A note on the above subject by Maj Gen VK Singh (Retd) drawn on 4.9.09 after detailed discussions on the subject, between him and Brig.Kamboj on 3.9.09, is posted for information of all Veterans concerned.
ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP)- THE PROBLEM AND SOLUTION
Background
1. Before 1970, armed forces personnel were granted pension based only on the rank held by them when they retired. A soldier became eligible for pension after having served for the minimum period laid down. Extra service did not earn him more pension. This really meant One Rank One Pension (OROP).
2. The Third Pay Commission, set up in April 1970, equated military pension with the civil pension. Eligibility for pension was related to the civil service requirement of 33 years service. The Commission ignored the fact that soldiers rarely serve for 33 years, since the age of retirement is not uniform, but related to rank. The earlier inbuilt monetary compensation for a truncated career was dispensed with and in lieu a weightage in years of service was introduced. These measures effectively neutralised the prevailing edge that military pension had until then.
3. In 1985, Shri KP Singh Deo, the then RRM, suggested that OROP should mean ‘same rank same total length of service same pension’. (This needs to be verified). The guiding principle or logic was “No two soldiers holding the same rank and same total length of service to their credit shall draw different pensions.” Since then, OROP has come to mean just this, with a length of service forming part of the eligibility criteria, unlike the pre 1970 definition when only rank was considered.
4. Successive pay commissions have continued with this trend, revising pay and pensions of military personnel from a certain date. This has effectively made classes within each rank, nullifying the principle given above ie soldiers holding the same rank and same length of service should get the same pension. This also contrary to the judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of 17 December 1982 that stated: “by introducing an arbitrary eligibility, being in service and retiring subsequent to the specified date, or being eligible for the regularised pension scheme and thereby dividing a homogeneous class, these classifications being not based on any discernible rational principle ... are unconstitutional and are struck down."
The Problem
5. The constraints at present stems from the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission, which has decided to fix the pension based on pay bands, instead of rank. The concept of clubbing several ranks in one pay band is illogical, especially in the military, which has distinct ranks. These pay bands are applicable from a particular date, leading to a differential in the pensions of persons of the same rank retiring before 1997, between 1997 and 2006, and after 2006.
The Solutions
6. The ideal solution would be to revert to the pre 1970 concept of one rank one pension, without taking into account the length of service. This solution is simple, logical and would be permanent. This provision can be incorporated in Defence Service Regulations and approved by Parliament. It would not be subject to debate and protests after every pay commission.
7. Another solution would be to fix the pensions in line with the latest Supreme Court judgment of September 2008 in the Major Generals’ case, which directed that “the pay of all pensioners ----- be notionally fixed at the rate given to similar officers of the same rank after the revision of pay scales ------, and, thereafter, to compute their pensionary benefits on such basis”. This solution appears to be logical, but would result in the pay of every retiree being fixed, notionally, into the new pay scale/ band, requiring issue of fresh individual PPOs – a herculean task. This exercise would have to be repeated every ten years or so, when a new pay commission is constituted.
8. There is a view that the truncated service of a soldier should not viewed as a loss which has to be compensated. A soldier who retires at the age of 45 with full pension is able to start a new career, where he earns a salary. In addition, he gets his pension. Civil servants who retire at the age of 60 are too old to start a new career, and have to make do with the pension only. There is merit in the argument. An out of the box solution would be to ensure that all government servants, including soldiers, retire at the age of 60. It is possible, as explained below.
9. Due to the peculiar demands of military service, soldiers cannot serve beyond a certain age in the Armed Forces. Then how does he serve up to the age of 60? By side stepping to a non military government job. This need not be only in the para military forces, but in any government department, such as forests, irrigation, education, agriculture, horticulture, electricity boards, telecom, PSUs and so on. The second career will be treated as a continuation of his service in the military, and he will start getting his pension only after his superannuation at the age of 60.
10. Consider the advantages. Every soldier will be assured of a government job till the age of 60. This will do wonders to his morale.. The induction of trained and disciplined personnel will gradually improve the motivation and discipline of the government work force, which is at present lacking these attributes. The State will save a lot of money. Today, a soldier gets a salary for 20 years and then draws a pension for 40 years, assuming he lives up to the age of 80. If he was to be side stepped to a government job, he would serve for 40 years and draw a pension for only 20 years. The pension bill for the Armed Forces would be reduced by almost half! The major objection to grant of OROP is that it will cost a lot of money.
11. Once we suggest a solution that saves money, how can anyone object? At least the Finance Minister should jump at it.
Maj Gen VK Singh (Retd), 4.9.09.
Showing posts with label AF Personnel Welfare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label AF Personnel Welfare. Show all posts
Friday, September 4, 2009
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
KENDRIYA SAINIK BOARD - CENTRAL GOVERNMENT CONCESSIONS AND BENEFITS AVAILABLE TO WAR WIDOWS/WAR DISABLED AND RETIREDD/SERVING DEFENCE PERSONNEL
Educational Concessions
Children of Defence personnel killed or disabled in action, including casualties of OP PAWAN and MEGHDOOT, who are studying in educational institutions under the Department of Education are entitled to the following educational concessions (Authority : AG's Branch, Army HQ letter No.56268/Policy/AG/ CW 3(b) dated 17 Aug 90 and Ministry of Human Resources Development (Dept. of Education) letter No.F.14-1/94-School-1 dated 10 Nov 95) :-
(a) Complete exemption from tuition fee and other fees levied by the educational institution concerned,
(b) Grants to meet hostel charges in full for those studying in Boarding Schools and Colleges.
(c) Full cost of books and stationery.
(d) Full cost of uniform where this is compulsory.
The above concessions would be available up to and inclusive of the first Degree Course. If any entitled child is, however studying in a Post Graduate Course, the concession would be admissible to him also.The educational concession is also applicable to the following:
(a) Children of Officers and Personnel below officers rank (PBOR) who have been declared missing
for a period of six months or till the date of return of the missing officer or PBOR, whichever is
earlier.
(b) Children of prisoners of war.
(c) Widows of officers and men of Armed Forces including Para military personnel killed during Indo
Pak conflict of 1971.
(d) Children of war widow would continue to get the educational concession even if she re-marries.
Admission into Professional Colleges
Medical and Engineering. Around 28 seats in MBBS and one seat in BDS and 2 seats in Engineering College at Annamalai University are available through KSB for wives/widows and wards of categories of Defence personnel in the following order of priority:
(a) Killed in action.
(b) Disabled in action and boarded out from service.
(c) Died while in service with death attributable to military service.
(d) Disabled in service and boarded out with disability attributable to military service.
(e) Gallantry Award/Other Award Winners.
Reservation of seats in IITs. A joint entrance examination is conducted every year by the six IITs for admission to the IITs at Bombay, Delhi, Kanpur, Kharagpur, Madras and Banaras Hindu University Institute of Technology. Two seats in each of the above six institutes are reserved for children of the Defence/Para Military Force Personnel killed or permanently disabled in action. Such candidates are however, required to qualify in the joint entrance examination.
Reservation in Sainik and Military Schools.;- (a) Sainik Schools. 25 % seats for serving and ex Services personnel. (b) Military Schools. Reservation of seats for wards of JCOs/ORs: 67 percent & Officers: 20 percent.
Reservation of seats in professional colleges for ex Servicemen and serving personnel granted by States/UTs are covered in the later chapters under each State/UT.
Accommodation in War Memorial Hostels
35 War Memorial Hostels have already been constructed in various Regimental Centres. These hostels provide accommodation to wards of war bereaved, disabled and attributable/non attributable peace time casualties to enable them to pursue their studies. KSB provides Rs.600/ p.m., education grant for each child except in respect of non attributable cases where the grant is Rs.300/ p.m,. To see "Location of War Memorial Hostels in States/UTs" click here.
Kendriya Sainik Board
MEDICAL
Entitlement for Medical Treatment from Service Hospitals for ex Service Pensioners and their Families
Ex Service pensioners and their families are entitled to medical treatment from service hospitals under provision of Para 296(O) of RMSAP 1983. The pensioners/widows are required to produce a non employment certificate at the hospital to ensure proper recovery of hospital stoppages vide DGAFMS letter No.1630/ DGAFMS/ DG3A dated 08 Oct 86. This entitlement card has come into effect from 01 Jan 94.
All ex Service pensioners/widows are advised to get the entitlement card made through Zila/Rajya Sainik Boards.
Medical Benefits for ex Servicemen/Widows and Dependents
Through Service Hospitals and Medical Establishments. Ex Servicemen, their families and families of deceased service personnel drawing pension of any kind are entitled to free out patient treatment at Military Hospitals. These personnel can also be provided in patient treatment in such hospitals subject to certain conditions. 24 MI Rooms and 12 Dental Centres have been created from the funds provided by the Service HQs and KSB for providing medical facilities to ex Servicemen pensioners and their dependents. The location of these MI Rooms and Dental Centres are given as under:
MI Rooms Dental Centres
(a) Large Hospitals :- (i) Base Hospital, Delhi (3) Delhi Cantt. (ii) CH, Chandimandir Chandimandir (1)
(iii) MH, Jalandhar Jalandhar (1), (iv) MH, Ambala Ambala (1), (v) 159 GH, Ferozpur, (vi) MH, Amritsar,
(vii) 166 MH, Jammu , (viii) 167 MH, Pathankot, (ix) BH, Lucknow Lucknow (1), (x) MH, Dehradun,
(xi) BH, Barrackpore, (xii) CH (EC), Kolkatta Kolkata (1),(xiii) MH, Jodhpur, (xiv) MH, Agra Cantt,
(xv) CH (SC), Pune Pune (1), (xvi) INHS Asvini, Mumbai Mumbai (1), (xvii) AF Hospital, Bangalore Bangalore (1), (xviii) INHS Sanjeevani, Cochin
(b) Small Hospitals:- (i) MH, Chennai, (ii) MH, Secunderabad, (iii) MH, Jaipur, (iv) MH, Aurangabad,
(v) MH, Dharamshala , (vi) MH, Faizabad, (vii) Trivandrum (1) -
Through State Government Hospitals. Ex-Servicemen can also avail medical treatment from their State Govt. Hospitals as normal State citizens.
Financial Assistance for Medical Treatment :- (a) All Ex Servicemen suffering from serious diseases are given financial assistance for treatment in civil hospitals in case they cannot be treated in Military Hospitals and have not availed similar assistance from other sources. These are :
(i) By pass surgery:- 90% and 75% of the authorised expenditure in case of JCOs/ORs and Officers respectively.
(ii) Angiography-do-, (iii) Kidney/Renal transplant-do-, (iv) Cancer/spastic Paraplegic -do-
(restricted to Rs. 75,000/- per annum), (v) Coronary Artery Surgery/Angioplasty-do-
(vi) Open Heart Surgery/Valve replacement-do-, (vii) Pace Maker implant-do- , (viii) Stroke -do-
(ix) Arterial Surgery -do-, (x) Prostate Surgery-do-, (xi) Total Joint Replacement-do-
xii) Dialysis-do- (restricted to Rs 75,000/- per annum)
(b) Procedure for Application. Financial assistance for medical treatment for serious diseases mentioned in para (a) above to ex Servicemen and their dependents is available from the Kendriya Sainik Board. For this purpose the individual has to apply to the Secretary, KSB, West Block 4, R K Puram, New Delhi 110 066
through his Zila/Rajya Sainik Board with the following documents:
(i) Original cash receipts in support of medicines purchased for the treatment/operation duly countersigned by the hospital authorities.
(ii) Photocopy of Hospital's discharge slip/prescription slip.
(iii) If the case was referred by Military Hospital, a copy of the Military Hospital's letter referring the case to Civil Hospital.
(iv) The details of financial assistance, if any, received.
(v) If re employed, the details of Medical facilities being provided by the employer.
(vi) If also a civil pensioner, the details of the medical facilities being provided by the Civil authorities to their pensioners.
(vii) Photocopy of discharge book/ex Servicemen Identity Card/ and MBS of AGIF Card.
NOTES:- (i) KSB has tied up with different specialised hospitals in the country for direct payment of 90 percent and 75 percent of the stipulated amount on account of treatment of JCOs/ORs & Officers respectively. For the purpose, letter issued by KSB is required to be sent by the ESM to the concerned Hospital.
(ii) Those ex-Servicemen who have been members of AGI/AFGI Medical Benefit Scheme and have already availed financial benefits from them are considered for financial assistance from Kendriya Sainik Board if they go in for subsequent treatment of serious disease and are not eligible for availing AGI/AFGI benefits for any further financial assistance.
TRAVEL:- Rail Travel Concession. Govt. of India have announced free rail travel in I Class/II AC Class to the recipients of PVC, Ashok Chakra, MVC, Kirti Chakra, VrC and Shourya Chakra and the widows of posthumous winners of these Gallantry Awards along with a companion. (Ministry of Railways letter No. E(W)96PS 5 6/22 dated 23 Feb 96.). 75 percent concession in rail fare for travel in II Class is available to war widows including those of IPKF and Kargil casualties. This concession can be availed on production of the I Card issued by the KSB.
Air Travel Concession. Following categories of personnel are eligible to 50 percent concession in fare for air travel in domestic flights of the Indian Airlines:
(a) Recipients of Gallantry Awards of Class I & Class II viz., PVC, Ashok Chakra, MVC, and Kirti Chakra.
(b) Permanently war disabled officers who have been invalidated out of service and the dependent members of their families.
(c) War widows of post Independence era.
CSD CANTEEN FACILITIES :- In accordance with Army Order AO 32/84, Ex Servicemen and their families and ex-Defence personnel with minimum 5 years of service are entitled to CSD (I) Canteen facilities available in units/establishments. Cadets/Recruits boarded out on medical grounds are also entitled to avail CSD facilities. In addition, the following categories of TA personnel are entitled to canteen facilities after their retirement:
(a) Pension holders for continuous embodied service.
(b) Persons with disability attributable to Military Service.
(c) Gallantry Award Winners.
PRIORITY TELEPHONE FACILITIES
The following categories of subscribers are exempted from payment of Registration Charges and installation charges for priority telephones connection under Non-OYT/Special Category and are entitled to 50 percent concession in normal rental charges. However, Gallantry Award winners are entitled to full concession in normal rental charges. (Authority : Ministry of Communications (Deptt. of Telecom Services) letter No. 2-47/92-PHA dated 19 Mar 93, circular NO 7/2000 dated 13 Jun 2000 and 2.47/92 PHA dt 18 Sep 2000):-
(a) Gallantry Award Winners in the three Services (PVC, Ashok Chakra, MVC, KC, VrC & SC).
(b) War widows.
(c) Disabled soldiers.
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED BY THE KSB THROUGH AFFDF/RMDF/DMACP
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM ARMED FORCES FLAG DAY FUND
Grant for Construction/Repair of Houses. 50 percent of the grant, paid to War Widows, War Disabled by the State Govt.s for construction/repair of houses is reimbursed by the KSB subject to a maximum of Rs.10,000/ (KSB letter No..105 SB(7)/EC/91/KSB/D dated 16 Nov 92).
Grant for Marriage of Daughters of War Widow/War Disabled. Kendriya Sainik Board gives a grant of Rs.8,000/ for the marriage of daughters of a war widow or war disabled ex Servicemen whose disability is more than 50 percent. .
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM RAKSHA MANTRI’S DISCRETIONARY FUND (RMDF)
The following cases of financial assistance from RMDF are considered by KSB:- (a) Assistance to old infirm Ex‑Servicemen/ widows of ESM - Rs 1000/‑ p.m. for two years. (b) Marriage of Daughter Ex‑Servicemen/ widows in penuryRs 8,000/‑.
(c) Repair of house for ESM/Widows in penury. Rs 10,000/‑
(d) Medical treatment Depending on the nature and gravity of ailmentSubject to a maximum of Rs 15,000/‑
(e) Education of children of ESM/ widows in penury Rs 100/‑ p.m. per child for max of three children up to XII class.
(f) Other cases in respect of ESM/widows in penury. like natural calamities, accidental or where feels that the case deserves sympathetic consideration) No single transaction to exceed Rs 15, 000/‑
Note : The cases of financial assistance from RMDF are submitted by the
concerned Zila/Rajya Sainik Boards to KSB.
DEFENCE MINISTER’S APPELLATE COMMITTEE ON PENSIONS (DMACP)
Cases where family pension claims have been rejected or where disability is neither attributable nor aggravated by military service are given the following types of grants by the DMACP:
(a) Educational allowance Rs 25/ p.m. up to three children of ex Servicemen who were enrolled prior to 01 Jan 85. For personnel enrolled on or after 01 Jan 85, the grant is admissible to only two children. The maximum amount of educational grant is, however, restricted to Rs. 3,000/ .
(b) A lump sum grant up to Rs. 2,000/ to aged parents of the deceased ex Servicemen.
(c) Cost of sewing machine to the wife of deceased/ disabled ex Servicemen.
(d) A one time grant of Rs 1,000/ for daughter's marriage.
Appeals for financial assistance on rejection of pension claims should be made to the Defence Minister's Appellate Committee on pension within six months of rejection of the claim. The appeals are considered by the Committee based on merits of each case and the financial assistance granted which is, subsequently, paid by the Kendriya Sainik Board through the concerned Rajya/Zila Sainik Board.
Ex gratia allowance to Burma Army Pensioners. Burma Army Pensioners who are Indian Nationals and are drawing their pension in India are given ex gratia allowance so as to raise their existing pension and relief drawn thereon to Rs 1275/ per month w.e.f 01 Nov 97. This allowance would be admissible to the families of such pensioners in the event of their death.
Tool Kit for ex Servicemen Technicians. Out of Armed Forces Flag Day Fund, tool kits are provided, amount not exceeding Rs.2,000/ , provided the following conditions are fulfilled:
(a) The ex Serviceman hold the qualification to utilise the tool kit.
(b) The ex Serviceman has the appropriate infrastructure to set up for himself the proposed trade. (KSB letter No.105 SB(7)/EC/91/KSB/D dated 16 Nov 92)
Reimbursement of Interest by way of subsidy on loan taken from Bank for construction of House to war bereaved, war disabled and attributable peace time casualties and their dependents. There is a scheme for re imbursement of interest subsidy on loan taken from Banks by war bereaved, war disabled, attributable peace time casualties and their dependents for construction of houses with the following conditions:
(a) The upper limit is Rs.10,000/ for eligibility of grant of interest subsidy, even though the loan taken may be of a higher amount.
(b) Apart from the Banks, loan taken from reputed organisations in Government/Public Sector Undertakings, LIC. GIC and HUDCO except private organisations are also made eligible for the grant of interest subsidy subject to the condition that the loan given by these organisations are based on genuineness of the requirement and the repaying capacity of the individual.
(c) The rates of the interest subsidy and the period for re payment of loan is as under:
(i) The subsidy will be paid up to a maximum period of five years or the date of final repayment of loan whichever is earlier.
(ii) 50 percent of the interest charges by the Banks or Govt. of Public Sector including LIC, GIC and HUDCO would be reimbursed as interest subsidy.
INSTITUTIONAL WELFARE ASSISTANCE PROVIDED BY KSB
Sainik Rest House Facility:- To facilitate short stay of ex Servicemen during their visit to District HQs in connection with settlement of their pensionary claims, for medical treatment, litigation, etc. a number of Sainik Rest Houses have been established all over the country. At present, there are 243 Sainik Rest Houses in the country. For details of Sainik Rest Houses click here. After Care of ex Servicemen/their dependents for Leprosy/TB etc. in the Cheshire Homes.
