S. Ramachandran Kunal Icon, Building no. A8,
Former General Manager Bank of Baroda. Flat no. 104, Pimple Saudagar,
Former Chairman & CEO - The Sangli Bank Ltd. Aundh Camp, Pune 411027
(Now merged with ICICI Bank Ltd.) Tel: 020 27201012.
Co-op Bank Ltd (Ahmedabad)
Former Director General Maratha Chamber of Commerce
Industries & Agriculture, Pune.
By Speed Post
To, 21stMay 2012
Shri .Pranab Mukherjee, MOST URGENT
Hon’ble Finance Minister,
Government of India, North Block,
Raisina Hills,3rd floor,
New Delhi, 110001.
Respected Sir,
BIG PENSION SCAM
Sub: Illegal Denial of 2nd Pension option to VRS Optees under Officers
serviceRegulations’ 1979. Though not denied by GOI AND RBI
In continuation of my letter dated 29th March,2012,addressed to you on the above subject I invite your kind attention to my letter dated 1st April, 2012 and reminder letter dated 12th April, 2012 addressed to Shri.K.Ramakrishnan, C.E.O of Indian Banks Association (copy enclosed annexure no 1&2 )on the above subject copies of which have been sent to Shri M.D.Mallya Chairman IBO AND Shri D.K.Mittal Chief Secretary, Ministry of Finance and received by them and regret to inform you on the total silence on the part of all the officials which is not at all befitting the position they are holding..
However this inaction and rock silence on the part of CEO and Chairman of IBA force me to totally lose confidence in the functioning of IBA under their leadership which calls for immediate action against these officials from the Government of India as they are playing with public money as, all Public Sector Banks subscribe lakhs of rupees as annual membership fees .
I repeat below the blunders committed by them against the VRS optees in denial of 2nd Pension option who are mostly senior citizens above 65 years or so .by overriding the instructions of GOVT
1.Department of financial services has conveyed to me vide letter F.NO.15/22/2012 dated 14th March 2012 that “IBA HAS CONFIRMED THAT THERE WAS NO COMMUNICATION FROM THE GOVERNMENT TO IBA TO DENY SECOND OPTION OF PENSION TO OFFICERS’WHO VOLUNTARILY RETIRED UNDER OFFICERS’SERVICE REGULATION,1979.
2 The Appellate Authority, Reserve Bank of India ,Central Office Mumbai ,vide his letter DBOD;CO;RIA;13849/04;03;00/2011-12 Dated 15th March ,2012 has conveyed as under to my question- “whether RBI has given any concurrence to Public Sector Banks to deny one more option to the officers voluntarily retired under the first scheme ? If so provide me photo copy of the same.
Answer:- We have not issued any specific instruction in this regard. (copy enclosed Annexure no 3)
3.Finance Ministry has given sanction to implement the terms of settlement /joint note dated 27-4-2010 between IBA and Unions/Associations for the grant of option to the retirees and payment of pension to such retirees w.e.f.27th November 2009,as sanctioned by your good selves , who opt for pension and comply with the terms and conditions set out in the settlement /joint note for grant of pension ,pending necessary amendments in the Bank (Employees ) Pension Regulations 1995. The joint note does not admit any specific exclusion based on mode of retiremen. Regulation 2(y) of the Pension Regulations defines ‘Retirement’ in the following words
‘(y) ‘retirement ‘ means cessation from banks service- (a) on attaining the age of superannuation specified in Service Regulations or Settlements (b)on voluntary retirement in accordance with provisions contained in regulations 29 of these regulations (c);on premature. Retirement by the bank before attaining the age of superannuation specified in Service Regulations or Settlements.
In spite of the above clear cut instructions from the Finance Ministry I am pained to inform that IBA in its circular NO CIR/HR&IR/G2/665/90/2010-11/999 dated 10th August 2010 in paragraph no13 in 3rd sentence has added the word “on superannuation” after retirement which is not mentioned in the joint note dated 27-4-2010 . The joint note on page no 3 under paragraph no (3) (a) states that Officers who were in the service of the bank prior to 29th September 1995 in the case of Nationalised Banks and retired after that date and prior to the date of this note. This addition of the words ON SUPERANNUATION is unethical and misrepresentation of facts AND FRAUD COMMITTED ON THE VRS OPTEES just to deny the 2nd pension option to VRS optees under officers service regulations 1979
When I asked Bank of Baroda whether the bank has made any reference to IBA asking them under whose authority they issued the instructions to the bank vide their letter dated 10-8-2010 DENYING 2ND PENSION OPTION TO VRS OPTEES referred to above the bank replied “NO” vide banks letter no BCC/RTI/PIO/104/418 DATED 11-5-2012.
Bank of Baroda’s G.M ( H.R.) ALSO PLAYED THE SAME MISCHIEF BY MISREPRESENTING THE ABOVE IN ITS BOARD NOTE DATED 30-8-2010 FOR GETTING THE 2ND PENSION OPTION APPROVED AND TO DENY THE 2ND PENSION TO VRS OPTEES. ( Annexure no 4)
HE ALSO CONCEALED THE MATERIAL INFORMATION FROM THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS IN THE SAME BOARD NOTE OF NOT MAKING PRIOR STATUTORY CONSULTATION WITH RBI UNDER SECTION 19 (I)OF BANKING COMPANIES ( TRANSFER OF UNDERTAKINGS) ACT 1970 BEFORE SUBMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR IMPLEMENTING THE 2ND PENSION OPTION. ( Annexure no 4 )
Further when I asked the CPIF of ministry of finance under point no 2 in my letter dated 8th Feb,2012 to provide copy of Govt sanction of RS. 6380.50 crores being the cost of funding gap as estimated by the actuaries for working as well as retired employees and as approved by IBA as given in the joint note dated 27-4-2010 the CPIF has replied as under.
“IBA HAS CONFIRMED THAT NO SUCH APPROVAL WAS SOLICITED FROM THE GOVERNMENT NOR CONVEYED TO THE GOVERNMENT” This means IBA has not obtained any sanction for the financial burden on PSU banks towards the second 2nd pension option which is very surprising and serious. Further you are aware the actual cost has gone up to Rs.24381 crores as against estimated cost of Rs 6380.50 crores as per joint note dated 27-4-2010 which was sent to Govt.
I also find from the reply given by RBI in their letter referred to above that none of the PSU banks have approached RBI for Statutory Consultations/ permission under section 19 (1),2(f)of Banking companies Act,1970 and 1980 for implementation of 2nd Pension Option as per joint note dated 27-4-2010 ( Annexure no 3_.
However I find when the total liability on account of 2nd PENSION OPTION has gone up by nearly Rs.18000/-crores as against estimated cost of Rs 6380.50 crores as stated in the joint note dated 27-4-2010.
MR M.V. NAIR.CHAIRMANN IBA on realizing that mainly his bank i.e. Union Bank Of India of which he was chairman and some of the PSU banks would go in loses and their reserves would go down and capital adequacy ratio would go down . IBA jointly with All Public sector Banks without losing any time approached RBI to amortise the pension liability over a period of 5 years .The banks which would have gone is losses are union bank of India, Punjab Sindh Bank, Central Bank of India ,Bank of Maharashtra.(Table given below)
When I asked RBI to provide me the copies of letters sent by all the banks giving the reasons for such amortization RBI Appellate authority turned down my request for the reason’ “The information requested if disclosed, could in my opinion have a adverse impact on the financial stability and economic interests of the country”. RBI as reported after examining the issue from a regulatory perspective with great reluctance permitted banks to amortise the liability on account of serving employees only and regretted the permission to amortise the liability on account of retired employees.
HERE IT IS FELT THAT THE RBI COULD HAVE ASKED BANKS TO DEBIT THE ADDITIONAL PENSION LIABILITY TO THEIR RESERVES IF THEY WERE UNABLE TO ABSORB THE LIABILITY IN ONE GO TO THEIR PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNTS.
THIS COULD HAVE BEEN THE RIGHT APPROACH TO THIS PROBLEM AS AMORTISION OVER A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS CAUSED THE FOLLOWING DISTORTIONS :
1 BANKS WERE/ARE ALLOWED TO SHOW MORE PROFITS AND IT CONTINUES TILL DATE.
2 BANKS SHARE PRICE IS UNNECESSARILY BEING ALLOWED TO QUOTE AT HIGHER PRICE IN THE MARKET THAN ITS ACTUAL MARKET PRICE.
3 BANKS ARE REQUIRED TO PAY MORE INCOME TAX ON BLOTED PROFITS ( BANKS WHICH WOULD HAVE GONE IS LOSSES HAVE ALSO PAID INCOME TAX. (SEE POINT NO 7 GIVEN BELOW)
4.CMD’s /ED’s OF THE BANKS GOT THE PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE ON THE BLOTED PROFITS WHICH IS NOT CORRECT.
5.EMPLOYEES PENSION TRUST FUND ACCOUNTS LOST THE OPPORTUNITY TO EARN LEGALLY ON RS 15800/-CRORES APPROX ( AMOUNT NOT CHARGED TO BANKS PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT ON 31-3-2011AND CARRIED FORWARD TO BE CHARGED TO P&L IN REMAINING 4 YEARS FOR ALL PSB’S PUT TOGETHER ) BY INVESTING THE AMOUNT IN APPROVED SECURITIES.
6.ALL BANKS BALANCESHEETS /PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNTS ARE NOT GIVING THE TRUE & FAIR FINANCIAL POSITION INSPITE OF STATUTORY AUDIT.
