NOIP Circular No 37

NATIONAL ORGANISATION OF INSURANCE PENSIONERS

Regn No.PN 4769 (Regd under Indian T U Act, 1926)

(Affiliated to Bharateeya Mazdoor Sangh)

BMS Office, Vishwakarma Bhavan, 185, Shaniwar Peth, Pune 411030.

 President: T.C. Gunesh Kumar Working President: Vilas V. Purkar General Secretary: Ashok J. Joshi

 Mob No: 9880683639 Mob No: 9922166599 Mob No: 9561084182 & 9945104570

Date: 18-12-2023

Cir No 37/2023

The Chairperson,

L I C of India, Central Office,

“Yogakshema”, Jeevan Bima Marg,

MUMBAI

Dear Sir,

Re: 100% DR neutralization to pre-8/97 retirees

This is further to our letter dtd 03-09-2023 to your good self, followed by our discussions with Shri.

Bhanoo ji, MD on 02-11-2023 on all the pending issues, including the captioned matter.

We have been demanding 100% DR neutralization to the retirees, who have retired prior to 01-08-1997.

After plethora of cases in various Courts, ultimately the case was decided by the Delhi HC in 2016 and

unfortunately, the Delhi HC verdict gave its own truncated DR formula, which works out to be much less

than 100% DR neutralization. In this regard the following facts are more relevant-

➢ This segment of pensioners has been unjustly denied of 100% neutralization of DR by the

introduction of Rule 3(A) to the Appendix IV (see rule 37) of Pension Rules, 1995.

➢ Regular Appeal No 9223/2013 came up for hearing on 7-5-2015 in the SC. Appeal was

adjourned but interim relief of 20% was ordered by the Supreme Court. This was possible,

because the SC found the strength in the valid arguments put forth by the pensioners’

associations.

➢ On 31-3-2016, Appeal 9223/2013 was disposed off by remanding the matter to Delhi HC for

deciding the constitutional validity of Rule 3(A). And also, a second IR of 20% was granted by

the SC, thus further strengthening the case in favour of affected pensioners.

➢ On 27-04-2017, Delhi HC delivered its second judgement and finds the complaint of

discrimination valid, but prescribes its own truncated formula for rectifying the DR anomaly.

➢ Against the above judgement of Delhi HC, SLPs were filed by the pensioners’ associations in the

SC. First date of listing of SLPs for hearing happened to be 10-01-2018 and thereafter there

were only adjournments. As on date SLPs are still pending in the SC.

➢ The 40% IR paid as per the SC order dtd 31-03-2016 was recovered from the beneficiaries, while

implementing the truncated order of Delhi HC, though it was not to be recovered as per the

order

➢ From the details given above, it will be seen that the judiciary has clearly indicated that,

adopting a stand of discriminating one group of pensioners in regard to the basis of Dearness Relief offends the constitutional right to equality; as otherwise SC would not have granted

interim relief of 20% each, twice and besides the Delhi HC in its second judgement of 2016 has

had in clear terms accepted the stand of the petitioners.

➢ The same issue stands sorted out already for Bank pensioners, as elucidated in our earlier letter

dtd. 3rd September 2023, written to your good self.

➢ Most of the pre 8/97 retirees are no more. Only a minuscule number of survivors in this

category, plus some family pensioners would be benefited if 100% neutralisation is brought.

Sir, you have the distinction of first ever Chief of LIC with a legal background. And you may

please appreciate that, this issue has now lost its relevance in its proper perspective at this

point of time. The issue can be put an end to at your level itself, if you deem fit, by issuing

appropriate administrative instructions, since the outlay involved is quite insignificant.

We look forward to your generous approach in the matter.

With kind regards,

 Yours Sincerely,

 General Secretary