petitioners cannot now

    claim payment of pension more than what is provided for under Rule

    23 of the State Bank of India Employees’ Pension Fund Rules unless

    the Rules are appropriately amended.

    3. After considering the rival contentions on this question, I

    am prima facie of opinion that the employees of the State Bank of

    India should be paid pension uniformly, that too, in accordance with

    Rule 23(1) of the State of Bank of India Employees’ Pension Fund

    Rules as it exists presently. But if pending finalisation of the

    amendment to the rules, the State Bank of India decides to give an ad

    hoc payment of increased pension, then that has to be made

    applicable to all retired employees of the State Bank of India

    irrespective of any cut of date on the basis of the date of retirement.

    That is a matter which has to be decided by the State Bank of India in

    its discretion. But if they decide to implement Ext.P4, that shall be

    uniformly implemented without reference to any cut of date on the

    basis of the date of retirement, which, in other words, would mean

    w.p.c.27929/03 3

    that benefit of Ext.P4 should be extended to all retired employees

    including persons like the petitioners also. But if the State Bank of

    India decides that unless and until the Rules are formally amended by

    a process known to law, enhanced pension cannot be given to the

    employees of the State Bank of India, then that shall also be uniformly

    applied to all retired employees of the State Bank of India and if any

    amount has been paid pursuant to Ext.P4 to any employees of the

    State Bank of India, that shall be promptly recovered. The State Bank

    of India shall take a decision on the basis of the above directions, as

    expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four months from the

    date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

    4. The petitioners have raised other questions also regarding

    the validity of fixing different percentage of salary as pension to

    different employees based on the maximum salary payable, which are

    left open to the agitated by the petitioners appropriately, if necessary,

    in future. I make it clear that I have not considered the questions on

    merit in view of the above directions, which would presently satisfy the

    petitioners.

    The writ petition is disposed of as above.

    Sd/-
    sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
    ///True copy///

    P.A. to Judge

    w.p.c.27929/03 4

    ALA HIGH COURT FOR IFORMATION TO ALL

    Like

  251. MR.KESAV RAI SAINIS’ WRITEUP IN THIS LOG SPEAK VOLUMES OF HIS KNOWLEDGE &EFFORTS IN SOLVING THE PENSION ISSUE IN SBI.
    HE HAS ALSO GIVEN A VIVID PICTURE OF EFFORTS TAKEN BY FEDERATION IN THIS REGARD. TO CAP IT ALL HE THINKS POSITIVE & BELIEVES JUSTICE SHALL BE DELIVERED SOON. HATS OFF SAINI
    BUT THEN WHO IS THE STUMBLING BLOCK? TO MY MIND IT IS OUR BELOVED EX FINANCE MINISTER MR.CHIDAMBARAM. HE IS THE ONE WHO SAID BANKERS ARE LIVING IN AN OASIS OF AN ISLAND OF POVERTY. HE IS BORN RICH & ENJOYS POWER, YET GETS 500% INCREASE IN EMOLUMENTS. HE EVEN ONCE SCOLDED OUR EX CHAIRMAN
    FOR SUPPORTING OUR CASE. TODAY OUR CHAIRMAN & RBI CHIEF SPEAK OF POST RETIREMENT PROBLEMS FACING THEM. I DONT KNOW WHEN GOD WILL OPEN THE EYES OF ALL CONCERNED IN HELPING THE SBI PENSIONERS. HOPE HOPE AND TRY TO LIVE ON HOPES.THAT WILL INCREASE YOUR LONGEVITY & GIVE THE COURAGE TO FACE PROBLEMS
    T.R.VENKATESAN. 28.09.10 9.15 P.M.

    Like

  252. DEAR T.R.VEN KATESAN , WE ARE THANKFUL TO SHRI PMGKPANICKR FOR GIVING US FIRST HAND INFORMATION OF KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT, HOPE SUSTAINS LIFE AND HOPE NEVER DIES ,WE SHOULD TRUST IN GOD AND EVERY THING BE ALRIGHT IN DUE COURSE.HOWEVER IN THIS WRITE UP I WILL TRY TO EXPLAIN HOW 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ARE DECEIVED BY GOVERNMENT/BANK AND SERVING FEDERATIONS FOR THE LAST FOUR AND HALF YEARS,I WILL START FROM THE PERIOD OF INDEFINITE STRIKE IN APRIL 2006 AFTER THE SIGNING A MEMORANDUM ON9-06-2006 SHRI SHANTA RAJU THEN GENRAL SECRETARY ISSUED ACIRCULAR NO 57 DATED 16-04-2006 IN WHICH HE SAID THAt settlement would result in enhancement of the monthly fiancial relief approximately ranging from RS 3000/ to RS 7000/ FOR THOSE WHO HAVE RETIRED ON OR AFTER 1-11-2002 AND RS 1400/TO RS 1550/ FOR THOSE WHO HAVE RETIRED ON OR AFTER 1-4-1998 TO 31-10-2002. ACCORDINGLY BANK HAS RECOMMENDED TO GOVERNMENT VIDE LETTER NOCDO/PM/16/SPL /29 DATED 19TH APRIL 2006FOR REVISION OF CEILING OF PAY FOR DETRIMINATION OF PENSION FOR 8TH AND 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ,THERE ARE THREE PARAGRAPH IN THIS LETTER ONE FOR REVISION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ,ONE FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES AND ONE FOR AMENDMENTS OF SBI PENSION FUND RULES.GOVERNMENT OF INDIA HAD CLEARED THE REVISION OF PENSION FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY AND FOR REVISION OF PENSION FOR 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES GOVT HAD CONSTITUTE A COMMITTE WHICH GIVE ITS REPORT ON 21-09-2007 ON THE PLEA OF BOTH FEDRATIONS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE WHICH INCLUDED TWO TOP OFFICIALS FROM GOVT,INSISTING 50% OF LAST DRAWN PAY AS BASIC PENSION,THE COMMITTEE CLARIFIED THAT THIS MATTER HAS ALREADY BEEN NEGOTIATED AND RESOLVED IN APRIL 2006(THE PERIOD WHEN THE M.O.U WAS SIGNED TO END THE INDEFINITE STRIKE) SETTLEMENT AND MADE IT CLEAR THAT THE SAME CANNOT BE REOPENED BUT AGREED TO RECOMMEND THE ISSUE ON 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES PENSION FOR GOVERNMENT OF INDIA’S CONSIDERATION AS DE-NOVO.. FROM THIS YOU CAN OBSERVE HOW GOVERNMENT CHEATED THE 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES BECAUSE IN THE ORIGINAL MOU THERE WAS REFERENCE OF 7TH BIPARTITE AND SHRI SHANTA RAJU THEN GENRAL SECRETARY HAS MENTIONED IN HIS CIRCULAR NO 57 ACCORDINGLY BANK HAS RECOMMENDED IN HIS LETTER DATED 19-04-2006 BUT GOVT CLEARED THE 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES PROPOSAL THUS GOVT HAS CHEATED US. .WITH BEST REGARDS..

