WPNo:16155/1997 M.VENKATESAN Ph:23700049
1. Application to be moved in HC for the REVISION OF PRAYER
2. Revised Prayer:
Normal retirement benefits to be awarded as applicable under CCS Pension rules of 1972 as I am prepared to refund all ILLEGAL AMOUNTS WITH INTEREST paid to me by the EIA.
Export Inspection Agency-a statutory body whose employees are governed by CCS Pension rules of 1972 has implemented illegally SVRS-1994 floating all rules/norms applicable under CCS Pension rules of 1972 in gross violation of articles 309,313,372 & 144 of the CONSTITUTION.
3. Counters filed by the EIA say that the scheme was floated by EIC & approved by Govt.
Violations given below:
· DOPT-Only nodal agency which is empowered to issue directives on surplus staff has not issued any circular pertaining to 1994-SVRS!!!!? Vide DPT No.134/2005-Estt.(A) Dt.18th.August 2005. NODAL DEPARRTENTS NOT INVOLVED
· Commerce Ministry is not empowered to Offer SVRS-1994. *
*
Allocation of Business Rules & the Transaction of Business Rules made by His Excellency The President of India under Article 77 (3) of Constitution of India-cited below:
1.“ Formation of policies” in relation to “pension and other Retirement benefits and other aspects of Personnel Administration” and the “Framing Rules” thereupon, under the “Proviso” to article 309 of the Constitution, are exclusively within the “domain” of the NODAL department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare (especially in cases INVOLVING significant recurring financial implications, under the Department of Expenditure as well); and
2.the exercise of SUPERORDINATE powers in relation to INTERPRETATION/RELAXATION of “any” of the provisions of the aforementioned Rules, inter alia the CCS (commutation of pension) Rules, 1981 is per se exclusively “reserved” to the NODAL Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare and NONE in the “administrative” Ministries/Departments like the Department of Commerce.
· Under Right To Information Act-2005 I got the following ministry of commerce circular:No.3/8/91-EI &EP Dt.21/5/1994 which clearly states that Govt. has not approved this SVRS. However EIA has deliberately suppressed **this fact in its circular & forced /cheated the employees without giving other options (48,48A,FR56-K) as required under Rule 29 of CCS Pension rule of 1972.
**
The clandestine action of the Export Inspection Council( in consultation with Department of Commerce) on the 21st.May 1994 circular- a blemish of “ignoring or overlooking” (willfully) is in violation of Article 144 of Constitution.
Ref: AIR 1989 SC 1133
“EMPLOYEES should NOT be made to suffer ADVERSLY for the DEFAULT OR LAPSE on the part of Government, as it would be ARBITRARY, UNJUST AND UNREASONABLE”
· SVRS was thrust stealthily on me as the dept. has directed me first to apply for VRS before giving explanations about the scheme. I was forced to submit the option Vide letter no: EIA:MS/Admn/gen/94-95/1134 dt.31.5.1994 even before clarifying the terms of the scheme. Deprived my rights for seeking information.
Venkatesan.M
Chennai-33
16th.July2006
WP No.16155/1997
OR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THIS SUIT & TO FILE A FRESH SUIT
My 11years continuous efforts for information from EIC finally succeeded with the introduction of Right to Information Act. I received a reply on 17th.Oct.2005.
The ambiguous SVRS-1994 is ILLEGAL as the Ministry of Commerce itself admits in the letter dt.21/5/1994 that the Govt does not approve the scheme. However the ministry implemented it arbitrarily in gross violation of CCS Pension Rules-1972 &
Articles 309,313,372 and 144 of the Constitution.
In the light of above latest evidences, the cause of action for this suit is entirely changed due to the latest information received by me from the ministry of commerce (EIC/D (Q/C) VRS/121/2005/5195 Dt.10.10.2005) under Right to Information Act-2005. So Hon’ble Court may permit me to withdraw this suit & to file a fresh suit to challenge the SVRS-1994 scheme itself and to get the entire legitimate benefits under the CCS Pension Rules-1972.
