Article:*

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF PENSIONER’S DAY CELEBERATIONS

ON 17TH DECEMBER EVERY YEAR.

NOW 32ND PENSINER’S DAY ON 17-12-2014.

(V.Seshadri: B.Sc; LL.M; PG.Dip. in IRPM; PG.Dip.in Crl.Laws.--Retired/Asst. Security Commissioner/RPF & President, RPF Pensioner's Welfare Assn., South Central Railway, HQ: Secunderabad)

History of STRUGGLE TO HAVE ‘Right to get Pension’ is over 150 years. After Independence Struggle in India in 1857, the British Govt. introduced the pension system what was being followed in England. This was just to make a provision to retired employees, under powers of mercy of the British, not as a Fundamental Right, made through Indian Pension Act, 1871.  We the members of RPFPWA, SCRly, Zone (Affiliated to AIRRF) are celebrating Pensioner's Day on 17-12-2014 at Secunderabad, Vijayawada and at Tirupathi.

A pensioner always to remember this day as is rightly recognized and that the fight of our great leader Mr.D.S.Nakara (always alive in our minds and thoughts, hence not writing as Late) in achieving the benefits now what we are enjoying through Supreme Court's Land Mark Judgment. The Petitioner in the case, Shri D.S.Nakara, was a retired Financial Advisor in the Ministry of Finance, an officer from Indian Defence Service Audit and Accounts, retired in 1972. He faced some problems in getting pension like all other pensioners. He moved the matter through a petition in the Honorable Supreme Court, case came up before Honorable Justice Yashavantrao Chandrachud, the then Chief Justice heard the case, ruled that 'Pension is neither a gift nor a reward or bounty' ‘Pension is the right of a retired Government servant who had served nation for a long time...’, Government is bound to ensure that the employees lead a peaceful and honorable life after retirement.

This historical judgment was issued on 17th Dec 1982.This is the reason why 17th December is chosen as 'Pensioners' Day', is observed as “Pensioners’ Day” by various organizations of the Pensioners in India. AS PER TIMES OF INDIA NEWS OF 04-02-1996, it is placed in the Gunnies Book of World Record, as, by this Judgment 20 Lakhs of pensioners benefited (it may be now around 50 Lakhs). By virtue of this, we are getting the pension, as a right… and not mere mercy of GOI.

The GOI recognized services rendered by every pensioner what we have done, foregoing young age comforts duly sacrificing other homely entertainment, facilities, dedicating our energy and life for service orientation/the job. This PENSION, WHAT WE ARE GETTING is but for the service rendered to the Nation and for social growth. WE are all still physically and mentally active in all aspects and ready to serve the Society and the Govt. This judgment resulted in the Recommendations of the IV Central Pay Commission (1984) and for Pension Revision, whenever there is a pay revision through Pay Commissions (now VII CPC).

This Judgment conferred the Right of the Pensioner to get their Pension including Dearness Relief. WE FULLY SUPPORT ALL MATTERS CONCERNING TO THE PENSIONERS.

The VI Pay Commission considered the views and values of service of pensioners and made recommendations and submitted its report to the Government on 31st March 2008. It may be submitted herein, that though the GOI considered most of the recommendations and made effective from First Jan, 2006, but, in other crucial issues (most beneficial to the Pensioners):

1)            Like MACP, it was made effective only from First September, 2008, and not from 01-01-2006, by which many pensioners have lost their valid service beyond 30 years, but for the reason that they have retired before Sept., 2008. The GOI is not considering the service of 30-40 years and more, but sticking to their own decision UNDER THE COVER OF POLOCIY MAKERS decision as Final;

2)            Policy making, decision to implement an Order and its effective date is in hands of the GOI, and in my considered opinion, no Court of Law can interfere in the Policy Making of the GOI, unless there is some transgression, violation of Law/Constitution provisions, etc. I hope, the GOI can, still consider this matter and see that JUSTICE IS DONE TO ALL THE PENSIONERS WHO RETIRED PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER, 2008 OR WHO RENDERED SERVICE BEYOND 30 YEARS OF CONTINUOUS SERVICE BEFORE RETIREMENT.

3)            Kindly compare the pension of the pre-MACP pensioners with that of pro-2008 retiree’s pension and uphold the dignity of labour and the service rendered by pre-MACP pensioners. ( pre-MACP pensioner with 30-40 years of service getting about Rs.3000-5000/- less pension than that of MACP pensioner retired after Sept.2008- Fundamental Rights of pensioner/equal rank/equal pension and FR309 stands hanging in between Policy and Right Judgment and Order).

4)            Likewise, pre-2006 pensioner’s hope of getting Justice and revised pension from First Jan, 2006 is also not yet materialized though DOP&PW gave Orders of Honorable Supreme Court/CAT implementation only to the Petitioners. AND NOT FOR ALL PRE-2006 RETIREES.

5)            Another example is that in CPOs/CPMFs (Central Police Organizations/Central Para-Military Forces) as per V CPC recommendations pay scales were made effective from the date of implementation, but for RPF/Railways first gave Railway Pay Scales to RPF and later extended CPOs Pay Scales only from the date of Separate/Special Order, say after about 1-2 years of V CPC implementation date (01-01-1996). By this pre-2006 RPF Pensioners were given Grade Pay  differently , as for example, some Retired RPF Inspectors were given Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- while some others given Rs.4200/-(SI grade pay), same fate for others in other Ranks also. In spite grate struggle, this parity/differential equation is continuing.