    Like

  253. DEAR SHRI VENKATESAN, YESTER DAY I COVERED PENSION DEVELOPMENT FOR THE YEARS 2006 AND 2007 NOW I WILL COVER THE PENSION DEVELOPMENT FOR THE YEARS 2008 AND 2009. AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT WHEN THERE WAS NO REVISION OF PENSION INTHE YEAR 2007 BOTH THE SERVING FEDERATIONS SERVE A STRIKE NOTICE ON BANK ONE DAY STRIKE IN JANUARY TWO DAYS STRIKE IN FEBUARY AND INDEFINITE STRIKE IN LAST WEEK OF MARCH 2008 IN STRIKE NOTICE PENSION ISSUE OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES BESIDES OTHER ISSUES(DEMANDS) ONE DAY STRIKE IN JANUARY TOOK PLACE BUT NOTHING ACHIEVED BY THE UNIONS THEN TIME FOR TWO DAYS STRIKE IN FEFRUARY CAME BUT ON 25-02-2008 BANK NEGOTIATED WITH BOTH THE UNIONS AND A MOU WAS SIGNED THAT WITH A PROMISE FROM BANK THAT PENSION ISSUE OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES BE GET CLEARED FOROM THE GOVERNMENT BY 31-05-2008.THUS SRIKE IN FEBUARY WAS DEFFERRED AND THERE WAS NO STRIKE IN FEBUARY 2008 OR MARCH 2008 .ACCORDINGLY BANK REFERREDTHE PENSION PROPOSALS(?)TO GOVT ON 25-02-2008 FOR CONSIDERATION AND BOTH THEUNIONS WERE SATISFIED AND THEY HOPE PENSION ISSUES WILL BE SOLVED BY 31-05-2008 .HOWEVER WHEN THE PENSION PROPOSALS WERE NOT CLEARED BY JUNE 2008 THEY REMINDED THE BANKAND BANK HAD SENT A REMINDER TO GOVT BUT NO REPLY FROM GOVT IN OCTOBER 2008 SUPERVISING STAFF HAD AGAIN SERVE A S TRIKE NOTICE ON BANK FOR CONSIDERATION OF PENSION ISSUES AND ON 16-10-2008 BANK AGAIN SENT THE PENSION PROPOSALTO GOVT FOR CONSIDERATION BUT SINCE THESE WERE BEREFIT PLAUSIBLE REASONS FOR IMPROVMENT IN THE EXTANT PENSION REGULATIONS,THESE WERE DULY CONSIDERED BY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND WERE REJECTED.SBI IS NOT WITHIN ITS COMPETENCE TO GRANTS ITS PENSION BENEFITS GOES AGAINST THE GRANTS OF SETTLEMENTS AND THAT TOO WITH THE APPROVAL OF GOVT.WITH BEST REGARDS.

    Like

  254. DEAR SHRI VENKATESAN AND MY OTHER FRIENDS,IN CONTINUATION OF MY WRITE UP DATED THE 29TH AND 30TH SEPTEMBER 2010 I HAVE TO ADVISE THAT A NUMBER OF PENSIONERS HAVE,IN FACT, MOVED THE HIGH COURTS IN SEVERAL STATES FOR REVISION OF THEIR PENSION.IN ONE JUDGEMENT DATED 16-10-2008,THE MADRAS HIGH COURT DIRECTED THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TO APPROVE THE DRAFT AMENDMENTS FOR REFIXING PENSION OF THOSE AFFACTED (7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES)WITHIN THREE MONTHS.IN ONE MORE RECENT JUDGEMENT ,KERALA HIGH COURT DIRECTED THE BANK TO REVISE THE PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES WITHIN FOUR MONTHS.DESPITE LAPSE OF TWO YEARS IN CASE OF MADRAS HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT,COURT ORDER HAS NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED. IN THE YEAR 2009 SERVING FEDERATIONS HAD DO NOTHING FOR THE REVISION OF PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES .HOWEVER A COORDINATION MEETING WAS CALLED IN OCTOBER 2009 WHERE THE MAIN AGENDA WAS IMPROVEMENT OF SUPERANNUATION BENEFITS AND COVERED ALL THE PENSION ISSUES. WHERE IT WAS DECIDED THAT ALL THREE FEDERATIONS(SUPERVISIN STAFF,AWARD STAFF AND PENSIONERS FEDERATION IE THREE FEDERATIONS) THAT PENSION ISSUES WILL BE SOLVED WITH 9TH BIPARTITE NOGOIATION , BUT AS YOU ARE AWARE NOTHING HAS BEEN DONE FOR THE PENSIONERS IN 9TH BIPARTITE AGREEMENTS .NOW FEDERATION OF PENSIONERS HAS REQUESTED THE SERVING FEDERATIONS TO CALL A COORDINATION COMMITTEE MEETING TO DISCUSS THE PENSION ISSUES BUT SERVING FEDRATIONS ARE NOT READY FOR THAT . IN OTHER WORDS THEY ARE NOT COOPERATING WITH PENSIONERS FEDERATION. HERE I HAVE TO MENTION THAT BANK HAS AMENDED THE PENSION RULES WEF FROM 1-05-2005 IN THE YEAR 2010 .IN NUTSHELL GOVERNMENT IS ADAMANT TO REVISE THE PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ,SERVING FEDERATIONS ARE NOT HELPING THE OLD PENSIONERS AND BANK HAS AMENDED THE PENSION RULES WHICH DOES NOT HELP THE 7TH AND 9TH BIPARTITE RETIREES . THIS IS THE POSITION FROM APRIL 2006 TO 30-09-2010. WITH BEST REGARDS .THANKING YOU.

