RETIREMENT BENEFITS

retirement-age-galore:-indianmandarins’-reports-proved-accurate

Retirement age galore: Indianmandarins’ reports proved accurate

Lowering the retirement age of the Central Govt employees had been the most discussed issue in past few months. Several such versions were floating across media claiming each of them to be authentic one but it was Indianmandarins which relied on its own top sources and its successive news reports denying any such move of lowering the retirement age from 60 yrs to 58 yrs.  

Indianmandarins questioned (21.09.2019) the growing uncertainty over retirement age issue and made an effort (23.09.2019) to expose the rumours through a reality check. Terming the rumour on ‘proposal of lowering the retirement age’ a ghost Indianmandarins in its report dated 05.11.2019 underlined that “....contrary to the rumours Indianmandarins’ learnt through some key officials that no such proposal has been initiated as yet.”

Finally, Union Minister for Personnel Dr Jitendra Singh (on 27.11.2019) said in a written reply to Lok Sabha; "No Sir. Presently, there is no proposal to reduce age of retirement on superannuation from 60 years to 58 years,"

It may be underlined that MPs Kaushal Kishore and Upendra Singh Rawat had asked whether there was any proposal before the government to decrease the retirement age of central government employees from 60 years to 58 years or under article 56(J) of compulsory retirement on attaining the age of 50 years.

Further, in his reply, the Dr Jitendra Singh said that there were provisions under Fundamental Rules 56(j), Rule 48 of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 and Rule 16(3) (Amended) of All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958, according to which the government has the absolute right to retire officials prematurely, on the ground of lack of integrity or ineffectiveness, in public interest, by giving notice of not less than three months in writing or three months' pay and allowances in lieu of such notice.

CLICK TO READ:

Retirement age 58 years: The ghost returns (News dated 05.11.2019)

NaMo Administration and retirement age: Rumours Vs reality (News dated 23.09.2019)

Uncertainty over retirement age galore: Buck must stop? (News dated 21.09.2019)


29 Nov 2019
premature-retirement:-154-sag-&-hag-officers-being-reviewed

Premature-retirement: 154 SAG & HAG officers being reviewed

If some well-placed sources are to be believed Railways Ministry has kick-started the NaMo administration’s directives of periodic review of officials to find out fit cases for premature retirement.

Reportedly, Railway Board is reviewing the services of 154 Indian Railway Medical Service (IRMS) officers at Senior Administrative Grade and Higher Administrative Grade who have attained 50 yrs of age or would be attaining 50 yrs of age in between 01.01.2020 to 31.03.2020.

Railway Board is appeared to have conveyed to the Zonal Railways that the screening of all IRMS officers between the above mentioned age brackets be carried out by an by internal committee. The Board has set 31.10.2019 as the deadline for submition of reports.

It may be mentioned that only 154 IRMS officers are presently working directly under the Railway Board whereas rest of the IRMS officers work under the direct supervision of Zonal Railways.

24 Oct 2019
retirement-age-galore:-indianmandarins’-reports-proved-accurate

Retirement age galore: Indianmandarins’ reports proved accurate

By IndianMandarins 29 Nov 2019

Lowering the retirement age of the Central Govt employees had been the most discussed issue in past few months. Several such versions were floating across media claiming each of them to be authentic one but it was Indianmandarins which relied on its own top sources and its successive news reports denying any such move of lowering the retirement age from 60 yrs to 58 yrs.  

Indianmandarins questioned (21.09.2019) the growing uncertainty over retirement age issue and made an effort (23.09.2019) to expose the rumours through a reality check. Terming the rumour on ‘proposal of lowering the retirement age’ a ghost Indianmandarins in its report dated 05.11.2019 underlined that “....contrary to the rumours Indianmandarins’ learnt through some key officials that no such proposal has been initiated as yet.”

Finally, Union Minister for Personnel Dr Jitendra Singh (on 27.11.2019) said in a written reply to Lok Sabha; "No Sir. Presently, there is no proposal to reduce age of retirement on superannuation from 60 years to 58 years,"

It may be underlined that MPs Kaushal Kishore and Upendra Singh Rawat had asked whether there was any proposal before the government to decrease the retirement age of central government employees from 60 years to 58 years or under article 56(J) of compulsory retirement on attaining the age of 50 years.

Further, in his reply, the Dr Jitendra Singh said that there were provisions under Fundamental Rules 56(j), Rule 48 of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 and Rule 16(3) (Amended) of All India Services (Death-cum-Retirement Benefits) Rules, 1958, according to which the government has the absolute right to retire officials prematurely, on the ground of lack of integrity or ineffectiveness, in public interest, by giving notice of not less than three months in writing or three months' pay and allowances in lieu of such notice.