Monday, October 30, 2006
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
FOLLOWING IS THE REPLY FOR THE REJECTION OF MY APPEAL BY EIC. BOTH COMMERCE MINISTRY & EIC ARE EQUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CHEATING THE EMPLOYEES BY THEIR CLANDESTINE ACTIONS WHICH THEY STILL CONTINUE.
From: M.Venkatesan, October 02, 2006
16, Raja apartments, 15/5A-B.K.N Street, Ref-86
Westmambalam,
CHENNAI-600 033
To: Attn: Anju Sharma,
The Director, FT Coord., Commerce Ministry,
Room no.425
Udyog bhavan, New Delhi.
Dear Madam,
Sub: Mockery of Grievance handling system.
Ref: 3/3/2006-Grievance Dt.20th.Sep2006
Congrats on joining the elite group of Directors/Senior Officials who are making a mockery of Citizens charter. EIC is under the administrative control of your commerce ministry which should have attached a reply of Dr.M.S.Rao or DOPT’s directives in support of its flagrant bluff dt.4.9.2006.
In the absence of any supporting documents from EIC my petition cannot be treated as closed.
Thanks for the excellent job of transmitting the copy of EIC letter.
Sincerely Yours,
Venkatesan.M
Chennai.
C.c to: fax to Rahul Sarin. Addl.Secretary, DARPG.
C.c to: email to Dr.M.S.Rao, mvpcs@ub.nic.in
PleaseVisit http://venkym.blogspot.com/
Copy of email message sent on 24th.Sep.2006
To:Attn:Anjusharma,Director,Room no.425A,Ministry of Commerce & Industry,NewDelhi.
Forwarding an evasive statement of EIC (4/9/2006) cannot be considered as a reply as it has not substantiated its claim by furnishing copies of relevant DOPT directives.
-VENKATESAN.M
Copy to:Shri.Rahul Sarin,Addl.Secretary,DARPG.
C.C to Shri. Gopal K.Pillai, Commerce Secretary with a special request to expedite.√√
____________________________________________________________________
From: M.Venkatesan, September 12, 2006 Ref-DARPG-84
16, Raja apartments, 15/5A-B.K.N Street,
Westmambalam, CHENNAI-600 033.
Telefax: +91 44 23700049 email: venkym1@sancharnet.in
To:
Shri.Suvrathan. Addl.Secretary, DARPG.
Fax: +91 11 23742133
URGENT & PRIORITY PLEASE
Dear Sir,
Ref: DARPG-80 dt.1st.Sep.2006
A reply received from the Export Inspection Council vide VRS/121/2006/3848 Dt.4.9.2006 is aimed at covering up their lapse & without an aorta of truth. Now the ball is in your court which has ample powers to verify & even to punish those found guilty as citizen’s charter points. It is up to you now to declare whether 1994-SVRS implemented by Commerce ministry is constitutionally valid or not & suggest appropriate remedial actions. I am asking for justice & my legitimate rights only.
Since the matter is serious, simultaneous actions will be initiated with media, parliament & judiciary on getting your final reply which is going to be a part of key evidence.
Please expedite & give your decision as soon as possible.
Thanking you.
Sincerely Yours,
Venkatesan.M
Chennai-33
Copy to: Dr.Manmohan Singh., Hon’ble PM, In charge DOPT.Fax: 23019545 √√
From: M.Venkatesan, October 02, 2006
16, Raja apartments, 15/5A-B.K.N Street, Ref-86
Westmambalam,
CHENNAI-600 033
To: Attn: Anju Sharma,
The Director, FT Coord., Commerce Ministry,
Room no.425
Udyog bhavan, New Delhi.
Dear Madam,
Sub: Mockery of Grievance handling system.
Ref: 3/3/2006-Grievance Dt.20th.Sep2006
Congrats on joining the elite group of Directors/Senior Officials who are making a mockery of Citizens charter. EIC is under the administrative control of your commerce ministry which should have attached a reply of Dr.M.S.Rao or DOPT’s directives in support of its flagrant bluff dt.4.9.2006.
