From : Ved Prakash Varshney,,
115/F, Pocket-4,
Mayur Vihar Phase-1,
Delhi, 110091,
To :The Chairman,
Union Bank of India,
239,Vidhan Sabha Marg,
Nariman Point,
Munbai-400021.
Reg:- REVISION / UPDATION OF PENSION.
Dear Sir,
.
I am ex-employee of Union Bank of India and to raise /address my grievances I will have to first approach the Bank for its redressal under the mechanism advised by the government of India/MOF regarding the issues of Retirees relating to service matters, which in turn after following due procedure and after passing a resolution in Bank’s Board will have to give a Mandate to IBA for discussing the issues with concerned parties. IBA after discussion will advise the Banks accordingly and the procedure to take up the issue with concerned quarters will be followed.
Kindly note that IBA is not my Employer so the issue of Pension Revision/ Updation of Ex-employees of Banks doesn't come under its jurisdiction, certainly it is the duty of Bank’s Boards to deal with the matter independently. Union Bank of India is a Nationalized Bank and a body corporate constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition & Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, which is “state” in itself as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution of India and is to act in furtherance of the welfare of the subjects of the Pension Regulations, 1995.
Now I submit that as per Pension Regulations, 1995 the Bank gave me an option and I accepted the same. On that basis the Bank started paying Pension to me after my retirement from the services of the Bank. Hence it is a "CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP" between the "BANK" and "PENSIONER" (me) arising out of that contract due to which the BANK is paying Pension to me every month from the Pension Trust Fund Account and nowhere any third party is involved in this contract. Bank cannot escape its responsibility by not extending the benefits as agreed in Memorandum of Understanding 1993 and Pension Regulations, 1995 and diverting the matter to IBA.
Kindly note that after deducting 50% of my SPF contribution amount and paying me Pension in lieu of that as per the "CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP", the Bank is duty bound to honour my already delayed demand of Revision/Updation of Pension as per Pension Regulations, 1995 in letter and spirit.
Sir, I am a member of the Pension Trust Fund of the Union bank of India, governed by its Pension Regulations viz. Union Bank (Employees’) Pension Regulations, 1995, which are statutory and binding on the Bank as Payment of Pension/Updating of Pension being out of the Pension Trust Fund. The Pension Scheme having been commissioned in lieu of CPF Scheme and fed by the contributions which were previously payable by the Bank as contributions to CPF pursuant to EPF and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 comprises of the deferred wages of the Employees held in trust by the Bank for payment to Employees on cessation of employment, though this brings in ZERO expenditure to the Union Bank of India. Yet, the Bank is not Revsing/Updating the Pension in utter disregard of Regulation 35(1) and 56 of the Pension Regulations, 1995 mandating the updating. By not Revising/ Updating Pension to me and similar
Retired Employees, we are being deprived of a life with dignity at old age as our Pension is not revised ever since the inception of the Pension Scheme thus defeating the very purpose of Pension when the Pension Trust Fund account of Bank have got sufficient funds to meet the Pension Revision /Updating of the present Pension to all the Pensioners.
The Pension Fund comprising the deferred wages of the Employees can be used only for payment of Pension as provided under regulation 5 (2) that:
“The Pension Fund shall have for its sole purpose the provision for payment of Pension or Family Pension in accordance with these regulations to the Employee or his Family”.
The Pension Fund of the Banks need not be used for service employees who joined its service after 31.03.2010 as they are covered under the PFRDA Scheme of Pension of the Bank/ Government. As such, the Pension liability of the bank will extinguish in due course of time when the last pensioner breaths his last and the Pension Fund may vest with the bank only. In these circumstance, the Banks are acting in connivance and detaining the money in the Pension Fund without paying the statutory benefits conferred by regulations 35 (1) and 56 with the evil design of snatching it away for themselves in the long run when the beneficiaries of the Pension Fund get extinct.
In terms of section 10 (7) of the Act, the Board of Directors of the Bank can declare a dividend and retain the surplus profits as accumulated reserves only after making due provision for Superannuation Funds like Pension, the said section giving a prior charge to Pension over the profits of the Bank stating as infra Section 10 (7) as :
"After making provision for bad and doubtful debts, depreciation in assets, contributions to staff and superannuation funds and all other matters for which provision is necessary under any law, or which are usually provided for by Banking Companies, a corresponding new Bank may out of its net profits declare a dividend and retain the surplus if any.”
