 |
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
Follow AllBankingSolutions @ 
|
Are MoF Officials Now Covering Misdeeds of IBA by Not Replying to
Information Sought Under RTI ?
|
Ads by Google
We have received the following email, which is an appeal against the denial of certain information by Ministry of Finance to S. Ramachandran, Former GM BOB & VRS OPTEE (SENIOR CITIZEN AGE 74). A perusal of the appeal indicates that Mr Ramachandran was able to extract certain information from BoB and BoI under RTI. The information is really explosive. In the following letter, he has clearly mentioned that the Mr M.D. Mallaya, Present CMD of BOB, Mr. Alok Kumar Mishra, CMD of Bank of India (present Chairman of IBA) and Shri K.RamaKrishnan , Present CEO OF IBA and signatory to the joint note dated 27-4-2010, were originally PF optees and were given 2nd Pension option in 2010 though they were not eligible as per IBA's instructions sent to Banks. All three are holding top posts and if they were given 2nd Pension option by banks but the same was denied to other bankers on same footing, it will certainly be considered as manipulation and illegal. The best thing will be that each one of them can clarify their position by issuing press statement so that bankers know the truth.
The appeal is almost one month old and we hope the reply to the
same will be received soon. We will appeal to MoF to put on
record the truth and full truth. Hope they will hide the facts under the
garb of secrecy. They should not hide anything even if certain heads have
to be rolled. It will be a shame for the banking industry if the guilty
are not punished. It will be really interesting to watch the reply
of MoF and the arguments designed to save the skin of manipulators.
If proper reply is not received, there will be need to approach CIC.
WE ARE SURE TRUTH WILL PREVAIL AND MANIPULATORS WILL BE EXPOSED We will be
keenly waiting for next developments.
12th July 2012
Smt Sreya Guha, Director/Appellate Authority, Ministry Of Finance, Department of Financial Services, Jeevan Deep Building, Parliament Street, New Delhi 110001.
Madam,
Re- Appeal under RTI ACT 2005 ON LETTER F.NO/15/54/2012-IR DATED 23-6-2012 OF CPIO OF Ministry OF Finance.
I refer to above reply and would like to state that I am aggrieved by the reply hence this appeal
(A) In reply to point no. 3 of my letter he has not given answer stating that the point raised by me do not amount to information as defined under section of 2(f) of RTI Act 2005.
(B) you will observe from my question that I have brought to the attention of CPIO CERTAIN IRREGULARITIES COMMITTED BY IBA AND ASKED how IBA has deviated from the sanction given by Joint Secretary in his letter DO/NO/14/1/1/2007-IR dated 10-8-2010 addressed to Chairman of IBO AND AS AGRREED IN THE JOINT NOTE DATED 27-4-2010
(C) HOW the 2ND PENSION OPTION GRANTED TO Deemed retired officers ? Though these officers are not actually deemed retirees as they did not opt for pension under pension regulation 1995 within the time limit for opting the first pension option given by the bank .
(D) These officers are actually on par with VRS optees who had not opted for pension in 1995. In spite of this I QUESTIONED how banks have granted these officers 2nd pension and denied 2nd pension option to VRS optees under officers service regulations 1979 and though finance ministry has not denied 2nd pension option to VRS optees as per finance ministry letter addressed TO ME vide letter F/NO/15/22/2012-IR 14TH MARCH 2012
(E) so you will find that I HAVE ASKED INFORMATION WHICH IS not interpreted correctly .by CIPO.
Ads by Google (a) The reply to point no 4 of my letter is also NOT GIVEN stating that this is vague and not specific. This is also not correct .I HAVE NOT MENTIONED THE NAMES OF DEEMED RETIREES BECAUSE THIS IS APPLICABLE TO ALL DEEMED RETIREES WHO HAD NOT OBTAINED FIRST PENSION OPTION IN 1995 AS PER PENSION REGULATION 1995 WITHIN THE STIPULATED THE TIME FRAME WHICH ENDED IN 1995 ONLY THEN HOW THESE OFFICERS WHO HAVE BEEN APPOINTED AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS AFTER THE TIME FRAME OF FIRST PENSION OPTION WAS OVER AND NOW HOW THEY ARE TREATED AS DEEMED OFFICER WHEN 2ND PENSION OPTION WAS OFFERED TO ALL THE RETIREES WHO HAD NOT OPTED FIRST PENSION OPTION IN 1995 WHICH INCLUDES VRS OPTEES UNDER OFFICERS SERVICE REGULATIONS 1979.
