Benefits of Sixth Pay Commission to Govt employees who retired before 1.1.2006
Benefits of Sixth Pay Commission to retirees...
A question has been raised in the Parliament regarding the benefits of
6th CPC to the employees who retired before 1.1.2006, the Dopt Minister
Shri V.Narayanasamy replied that the orders for implementation of the
decision taken by the Government on the recommendations of 6th CPC for
revision for pension of past pensioners were issued vide this
Department’s Office Memorandum(OM) dated 1.9.2008. The provisions of
Para 4.2 of this OM were clarified vide this Department’s letter dated
3.10.2008.
The Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in its
order dated 1.11.2011 observed that by the OM dated 3.10.2008 the
original orders of 1.9.2008 have been modified. Hon’ble CAT directed
that the past pensioners may be granted, w.e.f. 1.1.2006, a minimum
pension @ 50% of the minimum pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay
scale with reference to the fitment table applicable for revision of pay
of serving employees.
Writ Petitions were filed in the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi challenging the above mentioned order.
In its order dated 29.4.2013, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has upheld
the order dated 1.11.2011. After considering the order of Hon’ble High
Court of Delhi and various representations received in this regard,
Special Leave Petition was filed by the Department of Pension and
Pensioners’ Welfare in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
Department of Pension & Pensioners’ Welfare filed an SLP in the
Hon’ble Supreme Court against this order. This SLP came up for hearing
on 29.7.2013 and was dismissed and the Review Petition was also
dismissed.
Union of India has also filed SLP against the order dated 29.4.2013 in
Writ Petitions No.2348/2012, 2349/2012 and 2350/2012 in the Hon’ble
Supreme Court which came up for hearing on 19.11.2013. The Hon’ble
Supreme Court directed to list the SLP alongwith CA No.8875-8876 of 2011
filed by Ministry of Defence and is now listed for hearing on 4.2.2014.
The matter is therefore sub-judice.
No comments:
Post a Comment