Wednesday, September 28, 2016

100% DA APPEAL FILED BY UBI DISMISSED

Here is another favorable judgement in favour of pre 2002 pensioners from Kolkatta High Court under APO 315/2015 dated 26.09.2016.It may be recalled, that while delivering the verdict in Writ Petition NO. 507 of 2012 filed by United Bank of India Retirees' Welfare Association and Others against United Bank of India and Others,on extending 100% DA to pre Nov 2002 pensioners,before Hon : HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA on 4 th March 2015 learned Single Judge I P Mukerji, made it clear that :"In my opinion, the classification made in this case just as in the case of DS Nakara, is arbitrary and highly irrational. There is no intelligible difference between the pre 1st November, 2002 and post 1st November, 2002 retirees'. The artificial classification is discriminatory of one class of retired employees" and directed as follows: 
 " The Board of the respondent bank in consultation with the Central government and the Reserve Bank of India to take a reasoned decision, in the light of the above observations and findings regarding payment of 100% dearness relief to the pre November-2002 retirees' of the respondent bank by 30th June, 2015."
However management of United Bank of India preferred Against this verdict before Division Bench of KHC.The good news is the same Appeal is dismissed by HC and decided in favour of Retired Employees Assosciation and directed :
"We find that the distinction, between the pre-November, 2002 retirees and post-November, 2002 retirees, is unreasonable, arbitraryand discriminatory. There is no justification for the same. Thougheach bank which is a member of the Indian Banks Association has aseparate identity, the mandate of the Pension Regulations which have astatutory force of law, cannot be altered by a joint note.
Therefore, we direct the Bank to comply with Regulation 6 of the Pension Regulations and to pay pension to the pre-2002 retirees at the same rate as enjoyed by the post-2002 retirees, as has been paid to the retired employees of the Reserve Bank of India. The judgment of the learned Single Judge is modified to that extent. "



9 comments:

  1. Good news for retired prior 2002 But implementation of order is relying for the reasons unknown

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good news for retired prior 2002 But implementation of order is relying for the reasons unknown

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's most welcoming decision to uphold the judgement against appeal by the bank in the payment of 100℅ DA for all as a rule but it's painful to delay the process of payment which should have been taken to task to the concerned responsible persons.

    ReplyDelete
  4. It's most welcoming decision to uphold the judgement against appeal by the bank in the payment of 100℅ DA for all as a rule but it's painful to delay the process of payment which should have been taken to task to the concerned responsible persons.

    ReplyDelete
  5. We hope implementation will take soon.

    ReplyDelete
  6. We all know how the IBA-TradeUnion nexus has played every game to deny the just and fair DA to the retirees. Many of the retirees are no more on this earth to hear the sweet verdict of the court. Let me caution all the pre 2002 retirees that this may not be the final show as the anti-retiree IBA-TradeUnion nexus will leave no stone unturned to deny/delay the just and fair payment. They have all the resources to waste on further litigation as no one in IBA-TradeUnion is accountable to his/her action. If all their attempts fail and it becomes inevitable for banks to pay the dues, the TradeUnions will encash the opportunity by claiming that the fruits are due to their efforts.

    ReplyDelete
  7. implementation of DA 100% seems nearer consequent on the judgement and acceptance of suo moto appeal also by supreme court.Let us watch what IBA proposes now to UBI.Earlier IBA was asking us to wait for decision of the division bench in karnataka high court which went against us .Now the division bench decision is in our favour.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete