Leaders on whom lies the fate of an organisation or trade union or a state government or a country have become lover of flattery, have become lover of money and lover of high post without merit. Root cause of all mishappenings, irregularities, fraud or cheating lies in nothing but flattery which shuts the eyes, ears and mind & heart of leaders. Leaders become self cantered and sacrifice the interest of the masses for whom they are meant. They forget God and minimum moral and religious values. New record of corruption will precipitate if a total investigation is made into what Shiela Dikchit has done in Delhi. When a person becomes popular he becomes more prone to bad habits and there are more chances of committing fraud with the system.
Corruption cannot end in India until government takes harsh steps to stop flattery. Yes man and bribe give equally responsible for rampant corruption and for damaging the right course of action. Looting of money from a person through bribe is less harmful than looting of pride, self respect of service men or businessmen or professionals. All is well sir or No Problem sir culture is killing the enthusiasm of real workers, real Indians and real businessmen because flatterers by dint of their actions hypnotize the top officials and ministers and get success in getting undue benefit or up gradation in service or better posting and quick promotion in service at the cost of many genuine workers.
CVC as such cannot stop corruption said to be rampant in work done for Common wealth Games in Delhi because they also become victim of this disease. CVC has to survive in the same system where perpetuators or corruption are sitting at the helm of affairs. Officers at vulnerable and responsible post at CVC or CBI or audit offices are chosen from a team of best flatterers. CVC has to be bold enough and has to stop corruption in transfers, posting and promotion as also in recruitment processes of government employees and bring about maximum transparency, eliminate the channel of Interview which gives rise to whimsical and biased decision.
When honest and sincere officers are shunted in remote areas or posted in insignificant corners it is but natural that such officers will prefer indulging in flattery than wasting energy in good work.
CVC or for that matter Government of India has to make judicial process quick, affordable effective and honest so that victim of the system may approach court without any fear of repercussion. Fear of punishment may only keep flatterers and corrupt person away from the system. Similarly media has to take pro active and innovative initiativesto expose corrupt practices, conduct sting operation and do all acts deemed fit to expose the mischievous elements occupying top posts in government offices, ministry , banks, insurance companies, CBI, vigilance department, judiciary, tax departments etc who sell transfer, posting and promotions in service sector or who willfully torture and blackmail a good businessmen who do not flatter or bribe an officer.
Dkjain
30.07.2010
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Friday, July 23, 2010
9th Bipartite Settlement in Banks
I call upon CMDs of various banks to listen the voice of silent protestors, read the contents of writs filed in various high courts, opinion published in website such allbankingsolutions.com, open your eyes and ears and act fastly to correct the mistake done on 27.04.2010.
Please do not kill the voice coming from your own heart and mind. None of the respectable, wise, experienced, intelligent , talented, law abiding , and knowledgeable person in the banking industry of lawyers club of India will concur with injustice done to Non pension optees through the 9th Bipartite settlement
Since courts are slow, you cannot perpetuate reign of injustice in wage agreement for long as you are doing injustice in promotion processes and transfer decisions and employees of India cannot allow you to use discriminatory and divisive wage scale defying fundamental Laws of equality enshrined in Indian Constitution.
Various letters have been written to important dignitaries of the country in this regard by so many persons working in different banks. But unfortunately politicians of our country also do not understand the problem of victims for years and years, decades ad decades as long as there is mass movement, violent agitation arsoning, strike, lock out, destruction of public property, closure of banks and ATM, disturbing customer service etc .
It is ridiculous that those politicians in India suggest dialogue with naxalites and terrorists but never try to solve the problem from the root before it takes violent form. The said agreement was also signed after agitation and strike done by bank employees many times during preceding 30 months. It is sad that a few greedy leaders, I say hardly 10 persons spoilt the career and fate of 10 lac employees.
When king is Tuglak, everything is possible. When Koda is Chief Minister of a state, everything is possible. When IAS officers are like Mr Rathod, murder of innocent girl like Ruchika is not surprising. When person like Raju is CMD of Satyam computers, when CAs are dishonest certification of fake balance sheet is not impossible in India and similarly when CAs are corrupt, rating agencies rate on the basis and quantum of bribe and fees they get, happening of fraud or manipulation with balance sheet is not impossible for banks and I it is not astonishing to anyone in India at least.
I submit a copy of letter written by one retired officer.
The Editor,
Business Line
Dear Sir,
Stalemate over banking consensus
Queer banking equations implanted in the Pension Agreement signed along with ninth bipartite settlement attracted nationwide resentment among bank men, delaying its implementation indefinitely. A group of dissatisfied employees secured stay order from Madras High Court putting IBA and bank unions in the defense box. When they merely objected the recovery of a portion of their pay as contribution to Pension Fund for giving them entry to Pension Scheme, the long cherished desire of the retired to get pension is delayed further, adding to their more than a decade old sufferings. The irrational terms providing for recovery of 2.8 time revised pay from new entrants in respected of the employees on rolls as on the date of agreement (27 April, 2010), recovery of 156 percent CPF and interest paid at the time of retirement in respect of the retired, &nbs p; forfeiture of pension from the date of retirement to the arbitrary date of 27 November, 2009 to the retired, payment of commutation reckoning the age as on date of fresh option instead of the age of retirement, non inclusion of resigned employees who have qualifying service for Pension etc . are tools devised to take away huge sums from the prospective beneficiaries of Pension Scheme. ; It becomes wild justice, quite illegal and irrational, in the context of the Pension Regulations being one and the same as on the date of agreement and existing Pension Opted employees have derived the benefit without any levy or penalty. &nbs p; While addressing the anomaly of denying the social security benefit to a large segment by extending them a fresh chance for option, five fresh glaring anomalies have been infused into the scheme, making it a black agreement altogether.
In earlier Bipartite settlements, after setting apart a portion of the total load factor towards Pension Fund, the remainder alone was distributed among CPF opted and Pension opted, putting the former to erosion of emoluments in each agreement, benefitting the latter. ; The proposal initially mooted for a uniform recovery of 1.6 times revised pay for Nov.2007 from all existing employees for sharing pension costs got changed overnight at last hour, settling down for sharing 2.6 times pay from CPF opted alone to their detriment. &n bsp; The 17.5 percent pay hike in the industry for the six days working bank employees in contrast with the 40 percent settled for five days working government staff has inculcated in them a feeling that it is the result of the additional cost of Pension rather than of the low profile bargaining of Unions. They seem to be ignoring the core fact that Pension is the consideration for services rendered and not for a mere option letter exercised on a bit of paper. While Pension opted are getting some amount as arrears of salary, almost the entire amount is snatched away from the other category. Unions that announced the twin achievement of Wage Revision and Pension Option as a grand gala victory took a somersault saying that they had no option other than agreeing to the rude terms of IBA for securing fresh Pension Option.