CLICK TO READ:

Retirement age 58 years: The ghost returns (News dated 05.11.2019)

NaMo Administration and retirement age: Rumours Vs reality (News dated 23.09.2019)

Uncertainty over retirement age galore: Buck must stop? (News dated 21.09.2019)


premature-retirement:-154-sag-&-hag-officers-being-reviewed

Premature-retirement: 154 SAG & HAG officers being reviewed

By IndianMandarins 24 Oct 2019

If some well-placed sources are to be believed Railways Ministry has kick-started the NaMo administration’s directives of periodic review of officials to find out fit cases for premature retirement.

Reportedly, Railway Board is reviewing the services of 154 Indian Railway Medical Service (IRMS) officers at Senior Administrative Grade and Higher Administrative Grade who have attained 50 yrs of age or would be attaining 50 yrs of age in between 01.01.2020 to 31.03.2020.

Railway Board is appeared to have conveyed to the Zonal Railways that the screening of all IRMS officers between the above mentioned age brackets be carried out by an by internal committee. The Board has set 31.10.2019 as the deadline for submition of reports.

It may be mentioned that only 154 IRMS officers are presently working directly under the Railway Board whereas rest of the IRMS officers work under the direct supervision of Zonal Railways.

namo-administration-and-retirement-age:-rumours-vs-reality

NaMo Administration and retirement age: Rumours Vs reality

By IndianMandarins 23 Sep 2019

When one becomes a government servant, the most certain thing is tenure of service and retirement age. But today it has become the most uncertain thing albeit for the time being only. Changing rules of the game everywhere is the new normal. Making uncertain things certain (Demo & Article 370 are living examples) and certain things uncertain has been the hallmark of the NaMo Administration so far.

 

Lowering the retirement age of the Central Govt employees has been the most discussed issue of late. Several such versions are floating across media claiming each of them to be authentic one. It has heavily pre-occupied the mind space of govt officials and medipersons alike and none of them having any clear version about the truth of this piece of information. Even most of the senior members of Indian bureaucracy are anxious and inquisitive about the authenticity of what have been doing rounds for the last 4-5 days.

 

Social media is flooded with different versions. One such message reads, “DoPT has finalized proposals for implementation of 33 years service or 60 years age whichever is early for retirement on superannuation for all government employees. File sent to finance ministry for implementation w. e. f. 1.4.2020.”

 

Surprisingly, a list of senior civil servants was also circulated on social-media on Sunday announcing their new date of retirement. But it was also interesting that the list was only about IRS officers as if someone was trying to make them jittery.

 

Another document also found prime space in social-media having caption “DoPT seeks service profile of central services”.


Information and documents as above mentioned, intended to underline that retirement age (60 yrs or 33 yrs of service) was just a matter of announcement. May be true but at the same time Govt must come up with its true version. When ambiguity dominates public space like in the case of ‘Ganesh ji drinking milk’, the government version is announced to put thing in perspective.

 

Indianmandarins spoke to several senior bureaucrats across services and batches but most of them were unsure of any such move finding themselves among mute-spectators. When people sitting in high offices become uncertain even about certain things it castes its shadow downward as well.

 

In fact, several theories, though none of them convincing, are also being attached to the retirement age galore.

 

One such theory suggests that it may have been the game-plan of opposition ahead of Delhi Assembly elections as a big chunk of voters are from service class with influence. Earlier, same set of rhetoric of  retirement age did rounds ahead of Delhi elections.

 

The other theory doing round suggests that it might be a part of design to distract public attention from gleaming economic parameters. It is also being said that receiving Rs 1.76 lakh crore from RBI and big tax cut in corporate tax to boost economy, the government might have firm plan to address unemployment issue. This theory, to an extent, makes some sense as the move of lowering the retirement age may add up lakhs of recruitment every year.  But the flip side is that the government would have to cough up huge money for PF and gratuity payments.

 

Moreover, in case it turns out to be true early age entrants (at 22-24 yrs) who once exhibited competence and promising career prospects may be at the receiving end than those ones who entered civil service quite late. 

 

Another version too sounds convincing enough. A very senior civil servant told Indianmandarins that the NaMo administration has great appetite for experiments in governance and administration like in the cases 360 degree method, lateral entry, aspirational districts, IAS probationers as Assistant Secretary in Govt of India and many more. It has bigg appetite for bigger risks as well (e.g. Demo, GST and Article 370). And this debate over retirement age galore too could be part of NaMo administration’s scheme of thing but it seems to be at the nascent stage. The officials told Indianmandarins that it appears that the move could have been initiated from the very top that’s why most of the senior level officials are still less exposed to information on any such initiative.

 

Another official told Indianmandarins that as far as the new civil list with revised retirement date might be part of some ongoing exercise to gauge number of vacancy and monetary implications and floating the list of IRS officers must have been made viral from some IT enthusiast.

 

It may be recalled that following a similar sustained rumours Dr Jitendra Singh (MoS Personnel & PMO) had, in a written reply in the Rajya Sabha, put to rest all speculations on retirement age reduction (In December 2015) by saying that "the retirement age for Central Government employees was revised from 58-60 years in 1997 on the basis of recommendations of the fifth Central Pay Commission," and that there was no such proposal "at present" to reduce the age from 60 to 58 years.