    Like

  255. DEAR FRIENDS,PLEASE GO THROUGH MY WRITE -UPS DATED 29 ,30TH SEPTEMBER AND 1ST OCTOBER 2010, IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED TWO HAPPENGS/EVENTS HAVE BEEN TOOK PLACE DURING 2006 TO 2010 THAT IS TWO JUDGEMENTS IN FAVOUR OF PENSIONERS ,ONE BY MADRAS HIGH COURT AND OTHER BY KERALA HIGH COURT .IN THIS WRITE UP I AM WRITING ABOUT MADRAS HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT AND TOMORROW I WILL WRITE ON KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT.I AM WRITING HEREUNDER FOR THE INFORMATION OF MY FRIENDS EXTRACTS FROM THE JUDGEMENT DATED 16-10-2008——— FOUR WRIT PETITIONS FILED BY 157 PENSIONERS OF STATE BANK OF INDIA TO PAY PENSION AND COMUTATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWFUL DEFINATION OF PENSION AS LAID DOWN BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.BANK IN ITS COUNTER SAID BEFORE MADRAS HIGH COURT,IN SO FAR AS EMPLOYEES,WHO RETIRED AFTER1-11-1997(IN THE CASE OF AWARD STAFF) 1-04-1998(IN THE CASE OF OFFICERS)(7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES) THE SBI HAS ADDRESSED TO RESERVE BANK OF INDIA(RBI) AND CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TO GRANT NECESSARY APPROVAL TO INCORPORATE THE REVISED SCALE OF PAY BROUGHT IN 1997-1998 FOR THE EMPLOYEES, WHO RETIRED AFTER THE SAID DATE AND THE PROPOSAL IS PENDING WITH THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT TO PAY PENSION ACCORDINGLY.IN THE RESULT THEASE WRIT PETITIONS ARE DISPOSED OF WITH THE FOLLOWING DIRECTIONS TO BANK/GOVERNMENT TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL OF SBI LETTER NOCDO/PM/16/SPL/29 DATED `19-04-2006 AND APPROVE THE DRAFT FOR AMENDMENT FOR REFIXING OF PENSION FOR RETIREES BETWEEN1-11-1997(IN THE CASE OF AWARD STAFF)01-04-1998(IN THE CASE OF OFFICERS) AND 01-11-2002 WITHIN A PERIOD OF THREE MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF ACOPY OF THIS ORDER.HOWEVER THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA HAS FILED AN APPEAL WITH THE DIVISION BENCH OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT.THE GOVERNMENT WAS NOT ACTING ON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE SINGLE JUDGE.GOVT’S APPEAL HAS BEEN NUMBERD AND IS LIKELY TO BE HEARD.HERE I HAVE TO MENTION THAT GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IN ITS COUNTER DATED 15-02-2010 BEFORE MADRAS HIGH COURT SAYS(1) ON AN ISSUARANCE BY THE GROUP(COMMITTEE) REFERRED THE PROPOSALS TO GOVT OF INDIA FOR CONSIDERATION BUT THERE WERE BEREFT OF THE PLAUSBLE RESONS FOR IMPROVEMENT IN THE EXTANT PENSION REGULATIONS,THEASE WERE DULY CONSIDERED BY GOVT OF INDIA AND WERE REJECTED.(2)PENSION NEEDS TO BE MANAGED WITHIN THE CORPUS OF PENSION FUND.(3) IT IS MISPLACED NOTION THAT THE MATTER FOR REVISION OF PENSION IS UNDER CONSIDERATION OF GOVT OF INDIA AND ITS APPROVAL IS NOT YET RECEIVED.AS A MATTER OF FACT,THE PENSION OF RETIREES FROM 1-11-1997/1-04-1998 TO 31-10-2002 AND 1-11-2002 TO 30-04-2005 WERE REGULATED IN TERMS OF THE 7TH AND 8TH BIPARTITES AND THERE WAS HARDLY ANY POINT OF CONSIDERATION.THIS CLEARLY SHOWS THAT OUR PENSION ISSUES REMAIN UNRESOLVED DUE TO THE ADAMANT STAND BEING ADOPTED BY THE GOVT. AT ANY COST GOVERNMENT DO NOT WANT TO REVISE THE PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.WITH BEST REGARDS . GOVT APPEAL IN MADRAS HIGH COURT IS STILL PENDING IN MADRAS HIGH COURT.

    Like

  256. MY DEAR FRIENDS,FOR RECENT JUDGEMENT DATED 14-9-2010 BY KERALA HIGH COURT IN FAVOUR OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES KINDLY GO THROUGH THE WRITE- UP DATED 28-09-2010 BY MY FRIEND SHRI PMGKPANICKR WHERE BANK TAKE THE STAND IS THAT THE PENSION IN STATE BANK INDIA TO THE EMPLOYEES OF STATE BANK OF INDIA CAN BE PAID ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND RULES FRAMED UNDER THE STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955.THEY WOULD THEREFORE CONTEND THAT THE PETIONERS CANNOT NOW CLAIM PAYMENT OF PENSION MORE THAN WHAT IS PROVIDED FOR UNDER RULE 23 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND RULES UNLESS THE RULES ARE APPROPRIATELY AMENDED. AFTER COSIDERING THE BANK CONTENTIONS HON’ABLE JUDGE IS OF THE OPINION THAT THE EMPLOYEES OF STATE BANK OF INDIA SHOULD BE PAID PENSION UNIFORMALY,THAT TOO,IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE23(1)OF SBI EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES AS EXISTS PRESENTLY AND IN CASE SBI FEEL ANY DIFFICULTY TO PAY ENHANCED PENSION TO ALL PENSIONERS INCLUDING ALL
    PETITIONERS AND CANNOT MAKE THE UNIFORMITY BANK SHOULD RECOVER THE ENHANCED PENSION FROM 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ALSO . COURT DIRECTED THE BANK TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTIONS WITHIN FOUR MONTHS OF THE RECEIPT OF THIS JUDGEMENT.

    Like

  257. IN THIS WRITE- UP I AM COMMENTING ON THE TWO JUDGEMENTS IE MADRAS HIGH COURT AND KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT IN THE CASE OF MADRAS HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT BANK TAKE THE STAND THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY RECOMMENDED TO GOVT OF INDIA IN PAYING PENSION ON THE BASIS OF REVISED PAY SCALES EFFECTIVE FROM 1997/1998 AND GOVT APPROVAL IS AWAITED.HERE YOU WILL OBSERVE THIS RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE BEEN SENT ON 19-04-2006 ALONGWITH RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISION OF PENSION OF 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.FURTHER YOU WILL OBSRVE DURING THE HEARING OF MADRAS HIGH COURT BANK HAS AGAIN SENT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REVISION OF PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ON 25-02-2008AND 16-10-2008.HOWEVER NOW GOVT HAD APPEALED IN MADRAS HIGH COURT AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND GOVT IN ITS COUNTER ON 15-02-2010 IS NOT AGREEING TO HONOUR THE VERDICT OFMADRAS HIGH COURT AND SAYS THERE IS NO PROPOSAL PENDING WITH GOVT AS THEY HAVE REJECTED THE PROPOSAL OF BANK.THUS GOVT IS ADAMANT FOR RESOLVING THE PENSION ISSUE OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES .NOW I WILL WRITE ON KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT,HERE BANK TAKE THE STAND IS THAT PENSION INSTATE BABK OF INDIA TO THE EMPLOYEES OF STATE BANK OF INDIA CAN BE PAID ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES FRAMED UNDER THE STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955.THEY WOULD ,THEREFORE CONTEND THAT THE PETITIONERS CANNOT NOW CLAIM PAYMENT OF PENSION MORE THAN WHAT IS PROVIDED FOR UNDER RULE 23 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES UNLESS RULES ARE APPROPRIATELY AMENDED. HERE I HAVE TO COMMENT THAT BANK HAS ALSO JOINED WITH THE GOVT AND BANK HAS OBTAINED THE APPROVAL FROM GOVT IN 2009/2010 FOR 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY .THUS THERE IS NO PROPER AMENDMENTS IN THE PENSION RULES W.E.F 1-05-2005. BOTH THE GOVT AND BANK ARE NOT WATCHING THE INTEREST OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES FOR THE PRESENT .HERE I AM OF THE VIEW THAT KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT ON THE GROUND THAT CUT-OFF DATE IE 1-11-2002 WAS DISCRIMINATORY AND ARBITRARY AS THE BANK/GOVT HAD TAKEN DECISION IN 2006 TO GRANT PENSION (REVISED) TO 8TH BIBARTITE RETIREES.,BUT THE DELAY OF ABOUT MORE THAN FIVE YEARS IS NOT FRAMING THE RELEVANT RULES WAS NOT ON THE PART OF EMPLOYEES. PLEASE RESPOND TO MY BLOGS AS I AM NOT GETTING ANY REPLY FOR THE LAST ONE WEEK.WITH BEST REGARDS.KINDLY DO REPLY.