7.BANKS PAID DIVIDENDS THOUGH THEY HAD NOT MADE ACTUAL PROFITS AS PER DETAILS GIVEN BELOW ON ACCOUNT OF AMORTISATION OF PENSION LIABILITY :
NAME OF The BANKS
|
PROFIT SHOWN FOR
Fin Year 31.03.2011
( Amt rounded off in Crs)
Rs.
|
Balance of Amortised Pension Amount c/fd to be charged to P&L in next 4 years
(Amt rounded off in Crs) Rs.
|
LOSS
(Amt rounded off in Crs)
Rs.
|
UNION Bank
Punjab Sind Bank
Central Bank of India
Bank of Maharashtra
|
635.00
526.00
1073.00
334.00
|
1352
649
1181
409
|
(717)
(123)
(108)
(75)
|
8.THIS IS IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE TERMS OF JOINT NOTE AS EMPLOYEES CONTRIBUTION OF 30% WAS RECOVERED IN ONE GO WHERE AS BANKS SHARE OF 70% HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO AMORTISE IN FIVE YEARS
9.THIS HAS HELPED ALL BANKS TO SHOW MORE CAPITAL ADQUACY RATIO.
10.IT IS FELT THAT IF ONLY FOUR BANKS STATED ABOVE WERE TO GO IN LOSSES THE PERMISSION TO AMORTIZE THE PENSION LIABILITY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GIVEN TO OTHER 15 BANKS.
11. ALL THE 15 BANKS TOOK THE ADVANTAGE OF GENERAL PERMISSION GRANTED BY RBI TO AMORTIZE THE PENSION LIABILITY AND SHOWN MORE PROFITS,PAID MORE INCOME TAX, PAID MORE DIVIDEND, SHOWN BLOTED CAPITAL ADQUACY RATIO. THUS THEIR SHARE PRICES WERE QUOTED AT A HIGHER PRICE THEN THEY DESERVE AND MISLEAD THE GENERAL PUBLIC IN TERMS OF VALUATION.THIS IS CONTINUING EVEN TODAY.
THOUGH the Bank of Baroda informed me vide their no BCC/RTI/PIO/104/168 DATED 6-2-2012 that they have not approached RBI for amortization of pension liability, I find from the balance sheets of the BANK OF BARODA FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDED 31-3-2011 THEY HAVE NOT FULLY PROVIDED THE ADDITIONAL PENSION LIABILITY AND TAKEN THE ADVANTAGE OF GENERAL PERMISSION GRANTED TO AMORTISE THE LIABILITY OVER 5 YEARS AND THUS SHOWN MORE PROFIT FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31-3-2011 BY Rs.1463.92CRORES ( the amount bank has carried forward to be charged to profit and loss account in the remaining 4 years )AND SHOWED MORE PROFIT FOR THE YEAR ENDED 31-3-2012 BY Rs.1097.94 CRORE( the amount will be carried forward to be charged to profit and loss account in the next 3 years ) AND WILL CONTINUE TO SHOW MORE PROFIT FOR THE YEAR 31-3-2013 Rs.733.96 CRORE (the amount to be carried to be charged to profit and loss account in the next 2 years) ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH BANK paid and WILL BE PAYING MORE INCOME TAX AND WILL BE PAYING MORE DIVIDEND TO SHARE HOLDERS (Major beneficiary being Govt of India)
BUT
ALL THIS AT THE COST and LOSS TO PENSION TRUST FUND ACCOUNT WHICH BELONGS TO EMPLOYEES. IT IS MATTER OF SURPRISE NO BANK EMPLOYEES UNION OR ASSOCIATION IS RAISING ANY QUESTION ON THIS LOSS TO EMPLOYEES PENSION TRUST FUND.
ANOTHER IMPORTANT POINT HERETO NOTE IS THAT;-
According to the pension regulation pension was introduced in the banking industry .w .e .f 1-11-1993 in lieu of provident fund .The employees opting for pension have to contribute 10%of pay towards pension fund in lieu of provident fund
HOWEVER
During 7th bipartite settlement IBA requested the unions to bear additional cost on pension on account of increase in basic pay in 50:50 proportion over and above 10%of pay. The additional cost on pension on account of increase in the basic pay was estimated at 26.50%of the pay .excluding 10% of share of employees remaining 16.50%cost was shared in the ratio of 8.25/8.25each by the union and management.
Similarly during 8th bipartite settlement incremental cost on pension on account of change in basic pay was estimated at 30.50% of pay excluding 10%share of employees remaining cost was shared in the ratio of 11.25%and 9.25% by management and unions respectively.
In the 9th bipartite settlement incremental cost on account of salary revision is estimated at 36%of the pay and excess of 10%contribution by the employees ,will be shared in 50/50 ratio at 13%each by the union and management .
Banks were not depositing their 10% statutory contribution and the incremental cost as agreed in the 7th,8th and 9th bipartite since long and blotting their profits and were playing a fraud on the banks employees pension trust fund for which CMD’S AND ED’S OF THE PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS GOT PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE .The Bank of Baroda in fact dipped in the pension fund during 2009-2010 and taken out Rs 57 crores to boost the profit which evident from the annual report of March 2010 OF BOB .and AFIR OF RBI
The amount of shortfall in the pension fund account as per unconfirmed reports is estimated to be around Rs 100000 crores all public sector banks put together which needs to be thoroughly probed by appointing independent auditors by the government to know the exact quantum and to bridge the gap.
Further as stated above the wage revision settlement also provided for making compulsory deductions from the wages of the pension optees as well the non pension optees and recovered huge amount of money in the span of 13 years i.e .from 1-11-1997to27-10 2010 even then the IBA illegally denied 2nd pension option to voluntarily retired and resigned employees
AND NOT REFUNDED THEIR CONTRINUTION WHICH WAS DEDUCTED COMPULSORILY FROM EMPLOYEES WAGES .
Further .when pension scheme of RBI is not contributory pension scheme the question of recovering additional amount in excess of 10% is in violation of pension regulations no 7 & 11 as it takes care of the provision of pension fund. HENCE this violation needs to be rectified immediately by refunding the amount to employees.
Section 52 of the pension regulations stipulates the effective date of payment of pension benefits is the date following the date of retirement. Hence it is not understood why employees organisation were bargaining for the cut of date etc in violation of above stated section 52 of pension regulation and agreed to finance ministry decision of effective date as 27-11-2009.This clearly shows that neither the employees organisations ,nor the IBA and the Govt was aware of above regulations when the cut of date was fixed and hence needs to be rectified immediately.
ON ACCOUNT OF ABOVE IRREGULARITY I REALIABLY UNDERSTAND THE MEMBERS OF RESIGNED BANK EMPLOYEE’S WELFARE ASSOCIATION HAVE SOUGHT PERMISSION FROM MINISTRY OF FINANCE FOR PROSECUTION OF MR.M.V.NAIR THEN CHAIRMAN OF UNION BANK OF INDIA AND CHAIRMAN OF IBA AND MR M.D. MALLYA CHAIRMAN OF BANK OF BARODA AND PRESENT CHAIRMAN OF IBA AND SOME MORE OFFICIALS CONNECTED WITH THE ABOVE MATTERS UNDER SECTION 197 OF CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 1973. WHICH I FEEL IS CORRECT.
I am enclosing herewith the RBI circular DBODNO.Bp;Bc;80/21.04.018/2010/11 dated 9th FEB,2011 ( Annexure no 5.) In respect of permission granted to Public sector banks from the circular it will be observed that though the permission is granted to amortise the liability over a period of five years but actually from the paragraph no 3 (a) (b) it will the observed that unamortized amount of the year 4 and 5 will be debited to RESERVES OF THE BANKS on 1-4-2013 and reserves of the bank s will be reduced to the extent of the unamortized amount carry forward expenditure.
From the above it is felt that RBI SHOULD HAVE ASKED BANKS TO AMORTISE THE AMOUNT IN 3 YEARS INSTEAD OF 5 YEARS WHICH HAS FURTHER HELPED BANKS TO BOOST THEIR PROFITS. TO EXPLAIN THIS POINT I WOULD SAY THE BANK OF BARODA COULD SHOW MORE PROFITS (as shown in table below)
HAD THE PENSION LIABILITY WOULD HAVE DIVIDED IN THREE YEARS AS AGAINST FIVE YEARS.
Actual Pension Liability Amortised as per RBI Guidelines as on 31.03.2011 (Rs in Crores)
|
Amount Charged to Profit & Loss Account for Existing employees as on 31.03.2011 (Rs in Crores)
|
Balanced Carried forward to be charged to P&L in remaining 4 years (Rs in Crores)
|
Actual amount to be charged to p&l account incase it was amortized over 3 years (Rs in Crores)
|
1829.90
|
365.98
|
1463.92
|
609.66
|
-THE G.M.(H.R) HAS FILED THE UNDERNOTED WRONG AND CONCOCTED AFFIDAVIT IN HIGH COURT OF GUJRAT, AHMEDABAD IN DEFENCE OF DENIAL OF 2ND PENSION OPTION TO VRS OPTEES IS RESPONSE TO THE WRIT/ CASE FILED BY THE BANK OF BARODA RETIRED OFFICERS ASSOCIATION AT THE INSTANCE OF IBA,AND PROBABLY WITH THE CONSENT OF CMD/ED OF BOB AS IT IS EVIDENT FROM THEIR TOTAL SILENCE WHEN I BROUGHT CONTENTS OF AFFIDAVIT TO THE ATTENTION OF ED AND CMD VIDE MY LETTER DATED 16-11-2011. THE AFFIDAVIT READS AS UNDER:-
“THE IBA WHILE ARRIVING AT THE FRESH OPTION OF PENSION TO CLASSES OF EMPLOYEES INTERALIA CONSIDERED THE FINANCIAL BURDEN THAT WAS LIKELY TO ARISE,THE FINANCIALPOSITION OF THE BANKS ,THE QUANTUM OF NON PERFORMING ASSETS LIKE OVER DUE LOANSAND TREMENDOUS OUTSTANDINGS IN THIS BEHALF AND OVERALL BENEFIT WHICH WERE BEING GIVEN TO DIFFERENT EMPLOYEES AND CAPACITY OF THE BANKS TO PAY IN DIFFICULT TIMES,THE TOTAL OUT FLOW BY WAY OF PAYMENT OF ARREARS AND FUTURE PAYMENTS AND PAYING CAPACITY OF THE BANKS AT PRESENT AND MAY BE IN FUTURE”
IN FACT IF YOULOOK AT THE NET PROFIT ,% OF THE GROSS AND NET NPA ,PROVISION COVERING RATIO OF BANK OF BARODA IT PROVES MY POINT THAT THIS AFFIDAVIT IS TOTALLY WRONG AND DAMAGING THE REPUTATION Of BANK OF BARODA WHICH IS OWNED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA.
