From:-

S Ramachandran, aged 76 years,                                                                              Date :23/07/2015

Residing at,Kunal Icon,Bldg no A-8/104

Pimple Saudagar,Aundh Camp

Pune 411027.

To

The Honourable Chief Justice of India,

Supreme Court of India,

Tilak Marg, New Delhi – 110201.

My Lord,

Sub;- Violation of fundamental rights of senior citizens guaranteed under Article 21 of constitution of India

                                                                                  and

Unreasonable and unjustified denial of Updation of Pension, improvement in family pension and 100% DA neutralization  to the Bank Retirees [during the recently concluded wage revision] since 1995

We, the undersigned senior citizens of the country, in evening of our lives, most respectfully submit to you the following facts for your favourable consideration.

01. We have served our respective banks for 30 to 40 years and have been drawing pension fixed on the Basic Pay and other eligible allowances, the average of last 10 months. This Basic Pension was fixed at the time of our retirement from the service of the respective banks and thereafter, this amount of basic pension was never updated during the wage revisions which is taking place every 5 years in the banking industry.

02.On account of this non-updation of pension, a situation has arised that a very senior executive in the rank of General Manager who retired 20 years back, is getting lower pension than the Clerk retired recently that affecting our right to leave with dignity and reputation. This anomaly has been brought to the notice of Indian Banks’ Association (IBA) which is negotiating the wage settlement on behalf of its member banks and United Forum of Bank Organizations,(UFBU) an umbrella Organization of Unions and Associations of workmen and officers respectively.  

03. However, during the recently concluded wage revision on 25.05.2015, none of the issues of the bank retirees were solved and in turn the IBA and  UFBU issued a damaging Record Note of Discussion saying that there is no contractual relationship with the banks and retirees.( Copy appended Ex-1)

Let us  now read  what the IBA wrote to GoI on 6th August 2012 vide IBA letter No HR&IR/KU/GOVT  ( with signatures of Mr K Ramakrishnan,then CEO of IBA) says :-

The Managing Committee also emphasized that the sanctity of Joint Note (dated 27.04.2010) executed by Management / Unions / Association should not be reopened under any circumstances during the currency of agreement. If the spirit of DFS communication is to extend pension option to those who retired under VRS, the right thing would be to hold discussions with UFBU at the time of next settlement and make it a part of 10th Bipartite Settlement.( Copy appended Ex-2)

Now question arises, if IBA wrote to GoI in 2012 and confirmed in writing that it will be correct to hold discussions with UFBU about the issues of pension to retirees at the time of 10th BPS, what happened thereafter which made change of heart at IBA.    

Now the same Managing Committee of the IBA took a U turn at the time of negotiations for 10th BPS with UFBU and told that there is no contractual relation between retired bankers and Banks.   Was there any Supreme Court judgment between 2012 and 2015, which made IBA to change its stand of 2012? Or was it complete bankruptcy of grey matter of the people who signed the Record Note OR was it done to please bosses at GoI to get certain favours by misleading them about the true position?  We have no clues as to the exact reasons for doing such an immature, unconstitutional, illegal and void agreement.  Now there seems to be no way out except   to approach your lordship.

04. This Record Note of Discussion was discussed throughout the country, shri S Ramchandran, Pensioner wrote letters on 28^th May, 2015 and 18^th June, 2015 (Copy appended Ex-3 & 4) to various authorities in the country such as Secretary, Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi, Finance Minister of India, Governor, Reserve Bank of India and others, but there is no reply from any of the authorities.

05. It is pertinent to note that one of the constituents of the UFBU and association representing majority of the officers in the banking industry, issued a circular No. 2014/61 dated 27.09.2014, Copy appended Ex- 5 ) in which the discussions of wage revisions were quoted in that circular, and the retirees issues were also discussed and quoted in the said circular. The issues covered in the circular of retirees were

a. pension related matters i.e. 100% DA on pension for pre-Nov 2002 retirees,

b. improvement in family pension,

c. provision for periodical updation of pension,

The circular further says, that “after IBA informed that they are inclined to favorably consider the demand of 100 % DA on pension for pre-Nov 2002 retirees. IBA further informed that the cost aspect on improvement in family pension is being worked out and they would soon take a decision on the same. IBA responded positively on this issue. As regards updation of pension, IBA informed that in view of the high cost involved, it would be difficult to agree to the same. On our insistence, IBA agreed that any viable and affordable proposition from the UFBU in this regard would be examined.”  

When such was the discussion and negotiations on the retirees issues during the course of negotiations which spread to 31 months from November, 2012 to May 2015, the Record Note of Discussion dated 25.05.2015 signed by the IBA and 9 constituents of UFBU has shocked and surprised the retirees particularly the retirees who are in advanced age of 70 years plus, whose medical care expenses and inflation has beaten the meager monthly pension received by them. Hence the need for Updation of pension was felt as in State Bank of India and Government of India.

06. Originally the   Pension settlement was signed on 29.10.1993, the clause 12 of which provides, updation of pension among other things, but with rider that it will be as in force in Reserve Bank of India. The issue of updation of pension of RBI is before the Finance Ministry of the country. When the issues are as thus above, we do not know what transpired between IBA and UFBU after the circular date, referred para 5 above, to come to the conclusion that there is no relationship between the banks and retirees.  It is pertinent to know here we have relationship with the bank for the limited purpose of terminal benefits and monthly we are paid pension, without relations how pension will be paid.