    Like

  258. IN THIS BLOG I WILL EXPLAIN HOW OUR PENSION IS PROTECTED LEGALLY AT THE RATE OF 50% OF SALARY OF RETIRED EMPLOYEES AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT.OUR PENSION FUND REGULATIONS ARE WELL PROTECTED LEGALLY AS UNDER————(1)STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955.———————–(2) THE HON’ABLE SUPREME COURT BY ITS JUDGEMENT DATED 23-02-1989,IN THE CASE OF IMPERIAL BANK OF INDIA PENSIONERS’ ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS V/S STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS.—————————(3)CONSTITUTION OF INDIA-ARTICLE-14.——————-(1)-AT THE TIME OF FORMATION OF STATE BANK OF INDIA IN JULY 1955,AS PER ACT 1955 ANY PERSON WHO AN APPOINTED DAY,IS ENTITITLED OR IN RECEIPT OF A PENSION OR OTHER SUPERANNUATIONOR COMPASSIONATE ALLOWANCE OR BENEFIT FROM IMPERIAL BANK OF INDIA OR ANY PROVIDENT,PENSION OR OTHER FUND OR ANY AUTHORITY ADMINISTERING SUCH FUND THE SAME PENSION ,ALLOWANCE OR BENEFIT SO LONG AS HE OBSERVES THE CONDITIONS ON WHICH PENSION,ALLOWANCE OR BENEFIT WAS GRANTED.IN CASE OF SBI EMPLOYEES PENSION WAS CALCULATED AT THE RATE OF ONE-SIXTIETH PART FOR EVERY YEAR’S SERVICE OF AVERAGE MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DURING THE LAST 36 MONTHS AS THE FIXATION OF MAXIMUM PENSION IS CONCERNED,THE CEILING WAS RS 750/RELAXABLE UPTO RS1000/ NOW OUR RULE NO 23(1) OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES STILL EXISTAND NOW EVERAGE SALARY IS THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING ,OUR PENSION IS WELL PROTECTED AT THE RATE OF 50%OF SALARY AT THE TIME OF RETIREMEN TUNDER THE STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT 1955.IN OTHER WORDS PENSION WAS PAYABLE AND AT PRESENT IT SHOULD BE PAID AT THE RATE OF 50% OF THE AVERAGE SUBSTANTIVE SALARY SUBJECT TO 30 YEARS PENSIONABLE SERVICE.ON THE BASIS OF THIS RULE NO 23(1) STILL EXISTS AND KERALA HIGH COURT GAVE VERTICT IN FAVOUR OF PENSIONERS.(2).SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT DATED 23-02-1989.———-THE HON’ABLE SUPREME COURT BY ITS JUDGEMENT LAID DOWN AS PER FOURTH CENTRAL PAY COMMISSION WITH SINGLE CEILING OF RS2400/AS PENSION IN STATE BANK AGAINST THE BACKDROP OF MAXIMUM MONTHLY SALARY OF RS4800/ OF DEPUTY MANGING DIRECTOR IN STATE BANK OF INDIA AT THAT TIME.ACCORDINGLY STATE BANK OF INDIA PENSION FUND RULES WERE FRAMED AS UNDER.RULE NO 23 FROM 1-1-1986.THE MAXIMUM PENSION SHALL NOT EXCEED 50%(ONE-HALF) OF AVERAGE MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE OR RS 2400./PER MONTH WHICH EVER IS LESS.IN VIEW OF ABOVE PENSION IS WELL PROTECTED LEGALLY AT THE RATE OF 50% OF THE SALARY AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT AS PER SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT.——————(3)CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ARTICLE-14 EQUALITY BEFORE LAW—THE STATE NOT DENIED TO ANY PERSON EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW OR EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAWS WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF INDIA.EQUALITTY BEFORE LAW IS A NEGATIVE CONCEPT,EQUAL PROTECTION OF LAW IS POSITIVE ONE.THE FORMER DECLARES THAT EVERY ONE IS A EQUAL BEFORE LAW,THAT NO ONE CAN CLAIM SPECIAL PERIVILEGES AND ALL CLASSES ARE EQUALLY SUBJECT TO ORDINARY LAW OF LAND.,THE LATTER PROSTULATES AND EQUAL PROTECTION OF ALL ALIKE IN THE SAME SITUATION AND LIKE CIRCUMSTANCES.NO DISCRIMINATION CAN BE MADE EITHER IN THE PREVILEGES CONFERRED OR LIABILITIES IMPOSED.HOWEVER THERE IS DISCRIMINATION IN THE SAME CLASS BY CREATING TWO CATEGORIES OF PENSIONERS BY GOVT/SBI AND BANK SHOULD FOLLOW THE ESTABLISH NORM OF PENSION50% SALARY LEVEL OF RETIRED EMPLOYEE AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT.THE CEILING SHOULD BE FIXED AT 50% OF THE MONTHLY SALARY OF DEPUTY MANAGING DIRECTOR(HIGHEST PAY IN THE BANK)I REQUEST MY FRIENDS TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/YOUR VIEWS ON THIS BLOG DATED 5-10-2010. WITH BEST REGARDS .THANKING YOU.