Kendriya Sainik Board is providing grants to Cheshire Homes/Raphael Ryder Cheshire International Centre/QMTI so that the ex Servicemen/their dependents inmates are looked after by them. At present the following Cheshire Homes/Centres are being given grants:
(a) Raphael Ryder Cheshire International Centre, Dehradun.
(b) Cheshire Home, Thiruvananthapuram
(c) Cheshire Home, Delhi
(d) Cheshire Home, Lucknow
(e) Cheshire Home, Vellore
(f) Cheshire Home, Bangalore (g) QMTI, Pune
Grant in Aid in respect of Welfare Services undertaken by the Indian Red Cross Society
Annual grant is provided to the Indian Red Cross Society for welfare Services provided by the Society to sick and wounded Servicemen/ex Servicemen in the Armed Forces Hospitals.
Indian Gorkha Ex Servicemen Welfare Organisation
Kendriya Sainik Board provides grants to Indian Gorkha Ex Servicemen Welfare Association, Dehradun to look after the welfare of Indian Gorkha Ex Servicemen and their families.
Rehabilitation Centres/Training cum Production Centres for Widows of Defence Personnel
There are 18 Rehabilitation Centres/Training Centres/ Training cum Production Centres/Vocational Centres. These Centres provide Training Courses in Tailoring, Knitting, Stitching, Typing, Sewing, Stenography, Computer Programming, etc. For details of the location of Rehabilitation Centers click here.
Hostels for War Widows/Widows of Defence Personnel
Kendriya Sainik Board shares expenditure on 50 percent basis of the cost of the construction and thereafter the maintenance of Widows Hostels and Old Age Homes. These Hostels/Homes are at Bihar (Albert Eeka Memorial Complex, Patna), J&K (Jammu), Maharashtra (Naval War Memorial Hostel at Mumbai for Naval War Widows), Madhya Pradesh (Mahar Regimental Centre, Saugor and J&K Rifles Regimental Centre, Jabalpur), Meghalaya (Assam Regimental Centre, Shillong), Uttar Pradesh (Garhwal Rifles Regimental Centre, Lansdowne, Kumaon Regimental Centre, Ranikhet, Rajput Regimental Centre, Fatehgarh and AMC Centre & School, Lucknow), Delhi (War Widow Home Capacity for 30 inmates located at 18/1, Aruna Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi 110057) and Tamil Nadu (War Widows Home, Chennai 600 004).
REHABILITATION OF DISABLED SOLDIERS
Queen Mary’s Technical Institute, Pune
The Queen Mary's Technical Institute (QMTI), Range Hills, Pune, a private Charitable Institution conducts ITI recognised vocational trades training courses for disabled Servicemen, ex Servicemen and their dependents salient of which are as follows :
Course Duration Education
(a) FitterTwo yearsSSC Pass
(b) Electriciandodo
(c) Mechanic Radio & TVdodo
(d) Wiremando do
(e) Mechanic, Diesel One yearSSC Fail
(f) Steno (English) doSSC Pass (50% marks in English)
(g) Cutting & Tailoringdo VIII Pass
The session commences on 01 Aug every year and terminates on 31 Jul next year.. Admissions are completed by 15 Jul for the next session.
Application for admission are to be routed as under:
(a) Disabled ex Servicemen. Through respective Zila Sainik Welfare Officers and Secretary, Rajya Sainik Boards.
(b) Disabled Servicemen. Through Units, Record Offices, Army HQ (AG's Branch).
(c) Dependents. Directly to Supdt.,QMTI.
Fees.
(a) Disabled ex Servicemen. Fees and Boarding expenditure is payable by respective Rajya Sainik Boards.
(b) Disabled Servicemen. By respective parent Units.
(c) Dependents. By individuals.
Hostel facilities are provided for disabled ex Servicemen within the QMTI premises. Disabled soldiers are attached to MH, Kirkee.
Training. The syllabus followed is as per norms laid down by the National Council for Training in Vocational Trades and the successful trainees receive ITI certificates and stand a good chance for employment all over the country. Also, they can obtain National Trade Certificates after undergoing Apprenticeship training and examinations.
Placement. Training in QMTI helps a disabled soldier to acquire the all important will to live independently. Disabled ex Servicemen can easily find jobs after obtaining vocational training. Those who wish to start their own ventures can now do so better with technical qualifications and knowledge.
Paraplegic Rehabilitation Centres (PRC) at Kirkee and Mohali
In addition to QMTI, Paraplegic Rehabilitation Centres at Kirkee and Mohali with a capacity of 80 and 30 beds respectively are being run for rehabilitation of Paraplegic and Tetraplegic ex Servicemen. Financial assistance is also provided by the respective States to ex Servicemen during the period of training. The KSB provides a lump sum of annual grant to the PRCs Kirkee and Mohali for upkeep of the establishment in addition to grant per inmate actually housed in the Centres.
St Dunstan's After Care Organisation
St Dunstan's Organisation was formed to provide psychological support to over come the devastating shock of blindness as well as to impart vocational training to the blinded ex Servicemen, to enable them to find a place back in the society and to set them up in their homes and also after care services.. The administration is looked after by the After care Organisation headed by an After Care Officer under the overall control of the Sub Committee at Dehradun. Sub Area Commander, Dehradun is its Chairman.
Kendriya Sainik Board provides annual grant to After Care Organisation at Dehradun to meet the expenditure on the welfare of blinded ex Servicemen in the country. After Care Officer is responsible for operating the organisation and also maintaining a link with National Institute for the Visually Handicapped (NIVH) for training of blind ex Servicemen as well as new cases sponsored by MH Dehradun. St Dunstan's
After Care Organisation is located at Rajpur Road, PO NCB, Dehradun 248 001.
The items required by the disabled and other categories of physically handicapped are permitted to be imported duty free by any person. Also, any drugs, medicines or equipment, certified to be a life saving drug/medicines, equipment etc., by the DGHS/DDGHS/ ADGHS can also be imported duty free.
Duty Free Import of Therapeutic Gadgets for Paraplegic ex Servicemen Patients
Under Custom Notification No.208/81 Cus dated 22 Sep 81, items required by the disabled and other categories of physically handicapped are permitted to be imported duty free by any person. A perusal of the notification shows that it specifically covers the following items:
"Instruments and implants including self curing acrylic Bone Cement for replacement and bonding of hips, knee and other joints for severely crippled and handicapped”.
The following items required by spinal patients and other categories of physically handicapped people are covered :
(a) Wheel & other chairs:
(i) Folding wheel chairs with detachable arms and foot rests.
(ii) Special light wheel chairs for easy handling.
(iii) Motorised wheel chairs.
(iv) Special purpose chairs for stairs climbing for tetraplegic and paraplegic workers.
(b) Aids for disabled namely, folding walking frames.
(c) Aids to extend reach to pick up small items (with small magnet pick up).
(d) Specialised fixtures for orthopaedic and spastic tetraplegic for manoeuvring and providing dexterity to fingers and wrist.
(e) Turning beds for prevention of pressure sores.
(f) Emulsion cushions for tetraplegic and working paraplegics to avoid pressure sores.
Further, under the same notification any other drug, medicine or equipment which is certified by the DGHS/DDGHS/ADGHS to be a life saving drug, medicine, equipment, etc., can also be imported duty free by any person.
Similarly, under notification No.63/88 Cus and 64/88 Cus dated 01 Jan 88, Government hospitals and certain categories of charitable hospitals are permitted to import their requirements duty free
LT. CDR. BENIWAL, Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 6:15 PM, CORRECTS - Just two things as below:-
1. First - Non-Pensioner ESM get medical treatment in MHs vide 296(O) as amended on 26.9.96, pensioner ESM get treatment by ECHS.
2. Second - Only Non-Pensioner ESM get financial help from KSB after ECHS became effective.
Children of Defence personnel killed or disabled in action, including casualties of OP PAWAN and MEGHDOOT, who are studying in educational institutions under the Department of Education are entitled to the following educational concessions (Authority : AG's Branch, Army HQ letter No.56268/Policy/AG/ CW 3(b) dated 17 Aug 90 and Ministry of Human Resources Development (Dept. of Education) letter No.F.14-1/94-School-1 dated 10 Nov 95) :-
(a) Complete exemption from tuition fee and other fees levied by the educational institution concerned,
(b) Grants to meet hostel charges in full for those studying in Boarding Schools and Colleges.
(c) Full cost of books and stationery.
(d) Full cost of uniform where this is compulsory.
The above concessions would be available up to and inclusive of the first Degree Course. If any entitled child is, however studying in a Post Graduate Course, the concession would be admissible to him also.The educational concession is also applicable to the following:
(a) Children of Officers and Personnel below officers rank (PBOR) who have been declared missing
for a period of six months or till the date of return of the missing officer or PBOR, whichever is
earlier.
(b) Children of prisoners of war.
(c) Widows of officers and men of Armed Forces including Para military personnel killed during Indo
Pak conflict of 1971.
(d) Children of war widow would continue to get the educational concession even if she re-marries.
Admission into Professional Colleges
Medical and Engineering. Around 28 seats in MBBS and one seat in BDS and 2 seats in Engineering College at Annamalai University are available through KSB for wives/widows and wards of categories of Defence personnel in the following order of priority:
(a) Killed in action.
(b) Disabled in action and boarded out from service.
(c) Died while in service with death attributable to military service.
(d) Disabled in service and boarded out with disability attributable to military service.
(e) Gallantry Award/Other Award Winners.
Reservation of seats in IITs. A joint entrance examination is conducted every year by the six IITs for admission to the IITs at Bombay, Delhi, Kanpur, Kharagpur, Madras and Banaras Hindu University Institute of Technology. Two seats in each of the above six institutes are reserved for children of the Defence/Para Military Force Personnel killed or permanently disabled in action. Such candidates are however, required to qualify in the joint entrance examination.
Reservation in Sainik and Military Schools.;- (a) Sainik Schools. 25 % seats for serving and ex Services personnel. (b) Military Schools. Reservation of seats for wards of JCOs/ORs: 67 percent & Officers: 20 percent.
Reservation of seats in professional colleges for ex Servicemen and serving personnel granted by States/UTs are covered in the later chapters under each State/UT.
Accommodation in War Memorial Hostels
35 War Memorial Hostels have already been constructed in various Regimental Centres. These hostels provide accommodation to wards of war bereaved, disabled and attributable/non attributable peace time casualties to enable them to pursue their studies. KSB provides Rs.600/ p.m., education grant for each child except in respect of non attributable cases where the grant is Rs.300/ p.m,. To see "Location of War Memorial Hostels in States/UTs" click here.
Kendriya Sainik Board
MEDICAL
Entitlement for Medical Treatment from Service Hospitals for ex Service Pensioners and their Families
Ex Service pensioners and their families are entitled to medical treatment from service hospitals under provision of Para 296(O) of RMSAP 1983. The pensioners/widows are required to produce a non employment certificate at the hospital to ensure proper recovery of hospital stoppages vide DGAFMS letter No.1630/ DGAFMS/ DG3A dated 08 Oct 86. This entitlement card has come into effect from 01 Jan 94.
All ex Service pensioners/widows are advised to get the entitlement card made through Zila/Rajya Sainik Boards.
Medical Benefits for ex Servicemen/Widows and Dependents
Through Service Hospitals and Medical Establishments. Ex Servicemen, their families and families of deceased service personnel drawing pension of any kind are entitled to free out patient treatment at Military Hospitals. These personnel can also be provided in patient treatment in such hospitals subject to certain conditions. 24 MI Rooms and 12 Dental Centres have been created from the funds provided by the Service HQs and KSB for providing medical facilities to ex Servicemen pensioners and their dependents. The location of these MI Rooms and Dental Centres are given as under:
MI Rooms Dental Centres
(a) Large Hospitals :- (i) Base Hospital, Delhi (3) Delhi Cantt. (ii) CH, Chandimandir Chandimandir (1)
(iii) MH, Jalandhar Jalandhar (1), (iv) MH, Ambala Ambala (1), (v) 159 GH, Ferozpur, (vi) MH, Amritsar,
(vii) 166 MH, Jammu , (viii) 167 MH, Pathankot, (ix) BH, Lucknow Lucknow (1), (x) MH, Dehradun,
(xi) BH, Barrackpore, (xii) CH (EC), Kolkatta Kolkata (1),(xiii) MH, Jodhpur, (xiv) MH, Agra Cantt,
(xv) CH (SC), Pune Pune (1), (xvi) INHS Asvini, Mumbai Mumbai (1), (xvii) AF Hospital, Bangalore Bangalore (1), (xviii) INHS Sanjeevani, Cochin
(b) Small Hospitals:- (i) MH, Chennai, (ii) MH, Secunderabad, (iii) MH, Jaipur, (iv) MH, Aurangabad,
(v) MH, Dharamshala , (vi) MH, Faizabad, (vii) Trivandrum (1) -
Through State Government Hospitals. Ex-Servicemen can also avail medical treatment from their State Govt. Hospitals as normal State citizens.
Financial Assistance for Medical Treatment :- (a) All Ex Servicemen suffering from serious diseases are given financial assistance for treatment in civil hospitals in case they cannot be treated in Military Hospitals and have not availed similar assistance from other sources. These are :
(i) By pass surgery:- 90% and 75% of the authorised expenditure in case of JCOs/ORs and Officers respectively.
(ii) Angiography-do-, (iii) Kidney/Renal transplant-do-, (iv) Cancer/spastic Paraplegic -do-
(restricted to Rs. 75,000/- per annum), (v) Coronary Artery Surgery/Angioplasty-do-
(vi) Open Heart Surgery/Valve replacement-do-, (vii) Pace Maker implant-do- , (viii) Stroke -do-
(ix) Arterial Surgery -do-, (x) Prostate Surgery-do-, (xi) Total Joint Replacement-do-
xii) Dialysis-do- (restricted to Rs 75,000/- per annum)
(b) Procedure for Application. Financial assistance for medical treatment for serious diseases mentioned in para (a) above to ex Servicemen and their dependents is available from the Kendriya Sainik Board. For this purpose the individual has to apply to the Secretary, KSB, West Block 4, R K Puram, New Delhi 110 066
through his Zila/Rajya Sainik Board with the following documents:
(i) Original cash receipts in support of medicines purchased for the treatment/operation duly countersigned by the hospital authorities.
(ii) Photocopy of Hospital's discharge slip/prescription slip.
(iii) If the case was referred by Military Hospital, a copy of the Military Hospital's letter referring the case to Civil Hospital.
(iv) The details of financial assistance, if any, received.
(v) If re employed, the details of Medical facilities being provided by the employer.
(vi) If also a civil pensioner, the details of the medical facilities being provided by the Civil authorities to their pensioners.
(vii) Photocopy of discharge book/ex Servicemen Identity Card/ and MBS of AGIF Card.
NOTES:- (i) KSB has tied up with different specialised hospitals in the country for direct payment of 90 percent and 75 percent of the stipulated amount on account of treatment of JCOs/ORs & Officers respectively. For the purpose, letter issued by KSB is required to be sent by the ESM to the concerned Hospital.
(ii) Those ex-Servicemen who have been members of AGI/AFGI Medical Benefit Scheme and have already availed financial benefits from them are considered for financial assistance from Kendriya Sainik Board if they go in for subsequent treatment of serious disease and are not eligible for availing AGI/AFGI benefits for any further financial assistance.
TRAVEL:- Rail Travel Concession. Govt. of India have announced free rail travel in I Class/II AC Class to the recipients of PVC, Ashok Chakra, MVC, Kirti Chakra, VrC and Shourya Chakra and the widows of posthumous winners of these Gallantry Awards along with a companion. (Ministry of Railways letter No. E(W)96PS 5 6/22 dated 23 Feb 96.). 75 percent concession in rail fare for travel in II Class is available to war widows including those of IPKF and Kargil casualties. This concession can be availed on production of the I Card issued by the KSB.
Air Travel Concession. Following categories of personnel are eligible to 50 percent concession in fare for air travel in domestic flights of the Indian Airlines:
(a) Recipients of Gallantry Awards of Class I & Class II viz., PVC, Ashok Chakra, MVC, and Kirti Chakra.
(b) Permanently war disabled officers who have been invalidated out of service and the dependent members of their families.
(c) War widows of post Independence era.
CSD CANTEEN FACILITIES :- In accordance with Army Order AO 32/84, Ex Servicemen and their families and ex-Defence personnel with minimum 5 years of service are entitled to CSD (I) Canteen facilities available in units/establishments. Cadets/Recruits boarded out on medical grounds are also entitled to avail CSD facilities. In addition, the following categories of TA personnel are entitled to canteen facilities after their retirement:
(a) Pension holders for continuous embodied service.
(b) Persons with disability attributable to Military Service.
(c) Gallantry Award Winners.
PRIORITY TELEPHONE FACILITIES
The following categories of subscribers are exempted from payment of Registration Charges and installation charges for priority telephones connection under Non-OYT/Special Category and are entitled to 50 percent concession in normal rental charges. However, Gallantry Award winners are entitled to full concession in normal rental charges. (Authority : Ministry of Communications (Deptt. of Telecom Services) letter No. 2-47/92-PHA dated 19 Mar 93, circular NO 7/2000 dated 13 Jun 2000 and 2.47/92 PHA dt 18 Sep 2000):-
(a) Gallantry Award Winners in the three Services (PVC, Ashok Chakra, MVC, KC, VrC & SC).
(b) War widows.
(c) Disabled soldiers.
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDED BY THE KSB THROUGH AFFDF/RMDF/DMACP
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM ARMED FORCES FLAG DAY FUND
Grant for Construction/Repair of Houses. 50 percent of the grant, paid to War Widows, War Disabled by the State Govt.s for construction/repair of houses is reimbursed by the KSB subject to a maximum of Rs.10,000/ (KSB letter No..105 SB(7)/EC/91/KSB/D dated 16 Nov 92).
Grant for Marriage of Daughters of War Widow/War Disabled. Kendriya Sainik Board gives a grant of Rs.8,000/ for the marriage of daughters of a war widow or war disabled ex Servicemen whose disability is more than 50 percent. .
FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM RAKSHA MANTRI’S DISCRETIONARY FUND (RMDF)
The following cases of financial assistance from RMDF are considered by KSB:- (a) Assistance to old infirm Ex‑Servicemen/ widows of ESM - Rs 1000/‑ p.m. for two years. (b) Marriage of Daughter Ex‑Servicemen/ widows in penuryRs 8,000/‑.
(c) Repair of house for ESM/Widows in penury. Rs 10,000/‑
(d) Medical treatment Depending on the nature and gravity of ailmentSubject to a maximum of Rs 15,000/‑
(e) Education of children of ESM/ widows in penury Rs 100/‑ p.m. per child for max of three children up to XII class.
(f) Other cases in respect of ESM/widows in penury. like natural calamities, accidental or where feels that the case deserves sympathetic consideration) No single transaction to exceed Rs 15, 000/‑
Note : The cases of financial assistance from RMDF are submitted by the
concerned Zila/Rajya Sainik Boards to KSB.
DEFENCE MINISTER’S APPELLATE COMMITTEE ON PENSIONS (DMACP)
Cases where family pension claims have been rejected or where disability is neither attributable nor aggravated by military service are given the following types of grants by the DMACP:
(a) Educational allowance Rs 25/ p.m. up to three children of ex Servicemen who were enrolled prior to 01 Jan 85. For personnel enrolled on or after 01 Jan 85, the grant is admissible to only two children. The maximum amount of educational grant is, however, restricted to Rs. 3,000/ .
(b) A lump sum grant up to Rs. 2,000/ to aged parents of the deceased ex Servicemen.
