The Supreme Commander of Armed Forces Mrs. Pratibha Patil on 04 June 2009 announced that long pending demand of One Rank One Pension (OROP) of the Defence Forces will be reexamined and decision arrived at by 30 June 2009. The announcement has been widely welcomed by the Defence personnel specially the Ex-Servicemen who have been agitating for the past one year to press for their demands specially the One Rank One Pension. Deeply hurt and anguished at the apathy shown by the Govt in not accepting their main demand of OROP, they on four occasions deposited over 15000 gallantry and distinguished service medals with the President.
The Indian Ex-servicemen Movement (IESM,) an umbrella organization for all Ex Servicemen of India appeals to the Govt that the committee headed by Mr Chandrasekhar must not dilute the Definition of OROP ie irrespective of the date of retirement, the Defence Personnel who have rendered same years of service and holding same rank must get same pension. Only the grant of Full Parity with the new pensioners will meet the ends of justice.
We appeal to the Govt to accept the concept of One Rank One Pension with full Parity and make it the policy for grant of pensions to the Defence Personnel. Any other thoughts/proposal of One Time increase/ modified parity/ near parity will not be in line with the “Just and Fair” solution to the emotive issue of OROP. We are hopeful that the Govt will give due consideration to this important aspect of Defence Forces.
With regards,
Jai Hind
Respected Sir/Madam,
With reference the table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016.
I 2879637W Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar have served in Army 24 Years & 02 days. My service particular’s is as under –
Date of enrolment – 30 October 1982.
Date of retirement – 31 October 2006 (A/N).
Date of birth – 25 April 1962.
PPO No – S/29763/2006 (ARMY)
Basic Pension as per 6 CPC – Rs 7750/-
Revised Basic Pension on acceptance of OROP – Rs 8425/-
It is observed that pension of X group Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar of 24 years service is equal i.e. Rs 11138/- as per table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016. But basic pension of Y group Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar of 24 years service is different. 24 years service of Naib Subedar basic pension is more than Honorary Naib Subedar of 24 years service & this diffrence between Honorary Naib Subedar& Naib Subedar of 24 years service is Rs 1004. In this circular in table No 7 Y group Honorary Naib Subedar basic pension is Rs 8425 & 24 years service of Naib Subedar basic pension is Rs 9424. It should be equal as OROP as implemented for X group 24 years service of Honorary Naib Subedar & 24 years service of Naib Subedar basic pension are equal.
Hony Rank of Naib Subedar granted to Havildar will be notionally considered as a promotion to the higher grade pay and will be allowed notionally for the purpose of fixation of pension only with effect 01 January 2006. The said decision has been communicated vide Ministry of Defence letter No. 1(8)/2008-D(Pay/Policy) dated 12 June 2009.
On the definition of OROP (Definition of One Rank One Pension – One Rank One Pension (OROP) implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces Personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners. This implies bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners and the past pensioners, and also future enhancements in the rate of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.) and government of India Ministry of Defence letter No. 1(8)/2008-D(Pay/Policy) dated 12 June 2009 pension of Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar should be equal in the same length of service.
Keeping view of the above and as mentioned table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016 for 24 years service of X group Naib Subedar & Honorary Naib Subedar basic pension has fixed at same rate or equal, so Y group 24 service of Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar basic pension should also be fixed at same rate or equal. Please consider it.
Please do the needful for necessary amendment or issue related instructions for rectify the observations or variable? An early action is requested. I shall be highly obliged.
Thanking you with warm regards,
Yours obediently soldier,
Vijai Kumar Dudi
Mobile No 09871081782
Respected Sir/Madam,
With reference the table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016.
I 2879637W Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar have served in Army 24 Years & 02 days. My service particular’s is as under –
Date of enrolment – 30 October 1982.
Date of retirement – 31 October 2006 (A/N).
Date of birth – 25 April 1962.
PPO No – S/29763/2006 (ARMY)
Basic Pension as per 6 CPC – Rs 7750/-
Revised Basic Pension on acceptance of OROP – Rs 8425/-
It is observed that pension of X group Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar of 24 years service is equal i.e. Rs 11138/- as per table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016. But basic pension of Y group Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar of 24 years service is different. 24 years service of Naib Subedar basic pension is more than Honorary Naib Subedar of 24 years service & this diffrence between Honorary Naib Subedar& Naib Subedar of 24 years service is Rs 1004. In this circular in table No 7 Y group Honorary Naib Subedar basic pension is Rs 8425 & 24 years service of Naib Subedar basic pension is Rs 9424. It should be equal as OROP as implemented for X group 24 years service of Honorary Naib Subedar & 24 years service of Naib Subedar basic pension are equal.
Hony Rank of Naib Subedar granted to Havildar will be notionally considered as a promotion to the higher grade pay and will be allowed notionally for the purpose of fixation of pension only with effect 01 January 2006. The said decision has been communicated vide Ministry of Defence letter No. 1(8)/2008-D(Pay/Policy) dated 12 June 2009.
On the definition of OROP (Definition of One Rank One Pension – One Rank One Pension (OROP) implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces Personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners. This implies bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners and the past pensioners, and also future enhancements in the rate of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.) and government of India Ministry of Defence letter No. 1(8)/2008-D(Pay/Policy) dated 12 June 2009 pension of Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar should be equal in the same length of service.
Keeping view of the above and as mentioned table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016 for 24 years service of X group Naib Subedar & Honorary Naib Subedar basic pension has fixed at same rate or equal, so Y group 24 service of Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar basic pension should also be fixed at same rate or equal. Please consider it.
Please do the needful for necessary amendment or issue related instructions for rectify the observations or variable? An early action is requested. I shall be highly obliged.
Thanking you with warm regards,
Yours obediently soldier,
Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar
PPO No – S/29763/2006 (ARMY)
Mobile No 09871081782
Respected Sir/Madam,
Amended fresh request for necessary amendment in OROP table for justice with Honorary Naib Subedar of Y Group is forwarded. This is for your information and further necessary favourable action please .
With reference the table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016.
I 2879637W Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar have served in Army 24 Years & 02 days. My service particular’s is as under –
Date of enrolment – 30 October 1982.
Date of retirement – 31 October 2006 (A/N).
Date of birth – 25 April 1962.
PPO No – S/29763/2006 (ARMY)
Basic Pension as per 6 CPC – Rs 7750/-
Revised Basic Pension on acceptance of OROP – Rs 8425/-
It is observed that pension of X group Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar of 24 years service is equal i.e. Rs 11138/- as per table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016. But basic pension of Y group Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar of 24 years service is different. 24 years service of Naib Subedar basic pension is more than Honorary Naib Subedar of 24 years service & this diffrence between Honorary Naib Subedar& Naib Subedar of 24 years service is Rs 1004. In this circular in table No 7 Y group Honorary Naib Subedar basic pension is Rs 8425 & 24 years service of Naib Subedar basic pension is Rs 9424. It should be equal as OROP as implemented for X group 24 years service of Honorary Naib Subedar & 24 years service of Naib Subedar basic pension are equal.