    Like

  259. I am impressed to read the comments by Mr Keshav Rai Saint dated 29.09.2010. 30.09.2010 ,01.10.2010, 02.10.210 03.10.2010 04.10.2010 and now 5.10.2010 and congratulate him for the deep studies made on the pension. All our union leaders tried to befool the pensioners and have not projected the real story of the pension . By going through S.B.I. provident fund rules the bank cannot give less than 50% pension of the last drawn. this was the base of 8th bipartite and the then finance-minister agreed on the 50% of the basic of Rs21040/,Mr saini I afree with you the govt , the union leaders the Bank all are not infavour of giving the 50% pension to the retirees, otherwise this issue should not havegone so long. The union people of the supervising staff know that the will not get the share of increase in shape of levy from the pensioners,then why they should fight for the pensioners cause. They have just beggoled the pensioners, May god give them the wisdom to think on this issue. They must give the final notice to the I.B.A and the bank to implement the 50% formula in State Bank India pension. thanks Mr Saini Raj kumar Negi 2190 Sec 21 C chandigarh

    Like

  260. DEAR SIRS, IN THIS WRITING I WILL TRY TO EXPLAIN HOW SUPREME COURT HAD GIVEN DIRECTIONS ON THE TWO PENSION ISSUES LONG BACK IN 1989 AND HOWEVER GOVT /BANK HAD NOT IMPLEMENTED THE DIRECTIONS AS ON DATE AND WE ARE SEEKING JUSTICE FROM GOVT/BANK.AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT THE PENSION WHICH PRE-1993 RETIREES AND THOSE RETIRED UPTO 31-10-2002 ARE GETTING IS MEAGRE AND WORKS OUT TO EVEN LESS THAN A SENIOR ASSISTANT WHO RETIRES TODAY.WHAT A SHAME/PITY.WHENEVER THIS DISTURBING FACT BROUGT TO THE NOTICE OF GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,THEIR STOCK REPLY IS THAT ANY RAISE IN PNSION TO SBI PENSIONERS WILL HAVE WIDE RAMIFICATIOS IN THE BANKING INDUSTRY.THIS IS,HOWEVER NOT TRUE AS STATE BANK OF INDIA HAS ENTIRELY DIFFERENT PENSION SCHEME VIZ-A-VIZ OTHER BANKS.WHILE THE BANK IS’SHING’,OLD PENSIONERS ARE ‘SUFFERING’..TO RECAPITULATE AND IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES IN THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE,I ADVISE FOR THE BENEFIT OF OUR FRIENDS THAT THE IBI PENSIONER’ ASSOCIATION (DELHI CIRCLE) FILED A WRIT PETITION IN SUPREME COURT IN 1987 FOR PENSION AT 50% OF LAST DRAWN.THE SUPPREME COURT IN THE HISTORIC JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON ON 23-02-1989 DIRECTED THE BANK TO– DELETE THE CLAUSE OF ORIGINAL CEIL,ING AND FIX THE PENSION AT RS2400/AT 50% OF MAXIMUM SALARY I.E RS4800/ P.M AT THAT TIME.BEFORE SUPREME COURT JUDGME NT THE MAXIMUM PENSION WAS RS750/ AND AT THE DISCCRINAION OF TRUSTEES IT WAS RS1000/ TO SENIOR STAFF OFFICERS .SUPREME COURT OBSERVED THAT PENSION IS A RIGHT NOT A BOUNTY,IT WOULD NOT BE PROPER TO LEAVE THE QUANTUM OF PENSION AT THE DISCRETION OF THE TRUSTEES IN EACH CASE..EVEN AT THAT TIME BANK HAD PROPOSED THE CEILING OF AWARD STAFF AT RS1300/ AND FOR OFFICERS THE BANK PROPOSEDRS2400/. HOWEVER SUPREME COURT IN THEIR JUDGMENT ORDER PRESCRIBED THAT THE COUTER CEILING OF RS2400/ WOULD SUFFICE.HERE I AM OF THE VIEW SUPREME CORT HAS MAINTAINED THE UNIFORMITY TO FIX THE PENSION AT RS2400 AT 50% OF MAXIMUM SALARYI.E.RS4800/P.M AT THAT TIME.DURING THE HEARING OF SUPREME COURT CASE BANK PROMISED TO REVISE THE PENSION OF 5TH BIPARTITE RETIREES, BUT BANK HAD NOT FULLFILL OF THEIR PROMISE AND DID NOT REVISE THE PENSION OF 5TH BIPARTITE RETIREES. THUS DEFEATING THE CORDIAL PRINCIPLE LAID DOWN BY SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT DATED 23-02-1989.HERE I AM OF THE VIEW AS PER THIS JUDGMENT (1) PAYMENT OF PENSION TO ALL ELIGIBLE PENSIONERS/RETIREES AT50% OF THE LAST DRAWN PAY.(2)UPDATION OF PENSION WITH EVERY SUCCESSIVE WAGE REVISION IN THE BANK ON THE LINES OF PAY COMMISSIONS. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR VIEWS/COMMENTS AS I AM NOT GETTING ANY REPLY FOR THE LAST ONE WEEK. WITH BEST REGARDS. THANKING YOU.

    Like

  261. Mr Saini I have gone through your wtireups in this blog dated 29.9,30.9 1.10, 2.10, 3.10, 4.10, 5.10 and 7.10.2010 and wants to know your comments on the new issue of the pensioners association,who are going to file a write pettition in the supreme court to challenge the basic of pension in the state Bank of India in which only 50% of the last drawn sallry is payable as pension, and the fees to be paid the lawyer senior advocate at Supreme court is in Lacs as we have to know the fees will be Rs 50/lacs. Sir the persons like you must be having the individual thought on this and also I request to others to guide me in this directions because the amount is very big and this is the hard earned money, moreover the supervising staff unions have not contribted a single peny for the case , they have just grabed our monthly chanda, and levy , which I feel should be recovered from the officers association to fight the case in the supreme court. Please give your comments. RAJKUMARNEGI 2190 SEc 21C Chandigarh.