Section 10 (7) of the Act puts an onus on the Bank to pay the statutorily defines Pension even in case of operating in loss. The Bank was declaring dividends in past without paying the statutorily defined Pension in gross derogation of regulations 35 (1) and 56 of the Pension Regulations out of the Pension Trust Fund, neglecting section 10 (7) of the Act.
Section 10 (7) of the Act gives a prior charge to Superannuation Funds over the profits of the Bank which is a statutory guarantee to the Employees while taking over Banks through Act 5 of 1970 and even in case of loss, Banks cannot evade payment of Superannuation benefits. In as much as Pension is payable out of the Pension Trust Fund which is the deferred wages of the Employees and Pension costs ZERO expenditure to Bank, the Banks, by not Revising the Pension as mandated by Pension Regulations 35 (1) and 56 are indulging in a heinous crime of detaining the money of the Employees and denying them their right to live unbecoming of its status as the Government and “state”.
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India too have made it clear in Order dated 01.07.2015 in Civil Appeal No.1123 of 2015 viz. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Mehendra Nath Sharma and dated 13.02.2018 in Civil Appeal No.5525 of 2012 viz. Bank of Baroda & Anr. Vs. G Palani & Ors. emphasizing that Pension and Revision of Pension/Updating of Pension are inseparable/inevitable. The rulings made by the Apex Court says, even when Pension is payable by the State causing an expenditure to the Exchequer, that State cannot take a plea of financial burden to deny the legitimate Pension, as Pension is property within the meaning of Article 19 (1) (f) and 31 (1) of the Constitution. It is the duty of the State Government to avoid any unwarranted litigation etc. and as such the Banks are not justified in denying or delaying due Pension and Updating of Pension that brings in ZERO expenditure to them as Pension is payable out of the money and property of the employees and their deferred wages.
Keeping above in view, I request your good office to give a sympathetic view to my representation and implement in letter and spirit Pension Regulations 35 (1) and 56 which are Bank’s own rendering approved by the Legislature as a subordinate legislation and are the rules in force applicable, and forward/give a required necessary mandate to IBA for discussing and Revising the Basic Pension in tune with the Revision in Pay Bands arising out of Bipartite Settlements to enable IBA to initiate necessary steps in the matter .
I wish to add further that The bank is bound to act in accordance with the ruling of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in order dated 13.02.2018 in Civil Appeal No.5525 of 2012 viz. Bank of Baroda & Anr. Vs. G Palani & Ors. that “the regulations have statutory force, having been framed in exercise of the powers under section 19 (2) (f) of the Act of 1970 and are binding”, and that “That it is it is not permissible to add or subtract any word in a provision is a settled principle in statutory interpretation” since the ruling is squarely applicable in the case of regulations 35 (1) and 56 and disregard to the ruling, could lead to contempt of the Apex Court. Moreover Bank is under an obligation to Revise/Update the Pension of its Ex-mployees in view of the following observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in All India Reserve Bank Retired Officers Association and Ors Vs. Union of India & Ors., (1992) Suppl.1 664) .
“The concept of pension is now well known as has been clarified by this Court time and again. It is not a charity or bounty nor is it gratuitous payment solely dependent on the whim or sweet will of the employer. It is earned for rendering long service and is often described as deferred portion of the compensation for past service. It is in fact in the nature of a social security plan to provide for the December of life of a superannuated employee. Such social security plans are consistent with the socioeconomic requirements of the Constitution when the employer is a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution.”
The Bank’s decision by appropriate authority on the Revision/Updation of Pension be communicated to me within fifteen days from the receipt of this letter.
Thanking You.
Yours faithfully,
(_________signature_____)
Name :Ved Prakash Varshney,
Designation :Retd. Senior Manager,
PF No./ Staff No.73924,
Address :115/F,Pocket-4,
Mayur ihar Phase-1,
Delhi-110091.
Mobile No.9643962593.
Email No.vedprakashvarshney@gmail.com
CC:- 1) Shri ,
M.D. & C.E.O.
Union Bank of India,
Head Office
MUMBAI – 4000021.
for information and necessary action please.
CC:- 2) The General Manager
Union Bank of India,
Personnel Administration Department,
Head Office,
MUMBAI – 4000021.
for information and necessary action please
No comments:
Post a Comment