 

So will NaMo Govt come up with any such official statement approving or disapproving any such proposal on retirement age once again?

 

Obviously, speedy action on the provisions of 56J has added to the panic related to the retirement age.

 

Whatever be the truth the ongoing scenario has left various questions which may be answered in phases and they are: Has NaMo administration finalised a new retirement policy for govt employees adding new provisio of ’33 years of service or 60 years whichever earlier’ been added’? Has DoPT sent the policy decision to the Department of Expenditure for evaluation and assessment of cost of mass retirement? Will it pass judicial scrutiny? Will the move boost employment and economy? And lastly, will the policy, if already finalised, be effective w.e.f. 01.04.2020? A big question mark everywhere. And one may say that ‘the buck must stop’ somewhere.

(CLICK to read related story)

Uncertainty over retirement age galore: Buck must stop?

https://www.indianmandarins.com/news/uncertainty-over-retirement-age-galore:-buck-must-stop-/19128

(By Rakesh Ranjan, Editor-in-chief)

uncertainty-over-retirement-age-galore:-buck-must-stop-

Uncertainty over retirement age galore: Buck must stop?

By IndianMandarins 21 Sep 2019

For the past few years the ghost of retirement age has been haunting civil servants over and over again. It not only makes them apprehensive but keeps them on tenterhooks as well leaving them clueless that who’s and what purpose does it serve? And at what cost?

 

Sometime it is about lowering the retirement from 60 to 58 and sometime it is about increasing it from 60 to 62. The rumours keep oscilating between 58 to 62. Both ways the only certainty about retirement age is that there is uncertainty. Is this the response to clarion call made on employment generation?

 

This doesn’t seem to be the answer rather it is keeping bureaucracy in flux making their work hamper especially those who are at important positions. Moreover, it is the responsibility of the government of the day to clarify on issues like this traveling in public domain. But if the government wants to keep its officials at tenterhooks by such ambiguity, its prudence will be questioned for sure!

precedent-set:-no-vrs-and-pensionary-benefits-for-absconding-officers

Precedent set: No VRS and pensionary benefits for absconding officers

By IndianMandarins 08 Apr 2019

The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has dismissed the case of a former senior IAS officer and brother of former Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, for voluntary retirement from service and pensionary benefits. Sanjeev Singh Ahluwalia is a 1980 batch UP cadre officer.

 

In 2005, he was on Central deputation, holding the post of Joint Secretary in the Department of Disinvestment. On his request, he was repatriated to his parent cadre before completion of the term of deputation in the Union Finance Ministry. Thereafter, he made efforts for deputation abroad.

 

Finally, he got what he wanted and got the permission to accept an assignment of the World Bank to serve in Sudan for a period of one year between September 18, 2005, and September 17, 2006.

However, after the completion of his one-year foreign posting, he didn't report back to his cadre state for duty.


Ahluwalia informed the tribunal that he had been making representations for extension of leave beyond September 17, 2006, but the same was not considered. He said that he could not join duty in India on account of factors beyond his control, as well as some family issues and that though he had submitted an application for voluntary retirement in accordance with law, this was not considered at all.


Nikhil Majithia, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, said: "The applicant did not pursue the matter pertaining to the voluntary retirement till he reached the age of superannuation. It is natural that the application for voluntary retirement loses relevance once the employee attains the age of superannuation."


Majithia said that left with no alternative, the state government had issued a notice under rule 7(2)(c) of the Leave Rules, and it was only a year later that the applicant responded with an explanation.

"The application for voluntary retirement can only be considered if he (Ahluwalia) was on duty in the cadre, and since the applicant was not even available in the country, let alone on the post, the application was not considered," the Centre's counsel said in court.


On April 19, 2010, Ahluwalia forwarded an application seeking voluntary retirement under the terms of the relevant All India Service Rules. The Centre rejected his application on the ground that he wasn't given any extension beyond a year of his foreign posting, and yet he did not report on duty after the expiry of his foreign assignment.


Dismissing Ahluwalia's petition, CAT Chairman Justice L. Narasimha Reddy said: "Being an administrator himself, the applicant was supposed to bring about discipline in the various establishments. However, he did not introspect whether his acts and omissions were leading to violation of any provision of law."


The tribunal noted that the unauthorized period of absence of the applicant was six years and one month.


The tribunal noted that the Uttar Pradesh government had issued a notice on October 10, 2011, seeking an explanation from the official as to why he shall not be deemed to have resigned from service. Ahluwalia submitted his explanation on May 17, 2012, and he attained the age of superannuation on October 31, 2012.


The tribunal observed that if a member of the service who is on valid leave for a period exceeding five years, can be deemed to have resigned, the applicant, who remained on unauthorized absent for six years, cannot keep himself on a higher pedestal.


"Hence, any contention raised in this behalf becomes redundant", the tribunal noted.

free stat counter