    Like

  262. MY DEAR NEGI, TODAY I WANT TO DISCUSS(1) FIXATION OF PENSION FOR 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES(1ST NOVEMBER 1997-31ST OCTOBER 2002) ON THE BASIS OF SALARIES THEY RECEIVED AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT,PRESENTLY THEY ARE BEING PAID PENSION ON THE SALARYOF 6TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENT.(2)100% NEUTRALIZATION OF DEARNESS RELIEF.(3) FAMILY PENSION AT 30% ON GOVERNMENT PATTERN.SHRI NEGI I WILL GIVE YOU THE REPLY OF YOUR BLOG DATED 8TH OCTOBER 2010 TOMORROW ,PLEASE BEAR WITH ME.MY FRIENDS PLEASE GO THROUGH RULE NO 23(2)(A) OF SBI EMPLOYEES ‘PENSION FUND RULLES WHICH SAYS” WHERE THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELEVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE IS UP TO RS8500/ P.M50% OF THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS’ PENSIONABLE SERVICE.AND RULE NO 23(2)(b) SAYS WHERE THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS’ PENSIONABLE SERVICE IS ABOVE RS8500/P.M,40% OF THE AVERAGE OF MONTHLY SUBSTANTIVE SALARY DRAWN DURING THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS PENSIONABLE SERVICE SUBJECT TO MINIMUM OF RS4250/. HERE IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED TO WHOM THIS FORMULA OF PENSION HAS BEEN APPLIED PLEASE REFER TO PRECEEDING PARAGRAPH OF THEASE FORMULA WHICH SAYS ‘PROVIDED FURTHER THAT WITH EFFECT FROM 1-3-1999 THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF PENSION FOR THE MEMBERS WHO RETIRED/RETIRE DRAWING SUBSTANTIVE SALARY IN THE PAY SCALES EFFECTIVE FROM 1-11-1992(AWARD STAFF)/1-7-1993(SUPERVISING STAFF)AND THEREAFTER SHALL BE COMPUTED TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS IN THIS REGARD.’ HERE I AM OF THE VIEW THAT NO WHERE IT HAS BEEN MENTIOND IN THEASE RULES THAT THOSE RETIRED IN SEVENTH OR 8TH BIPARTITE SETTLEMENTS WILL GET ON THE BASIS OF 6TH BIPARTITE SCALES.FURTHER IT HAS BEEN MENTIONED ‘TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS IN THIS REGARD”IN CASE WE PRESUME THAT BANK.GOVT WERE RIGHT IN PAYING PENSION ON THE BASIS OF 6TH BIPARTITE SCALES THIS PHRASE TILL FURTHER AMENDMENTS SHOULD BE APPLICABLE TO 6TH AND 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES TOO AND NOT TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY BECAUSE YOU WILL FIND IN RULE NO 23 THIS CLAUSE HAD BEEN INTRODUCED W.E.F 1-3-1999 NOT BEFORE THAT .NOW I WILL WRITE ON 100%DEARNESS RELIEF TO ALL PENSIONERS.(2)AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT BANK HAS BEEN PAYING100% NEUTERALISATION DEARNESS RELIEF TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY W.EF 1-05-2005. HERE I HAVE TO MENTION THAT THE HON’ABLE SUPREME COURT BY ITS JUDGEMENETS IN VARIOUS CASES SAYS ‘IF APERSON RETIRING IS ELIGIBLE FOR PENSION AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT AND IF HE SURVIVES TILL THE TIME OF HIS SUBSQUENT AMENDMENT OF THE RELAVANT PENSION SCHEME,HE WOULD BECOME ELLIGIBLE TO GET MORE PENSIO N AS PER NEW FORMULA OF COMUTATION OF PENSION SUBSEQUENTLY BROUGHT INTO FORCE,HE WOULD BE ENTITLED TO GET BENEFIT OF THE AMENDED PENSION PROVISION FROM THE DATE OF SUCH ORDER.HERE I HAVE TO COMMENT THAT ALL THE PENSIONERS ARE ELLIGIBLE OF 100%NEUTRALISATION AS THE DEARNESS RELIEFW.E.F1-05-2005(3) FAMILY PENSION AT 30% ON GOVERNMENT PATTERN.AS YOU ARE AWARE THAT FAMILY PENSION SCHEME WAS INTRODUCED IN THE BANK W.E.F1-1-1986 AND THE RATE WAS UPTO RS1500/AS SUBSTANTIVE SALARY30% OF SUBSTANTIVE SALARY SUBJECT TO A MINIMUM OF RS300/P.M ABOVE RS1500/ 15% OF SUBSTANTIVE SALARY SUBJECT TO A MINIMUM OF RS 450/p.MAND MAXIMUM OF RS 1000/P.M NOW YOU WILL SURPRISE TO NOTE THAT ALTHOUGH FAMILY PENSION WAS REVISED W.E.F 1-5-2005 THAT IS MAXIMUM RS 4784/ AND IT IS 15% OF THE SUBSTANTIVE SALARY AND THIS MAXIMUM FAIMLY PENSION IS FOR 8TRH BIPARTITE RETIREES THIS AMOUMNT OF FAMILY PENSION IS MUCH LESS FOR EARLIER RETIREES OF 5TH ,6TH, 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.IN NUTSHELL WIDOWS OF PENSIONERS ARE GETTING MEAGRE FAMILY PENSION.I AM OF THE VIEW THAT IS ATTA-DAL CHEAPER FOR A WIDOW THAN OTHER PEAPLE OF THE SOCITY AND OF THE VIEW THAT IT SHOULD BE 30% OF THE SUBSTANTIVE SALARY AT THE TIME OF RETIREMENT. PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/VIEWS OF THIS BLOG AS I AM NOT GETTING ANY REPLY FOR THE LAST TEN DAYS. WITH BEST REGARDS.THANKING BYOU.