FURTHER YOU HAVE ALWAYS BEEN TELLING THAT “INDIAN BANKING SYSTEM IS STRONGLY REGULATED. “ EVEN THE CMD OF BOB RECENTLY WHILE ANNOUNCING THE FINANCIAL RESULTS OF THE BANK FOR FINANCIAL YEAR ENDING 31-3-2012 SAID ON THE ELECTROINIC MEDIA AND IN THE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS MEET THAT ASSET QUALITY OF BANK IS ROBOUST.
WHEREAS
SURPRISINGLY ABOVE STATED AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN REMOVED WHILE FILING BAKS REPLY TO WRIT FILED BY RETIRED OFFICERS OF BANK OF BARODA IN THE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI FOR DENIAL OF 2ND PENSION OPTION TO VRS OPTEES
ALL THIS CLEARLY INDICATES THAT BANK OF BARODA AND ITS MANAGEMENT CLEARLY PLAYING THE DOUBLE GAME/DOUBLE STANDARD AND TRYING TO FOOL THE HIGH COURT JUST TO PROTECT THEIR WRONG AND ILLEGAL DENIAL OF 2ND PENSION OPTION TO VRS OPTEES WHICH DOES NOT SPEAK GOOD OF THE BANK MANAGEMENT WHEN IT CALLS ITSELF INDIA’S INTERNATIONAL BANK .
Though the pension liability of all banks put together has gone up by nearly Rs 18000 crores ( Rs 24381 crores minus Rs6380.50 crores )as estimated by actuaries and approved by IBA,
NO BANK HAS QUESTIONED THE IBA FOR SUCH A STEEP RISE IN THE PENSION LIABILITY
AS BANKS HAD GIVEN A BLANKET MANDATE WITHOUT FIXING ANY UPPER LIMIT ON THE TOTAL LIABILITY . ( copy of BANK OF BARODA BOARD RESOLUTION IS ENCLOSED ANNEXURE NO 6 )
4.In this connection I invite your kind attention to AIBOC circular no 40 enclosing UFBU letter no1367/7/12 dated 8th April addressed to Chairman, IBA (copy enclosed Annexure no7) wherein they have pointed out in their letter that “ denial of the legitimate benefit to all the categories of retires CPF optees viz VRS,COMPULSORY RETIRES amounts to violation of the understanding reached between the UFBU and IBA on 27-4-2010.The UFBU also felt that IBA should have consulted unions/Associations before deciding to deny the offer to retirees of certain categories as these deviation do not conform to the understandings reached on 27-4-2010 which has resulted in filing various writ petitions in various courts by the affected employees.
All the above clearly indicates that it was the UNILATERAL AND PERVERSE INTERPRETATION OF IBA officials alone and not supported either by RBI or Ministry of Finance and UFBU which is very serious and cannot be condoned..
I find from the reply of joint secretary ,government of India ,ministry of finance , department of financial services ,New Delhi to IBA letter dated 29-4-2010 regarding pension to serving and retired employees dated 10-8-2010 according government sanction to implement the terms of settlement /joint note dated 27-4-2010 and he has not denied 2nd pension option to any of the retirees except those who join the services of the banks on or after 1st April,2010.
In spite of above clear cut direction/sanction by the government still IBA WITHOUT losing any time i.e. on the same day i. e 10-8-2010 issued instructions to member banks debarring the VRS OPTEES UNDER OFFICERS SERVICE REGULATIONS 1979 for 2nd pension option ILLEGALLY WITHOUT ANY SANCTION FROM GOVT ,RBI to deny 2nd pension option to VRS optees AND APPROVAL FROM UFBU the signatory to the joint note dated 27-4-2010 the main document /contract deciding the pension settlement AND DONE GREAT DAMAGE AND INJUSTICE TO VRS OPTEES BY DENYING THE 2ND PENSION OPTION, WHO ARE INFACT LEGALLY AND RIGHTFULLY ELIGIBLE FOR 2ND PENSION OPTION FOR WHICH YOUR OFFICE SHOULD CALL FOR THEIR EXPLANATION AND TAKE NECESSARY ACTION AGAINST IBA OFFICIALS as IBA has no powers to change any directions given by the Finance Ministry, RBI AND OTHER THAN WHAT IS AGREED IN THE JOINT NOTE 27-4-2010.