(c) Cost of sewing machine to the wife of deceased/ disabled ex Servicemen.
(d) A one time grant of Rs 1,000/ for daughter's marriage.
Appeals for financial assistance on rejection of pension claims should be made to the Defence Minister's Appellate Committee on pension within six months of rejection of the claim. The appeals are considered by the Committee based on merits of each case and the financial assistance granted which is, subsequently, paid by the Kendriya Sainik Board through the concerned Rajya/Zila Sainik Board.
Ex gratia allowance to Burma Army Pensioners. Burma Army Pensioners who are Indian Nationals and are drawing their pension in India are given ex gratia allowance so as to raise their existing pension and relief drawn thereon to Rs 1275/ per month w.e.f 01 Nov 97. This allowance would be admissible to the families of such pensioners in the event of their death.
Tool Kit for ex Servicemen Technicians. Out of Armed Forces Flag Day Fund, tool kits are provided, amount not exceeding Rs.2,000/ , provided the following conditions are fulfilled:
(a) The ex Serviceman hold the qualification to utilise the tool kit.
(b) The ex Serviceman has the appropriate infrastructure to set up for himself the proposed trade. (KSB letter No.105 SB(7)/EC/91/KSB/D dated 16 Nov 92)
Reimbursement of Interest by way of subsidy on loan taken from Bank for construction of House to war bereaved, war disabled and attributable peace time casualties and their dependents. There is a scheme for re imbursement of interest subsidy on loan taken from Banks by war bereaved, war disabled, attributable peace time casualties and their dependents for construction of houses with the following conditions:
(a) The upper limit is Rs.10,000/ for eligibility of grant of interest subsidy, even though the loan taken may be of a higher amount.
(b) Apart from the Banks, loan taken from reputed organisations in Government/Public Sector Undertakings, LIC. GIC and HUDCO except private organisations are also made eligible for the grant of interest subsidy subject to the condition that the loan given by these organisations are based on genuineness of the requirement and the repaying capacity of the individual.
(c) The rates of the interest subsidy and the period for re payment of loan is as under:
(i) The subsidy will be paid up to a maximum period of five years or the date of final repayment of loan whichever is earlier.
(ii) 50 percent of the interest charges by the Banks or Govt. of Public Sector including LIC, GIC and HUDCO would be reimbursed as interest subsidy.
INSTITUTIONAL WELFARE ASSISTANCE PROVIDED BY KSB
Sainik Rest House Facility:- To facilitate short stay of ex Servicemen during their visit to District HQs in connection with settlement of their pensionary claims, for medical treatment, litigation, etc. a number of Sainik Rest Houses have been established all over the country. At present, there are 243 Sainik Rest Houses in the country. For details of Sainik Rest Houses click here. After Care of ex Servicemen/their dependents for Leprosy/TB etc. in the Cheshire Homes.
Kendriya Sainik Board is providing grants to Cheshire Homes/Raphael Ryder Cheshire International Centre/QMTI so that the ex Servicemen/their dependents inmates are looked after by them. At present the following Cheshire Homes/Centres are being given grants:
(a) Raphael Ryder Cheshire International Centre, Dehradun.
(b) Cheshire Home, Thiruvananthapuram
(c) Cheshire Home, Delhi
(d) Cheshire Home, Lucknow
(e) Cheshire Home, Vellore
(f) Cheshire Home, Bangalore (g) QMTI, Pune
Grant in Aid in respect of Welfare Services undertaken by the Indian Red Cross Society
Annual grant is provided to the Indian Red Cross Society for welfare Services provided by the Society to sick and wounded Servicemen/ex Servicemen in the Armed Forces Hospitals.
Indian Gorkha Ex Servicemen Welfare Organisation
Kendriya Sainik Board provides grants to Indian Gorkha Ex Servicemen Welfare Association, Dehradun to look after the welfare of Indian Gorkha Ex Servicemen and their families.
Rehabilitation Centres/Training cum Production Centres for Widows of Defence Personnel
There are 18 Rehabilitation Centres/Training Centres/ Training cum Production Centres/Vocational Centres. These Centres provide Training Courses in Tailoring, Knitting, Stitching, Typing, Sewing, Stenography, Computer Programming, etc. For details of the location of Rehabilitation Centers click here.
Hostels for War Widows/Widows of Defence Personnel
Kendriya Sainik Board shares expenditure on 50 percent basis of the cost of the construction and thereafter the maintenance of Widows Hostels and Old Age Homes. These Hostels/Homes are at Bihar (Albert Eeka Memorial Complex, Patna), J&K (Jammu), Maharashtra (Naval War Memorial Hostel at Mumbai for Naval War Widows), Madhya Pradesh (Mahar Regimental Centre, Saugor and J&K Rifles Regimental Centre, Jabalpur), Meghalaya (Assam Regimental Centre, Shillong), Uttar Pradesh (Garhwal Rifles Regimental Centre, Lansdowne, Kumaon Regimental Centre, Ranikhet, Rajput Regimental Centre, Fatehgarh and AMC Centre & School, Lucknow), Delhi (War Widow Home Capacity for 30 inmates located at 18/1, Aruna Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi 110057) and Tamil Nadu (War Widows Home, Chennai 600 004).
REHABILITATION OF DISABLED SOLDIERS
Queen Mary’s Technical Institute, Pune
The Queen Mary's Technical Institute (QMTI), Range Hills, Pune, a private Charitable Institution conducts ITI recognised vocational trades training courses for disabled Servicemen, ex Servicemen and their dependents salient of which are as follows :
Course Duration Education
(a) FitterTwo yearsSSC Pass
(b) Electriciandodo
(c) Mechanic Radio & TVdodo
(d) Wiremando do
(e) Mechanic, Diesel One yearSSC Fail
(f) Steno (English) doSSC Pass (50% marks in English)
(g) Cutting & Tailoringdo VIII Pass
The session commences on 01 Aug every year and terminates on 31 Jul next year.. Admissions are completed by 15 Jul for the next session.
Application for admission are to be routed as under:
(a) Disabled ex Servicemen. Through respective Zila Sainik Welfare Officers and Secretary, Rajya Sainik Boards.
(b) Disabled Servicemen. Through Units, Record Offices, Army HQ (AG's Branch).
(c) Dependents. Directly to Supdt.,QMTI.
Fees.
(a) Disabled ex Servicemen. Fees and Boarding expenditure is payable by respective Rajya Sainik Boards.
(b) Disabled Servicemen. By respective parent Units.
(c) Dependents. By individuals.
Hostel facilities are provided for disabled ex Servicemen within the QMTI premises. Disabled soldiers are attached to MH, Kirkee.
Training. The syllabus followed is as per norms laid down by the National Council for Training in Vocational Trades and the successful trainees receive ITI certificates and stand a good chance for employment all over the country. Also, they can obtain National Trade Certificates after undergoing Apprenticeship training and examinations.
Placement. Training in QMTI helps a disabled soldier to acquire the all important will to live independently. Disabled ex Servicemen can easily find jobs after obtaining vocational training. Those who wish to start their own ventures can now do so better with technical qualifications and knowledge.
Paraplegic Rehabilitation Centres (PRC) at Kirkee and Mohali
In addition to QMTI, Paraplegic Rehabilitation Centres at Kirkee and Mohali with a capacity of 80 and 30 beds respectively are being run for rehabilitation of Paraplegic and Tetraplegic ex Servicemen. Financial assistance is also provided by the respective States to ex Servicemen during the period of training. The KSB provides a lump sum of annual grant to the PRCs Kirkee and Mohali for upkeep of the establishment in addition to grant per inmate actually housed in the Centres.
St Dunstan's After Care Organisation
St Dunstan's Organisation was formed to provide psychological support to over come the devastating shock of blindness as well as to impart vocational training to the blinded ex Servicemen, to enable them to find a place back in the society and to set them up in their homes and also after care services.. The administration is looked after by the After care Organisation headed by an After Care Officer under the overall control of the Sub Committee at Dehradun. Sub Area Commander, Dehradun is its Chairman.
Kendriya Sainik Board provides annual grant to After Care Organisation at Dehradun to meet the expenditure on the welfare of blinded ex Servicemen in the country. After Care Officer is responsible for operating the organisation and also maintaining a link with National Institute for the Visually Handicapped (NIVH) for training of blind ex Servicemen as well as new cases sponsored by MH Dehradun. St Dunstan's
After Care Organisation is located at Rajpur Road, PO NCB, Dehradun 248 001.
The items required by the disabled and other categories of physically handicapped are permitted to be imported duty free by any person. Also, any drugs, medicines or equipment, certified to be a life saving drug/medicines, equipment etc., by the DGHS/DDGHS/ ADGHS can also be imported duty free.
Duty Free Import of Therapeutic Gadgets for Paraplegic ex Servicemen Patients
Under Custom Notification No.208/81 Cus dated 22 Sep 81, items required by the disabled and other categories of physically handicapped are permitted to be imported duty free by any person. A perusal of the notification shows that it specifically covers the following items:
"Instruments and implants including self curing acrylic Bone Cement for replacement and bonding of hips, knee and other joints for severely crippled and handicapped”.
The following items required by spinal patients and other categories of physically handicapped people are covered :
(a) Wheel & other chairs:
(i) Folding wheel chairs with detachable arms and foot rests.
(ii) Special light wheel chairs for easy handling.
(iii) Motorised wheel chairs.
(iv) Special purpose chairs for stairs climbing for tetraplegic and paraplegic workers.
(b) Aids for disabled namely, folding walking frames.
(c) Aids to extend reach to pick up small items (with small magnet pick up).
(d) Specialised fixtures for orthopaedic and spastic tetraplegic for manoeuvring and providing dexterity to fingers and wrist.
(e) Turning beds for prevention of pressure sores.
(f) Emulsion cushions for tetraplegic and working paraplegics to avoid pressure sores.
Further, under the same notification any other drug, medicine or equipment which is certified by the DGHS/DDGHS/ADGHS to be a life saving drug, medicine, equipment, etc., can also be imported duty free by any person.
Similarly, under notification No.63/88 Cus and 64/88 Cus dated 01 Jan 88, Government hospitals and certain categories of charitable hospitals are permitted to import their requirements duty free
LT. CDR. BENIWAL, Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 6:15 PM, CORRECTS - Just two things as below:-
1. First - Non-Pensioner ESM get medical treatment in MHs vide 296(O) as amended on 26.9.96, pensioner ESM get treatment by ECHS.
2. Second - Only Non-Pensioner ESM get financial help from KSB after ECHS became effective.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
ABSOLUTE PARITY IN PENSION : MAJ GEN RN RADHAKRISHNAN (RETD)
( Based on the earlier papers date 10th and 14th May 2009)
Prologue
Soldering is unique. It is not just a profession. It is a service rendered due to an inherent inspiration to perform a noble act. A soldier is motivated and trained to ‘kill and get killed’. Both these acts are deplored and extremely difficult to perform. The process of evolution has built in the mother the protective instinct, more biological than emotional. So has the evolution process built in a soldier the protective instinct, far nobler than that of the mother for her child. This instinct is groomed by the deep rooted courage of conviction to protect the weak from the evil-strong. ‘Vya’sa’’ says in the ‘Bhagavat Gita’’:
As and when the evil raises its head and the good starts declining, I take birth in the human form; to protect the innocent by destroying the evil and to restore the rule of just law”. Such a human is termed as ‘avta’r’.
Whenever I think of a soldier, the role he plays and the sacrifices he makes in the bargain my mind wonders, if the soldier is an avta’r, and if not, what is he.
Synopsis
Prelude
“Soldiering is not just a profession. It has been looked upon from time immemorial as the most revered service inspired by a noble mental frame on the part of a citizen who cares for the Nation’s sovereignty. A soldier may, no doubt, be trained to develop the necessary skills in warfare. But, a soldier is born and not made. History bears witness to the adoration bestowed upon a soldier by the Rulers and the Citizens of all the different nations over all the ages. Hence such a soldier has to be preferentially treated. Compensation to a soldier is to be considered as homage and not pay. Thus, a soldier has to be given the preferred status of a better citizen and a more honorable government employee.”
1. Definition of OROP "One Rank One Pension" (OROP) was the terminology, presumably, coined by Sri KP Singh Deo, while reviewing the pension policy for the Armed Forces personnel, way back in 1985. OROP existed prior to 1970. A soldier (the word is used to mean all ranks in all the wings of the Armed Forces), in those distant days, was granted pension based only on the rank he held when he retired, provided that he was eligible for pension. More length of service put in by him did not earn him more of pension. Sri Singh Deo suggested, again presumably, that OROP should mean ‘same rank same total length of service same pension’. Since then OROP meant just that, with a different definition to include the service element unlike the pre 1970 vintage. The definition is:
“No two soldiers holding the same rank and same total length of service to their credit shall draw different pensions.”
2. The definition implies that as and when the pay of serving soldiers is revised the effect of such revision on the pension per force is applicable to the existing pensioners at the time of pay revision. In other words the pay of the ex-servicemen (ESM) also is revised, of course notionally, for the purpose of revising the pension and the pension accordingly revised. Thus parity between two soldiers is absolutely established (APIP). The spirit of OROP / APIP is the recognition of the special status of a soldier and not the increase in pension.
3. Fixing the Pay in the Revised Scale. Bound by the mandate that ‘pensioners of the same rank with same total length of service must draw the same pension’, the pension has to be related to the prevalent revised pay. Therefore, the fixing of pay, in the revised scale of pay (RSP), has to be judiciously done.
4. Initial Fixation of pay. It is absolutely necessary, at this juncture, to accept the special status of a soldier due to his and his family’s sacrifices and, the hardships he has to undergo while serving and on forced early retirement. Having accepted the preferred status of the soldier, the initial fixation of pay for a soldier must, more appropriately and judiciously, be done as described below:
First step – Take the bottom of the equivalent RSP as basis for fixing pay.
Second step – Build up his pay granting annual increments, equal to the number of increments he had drawn in the existing scale of pay (ESP) for each year of his service, taking into account the financial upgrade due to the concept of assured Career Progression (ACP) / time scale promotion.
Third step – Thus, arrive at the correct pay commensurate to the total number of years of service to the soldier’s credit.
This may sound complicated. But for an accountant, it is a simple matter of drawing two tables one for the commissioned officers and one for the others, in a time frame of a few hours. I have already drawn these tables and attached as Appendix ‘A’.
5. On the contrary, the initial pay fixation as on 01-01-2008 in terms of SAI 1&2/S/2008) has been complicated due to the application of arbitrary formulae without any rationale. In the bargain, the SAI has led to bunching up two levels in the ESP by granting one increment in the RSP, for most of the soldiers in the various ranks. In other words, one who earned more number of increments and hence higher pay is now drawing the same pay as that of a soldier one year junior to him. As expected, the whole serving soldiers’ community has mutely accepted this injustice.
6. Revision of Pension To make things worse, the revision of pension was devised ignoring the rationale mentioned above adopting more complicated and arbitrary formulae independent of the revised pay to which the ESM is rightly eligible, notionally of course. Thus anomaly rose in violation of ‘OROP’ or ‘APIP’. See Appendix ‘B’ for illustration.
7. The Correct Method. If the notional pay for an ESM is correctly fixed as described in para 4 above, the correct pension is easily and in a fair manner calculated for the ESM. As the notional pay in the revised scale, commensurate to his rank and the total length of service is known, his correct pension is easily and in a fair manner calculated for the ESM. The pension as shown in the tables at Appendix ‘A’ is worked out as a proportion of the total of the pay so determined, the Grade pay, the Military Service Pay and Group pay where applicable. (70% (PB1) in the case of ranks from sepoy to Havildar, 60% (PB2) for JCOs, 55% (PB3) for Commissioned Officers up to the rank of major and 50% (PB4) in others’ case).
8. Conclusion OROP or APIP can be assured, only by opting for the fair and just method as described in para 7. While addressing the issue of OROP, it is essential to consider the possibility of
Maximum Pension. A soldier is entitled for a maximum pension at the maximum of the pay band on retirement, having completed the terms of engagement and the increased qualifying service.
Full Pension. The pay component for the soldier on retirement having completed the minimum qualifying service the pay fixed in the revised scale according to the correct fitment formula.
Part Pension. The rest shall be entitled for a pension as a proportion of the full pension commensurate with the actual service put in, provided that they have completed at least five years of active service.
The rate of pension is 50% in PB4, 55% in PB2, 60% in PB3 and 70% for PB1, keeping in view of denial of continuation of employment till the normal age of superannuation a right vested on all government employee but the Soldier.
Assured Career till the age of Superannuation is the only means by which the unfortunate state of dependence on various welfare measures, instituted by the Government, reducing the status of the Soldier from a state of Preference to a pitiable state of neglect.
treating the retired soldiers other than the Commissioned officer as of one group namely X Group, so that an ESM of the same rank with same length of service gains equality in the retired life by earning same pension,
Granting any other awards and special components of the pension (like the disability pension) as a proportion or a multiple of the basic pension.
The Paper
Aim
1. This paper aims at presenting the facts that entitle an Ex-Serviceman with a pension he deserves.
Prelude
2. The pension of a soldier, for unknown reasons, has been given unduly a negative treatment in the recent past. During pre 1970, a soldier on retirement and on completion of qualifying service, was entitled with a pension - a pension that compensated him
For the financial difficulties created by the Government by retiring him from the Government service prematurely. (The financial difficulties arose out of loss of pay, allowances and perks due to truncated service. The financial difficulties multiplied because the government no longer contributed towards his provident fund. Further, the addition to his gratuity got truncated.)
For his dedicated service in the protection of the sovereignty of the nation during his prime youth sacrificing the comfortable family life and, in turn, the family sacrificing the emotional, rational and physical support of the man of the house.
For his service liability calling for the willingness to sacrifice his life, which would be the target, whenever he would have to face the enemy, either when war is declared or in covert insurgency operations of the enemy of different kind.
3. Rank Based Pension. The word ‘soldier’ is used in this paper to mean all non-commissioned, junior commissioned and commissioned officers of the three wings of the Armed Forces. At places the phrase Service Person / Personnel also have been used in this paper. Pre 1970, the pension of Soldiers has been rank based with no consideration for the length of service. Each rank was linked with one pension, once a soldier has served the minimum number of years to enable him to earn his pension of the rank, irrespective if he chooses to retire prematurely or to serve till the completion of the terms of engagement (TOE). The pension was the same for any soldier of a particular rank. The British Government, who conceived the notion of the pension, did not recognize the need to pay more to a soldier as pension, for the service rendered by him beyond the qualifying service. The reason is obvious. The British Government did not want him to continue beyond his prime, hence more or less forced him to resign immediately on completion of the qualifying service.
4. Subsequently, the wisdom of the democratic government led to the streamlining of the pension of the Soldiers on the lines of Civil Servants. On independence, our Nation was guided by the democratic principles. The Government aspired to become an ideal employer. The soldier was given pension commensurate with his rank and the years of service rendered. Thus a soldier can serve longer than the qualifying service and earn more pension than the entitlement on completion of the qualifying service alone. Sadly, the need to assure continued employment and career progression to the Soldier in parity with the Civil Servant was not given any cursory thought, leaving alone deliberate planning. Many innovative methods were introduced to compensate the soldier for the various sacrifices he believed to have made in the interest of the Nation, time to time, but grudgingly and inadequately.
Image of a Soldier
5. The majority of the people in the present days, especially the personnel in the business of the Governance of the country, do not have a realistic image of a soldier. A soldier is generally visualized as a person who has chosen to serve merely in the capacity of a government servant. The fact, that the terms of the Service Conditions specified by the Government are stringent only for him and not any other citizen, is not known to most. This, one must remember, is just an image and, not his true form. One must keep in focus the true form of the soldier, while perusing this paper, if he is truly interested in giving a fair deal to the soldier, in compensation to his performance in the capacity of a soldier.