    Like

  263. MY DEAR NEGI,BEFORE GIVING YOU MY COMMENTS ON YOUR POINTS RAISED IN YOUR WRITE-UP DATED 8-10-2010 I HAVE TO DISCUSS THE JUDGEMENTS IN FAVOUR OF PENSIONERS AND AGAINST THE PENSIONERS AND IN FAVOUR OF GOVERNMENT.I WANT TO TELL YOU THE LATEST STATUS OF JUDGEMENTS/PENDING COURT CASES THEN YOU WILL COME TO CONCLUSION.AS YOU ARE AWARE ,MADRAS HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT DATED 16-10-2008 COURT OBSERVED THAT THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION IN PAYMENT OF PENSION IN THE PRE-REVISED PAY OF 1993.BANK SAID THAT THEY HAVE ALREADY RECOMMENDED TO GOVT FOR REVISION OF PENSION ON 19-04-2006 AND THE GOVT APPROVAL WAS NOT YET RECEIVED.IN THE RESULT MADRAS HIGH COURT GAVE THE DECISION AND DIRECTED TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSAL OF SBI LETTER NOCDO/PM/16/SPL/29 DATED 19-04-2006 AND APPROVE THE DRAFT FOR AMENDMENT FOR REFIXING OF PENSION FOR RETIREES BETWEEN1-11-1997(IN THE CASE OF AWARD STAFF)01-04-1998(IN THE CASE OF OFFICERS) AND 01-11-2002 WITHIN A PERIOD OF THREE MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF A COPY OF THIS ORDER. AS YOU KNOW THAT GOVT HAS FILED AN APPEAL IN MADRAS HIGH COURT AGAINST THIS JUDGMENT, GOVT IN ITS COUNTER ON 15-02-2010 SAID THAT THE PROPOSAL OF BANK HAS BEEN REJECTED AND NO PROPOSAL IS PENDING WITH GOVERNMENT AND ALSO SAID THAT BANK ON ASSURENCES BY THE GROUP(COMMITTEE ON PESION IN SBI) REFERRED THE PROPOSALS(?)TO GOVT OF INDIA ON 25-02-2008 AND 1`6-10-2008 FOR CONSIDERATION,BUT SINCE THESE WERE BEREFT OF PLAUSIBLE RESONS FOR IMPROVEMENT IN EXTANT PENSION REGULATIONS,THEASE WERE DULY CONSIDERED BY GOVT OF INDIA WERE REJECTED AND SBI IS NOT WITHIN ITS COMPETENCE TO REVISE THE PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES..THE SAME HIGH COURT HAD DISMISSED THREE WRIT PETITIONS ON8-06-2010 THAT COURT CANNOT GIVE DIRECTIONS TO GOVT TO REVISE THE PENSION OF 7TH BIPARTITE RETIREES.IN KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT DATED 14-09-2010 BANK TOOK THE STAND THAT THE PENSION IN THE STATE BANK OF INDIA TO THE EMPLOYEES OF THE STATE BANK OF INDIA CAN BE PAID ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND RULES FRAMED UNDER THE STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT.THEY WOULD THEREFORE,CONTEND THAT THE PETIONERS CANNOT NOW CLAIM PAYMENT OF PENSION MORE THAN WHAT IS PROVIDED FOR UNDER RULE 23 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES’ PENSION FUND RULES UNLESS THE RULES ARE APPROPRIATELY AMENDED.NOW YOU WILL OBSRVE THAT BANK HAS AMENDED THE RULE 23 WITH EFFECT FROM 1-05-2005 FOR PAYMENT OF PENSION TO 8TH BIPARTITE RETIREES ONLY .THUS THE POSITION FOR THE PRESENT IS NO PROPOSAL FOR REVISION OF PENSION IS PENDING WITH GOVT OR NO AMENDMENT IN PENSION FUND RULES IS PENDING WITH BANK/GOVT.FOR DETERMINATION OF THE SAID ISSUES,IT IS DESIRABLE TO NOTICE AND DISCUSS THE RELEVANT RULES.THE CENTRAL BOARD OF THE BANK,IN EXERCISE OF POWERS CONFERRED BY SECTION 50 OF STATE BANK OF INDIA ACT,1955 AFTER CONSULTATION OF RBI AND PREVIOUS SANCTION OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT,FRAMED RULES,NAMELY,’STATE BANK OF INDIA EMPLOYEES PENSION FUND RULES.UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES I AM OF THE VIEW THAT OUR FEDERATION AND OTHERS(SENIOR PENSIONERS IN THE AGE GROUP OF 70 YEARS TO 80 YEARS FROM DIFFERENT CICLES) SHOULD FILE A WRIT PETITIONIN IN SUPREME COURT UNDER ARTICLE 32AND ALSO ENGAGE A COMPETENT COUNSEL SO THAT PROBLEM MAY BE SOLVED IMMEDIETLY. SO FAR FIANANCE IS CONCERNED FOR COURT CASE IT IS NOT A PRBLEM AND PENSIONERS ARE READY TO CONTRIBUTE. WITH BEST REGARDS .THANKING YOU.

    Like

  264. MY DEAR PENSIONERS,

    IT IS PAINFULLY INFORM YOU THAT I HAVE SENT A MAIL TO SBI PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION MUMBAI IN RESPECT OF COPY OF THE KERALA HIGH COURT VERDICT TO PUBLISH IN THEIR JOURNAL AND TO THEIR WEBSITE. BUT HEY HAVE NOT DONE IT SO FAR AND THE RELY I GOT FROM THEM WAS DISPLEASURE ONE . THE PURPOSE OF SENDING THE ORDER FOR A INFORMATION TO ALL OUR FELLOW PENSIONERS AND AND SOME SORTS OF ACTION CAN BE TAKEN BY THE FEDERATION . IF YOU GO THROUGH THE JUDGEMENT, IT IS NOT ONLY BENEFITS THE PETITIONERS BUT ALSO TO ALL THE PENSIONERS. THE HIGH COURT ORDER IS LIKE THAT. KINDLY GO THROUGH JUDGEMENT GIVEN BY ME ON 28-9-2010.

    IN THIS CONNECTION I HAVE TO POINT OUT THAT WHAT ACTION IS BEING TAKEN BY THE FEDERATION IN RESPECT OF THE CASE PENDING IN DELHI HIGH COURT AFTER 11 TH FEB 2010. ALL OF US HAVE TO THINK ABOUT FUNCTIONING OF OUR FEDERATION’S .I THINK MOST OF US ARE QUIT UNHAPPY

    COMMENT PLEASE

    Like

    1. As a pensioner I know all these legal tangles won’t help.Our Fed including the pensioners fed which are not recognised by the SBI management is full of old virus.they manage outings and Bharath darshan but to no avail.they are not able to solve medical benefits to VRS Retirees.How do you expect and hope any action?

      Like

  265. MY DEAR PMGKPANIKR,I SHALL BE GLAD IF YOU PLEASE GO THROUGH MY WRITE -UP DATED 29-09-2010 AND DATED4-10-2010 WHERE I HAVE COMMENTED ON KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT AND YOU WILL BE GLAD TO KNOW THAT ON INFORMATION GIVEN BY YOU ABOUT KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT I GAVE THIS INFORMATION TO OUR PRESIDENT OF PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION AT CHANDIGARH AND HE HAS PUBLISHED KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT IN MONTHLY MAGAZINE ISSUE OF OCTOBER 2010 AND SHALL BE GLAD IF YOU PLEASE ADVISE ME YOUR ADDRESS I CAN SEND YOU THE COPY OF THE MAGAZINE. HAVE PATIENCE YOUR MUMBAI PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION WILL ALSO PUBLISH THIS JUDGEMENT IN OCTOBER MAGAZINE .IN THE MEANTIME PLEASE GO THROUGH MY WRITE UPS STARTING FROM 29-09-2010 TO 9-10-2010 AND SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS/VIEWS.WITH BEST REGARDS .THANKING YOU.