Recovery of 156 percent of CPF paid in the case of the retired (up to March 2010) would entail to them huge pecuniary loss as many will have to shell out as much as Rs.15.00 lakhs when their counterpart retiring in April,2010 or afterwards will have to pay a meager sum of Rs.0.30 lakhs to Rs.1.20 lakhs only. The impact of the insignificant cut-off date, which does not appeal to any reasoning is a severe blow to several beneficiaries.
The agreement provides for payment of Pension to the retired from 27th November, 2009 alone irrespective of the date of retirement. Though in all fairness, they are eligible to get monthly pension and interest on each payment date from one decade back, they are victimized through recovery of 156 percent of the CPF paid at the time of retirement uniformly. &n bsp; This apparently is a dual penalty to them. The modality is totally enigmatic and carries with it unfairness of an extreme nature.
Pension Regulations for computing commutation recognizes the age next birthday at the time of retirement whereas the agreement stipulates age on the date of fresh option to the detriment of all the retired. &nbs p; This leads to application of entirely different yardstick under the same Regulations to different beneficiaries without any logic. The delay in implementation of the agreement is worsening the situation for the retired.
Non-inclusion of the resigned employees in the scheme is a further anomaly as the resigned possessing enough qualifying service are denied the social security benefit altogether. & nbsp; When VRS retirees who are paid an incentive for going out are also considered for pension, the resigned are to be invariably extended the benefit in all cases where they are paid all other terminal benefits. Qualifying service and not the mode of exist shall be the vesting criterion for Pension unless the termination if a compulsory one through disciplinary procedures.
In financial sector, Public Sector Banks appear to be competing with others to secure the worst employer award by denying proper compensation to the work force who run the shows for the progress of the nation. Even as profits are soaring for each bank, the key men are attempting to add to their cosmetics by transferring higher profits to the exchequer, which goes to part finance the pension and wages of employees in other sectors and government. They should say what banks would have done if all had opted for pension when initially offered. &nbs p; The deprived could not opt earlier when terms of offer contained a penal clause enabling forfeiture of entire past service for participation in strike and were not given fresh chance when the adverse chapter was scrapped in 1999. While denying pension to the retired, banks that function on sole premises of laws of the country and depend on them for each transaction are blatantly flouting substantive law. Retires and working, Pension Opted and CPF opted all are, without exception, growling over the agreement percolating with gross anomalies. The retired who did their best for banks are on crossroads for want of income for subsistence and their decade old sufferings get prolonged as the stalemate on the catastrophic agreement continues. IBA, Unions and Government should evince keen interest and initiate corrigendum steps to rectify all anomalies without further waste of time and bring solace to all.
Yours faithfully,
C N Venugopalan
C N Venugopalan
Ex-Manager, Union Bank of India
Camp: 101 Pinnacle Court,
Apt. # 82, Frankfort,
Kentucky 40601 USA
Cell:0013135491401
Nandanam,
Please do not kill the voice coming from your own heart and mind. None of the respectable, wise, experienced, intelligent , talented, law abiding , and knowledgeable person in the banking industry of lawyers club of India will concur with injustice done to Non pension optees through the 9th Bipartite settlement
Since courts are slow, you cannot perpetuate reign of injustice in wage agreement for long as you are doing injustice in promotion processes and transfer decisions and employees of India cannot allow you to use discriminatory and divisive wage scale defying fundamental Laws of equality enshrined in Indian Constitution.
Various letters have been written to important dignitaries of the country in this regard by so many persons working in different banks. But unfortunately politicians of our country also do not understand the problem of victims for years and years, decades ad decades as long as there is mass movement, violent agitation arsoning, strike, lock out, destruction of public property, closure of banks and ATM, disturbing customer service etc .
It is ridiculous that those politicians in India suggest dialogue with naxalites and terrorists but never try to solve the problem from the root before it takes violent form. The said agreement was also signed after agitation and strike done by bank employees many times during preceding 30 months. It is sad that a few greedy leaders, I say hardly 10 persons spoilt the career and fate of 10 lac employees.
When king is Tuglak, everything is possible. When Koda is Chief Minister of a state, everything is possible. When IAS officers are like Mr Rathod, murder of innocent girl like Ruchika is not surprising. When person like Raju is CMD of Satyam computers, when CAs are dishonest certification of fake balance sheet is not impossible in India and similarly when CAs are corrupt, rating agencies rate on the basis and quantum of bribe and fees they get, happening of fraud or manipulation with balance sheet is not impossible for banks and I it is not astonishing to anyone in India at least.
I submit a copy of letter written by one retired officer.
The Editor,
Business Line
Dear Sir,
Stalemate over banking consensus
Queer banking equations implanted in the Pension Agreement signed along with ninth bipartite settlement attracted nationwide resentment among bank men, delaying its implementation indefinitely. A group of dissatisfied employees secured stay order from Madras High Court putting IBA and bank unions in the defense box. When they merely objected the recovery of a portion of their pay as contribution to Pension Fund for giving them entry to Pension Scheme, the long cherished desire of the retired to get pension is delayed further, adding to their more than a decade old sufferings. The irrational terms providing for recovery of 2.8 time revised pay from new entrants in respected of the employees on rolls as on the date of agreement (27 April, 2010), recovery of 156 percent CPF and interest paid at the time of retirement in respect of the retired, &nbs p; forfeiture of pension from the date of retirement to the arbitrary date of 27 November, 2009 to the retired, payment of commutation reckoning the age as on date of fresh option instead of the age of retirement, non inclusion of resigned employees who have qualifying service for Pension etc . are tools devised to take away huge sums from the prospective beneficiaries of Pension Scheme. ; It becomes wild justice, quite illegal and irrational, in the context of the Pension Regulations being one and the same as on the date of agreement and existing Pension Opted employees have derived the benefit without any levy or penalty. &nbs p; While addressing the anomaly of denying the social security benefit to a large segment by extending them a fresh chance for option, five fresh glaring anomalies have been infused into the scheme, making it a black agreement altogether.