All that IBA can do is
“ UNDERTAKE THE NEGOTIATIONS ON BEHALF OF BANKS AND NOT ON BEHALF OF GOVERNMENT AND RESERVE BANK
THE MANDATE GIVEN BY THE BANKS TO IBA IS NOT TO MISREPRESENT THE FACTS TO MEMBER BANKS WHICH IBA HAS DONE AND IT IS SURPRISING THAT ALL THE MEMBER BANKS ARE KEEPING QUIET ON THE WRONG AND ILLEGAL ADVICE OF IBA IN MISREPRESENTING THE FACTS TOTHEM.
Hence it is very clear from the above IBA officials have clearly exceeded the brief given to them and advised member banks to follow illegal and wrong advice and it is a matter of regret that all PSU Banks followed this illegal ,arbitrary advice without referring to their legal department for the reasons best known to them.
However when the affected VRS optees knocked the doors of High courts for justice all the banks are spending good money by way huge amount of legal fees to defend their wrong action which is a sad commentary. This is happening because nobody questions banks for such avoidable expenditure though it is public money.
5. FURTHER THOUGH neither in the finance ministry communication dated 10-8-2010 referred to above nor in the joint note 27-4-2012 there was any specific mention of INCLUSION of officers “Deemed to have retired under clause no 2( x )of Bank ( Employees) Pension Regulations,1995 and any specific mention of EXCLUSION of officers who took VRS under 2(y) of Pension Regulations and officers service regulations 1979. As the joint note says another option for joining the existing pension scheme shall be extended to those who were in service of the bank prior to 29th September,1995 in the case of nationalised banks and ‘RETIRED’ after that date and prior to the date of this joint note.
In spite of above the Banks allowed 2nd Pension option without any reference to Government or RBI Etc. to officers deemed to have retired who are CMD’S AND ED’S OF PSU banks/retired CMD/ED THOSE WHO HAD NOT OPTED FOR PENSION EARLIER.
To quote a few Names:
1. MR M.D. MALLYA CMD OF BOB AND PRESENT CHAIRMAN OF IBA
2. Mr.K.Ramakrishnan C.E.O OF IBO and MR Alok Kumar Misra vice chairman of IBA and is CMD OF Bank OF India..
Mr.Mallya has been sanctioned 2nd pension option by CORPORATION BANK where he was working as general manager and subsequently appointed as ED/CMD of PSB and MR Ramakrishanan C.E.O IBA and Shri Alok Kumar Misra is sanctioned 2nd PENSION OPTION BY Bank of India where they were working as general manager and there after appointed as ED/CMD OF PSB. This information of opting 2nd pension option is given to me as per letters I have received from the respective banks under RTI Act 2005 which are in my possession..( ANNEXURE NO 8 & 9 ENCLOSED )
Mr Mallya CMD of BANK OF BARODA DENIED 2ND PENSION OPTION TO VRS OPTEES OF BANK OF BARODA IN CONTRAVENTION OF SANCTION OF BANKS BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND SANCTION BY THE JOINT SECRETARY OF THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE WHICH CALLS FOR HIS EXPLANATION AND CLEARLY PROVES THAT HE JOINED HANDS WITH IBA OFFICIALS IN DENYING THE 2ND PENSION OPTION TO VRS OPTEES WHICH IS ILLEGAL ALSO.
Another point to note here is all these above stated officials are the direct beneficiaries of 2nd PENSION OPTION and as such can be said to have had the vested interest in getting 2nd Pension option sanctioned by the government as there were interested in opting 2nd pension option and in such a situation from a Corporate Governance perspective, these officials should not have been party to pension negotiation committee / signatories to the joint note.
It is therefore felt that this is the reason why they have kept the net financial gap on account of 2nd pension option for working and retired officers at just Rs 6380.50 crores a very nominal amount as mentioned in the joint note dated 27-4-2010( as against Rs 26000crores as estimated by earlier actuaries and that is the reason why previous CEO MR SINOR OF IBA TURNED DOWN THE 2ND PENSION OPTION ON 1-12-2007) which was submitted to government though the final figure has touched the figure of Rs 24381 crores ON IMPLEMENTATION which is very close to the figure estimated by earlier actuaries and which has gone up by 382% which is unheard in any wage/pension settlement.
