Ex Servicemen forced into protracted litigation for legitimate pension

Reducing backlog: Litigation policy good but not enough
The Tribune Friday, June 25, 2010, Chandigarh, India
The government as a ‘responsible and efficient’ litigant is an attractive proposition and the Union Law Minister’s belated announcement of a national policy to reduce the number of pending cases to achieve that end is certainly welcome. While over two crore cases are said to be pending before various courts in the country, Law Minister Veerappa Moily acknowledged that 70 per cent of them involve the government as either the petitioner or the respondent. Government litigation, as the Prime Minister once admitted, crowds out the private citizen from the system. Dr Manmohan Singh had then cited a survey conducted in Karnataka, where 65 per cent of the civil cases involved the government as litigant, sometimes on both sides. Under the new policy, the government would cease to be a ‘compulsive litigant’ and, as far as possible, would refrain from filing appeals against orders, assured the minister. The move will save the government both time and money as surveys reveal that the government actually loses over 90 per cent of the appeals.

A close watch would be kept on the implementation of the policy, said the minister and indicated that empowered committees, to be chaired at the national level by the Attorney-General, would be set up to monitor the implementation and fix the accountability of different departments. Though the objective is laudable, the measure is simply not enough. The government officials who fail to apply their mind and squander public money in unnecessary litigation must receive deterrent penalties for the policy to become effective. Government officers, who force citizens into protracted litigation to secure their dues like PF, pension, insurance or compensation, must also be held accountable. The Law Commission has often cited instances of the government pursuing frivolous litigation or as a “matter of prestige”. Often the officials are vindictive and vengeful, arrogant and determined to harass the citizens. For the policy to work, therefore, these busybodies must be made accountable for their action.

In its eagerness to reduce court cases, it is hoped, the government will not fall into the trap of letting off the big sharks. As it is, the Indian judiciary and the state are believed to be soft on the rich and the powerful. It would be tragic, therefore, if the really culpable, especially among the elite who bend the rules, are allowed to get away.
Rank Pay: Lt-Gen writes to Sonia against Centre's appeal
Pension bonanza for ex-servicemen after Supreme Court ruling: 16 Mar 2010, 2006 hrs IST,IANS
Grant of Rank Pay- Review Petition slapped by Union of India in the Apex Court
When the Government Becomes an Adversary of its Ex-servicemen

Moily unveils new policy to cut down on government litigation

NEW DELHI, June 24, 2010 Moily unveils new policy to cut down on government litigation by P. Sunderarajan. The Hindu

Union Law Minister Veerappa Moily with Attorney General G. E. Vahanvati addressing a press conference on ‘National Litigation Policy’ at Shastri Bhavan in New Delhi on Wednesday. Photo: R.V. Moorthy

With the huge backlog of cases continuing to clog the wheels of justice, Union Law Minister M.Veerappa Moily on Wednesday launched a new policy initiative to ensure that government departments and agencies become more “responsible” in filing and pursuing cases.

Recognising that the departments and agencies contribute the maximum to court cases, the new ‘National Litigation Policy' enjoins on these organisations to think twice before resorting to litigations, as well as in pursuing them.

The policy statement makes it very clear that, “litigation will not be resorted to for the sake of litigating” and that “false pleas and technical points will not be taken.”

It also lays down that correct facts, all relevant documents should be placed before the court and that nothing should be suppressed or an attempt made to mislead any court or tribunal.

The policy also directs that “the Government must cease to be a compulsive litigant” and states that, “the philosophy that matters should be left to the courts for ultimate decision has to be discarded” and that “the easy approach, ‘let the court decide' must be eschewed and condemned.”

Drafted by the office of Attorney-General G.E. Vahanvati, the policy provides a set of tools for its implementation, including a provision for appointment of well-trained nodal officers, with adequate legal background and expertise by each and every department and agency for a “pro-active” management of its cases and constitution of empowered committees to monitor the implementation of the policy.