In earlier Bipartite settlements, after setting apart a portion of the total load factor towards Pension Fund, the remainder alone was distributed among CPF opted and Pension opted, putting the former to erosion of emoluments in each agreement, benefitting the latter. ; The proposal initially mooted for a uniform recovery of 1.6 times revised pay for Nov.2007 from all existing employees for sharing pension costs got changed overnight at last hour, settling down for sharing 2.6 times pay from CPF opted alone to their detriment. &n bsp; The 17.5 percent pay hike in the industry for the six days working bank employees in contrast with the 40 percent settled for five days working government staff has inculcated in them a feeling that it is the result of the additional cost of Pension rather than of the low profile bargaining of Unions. They seem to be ignoring the core fact that Pension is the consideration for services rendered and not for a mere option letter exercised on a bit of paper. While Pension opted are getting some amount as arrears of salary, almost the entire amount is snatched away from the other category. Unions that announced the twin achievement of Wage Revision and Pension Option as a grand gala victory took a somersault saying that they had no option other than agreeing to the rude terms of IBA for securing fresh Pension Option.
Recovery of 156 percent of CPF paid in the case of the retired (up to March 2010) would entail to them huge pecuniary loss as many will have to shell out as much as Rs.15.00 lakhs when their counterpart retiring in April,2010 or afterwards will have to pay a meager sum of Rs.0.30 lakhs to Rs.1.20 lakhs only. The impact of the insignificant cut-off date, which does not appeal to any reasoning is a severe blow to several beneficiaries.
The agreement provides for payment of Pension to the retired from 27th November, 2009 alone irrespective of the date of retirement. Though in all fairness, they are eligible to get monthly pension and interest on each payment date from one decade back, they are victimized through recovery of 156 percent of the CPF paid at the time of retirement uniformly. &n bsp; This apparently is a dual penalty to them. The modality is totally enigmatic and carries with it unfairness of an extreme nature.
Pension Regulations for computing commutation recognizes the age next birthday at the time of retirement whereas the agreement stipulates age on the date of fresh option to the detriment of all the retired. &nbs p; This leads to application of entirely different yardstick under the same Regulations to different beneficiaries without any logic. The delay in implementation of the agreement is worsening the situation for the retired.
Non-inclusion of the resigned employees in the scheme is a further anomaly as the resigned possessing enough qualifying service are denied the social security benefit altogether. & nbsp; When VRS retirees who are paid an incentive for going out are also considered for pension, the resigned are to be invariably extended the benefit in all cases where they are paid all other terminal benefits. Qualifying service and not the mode of exist shall be the vesting criterion for Pension unless the termination if a compulsory one through disciplinary procedures.
In financial sector, Public Sector Banks appear to be competing with others to secure the worst employer award by denying proper compensation to the work force who run the shows for the progress of the nation. Even as profits are soaring for each bank, the key men are attempting to add to their cosmetics by transferring higher profits to the exchequer, which goes to part finance the pension and wages of employees in other sectors and government. They should say what banks would have done if all had opted for pension when initially offered. &nbs p; The deprived could not opt earlier when terms of offer contained a penal clause enabling forfeiture of entire past service for participation in strike and were not given fresh chance when the adverse chapter was scrapped in 1999. While denying pension to the retired, banks that function on sole premises of laws of the country and depend on them for each transaction are blatantly flouting substantive law. Retires and working, Pension Opted and CPF opted all are, without exception, growling over the agreement percolating with gross anomalies. The retired who did their best for banks are on crossroads for want of income for subsistence and their decade old sufferings get prolonged as the stalemate on the catastrophic agreement continues. IBA, Unions and Government should evince keen interest and initiate corrigendum steps to rectify all anomalies without further waste of time and bring solace to all.
Yours faithfully,
C N Venugopalan
C N Venugopalan
Ex-Manager, Union Bank of India
Camp: 101 Pinnacle Court,
Apt. # 82, Frankfort,
Kentucky 40601 USA
Cell:0013135491401
Nandanam,
Friday, July 16, 2010
Bank Management Hai Hai
How many Banks have obeyed the stay order of Madras High Court and not recovered 2.8 times of November 2007 salary from PF optees?
How many banks have not yet started paying arrears as per 9th BPS.?
How many banks have issued pension offer till date and if not why have they recovered from PF optees? Already three months are likely to complete after the date of settlement. Why bank is so slow on the issue of pension offer and so fast on the matter of recovery and similarly why union leaders are so anxious on recovery of levy of Rs.3000/ from their members and not worried for delay in offer of pension? Union leaders are getting farewell gift of five lacs or ten lacs on their retirement from Union Fund. Is this the way to use hard earned contribution made to Unions and Associations by poorly paid bank employees?
Days are not far when union leaders will distribute accumulated union levy amounting to hundreds of crores of rupees among themselves and ask for separate fee if they fight for any aggrieved employee. Are union leaders not more dangerous than our management bosses? I say this because union leaders have threatened to expel officer from their association if they do not pay union levy of Rs.3000/ on account of so called successful historic agreement. Management never dared to issue dismissal threatening to officer employee if they fail to obey any instruction of boss.
Why are employees keeping mum on illegitimate recovery and bent upon getting arrear at the earliest even if it is discriminatory? Why are they afraid of even lodging their protest before accepting arrear payment?
Bank management has signed a historic victory agreement when they have vertically divided the employees in two segments and created an unbridgeable split in banking unity and created dilution in their intensity to fight against the reign of injustice perpetuated by management.
And Bank union leaders on the contrary has committed a historic blunder by signing a discriminatory and divisive agreement on 27.04.2010 for some or the other vested interest and clearly betrayed the cause of unity for which they used to struggle under the banner of communist parties.
At least pension optees are now in support of the agreement. It hardly matters to most of them how loudly PF optees cries and weeps though in the past they all always used to be on the same platform and UFBU was also formed for the same purpose. Banking unity was an example in the community of labour class or working class.