In the absence of any supporting documents from EIC my petition cannot be treated as closed.
Thanks for the excellent job of transmitting the copy of EIC letter.
Sincerely Yours,
Venkatesan.M
Chennai.
C.c to: fax to Rahul Sarin. Addl.Secretary, DARPG.
C.c to: email to Dr.M.S.Rao, mvpcs@ub.nic.in
PleaseVisit http://venkym.blogspot.com/
Copy of email message sent on 24th.Sep.2006
To:Attn:Anjusharma,Director,Room no.425A,Ministry of Commerce & Industry,NewDelhi.
Forwarding an evasive statement of EIC (4/9/2006) cannot be considered as a reply as it has not substantiated its claim by furnishing copies of relevant DOPT directives.
-VENKATESAN.M
Copy to:Shri.Rahul Sarin,Addl.Secretary,DARPG.
C.C to Shri. Gopal K.Pillai, Commerce Secretary with a special request to expedite.√√
____________________________________________________________________
From: M.Venkatesan, September 12, 2006 Ref-DARPG-84
16, Raja apartments, 15/5A-B.K.N Street,
Westmambalam, CHENNAI-600 033.
Telefax: +91 44 23700049 email: venkym1@sancharnet.in
To:
Shri.Suvrathan. Addl.Secretary, DARPG.
Fax: +91 11 23742133
URGENT & PRIORITY PLEASE
Dear Sir,
Ref: DARPG-80 dt.1st.Sep.2006
A reply received from the Export Inspection Council vide VRS/121/2006/3848 Dt.4.9.2006 is aimed at covering up their lapse & without an aorta of truth. Now the ball is in your court which has ample powers to verify & even to punish those found guilty as citizen’s charter points. It is up to you now to declare whether 1994-SVRS implemented by Commerce ministry is constitutionally valid or not & suggest appropriate remedial actions. I am asking for justice & my legitimate rights only.
Since the matter is serious, simultaneous actions will be initiated with media, parliament & judiciary on getting your final reply which is going to be a part of key evidence.
Please expedite & give your decision as soon as possible.
Thanking you.
Sincerely Yours,
Venkatesan.M
Chennai-33
Copy to: Dr.Manmohan Singh., Hon’ble PM, In charge DOPT.Fax: 23019545 √√
FINAL APPEAL FOR A SETTLEMENT SENT TO THE COMMERCE MINISTRY
From: M.Venkatesan, May 06, 2006
Ref:DPG-5916, Raja apartments, 15/5A-B.K.N Street,
Westmambalam,
CHENNAI-600 033.
To: Dr. M.S. Rao,
Joint Secretary, Dept. Of commerce, Room No. 247, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi.
Telefax: 23016461
m_srao@ub.nic.in
Through The Director, Export Inspection council of India, New Delhi.
(Ref:DPG-59)
Dear Sir,
Sub: Surrender of incentives received under illegal SVRS-1994.
After 12 years of effort I could get hold of a circular under Right To Information Act-2005.Original circular no: 3/8/91-EI & EP Dt. 21May1994 issued by the ministry was manipulated by the then Director of EIC to cheat the officers/staff. Govt. of India under the Allocation of Business Rules & Transaction of Business Rules has empowered The Department of Personnel &Training (as Nodal Dept) to frame the rules/regulations to be implemented by all other ministries.
Hence SVRS-1994 of EIC is illegal & in violation of articles 144,309,313 & 372 of Constitution of India.
I am prepared to repay the so called illegal incentives received by me to accept the normal VRS benefits under the CCS Pension Rules of 1972.
Hope this will receive your kind attention to end my ordeal & mental agony.
Thanking you.
Sincerely Yours,
Chennai-33
16th.May2006
√c.c to: Staff Grievance Officer, Shri P.K. Mahapatra, Joint Secretary, Room No. 247, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi (Tele fax No. 23063461; E-mail: pkmahapatra@nic.in).Ref:DPG-58
As fax number 23016461 is not responding this message is being faxed to Commerce Secretary Number 23061796# for onward transmission to Dr.MSR.
