You are Visitor No:

Thursday, December 1, 2011

An Eye-opener from SHAJI DAVIS

Dear friend,

Though our case at Ranchi HC is going to be a milestone the following vital details are missing. So people are groping in darkness:
In the Original Affidavit submitted by Sri.P N Misra "that this is an application for issuance of a writ or writs, direction or directions commanding the respondents and adopt and formulate the uniform and consistent pension rule for the entire teaching and Non-teaching staff as pension rules as has been adopted and made applicable to the other educational institutions of the central Government, Human Resource department....."
As such does everyone need to file an affidavit and vakalat?
Sl.No.02 of the Original Affidavit Annexure -I. Gazette Notification dated 31.07.2008 has been rejected as there is no such notification. It is only PIB report. Notification  for implementing NPS is dated 04.08.2009
The petitioner has not responded to this in his rejoinder
The All India Sainik Schools Employees Association in a petition filed in this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution has asked for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents, primarily, to extend to the employees working in the Sainik Schools, all the service benefits and advantages in the same pattern as being obtained in Kendriya Vidalya Sangthan. The petitioner's contentions are that the Sainik School Society is `State' within the meaning of Article 12 and is accordingly amenable to claim the enforcement of fundamental rights, and further that the society has to be guided by what is provided in Part 4 of the Constitution by way of Directive Principles of State Policy
Our case is Sri.P N Misra v/s Union of India & others NOT
AINVSA v/s Union of India & others
In the rejoinder submitted by NVS (through Sri.A K Shukla,DC-Sl.No.5 )that the Govt has approved the introduction of the NPS for all the employees of NVS
The petitioner has not challenged this
In the rejoinder submitted by NVS (through Sri.A K Shukla, DC.Sl.No.7)that the govt has never given any assurance that it would be granting pensionary benefit to the employees of the Samiti under the CCS pension Rules 1972.
The petitioner has not challenged this by stating that as per CCS Pension Rules 1972 CPF is not meant for regular employees.
In the rejoinder submitted by NVS (through Sri.A K Shukla, DC.Sl.No.8)it has been stated that there are many organisations in the country which do not have pension under the CCS Pension Rule.

The petitioner has  not challenged this by stating that 26 other organisations have either given one time switching over option or newly implemented GPF-cum pension scheme. Again the petitioner has failed to challenge by presenting the landmark judgement of the Supreme court. No list attached as annexure.
Counter Affidavit filed by NVS through Sri.Alok Verma.Preliminary submission Sl.No.1.Govt of India had approved the introduction of NPS of Govt.of India for all regular employees……
The petitioner has not challenged the matter stating that NPS cannot be implemented in any organisation which does not have GPF-cum-Pesion.Thus it violates pension rule.
Introduction of GPF-cum -Pension
The petitioner is silent on DO letter no.3011/10/81 vide dated 17th July 1995.
Parliamentary Standing Committee Reports
Sl.No04.Annexure 3 series The petitioner presented only the copy of 198 Parliamentary Standing Committee Report and has forgotten 154,168 and 184 Parliamentary Standing Committee reports.
Chaturvedi Committee Report
No Annexure attached.
One time Switch over
No mention in petitotioner’s submission
Dr.Muralimanohar Joshi then HRD Minister strongly recommended
No submission No annexure
Minutes of Meetings held in 2000 Chaired by Secretary(SE&HE) strongly recommended and directed NVS to submit justification for non introduction of GPF-cum-pension
No submission No annexure
There are 103 representations submitted by AINVSA to govt and NVS etc(more are getting retrieved )
Sl.No 05. Annexure 4 series: The petitioner has annexured only 5 representations of AINVSA.
More than 55 documents are there in support of a case
No other documents  annexured  by the Petitioner
50 letters from Govt.Ministers,MPs regarding pension
Nothing is annexured by Petitioner
Documents of 5 other court cases and Sainik School case can support the fight for pension.
Nothing is annexured by Petitioner