Show menu
Close
FAQ FAQ Sign in Sign in
Close
ADVERTISEMENT

[Resolved]  NTPC/NTPC ltd. Self contributory superannuation Benefit(Pension) scheme — Pension through "NTPC ltd. Self contributory superannuation Benefit(Pension) scheme" not allowed

Ref: Ex employee No. 001318

I had resigned from NTPC in May-2008 and was released on 22nd May 2008. Subsequently, I had claimed the pension amount and received only Rs. 2,26,696 whereas the actual amount in my account at the time of leaivng was Rs3,30,000. Later on NTPC had informed that if we opt for pension, this deduction will not be made. Accordingly NTPC started paying the pension to one of my friends on his request after taking back the amount payed to him at the time of settlement. However when I sent a similar claim for availing the pension, NTPC has disallowed citing an absurd reason that I should have opted for pension at the time of leaving the organisation. As stated above, NTPC has started paying the pension to my excolleague under similar circumstances.
Please help me in getting the pension.
ADVERTISEMENT
Complaint marked as Resolved Aug 14, 2020
Complaint comments  4 CommentsShareTweet

Comments

what is the difference between NTPC Pension Scheme and New Pension System of Govt of india?
pl see the following link:

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/investor-education-will-drive-nps/544964/5
Investor education will drive NPS
Sanjay Kr Singh Posted online: Monday, Nov 23, 2009 at 0320 hrs
The Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) has in recent times met with criticism as the New Pension System (NPS) has not found too many takers in the voluntary segment. Only about 3, 000-odd accounts have been opened. PFRDA chairman D. Swarup explains why the take-off has been slow and talks about PFRDA’s initiatives to popularise NPS in this segment in this interview with Sanjay Kr. Singh.
The PFRDA Bill is to be reintroduced in Parliament. What difference will the passing of the Bill make to the working of PFRDA?

We have launched the New Pension System (NPS) under an executive order of the government. But the statutory powers that the passing of the Bill would give the regulator are necessary for fully implementing the scheme. At this point, one has to go back to the government for every major decision that the regulator takes, such as regarding investment norms, appointment of fund managers, establishment of another CRA (central record keeping agency), and so on. Once the Bill is passed all these powers will get transferred to the regulator and we will be truly independent thereafter. Then the regulator will also have the power to penalise and impose fines on erring fund managers or intermediaries. Today we are managing through contractual arrangements. After the Bill is passed, these will be replaced by regulations that will have the force of law. The passing of the Bill will also bring confidence to the market that the pension scheme is being regulated by a statutory regulator.

Why has NPS not caught on in a big way in the voluntary segment? What initiatives are you taking to remedy this situation?

The main reason is the lack of awareness about NPS. We are now stepping up our media campaign. The points of presence (PoPs) and the pension fund managers will launch their own awareness programmes. The second reason is the lack of preparedness on the part of PoPs. They are now stepping up staff training.

But this will always be a product that has to be bought.

Yes, because the NPS model provides for direct selling. There won’t be agents pushing this product. We deliberately chose this option to keep costs low. In NPS the intermediary gets only Rs 40 for enrolling and Rs 20 for transaction. This is low compared to what they can earn from an insurance product. But we are willing to be patient. As word spreads that this is a good and honest product, we expect the numbers to increase.

Customers will have to buy the product themselves. And for that greater awareness is required. That’s where the media campaign will help.

Specifically, what do you propose to do to energise the PoPs?

So far we have appointed 22 PoPs. These are all regulated financial entities, including SBI and its subsidiary banks, UTI, and many other banks and financial institutions. LIC was eventually not given permission by IRDA (the insurance regulator), so we now have 21 PoPs. So far the PoPs have authorised 800-plus branches to offer this product. Altogether 25, 000 branches of various financial entities will eventually sell this product. We have now gone for a fresh tender and want to expand the PoP network. We are also thinking of reducing the net worth requirement for becoming a PoP. At present it is Rs 100 crore. The idea is to get as many PoPs as possible to offer NPS across the country.

We have also asked the PoPs to submit their business plans regarding how they propose to enrol more subscribers. We propose to examine the PoPs’ performance against their own business plans.

Banks, which are among your PoPs, sell insurance products also that offer higher commissions. What incentive will the bank staff have to sell NPS?

We have received reports that when a customer goes to a bank and asks for an NPS form, the person at the counter pushes across the form of a Ulip product where the commission is higher. Now, with the ban on entry load, we at least have a level playing field vis-à-vis mutual funds.