Banks are not in the grip of flatterers. Those who are yes-men are getting timely promotion and getting best posting and in this way a team of flatterers are generated by bank management who blindly support of all action of the management right or wrong. Even union leaders do not fight against such lollipop like promotions and transfers because they say that ultimately their members are getting promotions and cream posting or choice posting though the same may be at the cost of others genuine right. At least veteran union leaders are enjoying posting in Metros and capital towns, they need not perform bank’s job, they may do their side business, they may take share from dirty dealings in credit decision or contract offers corruption and they may get sweet request from corrupt officers for reduction of punishment and so on. Lastly they may get huge gifts from top branch managers, big bribe earners, big customers and last but not the least huge money from union fund on their retirement and on attending an inquiry from Union Fund. Similarly union leaders now plead that the said agreement is good in the light of social security though they know and understand from the core of their heart that recovery from PF optees is not justified from any angle of consideration.
This is called divide and rule policy. Intelligent, talented, experienced, valued and visionary leaders of bank management who occupy the important seats of core committee of IBM as also that of United Forum of Bank Unions are very well aware and they all realize from the core of their heart that injustice has occurred with PF optees, retirees and those who have resigned. They all know very well that courts cannot deliver justice in decades and decades and this is why they are least bothered of courts also. They have gained sufficient experience by giving undue promotions to even charge sheeted officers and by rejecting even good officers. In every circular enlisting name of officers getting promotion they used to mention “subject to court decisions on various writs going on in various courts”
In the same way IBA is bent upon making recovery from PF optees subject to court decisions. But at the same time God knows whether they will issue pension offer or not. Reason for not issuing pension offer, bank will say they are waiting decision from courts. It is not surprising at least for me that even so called union leaders are also keeping mum on this matter for which they feel proud and say that the agreement is historic.
Bank Unity Zindabad?
How many banks have not yet started paying arrears as per 9th BPS.?
How many banks have issued pension offer till date and if not why have they recovered from PF optees? Already three months are likely to complete after the date of settlement. Why bank is so slow on the issue of pension offer and so fast on the matter of recovery and similarly why union leaders are so anxious on recovery of levy of Rs.3000/ from their members and not worried for delay in offer of pension? Union leaders are getting farewell gift of five lacs or ten lacs on their retirement from Union Fund. Is this the way to use hard earned contribution made to Unions and Associations by poorly paid bank employees?
Days are not far when union leaders will distribute accumulated union levy amounting to hundreds of crores of rupees among themselves and ask for separate fee if they fight for any aggrieved employee. Are union leaders not more dangerous than our management bosses? I say this because union leaders have threatened to expel officer from their association if they do not pay union levy of Rs.3000/ on account of so called successful historic agreement. Management never dared to issue dismissal threatening to officer employee if they fail to obey any instruction of boss.
Why are employees keeping mum on illegitimate recovery and bent upon getting arrear at the earliest even if it is discriminatory? Why are they afraid of even lodging their protest before accepting arrear payment?
Bank management has signed a historic victory agreement when they have vertically divided the employees in two segments and created an unbridgeable split in banking unity and created dilution in their intensity to fight against the reign of injustice perpetuated by management.
And Bank union leaders on the contrary has committed a historic blunder by signing a discriminatory and divisive agreement on 27.04.2010 for some or the other vested interest and clearly betrayed the cause of unity for which they used to struggle under the banner of communist parties.
At least pension optees are now in support of the agreement. It hardly matters to most of them how loudly PF optees cries and weeps though in the past they all always used to be on the same platform and UFBU was also formed for the same purpose. Banking unity was an example in the community of labour class or working class.
Banks are not in the grip of flatterers. Those who are yes-men are getting timely promotion and getting best posting and in this way a team of flatterers are generated by bank management who blindly support of all action of the management right or wrong. Even union leaders do not fight against such lollipop like promotions and transfers because they say that ultimately their members are getting promotions and cream posting or choice posting though the same may be at the cost of others genuine right. At least veteran union leaders are enjoying posting in Metros and capital towns, they need not perform bank’s job, they may do their side business, they may take share from dirty dealings in credit decision or contract offers corruption and they may get sweet request from corrupt officers for reduction of punishment and so on. Lastly they may get huge gifts from top branch managers, big bribe earners, big customers and last but not the least huge money from union fund on their retirement and on attending an inquiry from Union Fund. Similarly union leaders now plead that the said agreement is good in the light of social security though they know and understand from the core of their heart that recovery from PF optees is not justified from any angle of consideration.
This is called divide and rule policy. Intelligent, talented, experienced, valued and visionary leaders of bank management who occupy the important seats of core committee of IBM as also that of United Forum of Bank Unions are very well aware and they all realize from the core of their heart that injustice has occurred with PF optees, retirees and those who have resigned. They all know very well that courts cannot deliver justice in decades and decades and this is why they are least bothered of courts also. They have gained sufficient experience by giving undue promotions to even charge sheeted officers and by rejecting even good officers. In every circular enlisting name of officers getting promotion they used to mention “subject to court decisions on various writs going on in various courts”
In the same way IBA is bent upon making recovery from PF optees subject to court decisions. But at the same time God knows whether they will issue pension offer or not. Reason for not issuing pension offer, bank will say they are waiting decision from courts. It is not surprising at least for me that even so called union leaders are also keeping mum on this matter for which they feel proud and say that the agreement is historic.
Bank Unity Zindabad?
Friday, July 09, 2010
Trade Unionism in Bank
IBA in its affidavit has stressed on the point that the trade union representing 95% of bank employees signed the agreement and hence Canara Bank petition filed by a union representing only 244 members should be ignored is not acceptable to any one who believes in justice.
Suppose if majority union decides that female employees will be given three increments less than male employees though they male and female perform same duty in the bank. , Can such unconstitutional agreement be treated as valid only because the same has been signed by a union representing majority of members?
Are we living in a jungle of sheep?
Another point is that the disputed agreement was signed by leaders of majority union. If leaders become victim of management, if leaders become hostile to members due to self interest, if leader’s intention become malicious there is all possibility of betrayal such as anti-member decision, divisive wage agreement, discriminatory treatment to divide them, sacrificing the interest of members to serve self interest etc. There is country wide protest and several writs have been filed in various courts of the country against the disputed clause which shows that the said agreement signed by leaders of majority union is not liked by majority of members. When leaders found that member can now resign or revolt against the union, they thought it better to release the arrear in hurry and recover the contribution from PF optees so that intensity of revolt is diluted. Further pension optees who are getting better treatment and who are getting full arrear will not support PF optees. This is called “Divide and Rule” policy. Leaders further took support of management in making recovery of Levy directly from arrear or pay slip to avoid the risk of member not paying levy in anger. All these fact reveal that union leaders realize from the core of their heart that they members are not happy with them.