Acknowledging that frequent adjournments are resorted to by government lawyers, the policy states: “unnecessary and frequent adjournments would be frowned upon and infractions dealt with seriously.” Defaulting lawyers may even have their names removed or suspended from government panels.

The policy also provides that in service matters, no appeal would be filed in cases where the matter pertains to an individual grievance without any major repercussion or where the matter pertains to a case of pension or retirement benefits without involving any principle and without setting any precedent or financial implications.

Further, an appeal would not be filed in service matters merely because the order of the Administrative Tribunal affects a number of employees and appeals would not be filed to espouse the cause of one section of employees against another. Challenges to orders of Tribunals would be an exception rather than a matter of routine.

Mr. Moily said that in keeping with the new policy, all pending cases involving the government would be reviewed and categorised in order of priority so that they could be disposed of quickly.

Noting that the monitoring and review mechanism proposed under the policy would help prevent delay and neglect of important cases, he said, “May be, cases like the Bhopal case would not be repeated.”

Asked about the curative petition that the Group of Ministers (GoM) have recommended on the Bhopal case, Mr. Vahanvati, who was also present at the launch function, said, the Law Minister had only made a suggestion before the GoM and that it was not a considered opinion. The GoM's recommendation had to first go to the Union Cabinet for approval before any follow up measure could be taken up.

In response to a question, he acknowledged that the 1996 Supreme Court order judgment “wrong as a matter of law,” he said: “I am not criticising the judgment. [But,] I am entitled to tell you that it is wrong. I say it as a matter of law. I believe there are contradictions in the judgment and there are lot of material that have come up post that judgment.”

The Attorney-General pointed to evidence that people knew that there were some flaws in the factory and that they were not rectified as matter of economy. Moily unveils new policy to cut down on government litigation

SC relief to officers over pay anomalies: Orders arrears with 6 pc interest to all affected by Vijay Mohan Tribune News Service Chandigarh, March 9, 2010
Grant of Rank Pay: When the Government Becomes an Adversary of its Ex-servicemen by Maj Gen Suman
Parawise comments on Review Petition slapped by GOI on ESM

How sincere is the GOI? The Rank Pay case has been fought in the court for 25 years and the Military Personnel have won the case. The GOI has slapped a Review Petition. What and where is the Justice for the Personnel who defend the Nation with their blood, sweat and tears? Does Law Minister Moily has any answer to another injustice heaped on the ESM! Travesty of Justice can be gauged by how the victims of Bhopal Gas Tragedy have been fooled by Bureaucrats for 25 years without matching succour for thousands of families for 25 long years. Now a GOM has speedily announced a token of about 1000 core package to alleviate the sufferings of victims. The bureaucrats have denied Rank pay for want of Rs 1600 crores for legitimate dues to Military Personnel for period from 1986 to 2006 (twenty years).

Frivolous government litigation clogs wheels of justice: Supreme Court

The goverment is the biggest litigant and in November 2009, Supreme Court came heavily against its resorting to unnecessary appeals. Though it loses almost all the cases yet the wheels of justice are clogged for decades and people suffer. One simple example will suffice.

Military officers were wrongly denied Rank Pay’ granted by the 4th Pay Commission. Officers finally got redressal from to the Hon'ble Supreme Court after 24 years. Rather than gracefully honouring the verdict, the govt has appealed for reopening of the case and cancellation of orders. It is nothing but delaying tactics and shows Govt’s callous attitude towards its military.

Is it not enough that the Officers have been made to suffer from January 1986 and in the meantime some of them have even died? Law Minister in the recently concluded All India Conference of the Central Administrative Tribunals, advised that that Government should go in litigation only where it is absolutely necessary. Will the bureaucrats please take the advice?
Brig Harwant Singh (Retd)
President, The All India Defence Brotherhood (Regd)
Statutory authorities should be responsible litigants
Frivolous government litigation clogs wheels of justice: Supreme Court