First and foremost, a soldier is as much a citizen as any other citizen of the Nation. Hence he deserves not to be denied any right that is available to any citizen.
Second, he is a better citizen. The culture he develops while in the service inculcates in him the virtues that are considered honorable. Many surveys have shown so. Loyalty, integrity, discipline, dedication to the cause and sacrifice in the interest of the cause are just a few of such virtues.
Third, he not only is willing to sacrifice his life when war breaks out but also has willingly sacrificed his rights, so that the Government can bind him almost to the level of bonded labor, under the guise of Service Conditions. He is denied
his right to freedom of speech
his right to voluntarily retire from service without government’s permission,
his right to proceed even on legitimate leave at his convenience and above all
his right to form an association that will give him the power of collective bargaining with his employer.
Fourth, the service conditions for a soldier are of the severest kind. No other occupation or service can ever be compared while discussing the stress to which these service conditions subject the soldier.
The frequent transfers to various stations and very short tenures in a station disrupt the family life;
Such transfers cause severe emotional sense of insecurity in the minds of the family members especially the children.
Admission to the schools of repute, once considered by the school as a bounden duty towards the Service Personnel, is denied nowadays.
‘Rolling stone gathers no mass’ is a saying that aptly describes the plight of soldier who can never build a home for himself in any particular place of choice.
The need to rotate the soldier through soft and hard peace station and similarly hard and soft field stations cause separation from the family, to very great extent. The lack of parental guidance to the children and moral and physical support of the man of the house have wrecked quite a few families.
Fifth, many tend to take the willingness to sacrifice the life on the part of the soldier as a matter of ‘professional hazard’. How strange! Let us take a look at the figures of casualty suffered by the Armed forces to ensure the sovereignty of the Nation over past sixty glorious years of Indian Democracy. The figures were downloaded from the Web.
War Killed Wounded
Indo-Pakistani War of 1948 1,104 3,152
Sino-Indian War 1962 3,128 1,697
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 3,264 8,623
Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 3,843 9,851
Kargil War: May-July 1999 527 1,363
Total Casualties 11,866 24,686
Should this be considered as professional hazard or sacrifice of the highest order that can never be compensated by any means by any Nation?
Sixth, the living conditions of the soldier and his family of any rank is pathetic notwithstanding the provisions that exist to cater for comforts to the decent extent. Ninety percent of a soldier’s life in actual service is spent in substandard living conditions.
6. This is the true form of a soldier in whatever rank and in whatever fighting arm, he serves. This true form must be borne in mind, while serving and on retirement, when dealing with his
Status
Perks and privileges
Pay and pension
Soldiering is not just a profession. It has been looked upon as the most revered service inspired by the noble mental frame that cares for the Nations sovereignty. A soldier may, no doubt, be trained to develop the necessary skills in warfare. But, a soldier is born and not made. History bears witness to the adoration bestowed upon a soldier from time immemorial by the Rulers and the citizens of any nation. Should a soldier not be given the preferred status of a better citizen and a more honored government employee? Of course! Such a soldier has to be preferentially treated. Compensation to a soldier is to be considered as payment of homage and not pay. In this context, the words of Sanding Parliamentary Committee for the Defence, found in its report for the year 2003, are worth recalling.
“The nation must repay its debt to those defenders of the motherland with gratitude and humility. We should, instead of, looking for precedents in this regard, create precedents for the others to emulate. Any amount paid in this regard would be small token of our gratitude to them.”
Pay
7. Any Government, in a Nation guided by the principles of democracy, is expected to be an ‘ideal employer’; a role model to be emulated by the private sector, while compensating the employee for the services he renders. The ideal employer does not exploit the employee in terms of ‘supply and demand’, but takes care of him in terms of decent compensation that will not only meet his personal needs but also enable him to meet his social obligation towards his family while living, and thereafter, as well. The family includes the dependents, also. Therefore, the notion of pension is inherent in the Service Conditions of any Government employee. He is provided with adequate financial support even after his terms of engagement. The concern on the part of the ideal employer for the employees goes further. The family also is adequately provided with financial support on the demise of the Government employee during or after the service. Laudable indeed!
Pension
8. Pension thus, in terms of the honorable sentiments the ideal employer has for his employee, has been defined, in an unambiguous terms, with the best of the judicial wisdom of the most revered judges, and accepted by one and all, as ‘deferred payment of wages for the past services rendered’. The pension policy determines only the rule that is applicable to work out the magnitude of the deferred wages and other related issues, in relation to the wages the employee drew while serving.
9. Thus pension is linked with the pay through a rule and not through any arbitrary provision. Thus logic dictates that when pay is revised the pension stands revised per force within the frame of the Pension Rules, unless the Pension Rule itself is modified. And when the pension rule is modified, the modification is applicable to the existing pensioners as well, if found advantageous.
Pay Revision
10. It is known justifiably that the pay needs to be revised periodically. The reasons are:
First, the necessity to regularize the compensation given along with the pay keeping in view the eroded value of the pay caused by the inflationary trend of a developing nation, inhibiting the purchase power
Second, to improve upon the remunerations of the Government employees to a decent level in view of the increased wealth of the nation.
It has to be borne in mind that both the conditions referred to above are relevant to pensioners as well. When the wealth of a nation goes up, the role of the Government employees in the increase of the wealth cannot be just forgotten. Above all, who else, but a soldier, ensures that the Sovereignty of the Nation is not threatened? Can one ever question the role played by the Soldier in ensuring security of the Nation from internal and external threats, thus ensuring the required peaceful ambience for progress to continue in a country? If, over the decade from 1996 to 2006 the national wealth has shot up to the extent that the serving soldiers’ pay could be increased manifolds, almost three and a half times, could one ignore the role played by those who served and retired during that decade and for that matter earlier to that decade, as a contributor to that economic growth? Can one ignore the fact that they, the soldiers served in far more difficult circumstances and environmental conditions to help the Nation increase its wealth?
11. The words of SC judgment are likely to throw much better light on the relationship between the pay, pension and the revision. The words are;
“It must be remembered that pension is relatable to qualifying service. ... It is undoubtedly a condition of service but not an incentive to attract new entrants only; it would be prospective at such distance of thirty-five years back. Pension is thus not an incentive but a reward for past service. ... Revised pay-scales are introduced from a certain date. All existing employees are brought on to the revised scales by adopting a theory of fitments and increments for past service. In other words, benefit of revised scale is not limited to those who enter service subsequent to the date fixed for introducing revised scales but the benefit is extended to all those in service prior to that date. This is just and fair. Now pension, as we view it, is some kind of retirement wages for past service. Can it be denied to those who retired earlier while the revised retirement benefits being available to future retirees only?” (Para 46 - Judgment in the Case of Nakara Vs UOI)
12. Fortunately, a few, that too from the Civil Servants, went to the Court challenging the rationale of arbitrarily fixing a date of implementation for revised pensions and of similar related matters. And luck would have it for the Soldiers, a few of the Judgments of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court and other Courts made the concept of Pension so clear that an awakening has taken place among the Existing Service Pensioners (ESP) regarding their entitled pensions. Let us see extracts from two of the Judgments.
Case 1. Apt it is to quote from the Supreme Court judgment in the case of D. S. Nakara And Others Vs Union Of India, as a prelude and as the foremost of the two brilliant understandings of the issue of the pension. The words of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, spoken way back amount, amazingly to prophesy the present case.
On arbitrariness of cut off date for implementation “The date of retirement is irrelevant. … Date is merely to avoid payment of arrears which may impose a heavy burden. … The Central Government cannot pick out a date from a hat, and that is what it seems to have done in this case. … But the principle is that when a certain date or eligibility criteria is selected with a reference to legislative or executive measures which has the perni 11. The words of SC judgment are likely to throw much better light on the relationship between the pay, pension and the revision. The words are;
“It must be remembered that pension is relatable to qualifying service. ... It is undoubtedly a condition of service but not an incentive to attract new entrants only; it would be prospective at such distance of thirty-five years back. Pension is thus not an incentive but a reward for past service. ... Revised pay-scales are introduced from a certain date. All existing employees are brought on to the revised scales by adopting a theory of fitments and increments for past service. In other words, benefit of revised scale is not limited to those who enter service subsequent to the date fixed for introducing revised scales but the benefit is extended to all those in service prior to that date. This is just and fair. Now pension, as we view it, is some kind of retirement wages for past service. Can it be denied to those who retired earlier while the revised retirement benefits being available to future retirees only?” (Para 46 - Judgment in the Case of Nakara Vs UOI)
12. Fortunately, a few, that too from the Civil Servants, went to the Court challenging the rationale of arbitrarily fixing a date of implementation for revised pensions and of similar related matters. And luck would have it for the Soldiers, a few of the Judgments of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court and other Courts made the concept of Pension so clear that an awakening has taken place among the Existing Service Pensioners (ESP) regarding their entitled pensions. Let us see extracts from two of the Judgments.
Case 1. Apt it is to quote from the Supreme Court judgment in the case of D. S. Nakara And Others Vs Union Of India, as a prelude and as the foremost of the two brilliant understandings of the issue of the pension. The words of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, spoken way back amount, amazingly to prophesy the present case.
On arbitrariness of cut off date for implementation “The date of retirement is irrelevant. … Date is merely to avoid payment of arrears which may impose a heavy burden. … The Central Government cannot pick out a date from a hat, and that is what it seems to have done in this case. … But the principle is that when a certain date or eligibility criteria is selected with a reference to legislative or executive measures which has the pernicious tendency of dividing an otherwise homogeneous class and the choice of beneficiaries of the legislative /executive action becomes selective, the division or classification made by choice of date or eligibility criteria must have some relation to the objects sought to be achieved.
On application of logic in revision in preference to legislature “And apart from the first test that the division must be referable to some rational principles, if the choice of the date or classification is wholly unrelated to the objects sought to be achieved, it cannot be upheld on the spacious plea that that was the choice of the legislature.”
On the purpose of pension “In view of the present economic conditions in India and constant rise in the cost of living due to inflation, it is all the more important even from purely humanitarian considerations if not from the stand point of fairness and justice, to protect the actual value of their meager pension to enable the pensioners to live in their declining years with dignity and in reasonable comfort’. …Noncontributory pension under 1972 rule is a State obligation.”
The verdict “The liberalized pension scheme becomes operative to all pensioners governed by 1972 Rules irrespective of the date of retirement. It is declared that all pensioners governed by the 1972 Rules and Army Pension Regulations shall be entitled to pension as computed under the liberalized pension scheme from the specified date, irrespective of the date of retirement.”
Case 2. Let us see the extract of the second judgment by the Honorable Judges of the Supreme Court, on the issue of revision of pension. I quote Para 19 and Para 31 from Judgment dated 09-09-2008 by Judges Altamas Kabir and Markandey Katju. The judgment has a direct bearing in our present case.
“19. On behalf of the respondents reliance was also placed on two letters addressed by the Chairman, Chief of Staff Committee, dated 8.2.2006 and 21.2.2006, along with the recommendation made by the Air Chief Marshal on 17.2.2006, stating that it was necessary to correct the injustice and discrimination which had been aimed at denying those officers who had retired prior to 1.1.1996, the benefits of the pension enjoyed by officers who retired after the said date.”
“31. We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal and modify the order of the High Court by directing that the pay of all pensioners in the rank of Major General and its equivalent rank in the two other Wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the rate given to similar officers of the same rank after the revision of pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996, and, thereafter, to compute their pension benefits on such basis with prospective effect from the date of filing of the writ petition and to pay them the difference within three months from date with interest at 10% per annum.”
13. Thus, it is crystal clear from these judgments that there cannot be any difference between the pension of any service person of any particular rank who retired prior to 1st Jan 2006 and the other similarly placed service person retiring afterwards, provided that they retired in the same rank and with the same qualifying service. Yet it is baffling that, in our country, lauded world over for its democratic system of governance based on the prevailing high ethics passed on from time immemorial, the words of wisdom of the Supreme Court, which is empowered with the authority to pass judgment over even the constitutional issues, have been ignored.
The Expectations
14. Due to the recent awakening in the ESP the demand ‘One Rank One Pension’ under the popular abbreviation ‘OROP’ has been widely and vociferously raised. As I understand from Maj Gen Surjit Singh “a high powered committee headed by Mr. K.P. Singh Deo coined the term OROP”, way back in 1985. The reason for the expectation of the ESP is better put in the words of Colonel SS Rajan.
“Military Service is UNIQUE, with a highly demanding 24 by 7 work culture under hostile environments; and secondly, Military Service is the only Service wherein a Jawan is bundled out at the young age of 35, when he has a young wife, two small children, his parents & unmarried sisters to be taken care of; without the STATE bothering to give him an alternative employment. It is absolutely callous. A young man who joins service in civil as a LDC or a Police constable serves comfortably till the age of 60 years and retires in a much higher position with a good amount as pension. Not so in the case of a Jawan. 85% of the Sepoys retire as Sepoys only after 15 years service. Most civilians who retire at 60, would live to see only one Pay Commission after retirement, considering their longevity to be 70-75 years; but a Sepoy would live to see nothing less than four Pay Commissions after retirement. It is the older pensioners of the Army, Navy & Air Force who are the worst sufferers. It is not only the serving soldier that the STATE is duty bound to take care of; but also the Veterans who have sacrificed their youth in service of the Nation with no other thought but, DUTY, HONOUR and COUNTRY.”
15. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence has been asking the Govt. time & again to implement 'ONE RANK, ONE PENSION'. Para 99 of the Report of Standing Committee on Defence (2003) clearly states:
"The Committee has been recommending grant of `One Rank One Pension' to the armed forces personnel time and again. The Committee observes that successive Governments and Pay Commissions have made improvements in the pension structure keeping in view the cost of living index. This has accentuated the disparity of pension benefits between pensioners of the same rank. The older pensioners who have become infirm in ability and capability and burdened with a larger social obligation receive pension calculated at the rate of pay at the time of their retirement in 1950s or 1960s or 1970s, which is quite paltry and the Dearness Relief quite inconsequential in today's context of inflation and shrinking purchasing value of money. The nation must repay its debt to those defenders of the motherland with gratitude and humility. We should, instead of, looking for precedents in this regard, create precedents for the others to emulate. Any amount paid in this regard would be small token of our gratitude to them. The Committee, therefore, once again reiterates their earlier recommendation for providing `One Rank One Pension' to the armed forces personnel".
Quantum of Pension
16. The pension in terms of the implementation provisions of the 6CPCR stands the same in the sense that 50% of the emolument drawn at the time of the retirement with the stipulations that
The emolument includes the last pay drawn plus Grade Pay and Military Service Pay that are due to the retiree.
The retiree must have completed a qualifying service of not less than 20 years. (Check this provision for personnel other than commissioned officers)
However, the officials, while implementing this provision, have resorted to arbitrarily divide the homogeneous single class of pensioners into two different classes, one class comprising those who retired prior to 1st Jan 2006 (referred as ESP hereafter) and the other class comprising those retired thereafter. The full benefit of pension consequent to the revision thus stands extended to the retirees of post 1st Jan 2006. Therefore, a service person retiring after 1st Jan 2006 stands to be benefited with much better a pension based on the revised pay.
17. In the case of the pensioners who retired prior to 1st Jan 2006, these provisions are made applicable in a very complicated manner, twisting the principles that govern the award of pension. The net result is that the pension of the ESP of a particular rank is far less than the pension of the future pensioner of the same rank and of the same length of service. They are denied the benefit of the revision of the pay. It is maintained that their pension remains related to the pay, they were entitled to at the time of retirement or as a result of modified parity, prior to 1st Jan 2006.
The benefit of the grade pay and MSP is permissible to all ranks except that the MSP is not applicable to ranks of Major and Lieutenant Generals.
However, the pay in the case of the ESP, for the purpose of revision of pension, stands modified, arbitrarily, with out taking cognizance of the judgments of the Supreme Courts referred above, as the minimum of the applicable pay band which governs the pay of more than one grade of the service personnel.
It is a misinterpretation that the same fitment formula that is adopted for the fitment of serving personnel is also made applicable to the ESP. It is not the fitment formula alone but also the revised scale of pay that has to be together adopted for the ESP as well.
18. Thus, it is obvious that, the pension policy made applicable to the Armed Forces Service Personnel is in violation of the principles, that are judiciously applicable, and hence require to be suitably corrected keeping in focus the Supreme Court Judgments.
Fitment of Pay.
19. The obvious and quite apparent choice is to notionally fix the pay of the ESP in the same manner as done for the serving personnel. See Para 12 Case 2 Sub-Para numbered as 31 above. Let us not forget to replace the phrase ‘Major General’ with the phrase ‘all service personnel’ and the date ’01-01-1996’ with the date ’01-01-2006’. That is what is conveyed by the SC judgments. This calls for some study of the fitment stipulated in SAI 1&2/S/2008.
20. It is strange that the fitment is seen to be on point to point basis for all ranks other than Colonel, Brigadier and Lieutenant General. In these ranks bunching up of personnel who have drawn two or more increments in the existing scale of pay by permitting only one increment in the revised scale for every two increments. Why this disparity only for these three ranks, is a mystery that eludes my comprehension. Of course, I am no finance wizard.
21. Arbitrary Fitment of Pay. The fitment of pay for those who are in service as on 01 Jan 2006 is done by multiplying the pay in the existing scale plus the rank p[ay with a factor of 1.86 rounded to the next higher ten. In cases of some of the ranks, it fits in well in the pay band without ay modification. In the cases of Colonel to Major General (perhaps for the Lieutenant Colonel as well), such a fitment does not amount to the minimum pay admissible for them in the Pay Band 4. Therefore, the pay is stepped up to that minimum of the applicable PB4. As this resulted in bunching up, additional increments at the rate of one increment for every two increment drawn in the existing scale was permitted. Thus we find that person of the same rank differing in their service by one year draw the same pay, which is in violation of the norms laid for granting increment. Such arbitrary fitment has adverse effect on the pension in violation of the principle of parity.
Violation of the Principle of Parity
22. If the fitment is notionally done for the ESP, strictly in accordance to the point to point fitment principle, the directions of the SC judgment of 09 Sep 2008 in the case of the Major Generals, stands fulfilled to some extent. But, it still does not meet the spirit of the SC Judgments that spell out Absolute Parity in Pension, in its entirety. No two service persons that hold the same rank and the same length of the service to their credit can draw different pensions because of the difference in their date of retirement. This is the spirit of the judgment.
23. But, the spirit is violated in its application by the Government. We find that all ESP, who are qualified with length of service that entitles them for full pension, draw lesser pension than similarly placed personnel retiring after 01 Jan 2006. Even these later retirees in spite of retiring in the same rank with same qualifying service stand to draw different pensions depending on the date of retirement. Those who earn more increments as per the new rate and approach the maximum of the Pay Band obviously stand to gain higher pension. Thus we have a situation where there is more than one class within an otherwise homogeneous class, contrary to what the Honorable Judges of the Constitution Bench ruled.
The Solution lies in Absolute Parity
24. If we believe in the wisdom of the Supreme Court, in the noble qualities of a Soldier and in the spirit of an ideal employer, there is but just one way that will lead us to the solution. Aiming at absolute parity in pension is that way. With the acceptance of twenty years of qualifying service as the minimum for earning full pension and the principle of ACP, it can be seen that all soldiers earn their pension at the top of the corresponding pay band, provided they serve till the completion of the terms of engagement. All directly Commissioned Officers will be placed in PB4 by the time they retire and will reach the top of PB4 much before they are due to retire. Thus, the pension of all directly commissioned officers shall be fifty percent of the total 67000 plus corresponding Grade Pay and MSP at 6000. The difference in the pensions of the directly commissioned officers amounts to just half of the difference in the corresponding grade pays.