When late Indira Gandhi, exPrime Minister of India lost her temper, she lost her conscience, she put all her opponents in jail, imposed emergency and without any fear of legal consequences or political reaction she misused the majority of her party in the Parliament to change the basic structure of the constitution. Similarly IBA has divided the bank employees in two segments, one pension optee and another PF optee and there is no doubt that bank management will use this division for imposing illegal recovery on PF optees. To add fuel to fire, IBA has created division even among various union leaders. This is why powerful protest against illegal recovery is not visible and management is taking advantage of this division and submitting illogical plea in the court to defend the discriminatory clause of the Bipartite Settlement. Those employees who are raising voices against misrule of IBA and union leaders are facing threatening of transfer or rejection in promotion process or posting at critical place or transfer from east to west or from north to south. Obviously reign on injustice will continue unabated until courts impose some punitive action against erring officials and leaders.
One more point raised by IBA in their affidavit filed in Madras High Court is that the second option of pension is not mandatory and employee at his will to opt or not to opt for pension. Days are not far when bank will curtail salary of all employees by 50% and give option to employee to continue in service or leave the job. In the initial offer for pension bank did not put any condition and hence there is no logic to put condition of recovery in the present offer of pension.
Union leaders have got no right to damage career of any individual or cause financial loss to any single person, not to speak of 3 lacs employees PF optees. When PF optees have also contributed in pension fund along with pension optees in the past during 7th and 8th Bipartite Settlement, there is no question of making recovery this time only from PF optees only to bridge the gap of 1800 crores. It is worthwhile to mention here that bank management has saved interest to the tune of 1800 crores by merely delaying the settlement for 30 months. Further bank will earn interest on money recovered from PF optees (total of 1800 crores from PF optees) till the court finally stops such illegitimate deduction.
Further when these union leaders called for strike or agitation programme, the same was put in action by all the employees including PF optees and not by PF or pension optees alone. Never in the past, had these union leaders ever told that second option for PF optees will be purchased by paying three months salary to pension fund. Had it been so there was no need to wait for 15 to 17 years, it could have been easily offered by PBA in 1995 itself.
When union leaders and IBA both had unanimous view of 1.6 times recovery and they have expressed the same in their separate affidavits, what happened during last two three days that both parties changed their view and agreed for recovery from only PF optees. Such discriminatory agreement pass the test of existing laws and the provision of constitutionally granted fundamental right called as Equality before law.
Already bank management has been violating spirit of transfer policy and promotion policy just to please union leaders and to conceal the misdeeds of corrupt executives. Management even does not hesitate to compromise lending policy or ethics behind waiver or comprise settlement with willful defaulters.
80% of officers belonging to the state of Jharkhand, Bihar, Orrisa and a few other states are posted outside their parent state and transferred whimsically frequently whereas those of the state of Maharashtra, Tamilnadu and West Bengal are seldom transferred outside their state for three decades and more. In the name of exigencies of work officers are transferred from one corner to other in clear cut violation of transfer policy. Similarly in the name of interview in promotion processes, higher management in nexus with union leaders promote or reject officers as per their sweet will and thus perpetuating arbitrary rule and reign of injustice.
Now they have jointly committed fraud with PF optees, they have cheated PF optees, they have extended biased benefits to scale four officers at the cost of junior level officers, they have caused loss to senior officers by stagnating them and depriving them of annual increments and what not.......
Reason behind continuance of such atrocities is that banks in general give choice posting to union leaders, militant officers, out of turn promotion to inefficient and corrupt employees, avoid punitive action against even fraudulent and charge sheeted employees to create a team of truely loyal and flatterers .This time IBA has created a team of pension optees who will blindly support misrule of Bank Management. If hundred or thousand employees are promoted even if they are not fit for the same, these promotees will become truely loyal to bank bosses. On the other hand if honest and performers are promoted, such promotees will never flatter their bosses or support blindly IBA.This is also a proof of “Divide and Rule” policy adopted by bank management. Similarly Union leaders are never transferred from their home town, they are given preferred treatment, hotel expenses and what not to make them blind supporter of what management do and like to do.
But how long such cruelty will be tolerated is a million dollar question?
How long top executives and CEOs forming IBA will kill their own conscience and commit unethical acts and work against all moral values.
I ask IBA team leaders and veteran trade union leaders to peep into their own mind and heart, try to affirm and reaffirm whether core of their heart permits such divisive and discriminatory agreement. If their heart and soul, their conscience do not allow discrimination, they should at least now rectify their error . It is never too late.
Suppose if majority union decides that female employees will be given three increments less than male employees though they male and female perform same duty in the bank. , Can such unconstitutional agreement be treated as valid only because the same has been signed by a union representing majority of members?
Are we living in a jungle of sheep?
Another point is that the disputed agreement was signed by leaders of majority union. If leaders become victim of management, if leaders become hostile to members due to self interest, if leader’s intention become malicious there is all possibility of betrayal such as anti-member decision, divisive wage agreement, discriminatory treatment to divide them, sacrificing the interest of members to serve self interest etc. There is country wide protest and several writs have been filed in various courts of the country against the disputed clause which shows that the said agreement signed by leaders of majority union is not liked by majority of members. When leaders found that member can now resign or revolt against the union, they thought it better to release the arrear in hurry and recover the contribution from PF optees so that intensity of revolt is diluted. Further pension optees who are getting better treatment and who are getting full arrear will not support PF optees. This is called “Divide and Rule” policy. Leaders further took support of management in making recovery of Levy directly from arrear or pay slip to avoid the risk of member not paying levy in anger. All these fact reveal that union leaders realize from the core of their heart that they members are not happy with them.
When late Indira Gandhi, exPrime Minister of India lost her temper, she lost her conscience, she put all her opponents in jail, imposed emergency and without any fear of legal consequences or political reaction she misused the majority of her party in the Parliament to change the basic structure of the constitution. Similarly IBA has divided the bank employees in two segments, one pension optee and another PF optee and there is no doubt that bank management will use this division for imposing illegal recovery on PF optees. To add fuel to fire, IBA has created division even among various union leaders. This is why powerful protest against illegal recovery is not visible and management is taking advantage of this division and submitting illogical plea in the court to defend the discriminatory clause of the Bipartite Settlement. Those employees who are raising voices against misrule of IBA and union leaders are facing threatening of transfer or rejection in promotion process or posting at critical place or transfer from east to west or from north to south. Obviously reign on injustice will continue unabated until courts impose some punitive action against erring officials and leaders.