Hony Rank of Naib Subedar granted to Havildar will be notionally considered as a promotion to the higher grade pay and will be allowed notionally for the purpose of fixation of pension only with effect 01 January 2006. The said decision has been communicated vide Ministry of Defence letter No. 1(8)/2008-D(Pay/Policy) dated 12 June 2009.
On the definition of OROP (Definition of One Rank One Pension – One Rank One Pension (OROP) implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces Personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners. This implies bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners and the past pensioners, and also future enhancements in the rate of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.) and government of India Ministry of Defence letter No. 1(8)/2008-D(Pay/Policy) dated 12 June 2009 pension of Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar should be equal in the same length of service.
Keeping view of the above and as mentioned table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016 for 24 years service of X group Naib Subedar & Honorary Naib Subedar basic pension has fixed at same rate or equal, so Y group 24 service of Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar basic pension should also be fixed at same rate or equal. Please consider it.
Please do the needful for necessary amendment or issue related instructions for rectify the observations or variable? An early action is requested.
I shall be highly obliged.
Thanking you with warm regards,
Yours obediently soldier,
Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar
PPO No – S/29763/2006 (ARMY)
Mobile No 09871081782
Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar says
April 19, 2016 at 1:37 pm
As per table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016 basic pension of Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar of X group for service 24 years or 26 years has fixed in same rate i.e. Rs 11138 but basic pension of Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar of Y group is different. This difference is Rs 1004/- .
As per table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016 for 24 years service Y group Honorary Naib Subedar basic pension has fixed at Rs 8425/- and Naib Subedar basic pension has fixed on Rs 9429/- which is not understood in OROP and it is injustice with the Honorary Naib Subedar of Y group.
Hony Rank of Naib Subedar granted to Havildar will be notionally considered as a promotion to the higher grade pay and will be allowed notionally for the purposes of fixation of pension only with effect from 01-1-2006. The said decision has been communicated vide Ministry of Defence letter NO. 1(8)/2008-D (Pen/ Policy) dated 12-6-2009.
As per table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016 24 years service of X group Naib Subedar & Honorary Naib Subedar pension are equal, so 24 years service of Y group Naib Subedar & Honorary Naib Subedar pension also should be equal, please consider it.
7. Keeping view of the above, You are requested to do the needful.
Thanking you with warm regards,
Yours obediently soldier,
2879637W Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar, PPO No-S/29763/2006(ARMY)
This least beneficial means by which to missed the person is planned to be waiting directly alongside that company realizing you possibly can
I am staying at Daman & Diu ther is no DSB established till today after a lot of try So for i could know my present figure of pension as wel. So for i have request to you kindly let me know. NO 14570979N NK (TS)SERVED 21 YEARS DDATE OF RETIREMENT 31 AUG 2005. GROUP X
From : Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar
Dudi Bhawan Jawaharnagar, Rly Stn ke samne,
Village & Post Office – Mandi Adampur
District- Hisar (Haryana)-125052
E-mail : vijaidudi1962@gmail.com
Mobile No – 09871081782
Respected Sir,
1. I, No 2879637W Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar have served in the Indian Army (in The Rajputana Rifles) for 24 years & 02 days in Group ‘Y’ with an Exemplary Character (with effect from 30/10/1982 to 31/10/2006) and retired on 31 October 2006 (A/N).
2. The following service & pension particulars are submitted herewith for your perusal and necessary favourable action please :-
a. My last basic pay was Rs 4700/-, DP Rs 2400/-, Classification Pay was Rs 100/-.
b. Total leave encashment period was – 120 days.
c. Basic pension fixed on 01/11/2006 was Rs 3529/-.
d. New pension has fixed Rs 7750/-.
e. Total Gratuity has received Rs 170208/- till date.
f. Total capitalise value has received Rs 530158/- till date (@ 50 % commuted portion of pension).
g. Total leave encashment was received Rs 36780/- till date.
h. Records – RAJ RIF, DELHI CANTT – 110010.
j. Original PPO No – S/029763/2006(ARMY) issued on 30/06/2006.
k. Corrigendum PPOs issued to me till date is as under :-
aa. S/COR/032767/2006(ARMY) dated 21/11/2006.
ab. S/CORR/023552/2007(ARMY) dated 25/05/2007.
ac. S/CORR/161493/2009(ARMY) dated 31/07/2009.
ad. S/CORR/225039/2010(ARMY) dated 02/04/2010.
ae. S/CORR/039335/2010(ARMY) dated 19/10/2010.
af. Bank details – Punjab National Bank, Mandi Adampur, District – Hisar (Haryana) – 125052. A/C No – 2994001301104170 code No – 2994.
3. Please provide the following details which has effected for me and clarify regarding entitlement for Honorary Naib Subedar as per 6th Central Pay Commission Award and intimate me I will be eligible for MACP/ACP scheme if yes, also intimate what type of benefit or entitlement is due under MACP or ACP as per directions/orders issued form Government of India, Ministry of Defence :-
a. Last basic pay should be as per 6th CPC Award.
b. Arrears should be of pay & allowances w.e.f. 01/01/2006 to 31/10/2006 as per 6th CPC Award.
c. Arrears should be of leave encashment for 120 days as per 6th CPC Award.
d. Basic pension should be fixed on 01/11/2006 as per 6th CPC Award.
e. Arrears should be of pension w.e.f. 01/11/06 to till date as per 6th CPC Award.
f. Gratuity should be as per 6th CPC Award.
g. Commutation value as per 6th CPC Award (@ 50 % commuted of portion of pension).
4. In view of the above, please do the needful and provide all the above require details at the earliest. I shall be highly obliged. Your anticipation is highly appreciated. Thanking you sir.
Yours faithfully,
Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar Dudi
Please intimate regarding the new pension table & the pension of Honorary Naib Subedar who have served in Army as Infantry Soldier in Group ‘Y’ and retired on completion of 24 years service on or after 01 January 2006 as per instruction of Government of India, Ministry of Defence on accepting the demand of one rank one pension on 24 September 2012. With Best regards, Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar
JC-468466 p sub jogendra singh sengar It mvery need to accept one rank one pension , time has been changed old people struggled more then new pensioners , now are growing old they cant get any assistance from there children only pension is stick in this age i apeal to govt please recommend it soon
I am EX-Hav/Clk S.B. Kumara Swamy Retaired on 2nd Speptember, 1995 from Brigade of the Guards as I am getting Service pension and Disability pension and now disability pension revised from 1-7-2009 hence I was forwarded all the relavent ducument to PDA for my disability pension revision, the PDA is State Bank of Mysore, Main branch, Chikmagalur-577 101 (Karnataka)but still no action was taken by the PDA in this regard I was also sent the letter and documents to Records the Guards and PCDA Allahabad, now I will kindly requested to concerned department, what I should take the next step for the revision of my disability pension. please inform me on mail ID is sbk_supra@yahoo.com, Thanking you, with warms regards.