07. When such was the stand of IBA and UFBU on 25.05.2015 about the issues of retirees, All India Bank Officers Confederation a constituent of UFBU and association representing majority of officers in the banking industry, issued a circular on 12/06/2015, openly dissenting with Record Note of Discussion, stating that there is relationship between banks and retirees and also touched the Nakara case.(copy appended Ex-6)

08. Now due to this development, we have become orphans, because there is no response from Government of India and Reserve Bank of India, individual banks are not responding, as they have no instructions from IBA, UFBU though submitted our demands to IBA on 30.10.2012 (Copy appended Ex-7), now has taken this new stand. Hence there is no transparency in wage revision negotiations.

09. With regard to cost factor, the PSU banks have adequate/enough pension funds as on 31.03.2014 and 31.03.2015.( Copy appended Ex- 8 &9 ) The cursory glance of  Ex 8 & 9 reveals the position is as under: -

                *              The corpus of Pension fund as of 31/03/2015 is of Rs.180459.71 crores.

*              The payouts from the fund during 2015 is of Rs. 11783.35 crores as against income of Rs. 13416.15 crores resulting to surplus of Rs.1632.8 Crores.

*              Similar is the position during FY ending 31/03/2014.

*              The Exhibit 7 & 8 will reveal that the interest earned on corpus pension fund is sufficient to service pension paid in the years 2013-14 and 2014-15, besides after further monthly additional contributions from employees are added to the corpus fund, thereby there is annual growth in the funds of the banks.

L0SS to Pension Funds for Retirees Due To Amortisation of pensioncost of banks over five years in the  9^TH BPS    

 RBI Vide its circular dated NO DBOD.NO.BP.BC.80/21.04.018/201011 9th February 2011 (Copy appended Ex-10)  “ allowed banks to the expenditure, as indicated in paragraph 2  in the above circular, may, if not fully charged to the Profit and Loss Account during the financial year 2010-11, be amortised over a period of five years {subject to (b) and (c) below} beginning with the financial year ending March 31, 2011 subject to a minimum of 1/5th of the total amount involved every year.” Thus, RBI in conivance with banks and INDIAN BANKS ASSOCIATION put to loss the interest part if the same have been credited in one year. If amortisation was absolutely necessary then it should have been with interest so that pension funds had not suffered the loss. However it is pertinent to note that this decision of RBI helped banks to show more profits (i.e inflated profits)for five years,  show better financial position of banks though it was not so ,banks paid more dividend to Govt of India / other stake holders, paid more income tax and also helped to boost the share prices of banks share  in the stock market .All the above clearly shows that banks were permitted to adopt unhealthy practice  for five years and which was also against sound accounting principles/practices

 It may be further noted that though the RBI allowed the Banks  to amortize their contribution over a period of five years the recovery of amount from the working employees and the retired employees was made in one go/upfront.

10. As the IBA, GOI, individual banks, RBI, UFBU have not taken care of our issues and there is no transparency in the wage revision negotiations and as such with paltry pension amount, we are      become orphans / destitute life in the society.

Added to above, our efforts to seek redressal from judiciary has been scuttled down by banks by contravening the “National Litigation Policy” & by resorting to unjust adjournments in the High Courts.

All the above acts of Bank lead to non revision of pension for last 20 years and the quantum of pension that we are receiving is not adequate EVEN to take care of increasing cost of medical requirement of the family that makes us impossible to leave with dignity & reputation, and enjoy the right to life as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and we have no recourse other than approaching your Lordship 

In civil Appeal No 1123 of 2015 in State of Rajsthan Vs Mahendra Nath Sharma, while dismissing the appeal Honorable lordship confirming the principlies laid down in D S Nakara case further held that:-

·         Paragraph 5  clearly  lays  the  postulate  that  the  consolidated  pension(treated as final basic pension) as on 1.9.2006, all pre-1.9.2006  pensioner shall not be lower than 50% of sum of the minimum pay of  the  post  in  the running pay band plus grade pay introduced w.e.f. 1.9.2006 corresponding  to the pre-revised pay scale of the post  from  which  pensioner  had  retired.

·         It is the duty of the State Government to avoid unwarranted litigations and not to encourage any litigation for the sake of litigation.

·         The State cannot take a plea of financial burden to deny the legitimate dues of the respondents.

In 1978, in Maneka Gandhi case, it ruled by your lordship that the expression ''life'' did not mean mere animal existence but with dignity, it added another legal leaf in 2008 in Deepak Bajaj case, when it said right to life encompassed a person's reputation as well.

India's justice system is perceived to be a world exemplar in sloth and inefficiency, with more than 3 crore cases pending and average litigation completion time being over a decade. Several hundred cases are in courts for over two decades.

It is in view of the facts referred at points 1-10 above and average litigation span of ten years & short of life at our disposal, specifically of Mr. S G Lele (87 years), Mr. C M Bhat (86 years) and other signatories of 80+years, we earnestly pray for your intervention and this Petition may kindly be treated as a Suo-Moto Writ Petition on the appellate side of the Honorable Supreme Court  

Therefore for the points 1 to 10 above, we pray  your lordship may be pleased to call for

1. the records and minutes of wage revision discussions in which our issues were discussed and  finally taken the stand as mentioned in Record Note of Discussion dated 25.05.2015.

2. to investigate into the cost of updation of pension, improvement in family pension and 100% DA neutralization by Actuarials defined in Pension Regulations 1995.

3. Upon investigation report from actuarials, to order to the concerned banks RBI and GOI, to arrive at the decision on the demands of the retirees. 

For the kind response and acts of your Lordship, we all, shall always remain obliged, as duty bound.

With Respectful &Warm Regards,

Signature:

Name: S. RAMACHANDRAN

Contacts: Residence Tel: +91 20  27201012             

Cell                                               :  8600064195                      

E-mail                                          : ramans1938@gmail.com