One more point raised by IBA in their affidavit filed in Madras High Court is that the second option of pension is not mandatory and employee at his will to opt or not to opt for pension. Days are not far when bank will curtail salary of all employees by 50% and give option to employee to continue in service or leave the job. In the initial offer for pension bank did not put any condition and hence there is no logic to put condition of recovery in the present offer of pension.
Union leaders have got no right to damage career of any individual or cause financial loss to any single person, not to speak of 3 lacs employees PF optees. When PF optees have also contributed in pension fund along with pension optees in the past during 7th and 8th Bipartite Settlement, there is no question of making recovery this time only from PF optees only to bridge the gap of 1800 crores. It is worthwhile to mention here that bank management has saved interest to the tune of 1800 crores by merely delaying the settlement for 30 months. Further bank will earn interest on money recovered from PF optees (total of 1800 crores from PF optees) till the court finally stops such illegitimate deduction.
Further when these union leaders called for strike or agitation programme, the same was put in action by all the employees including PF optees and not by PF or pension optees alone. Never in the past, had these union leaders ever told that second option for PF optees will be purchased by paying three months salary to pension fund. Had it been so there was no need to wait for 15 to 17 years, it could have been easily offered by PBA in 1995 itself.
When union leaders and IBA both had unanimous view of 1.6 times recovery and they have expressed the same in their separate affidavits, what happened during last two three days that both parties changed their view and agreed for recovery from only PF optees. Such discriminatory agreement pass the test of existing laws and the provision of constitutionally granted fundamental right called as Equality before law.
Already bank management has been violating spirit of transfer policy and promotion policy just to please union leaders and to conceal the misdeeds of corrupt executives. Management even does not hesitate to compromise lending policy or ethics behind waiver or comprise settlement with willful defaulters.
80% of officers belonging to the state of Jharkhand, Bihar, Orrisa and a few other states are posted outside their parent state and transferred whimsically frequently whereas those of the state of Maharashtra, Tamilnadu and West Bengal are seldom transferred outside their state for three decades and more. In the name of exigencies of work officers are transferred from one corner to other in clear cut violation of transfer policy. Similarly in the name of interview in promotion processes, higher management in nexus with union leaders promote or reject officers as per their sweet will and thus perpetuating arbitrary rule and reign of injustice.
Now they have jointly committed fraud with PF optees, they have cheated PF optees, they have extended biased benefits to scale four officers at the cost of junior level officers, they have caused loss to senior officers by stagnating them and depriving them of annual increments and what not.......
Reason behind continuance of such atrocities is that banks in general give choice posting to union leaders, militant officers, out of turn promotion to inefficient and corrupt employees, avoid punitive action against even fraudulent and charge sheeted employees to create a team of truely loyal and flatterers .This time IBA has created a team of pension optees who will blindly support misrule of Bank Management. If hundred or thousand employees are promoted even if they are not fit for the same, these promotees will become truely loyal to bank bosses. On the other hand if honest and performers are promoted, such promotees will never flatter their bosses or support blindly IBA.This is also a proof of “Divide and Rule” policy adopted by bank management. Similarly Union leaders are never transferred from their home town, they are given preferred treatment, hotel expenses and what not to make them blind supporter of what management do and like to do.
But how long such cruelty will be tolerated is a million dollar question?
How long top executives and CEOs forming IBA will kill their own conscience and commit unethical acts and work against all moral values.
I ask IBA team leaders and veteran trade union leaders to peep into their own mind and heart, try to affirm and reaffirm whether core of their heart permits such divisive and discriminatory agreement. If their heart and soul, their conscience do not allow discrimination, they should at least now rectify their error . It is never too late.
Saturday, July 03, 2010
Sonia Gandhi
"Asli Chehra" - TRUE FACE OF BANK UNIONS
Immediately after the settlement, most of the unions patted their back for the so called "historic settlement". Slowly as they started facing volley of questions from the members, they came out with various theories to justify their action, which included the so called legal opinion and IBA's stiff attitude which forced them to agree to recovery from only PF optees to the tune of 2.8 times of the November 2007 pay. An impression was being created by them as if they were not in favour the same till 26th April, 2010, but somehow they were cornered so much that they had to agree to the terms set by IBA. If that would have been the case, then they would not now oppose the petition pending in Madras High Court. That shows the double standards.
But soon the bankers will be able to see the "Asli Chehra" (i.e. True Face) of these union leaders. These union leaders will now not be able to beat around the bush and befool the members by shedding crocodile tears. They have to take a stand in the Madras High Court, as to whether they are in favour of payment by all employees / officers @ 1.6 times or they favour 2.8 times only from PF optees. Some of these unions have already been exposed. Let us see what does the market reports say as at the end of June, 2010.
It is reported that during the course of hearing of the case at Madras High Court, while opposing the interim stay granted by Madras High Court, advocates of IBA, and AIBEA and NCBE, requested for vacation of the stay. AIBEA and NCBE were represented by one of the top most firm namely M/s Aiyar & Dolia and wanted vacation of the interim stay on recovery of 2.8 times only from PF optees to be vacated. So the stands of these two unions are very clear now. They will be using the members’ funds (including PF optees) for payment to the law firms and fighting case against them. However, the Hon’ble Judge advised them to file their counter affidavits and Ordered continuation of the Stay Order. Next hearing has been fixed for 6th July 2010.
Vide circular No. 98 dated 29th June, 2010. AIBOC has declared "We are in constant touch with the IBA and the Convenor of UFBU, to initiate appropriate steps to vacate the stay, at the earliest, to enable IBA to issue necessary instructions to member Banks on the Pension offer". Thus, AIBOC is also likely to oppose the move and appears to be in favour of payment by only PF optees".
(Remember, the stay is not against the Pension offer or issuing circular by IBA, it is only against immediate recovery of 2.8 times of pay of November, 2007 from PF optees. )
The stand of other unions will also be clear within a week, as court in its orders says ""Notice to respondents returnable by 06.07.2010. There shall be an interim order of stay". (all major unions are respondents in this case). The reports indicate that NOBW may support the petition filed by Canara Bank Workers Unions. Similarly, BEFI may not oppose the petition of Canara Bank Workers union. The protest by INBEF has already been incorporated in the affidavit filed in the Court.