We have proposed to the government that PoPs should be given incentives. If they bring in a high number of subscribers in a year, they could be given incentives by the government, not by the subscriber. Similarly, we have proposed to the government that it should pick up the record-keeping costs, as it does for subscribers in the formal sector. For instance, in the case of Employee Pension Scheme (EPS) run by EPFO the government gives a contribution of 1.16 per cent. We have proposed to the government that it should give a similar contribution for those in the informal sector who join NPS. Instead of subscribers bearing NSDL’s (National Securities Depository Ltd) CRA cost, the government could bear it.

The present tax provisions make NPS unattractive vis-à-vis other investment products. Do you expect relief after the new tax code is implemented?

The new tax code proposes to move every investment product to EET (exempt, exempt, tax) regime. We are happy that the new tax code proposes to create a level playing field. But if the new tax code doesn’t come through, we will continue to discuss with the government that NPS be brought to the EEE regime.

Tell us about the savings plan you are going to launch.

We call it the tier II savings plan. This was part of the original design of NPS. But we thought that tier I, which is a pure pension, non withdraw-able account, should be introduced first.

Tier II is a withdraw-able account. You can use it as a savings account. Your money will be invested in the same fashion as in the tier I account. The only precondition is that you must have an active tier I account to avail of the tier II account.

Will it offer any tax benefit?

No, none at all.

Tell us about the low-cost CRA initiative. What will be the cost? And whom will it be made available to?

We are still in discussions with NSDL. The technical parameters have been finalised, but we are still discussing the financial terms. The low-cost CRA has been thought of for low-income earners who are unable to afford the charges that NSDL levies for its current CRA, which is Rs 350 per annum. The low-cost CRA model will have lesser functionality. Online transaction facility or switching from one fund manager to another will not be available. It will target self-help groups and co-contribution schemes of governments. For instance, the Madhya Pradesh government has already agreed to become a member of the low-cost CRA. It will be available only to groups, not to individuals. We are looking at a cost of Rs 60-70 per individual per annum for this product against Rs 350 for the current CRA.

NPS is reported to have garnered 14.82 per cent return in the first year. Is this the fund in which civil servants’ pension money is invested?

Yes, that’s right. In the first year, i.e., 2008-09, NPS was open only to civil servants and not to private citizens.

What is the debt to equity ratio that this fund maintains?

This fund has a composition of debt up to 85 per cent and equity up to 15 per cent. Even this 15 per cent equity window was not used up fully by the fund managers. In 2008-09 investment in equities was less than 5 per cent. Despite the high debt component, it earned good returns.

Organisations such as SBI, Nalco, and a few others are reportedly requesting that their pension funds be managed by NPS. Could you tell us more about this development?

So far they were managing their pension funds themselves. SBI Employees Pension and Retirement Fund is basically an exempted fund under the EPFO (Employees Provident Fund Organisation) regime. They do fund management and record-keeping on their own. Now they would like to make use of the NPS architecture to manage their funds. The PFRDA Board has approved in principle. The funds will be managed by one of the fund managers appointed by us. The record keeping will be done by SBI itself.

Nalco’s case is different. Their officials will join us as individual members. We have received a similar request from NTPC. This is another growth area for NPS — that people from the organised sector will invest with us over and above their obligations under the EPFO Act. Under the EPFO Act, employees give 12 per cent of their salary and employers contribute another 12 per cent. Now the PSU Wage Revision Commission allows employees to save up to 30 per cent of their salary in pension-related funds. So over and above their obligations under the EPFO Act, 6 per cent is left. It is this 6 per cent that employees want to invest with NPS. While Nalco has signed up, NTPC is in the pipeline, and with SBI we have an informal agreement though they have not sent a letter so far.

Would you like to add anything more?

We have recently written to the Department of Public Enterprises to issue an advisory to PSUs to explore the possibility of joining NPS in addition to their obligations under the EPFO Act. Similarly, we propose to approach all exempted and excluded funds and propose to manage their pension funds. The number of exempted and excluded funds is very large. Their accumulated corpus would run into thousands of crores. This could be a potential growth area for NPS in addition to individual subscribers. sk.[protected]@expressindia.com
is there any SCAM in NTPC PENSION SCHEME? any idea?
there is a big scam in NTPC pension scheme. in the financial year 2008-09 New Pension Scheme of PFRDA has given a average return of 14.82% but NTPC pension scheme has given a return of only 8.55%. so there is a difference of 6.27% . as per audited report total capital of NTPC pension scheme as on 31st March 2008 was Rs 540 crore. so 6.27% on it works out to be Rs 34 crore.

SO IT IS A BIG SCAM OF Rs 34 CRORE IN NTPC PENSION SCHEME
ADVERTISEMENT

Post your Comment

    I want to submit Complaint Positive Review Neutral Comment
    code

    Contact Information

    India

    Add Company Information

    ADVERTISEMENT