25. Reference to the table below shall reveal the fact in concrete terms. Point to note while reading the table is that unless notional admission of MSP at the top of the Pay band also done an anomaly in pay and pension of the Major and Lieutenant Generals will occur. For detailed figures refer to the Table at Appendix A.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Rank QYS Pay GP MSP Total Pension
Colonel 31 yrs 67000 8700 6000 81700 40850
Brigadier 31 yrs 67000 8900 6000 81900 40950
Maj Gen 31 yrs 67000 10000 6000 83000 41500
Lt Gen 31 yrs 67000 12000 6000 85000 42500
NOTE. As the Army Commanders and equivalent officers are having a fixed pay of 80000 only, their pension gets fixed at 40000. Thus an anomaly occurs. It is but logical that they also are given the benefit of MSP, fixing their pay at 86000 and pension at 43000
26. In a similar manner we have the table for the Personnel Other than Commissioned Officers, as shown below: (The figures need to be authenticated. I have prepared this table from some info I got through the various emails. I find downloading appropriate Government Orders rather a cumbersome affair, strangely.) Applying the principle of ACP, it is reasonable to conclude that a Sepoy is bound to retire as a Havildar and hence the maximum pension for the Sepoy and Naik is likely to be the same as that of the Havildar.
Rank QYS Pay GP MSP Total Pension
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
@50% @70%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Havildar 24 yrs 20200 2800 2000 25000 12500 17500
Nb Sub 26 yrs 34800 4200 2000 41000 20500 28700
Subedar 28 yrs 34800 4600 2000 41400 20700 28980
Sub Major 30 yrs 34800 4800 2000 41600 20800 29120
NOTE. In the case of the Personnel other than the Commissioned officers we may explore the desirability and implications of fixing pension at 70 % instead of the 50 %.
27. Question may arise regarding the basis for awarding pension at the top of the pay band. This aspect must be analyzed in the backdrop of the concept of Golden handshake used in the nationalized banks as well as other private corporate houses and public sector undertakings, when they wanted to cut the expenditure on the wages. The Golden Handshake envisaged the possibility of compensating the employee adequately keeping in view the loss in pay and perks on the part of the employee and the gain to the Company on releasing him. Thus the company was willing to share the savings with the employee and considered that as fair and just. When a person retires having attained the pay at the top of the band, it is obvious that he gets the corresponding pension. Already, the rule has been framed that a person is entitled for full pension once he completes twenty years of qualifying service. Hence, all those who are in service as on 1st Jan 2006, have to be granted full pension, on completion of twenty years of qualifying service. But could it be at the top of the scale, if prevailing fitment formula is applied? It may not be. In such situation, it is necessary to review the fitment formula itself, lest it should create an anomaly in respect of the Parity. The fitment formula again is an arbitrary one with no rationale but to save a few pennies to the exchequer, as the formula leads to bunching up of two or more officers of different seniority with one pay whereas they have been drawing different pay, the senior drawing more than the junior, which is but natural, fair and just. Here we may recollect the expert recommendation of the Parliamentary Committee quoted in Para 15 above.
Regulation of Pension for ESP
28. Maximum Pension The next question is how to regulate the pension of the ESP. This question is redundant, if we change our prevailing mindset that pension has to be re-fixed, using some fitment formula. This mindset only has been the bugbear all along and has precipitated to the present crisis. By the sheer logic of the SC Judgments, it follows that
Pension being deferred wages, the revised wage structure namely the Pay Band concept is applicable to the ESP.
The twenty years’ eligibility clause for earning full pension is applicable to the ESP, as well. Full pension must be made applicable on completion of 12 years of service in the case of the ESM other than the Commissioned Officers.
All commissioned officers who have retired on completion of the terms of engagement would have put in more than 30 years of qualifying service by the time they retired and hence eligible for the pension at the top of the pay band.
In the case of ESM other than the commissioned officers, a clause has to be introduced by which they, on having the qualifying service of 15 years shall be eligible for pension for maximum pension, at the top of the corresponding Pay Band.
It is obvious, therefore, that there is absolutely no need to apply any fitment formula for the ESP. Their pay has to be fixed according to the fitment formula adopted for the Serving Soldiers, albeit notionally, and the pension revised in terms of liberalized rules. Thus the tables above are equally applicable ESP in the case of all pensioners who retired on completion of the terms of engagement.
29. Full and Part Pension. But, there are quite a few who might have retired with more than the minimum qualifying service for earning full pension but less than that for earning the maximum pension. In case of those officers it is obvious that they are to be granted full pension at the pay they would be eligible, by fixing their pay on point to point basis in the Pay Band. Besides, those who have retired with less than the minimum qualifying service for earning full pension must also be made eligible for pension in the ratio of the service put in divided by twenty years or twelve years as the case may be, provided that they have completed qualifying service of not less than say five years, a new condition.
30. The case of personnel other than commissioned officers needs to be streamlined keeping in focus the fact that their terms of engagement are much less compared to that of the Commissioned Officers. And, as they are deprived of assured continuity of employment, the proportion of the pension with respect to the pay, they drew at the time of retiring, has to more liberal. Perhaps pension at 70% for them instead of 50% for the commissioned officers might compensate the early truncation of service. Besides the service conditions for earning the various pensions also must be liberalized.
Financial Implications
31. It is apparent that the financial implications when worked out at the time of implementation of the 6CPCR, would not have taken into consideration the extent of cash flow that might result if the principle of absolute parity on the lines described above is to be complied with. Some have ventured to state that even if the pensions are paid with absolute parity, the financial burden may just exceed seven billion rupees, which amount is absolutely within the easy grasp of our Nation. Never had there been a year during which the budget allotted for Defence had been completely expended. Of course, a detailed study may reveal the correct extent of the financial liability.
32. Notwithstanding the above, a few moments must be spared to tackle the additional financial burden. The decision on final pension can be implemented in phased manner spread over five years’ time span. The difference between the pension that has been already paid and the final pension arrived at as the result of this review can be progressively reduced at the rate of 20% per year. Fairness demands that the amount that stands withheld is treated as a deposit with the Government earning reasonable interest and paid in the subsequent year with the increased pension.
Cost of Denial
33. Before we conclude, thought as well has to necessarily be given to the possible repercussions of denying what is right on moral ground and from judicial point of view. Let us term it ‘cost of denial’. If we talk of tangible cost in terms of cash outflow the Government stands to gain as it would be paying less the ESP community. Intangible cost is subtle and manifests in the long run more like the expenditure that is involved in the cure of cancer not detected and treated in time. These costs can be due to any or all of the following forms of manifestation.
First due to the increased awareness in the ESM community, denial of the parity in pension shall certainly lead to a high degree of frustration. The ill effect of a frustrated soul can take any form. The type of harm it causes can result in heavy loss in trying to remedy.
I certainly will be naive if I ignore how a few of these frustrated souls may fall prey to the lure of anti-social elements. The specialist skills acquired by the soldier are always in demand by misguided elements. (In fact, I, along with many firmly, believe that the elements promoting insurgent operations and terrorism are diabolically clever to use the disillusioned youth for furthering their prospects). Can any rational thinking person ignore this potential danger and cost of damage that follows?
This country, for that matter any country, needs the voluntary services of skilled personnel in handling calamities, man-made or nature oriented. Even for event management at the National and state levels one can utilize the services of the Ex-Servicemen to a very great extent, provided they are a happy lot and treated with respect by the nation. A lot of wasteful expenditure that can be effectively curtailed can be such a hidden cost of denial.
Let us take note of what Sri N Vittal the well known Chief Vigilance Commissioner of yester years has to say. “Unless we take serious note of these signals of hurt pride and wounded morale, there is a danger that our vaunted track record of democracy may be seriously threatened” (from Times of India).
Let us see what Air Vice Marshal (Rtd) Hamid Shahul, Former Chairman, Airports Authority of India, has to say. “Armed Forces have served the country with dignity and honor. We talk about emulating the example that is Best in the World and if we were to just look at the example of the US Armed Forces serving as well as retired, it will be a reminder to our Top Leadership that this critical issue cannot be further delayed in difficult times like these as is obtainable today to restore the Grace and Dignity of the Armed Services that it deserves without further delay. Let it not be mistaken that it is just the Pay. Pay is just a part of the problem as I perceive”.
34. Assured Continuation of Employment It is time to conclude (thank God some may be inclined to say, well not yet). There is yet another aspect that needs analysis. What caused all these fuss and frustration blowing into almost a National Crisis? Do we not need a permanent solution? If we need, should that root cause not be identified, instead of treating the symptom by according Absolute Parity in Pension? The root cause is glaring yet not seen by us. The government, which is contemplating to include the right to work as fundamental, does not consider not assuring job security to a soldier as a gross injustice. Please refer back to Para 3 and 4. It is this injustice meted out by the British and perpetuated by the humanitarian democratic Indian Government, which led to all these problems of lack of parity. Think for a while. Is there a need for a Department of Ex-Services Welfare and Directorate of Resettlement for Ex-Servicemen, if they are provided with Job security, the ideal concept that lures one to the Government jobs? Have we not relegated the proud soldiers to the level of a degraded and downtrodden community that needs to be taken care by raising ‘flag-day’ collections from the public? Have we not usurped lakhs and lakhs of jobs under the Ministry of Defence that rightfully belongs to the soldier? Are we justified in taking support of the resentment of the civilian staff managing these posts as the reason for not releasing these posts to the rightful owner, the soldier? Is ignoring the wisdom of the 6CPC in recommending lateral induction justified? Only after all these questions are sincerely raised and answered, ‘Maha’n Bha’rat’ can hold her head high and shout the slogan ‘Jai Jawa’n’ in all sincerity and not mere lip service.
Conclusion.
35. When we study the issue of the pension for the Existing Service Pensioners, -keeping in focus the law of natural justice and fairness, the humanitarian grounds, principles of democratic and welfare based governance, the role of ideal employer and the legitimate preferred status for a soldier based on the sacrifices he and his family are called upon to perform - the wisdom of the SC Judgment that crystallized the definition of pension becomes extremely and lucidly clear. The verdict that has to perforce be favored by the Government is that
Let the pay of all the pensioners of any rank of Indian Army and its equivalent rank in the two other Wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the rate given to similar officers of the same rank keeping in focus the years of service put in by them in the revised pay scales with effect from 1.1.2006, and, thereafter, their pension benefits computed on such basis.
But this verdict is based on the recent judgment related to the restricted issue of Major Generals. Even this verdict is not in tune with the concept of Parity in Pension. More pragmatic view emerges only when the real spirit of the judgment awarded in the case of 1982 / D. S. Nakara And Others Vs Union Of India is diligently applied.
36. Keeping the spirit of judgment dated 17 Dec 1982 of the five judges Constitution Bench in the case of 1982 / D. S. Nakara And Others Vs Union Of India, the following verdict is more apt and shall hold good for many more pay commissions:
(a) Maximum Pension Let the pay of all the pensioners of any rank of Indian Army and its equivalent rank in the two other Wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the top of the revised pay scale applicable to that rank of the serving persons with equal or more service, provided that the years of service put in by pensioners is not less than thirty years for Commissioned Officers and twenty years for the rest and, thereafter, their pension benefits computed on such basis.
(b) Full pension at fifty percent. Let in the case of others not covered under sub-para (a) above, notional pay for the computation of the pension be fixed at the rate given to serving personnel of the same rank with same length of service and, thereafter, their pension benefits computed on such basis, provided that the years of service rendered by them is not less than twenty years for Commissioned Officers and twelve years for the rest.
(c) Part Pension Let in the case of pensioners not covered under sub-para (a) and (b) above, the notional pay for the computation of the pension be fixed at the rate given to serving personnel of the same rank with same service and, thereafter, their pension benefits computed on pro-rata basis, provided that the years of service rendered by them is not less than five years.
The revised pension is payable with effect from 1.1.2006.
37. Thus, the ‘Absolute Parity in Pension’ as described under Para 24 is the homage paid to a soldier on retirement, irrespective of the date of retirement. No matter when pay is revised, the revision of the pension, being inherent with the pay revision, will maintain parity. All soldiers of the same rank shall live holding their head high and with mutual respect. Besides, a senior is always respected as senior, with due regard to the age as well; a unique feature of the Service Culture, which has shaped up a bond among the servicemen as strong as that in an Indian Family.
THE END
Appendix A
PAY AND PENSION TABLES
(All tables are to be treated as model and the actual figures need to be reworked)
P-Part Pension F-Full Pension M-Maximum Pension
Pension for Sepoy to Sub Major based on completed years of service
Table 1A – X Group
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Years
Band Pay
Gr Pay
MSP
X Gp pay
Total
Note 1
1
6840
2000
2000
1400
12240
N/A
2
7150
2000
2000
1400
12550
N/A
3
7470
2000
2000
1400
12870
N/A
4
7800
2000
2000
1400
13200
N/A
5
8140
2000
2000
1400
13540
P-3510
6
8490
2000
2000
1400
13890
P-4680
7
8850
2000
2000
1400
14250
P-5840
8N
9220
2400
2000
1400
15020
P-7010
9
9620
2400
2000
1400
15420
P-8180
10
10030
2400
2000
1400
15830
P-9350
11
10450
2400
2000
1400
16250
P-10520
12*
10880
2400
2000
1400
16680
F-11680
13
11330
2400
2000
1400
17130
F-12000
14
11790
2400
2000
1400
17590
F-12320
15
12260
2400
2000
1400
18060
F-12650
16H
12750
2800
2000
1400
18950
F-13280
17
13260
2800
2000
1400
19460
F-13630
18
13790
2800
2000
1400
19990
F-14000
19
14330
2800
2000
1400
20530
F-14380
20
14890
2800
2000
1400
21090
F-14770
21
15470
2800
2000
1400
21670
F-15180
22
16070
2800
2000
1400
22270
F-15600
23
16680
2800
2000
1400
22880
F-16020
24NS*
17330
4200
2000
1400
24930
M-25440
25
18000
4200
2000
1400
25600
M-25440
26
18710
4200
2000
1400
26310
M-25440
27
19440
4200
2000
1400
27040
M-25440
28
20200
4200
2000
1400
27800
M-25440
29S
20980
4600
2000
1400
28980
M-25680
30
21790
4600
2000
1400
29790
M-25680
31SM
22630
4800
2000
1400
30830
M-25800
32
23500
4800
2000
1400
31700
M-25800
Notes
The pension is calculated @70% for Sepoy to Havildar (PB1) and 60% for JCOs (PB2).
The minimum pay of Rs 6840 for sepoy and the grade pay and MSP 2000 have been taken from SAI 1/S/2008 Appendix F and the table built up on that basic value of 6840
The table above is based on TS promotion to Naik, Havaldar and Nb Subedar after 8, 16 and 24 years respectively.
Existing Havildar on completion of his term of engagement must be treated as having qualifying Service of 24 years and given the benefit of Maximum Pension 60% of 34800+4200+2000+1400=25440
Nb Subedar (TS) retires after 4 years of service.
Keeping in consonance with the principle that the pay and pension to a soldier is homage paid by the nation and that parity in retired life is more valuable, it is recommended that the pension for SPOTCO be determined as per the X Group.
* It is recommended that maximum pension (M) at the maximum of the pay band be permitted on completion of 24 years of service, full pension (F) at 70% / 60% at the pay drawn be permitted on completion of 12 years.
Part pension (P) starts on completion of five years of SQP @30% full pension entitled on completion of 12 years and for every additional year of service 10% increase is permitted. Thus on completion of 12 years one gets full pension
Table 1B – Naib Subedars Yet to be prpared
Table 1C – Subedars Yet to be prpared
Table 1D – Sub Major Yet to be prpared
Table 2A- Lieutenant to Colonel (TS)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Rank
QYS
Band Pay
Grade Pay
MSP
Total
Pension
Lt
1
15600
5400
6000
27000
NA
2
16230
5400
6000
27630
NA
Capt
3
16880
6100
6000
28980
NA
4
17570
6100
6000
29670
NA
5
18280
6100
6000
30380
P-7530
6
19020
6100
6000
31120
P-9040
Major
7
19780
6600
6000
32380
P-10550
8
20580
6600
6000
33180
P-12050
9
21400
6600
6000
34000
P-13560
10
22240
6600
6000
34840
P-15060
11
23110
6600
6000
35710
P-15570
12
24010
6600
6000
36610
P-18080
13
24930
6600
6000
37530
P-19580
Lt Col
14
37400
8000
6000
51400
P-21090
15
38770
8000
6000
52770
P-22590
16
40180
8000
6000
54180
P-24100
17
41630
8000
6000
55630
P-25610
18
43120
8000
6000
57120
P-27010
19
44660
8000
6000
58660
P-28610
20
46240
8000
6000
60240
F-30120
21
47870
8000
6000
61870
F-30935
22
49550
8000
6000
63550
F-31775
23
51280
8000
6000
65280
F-32640
24
53060
8000
6000
67060
F-33530
25
54900
8000
6000
68900
F-34450
26
56790
8000
6000
70790
F-35395
Col(TS)
27
58740
8700
6000
73440
F-36720
28
60770
8700
6000
75470
F-37735
29
62860
8700
6000
77560
F-38780
30
65010
8700
6000
79710
F-39855
31
67000
8700
6000
81700
M-40850
Note
From 6th year till 19 years one is eligible for the part pension (P). The full pension is reduced prorate of the service divided by 20 years. as shown under column 7. This amounts to 5% reduction in the full pension for every one year of shortfall.
On completion of twenty years the officer is entitled to full pension (F).
Part pension for Major and Captains is based on the full pension applicable to Lt Colonel taking into account the Grade pay of 8000, because it is meant to compensate the ESP, who were deprived of the present liberal promotion policy and hence had to retire earlier.
Maximum pension (M) is at the top of PB once TOE/ 30 years of service
If the decision to ensure promotion to the rank of Colonel on completion of 15 years is made applicable this, table needs to be revised.
Table 2B Colonel (Selection Grade)
1
2
3
4
5
6
Years of Service
Band Pay
Grade Pay
MSP
Total
Pension
@50%
24
53060
8700
6000
67760
F-33880
25
54920
8700
6000
69620
F-34810
26
56830
8700
6000
71530
F-35765
27
58800
8700
6000
73500
F-36750
28
60830
8700
6000
75530
F-37765
29
62920
8700
6000
77620
F-38810
30
65070
8700
6000
79770
F-39885
31
67000
8700
6000
81700
M-40850
Table 2C Brigadier
1
2
3
4
5
6
Years of Service
Band Pay
Grade Pay
MSP
Total
Pension
26
56830
8900
6000
71730
F-35865
27
58810
8900
6000
73710
F-36855
28
60850
8900
6000
75750
F-37875
29
62950
8900
6000
77850
F-38925
30
65110
8900
6000
80010
F-40005
31
67000
8900
6000
81900
M-40950
Table 2D Major General
1
2
3
4
5
6
Years of Service
Band Pay
Grade Pay
MSP
Total
Pension
28
60850
10000
6000
76850
F-38425
29
62980
10000
6000
78980
F-39490
30
65170
10000
6000
81170
F-40580
31
67000
10000
6000
83000
M-41500
Table 2E Lt General
1
2
3
4
5
6
Years of Service
Band Pay
Grade Pay
MSP
Total
Pension
28
62980
12000
6000
80980
F-40490
29
65230
12000
6000
83230
F-41120
30
67000
12000
6000
85000
M-42500
Note: In the case of Major General and Lt Generals denying the MSP is irrational and leads to anomaly in pay and pension. We have included the MSP and worked out the pension entitlement.