Thus it will be observed from the above,
OFFICIALS REPRESENTING THE MANAGEMENT OF PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS TOOK CARE OF THEMSELVES BY MISUSING THEIR OFFICIAL POSITION
TOTALLY IGNORGING THE INTEREST OF BANK /GOVERNMENT WHO APPOINTED THEM AS CMDS
AND DENIED THE 2nd PENSION OPTION ILLEGALLY TO VRS OPTEES WHO ARE MOSTLY SENIOR CITIZENS IN THE AGE GROUP OF 65 AND ABOVE AND ARE STRUGGLING TO MAINTAIN THEIR FAMILY BUDGET and created discrimination among two classes of RETIREES which is illegal and arbitrary
FURTHER I DO NOT KNOW AT WHOSE REQUEST THE GOVT HAS INCREASED THE PENSION AMOUNT OF WHOLE TIME DIRECTORS OF PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS FROM 1-4-2012 PAYABLE ON SALARY DRAWN AS CMD /ED INSTEAD OF ON THE SALARY DRAWN AS GM AS PER GOVT NOTIFICATION FNO 13/5/2009/BO.1 DATED 3-4-2012
BUT THE TOP OFFICIALS OF FINANCE MINISTRY ARE NOT FINDING TIME TO OFFER 2ND PENSION OPTION TO VRS OPTEES INSPITE OF SEVERAL REPRESENTATION SENT TO HON’BLE FINANCE MINISTER, HON’BLE PRIMEMINISTER ,GOVERNOR RBI ETC
In view of what is stated above,
Can not the above action be called as a systematically and well planned financial fraud committed by the members of IBO WHO REPRESENTS PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS, the CMDS OF PSU BANKS on the PSU banks /GOVT for their personal financial gain???
Also, do these Executives /Officials have any Moral Right to continue in PSU Banks /IBA as Role Models needs to be viewed urgently and seriously by the Govt and RBI.
6.Though I had brought clearly most of the above irregularities as early as in June 2011vide my letter dated 4-6-2011on the above subject addressed to our Hon’ble Prime Minister in which I had clearly asked to carry out through investigation by an independent agency like C.B.I in view of fraud committed by the IBA management team no action seems to have been taken though the letter was forwarded to your department FOR NECESSARY ACTION which is evident from the fact that my letter was forwarded by MR.Sant Ram section officer of your ministry to Bank of Baroda in JANUARY 2012 after a gap of six months with instructions to send a suitable reply to me instead of investigating the matter as requested by me in my letter.
To this Bank of Baroda replied to me vide their letter BCC/HRM/HR/A/P/26/629 dated 16-1-2012 as under ‘On perusal of your said representation dated 4-6-2011, we observe that the issue/grievance raised by you is related to IBA and we are not in a position to comment on the same’ (copy of BoB letter is enclosed Annexure no 10) To this reply I immediately wrote a letter to Mr. Sant on 2nd FEB,2012 which was received by his office on 6-2-2012 as the same was sent by speed post and thereafter followed by my various e. mail reminders dated 5/3/2012,24/3/2012.3/4/2012 for which so far I have not yet received any replies which is very strange. Total silence in the matter needs investigation by you.
7. I may also inform you that on 29th March, 2012 I had sent my detailed appeal MENTIONING MOST OF ALL THE ABOVE IRREGULATITIES to the board of directors of the Bank of Baroda including to MR. ALOK Nigam, joint secretary of your ministry who is on the board of Bank of Baroda AND MR SEN,REGIONAL DIRECTOR RESERVE BANK OF INDIA ,WHO IS ON THE BOARD OF BANK BARODA which WERE received by THEIR offices on 2-4-2012 with a request to discuss the appeal in the board meeting I understand my appeal was taken up by one of the directors in the board meeting held on 13-4-2012 at Bangalore BUT I REALIABLY UNDERSTAND the deliberations and the reply given by the chairman is not recorded in the minutes which is against corporate governance .and no reply has been sent to me by the bank in spite of my several telephonic and e. mail reminders sent to secretary of the board. A copy of this appeal was also sent to Your office which was received by your office as per acknowledgement sent by your office vide D.NO 64102 DATED 17TH April,2012. HERE I MUST APPRECIATE THAT YOUR OFFICE COULD FIND TIME TO SEND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BUT THE CMD OF THE BANK HAD NO COURTSY EVEN TO ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF MY APPEAL.
In view of the above ;
1. I urge you to sanction 2nd pension option to all the VRS optees immediately AS PER SECTION 52 OF PENSION REGULATIONS 1995 which is their right as a social security and as decided by the constitutional bench of Supreme Court of India in 1982 that pension is employees right and not deferred wages nor a favour or concession shown by the employer and
2. Initiate immediate investigation in the matter and take /arrange to take appropriate action against officials who were on the personal committee of IBA REPRESENTING the PSU BANKS/members of IBA AND WHO HAVE NOW TAKEN 2ND PENSION OPTION.
3. IN THE END FROM THE ABOVE GIVEN FACTS IT IS CLEAR THAT THECMD’S OF PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS WHO WERE PARTY TO PENSION SETTLEMENT AS CHIRMAN /VICE CHAIRMAN/PERSONNEL COMMITTEE MEMBER OF IBA HAVE COMMITTED A FRAUD ON THE GOVT MISUSING THEIR OFFICIAL POSITION FOR THEIR OWN BENEFIT .WHICH HAS RESULTED IN ADDITIONAL EXPENSES OF RS18000/-CRORES TO ALL THE PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS PUT TOGETHER FOR WHICHACTION AGAINST THEM IS WARRENTED.