I was groomed in an apolitical organisation like rest of fellow Defence Services men and senior officers; we are the types of Indian Citizens who can suffer physically, mentally and financially but always inept in protesting in rallies or knock the door of law for individual benefits, whatsover. Our max spot of placing our plights ends to the “Green Table” of Commanding Officers at different levels. A soldier is allowed to convey the common neccesity in Unit Durbars, Welfare Meet or at different conferences. In modern India, we experience a different scenario once we are in the mainstream(after our military service), wherein all demands of any department,civil services – let it be of teachers, Bank, Railway or even Health Departments are promptly met after so called “Strikes, Hartals,Gheraos,Blockades or other hooliganism. Soldiers have not been taught this technique in the services and once they become ex-soldiers they hate to resort to this “Unsoldierly” and harmful tactics. Mere handing over hard earned honour of “Gallantry Medals” wont effect any Govt that is in helm of affairs now or which one may come successively. So better we remain contained whatever a “Pea Nut” is thrown to us. I remember when I was transferred to pension establishment at the age of 47 plus, after putting in 29 years of active service, my base pension was Rs. 1500/-pm plus DA available then and a Havilder of my group was getting less base pay than me. Now after the award of 6th CPC, a Havildar’s take home salary is around Rs. 30,000/- pm whereas an ex-Sub Maj, even after the latest Govt Orders, get a mere Rs. 18,000/- pm. So where does this most talked about OROP lead us to? The market scenarios, old age medical treatment, looking after family of four of five, education of children, marriages of daughter(a social responsibility) cannot be met with this. Since every body could not acquire a house of his own due to various pecuniar conditions, house rent at this time beyond their reach. Since we are cut off from our job when we are 40 to 48 yrs of age, availability of a re-employment is bleak. Straightway absorption is other forces/other jobs as per our expertise and acumenship is not available in our country. So we need some open hearted treatment; this would not have been neccessiated, had our service was extended till the age of 60 years as our civilian counterparts, even in Central Police or State Police Forces. We request our nation and govt to give a due thought while fixing our pay and pension. Furthermore, award of 6th CPC was effected from 01.01.2006 and enhancement, re-adjustment of pensionary benefits to PBOR should have been given retrospective effect 01.01.2006 and not from 01.9.2009. Any simple logic or ethic wount cover it. So whatever the PsBOR have been given, give them from 01.06.2006; there is a limit of deprivation of these poor and most neglected category of ex-soldiers. This is the fervent request of all the ESM.JAI HIND.
I have gone through all the latest policy of Govt of India and read
deliberations of Hon’ble Prime Minister, Shri Man Mohan Singh, in the Parliament. All hues and cries are over. The young, brave, dare-devil sons and daughters of this great land have given their prime for the cause of motherland and requirement of the countrymen when in need during Earthquake, Flood or Outbreaking of Fire or unfortunates
natural calamities like “AILA” or terrorist attacks inside the country. But their services in Hill, Mountain, Ocean, Sky and Outside the national borders are just forgotten by each successive Govts, irrrespective of the Political Party they belong to. Govt does not constitute so called “High Power Committe” to look after the pensionary affair with the representation of commanders of three services, Retd Supreme Court Judges, available senior service chiefs and Senior Bureacrats from Min of Defence and Finance, instead a senior Secretary of IAS cadre is asked to examine and decide the fate of this unsung heroes of the nations. This is not expected and we should be satisfied with the enhancement, a pie in reality. OROP is a distant dream and a Prime Minister like late Mrs Indira Gandhi only can feel for our plight and do some good within the resources available in the country. Anyway, if the Central Govt and society can not do any good, then under a blanket sanction, all ex-men from a Sepoy to the General be issued with “BPL” Cards or may even be issued with “Antordaya” cards. Since these cards are issued to illegal immigrants from Bangladesh etc, then why should not be given to helpless ex-soldiers? Let the Countrymen, all Large and Small political parties as well as the Central and State Govts think and consider how these “Brave and Ready to commit Supreme Sacrifice for motherland and fellow countrymen” who gave out their Prime of Life should be treated? Happy Vijaya, Dushera and Good Wishes. JAI HIND.
I have gone through most of the govt decisons available so far including the clarifications Hon’ble PM given in Parliament and come
to the conclusion that long demand of ex-servicemen as well as hidden
desire (or demand) of serving soldiers about OROP is a long distant dream. The beauty of solving our problems is peculiar. Instead of constituting the “HIGH pOWERED COMMITTEE” with senior commanders of three services, retired Supreme Court Judges, some reputed sociologist and senior Bureaucrats from MOD, Min of Finance etc, the same had been handed over to senior IAS officers who do not have slightest idea of service persons’ commitment, day to agony they face, very limited length of service and being cut off at the middle age from their bread earning capability. So how could a honourable and acceptable solutions could be expected. Gone are the days when soldiers mostly were based in villages and inherited landed property wherein they could find some source of income. Now the scenario is completely changed. Serving soldiers are mostly educated, some of them are graduates and post graduates and most of them are based in
towns and cities and they have to confront bigger challenges with pea nut pensions, no job after 20 or 29 years in the forces and availability of joining very limited job that too at grass root level. So the Society and Govt as a whole should come forward to alleniate the problems of ex-servicemen. And OROP is the minimum welfare the Govt can provide to ex-soldiers who had spent their prime for sake of motherland and society. Lets hope if any one listens to our prayer and do some good not in words and promises but in action. We are a forgotten citizens now. If nothing is possible then give us BPL cards or better Antordaya Cards, which all political parties would agree as they are giving to illegal immigrfants from Bangladesh etc
for the prospect of “VOTES”. It is an open Secret. Regards and JAI
HIND.
I have retired from active service on 31 Oct 1993 at the age of 47 plus when my three sons were in School. I needed an extension of service but was not allowed. My meagre pension was quite insufficent
to maintain a family particularly with school going children. No suitable job was available or provided even though I was very young,active and a postgraduate. So Army’s pension should be decided with a different perspective considering their limited length of service,their contribution and sacrifice for the cause of the nation,working in most inhospitable areas leaving their family and dear ones away at home, mostly unguarded & uncared for. Whosoever remain in the helm of affairs deciding pension of ex servicemen should take into consideration above facts, present day market scenarios,medical requirement of aged retired ex-servicemen and
quantum of pensionery benefits available to present day serving soldiers so that those old soldiers who shed their youth and lives could find some solace that the govt and society, at last came forward
to their cause. This would boost the morale of serving men as well,
because they would also retire in the near future. Please do consider our long cherished desire and heartfelt prayer for OROP. All major POLITICAL PARTIES and senior LEADERS in the que for
forming prospective govts had promised to grant our
prayers but it is yet to be fulfilled. Granting small peas off and on
is not a solution. Regards and thanks. JAI HIND.
I am retiring from army w.e.f 30 Jun 2006, but I was drawn service pension is less Rs (Full Pension Rs 11970 – 10390 = 1580) though retired from Army on 31 Dec 2005. Kindly let me known the present position of service pension i.e one rank one pension to PBOR.
Thanking you
With Regards
Eam Murti Singh
Devinder Singh, Please dont feel Vindicated. Entire Country is with you. Infact you should join Politics and go for DEFENSE MINISTRY, this would help India to clean some more Dirt. A true warrior like you as Defense Minister would go for buying UPGRADED ARMS, rather than ” COFFINS “.
