International Labor Day - A Day of Reckoning for L.I.C of India

 

This International Labor Day, L.I.C of India must be brought to book!

Dear friends,

                    

                  Today should be the day of reckoning for L.I.C of India, our ex-employer, which has unjustly deprived us of our rightful dues, since more than two decades. It must come to its senses today, wake up and undo its wrong-doing towards us. Will this International Labor Day prove to be lucky for us, or just fade away into History like the past ones?                   

All of us must unite and collectively fight for our legal dues, with all our might. 

Let's wake up the sleeping giant!                                                                                                                                                                                                            

Priya

P.S. This post was carried verbatim, last year too, on this day! How many more of such International Labor Days must pass by, for L.I.C of India to come to its senses, undo its wrongdoings and bestow justice; regard the Supreme Court's judgments for a change?        

It's high time that the Prime Minister and the Finance Minister stepped in, to put in a strong word for the long-suffering, resigning ex-employees.        

Now that the concerned agencies are cracking a whip on the white-collar criminals, why not do the same with L.I.C of India? After all, it has been illegally repudiating our dues regularly, since 1997!

Consider this extract from a Supreme Court judgment, in 2007: 

SC - "Proviso of Para 3 is struck sown ultra vires"

 K. S. Raina.                                                                                       -      ------------Petitioner.

                        Versus

Union of India and others.                                                                         --------Respondents.

Coram:

The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?*                                    Yes.

For the Petitioner:                                                  Ms. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate.

For Respondent No. 1:                                         Ms. Shilpa Sood,

Central Government Counsel.

For Respondents No. 2 & 3:                                Mr. Ashwani Sharma, Advocate.

Rajiv Sharma, J.

It has come in the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 that the wage revision of the employees of the nationalized insurance companies follows a periodicity of five years, i.e. 1^st August 1987, 1^st August 1992, 1^st August 1997 and 1^st August 2002. Thus, it is evident that in normal circumstances wage revision should have taken place in the year 2002 instead of 2005.

Classification made by the employer on the basis of seeking premature retirement on the basis of two sets of retirement schemes is not sustainable being irrational and discriminatory. 

The petitioner has a constitutional right to get his pay including the revision in the pay scale and it is settled law by law the fundamental rights can neither be waived off nor bartered away.

The action of the respondents is not supported by any rational basis or intelligible differentia.

In the present case the petitioner was in fact in employment as on 1^st August 2002, the date from which the Notification (Annexure P-4) dated 21^st December 2005 has been made applicable.

Consequently, in view of the observations made above, send proviso of Para 3 of the Notification dated 21^st December 2005 is struck sown being ultra vires to the extent it deprives the petitioner and other similarly situated persons to get the benefit of revised pay scale with effect from 1^st August 2002 after applying the principle of severability.

According, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is held entitled to get the revised pay scale corresponding to his post he was occupying as on 1^st August 2002 till 15^th March 2004. The respondents are directed to work out the arrears etc. within six weeks from today.

December 3, 2007                                                                                      (Rajiv Sharma), J.

*************************************************************************************************

Source: Supreme Court and High Court judgments relating to Insurance. 

Broad daylight robbery by L.I.C of India again!

EXCERPT FROM THE GAZETTE OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Financial Services)

NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 15th April, 2021

G.S.R. 267(E)

(3) These rules shall be applicable to those Class I Officers who were in the whole-time salaried service in the permanent establishment of the Corporation on or after the 1st August, 2017:

Provided that where any Class I Officer gives a notice in writing to the Corporation, within a period as specified by the Corporation, expressing his option to be governed by the provisions of these rules with effect from a date which is not earlier than 1st August, 2017 and not later than the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette, then the Corporation may, by order, permit such Officer to be governed by these rules with effect from the said date and no arrears for the period prior to the date so opted shall be payable to such officer:

Provided further that an officer whose resignation had been accepted or whose services had been terminated under rule 39 of Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Rules, 1960 during the period from 1st August, 2017 to the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette, shall not be eligible for the arrears on account of revision under these rules.

END OF EXCERPT

**********

Deja vu again!

L.I.C of India, the premier Government owned organization has again included the Clause 3 ii b by which resigning employees' arrears payments will be repudiated again, despite a Supreme Court judgment that has declared this Clause to be ultra vires.

Whom is the Corporation and Government trying to fool? Its stake-holders or the esteemed Supreme Court which can haul them up for repeated Contempt of Court?

Just omitting the nomenclature ii b does not make the said clause legal! It is as illegal and unjust as ever, as it has the exact wordings by which the arrears are blatantly repudiated in contravention of our fundamental right to wages; in each Charter of wage revision since 1997.  The esteemed Supreme Court's judgment of 2007 had declared this Clause 3 ii b to be ultra vires.

Will the Corporation and the Government never ever mend their ways and mete out justice to all of us resigning employees who have been denied our arrears' payments and the corresponding difference in statutory payments like Provident Fund and Gratuity?

Why act 'holier than thou' while bringing other criminals who don't pay their employees, share or debenture-holders or default on their loan or mortgage payments to banks, to book; for their crimes, when you are sweeping your own crime under the proverbial carpet since more than two decades?

 It is just like the pot calling the kettle black!

Not paying us our dues is also a crime, in case you need to be reminded!

It is thus downright shameful that such a Government owned premier insurance organization even thinks of announcing an I.P.O. when it can't be ethical and pay us our dues. This injustice has been going on since 1st August, 1997.

Rest assured, dear long-suffering resigning ex-employees, this crusade will end only when all of us get back our dues with accrued interest!

Isn't it often said, "Bhagwan ke ghar mein der hai, andher nahi!"

Let's trust in God and keep up the josh!

SATYAMEVA JAYATE!