APPEAL & REQUEST TO THE HON’BLE MINISTER OF COMMERCE,GOI SHRI.ANAND SHARMA.
SUB: EXPEDITE CORRECTIVE ACTION ON 1994-ILLEGAL SVRS.
YOUR PREDICISORS IN 1994 HAVE COMMITTED A GRAVE MISTAKE OF FRAMING A SPECIAL VRS TO THE EXPORT INSPECTION COUNCIL EMPLOYEES IN FRAGRANT VIOLATION OF ALL CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS & PENSION ACT. IT WAS STEALTHLY IMPLEMENTED BY THE EIC, DEPRIVING THE PENSION BENEFITS OF OVER 800 FAMILIES.
WE REQUEST YOU TO USE YOUR GOOD OFFICES TO SET RIGHT THE MISTAKES BY MODIFYING THE COMMERCE MINISTRY’S CIRCULAR SO AS TO RESTORE THE PENSION RIGHTS OF THE EMPLOYEES.
PENSION IS NOT A BOUNTY & IT CANNOT BE BARTERED EVEN BY THE EMPLOYEE WHO IS PROTECTED BY THE PENSION ACT.
-BY VENKATESAN- AN EMPLOYEE CHEATED BY THE EXPORT INSPECTION AGENCY/COUNCIL OF INDIA.
VENKATESAN.M
Mob:9444030900
Skype:venkym9971
C.C. Blogs/Media
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Tuesday, July 06, 2010
AGAIN IT IS PROVED THAT THE CITIZENS CHARTER IS A MOCKERY OF CENTRAL GOVT WHERE IN CRORES SPENT WITH NO TANGIBLE SOLUTIONS GIVEN BY NODAL DEPARTMENT LIKE DOPT!!!!!!!
DOPT, A NODAL AGENCY WITH SUPERORDINATE POWERS WASHING OFF IT'S RESPONSIBILITIES BY DIRECTING OUR QURIES TO THE SUBORDINATE COMMERCE MINISTRY WHICH HAS NO POWERS TO FORMULATE VRS SCHEMES TO CENTRAL GOVT.EMPLOYEES. THUS DOPT ALSO IS TRYING TO COVERUP THE COMMERCE MINISTRY'S BLATANT FRAUD ON
TO GIVE THE FOLLOWING EVASIVE REPLY THROUGH THE PRESIDENTS SECRATRIAT DOPT HAS TAKEN ONE LONG YEAR. INSTEAD OF TAKING CORRECTIVE MEASURES DOPT TRIES TO COVERUP THE CONSTITUTIONAL FRAUD COMMITTED ON EMPLOYEES WHO WERE COVERED BY CCS PENSION RULES OF 1972. I HAVE APPROCHED DOPT FOR JUSTICE, DOPT INSTEAD OF GIVING ITS DECISION DIRECTS THE COMMERCE MINISTRY-WHICH COMMITTED THE FRAUD TO ANSWER!!!!!!!ACCUSED GIVES THE VERDICT.
Registration Number : PRSEC/E/2009/01246
Name : Shri Venkatesan.M
Date of Receipt : 27 Jul 2009
Current Status : Case disposed of
Date of Action : 06 Jul 2010
Details : The matter does not concern DOPT. Forwarded to Department of Commerce vide O.M.No.23011/4/2009-P.G. dated 5.10.2009 who have further forwarded the representation to EI&EP Section of Department of Commerce vide their letter No. 1/34/2009-TFS dated 21.12.2009 for disposal.
Friday, July 02, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
04.03.2010
Present:- Mr. P. Narasimhan for the petitioner.
Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj for the respondents.
W.P.(C.) No. 1295/2010
The petitioner has retired from the post of Joint Director from Export
Inspection Council (respondents No. 2 and 3 herein) on 30.10.2009. He has filed
this writ petition for directions to the respondents to place him in pension
scheme in terms of circular No. EIC/D(O/C)/56/87/343 dated 02.07.1987. The
petitioner has stated that after his retirement, he has made representation to
the respondents for placing him in pension scheme in terms of the aforementioned
circular but no decision has been taken by the respondents till date.
Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj is present on behalf of the respondents on advance
notice and he accepts formal notice of this petition.
With the consent of counsel for the parties, this writ petition has been
taken up for final disposal at admission stage itself because counsel for both
the parties have agreed for passing of a consent order in the matter.
Mr. P. Narasimhan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner,
says that his client will be satisfied, in case, directions are given to the
respondents to decide the representation of the
W.P.(C.) No. 1295/2010
page 1 of 2
petitioner pending with them to place him in pension scheme in terms of office
circular of the respondents mentioned hereinabove.
Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondents, says that his clients will decide the said representation of the
petitioner within such reasonable time as may be fixed by the Court.
In view of the above submissions made by the counsel for the parties,
this writ petition is disposed of with directions to the respondents to decide
the representation of the petitioner pending with them to place him in pension
scheme in terms of office order dated 02.07.1987 within a period of eight weeks
from today. The respondents are directed to pass a speaking order and intimate
the same to the petitioner so that, in case, if he is aggrieved by the said
decision, he may take appropriate legal remedy as available to him in law.
Order dasti to both the parties under the signatures of the Court Master.
MARCH 04, 2010 S.N.AGGARWAL, J
'BSR'
04.03.2010
Present:- Mr. P. Narasimhan for the petitioner.
Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj for the respondents.
W.P.(C.) No. 1295/2010
The petitioner has retired from the post of Joint Director from Export
Inspection Council (respondents No. 2 and 3 herein) on 30.10.2009. He has filed
this writ petition for directions to the respondents to place him in pension
scheme in terms of circular No. EIC/D(O/C)/56/87/343 dated 02.07.1987. The
petitioner has stated that after his retirement, he has made representation to
the respondents for placing him in pension scheme in terms of the aforementioned
circular but no decision has been taken by the respondents till date.
Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj is present on behalf of the respondents on advance
notice and he accepts formal notice of this petition.
With the consent of counsel for the parties, this writ petition has been
taken up for final disposal at admission stage itself because counsel for both
the parties have agreed for passing of a consent order in the matter.
Mr. P. Narasimhan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner,
says that his client will be satisfied, in case, directions are given to the
respondents to decide the representation of the
W.P.(C.) No. 1295/2010
page 1 of 2
petitioner pending with them to place him in pension scheme in terms of office
circular of the respondents mentioned hereinabove.
Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondents, says that his clients will decide the said representation of the
petitioner within such reasonable time as may be fixed by the Court.
In view of the above submissions made by the counsel for the parties,
this writ petition is disposed of with directions to the respondents to decide
the representation of the petitioner pending with them to place him in pension
scheme in terms of office order dated 02.07.1987 within a period of eight weeks
from today. The respondents are directed to pass a speaking order and intimate
the same to the petitioner so that, in case, if he is aggrieved by the said
decision, he may take appropriate legal remedy as available to him in law.
Order dasti to both the parties under the signatures of the Court Master.
MARCH 04, 2010 S.N.AGGARWAL, J
'BSR'
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
