Government may not Scrap 145 year old Pension Act - Read More
Government may not Scrap 145 year old Pension Act –
The government had almost decided to axe the 145-year-old Pension Act
in its zealousness to heed the Prime Minister’s call to scrap obsolete
laws.
A
last-minute realisation may have saved the Central government from
blowing away the legal cover available to authorities right from the
President and Supreme Court judges to ministers and members of
Parliament against any orders of attachment of their pensions from the
courts.
The
government had almost decided to axe the 145-year-old Pension Act in
its zealousness to heed the Prime Minister’s call to scrap obsolete
laws. But at a meeting held on April 28, minutes of which have been
accessed by ET, several ministries pointed out that no other law
protects government authorities from seizure or attachment of pension by
process of any court at the instance of a creditor who raises a demand
against the pensioner.
This
led the government to consider doing away with some of the “irrelevant
or redundant” provisions of the Pensions Act, 1871 instead of repealing
it. The final decision will now be made by Prime Minister Modi, who
heads the pensions department of the personnel ministry. The government
has so far repealed 125 archaic laws.
It
has proposed to scrap over 1,000 more such laws. The representative of
the Department of Financial Services (DoFS) said at the meeting that the
Pensions Act is applicable to pensions under a large number of rules
and Acts of Parliament.
“He specifically mentioned that pensions of the President, vicepresident, ministers and MPs are regulated by Acts of Parliament.
Similarly,
pensions of Supreme Court/high court judges, central vigilance
commissioners, central information commissioners and members of UPSC are
also granted under Acts regulating their service conditions. These Acts
of Parliament do not contain provisions securing the pension against
attachment,” the minutes recorded.
Only
Section 11 of the Pensions Act provides this protection to the
constitutional authorities. When the pensions department proposed that
the rules regulating various types of pension be amended to secure the
pension and hence facilitate repealing of the Pensions Act, all
ministries raised objections.
The
home ministry “expressed apprehension” that the protection against
attachment by courts, if provided in rules, “may not be as effective” as
that provided in an Act of Parliament.
The
rural development department concurred, saying all social security
pensions administered by it are through executive orders and any
provisions for security against attachment by court “may not be
effective” as the provisions will not have any statutory backing.
The
ministries of environment, culture and external affairs, and the
departments of telecom, expenditure and posts said they do not even
administer any separate pension rules.
The
financial services department said the government will have to amend
all other Acts and rules regulating various kinds of pension to
incorporate the safety net, if the Pensions Act is to be repealed.
It
proposed that instead of amending a large number of Acts and rules, the
Pensions Act may be amended to repeal only those provisions which have
since become irrelevant or redundant.
“Ministries
of home, labour, rural development, defence, railways and DoPT endorsed
the views of the Department of Financial Services… the aforesaid views
of the ministries/departments will be placed before competent authority
for taking a decision in the matter,” the minutes noted.
May 10, 2016
Kalaivaraikalai