    Like

  266. THERE IS NO WEBSITE FOR OUR FEDERATION TO PUBLISH THE JUDGMENTS OF KERALA HC & THAT OF MADRAS HC.
    EVEN IN BOMBAY PENSIONERS ASSCN, THESE JUDGMENTS ARE NOT PUBLISHED. WHY?. IF YOU KNOW THE ANSWER,PLEASE LET ME KNOW
    T.R.VENKATESAN.12.10.10 8.45 A.M

    Like

  267. MR. VENKITESHAN,

    DO YOU THINK THAT OUR PENSIONERS FEDERATION IS TO HELP US.? NEVER. THEY ARE INLY HIGHER RACY. I ALREADY SENT A MAIL TO THE MUMBAI PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION TO PUBLISH THE KERALA HIGH COURT JUDMENT WHERE AS THIER REPLY I GOT IS A DISAPPOINTED ONE. THIS IS THE ATTITUDE OF OUR ASSOCIATION. I AM PMGK PANICKER AND I
    THIN K THAT WE WORKED TOGETHER IN ZONAL OFFICE KOCHI OR KOLLAM BRANCH. OUT OF TWENTY PERSONS, I AM ALSO ONE OF THE PETITIONER. LET ME KNOW YOUR OBSERVATION ABOUT THE HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT. IN THIS REGARD I HAVE TO TELL THAT THE ORDER WILL BENEFIT TO ALL PENSIONERS. WE HAVE ALREADY SENT THE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT TO OUR CHAIRMAN LET US SEE THE RESULT. HOPE BANK HAS TO TAKE SOME ACTION.

    COMMENT PLEASE

    Like

  268. DEAR SHRI T.R.VENKATESAN AND SHRI PMGKPANICKR, I HAVE ALSO REQUESTED PENSIONERS ASSOCIATION MUMBAI FOR PUBLISHING THE KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT IN THEIR OFFICIAL MAGAZINE SAMVAD FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 2010 LET US WE WAIT FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 2010, I HOPE THAT GOOD SENCE PERVAIL ON THEM AND IT WILL BE PUBLISHED. THIS IS MY PERSUMPTION NOT DEFINITE.FOR MY COMMENTS ON THIS JUDGEMENT AND ALL THE JUGEMENTS DECLARED SO FAR PLEASE GO THROUGH MY WRITE -UP DATED 9-10-2010 IN WHICH I HAVE ALREADY COMMENTED ON ALL THE JUGEMENTS AND RATHER CALL THE COMMENTS FROM MY OTHER FRIENDS. IN CASE YOU HAVE SPARE TIME PLEASE GO THROUGH MY WRITE UP DATED 29-09-2010 TO 9-10-2010 AND SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS, WITH BEST REGARDS .THANKING YOU.

    Like

  269. There is no use in submitting the copy of the Judgment to Chairman as court has all ready may be issued order to the Bank and GOI We got improvement in our pension in 2006 by strike of 6days But for this time, now working employees’ union and officers’ association should take interest in this regard But to our unfortunate they are interested in enhancing the superannuation age limit by 2years as per recent circular of sbi federation and least interest in pensioners’ issue Hence even now the retired people after latest wage revision are not going to get the benefit of 9th settlement Only god has to do some miracle to get our genuine dues from the bank&government
    Instance of Chennai High Court is already before us and the same will be the fate of Kerala High Court.Publishing of court judgement in Samvad will not make any difference Only few more people may read the judgment of Kerala High Court

    Like

  270. MY DEAR FRIENDS,WHILE I STILL AWAITS THE REPLIES OF MY WRITE -UPS DATED 29-09-2010 TO 09-10-2010 ,IN THE MEANTIME I HAVE READ A NEWS ITEM IN THE NEWS PAPER ‘BUSINESS STANDARD DATED 14-10-2010 AND ALL OF YOU ARE ADVISED TO COMMENT ON THIS NEWS ITEM PLEASE GO THROUGH UNDER THE HEADING’ LIC EMPLOYEES TO GET17.5% WAGE HIGH,SBI STAFF IN FOR MORE BENIFITS” LIFE I NSURANCE CORPORATION(LIC) HAVE HAD TO SETTLE FOR A 17.5% WAGE INCREASE IN LINE WITH WHAT WERE OFFERED TO BANKS EMPLOYEES UNDER THE AGREEMENT SIGNED WITH IBA.THE WAGE HIKE APPROVED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF FRIDAY,WOULD BE EFFECTIVE FROM AUGUST 2007. THE STATE BANK EMPLOYEES,WHO HAD PROTESTED THE 17.5% PAY INCREASE ON THE GROUND THAT THEY ALREADY HAD THE PENSION OPTION AND WOULD THEREFORE LOSE OUT,ARE IN FOR SOME BONAZA.THE BANK MANAGEMENT IS AWAITING APPROVAL FROM THE GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE FOR AN ADDITIONAL 6.4 PER CENT INCREASE WHICH WILL COST THE BANK AMOUNTING TO RS290/CRORES,THERE IS A PROPOSAL BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT FOR RAISING PENSION FOR SENIOR OFFICERS BY ARROUND 40 PER CENTAND CLERICAL ANDJUNIOR OFFICER MANAGEMENT GRADE EMPLOYEES BY ARROUND 50 PER CENT.A SENIOR EXCUTIVE SAID THE BANK HAD ALREADY PROVIDED RS290/CRORESFOR THE EXPECTED AMPACT OF SALARY INCREASE.SBI UNIONS REPRESENTATIVES HAD NOT SIGNED THE WAGE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ”’ MY FRIENDS PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS ON THIS DEVELOPMENT .WITH BEST REGARDS. THANKI NG YOU.

    Like

  271. Gratuity was not paid from 1.1.06 to Bank employees like Central Govt.employees. The reason adduced by the Govt. is they don’t have funds. But how come they are asking for increase in salaries which is a recurring expense compared to one time payment of Gratuity. Please comment.

    Like

  272. MY DEAR PMGKPANICKR,IN CONTINUATION OF MY WRITE UP DATED 12-10-2010 ,YOU WILL BE GLAD TO KNOW THAT KERALA HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT HAS BEEN PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL MAGAZINE ”SAMVAD” BY SBI PENSIONERS’ ASSOCIATION MUMBAI.FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 2010 AS I HAVE ALREADY AD VISED YOU ON 12-10-2010 IN MY WRITE-UP. PLEASE ADVISE ME THE LATEST DEVELOPMENT FOR ANY PENSION ISSUES. WITH BEST REGARDS .THANKING YOU.

    Like

    1. CAPITAL LETTERS ARE PREFERABLE. AS MOST OF THE SENIOR CITIZENS COULD NOT READ SMALL LETTERS DUE TO POOR EYE SIGHT
      T.VENKATESAN
      01.11.2010-7.45AM

      Like

  273. I THINK all THE ideas, VIEWPOINTS regarding PENSION has NOW exhausted. THAT is WHY we ARE now ARGUING about CAPITAL and SMALL letters. I have NOW used BOTH capital AND small LETTERS, both VIEWPOINTS are CORRECT. Capital LETTERS do OFFEND the READERS and AT the SAME time IT is EASIER for THE old MEMBERS to READ.

    We HAVE now SURRENDERED ourselves TO our FATE as NO help IS coming FROM any QUARTER. We only HOPE and PRAY to GOD that BETTER sense WOULD prevail ON the DECISION makers. GOD help THE pensioners.

    Like