If the above reports are true, then 29th June 2010 would be regarded as a sad day in the history of trade union movement of Banking Industry. Souls of great leaders like Parawana Ji would be feeling really sad and dejected.
Till now they have been propagating that they have been forced by the circumstances and situation to accept contributory pension scheme in banking industry. They are giving so many logics and have been pleading as to why they could not make IBA agree to the Pension Scheme in its original form of 1993. We are unable to find any logical reason from Unions wherein it joined hands with the union of the Management i.e. IBA to defeat the efforts of bank employees.
Duniya ke Mazdooron ek ho - Duniya ke mehanatkashon ek ho ka naara laagene waale aaj majdooron ke khilaf hi Court main jaa pahunche.
TESTING TIME IS NOT FAR WAY NOW. NOW THESE UNION LEADERS WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SAY THAT IBA DID NOT LET THEM SUFFICIENT TIME AND CORNERED THEM SO SUCH THAT THEY SIGNED THE SETTLEMENT ON 27TH APRIL, 2010. THEY HAVE SUFFICIENT TIME OF OVER A WEEK TO DECIDE WHETHER THEY WANT TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF PF OPTEES OR WANT TO DO WHAT IBA IS SAYING.
It has also been reported that some Banks have issued strict instructions for payment of arrears to all the employees / officers by 30th June, 2010 or so, after keeping 2.8 times of the pay of November, 2007 in suspense account. This clearly gives an indication that banks are in a hurry to pay arrears so that they can deduct 2.8 times from the arrears of PF optees before orders of Madras High Court are delivered to them through IBA. In court they will take the plea that notice of stay was not received by them and arrears have already been paid. As Canara Bank has also rushed to pay the arrears today after keeping the 2.8 recovery in suspense, Canara Bank Workers Union is likely to give a strong protest letter on 1st July, 2010 at their Head Office. Canara Bank Workers Union has informed that they are proceeding to Bangalore to personally handover the letter along with a copy of the court order and get the acknowledgement.
Now all the bankers have to take a final call as to whether these union leaders are with the workers or are working against them. We know it is a difficult task as they have to eat their own words. They have issued number of circulars justifying as to why and how they were cornered to agree this changed stand on the night of 26th and 27th April, 2010. However, this is the time when they can correct the mistakes as PF optees have shared the burden of pension even in the last two Bipartite settlements (7th and 8th). This information is now shared by almost everybody (which was not known earlier to 99% of the PF optees).
The unions opposing the petition will be spending lacs of rupees in the legal battle. All this money can be saved if they simple say that we do not oppose the petition and are in favour of the same.
LET PF OPTEES DECLARE THAT THEY WILL QUITE THEIR UNION (WHICHEVER IT MAY BE) IF THEIR UNION OPPOSES THE PETITION FILED BY CANARA BANK WORKERS UNION AT MADRAS HIGH COURT. LET COURT DECIDE THE CASE ON MERITS.
(Inputs also by kamlesh.chaturvedi@yahoo.com; canara bank workers unions etc )
UPDATE ON THE ORDERS ISSUED BY VARIOUS HIGH COURTS AGAINST RECOVERY OF 2.8 TIMES OF NOVEMBER 2007 PAY
In order to ventilate the grievances of the employees, Writ Petitions have been filed in various Hon’ble High Courts.
(A)The First Writ Petition was filed before the Hon’ble Andhra High Court bearing number Writ Petition No. 8237 of 2010 where in Hon’ble Court has passed following orders:
“ORDER: Interim order dated 13-04-2010, to continue, subject to final orders to be passed in this WPMP. Any settlement also, shall be subject to final orders in this WPMP.
Post after Summer Vacation, 2010.”
(B) Writ Petition No. (C) No.3729/2010 has been filed before Hon’ble Delhi High Court, where Hon’ble Court has passed following Orders on 28.05.2010:
“Issue notice to the respondents to show cause as to why rule nisi
be not issued, returnable on 30.07.2010. Necessary steps be taken within seven
days.”
(C) Subsequently, Division Bench of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court while disposing Special Appeal No. 947 of 2010 passed following orders Orders:
“Issue notice.
Respondents are allowed three weeks time to file counter
Affidavit.
List thereafter”
(D) And now recently a Writ Petition bearing no. WP 12269/2010 has been filed before Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras, in the matter of Clause No. 32 of the industry level Wage Revision Settlement dated 27.04.2010 and also clause (1) of the Pension Settlement of even date, seeking a direction from the Hon’ble Court to quash the above clauses only in so far as the said clauses require the provident fund optees now in service to contribute 2.8 times of the Nov 2007 revised pay, if they want to opt for the pension scheme.
Hon’ble Justice K Venkataraman, who heard the matter has ordered an interim stay and the next date of hearing, has been fixed on 06 July 2010. A copy of this order is enclosed.
From what is stated here in above, it is evidently clear that Clause 32 of Settlement dated 27.04.2010 and Clause (1) of Pension Settlement dated 27.04.2010 has become subject matter of judicial scrutiny by the Hon’ble Courts and Hon’ble Madras High Court has passed orders to stay the operation of these clauses.
Immediately after the settlement, most of the unions patted their back for the so called "historic settlement". Slowly as they started facing volley of questions from the members, they came out with various theories to justify their action, which included the so called legal opinion and IBA's stiff attitude which forced them to agree to recovery from only PF optees to the tune of 2.8 times of the November 2007 pay. An impression was being created by them as if they were not in favour the same till 26th April, 2010, but somehow they were cornered so much that they had to agree to the terms set by IBA. If that would have been the case, then they would not now oppose the petition pending in Madras High Court. That shows the double standards.
But soon the bankers will be able to see the "Asli Chehra" (i.e. True Face) of these union leaders. These union leaders will now not be able to beat around the bush and befool the members by shedding crocodile tears. They have to take a stand in the Madras High Court, as to whether they are in favour of payment by all employees / officers @ 1.6 times or they favour 2.8 times only from PF optees. Some of these unions have already been exposed. Let us see what does the market reports say as at the end of June, 2010.