It is hightime for a rotest by one and all ex servicemen for the implementation of OROP.as such it is more than six months have passed after pranabji has declared a relif package for pre96 PBOR.Nothing has come out till date.this is not only a cheating but also a total disregard towards the ex servicemen from the side of bureucrats.they shouldnot forget the freedom they enjoy is due to the sacrifice of each and every jawans at the boarders and high seas and up in the sky keeping vigil 7/7 and 24/24 duty.
FEEL SHAME ON YOUR PART MR.POLITICIAN
VIEWS OF A SOLDIER.
IS THEIR ANY ONE WHO CAN SEND THE VIEWS OF A SOLDIER TO THE HON’BLE PRESIDENT OF INDIA, PRIME MINISTER OF INDIA AND DEFENSE MINISTER?
Respected Sir,
I am very sorry to disturb you. First thing I am not competent to write/suggest to you. Still I feel that I must amplify my views through you.
Respected sir, we are fighting for enhance pension for all Defence personnel, but anyone of us has thought any time about those 70% of Indian population who earns only Rs 20/= a day.
Respected Sir, take another case of subscribers of EPFO pensioners, if a average age of employment is 20 years and retirement age is around 60 yrs, it means a employer of such employee contributes to EPFO @ 12.33% of basic of the employee to EPFO per month for around 40 yrs, on that amount EPFO sanctions maximum of Rs 3000/= P.M. against pension to that employee, if employee dies the such contribution is gutted by EPFO.
Respected Sir, take third example, solders/Officers die [my English is very poor, i do not have rich word than this with me] in enemy action, when they were Lt, Flt.Lt. or PBORs and their family gets the poor family pension of that rank, sir, please understand if they could have not died they could have become Generals or Air Marshals or Admirals and would have drawn handsome pension.
Respected Sir, anyone of us is thinking of their sacrifice, have we anytime taken up this issue on any platform, have we fought for benefit to their family for their sacrifice, if they would have not died, we could have died.
Respected Sir, please note that we defence pensioners are not Son in Laws of Govt of India, we joined Defence Forces and came out safely,[I believe you also had same experience]. We want enhanced pension, medical allowance of Rs 2000/P.M.,few pensioners want LTC for themselves also and so on.
We are en cashing sacrifice of those brave solders/Officers who became SHAHID or received serious injuries, which made them handicapped, but can we imagine their lifestyle in dreams even, for such Solders/Officers.
Govt of India should give pension to them at par with their Batch/entry met are drawing right now and that is what is known as OR OP.
Sir, last thing, but not list, we are not in welfare meeting, please ask defence pensioners to maintain discipline Sir, I will await for your comments and amplification of my views, if you have coincidence with me.
Thanks & Regards,
jayvant walawalkar
(A) ADDITIONAL POINT ON OROP PROPOSED.
In addition to the points considered by the High Powered Committee; another point proposed is that if the OROP is not be fixed on the basis of maximum of the pay band + grade pay of the rank + MSP. Instead, it may be fixed considering the number of years of service every pensioner rendered before his retirement + additional numbers of service for each rank as is being added presently; on the similar basis of 50% of pay of the pay band after rendering that length of service + grade pay of the rank + MSP. It is a justified suggestion and the Govt. must accept it without any reservation or hesitation.
K L Jaspal.
krishanlaljaspal@yahoo.co.in
Mob: 09471889885.
(B) WHY ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP) OF DEFENSE SERVICES PENSIONERS?
(1). A very high powered Committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary Mr. K M Chandrasekhar, the Senior Most IAS officer of the country was constituted by the Govt. to consider ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP) for the defense pensioners. It is very agonizing that the Committee did not put in any efforts to formulate the report on OROP with clear heart and mind except referring the previous reports on the subject and summarizing them as its recommendations. Rather, the report seems to have been prepared with biased, prejudiced, predisposed, skewed and subjective mind. In fact, even otherwise, how could it have done justice to the requirement of OROP when none of the members of the Committee has any physical or practical experience or knowledge of service conditions of armed forces which warrant special considerations to afford them attractive and better pay and allowances during the service and pension after their retirement? Also, the defense forces pensioners did not expect that the Committee could have ever done justice since none them has ever been associated with Armed Forces, nor any of their children, wards or relatives have remained part of the Armed Forces. Also, none of them will ever like their children/wards to join the Armed Forces even ever in future.
(2). Further, such a Committee must have been large enough and would have had some of the members of high ranking serving as well as retired pensioners who could have brought out the facts of the case on the bases of which the demand of OROP is being projected since decades thereby, helped the Committee to consider its genuineness and done justice with the same. Surprisingly, The Committee did not even care to consult any of the members of National Ex-servicemen Association, which is the IESM on date, whose Chairman is Lt Gen (Retd.) Raj Kadyan, PVSM, AVSM, VSM. It is also astonishing and astounding that this report has been accepted and even approved by the Govt. as it is without consulting any one from the armed forces or the IESM, which has been struggling to get OROP since decades.
(3). The manner and approach the report of ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP) prepared by the very high powered Committee was never expected to be formulated as asked for. The report of 21 pages or so seems to have been prepared by the Committee most callously, carelessly, casually, dispassionately, imperturbably, heedlessly, offhandedly, indifferently and nonchalantly. The report is absolutely and enormously painful, nasty, eyewash, mean-spirited, unkind, cruel, callous, uncaring, heartless, merciless, selfish, and the veterans can not be deceived with such a redundant and superfluous report.
(4). Rather, it is beyond anyone’s imagination as to how the Govt. selected the constituent members of the so called High Power Committee, which is absolutely unfair, unjust, inequitable, iniquitous, unwarranted, discriminatory and unbalanced.
(5). The Committee on every point has been putting forward its argument that if the OROP is given to the defense forces pensioners, it should be given to the IAS Officers as well; rather this has always been the logic, argument and thinking of the concerned IAS officer in position. Hence, the committee proposed not to propose OROP to the defense pensioners, especially the retired commissioned Officers. Truly speaking, from the arguments put forth by the committee, it seems that they were considering the OROP for their own self cadre rather than for the defense forces pensioners.
(6). There is no hesitation in saying that such a report as prepared by the Committee could have been better prepared even by a UDC or maximum an Office Superintendent or at the most by a Section Officer within one working day, where as the High Powered Committee, the constituent members of which were very senior and high ranking/position holding officers of the Govt. have taken more than two months. It has been rather, sheer wastage of time and efforts.
(7). Considering the above facts, how one can expect that the Committee could have done justice to the OROP for the defense forces pensioners.
(8). It is amazing and beyond belief that this report has been accepted and even approved by the Govt. as it is without consulting the services’ officers and the IESM, which has been struggling to get OROP since eighties. Rather, it is inconceivable and unthinkable that the negative report on the subject matter that suggested rejecting the demand of OROP has been accepted and approved by that Govt., that too “that Govt. which is headed by the Congress Party”, that had promised to give OROP and the same was incorporated in the Party manifesto before the previous general elections. Every one who so ever happens to know the contents of the OROP report on its perusing is most disheartened, discouraged, depressed, saddened, dejected, dispirited, crestfallen, dismayed, and disappointed.
(9). This announcement is no where near requirement of desired OROP, rather, it is mere, sheer, downright, utter, and absolute eyewash, but the veterans can not be deceived with such a flimsy, insubstantial, unconvincing and inadequate report.
(10). Except the so called High Powered Committee and the Govt., it is well known to countrymen of the nation that the service conditions of the defense forces personnel are highly precarious, rough, tough, hard, grueling, arduous, ruthless, strenuous, severe, brutal, vigorous, rigorous, exhausting, backbreaking, troublesome, horrifying, scary, petrifying, risky, terrifying, frightening, harsh, perilous, death-defying, dangerous, hard-hitting, insecure, hazardous, treacherous, terrorizing, and unsafe. Such service conditions are incomparable, unrivaled, unparalleled, and unmatched with any of the services of the country.
(11). In addition to unfavourable service conditions of defense personnel; a wide disparity exists between civil services officers and defense services officers, which always have been persisting. Just to highlight a few of them, all the defense services personnel retire much before what the civil services employees retire. The promotions in defense services are too meager in comparison to civil services employees. The commissioned officers get only three chances to get selection grade promotion of a rank during their entire service, where as all civilian officers keep getting such chances for promotion till they retire from service. The transfers/postings for the defense services personnel are very frequent, where as the transfers/postings for civilian are most rare. The married accommodation for defense services personnel is never adequate/100%; where as all civil servants are authorised 100% married accommodation. The families and children of services personnel always keep suffering during their entire service and even after their retirement since the deficiencies and responsibilities they had in service keep increasing, rather, worsening after there retirement. There are unaccounted and numerous such disparities between the defense services and civil services employees, which may possible to enumerate them here.
(12). Under the aforesaid service conditions and with such disparities, how many parents, especially the ministers, politicians and IAS officers who are in the helm of affairs would have ever sent or like to send their children, wards and relatives to join defense forces? It is assured there is none.
(13). Nevertheless, no nation can survive without the services of defense forces to safeguard its national borders and even to maintain internal security, especially under the present scenario. It is rather more imperative and essential in the present scenario, when our country is surrounded by the enemy countries. Some of them have been producing the infiltrators and terrorists, who have been playing havoc to disturb the peace and harmony of our countrymen as well as trying to destabilize our economy by smuggling and various other means.
(14). The Govt. seems to have forgotten the Kargil war, number of previous wars and recent havoc of Bombay created by the terrorists, when property worth billions was destroyed and a large number of valuable lives were lost. The Govt. seems to have totally forgotten all these.
(15). Further, the Prime Minister on behalf of the Govt. and whole nation pays homage to the martyrs by laying writhe at the India Gate to the sacrificial victims and war heroes and during any other contingencies, where all ranks of defense services have lost their lives for the nation and its nationals. But it seems; the Govt. does it just to show off and eyewash, thereby befooling the people and defense forces personnel. If it so, it is very sad on the part of the Govt.
(16). What are the places where forces are not deployed? They are deployed, not against the foreign enemies alone, but they are utilized against the enemies within the country, counter insurgencies, against militants, terrorists and remain stand-to for 24 hours to counter any eventualities, emergencies and emergencies. Even during the natural calamities like floods, fires and situations like tsunamis, it is the services of defense personnel which are called for to bring the things to normalcy. Even, during normal conditions, it is the defense forces personnel who remain stand-to for 24 hours to counter any eventualities throughout the year.
(17). Do the authorities not know that the defense forces personnel never remain in any station for more than two years? Some of the stations, though these may be peace areas, but there is no sufficient married accommodation and some places no or little required educational facilities. As a result, their families remain forced separated and their children and old parents/dependents keep suffering throughout their service.
(18). The above disparities, especially the service conditions are that of permanent nature which can never be removed. However, just to compensate at least to some extent, the Govt. must give better pay & allowances as well as pension to defense officers and PBOR commensurately to their counterparts under the prevailing service conditions and disparities.
(19). Accordingly, with the view to get some essentially required and genuine benefits, the OROP has been a persistent and relentless demand of defense services pensioner since decades. Yet, it is a very sad to say that the demand of OROP has been ruthlessly ignored and disregarded by the High Powered Committed constituted by the Govt., based on which the same is then rejected by the Govt.
(20). The entire nation knows of the defense forces personnel problems. It is due to these adverse service conditions and problems, the real talents do not come forward to join the defense services. Also, a large number of officers leave the forces to join private service. As a result of it, the present huge deficiency of defense services officers, which is prevailing since decades, is never likely to be made up unless the Govt. takes up necessary steps to give the soldiers better and attractive incentives in the form of pay, allowances, perks, pension and other benefits as and when suggested from time to time during their service as well as after retirement.
(21). Also, the entire nation knows and recognize the work and services of defense forces, but it is beyond anyone’s comprehension that why our own Govt does not pay any heed to the problems and genuine requirements of the defense services. It is really very strange.
(22). It is felt that anyone not realizing the problems and requirements of the defense forces, he is definitely not the well-wisher of the defense forces personnel; rather, he is the enemy of the defense forces. In fact such people are not the enemies of the defense forces personnel alone, but they are the enemies of the whole nation/country, who are trying to demoralize the forces to destabilize the nation. Is there any one from such persons’ generations, who would have ever thought of joining neither the defense forces nor they will ever ask their children to do so. Such persons presumably could have amassed unaccountable wealth, the means for which could be best known to them.
(23). Notwithstanding, in spite of the such a negative attitude of the Govt. and concerned authorities towards defense forces, the all ranks of defense forces still pray to the Almighty to give all of them some wisdom and shower best wishes over them.
(24). Nevertheless, the demand of the OROP will never be left here-itself come what may. This has to be followed with more vociferous protests by all the ex-servicemen organisations as well as Services Chiefs till the desired genuine results are achieved, thus to demand a re-look at the issue from the Govt. of UPA, headed by the Congress party which had included in its manifesto that of the previous as well 2004 polls.
K L JASPAL.
MOB: 09471889885
SIR
I AM RETD SUB 21 YEAR SERVICE RETD ON 01 JAN 2000 MY REVISED PENSIN IS 8299/- WHAT WILL BE ONE RANK ONE PENSION REVISED
WASANT PATTHEY
WHAT WILL BE NEW PENSION, MY PRESENT PENSION IS 5694/- AS PER
6PC+ DA. WHAT IS THE EQUATION AND IMMPLIMENTATION.
give silent features of one rank one pay.
i am ex indian navy chief shipwright drade i pay. i was awarded
a retiring pension of RS/102- from 1969. upgraded to 2500/-
iam equivelent that time to jco level. now i get equated to present
scales. it is very dicy to comprend the placement
kohli.ds
From:
Lt. Col. (Retd.) K L Jaspal,
H. No. 28, Sector 21-B, Faridabad, Haryana. Pin-121001.
Mobile Phone No. 09471889885
Email address: krishanlaljaspal@yahoo.co.in
SUBJECT:DIVIDING THE DEFENSE PENSIONERS AND CREATING DISCRIMINATION IN APPROVING ONE RANK AND ONE PENSION FOR THEM AND BY INCARPORATITING A CLAUSE OF PRO RATA OF 33YEARS FOR CALCULATING PENSION OF PRE-2006 PENSIONERS.
PROLOGUE.
1.In accordance with the contents of Article 14, this piece of writing is to throw light on similarly circumstanced country men who cannot be and must not be arbitrarily divided or categorized or classified by the state for debarring some of them from the benefits whenever announced by the Govt. Efforts are made to explain that already existing classifications/categories of pensioners are founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes pensioners that are grouped together. Whenever and wherever, the state has ever made any deceptive efforts to further classify the pensioners for its own financial or any other interest, but that was against pensioners in financial or in any other manners, it was checked by the Law of the Land. Many of the courts of the country including the Apex court of India always stood by Article 14, which forbade the Govt. from doing so. Article 14 is therefore specifically incorporated in the constitution to ensure fairness and equality of treatment to all the countrymen of the nation, so that all of them are treated alike both in privileges conferred and liabilities imposed by the state or any of the state’s authorities.
A BRIEF SUMMARY OF ARTICLE 14.
2.Article 14 of the constitution strikes at arbitrariness of the State action and ensures fairness and equality of treatment to all the country men of India. This article is attracted where equals are treated differently without any reasonable basis. The principle making the guarantee compulsory and obligatory is that all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike both in privileges conferred and liabilities imposed. Equal laws would have to be applied to all the persons happened to be in the same situation and there should be no discrimination between one class of persons from the other classes of similar persons as regards the subject-matter of the legislation, their position is substantially the same.
3.The Article 14 further explicitly and unambiguously forbids class division by the state. This Article, unequivocally explains that the classification already made is founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons or things that are grouped together from those that are left out of the group and that differentia must have a rational to the object sought to be achieved by the statute in question.
ENTITLEMENT OF PENSION.
4.It is well known that the pension is a right and not a bounty or gratuitous benefit. The payment of pension does not depend upon the discretion of the Government alone but it is governed as per the constitution of the nation and by the rules framed by the parliament. Thus, a government servant coming within the preview of those rules is entitled to claim the pension.
CLASSIFICATIONS OF DEFENSE SERVICE PENSIONERS CARRIED OUT BY THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DISREGARDING AND DISRESPECTING THE CONTENTENTS AND SPIRIT OF ARTICLE 14 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WHICH FORBIDS FOR DOING SO.
5.Since inception of defense forces, the defense pensioners have just in one class; irrespective of ranks they wear i.e. retired defense personnel called ex-servicemen or defense pensioners. Whenever the pensionary benefits were ever enhanced by the Govt., these have been made applicable to all the pensioners, irrespective of their dates of retirements or ranks they wore.
6.Factually, Just to partially approving the concept of OROP and denying the benefit to a large number of defense pensioners, the Govt. of India have divided one united and unified the homogeneous class of ex-servicemen/defense pensioners in number of classes as under:
7.Firstly:Post 2006 defense pensioners and secondly: Pre-2006 defense pensioners. Such a division was never made earlier for affording any pensionary benefit to a few of them and debarring all others after any of the Central Pay Commissions.
8.The pre-2006 defense pensioners have been further divided in other two classes; Firstly:Pre-1997 defense pensioners and secondly:Post 1997 defense pensioners upto Dec 31 2005. Even such a division was never made earlier for affording any pensionary benefit to a few of them and debarring a large number of all others after any of the Central Pay Commissions.
9.They have once again divided the defense pensioners in other two classes: Firstly, defense pensioners that of personnel below officers’ ranks (PBOR) and secondly, defense pensioners of officers’ ranks, in spite of the fact that they always have been a unified class of es-servicemen/ex-defense pensioners. This too has never happened in the past that one part of defense pensioners is to be given enhanced pensionary benefits and other ones are to be denied/debarred.
10.Like-wise, the govt. just to re-introduce the pro rata clause of 33 years, have also divided all pensioners i.e. the defense pensioners as well as civilian central govt. pensioners in two classes: Firstly, the present pensioners i.e. post 2006 pensioners to give full pension on completion of 20 years service, and secondly, pre-2006 pensioners to re-fix their pension on the bases of completion of 33 years of service, in spite of the fact that 6th CPC has completely removed this earlier existing clause. The division of pensioners in this manner is just for applying pro rata of 33 years, only i.e. in the case of pre-2006 pensioners alone, though this clause stand removed by the 6th CPC. However, even such a division was never made earlier for affording any pensionary benefit to some of the pensioners, while others are to be denied after any of the Central Pay Commissions.
11.It seems if the govt. has divided the pensioners with ulterior, underhanded, mysterious and inexplicable motive so that none of the large number of pensioners can put forth their grievances unitedly.
12.It is surprising to note that our own Govt have adopted this sort of a policy of dividing even the defense pensioners who have been nation’s bravest heroes, most sincere, honest, loyal, faithful, obedient, dutiful, submissive, docile, tractable, and disciplined soldiers during their service. They served the nation in most hostile, unfavourable conditions and difficult terrains on its border to safe guard its safety and security. They fought against external and internal enemies, without caring of their own life as well as future of their families and children. The Govt must have done not so, rather, must have some soft corner to do justice to the pensioners, especially to the defense pensioners, who have given their entire prime youth in service of the nation.
WELFARE OF DEFENSE PERSONNEL.
13.It is that of paramount importance that soldiers’ welfare while they are serving as well after their retirement must be taken care of, so that they do not have to worry, vacillate, remain anxious, agonize, and lose sleep and their proficiency, competence, performance, drive and morale is never effected adversely. If it is not done, the morale, self-confidence, self-esteem, and buoyancy of the soldiers are most likely to be effected adversely. Considering the conditions a soldier is required to serve, nature of his duties and expectations from him, suitable candidate may not like to join the forces, which will not in the national interest and may prove to be disastrous and catastrophic at some unknown stage
CONCEPT OF ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP).
14.Principally, the concept of ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP) implies that, all the defense personnel, who have retired or will be retiring from the same rank/post with the same length of service, should always get same amount of pension, irrespective of their past or future dates of retirements and total length of service they rendered or will render for the national security.
15.The demand of One Rank One Pension (OROP) had been pending since decades. The govt. has divided the defense personnel in number of classes just to debar a large number of them from the concept and benefit of entitlement of One Rank One Pension (OROP) before its approval.
16.Astonishingly, the Govt. of India while approving the concept of One Rank One Pension, have completely ignored, unobserved, disregarded, overlooked and by passed the contents of Article 14 of the constitution of the country as well as judgements of the Apex court and various other courts of the country.
17.The demand of “One Rank One Pension (OROP)” of defense personnel is long outstanding and has been raised time and again by the defense personnel/pensioners. Unfortunately and regrettably, all the preceding CENTAL PAY COMMISSIONS (CPCs) and the Governments have been shying away, refusing, declining,, throwing out, denying, and thrusting aside this legitimate demand for decades. It is mentioned with anguish, agony, pain, grief and distress that it had been happening despite the fact that main national political parties of the country like National Congress Party and Bhartia Janta Party, have been including this demand in their previous election manifestoes. This subject was also included in the President’s address in the Parliament in 2004, thereby making One Rank One Pension (OROP) the declared policy of Government (not that of any particular political party).
18.The National Congress party and Bhatia Janta party had incorporated in their election manifesto before the preceding general election to approve the concept of providing One Rank One Pension, the long outstanding demand of defense pensioners. None of the political party mentioned that the concept of OROP will be approved in the case of a few of the defense pensioners by dividing them in various classes. Accordingly, the issue was taken up by the present UPA Govt from the very beginning on assuming the power of its second tenure.
19.Nevertheless, it is most disappointing to note that while approving One Rank One Pension benefit, a large number of the defense pensioners “personnel below officers ranks” and all the defense pensioners of the officer’ ranks have been debarred/left out of this legitimate benefit and approved in case of some of them. It is regretted that while approving OROP, the defense pensioners have been divided in number of classes by the govt. just to debar a large number of them from the concept of One Rank One Pension benefit. From the action of dividing the defense pensioners in such a manner, it can be clearly seen that the govt. has totally violated, disregarded, ignored, unobserved, overlooked and by passed the contents of the Article of the constitution of the country.
20.The UPA Govt. must fulfill their promise, assurance and pledge since it was incorporated in their manifesto/agenda of providing OROP in totality for all the past, present and future defense personnel/pensioners without dividing them in various classes as has been presently done.
21.As a result of the most undesired action of dividing the defense pensioners, they feel to have been cheated, disenchanted, let down, embittered and disillusioned by the govt. It was never expected and imagined that the present govt. could do such a great injustice to them and it would approve the concept of One Rank One Pension benefit just for a few of the defense pensioners and a large number of them would be excluded and debarred from this long awaited legitimate demand. The govt. and the concerned authorities therefore have done a most heinous, monstrous, atrocious, odious, shocking, wicked and scandalous act of debarring the old soldiers from getting their long awaited due.
22.It is regretted with extreme pain, distress and anguish to point out that by dividing the defense pensioners in number of classes in such a deceitful manner, the govt. seem to have treated the left out defense pensioners from the approved preview of One Rank One Pension as if the debarred defense pensioners have been disloyal, or discarded, or undisciplined, or traitors, or conspirators, or collaborators, or defectors, or deserters, or spies, or double agents, or turncoats. If it is not so, no govt. could ever think of meting such a shabby, scruffy, dilapidated, grungy, disgraceful, shameful, shocking, outrageous, scandalous, dishonorable, discreditable, reprehensible, appalling, biased, prejudiced, unfair, bigoted, inequitable and discriminatory treatment to any of the defense pensioners.
23.The debarred defense forces pensioners wish to ask the present Govt. and the concerned authorities to reply to the question: Does any of the authorities who approved such an awful, appalling, shocking, evil, wicked, depraved, brutal, and abysmal action of dividing the defense pensioners in such a deceitful, cunning, devious and deceitful manner and debarring a large number of them from the benefit of OROP have any answer of the following questions in support of their misdeed, transgression and misdemeanor:
a.Are the remaining debarred defense pensioners for whom benefit of One Rank One Pension has not been approved are not the ex-defense personnel and did they not serve the nation, may they be officers or PBOR of pre-1997 period and the officers of post 1997 period?
b.Did all the debarred defense pensioners when in service of their beloved motherland not fight and many of them not give their lives while fighting against the external and internal enemies, whose families and children have suffered and are still suffering till date?
c.Could the defense forces pensioners served or fought the wars/battles against the enemies without the officers or can it be possible ever in future?
d.Have the defense pensioners who have been debarred from the benefit of OROP not served the nation like other soldiers for whom the concept of OROP has been approved?
e.Were the deprived defense pensioners not sincere, honest, loyal, faithful, obedient, dutiful, submissive, docile, tractable, and disciplined soldiers while they were in service of their beloved country?
f.Did the deprived defense pensioners not give their prime youth and some of them their lives in service of the nation while they were in service?
24.The whole nation in general and the debarred defense pensioners in particular would like to know the answers of the above questions and similar many more questions. It is felt that no concerned authorities can ever answer the above questions.
25.It seem that the authorities think that all the debarred officers and some PBOR are from the royal families like Maharaja Bhawani Singh who did not take his pay except Rupee one as his salary. Hence, they need not get the benefit of OROP.
26.OR, they think that the debarred officers and PBOR pensioners are multi millionaires/billionaires like politicians who keep spending in crores for fighting elections, hence they are not required to give the benefit of OROP. Surprisingly, all the MPs, irrespective any amount of wealth they possess, even then they get full pension for each and all of their tenures for any amount of period they remain MPS, where as the defense pensioners are denied full pension/OROP for their such a long service to the nation.
27.It is emphatically and vigorously pointed out that such an action of dividing the defense pensioners and debarring a large number of the existing pensioners is that of denial of equal benefit for fixation of pension for the pre-2006 defense pensioners including defense officers’ pensioners. Such a division of defense pensioners is the explicit case of arbitrary introduction of words of limitation as per Article 14. There is nothing immutable and incontrovertible about the choosing of an event as an eligibility criterion subsequent to a specified date. As the event is certain but its occurrence may have happened to be at a different point of time, it is considered wholly irrelevant and arbitrary, having an undesirable effect of dividing a homogeneous class of defense pensioners and creating discrimination among them, which can be easily severed and set aside by any court of the country.
28.The Govt. is fully aware of the contents of Article 14 and its requirement/importance. It seems that the govt. by dividing the defense pensioners has intentionally and deliberately violated and disregarded the spirit of Article 14 as it has completely ignored, unobserved, overlooked and by passed its contents. It is therefore just and proper that the words introducing the arbitrary and fortuitous circumstances which are vulnerable as denying equality be severed and struck down by the govt. with immediate effect.
29.It is strongly felt that if the govt. still justify their action of dividing the defense pensioners and debarring a large number of them from getting the benefit of OROP, in that case, it is suggested with anguish that all the debarred defense pensioners who are considered a fit case for their disqualification and debarring then from giving the benefit of One Rank One Pension; it is better “all of them be shot dead or hanged, so that none of them are required to be paid any amount of their pension”, rather than wounding and insulting them in such a heinous and atrocious manner.
APPLYING PRO RATA OF 33 YEARS FOR GIVING FULL PENSION.
30.As mentioned at para 10 above, the DP&T (P&PW have retained the clause of pro rata of 33 years, quoting; it is as per pension regulations of 1972. The pension regulations were originally framed afresh at that time when number of clauses were incorporated in these regulations. It may be noted that most of the clauses have undergone changes since thereafter.
31.It is clear that the pension is admissible to the eligible employees in accordance with the pension regulations of 1972. The pension regulations of 1972 lay down as to: How much should be the pension, how it is to be calculated, when it is to be revised, how much and when it is to be revised, after how long one should be entitled, how it is re-fixed e.t.c. These regulations are being changed periodically since 1972. Nevertheless, these have always been uniformly applied category-wise/class-wise, but class/category was never further divided to give benefit to some and deny the others. Rather, it has always been done without any discrimination. However, if the Govt. ever divided the category or class of employees for whatever reasons that happened to be against the interest of some pensioners, the courts of the land always struck down such divisions. Hence, in view of the fact that 6th CPC has removed the period of 33 years service for giving full pension and full pension, which now is eligible after 20 years of service; retaining the pro rata of 33 years for pre 2006 pension alone is highly illogical and discriminatory.
32.It is reiterated that dividing the defense personnel in various classes just for approving the concept/benefit of OROP for a few of them and denying it to a large number of them. Also, dividing all other pensioners as mentioned above, is just for applying the pro rata of 33 year for re-fixation of their pension after 6th CPC. It is emphatically, forcefully, ardently, insistently, strongly, heartily and vigorously stated that while creating such a division among the defense as well as all other pensioners in this manner, the Govt has completely, totally, entirely, fully, utterly, and absolutely neglected the principal of equality and the contents of Article 14 and even overlooked, ignored and disregarded the judgements of the Apex Court of the country and also various other courts delivered their judgments in adopting the principal of equality in the past.
33.Further, the govt. and concerned authorities, are also well aware that the Constitutional Bench of Honorable Supreme Court of India gave decision in the case of D S Nakra and others Verses Union of India (1983) 1 SCC 305 . One of the questions posed in the case was whether a class of Pensioners could be divided for the purpose of entitlement and payment of pension into those who retired by certain date and those who retired thereafter. The Constitution Bench held that such division being both arbitrary and unprincipled; the classification did not stand the test of Article 14. The argument that the cut off date had to be fixed in view of the limited financial resources available to cover up additional expenses to be incurred on account of revision of pay scale was not accepted by the Constitution Bench of the honorable Supreme Court.
34.The above Judgement pronounced by a Constitutional Bench of Supreme Court is available at http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/qrydisp.aspx for the benefit of all who want to read it.
35.The case dates back to 70s when the Government had introduced Liberalized Pension Scheme. Earlier pension was calculated based on the average salary of last 36 months. Under Liberalized Pension Scheme, the provisions were changed to calculate the pension based on the average salary of last 10 months. This was applicable to all the present and future pensioners. The case was filed by one retired civil officer (subject to Central Civil Pension Rules 1972) and one retired defense officer (subject to Army Pension Regulations) and the third petitioner was a Registered Society. Only the following extracts of this judgment will clarify the of the Apex court, which is the position:
a.“Proceeding further, this Court observed that where all relevant considerations are the same, persons holding identical posts may not be treated differently in the matter of their pay merely because they belong to different departments. If that can’t be done when they are in service, can that be done during their retirement? Expanding this principle, one can confidently say that if pensioners form a class, their computation cannot be by different formula affording unequal treatment solely on the ground that some retired earlier and some retired later.”
b.Further “All pensioners whenever they retired, would be covered by the liberalised pension scheme, because the scheme is a scheme for payment of pension to a pensioners governed by 1972 Rules. The date of retirement is irrelevant. But the revised scheme would be operative for all from the date mentioned in the scheme and would bring under its umbrella all existing pensioners and those who retired/retire subsequent to that date. In case of pensioners who retired prior to the specified date, their pension would be computed afresh”
36.The above part pertains to clearly explains that while approving OROP, the defense pensioners of officers’ ranks and defense personnel below officers ranks must not be differentiated. It also clarifies that the pensioners must not be divided in various classes on the ground that some retired earlier and some retired later for giving the benefit of OROP to some and debar others as well as adopting pro rata of 33 yeas for some and giving full pension in 20 years to others.
37.It is abundantly clear from the above extracts that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, upholding the Article 14 of the constitution of India has already objected to the division of pensioners and accepted the principle of equality and this is the Apex court of the country which enjoys the status of the LAW OF THE LAND.
38.The Apex court judgements apply exactly to the case of all the debarred defense pensioners for approving One Rank One Pension for them irrespective of their date of retirement and rank they held before their retirement. If the govt. still does not reconsider their decision of approving the concept of OROP for all the defense pensioners, it will be the contempt of court orders as well as disregard and disrespect to Article 14 of the constitution of India.
39.Deprival of due and that too justified due of approval of concept of OROP for a large number of the defense pensioners including retired officers has created gloom and obscurity as well as a great resentment, antipathy and umbrage amongst the pre-2006 defense retirees.
40.It is submitted that it may not be possible for the debarred old disciplined defense and civil pensioners to do what other civilian force of the country can do, due to their old age, poor health, left over responsibilities and financial constraints; moreover all of them being spread in far flung areas and some in most remote areas in the country. They are unable to approach any of the concerned authorities or Courts of Law to seek justice due to their inabilities and constrains. The govt. therefore must not take undue advantage of their inabilities, rather, must have mercy on them to give OROP to all the defense pensioners irrespective of their date of retirement and the ranks they held before their retirement and remove the clause of pro rata of 33 years for re-fixing their pension, as this clause is completely removed by the 6th CPC for all the post 2005 retirees.
41.It is mandatory for the Govt. to Adhere, regard, observe, respect and honor Article 14 of the constitution of India and number of Apex court judgements on the subject, as well as considering the nature of services the defense pensioners rendered in extreme unfavorable climatic conditions, and terrains against external and internal enemies of the nation for the security and safety of the country and the countrymen. As such, it becomes, necessary, unavoidable obligatory, binding and compulsory for the govt. to reconsider the matter to have sympathetic consideration in favour of old soldiers to approve One Rank One Pension for all of them without any discrimination, and prejudice.
42.The govt. and the concerned authorities therefore to please do look into this matter without any prejudice, narrow-mindedness, discrimination and insularity to initiate immediate action and issue amendment to sanction One Rank One Pension for all the defense pensioners without any disparity of ranks. It is equally essential to remove the unwarranted, gratuitous, uncalled-for, unjustifiable and unsubstantiated pro rata clause of 33 years for the pre 2006 pensioners.
43.In view of the facts, particulars, details, specifics, documentary evidence and veracity explained above, all the defense pensioners, most industriously, earnestly, vigorously, sincerely and honestly request and appeal to benign self of the President of India, Vice President, Speaker of the Lok Sabha, Prime Minister, all the Ministers of the Govt., MPs of the country and concerned authorities to please examine, and review the case to approve the principle/concept of One Rank One Pension in totality for all the defense forces pensioners without attaching any strings of dates of retirement or ranks they wore before their retirement.
44.Also, another earnest request is made to remove the clause of pro rata of 33 years for all the pre-2006 pensioners for fixation of their revised pension.
45.The most urgent action in the matter is solicited please.
Yours Sincerely,
Lt. Col. (retd). K L Jaspal.
Since supreme commander has taken up the issue of OROP, it is considered that it must be of utmost importance . There are issues which were not raised in the open for various reasons good/bad.the time are changing & the way to administer has also to change with time .this country is of big importance to the World in the modern times therefore the security & development also is of great need of times .A country has to look after its assets whether human or others ,since the other aspect is being looked after the enterpreneurs & a check is being maintained by the political there is little worry about it but the security of the country which by neglect by the politician & by design & ignorance by the bureaurocrat has been languishing is at a stage if ignored for whatever reason will be injurious & may never recover from the damage .The fighting force has to be kept in high esteem by everyone ,that is the only reason for the man in uniform to fight unto death if required ,If he is treated like anyother entity then his responce also will be the same in uncalled for situations ,he will count the cash & say i have done my work for the day & i have to go 7 look after my family now & he will also start thinking “after me what “.That is a situation that has to avoided .Even developed countries when it come to servicemen or vetrans the whole country salutes to them . The economic condition in this country are not like they are there but so are thins places like China & Russia (CIS ).When things can be managed there then why not here .