Pension of Vice Chiefs and Commanders. 40000 + 3000 (due to MSP)
Table 3 - Pension on Retiring after Completion of Term of Engagement subject to completion of 30 years in the case of Commissioned Officers and 24 years for others.
Rank
Pension Arithmetic
Pension
Havildar (ESP)
(20200+2800+2000+1400) * 70%
M-18480
Naib Subedar
(34800+4200+2000+1400) * 60%
M-25440
Subedar
(34800+4600+2000+1400) * 60%
M-25560
Sub Major
(34800+4800+2000+1400) * 60%
M-25680
Major (ESP)
(39100+6600+6000) * 55%
M-28440
Lt Colonel (ESP)
(67000+8000+6000) * 50%
M-40450
Colonel (TS)
(67000+8700+6000) * 50%
M-40850
Colonel (Selection Grade)
(67000+8700+6000) * 50%
M-40850
Brigadier
(67000+8900+6000) * 50%
M-40950
Major General
(67000+10000+6000) * 50%
M-41500
Lt General
(67000+12000+6000) * 50%
M-42500
Vice Chief & Equivalent
(80000+6000) * 50%
M-43000
The Chiefs
90000 * 50%
M-45000
Note :
In future no commissioned officer retires below the rank of Colonel. However, this table provides for the Majors and Lt Colonels of Existing Service Pensioners. If they had retired on completion of the term of engagement the shortfall for the qualifying service of 30 years for maximum pension may notionally added.
In the case of Major, being applicable only to ESM community and placed in PB3 the pension is calculated @55%
In the cases of Major Generals and above Rs6000, the MSP component has been notionally added to the maximum of the pay band failing which an anomaly arises.
The case of SL Commissioned officers
And
Officers passing out of the Army Cadet College
The case of SL Commissioned officers and Officers passing out of the A C College has to be separately dealt, taking into account the combined service in the various ranks the officer was holding before being commissioned. One point however worth mentioning now is that the Service Qualifying for Pension (SQP) can be counted by adding to the years of service as commissioned officer with 40% years of qualifying service in the other ranks. The SQP so arrived can be used for determining the eligibility for part, full, and maximum pension.
(PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE TABLES HAVE BEEN WORKED OUT FROM MEAGRE UNAUTHENTICATED DATA AVAILABLE AND ARE MEANT TO SHOW THE FEASIBILITY OF THE PENSION REVISION SUGGESED IN THIS PAPER.)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
All these tables have been initially worked out by AVM RP Mishra. Subsequently the author built upon the basic structure of the tables to cater for the implementation of the concept of “Part Pension”, “Full pension” and “Maximum Pension”.
Appendix ‘B’
Anomaly
Case of a Sepoy of ‘Y’ Group
Pay fixation in terms of SAI 1&2/S/2009 shall lead to anomaly in fixing pension in contradiction to the concept of OROP. Let us illustrate the case of a Sepoy, belonging to ‘Y’ Group. Pay fixation is in terms of SAI 1/S/2008. ACP benefit of GP of Naik on completion of 8 years, Havildar 16 years and Nb Sub 24 years has been considered. Annual increment @ 3% on Scaled Pay plus Grade pay is permitted wef 01-01-06. Pension is worked out @70%.
Case 1 Emoluments (Scaled Pay + Grade Pay + Military Service Pay) and pension of Sepoy enrolled post 01-01-2006
In the first year in the RSP 6250+2000+2000 as Sepoy 10250
On completing 16 years if notionally promoted as Havildar (ACP 2nd promotion)
Emoluments 11450+2800+2000 16250
Pension @ 70% (rounded to near 10) 11380
On completing 24 years if notionally promoted as Nb Sub (ACP 3rd promotion)
Emoluments 15340+4200+2000 21540
Pension @ 70% (rounded to near 10) 15080
Case 2 Comparing with a Sepoy of the same group, retiring with 16 years of service during the year 2006
Without the benefit of notional ACP promotions
Emoluments 8650+2000+2000 12650
Pension @ 70% (rounded to near 10) 8860
With the benefit of notional ACP promotion up to Havildar if made applicable
Emoluments 10000+2800+2000 14800
Pension @ 70% (rounded to near 10) 10360
Case 3 In the case of a Sepoy who is a pensioner as on 31-12-2005 having retired on completion of 16 years of service, the scale post 01-01-1996 was 3250-70-4300. Hence in the 16th year he is entitled for 4300 as basic pay. A Sepoy retiring in the year 2005 has to have 6 years of service in pre 1996 scale of pay. Hence it appears that his basic pay was fixed wef from 1996 such that he could reach only maximum of 3448 (not 4300) and his pension @50% was 1724.
The result. His pension post 2006 is fixed as (1724*2.26) = 3897
Whereas had he been given the benefit of notional pay commensurate to his 16 years of service as 4300, his pension would have been at least (4300*1.13) = 4859
“Now study the various figures shown as pensions and compare the reality of 3897 to the possibility of 15080. Draw your own conclusion if the pay revision, its implementation and the consequent application for the revision of pension have any semblance of fairness and justice towards the ESM community.”
Prologue
Soldering is unique. It is not just a profession. It is a service rendered due to an inherent inspiration to perform a noble act. A soldier is motivated and trained to ‘kill and get killed’. Both these acts are deplored and extremely difficult to perform. The process of evolution has built in the mother the protective instinct, more biological than emotional. So has the evolution process built in a soldier the protective instinct, far nobler than that of the mother for her child. This instinct is groomed by the deep rooted courage of conviction to protect the weak from the evil-strong. ‘Vya’sa’’ says in the ‘Bhagavat Gita’’:
As and when the evil raises its head and the good starts declining, I take birth in the human form; to protect the innocent by destroying the evil and to restore the rule of just law”. Such a human is termed as ‘avta’r’.
Whenever I think of a soldier, the role he plays and the sacrifices he makes in the bargain my mind wonders, if the soldier is an avta’r, and if not, what is he.
Synopsis
Prelude
“Soldiering is not just a profession. It has been looked upon from time immemorial as the most revered service inspired by a noble mental frame on the part of a citizen who cares for the Nation’s sovereignty. A soldier may, no doubt, be trained to develop the necessary skills in warfare. But, a soldier is born and not made. History bears witness to the adoration bestowed upon a soldier by the Rulers and the Citizens of all the different nations over all the ages. Hence such a soldier has to be preferentially treated. Compensation to a soldier is to be considered as homage and not pay. Thus, a soldier has to be given the preferred status of a better citizen and a more honorable government employee.”
1. Definition of OROP "One Rank One Pension" (OROP) was the terminology, presumably, coined by Sri KP Singh Deo, while reviewing the pension policy for the Armed Forces personnel, way back in 1985. OROP existed prior to 1970. A soldier (the word is used to mean all ranks in all the wings of the Armed Forces), in those distant days, was granted pension based only on the rank he held when he retired, provided that he was eligible for pension. More length of service put in by him did not earn him more of pension. Sri Singh Deo suggested, again presumably, that OROP should mean ‘same rank same total length of service same pension’. Since then OROP meant just that, with a different definition to include the service element unlike the pre 1970 vintage. The definition is:
“No two soldiers holding the same rank and same total length of service to their credit shall draw different pensions.”
2. The definition implies that as and when the pay of serving soldiers is revised the effect of such revision on the pension per force is applicable to the existing pensioners at the time of pay revision. In other words the pay of the ex-servicemen (ESM) also is revised, of course notionally, for the purpose of revising the pension and the pension accordingly revised. Thus parity between two soldiers is absolutely established (APIP). The spirit of OROP / APIP is the recognition of the special status of a soldier and not the increase in pension.
3. Fixing the Pay in the Revised Scale. Bound by the mandate that ‘pensioners of the same rank with same total length of service must draw the same pension’, the pension has to be related to the prevalent revised pay. Therefore, the fixing of pay, in the revised scale of pay (RSP), has to be judiciously done.
4. Initial Fixation of pay. It is absolutely necessary, at this juncture, to accept the special status of a soldier due to his and his family’s sacrifices and, the hardships he has to undergo while serving and on forced early retirement. Having accepted the preferred status of the soldier, the initial fixation of pay for a soldier must, more appropriately and judiciously, be done as described below:
First step – Take the bottom of the equivalent RSP as basis for fixing pay.
Second step – Build up his pay granting annual increments, equal to the number of increments he had drawn in the existing scale of pay (ESP) for each year of his service, taking into account the financial upgrade due to the concept of assured Career Progression (ACP) / time scale promotion.
Third step – Thus, arrive at the correct pay commensurate to the total number of years of service to the soldier’s credit.
This may sound complicated. But for an accountant, it is a simple matter of drawing two tables one for the commissioned officers and one for the others, in a time frame of a few hours. I have already drawn these tables and attached as Appendix ‘A’.
5. On the contrary, the initial pay fixation as on 01-01-2008 in terms of SAI 1&2/S/2008) has been complicated due to the application of arbitrary formulae without any rationale. In the bargain, the SAI has led to bunching up two levels in the ESP by granting one increment in the RSP, for most of the soldiers in the various ranks. In other words, one who earned more number of increments and hence higher pay is now drawing the same pay as that of a soldier one year junior to him. As expected, the whole serving soldiers’ community has mutely accepted this injustice.
6. Revision of Pension To make things worse, the revision of pension was devised ignoring the rationale mentioned above adopting more complicated and arbitrary formulae independent of the revised pay to which the ESM is rightly eligible, notionally of course. Thus anomaly rose in violation of ‘OROP’ or ‘APIP’. See Appendix ‘B’ for illustration.
7. The Correct Method. If the notional pay for an ESM is correctly fixed as described in para 4 above, the correct pension is easily and in a fair manner calculated for the ESM. As the notional pay in the revised scale, commensurate to his rank and the total length of service is known, his correct pension is easily and in a fair manner calculated for the ESM. The pension as shown in the tables at Appendix ‘A’ is worked out as a proportion of the total of the pay so determined, the Grade pay, the Military Service Pay and Group pay where applicable. (70% (PB1) in the case of ranks from sepoy to Havildar, 60% (PB2) for JCOs, 55% (PB3) for Commissioned Officers up to the rank of major and 50% (PB4) in others’ case).
8. Conclusion OROP or APIP can be assured, only by opting for the fair and just method as described in para 7. While addressing the issue of OROP, it is essential to consider the possibility of
Maximum Pension. A soldier is entitled for a maximum pension at the maximum of the pay band on retirement, having completed the terms of engagement and the increased qualifying service.
Full Pension. The pay component for the soldier on retirement having completed the minimum qualifying service the pay fixed in the revised scale according to the correct fitment formula.
Part Pension. The rest shall be entitled for a pension as a proportion of the full pension commensurate with the actual service put in, provided that they have completed at least five years of active service.
The rate of pension is 50% in PB4, 55% in PB2, 60% in PB3 and 70% for PB1, keeping in view of denial of continuation of employment till the normal age of superannuation a right vested on all government employee but the Soldier.
Assured Career till the age of Superannuation is the only means by which the unfortunate state of dependence on various welfare measures, instituted by the Government, reducing the status of the Soldier from a state of Preference to a pitiable state of neglect.
treating the retired soldiers other than the Commissioned officer as of one group namely X Group, so that an ESM of the same rank with same length of service gains equality in the retired life by earning same pension,
Granting any other awards and special components of the pension (like the disability pension) as a proportion or a multiple of the basic pension.
The Paper
Aim
1. This paper aims at presenting the facts that entitle an Ex-Serviceman with a pension he deserves.
Prelude
2. The pension of a soldier, for unknown reasons, has been given unduly a negative treatment in the recent past. During pre 1970, a soldier on retirement and on completion of qualifying service, was entitled with a pension - a pension that compensated him
For the financial difficulties created by the Government by retiring him from the Government service prematurely. (The financial difficulties arose out of loss of pay, allowances and perks due to truncated service. The financial difficulties multiplied because the government no longer contributed towards his provident fund. Further, the addition to his gratuity got truncated.)
For his dedicated service in the protection of the sovereignty of the nation during his prime youth sacrificing the comfortable family life and, in turn, the family sacrificing the emotional, rational and physical support of the man of the house.
For his service liability calling for the willingness to sacrifice his life, which would be the target, whenever he would have to face the enemy, either when war is declared or in covert insurgency operations of the enemy of different kind.
3. Rank Based Pension. The word ‘soldier’ is used in this paper to mean all non-commissioned, junior commissioned and commissioned officers of the three wings of the Armed Forces. At places the phrase Service Person / Personnel also have been used in this paper. Pre 1970, the pension of Soldiers has been rank based with no consideration for the length of service. Each rank was linked with one pension, once a soldier has served the minimum number of years to enable him to earn his pension of the rank, irrespective if he chooses to retire prematurely or to serve till the completion of the terms of engagement (TOE). The pension was the same for any soldier of a particular rank. The British Government, who conceived the notion of the pension, did not recognize the need to pay more to a soldier as pension, for the service rendered by him beyond the qualifying service. The reason is obvious. The British Government did not want him to continue beyond his prime, hence more or less forced him to resign immediately on completion of the qualifying service.
4. Subsequently, the wisdom of the democratic government led to the streamlining of the pension of the Soldiers on the lines of Civil Servants. On independence, our Nation was guided by the democratic principles. The Government aspired to become an ideal employer. The soldier was given pension commensurate with his rank and the years of service rendered. Thus a soldier can serve longer than the qualifying service and earn more pension than the entitlement on completion of the qualifying service alone. Sadly, the need to assure continued employment and career progression to the Soldier in parity with the Civil Servant was not given any cursory thought, leaving alone deliberate planning. Many innovative methods were introduced to compensate the soldier for the various sacrifices he believed to have made in the interest of the Nation, time to time, but grudgingly and inadequately.
Image of a Soldier
5. The majority of the people in the present days, especially the personnel in the business of the Governance of the country, do not have a realistic image of a soldier. A soldier is generally visualized as a person who has chosen to serve merely in the capacity of a government servant. The fact, that the terms of the Service Conditions specified by the Government are stringent only for him and not any other citizen, is not known to most. This, one must remember, is just an image and, not his true form. One must keep in focus the true form of the soldier, while perusing this paper, if he is truly interested in giving a fair deal to the soldier, in compensation to his performance in the capacity of a soldier.
First and foremost, a soldier is as much a citizen as any other citizen of the Nation. Hence he deserves not to be denied any right that is available to any citizen.
Second, he is a better citizen. The culture he develops while in the service inculcates in him the virtues that are considered honorable. Many surveys have shown so. Loyalty, integrity, discipline, dedication to the cause and sacrifice in the interest of the cause are just a few of such virtues.
Third, he not only is willing to sacrifice his life when war breaks out but also has willingly sacrificed his rights, so that the Government can bind him almost to the level of bonded labor, under the guise of Service Conditions. He is denied
his right to freedom of speech
his right to voluntarily retire from service without government’s permission,
his right to proceed even on legitimate leave at his convenience and above all
his right to form an association that will give him the power of collective bargaining with his employer.
Fourth, the service conditions for a soldier are of the severest kind. No other occupation or service can ever be compared while discussing the stress to which these service conditions subject the soldier.
The frequent transfers to various stations and very short tenures in a station disrupt the family life;
Such transfers cause severe emotional sense of insecurity in the minds of the family members especially the children.
Admission to the schools of repute, once considered by the school as a bounden duty towards the Service Personnel, is denied nowadays.
‘Rolling stone gathers no mass’ is a saying that aptly describes the plight of soldier who can never build a home for himself in any particular place of choice.
The need to rotate the soldier through soft and hard peace station and similarly hard and soft field stations cause separation from the family, to very great extent. The lack of parental guidance to the children and moral and physical support of the man of the house have wrecked quite a few families.
Fifth, many tend to take the willingness to sacrifice the life on the part of the soldier as a matter of ‘professional hazard’. How strange! Let us take a look at the figures of casualty suffered by the Armed forces to ensure the sovereignty of the Nation over past sixty glorious years of Indian Democracy. The figures were downloaded from the Web.
War Killed Wounded
Indo-Pakistani War of 1948 1,104 3,152
Sino-Indian War 1962 3,128 1,697
Indo-Pakistani War of 1965 3,264 8,623
Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 3,843 9,851
Kargil War: May-July 1999 527 1,363
Total Casualties 11,866 24,686
Should this be considered as professional hazard or sacrifice of the highest order that can never be compensated by any means by any Nation?
Sixth, the living conditions of the soldier and his family of any rank is pathetic notwithstanding the provisions that exist to cater for comforts to the decent extent. Ninety percent of a soldier’s life in actual service is spent in substandard living conditions.
6. This is the true form of a soldier in whatever rank and in whatever fighting arm, he serves. This true form must be borne in mind, while serving and on retirement, when dealing with his
Status
Perks and privileges
Pay and pension
Soldiering is not just a profession. It has been looked upon as the most revered service inspired by the noble mental frame that cares for the Nations sovereignty. A soldier may, no doubt, be trained to develop the necessary skills in warfare. But, a soldier is born and not made. History bears witness to the adoration bestowed upon a soldier from time immemorial by the Rulers and the citizens of any nation. Should a soldier not be given the preferred status of a better citizen and a more honored government employee? Of course! Such a soldier has to be preferentially treated. Compensation to a soldier is to be considered as payment of homage and not pay. In this context, the words of Sanding Parliamentary Committee for the Defence, found in its report for the year 2003, are worth recalling.
“The nation must repay its debt to those defenders of the motherland with gratitude and humility. We should, instead of, looking for precedents in this regard, create precedents for the others to emulate. Any amount paid in this regard would be small token of our gratitude to them.”
Pay
7. Any Government, in a Nation guided by the principles of democracy, is expected to be an ‘ideal employer’; a role model to be emulated by the private sector, while compensating the employee for the services he renders. The ideal employer does not exploit the employee in terms of ‘supply and demand’, but takes care of him in terms of decent compensation that will not only meet his personal needs but also enable him to meet his social obligation towards his family while living, and thereafter, as well. The family includes the dependents, also. Therefore, the notion of pension is inherent in the Service Conditions of any Government employee. He is provided with adequate financial support even after his terms of engagement. The concern on the part of the ideal employer for the employees goes further. The family also is adequately provided with financial support on the demise of the Government employee during or after the service. Laudable indeed!
Pension
8. Pension thus, in terms of the honorable sentiments the ideal employer has for his employee, has been defined, in an unambiguous terms, with the best of the judicial wisdom of the most revered judges, and accepted by one and all, as ‘deferred payment of wages for the past services rendered’. The pension policy determines only the rule that is applicable to work out the magnitude of the deferred wages and other related issues, in relation to the wages the employee drew while serving.
9. Thus pension is linked with the pay through a rule and not through any arbitrary provision. Thus logic dictates that when pay is revised the pension stands revised per force within the frame of the Pension Rules, unless the Pension Rule itself is modified. And when the pension rule is modified, the modification is applicable to the existing pensioners as well, if found advantageous.
Pay Revision
10. It is known justifiably that the pay needs to be revised periodically. The reasons are:
First, the necessity to regularize the compensation given along with the pay keeping in view the eroded value of the pay caused by the inflationary trend of a developing nation, inhibiting the purchase power
Second, to improve upon the remunerations of the Government employees to a decent level in view of the increased wealth of the nation.