6)            Justice delayed, Justice denied, Justice denied, Justice buried. GREAT EXPECTATIONS AMINATES THROUGH AN INDIVIDUAL AND SLOWLY SPREAD LIKE WILD FIRE, REACHES PINNACLE TO ACHIEVE ITS JUST AND JUSTIFIED DEMANDS AND SHALL BE RECOGNISED BY THE RULER/GOI ON ONE OR THE OTHER DAY, LIKE OUR INDEPENCE STRUGGLE, WHICH WE ARE NOW ENJOYING.

WE PRAY THE GOI TO RENDER JUSTICE TO ALL.

YE HOSOLONKA UDAN HAI. JAI HIND.

·        *For more information kindly read:

____________________________________________________________

·       D.S. Nakara & Others Vs Union Of India Judgment on 17^th  December, 1982:

·       Citations: 1983 AIR 130, 1983 SCR (2) 165…

·       Constitution of India, Article-14-Central Civil Services(Pension) Rules,  1972 and Regulations governing pension for Armed  Forces  Personnel-Liberalization in  computation  of pension effective  from specified date-Divides pensioners so as to  confer benefit  on some while denying  it to others-Classification arbitrary, devoid of rational nexus to object of liberalization and violative of Art. 14   Constitution   of   India,   Art.    14-Doctrine      of severability-Severance may have effect of enlarging scope of legislation.     Rules  and  Regulations  governing    grant  of  pension-Pension is  a right-Deferred  portion  of  compensation   for service rendered-Also a social-welfare measure.

·      The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DESAI,J. , with a slight variation to suit the context Woolesey's prayer : "had I served my God as reverently as I did my king, I would not have fallen on these days of penury… I fall on 172the thorns of life I bleed.' Old age, ebbing mental and physical prowess, atrophy of both muscle and brain powers permeating these petitions, the petitioners in the fall of life yearn for equality of treatment which is being meted out to those who are soon going to join and swell their own ranks….”

·        Do pensioners entitled to receive superannuation or retiring pension under Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 ('1972 Rules' for short) form a class as a whole ? Is the date of retirement a relevant consideration for eligibility when a revised formula for computation of pension is ushered in and made effective from a specified date ? Would differential treatment to pensioners related to the date of retirement qua the revised formula for computation of pension attract Article 14 of the Constitution and the element of discrimination liable to be declared unconstitutional as being violative of Article 14 ?

·       These and the related questions debated in this group of petitions call for an answer in the backdrop of a welfare State and bearing in mind that pension is a socio-economic justice measure providing relief when advancing age gradually but irrevocably impairs capacity to stand on one's own feet.

·     Any  member of the public having sufficient interest can maintain  an action for  judicial redress for  public  injury arising  from breach of public duty or from violation of some  provision of  the Constitution          or the law and seek enforcement of such public  duty  and observance of such constitutional or  legal  provision.  The  locus  standi  of petitioner No.3 which seeks to enforce rights that may be available to  a large  number of  old, infirm retirees  is unquestionable as   it is   a  non-political, non-profit, voluntary  organization registered  under the  Societies Registration Act,  1860 and  its members  consist of  public spirited citizens who have taken up the cause of ventilating legitimate public problems.

·       With the expanding horizons of socio-economic justice, the socialist Republic and welfare State which we endeavour to set up and largely influenced by the fact that the old men who retired when emoluments were comparatively low and are exposed to vagaries of continuously rising prices, the falling value of the rupee consequent upon inflationary inputs, we are satisfied that by introducing an arbitrary eligibility criteria: 'being in service and retiring subsequent to the specified date' for being eligible for the liberalised pension scheme and thereby dividing a homogeneous class, the classification being not based on any discernible rational principle and having been found wholly unrelated to the objects sought to be achieved by grant of liberalised pension and the eligibility criteria devised being thoroughly arbitrary, we are of the view that the eligibility for liberalised pension scheme of being in service on the specified date and retiring subsequent to that date' in impugned memoranda, Exhibits P-I and P-2, violates Art. 14 and is unconstitutional and is struck down. Both the memoranda shall be enforced and implemented as read down as under: In other words, in Exhibit P-1, the words:

·       "that in respect of the Government servants who were in service on the 31st March, 1979 and retiring from service on or after that date" 210and in Exhibit P-2, the words:

·       "the new rates of pension are effective from 1st April 1979 and will be applicable to all service officers who became/become non-effective on or after that date." are unconstitutional and are struck down with this specification that the date mentioned therein will be relevant as being one from which the liberalised pension scheme becomes operative to all pensioners governed by 1972 Rules irrespective of the date of retirement. Omitting the unconstitutional part it is declared that all pensioners governed by the 1972 Rules and Army Pension Regulations shall be entitled to pension as computed under the liberalised pension scheme from the specified date, irrespective of the date of retirement. Arrears of pension prior to the specified date as per fresh computation is not admissible. Let a writ to that effect be issued. But in the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.