HENCE FROM ALL THE ABOVE GIVEN FACTS IT CAN BE SAFELY CONCLUDED THAT A LARGE SCALE FINANCIAL FRAUD IS COMMITTED BY IBA BY JOINING HANDS WITH CMDS OF PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS ON THE EMPLOYEES TRUST FUND ACCOUNT/ON VRS OPTEES/ON CRS & RESIGNEES BY ILLEGALLY DENYING THE 2ND PENSION OPTION, ON THE BANKS AND THE GOVERNMENT WHICH IS NO WAY LESS THAN “FAMOUS FRAUD COMMITTED BY SATYAM LTD”
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
S.Ramachandran
Former GM BOB &
VRS OPTEE AGE 74
SENIOR CITIZEN.
Encls: as above.
A very good article written by Mr. Rajesh Goyal available on website www.allbankingsolutions.com is presented below for your perusal and for taking a well thought decision on necessity of strike in Bank which is scheduled to happen in the month of July as proposed by Union Leaders.
Time to Ponder Whether Bankers Should Blindly Follow Union Leaders for Strikes or Revolt Against Non-Issue Protests and Strikes
I have been writing about the indifferent attitude of union leaders towards a common banker and their nexus with top management. I am sure, most of the union sympathizers must have dubbed me as Anti-union, as Anna Hazare has been dubbed as anti-Parliament. However, inspite of this knowledge, I will continue to write about the need for bringing a REAL CHANGE in the thinking and attitude of the union leaders, almost similarly as Anna Hazare is continuing his movement inspite of the fact that all MPs passed a resolution against him and his team mates. All this because I myself being an ex-banker, can feel the pain of the banker working in a remote branch.
Most of the bankers must have noticed the recent controversy regarding over 60 years old cartoon relating to Dr Ambedkar. All of a sudden, the whole Parliament erupted and Mr Kapil Sabil, now notorious about his comments of zero loss in 2G scam, jumped to apologies on behalf of the government. (Till date he has never apologised for loss of Rs 1,76,000 crores in 2G scam). The whole episode left me baffled as to the state of affairs of Indian Netas. I was so shocked that I could not find words to express myself. Finally, I came across the following cartoon which appeared alongwith an article in Times of Indiaon 20th May, 2012, which relieved me for searching the words to explain the status of our netas. I express my gratitude to the cartoonist for such a wonderful expression.
Source (Times of India)
The above cartoon truly depicts not only our political Netas, but also Bank Union Netas
On 21st May, 2012, Unions gave a call for Protest Day and now they are giving a call for 2 Day Strike in July, 2012. In a separate article by Mr Jain on this website, we have dealt in detail about the issues which needs to be tackled for the welfare of the bankers and for improving the health of the banks which are 'rozi roti" of the bankers. However, instead of taking those serious issues, they have launched protest against trivial issues and will soon spend lakhs of rupees on posters and other preparations to make happy their political bosses. However, they are not ready to finalise the demands for Xth Bipartite Settlement, 2nd Pension Option denial to a group of bankers inspite of so many court decisions. They do not want to talk about National Litigation Policy about which I have recently written on this website.
In the given circumstances, what should bankers do ? This is the right time to ponder upon as discussions for Xth Bipartite are still far away from concluding stage, and union leaders need support of the cadre to keep the pot boiling for their political bosses as next Lok Sabha elections are not far away.
There is a need to take a pledge that you will not support union leaders for any flimsy and useless emotive issues. Support them fully and go on long strikes if needed to get your due share of higher salaries and updation of pension for the retired bankers. Ask union leaders to be transparent in talks with IBA and management on various issues. Show the above cartoonto your fellow friends to impress upon that there is no need to charge on "useless emotive issues" of petty HR issues or computerisation or outsourcing. Every banker is aware that inspite of all their efforts, union leaders have not been able to thwart computerisation. If there is a need for outsourcing, it will certainly come, and no kind of protest can stop them. Hundreds of protests and strikes were done by unions against computerisation, dilution of equity etc., but they could not do anything in this regard.
Can any union leader has the courage to publish the list of all the protests and strikes undertaken for various issues (except wage revision), and the follow up agreements concluded with government on these issues in last 15 years or so. They have hardly anything to show. Therefore, I am of the firm opinion that bankers should refuse to support the unions on these petty issues and ask them to protest and strike only on real issues.
In the end I would like the bankers to ponder on these issues and create awareness among the fellow bankers and friends so that bankers too can get their due share like the central government employees. I hope this message will spread among the bankers and they will have brighter future. If necessary bankers should think of stopping the monthly subscription to unions, most of which is wasted in travel and 5 star stays.
Hi
ReplyDeleteThe post reveals me in and out about the Tax services.Keep on sharing Good Stuff.
Tax