It has to be borne in mind that both the conditions referred to above are relevant to pensioners as well. When the wealth of a nation goes up, the role of the Government employees in the increase of the wealth cannot be just forgotten. Above all, who else, but a soldier, ensures that the Sovereignty of the Nation is not threatened? Can one ever question the role played by the Soldier in ensuring security of the Nation from internal and external threats, thus ensuring the required peaceful ambience for progress to continue in a country? If, over the decade from 1996 to 2006 the national wealth has shot up to the extent that the serving soldiers’ pay could be increased manifolds, almost three and a half times, could one ignore the role played by those who served and retired during that decade and for that matter earlier to that decade, as a contributor to that economic growth? Can one ignore the fact that they, the soldiers served in far more difficult circumstances and environmental conditions to help the Nation increase its wealth?
11. The words of SC judgment are likely to throw much better light on the relationship between the pay, pension and the revision. The words are;
“It must be remembered that pension is relatable to qualifying service. ... It is undoubtedly a condition of service but not an incentive to attract new entrants only; it would be prospective at such distance of thirty-five years back. Pension is thus not an incentive but a reward for past service. ... Revised pay-scales are introduced from a certain date. All existing employees are brought on to the revised scales by adopting a theory of fitments and increments for past service. In other words, benefit of revised scale is not limited to those who enter service subsequent to the date fixed for introducing revised scales but the benefit is extended to all those in service prior to that date. This is just and fair. Now pension, as we view it, is some kind of retirement wages for past service. Can it be denied to those who retired earlier while the revised retirement benefits being available to future retirees only?” (Para 46 - Judgment in the Case of Nakara Vs UOI)
12. Fortunately, a few, that too from the Civil Servants, went to the Court challenging the rationale of arbitrarily fixing a date of implementation for revised pensions and of similar related matters. And luck would have it for the Soldiers, a few of the Judgments of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court and other Courts made the concept of Pension so clear that an awakening has taken place among the Existing Service Pensioners (ESP) regarding their entitled pensions. Let us see extracts from two of the Judgments.
Case 1. Apt it is to quote from the Supreme Court judgment in the case of D. S. Nakara And Others Vs Union Of India, as a prelude and as the foremost of the two brilliant understandings of the issue of the pension. The words of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, spoken way back amount, amazingly to prophesy the present case.
On arbitrariness of cut off date for implementation “The date of retirement is irrelevant. … Date is merely to avoid payment of arrears which may impose a heavy burden. … The Central Government cannot pick out a date from a hat, and that is what it seems to have done in this case. … But the principle is that when a certain date or eligibility criteria is selected with a reference to legislative or executive measures which has the perni 11. The words of SC judgment are likely to throw much better light on the relationship between the pay, pension and the revision. The words are;
“It must be remembered that pension is relatable to qualifying service. ... It is undoubtedly a condition of service but not an incentive to attract new entrants only; it would be prospective at such distance of thirty-five years back. Pension is thus not an incentive but a reward for past service. ... Revised pay-scales are introduced from a certain date. All existing employees are brought on to the revised scales by adopting a theory of fitments and increments for past service. In other words, benefit of revised scale is not limited to those who enter service subsequent to the date fixed for introducing revised scales but the benefit is extended to all those in service prior to that date. This is just and fair. Now pension, as we view it, is some kind of retirement wages for past service. Can it be denied to those who retired earlier while the revised retirement benefits being available to future retirees only?” (Para 46 - Judgment in the Case of Nakara Vs UOI)
12. Fortunately, a few, that too from the Civil Servants, went to the Court challenging the rationale of arbitrarily fixing a date of implementation for revised pensions and of similar related matters. And luck would have it for the Soldiers, a few of the Judgments of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court and other Courts made the concept of Pension so clear that an awakening has taken place among the Existing Service Pensioners (ESP) regarding their entitled pensions. Let us see extracts from two of the Judgments.
Case 1. Apt it is to quote from the Supreme Court judgment in the case of D. S. Nakara And Others Vs Union Of India, as a prelude and as the foremost of the two brilliant understandings of the issue of the pension. The words of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, spoken way back amount, amazingly to prophesy the present case.
On arbitrariness of cut off date for implementation “The date of retirement is irrelevant. … Date is merely to avoid payment of arrears which may impose a heavy burden. … The Central Government cannot pick out a date from a hat, and that is what it seems to have done in this case. … But the principle is that when a certain date or eligibility criteria is selected with a reference to legislative or executive measures which has the pernicious tendency of dividing an otherwise homogeneous class and the choice of beneficiaries of the legislative /executive action becomes selective, the division or classification made by choice of date or eligibility criteria must have some relation to the objects sought to be achieved.
On application of logic in revision in preference to legislature “And apart from the first test that the division must be referable to some rational principles, if the choice of the date or classification is wholly unrelated to the objects sought to be achieved, it cannot be upheld on the spacious plea that that was the choice of the legislature.”
On the purpose of pension “In view of the present economic conditions in India and constant rise in the cost of living due to inflation, it is all the more important even from purely humanitarian considerations if not from the stand point of fairness and justice, to protect the actual value of their meager pension to enable the pensioners to live in their declining years with dignity and in reasonable comfort’. …Noncontributory pension under 1972 rule is a State obligation.”
The verdict “The liberalized pension scheme becomes operative to all pensioners governed by 1972 Rules irrespective of the date of retirement. It is declared that all pensioners governed by the 1972 Rules and Army Pension Regulations shall be entitled to pension as computed under the liberalized pension scheme from the specified date, irrespective of the date of retirement.”
Case 2. Let us see the extract of the second judgment by the Honorable Judges of the Supreme Court, on the issue of revision of pension. I quote Para 19 and Para 31 from Judgment dated 09-09-2008 by Judges Altamas Kabir and Markandey Katju. The judgment has a direct bearing in our present case.
“19. On behalf of the respondents reliance was also placed on two letters addressed by the Chairman, Chief of Staff Committee, dated 8.2.2006 and 21.2.2006, along with the recommendation made by the Air Chief Marshal on 17.2.2006, stating that it was necessary to correct the injustice and discrimination which had been aimed at denying those officers who had retired prior to 1.1.1996, the benefits of the pension enjoyed by officers who retired after the said date.”
“31. We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal and modify the order of the High Court by directing that the pay of all pensioners in the rank of Major General and its equivalent rank in the two other Wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the rate given to similar officers of the same rank after the revision of pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996, and, thereafter, to compute their pension benefits on such basis with prospective effect from the date of filing of the writ petition and to pay them the difference within three months from date with interest at 10% per annum.”
13. Thus, it is crystal clear from these judgments that there cannot be any difference between the pension of any service person of any particular rank who retired prior to 1st Jan 2006 and the other similarly placed service person retiring afterwards, provided that they retired in the same rank and with the same qualifying service. Yet it is baffling that, in our country, lauded world over for its democratic system of governance based on the prevailing high ethics passed on from time immemorial, the words of wisdom of the Supreme Court, which is empowered with the authority to pass judgment over even the constitutional issues, have been ignored.
The Expectations
14. Due to the recent awakening in the ESP the demand ‘One Rank One Pension’ under the popular abbreviation ‘OROP’ has been widely and vociferously raised. As I understand from Maj Gen Surjit Singh “a high powered committee headed by Mr. K.P. Singh Deo coined the term OROP”, way back in 1985. The reason for the expectation of the ESP is better put in the words of Colonel SS Rajan.
“Military Service is UNIQUE, with a highly demanding 24 by 7 work culture under hostile environments; and secondly, Military Service is the only Service wherein a Jawan is bundled out at the young age of 35, when he has a young wife, two small children, his parents & unmarried sisters to be taken care of; without the STATE bothering to give him an alternative employment. It is absolutely callous. A young man who joins service in civil as a LDC or a Police constable serves comfortably till the age of 60 years and retires in a much higher position with a good amount as pension. Not so in the case of a Jawan. 85% of the Sepoys retire as Sepoys only after 15 years service. Most civilians who retire at 60, would live to see only one Pay Commission after retirement, considering their longevity to be 70-75 years; but a Sepoy would live to see nothing less than four Pay Commissions after retirement. It is the older pensioners of the Army, Navy & Air Force who are the worst sufferers. It is not only the serving soldier that the STATE is duty bound to take care of; but also the Veterans who have sacrificed their youth in service of the Nation with no other thought but, DUTY, HONOUR and COUNTRY.”
15. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence has been asking the Govt. time & again to implement 'ONE RANK, ONE PENSION'. Para 99 of the Report of Standing Committee on Defence (2003) clearly states:
"The Committee has been recommending grant of `One Rank One Pension' to the armed forces personnel time and again. The Committee observes that successive Governments and Pay Commissions have made improvements in the pension structure keeping in view the cost of living index. This has accentuated the disparity of pension benefits between pensioners of the same rank. The older pensioners who have become infirm in ability and capability and burdened with a larger social obligation receive pension calculated at the rate of pay at the time of their retirement in 1950s or 1960s or 1970s, which is quite paltry and the Dearness Relief quite inconsequential in today's context of inflation and shrinking purchasing value of money. The nation must repay its debt to those defenders of the motherland with gratitude and humility. We should, instead of, looking for precedents in this regard, create precedents for the others to emulate. Any amount paid in this regard would be small token of our gratitude to them. The Committee, therefore, once again reiterates their earlier recommendation for providing `One Rank One Pension' to the armed forces personnel".
Quantum of Pension
16. The pension in terms of the implementation provisions of the 6CPCR stands the same in the sense that 50% of the emolument drawn at the time of the retirement with the stipulations that
The emolument includes the last pay drawn plus Grade Pay and Military Service Pay that are due to the retiree.
The retiree must have completed a qualifying service of not less than 20 years. (Check this provision for personnel other than commissioned officers)
However, the officials, while implementing this provision, have resorted to arbitrarily divide the homogeneous single class of pensioners into two different classes, one class comprising those who retired prior to 1st Jan 2006 (referred as ESP hereafter) and the other class comprising those retired thereafter. The full benefit of pension consequent to the revision thus stands extended to the retirees of post 1st Jan 2006. Therefore, a service person retiring after 1st Jan 2006 stands to be benefited with much better a pension based on the revised pay.
17. In the case of the pensioners who retired prior to 1st Jan 2006, these provisions are made applicable in a very complicated manner, twisting the principles that govern the award of pension. The net result is that the pension of the ESP of a particular rank is far less than the pension of the future pensioner of the same rank and of the same length of service. They are denied the benefit of the revision of the pay. It is maintained that their pension remains related to the pay, they were entitled to at the time of retirement or as a result of modified parity, prior to 1st Jan 2006.
The benefit of the grade pay and MSP is permissible to all ranks except that the MSP is not applicable to ranks of Major and Lieutenant Generals.
However, the pay in the case of the ESP, for the purpose of revision of pension, stands modified, arbitrarily, with out taking cognizance of the judgments of the Supreme Courts referred above, as the minimum of the applicable pay band which governs the pay of more than one grade of the service personnel.
It is a misinterpretation that the same fitment formula that is adopted for the fitment of serving personnel is also made applicable to the ESP. It is not the fitment formula alone but also the revised scale of pay that has to be together adopted for the ESP as well.
18. Thus, it is obvious that, the pension policy made applicable to the Armed Forces Service Personnel is in violation of the principles, that are judiciously applicable, and hence require to be suitably corrected keeping in focus the Supreme Court Judgments.
Fitment of Pay.
19. The obvious and quite apparent choice is to notionally fix the pay of the ESP in the same manner as done for the serving personnel. See Para 12 Case 2 Sub-Para numbered as 31 above. Let us not forget to replace the phrase ‘Major General’ with the phrase ‘all service personnel’ and the date ’01-01-1996’ with the date ’01-01-2006’. That is what is conveyed by the SC judgments. This calls for some study of the fitment stipulated in SAI 1&2/S/2008.
20. It is strange that the fitment is seen to be on point to point basis for all ranks other than Colonel, Brigadier and Lieutenant General. In these ranks bunching up of personnel who have drawn two or more increments in the existing scale of pay by permitting only one increment in the revised scale for every two increments. Why this disparity only for these three ranks, is a mystery that eludes my comprehension. Of course, I am no finance wizard.
21. Arbitrary Fitment of Pay. The fitment of pay for those who are in service as on 01 Jan 2006 is done by multiplying the pay in the existing scale plus the rank p[ay with a factor of 1.86 rounded to the next higher ten. In cases of some of the ranks, it fits in well in the pay band without ay modification. In the cases of Colonel to Major General (perhaps for the Lieutenant Colonel as well), such a fitment does not amount to the minimum pay admissible for them in the Pay Band 4. Therefore, the pay is stepped up to that minimum of the applicable PB4. As this resulted in bunching up, additional increments at the rate of one increment for every two increment drawn in the existing scale was permitted. Thus we find that person of the same rank differing in their service by one year draw the same pay, which is in violation of the norms laid for granting increment. Such arbitrary fitment has adverse effect on the pension in violation of the principle of parity.
Violation of the Principle of Parity
22. If the fitment is notionally done for the ESP, strictly in accordance to the point to point fitment principle, the directions of the SC judgment of 09 Sep 2008 in the case of the Major Generals, stands fulfilled to some extent. But, it still does not meet the spirit of the SC Judgments that spell out Absolute Parity in Pension, in its entirety. No two service persons that hold the same rank and the same length of the service to their credit can draw different pensions because of the difference in their date of retirement. This is the spirit of the judgment.
23. But, the spirit is violated in its application by the Government. We find that all ESP, who are qualified with length of service that entitles them for full pension, draw lesser pension than similarly placed personnel retiring after 01 Jan 2006. Even these later retirees in spite of retiring in the same rank with same qualifying service stand to draw different pensions depending on the date of retirement. Those who earn more increments as per the new rate and approach the maximum of the Pay Band obviously stand to gain higher pension. Thus we have a situation where there is more than one class within an otherwise homogeneous class, contrary to what the Honorable Judges of the Constitution Bench ruled.
The Solution lies in Absolute Parity
24. If we believe in the wisdom of the Supreme Court, in the noble qualities of a Soldier and in the spirit of an ideal employer, there is but just one way that will lead us to the solution. Aiming at absolute parity in pension is that way. With the acceptance of twenty years of qualifying service as the minimum for earning full pension and the principle of ACP, it can be seen that all soldiers earn their pension at the top of the corresponding pay band, provided they serve till the completion of the terms of engagement. All directly Commissioned Officers will be placed in PB4 by the time they retire and will reach the top of PB4 much before they are due to retire. Thus, the pension of all directly commissioned officers shall be fifty percent of the total 67000 plus corresponding Grade Pay and MSP at 6000. The difference in the pensions of the directly commissioned officers amounts to just half of the difference in the corresponding grade pays.
25. Reference to the table below shall reveal the fact in concrete terms. Point to note while reading the table is that unless notional admission of MSP at the top of the Pay band also done an anomaly in pay and pension of the Major and Lieutenant Generals will occur. For detailed figures refer to the Table at Appendix A.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Rank QYS Pay GP MSP Total Pension
Colonel 31 yrs 67000 8700 6000 81700 40850
Brigadier 31 yrs 67000 8900 6000 81900 40950
Maj Gen 31 yrs 67000 10000 6000 83000 41500
Lt Gen 31 yrs 67000 12000 6000 85000 42500
NOTE. As the Army Commanders and equivalent officers are having a fixed pay of 80000 only, their pension gets fixed at 40000. Thus an anomaly occurs. It is but logical that they also are given the benefit of MSP, fixing their pay at 86000 and pension at 43000
26. In a similar manner we have the table for the Personnel Other than Commissioned Officers, as shown below: (The figures need to be authenticated. I have prepared this table from some info I got through the various emails. I find downloading appropriate Government Orders rather a cumbersome affair, strangely.) Applying the principle of ACP, it is reasonable to conclude that a Sepoy is bound to retire as a Havildar and hence the maximum pension for the Sepoy and Naik is likely to be the same as that of the Havildar.
Rank QYS Pay GP MSP Total Pension
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
@50% @70%
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Havildar 24 yrs 20200 2800 2000 25000 12500 17500
Nb Sub 26 yrs 34800 4200 2000 41000 20500 28700
Subedar 28 yrs 34800 4600 2000 41400 20700 28980
Sub Major 30 yrs 34800 4800 2000 41600 20800 29120
NOTE. In the case of the Personnel other than the Commissioned officers we may explore the desirability and implications of fixing pension at 70 % instead of the 50 %.
27. Question may arise regarding the basis for awarding pension at the top of the pay band. This aspect must be analyzed in the backdrop of the concept of Golden handshake used in the nationalized banks as well as other private corporate houses and public sector undertakings, when they wanted to cut the expenditure on the wages. The Golden Handshake envisaged the possibility of compensating the employee adequately keeping in view the loss in pay and perks on the part of the employee and the gain to the Company on releasing him. Thus the company was willing to share the savings with the employee and considered that as fair and just. When a person retires having attained the pay at the top of the band, it is obvious that he gets the corresponding pension. Already, the rule has been framed that a person is entitled for full pension once he completes twenty years of qualifying service. Hence, all those who are in service as on 1st Jan 2006, have to be granted full pension, on completion of twenty years of qualifying service. But could it be at the top of the scale, if prevailing fitment formula is applied? It may not be. In such situation, it is necessary to review the fitment formula itself, lest it should create an anomaly in respect of the Parity. The fitment formula again is an arbitrary one with no rationale but to save a few pennies to the exchequer, as the formula leads to bunching up of two or more officers of different seniority with one pay whereas they have been drawing different pay, the senior drawing more than the junior, which is but natural, fair and just. Here we may recollect the expert recommendation of the Parliamentary Committee quoted in Para 15 above.
Regulation of Pension for ESP
28. Maximum Pension The next question is how to regulate the pension of the ESP. This question is redundant, if we change our prevailing mindset that pension has to be re-fixed, using some fitment formula. This mindset only has been the bugbear all along and has precipitated to the present crisis. By the sheer logic of the SC Judgments, it follows that
Pension being deferred wages, the revised wage structure namely the Pay Band concept is applicable to the ESP.
The twenty years’ eligibility clause for earning full pension is applicable to the ESP, as well. Full pension must be made applicable on completion of 12 years of service in the case of the ESM other than the Commissioned Officers.
All commissioned officers who have retired on completion of the terms of engagement would have put in more than 30 years of qualifying service by the time they retired and hence eligible for the pension at the top of the pay band.
In the case of ESM other than the commissioned officers, a clause has to be introduced by which they, on having the qualifying service of 15 years shall be eligible for pension for maximum pension, at the top of the corresponding Pay Band.
It is obvious, therefore, that there is absolutely no need to apply any fitment formula for the ESP. Their pay has to be fixed according to the fitment formula adopted for the Serving Soldiers, albeit notionally, and the pension revised in terms of liberalized rules. Thus the tables above are equally applicable ESP in the case of all pensioners who retired on completion of the terms of engagement.
29. Full and Part Pension. But, there are quite a few who might have retired with more than the minimum qualifying service for earning full pension but less than that for earning the maximum pension. In case of those officers it is obvious that they are to be granted full pension at the pay they would be eligible, by fixing their pay on point to point basis in the Pay Band. Besides, those who have retired with less than the minimum qualifying service for earning full pension must also be made eligible for pension in the ratio of the service put in divided by twenty years or twelve years as the case may be, provided that they have completed qualifying service of not less than say five years, a new condition.