Ref: DPG-57 (Advance copy)
From: M.Venkatesan, May 06, 2006
Ref:DPG-5916, Raja apartments, 15/5A-B.K.N Street,
Westmambalam,
CHENNAI-600 033.
To: Dr. M.S. Rao,
Joint Secretary, Dept. Of commerce, Room No. 247, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi.
Telefax: 23016461
m_srao@ub.nic.in
Through The Director, Export Inspection council of India, New Delhi.
(Ref:DPG-59)
Dear Sir,
Sub: Surrender of incentives received under illegal SVRS-1994.
After 12 years of effort I could get hold of a circular under Right To Information Act-2005.Original circular no: 3/8/91-EI & EP Dt. 21May1994 issued by the ministry was manipulated by the then Director of EIC to cheat the officers/staff. Govt. of India under the Allocation of Business Rules & Transaction of Business Rules has empowered The Department of Personnel &Training (as Nodal Dept) to frame the rules/regulations to be implemented by all other ministries.
Hence SVRS-1994 of EIC is illegal & in violation of articles 144,309,313 & 372 of Constitution of India.
I am prepared to repay the so called illegal incentives received by me to accept the normal VRS benefits under the CCS Pension Rules of 1972.
Hope this will receive your kind attention to end my ordeal & mental agony.
Thanking you.
Sincerely Yours,
Chennai-33
16th.May2006
√c.c to: Staff Grievance Officer, Shri P.K. Mahapatra, Joint Secretary, Room No. 247, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi (Tele fax No. 23063461; E-mail: pkmahapatra@nic.in).Ref:DPG-58
As fax number 23016461 is not responding this message is being faxed to Commerce Secretary Number 23061796# for onward transmission to Dr.MSR.
Ref: DPG-57 (Advance copy)
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
EIA employees cases-WP/WA-Status
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
1. Sunil Kumar Das + 27 others WP-6373-1995 Judgement Dt.26.11.1996
EIA has been directed to pay all dues with 12% interest within one month & directed the employees to take up other issues(rights) in appropriate fora.
2. EIC filed CAN Application -9099-1998 but dismissed by court.
3.MAT2344 OF 2001
4. SMA102OF 2004
5.CAN5882OF 2007(all these are related to item no.2)
6.Mat-3762/3763-1998
7. Sukriti bhusan Roy-W.P-574 -2008 -Challenging the Scheme &Demands restoration of Pension-Final hearing over-Judgment awaited.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHENNAI HIGH COURT
1. R.S.Balasubramaniam WP-13104-1997 Demands DA-On 9.6.2008 judge directed EIA to pay as they did in Kolkatta.-Response from EIC awaited.
2. M.Venkatesan WP-16155-1997 Demands Pension -A fresh writ is also being filed to speedup as revised prayer may or may not be considered by the sitting Judge at the time of hearing. **
3. S.Krishnamurthy WP-16289-1997 ------Do---------- **
4. Ramasubramanian+12 others WP-12030-1998 weightage + pension **
5. K.E.Ramalingam WP-660-1999 Dismissed by bench on appeal. –Demands DA
6. N.Kalyanaraman + 7 others WP-958-1999 –Demand pension **
7. E.P.Srinivasan & V.N -WP-46130-2002 **
(Posted for hearing by Bench 6 cases(2-7) on 30th.July2008)Judgment delivered on 16th.Sep -Pension declined & employees directed to EIA for DA/DR.