NOW I QUOTE BELOW THREE SPECIFIC CASES OF DEEMED RETIREES WHO HAD NOT OPTED FOR FIRST PENSION OPTION IN 1995 IN LIEU OF PROVIDENT FUND WITH IN THE TIME FRAME OF FIRST OPTION WHICH ENDED IN 1995 BUT GRANTED 2ND PENSION OPTION IN 2010 AS DESIRED BY CPIO.
1. Shri M.D Mallya PRESENT CMD BANK OF BARODA , AND PREVIOUS CHAIRMAN OF IBA. HE HAD NOT OPTED FOR FIRST PENSION OPTION IN 1995 BUT HE HAS BEEN GRANTED 2ND PENSION OPTION AS PER CORPORATION BANK LETTER RTI/142/2012/OR/363/2012 Dated 11-5-2012. copy enclosed
2 Shri AloK Kumar Misra CMD OF BANK OF INDIA AND PRESENT CHAIRMAN OF IBA.
3 Shri K.RamaKrishnan , Present CEO OF IBA and signatory to the joint note dated 27-4-2010
BOTH THE OFIFICIALS AS STATED AT NO 2 AND 3 HAVE BEEN GRANTED 2ND PENSION OPTION though they had not opted first pension option in 1995 BY BANK OF INDIA VIDE THE LETTER NO HO/LGL/CPIO/84 DATED 11-5-2012. COPY ENCLOSED
SINCE THESE ARE THE OFFICIALS DIRECTLY CONNECTED WITH IBA AND ARE IN POWER THEY TOOK SUCH DECISION TO THEIR ADVANTAGE AND DENIED 2ND PENSION OPTION TO VRS OPTEES UNDER OFFICERS REGULATIONS 1979 WHO HAD NOT OPTED FIRST PENSION OPTION IN 1995 AND THUS DISCREMINATED THE VRS OPTEES WHO ARE NO MORE IN SERVICE AND WHO HAVE NO VOICE AS THEY ARE NOT IN POWER AS THE ABOVE QUOTED OFFICIALS ARE.
FURTHER YOU WILL OBSERVE THAT CPIO HAS REFERRED MY LETTER TO IBO ASKING THEM ITS STAND ON THE ABOVE POINTS AND NOW AFTER A GAP OF NEARLY TWO MONTHS FROM MY APPLICATION HOW CAN HE SAY THAT MY QUESTIONS ARE VAGUE AND NOT SPECIFIC AND SUCH NOT COVERED UNDER THE AMBIT OF DEFINITION UNDER SECTION NO 2(f) OF THE RTI ACT 2005. IF MY QUESTIONS WERE NOT COMING UNDER SECTION 2(f) of RTI act 2005 THEN HE SHOULD NOT HAVE REFERRED TO IBA AT ALL.
(C) AS REGARDS REPLY TO POINT NO 5 OF MY LETTER HOW CPIO IS TELLING THAT THIS PERTAINS TO IBA A THIRD PARTY. In fact finance ministry sanctioned the 2nd Pension with reference to this letter of IBA AS SUCH I have every right to get copy of this letter and this cannot be construed as third party . FURTHER WHEN IBA IS NOT A public body under RTI ACT 2005 HOW CAN THEY TAKE SHELTER UNDER SECTION 11(1) OF RTI ACT 2005.AND I am surprised CPIO HAS ALSO ACCEPTED THEIR VIEWS.
IBA COMMITS A FRAUD /TAKE ILLEGAL DECISION/ FOLLOW DISCREMINATIVE POLICY AGAINST THE SECTION 14,16 AND 22 OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION/ NOT FOLLOWS THE GOVT SANCTION &THE TERMS OF JOINT NOTE DATED 201O THAT BASIC AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO AND STILL CPIO SUPPORTS THEIR STAND WHICH IS SURPRISING AND ANNOYING.
In the light of the above facts I request you to view the matter dispassionately in proper perspective and give you decision
Thanking you, Yours faithfully
S. Ramachandran Former GM BOB & VRS OPTEE SENIOR CITIZON AGE 74
|