30. The case of personnel other than commissioned officers needs to be streamlined keeping in focus the fact that their terms of engagement are much less compared to that of the Commissioned Officers. And, as they are deprived of assured continuity of employment, the proportion of the pension with respect to the pay, they drew at the time of retiring, has to more liberal. Perhaps pension at 70% for them instead of 50% for the commissioned officers might compensate the early truncation of service. Besides the service conditions for earning the various pensions also must be liberalized.
Financial Implications
31. It is apparent that the financial implications when worked out at the time of implementation of the 6CPCR, would not have taken into consideration the extent of cash flow that might result if the principle of absolute parity on the lines described above is to be complied with. Some have ventured to state that even if the pensions are paid with absolute parity, the financial burden may just exceed seven billion rupees, which amount is absolutely within the easy grasp of our Nation. Never had there been a year during which the budget allotted for Defence had been completely expended. Of course, a detailed study may reveal the correct extent of the financial liability.
32. Notwithstanding the above, a few moments must be spared to tackle the additional financial burden. The decision on final pension can be implemented in phased manner spread over five years’ time span. The difference between the pension that has been already paid and the final pension arrived at as the result of this review can be progressively reduced at the rate of 20% per year. Fairness demands that the amount that stands withheld is treated as a deposit with the Government earning reasonable interest and paid in the subsequent year with the increased pension.
Cost of Denial
33. Before we conclude, thought as well has to necessarily be given to the possible repercussions of denying what is right on moral ground and from judicial point of view. Let us term it ‘cost of denial’. If we talk of tangible cost in terms of cash outflow the Government stands to gain as it would be paying less the ESP community. Intangible cost is subtle and manifests in the long run more like the expenditure that is involved in the cure of cancer not detected and treated in time. These costs can be due to any or all of the following forms of manifestation.
First due to the increased awareness in the ESM community, denial of the parity in pension shall certainly lead to a high degree of frustration. The ill effect of a frustrated soul can take any form. The type of harm it causes can result in heavy loss in trying to remedy.
I certainly will be naive if I ignore how a few of these frustrated souls may fall prey to the lure of anti-social elements. The specialist skills acquired by the soldier are always in demand by misguided elements. (In fact, I, along with many firmly, believe that the elements promoting insurgent operations and terrorism are diabolically clever to use the disillusioned youth for furthering their prospects). Can any rational thinking person ignore this potential danger and cost of damage that follows?
This country, for that matter any country, needs the voluntary services of skilled personnel in handling calamities, man-made or nature oriented. Even for event management at the National and state levels one can utilize the services of the Ex-Servicemen to a very great extent, provided they are a happy lot and treated with respect by the nation. A lot of wasteful expenditure that can be effectively curtailed can be such a hidden cost of denial.
Let us take note of what Sri N Vittal the well known Chief Vigilance Commissioner of yester years has to say. “Unless we take serious note of these signals of hurt pride and wounded morale, there is a danger that our vaunted track record of democracy may be seriously threatened” (from Times of India).
Let us see what Air Vice Marshal (Rtd) Hamid Shahul, Former Chairman, Airports Authority of India, has to say. “Armed Forces have served the country with dignity and honor. We talk about emulating the example that is Best in the World and if we were to just look at the example of the US Armed Forces serving as well as retired, it will be a reminder to our Top Leadership that this critical issue cannot be further delayed in difficult times like these as is obtainable today to restore the Grace and Dignity of the Armed Services that it deserves without further delay. Let it not be mistaken that it is just the Pay. Pay is just a part of the problem as I perceive”.
34. Assured Continuation of Employment It is time to conclude (thank God some may be inclined to say, well not yet). There is yet another aspect that needs analysis. What caused all these fuss and frustration blowing into almost a National Crisis? Do we not need a permanent solution? If we need, should that root cause not be identified, instead of treating the symptom by according Absolute Parity in Pension? The root cause is glaring yet not seen by us. The government, which is contemplating to include the right to work as fundamental, does not consider not assuring job security to a soldier as a gross injustice. Please refer back to Para 3 and 4. It is this injustice meted out by the British and perpetuated by the humanitarian democratic Indian Government, which led to all these problems of lack of parity. Think for a while. Is there a need for a Department of Ex-Services Welfare and Directorate of Resettlement for Ex-Servicemen, if they are provided with Job security, the ideal concept that lures one to the Government jobs? Have we not relegated the proud soldiers to the level of a degraded and downtrodden community that needs to be taken care by raising ‘flag-day’ collections from the public? Have we not usurped lakhs and lakhs of jobs under the Ministry of Defence that rightfully belongs to the soldier? Are we justified in taking support of the resentment of the civilian staff managing these posts as the reason for not releasing these posts to the rightful owner, the soldier? Is ignoring the wisdom of the 6CPC in recommending lateral induction justified? Only after all these questions are sincerely raised and answered, ‘Maha’n Bha’rat’ can hold her head high and shout the slogan ‘Jai Jawa’n’ in all sincerity and not mere lip service.
Conclusion.
35. When we study the issue of the pension for the Existing Service Pensioners, -keeping in focus the law of natural justice and fairness, the humanitarian grounds, principles of democratic and welfare based governance, the role of ideal employer and the legitimate preferred status for a soldier based on the sacrifices he and his family are called upon to perform - the wisdom of the SC Judgment that crystallized the definition of pension becomes extremely and lucidly clear. The verdict that has to perforce be favored by the Government is that
Let the pay of all the pensioners of any rank of Indian Army and its equivalent rank in the two other Wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the rate given to similar officers of the same rank keeping in focus the years of service put in by them in the revised pay scales with effect from 1.1.2006, and, thereafter, their pension benefits computed on such basis.
But this verdict is based on the recent judgment related to the restricted issue of Major Generals. Even this verdict is not in tune with the concept of Parity in Pension. More pragmatic view emerges only when the real spirit of the judgment awarded in the case of 1982 / D. S. Nakara And Others Vs Union Of India is diligently applied.
36. Keeping the spirit of judgment dated 17 Dec 1982 of the five judges Constitution Bench in the case of 1982 / D. S. Nakara And Others Vs Union Of India, the following verdict is more apt and shall hold good for many more pay commissions:
(a) Maximum Pension Let the pay of all the pensioners of any rank of Indian Army and its equivalent rank in the two other Wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the top of the revised pay scale applicable to that rank of the serving persons with equal or more service, provided that the years of service put in by pensioners is not less than thirty years for Commissioned Officers and twenty years for the rest and, thereafter, their pension benefits computed on such basis.
(b) Full pension at fifty percent. Let in the case of others not covered under sub-para (a) above, notional pay for the computation of the pension be fixed at the rate given to serving personnel of the same rank with same length of service and, thereafter, their pension benefits computed on such basis, provided that the years of service rendered by them is not less than twenty years for Commissioned Officers and twelve years for the rest.
(c) Part Pension Let in the case of pensioners not covered under sub-para (a) and (b) above, the notional pay for the computation of the pension be fixed at the rate given to serving personnel of the same rank with same service and, thereafter, their pension benefits computed on pro-rata basis, provided that the years of service rendered by them is not less than five years.
The revised pension is payable with effect from 1.1.2006.
37. Thus, the ‘Absolute Parity in Pension’ as described under Para 24 is the homage paid to a soldier on retirement, irrespective of the date of retirement. No matter when pay is revised, the revision of the pension, being inherent with the pay revision, will maintain parity. All soldiers of the same rank shall live holding their head high and with mutual respect. Besides, a senior is always respected as senior, with due regard to the age as well; a unique feature of the Service Culture, which has shaped up a bond among the servicemen as strong as that in an Indian Family.
THE END
Appendix A
PAY AND PENSION TABLES
(All tables are to be treated as model and the actual figures need to be reworked)
P-Part Pension F-Full Pension M-Maximum Pension
Pension for Sepoy to Sub Major based on completed years of service
Table 1A – X Group
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Years
Band Pay
Gr Pay
MSP
X Gp pay
Total
Note 1
1
6840
2000
2000
1400
12240
N/A
2
7150
2000
2000
1400
12550
N/A
3
7470
2000
2000
1400
12870
N/A
4
7800
2000
2000
1400
13200
N/A
5
8140
2000
2000
1400
13540
P-3510
6
8490
2000
2000
1400
13890
P-4680
7
8850
2000
2000
1400
14250
P-5840
8N
9220
2400
2000
1400
15020
P-7010
9
9620
2400
2000
1400
15420
P-8180
10
10030
2400
2000
1400
15830
P-9350
11
10450
2400
2000
1400
16250
P-10520
12*
10880
2400
2000
1400
16680
F-11680
13
11330
2400
2000
1400
17130
F-12000
14
11790
2400
2000
1400
17590
F-12320
15
12260
2400
2000
1400
18060
F-12650
16H
12750
2800
2000
1400
18950
F-13280
17
13260
2800
2000
1400
19460
F-13630
18
13790
2800
2000
1400
19990
F-14000
19
14330
2800
2000
1400
20530
F-14380
20
14890
2800
2000
1400
21090
F-14770
21
15470
2800
2000
1400
21670
F-15180
22
16070
2800
2000
1400
22270
F-15600
23
16680
2800
2000
1400
22880
F-16020
24NS*
17330
4200
2000
1400
24930
M-25440
25
18000
4200
2000
1400
25600
M-25440
26
18710
4200
2000
1400
26310
M-25440
27
19440
4200
2000
1400
27040
M-25440
28
20200
4200
2000
1400
27800
M-25440
29S
20980
4600
2000
1400
28980
M-25680
30
21790
4600
2000
1400
29790
M-25680
31SM
22630
4800
2000
1400
30830
M-25800
32
23500
4800
2000
1400
31700
M-25800
Notes
The pension is calculated @70% for Sepoy to Havildar (PB1) and 60% for JCOs (PB2).
The minimum pay of Rs 6840 for sepoy and the grade pay and MSP 2000 have been taken from SAI 1/S/2008 Appendix F and the table built up on that basic value of 6840
The table above is based on TS promotion to Naik, Havaldar and Nb Subedar after 8, 16 and 24 years respectively.
Existing Havildar on completion of his term of engagement must be treated as having qualifying Service of 24 years and given the benefit of Maximum Pension 60% of 34800+4200+2000+1400=25440
Nb Subedar (TS) retires after 4 years of service.
Keeping in consonance with the principle that the pay and pension to a soldier is homage paid by the nation and that parity in retired life is more valuable, it is recommended that the pension for SPOTCO be determined as per the X Group.
* It is recommended that maximum pension (M) at the maximum of the pay band be permitted on completion of 24 years of service, full pension (F) at 70% / 60% at the pay drawn be permitted on completion of 12 years.
Part pension (P) starts on completion of five years of SQP @30% full pension entitled on completion of 12 years and for every additional year of service 10% increase is permitted. Thus on completion of 12 years one gets full pension
Table 1B – Naib Subedars Yet to be prpared
Table 1C – Subedars Yet to be prpared
Table 1D – Sub Major Yet to be prpared
Table 2A- Lieutenant to Colonel (TS)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Rank
QYS
Band Pay
Grade Pay
MSP
Total
Pension
Lt
1
15600
5400
6000
27000
NA
2
16230
5400
6000
27630
NA
Capt
3
16880
6100
6000
28980
NA
4
17570
6100
6000
29670
NA
5
18280
6100
6000
30380
P-7530
6
19020
6100
6000
31120
P-9040
Major
7
19780
6600
6000
32380
P-10550
8
20580
6600
6000
33180
P-12050
9
21400
6600
6000
34000
P-13560
10
22240
6600
6000
34840
P-15060
11
23110
6600
6000
35710
P-15570
12
24010
6600
6000
36610
P-18080
13
24930
6600
6000
37530
P-19580
Lt Col
14
37400
8000
6000
51400
P-21090
15
38770
8000
6000
52770
P-22590
16
40180
8000
6000
54180
P-24100
17
41630
8000
6000
55630
P-25610
18
43120
8000
6000
57120
P-27010
19
44660
8000
6000
58660
P-28610
20
46240
8000
6000
60240
F-30120
21
47870
8000
6000
61870
F-30935
22
49550
8000
6000
63550
F-31775
23
51280
8000
6000
65280
F-32640
24
53060
8000
6000
67060
F-33530
25
54900
8000
6000
68900
F-34450
26
56790
8000
6000
70790
F-35395
Col(TS)
27
58740
8700
6000
73440
F-36720
28
60770
8700
6000
75470
F-37735
29
62860
8700
6000
77560
F-38780
30
65010
8700
6000
79710
F-39855
31
67000
8700
6000
81700
M-40850
Note
From 6th year till 19 years one is eligible for the part pension (P). The full pension is reduced prorate of the service divided by 20 years. as shown under column 7. This amounts to 5% reduction in the full pension for every one year of shortfall.
On completion of twenty years the officer is entitled to full pension (F).
Part pension for Major and Captains is based on the full pension applicable to Lt Colonel taking into account the Grade pay of 8000, because it is meant to compensate the ESP, who were deprived of the present liberal promotion policy and hence had to retire earlier.
Maximum pension (M) is at the top of PB once TOE/ 30 years of service
If the decision to ensure promotion to the rank of Colonel on completion of 15 years is made applicable this, table needs to be revised.
Table 2B Colonel (Selection Grade)
1
2
3
4
5
6
Years of Service
Band Pay
Grade Pay
MSP
Total
Pension
@50%
24
53060
8700
6000
67760
F-33880
25
54920
8700
6000
69620
F-34810
26
56830
8700
6000
71530
F-35765
27
58800
8700
6000
73500
F-36750
28
60830
8700
6000
75530
F-37765
29
62920
8700
6000
77620
F-38810
30
65070
8700
6000
79770
F-39885
31
67000
8700
6000
81700
M-40850
Table 2C Brigadier
1
2
3
4
5
6
Years of Service
Band Pay
Grade Pay
MSP
Total
Pension
26
56830
8900
6000
71730
F-35865
27
58810
8900
6000
73710
F-36855
28
60850
8900
6000
75750
F-37875
29
62950
8900
6000
77850
F-38925
30
65110
8900
6000
80010
F-40005
31
67000
8900
6000
81900
M-40950
Table 2D Major General
1
2
3
4
5
6
Years of Service
Band Pay
Grade Pay
MSP
Total
Pension
28
60850
10000
6000
76850
F-38425
29
62980
10000
6000
78980
F-39490
30
65170
10000
6000
81170
F-40580
31
67000
10000
6000
83000
M-41500
Table 2E Lt General
1
2
3
4
5
6
Years of Service
Band Pay
Grade Pay
MSP
Total
Pension
28
62980
12000
6000
80980
F-40490
29
65230
12000
6000
83230
F-41120
30
67000
12000
6000
85000
M-42500
Note: In the case of Major General and Lt Generals denying the MSP is irrational and leads to anomaly in pay and pension. We have included the MSP and worked out the pension entitlement.
Pension of Vice Chiefs and Commanders. 40000 + 3000 (due to MSP)
Table 3 - Pension on Retiring after Completion of Term of Engagement subject to completion of 30 years in the case of Commissioned Officers and 24 years for others.
Rank
Pension Arithmetic
Pension
Havildar (ESP)
(20200+2800+2000+1400) * 70%
M-18480
Naib Subedar
(34800+4200+2000+1400) * 60%
M-25440
Subedar
(34800+4600+2000+1400) * 60%
M-25560
Sub Major
(34800+4800+2000+1400) * 60%
M-25680
Major (ESP)
(39100+6600+6000) * 55%
M-28440
Lt Colonel (ESP)
(67000+8000+6000) * 50%
M-40450
Colonel (TS)
(67000+8700+6000) * 50%
M-40850
Colonel (Selection Grade)
(67000+8700+6000) * 50%
M-40850
Brigadier
(67000+8900+6000) * 50%
M-40950
Major General
(67000+10000+6000) * 50%
M-41500
Lt General
(67000+12000+6000) * 50%
M-42500
Vice Chief & Equivalent
(80000+6000) * 50%
M-43000
The Chiefs
90000 * 50%
M-45000
Note :
In future no commissioned officer retires below the rank of Colonel. However, this table provides for the Majors and Lt Colonels of Existing Service Pensioners. If they had retired on completion of the term of engagement the shortfall for the qualifying service of 30 years for maximum pension may notionally added.
In the case of Major, being applicable only to ESM community and placed in PB3 the pension is calculated @55%
In the cases of Major Generals and above Rs6000, the MSP component has been notionally added to the maximum of the pay band failing which an anomaly arises.
The case of SL Commissioned officers
And
Officers passing out of the Army Cadet College
The case of SL Commissioned officers and Officers passing out of the A C College has to be separately dealt, taking into account the combined service in the various ranks the officer was holding before being commissioned. One point however worth mentioning now is that the Service Qualifying for Pension (SQP) can be counted by adding to the years of service as commissioned officer with 40% years of qualifying service in the other ranks. The SQP so arrived can be used for determining the eligibility for part, full, and maximum pension.
(PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE TABLES HAVE BEEN WORKED OUT FROM MEAGRE UNAUTHENTICATED DATA AVAILABLE AND ARE MEANT TO SHOW THE FEASIBILITY OF THE PENSION REVISION SUGGESED IN THIS PAPER.)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
All these tables have been initially worked out by AVM RP Mishra. Subsequently the author built upon the basic structure of the tables to cater for the implementation of the concept of “Part Pension”, “Full pension” and “Maximum Pension”.
Appendix ‘B’
Anomaly
Case of a Sepoy of ‘Y’ Group
Pay fixation in terms of SAI 1&2/S/2009 shall lead to anomaly in fixing pension in contradiction to the concept of OROP. Let us illustrate the case of a Sepoy, belonging to ‘Y’ Group. Pay fixation is in terms of SAI 1/S/2008. ACP benefit of GP of Naik on completion of 8 years, Havildar 16 years and Nb Sub 24 years has been considered. Annual increment @ 3% on Scaled Pay plus Grade pay is permitted wef 01-01-06. Pension is worked out @70%.
Case 1 Emoluments (Scaled Pay + Grade Pay + Military Service Pay) and pension of Sepoy enrolled post 01-01-2006
In the first year in the RSP 6250+2000+2000 as Sepoy 10250
On completing 16 years if notionally promoted as Havildar (ACP 2nd promotion)
Emoluments 11450+2800+2000 16250
Pension @ 70% (rounded to near 10) 11380
On completing 24 years if notionally promoted as Nb Sub (ACP 3rd promotion)
Emoluments 15340+4200+2000 21540
Pension @ 70% (rounded to near 10) 15080
Case 2 Comparing with a Sepoy of the same group, retiring with 16 years of service during the year 2006
Without the benefit of notional ACP promotions
Emoluments 8650+2000+2000 12650
Pension @ 70% (rounded to near 10) 8860
With the benefit of notional ACP promotion up to Havildar if made applicable
Emoluments 10000+2800+2000 14800
Pension @ 70% (rounded to near 10) 10360
Case 3 In the case of a Sepoy who is a pensioner as on 31-12-2005 having retired on completion of 16 years of service, the scale post 01-01-1996 was 3250-70-4300. Hence in the 16th year he is entitled for 4300 as basic pay. A Sepoy retiring in the year 2005 has to have 6 years of service in pre 1996 scale of pay. Hence it appears that his basic pay was fixed wef from 1996 such that he could reach only maximum of 3448 (not 4300) and his pension @50% was 1724.
The result. His pension post 2006 is fixed as (1724*2.26) = 3897
Whereas had he been given the benefit of notional pay commensurate to his 16 years of service as 4300, his pension would have been at least (4300*1.13) = 4859
“Now study the various figures shown as pensions and compare the reality of 3897 to the possibility of 15080. Draw your own conclusion if the pay revision, its implementation and the consequent application for the revision of pension have any semblance of fairness and justice towards the ESM community.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