8. Sethuramanathan WP-9466-2006 Demands pension
9.M.Venkatesan WP-10442-2008-Challenging the scheme as the cause of action is totally changed -Pending
** On 24.6.2008 Judge referred all 6 cases for Full bench hearing as EIA did not provide the details of SLP it filed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KOCHI HIGH COURT
WA-617-2000
WA-42- 2001
WA-676-2002 All three WAppeals dismissed on 29.10.2004-An unique judgement directing the petitioners to appeal to the ministry.(treated like beggars)
WP-34008-2005 Some petitioners have gone for Revision Petition.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MUMBAI HIGH COURT
1.WP-1391-2000 by 13 persons-Pending
2.WP-214-2003 by 18 persons-Pending
Prayer: Full DA or surrender of 2/3rd. commuted pension for resumption of Full pension & 5years weightage for those with 15years qualifying service.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW DELHI HIGH COURT/SUPREME COURT
Civil Writ-5335-1995 is still pending.
LPA-(Letter Patent Appeal) 454-2001 by 23 people-Dismissed on the principle of estoppel as they have not challenged the legality & the validity of the scheme but demanded more benefits under the scheme.
Supreme court-Petition for Special Leave to Appeal-9772-2003-Also dismissed.
Review Petition No.1201-2003 in SLP-9772-2003-Dismissed.
*Fresh writ filed challenging the scheme by Mr.Saxena
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
1. Sunil Kumar Das + 27 others WP-6373-1995 Judgement Dt.26.11.1996
EIA has been directed to pay all dues with 12% interest within one month & directed the employees to take up other issues(rights) in appropriate fora.
2. EIC filed CAN Application -9099-1998 but dismissed by court.
3.MAT2344 OF 2001
4. SMA102OF 2004
5.CAN5882OF 2007(all these are related to item no.2)
6.Mat-3762/3763-1998
7. Sukriti bhusan Roy-W.P-574 -2008 -Challenging the Scheme &Demands restoration of Pension-Final hearing over-Judgment awaited.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHENNAI HIGH COURT
1. R.S.Balasubramaniam WP-13104-1997 Demands DA-On 9.6.2008 judge directed EIA to pay as they did in Kolkatta.-Response from EIC awaited.
2. M.Venkatesan WP-16155-1997 Demands Pension -A fresh writ is also being filed to speedup as revised prayer may or may not be considered by the sitting Judge at the time of hearing. **
3. S.Krishnamurthy WP-16289-1997 ------Do---------- **
4. Ramasubramanian+12 others WP-12030-1998 weightage + pension **
5. K.E.Ramalingam WP-660-1999 Dismissed by bench on appeal. –Demands DA
6. N.Kalyanaraman + 7 others WP-958-1999 –Demand pension **
7. E.P.Srinivasan & V.N -WP-46130-2002 **
(Posted for hearing by Bench 6 cases(2-7) on 30th.July2008)Judgment delivered on 16th.Sep -Pension declined & employees directed to EIA for DA/DR.
8. Sethuramanathan WP-9466-2006 Demands pension
9.M.Venkatesan WP-10442-2008-Challenging the scheme as the cause of action is totally changed -Pending
** On 24.6.2008 Judge referred all 6 cases for Full bench hearing as EIA did not provide the details of SLP it filed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KOCHI HIGH COURT
WA-617-2000
WA-42- 2001
WA-676-2002 All three WAppeals dismissed on 29.10.2004-An unique judgement directing the petitioners to appeal to the ministry.(treated like beggars)
WP-34008-2005 Some petitioners have gone for Revision Petition.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MUMBAI HIGH COURT
1.WP-1391-2000 by 13 persons-Pending
2.WP-214-2003 by 18 persons-Pending
Prayer: Full DA or surrender of 2/3rd. commuted pension for resumption of Full pension & 5years weightage for those with 15years qualifying service.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NEW DELHI HIGH COURT/SUPREME COURT
Civil Writ-5335-1995 is still pending.
LPA-(Letter Patent Appeal) 454-2001 by 23 people-Dismissed on the principle of estoppel as they have not challenged the legality & the validity of the scheme but demanded more benefits under the scheme.
Supreme court-Petition for Special Leave to Appeal-9772-2003-Also dismissed.
Review Petition No.1201-2003 in SLP-9772-2003-Dismissed.
*Fresh writ filed challenging the scheme by Mr.Saxena
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