It is reported that during the course of hearing of the case at Madras High Court, while opposing the interim stay granted by Madras High Court, advocates of IBA, and AIBEA and NCBE, requested for vacation of the stay. AIBEA and NCBE were represented by one of the top most firm namely M/s Aiyar & Dolia and wanted vacation of the interim stay on recovery of 2.8 times only from PF optees to be vacated. So the stands of these two unions are very clear now. They will be using the members’ funds (including PF optees) for payment to the law firms and fighting case against them. However, the Hon’ble Judge advised them to file their counter affidavits and Ordered continuation of the Stay Order. Next hearing has been fixed for 6th July 2010.
Vide circular No. 98 dated 29th June, 2010. AIBOC has declared "We are in constant touch with the IBA and the Convenor of UFBU, to initiate appropriate steps to vacate the stay, at the earliest, to enable IBA to issue necessary instructions to member Banks on the Pension offer". Thus, AIBOC is also likely to oppose the move and appears to be in favour of payment by only PF optees".
(Remember, the stay is not against the Pension offer or issuing circular by IBA, it is only against immediate recovery of 2.8 times of pay of November, 2007 from PF optees. )
The stand of other unions will also be clear within a week, as court in its orders says ""Notice to respondents returnable by 06.07.2010. There shall be an interim order of stay". (all major unions are respondents in this case). The reports indicate that NOBW may support the petition filed by Canara Bank Workers Unions. Similarly, BEFI may not oppose the petition of Canara Bank Workers union. The protest by INBEF has already been incorporated in the affidavit filed in the Court.
If the above reports are true, then 29th June 2010 would be regarded as a sad day in the history of trade union movement of Banking Industry. Souls of great leaders like Parawana Ji would be feeling really sad and dejected.
Till now they have been propagating that they have been forced by the circumstances and situation to accept contributory pension scheme in banking industry. They are giving so many logics and have been pleading as to why they could not make IBA agree to the Pension Scheme in its original form of 1993. We are unable to find any logical reason from Unions wherein it joined hands with the union of the Management i.e. IBA to defeat the efforts of bank employees.
Duniya ke Mazdooron ek ho - Duniya ke mehanatkashon ek ho ka naara laagene waale aaj majdooron ke khilaf hi Court main jaa pahunche.
TESTING TIME IS NOT FAR WAY NOW. NOW THESE UNION LEADERS WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SAY THAT IBA DID NOT LET THEM SUFFICIENT TIME AND CORNERED THEM SO SUCH THAT THEY SIGNED THE SETTLEMENT ON 27TH APRIL, 2010. THEY HAVE SUFFICIENT TIME OF OVER A WEEK TO DECIDE WHETHER THEY WANT TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF PF OPTEES OR WANT TO DO WHAT IBA IS SAYING.
It has also been reported that some Banks have issued strict instructions for payment of arrears to all the employees / officers by 30th June, 2010 or so, after keeping 2.8 times of the pay of November, 2007 in suspense account. This clearly gives an indication that banks are in a hurry to pay arrears so that they can deduct 2.8 times from the arrears of PF optees before orders of Madras High Court are delivered to them through IBA. In court they will take the plea that notice of stay was not received by them and arrears have already been paid. As Canara Bank has also rushed to pay the arrears today after keeping the 2.8 recovery in suspense, Canara Bank Workers Union is likely to give a strong protest letter on 1st July, 2010 at their Head Office. Canara Bank Workers Union has informed that they are proceeding to Bangalore to personally handover the letter along with a copy of the court order and get the acknowledgement.
Now all the bankers have to take a final call as to whether these union leaders are with the workers or are working against them. We know it is a difficult task as they have to eat their own words. They have issued number of circulars justifying as to why and how they were cornered to agree this changed stand on the night of 26th and 27th April, 2010. However, this is the time when they can correct the mistakes as PF optees have shared the burden of pension even in the last two Bipartite settlements (7th and 8th). This information is now shared by almost everybody (which was not known earlier to 99% of the PF optees).
The unions opposing the petition will be spending lacs of rupees in the legal battle. All this money can be saved if they simple say that we do not oppose the petition and are in favour of the same.
LET PF OPTEES DECLARE THAT THEY WILL QUITE THEIR UNION (WHICHEVER IT MAY BE) IF THEIR UNION OPPOSES THE PETITION FILED BY CANARA BANK WORKERS UNION AT MADRAS HIGH COURT. LET COURT DECIDE THE CASE ON MERITS.
(Inputs also by kamlesh.chaturvedi@yahoo.com; canara bank workers unions etc )
UPDATE ON THE ORDERS ISSUED BY VARIOUS HIGH COURTS AGAINST RECOVERY OF 2.8 TIMES OF NOVEMBER 2007 PAY
In order to ventilate the grievances of the employees, Writ Petitions have been filed in various Hon’ble High Courts.
(A)The First Writ Petition was filed before the Hon’ble Andhra High Court bearing number Writ Petition No. 8237 of 2010 where in Hon’ble Court has passed following orders:
“ORDER: Interim order dated 13-04-2010, to continue, subject to final orders to be passed in this WPMP. Any settlement also, shall be subject to final orders in this WPMP.
Post after Summer Vacation, 2010.”
(B) Writ Petition No. (C) No.3729/2010 has been filed before Hon’ble Delhi High Court, where Hon’ble Court has passed following Orders on 28.05.2010:
“Issue notice to the respondents to show cause as to why rule nisi
be not issued, returnable on 30.07.2010. Necessary steps be taken within seven
days.”
(C) Subsequently, Division Bench of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court while disposing Special Appeal No. 947 of 2010 passed following orders Orders:
“Issue notice.
Respondents are allowed three weeks time to file counter
Affidavit.
List thereafter”
(D) And now recently a Writ Petition bearing no. WP 12269/2010 has been filed before Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Madras, in the matter of Clause No. 32 of the industry level Wage Revision Settlement dated 27.04.2010 and also clause (1) of the Pension Settlement of even date, seeking a direction from the Hon’ble Court to quash the above clauses only in so far as the said clauses require the provident fund optees now in service to contribute 2.8 times of the Nov 2007 revised pay, if they want to opt for the pension scheme.
Hon’ble Justice K Venkataraman, who heard the matter has ordered an interim stay and the next date of hearing, has been fixed on 06 July 2010. A copy of this order is enclosed.
From what is stated here in above, it is evidently clear that Clause 32 of Settlement dated 27.04.2010 and Clause (1) of Pension Settlement dated 27.04.2010 has become subject matter of judicial scrutiny by the Hon’ble Courts and Hon’ble Madras High Court has passed orders to stay the operation of these clauses.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)