ALL VETERANS ARE REQUESTED TO SEE THE WEB SITE & GIVE YOUR VALUABLE COMMENTS/SUGGESTIONS

Streamlining Action on Pension grievances-uploading of replies given by the Ministries/Departments to the petitioner on CPENGRAMS

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Streamlining Action on Pension grievances-uploading of replies given by the Ministries/Departments to the petitioner on CPENGRAMS No. 55/6/2015-P&PW(C) Government of India Ministry of Personnel, P.G. & Pensions Department of Pension & Pensioners’ Welfare 3rd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan, New Delhi, the 29th September, 2015 OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject: Streamlining Action on Pension grievances-uploading of replies given by the Ministries/Departments to the petitioner on CPENGRAMS. It has been observed that in most of the cases of pension related grievance, the Ministries/Departments/Organizations do not upload the replies to the petitioner on the portal and close the cases. It is therefore requested that in case, any letter or orders etc, are issued by the concerned Ministry/Department/Organization for redress of the grievance or for not acceding the request of the petitioner for valid reasons, the same may also be uploaded on the portal CPENGRAMS. It is again reiterated that since effective grievance redress mechanism is a priority of the Government, the quality of disposal is important and a well reasoned speaking reply should be furnished to the petitioner before closure of grievance an a copy of the same be uploaded on CPENGRAMS, (Seema Gupta) Deputy Secretary to the Government of India Tel: 24624802 Signed copy

0 comments:

Post a Comment

With eye on one rank one pension, Navy officers seek higher grade pay

, by indianmilitaryveterans

In what is linked to the government’s announcement of One Rank One Pension scheme for armed forces, at least 10 serving Navy officers have made representations to the Navy Headquarters seeking enhancement of their grade pay which may entitle them to higher salaries, pension and benefits. Sources said the Navy authorities might receive more such representations. The hikes sought, though seemingly minuscule, will put them in a higher pay band thereby entitling them to much higher benefits under the seventh Central Pay Commission and OROP, the officers have said.  Select grade captains are officers promoted to the rank of a captain on clearing selection boards. Those who do not clear the selection boards become captains on completion of 26 years of service. One of the “time-scale” captains, in his letter to the Navy Headquarters, has sought that his “grade pay” be increased from Rs 8,700 per month to Rs 8,900 per month. Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the navy officer said: “The seventh Central Pay Commission is currently preparing its report. It may look like a fight for just Rs 200, but it is not so. A grade pay of Rs 8,900 puts officers in a different pay band that would entitle them to enhanced benefits under the Central Pay Commission recommendations. In the light of the OROP, the hike may also affect our pensions substantially.” Watch Video: Understanding The Unresolved Issues In OROP (One Rank One Pension) Implementation  Related Will early retirees benefit from OROP? One rank one pension: The arguments for and against Armed forces seek pay parity with civil servants What forms the backdrop of this demand is a 2013 Supreme Court verdict that quashed differential treatment to “time-scale” captains and select grade captains. Select grade captains are officers promoted to the rank of a captain on clearing selection boards. Those who do not clear the selection boards become captains on completion of 26 years of service. Select grade captains who spend three years in the rank enjoy a higher grade pay of Rs 8,900 per month equivalent to a Commodore, while “time scale” receive Rs 8,700. Also, retirement age for selection grade captains in 56 years, while their “time-scale” counterparts retire at 54. In 2013, “time-scale” captains approached the Supreme Court seeking extension of their service by two years. Ex-paramilitary personnel threaten to go on hungerstrike from November 2 The association of ex-paramilitary personnel has shot off a notice to Prime Minister Narendra Modi threatening to go on a hungerstrike from November 2 unless its demand for One Rank, One Pension is met. In the notice, undersigned by its national general secretary PS Nair, the All India Central Paramilitary Forces Ex-servicemen Welfare Association demanded separate service and pension rules for paramilitary personnel, CSD canteen facility, exemption from contributory pension system and paramilitary service pay. It also reminded the PM of the promises he had made during his election speeches. – ENS

0 comments:

Post a Comment

WRONG FIXATION OF PENSION OF JCOs/NCOs/ORs WEF 1.1.2006

, by indianmilitaryveterans

BRIG S VIDYASAGAR VETERAN'S EXPLANATION Since IESM has taken my name and tried to buttress their argument that everything is honky dory on pension front of JCOs and OR and produce a commentary from Maj Navdeep singh whom I do admire a lot for his work in fighting cases for Ex-Servicemen and widows of ESM, I thought I will be failing in my duty if I do not respond. The learned Advocate has commented “The Brig is unnecessarily asking people to file cases”. Though I am not a lawyer by profession, I have few comments on the explanation given by Maj Navdeep Singh. I am reproducing his comment as under:- Comment of Maj Navdeep Singh : In implementation of the decision of the Delhi High Court affirmed by the Supreme Court, the Government has issued the implementation instructions under question. For ranks other than Commissioned Officers, the instructions would apply from 01 Jan 2006 till 30 June 2009 since from 01 July 2009 onwards the anomaly stood removed and rendered redundant since all such personnel were as it is fixed on notional top of scales. For Commissioned Officers and Civilian pensioners, the instructions would apply from 01 Jan 2006 till 23 Sept 2012 since the anomaly was only removed on 23 Sept 2012 My (Brig S Vidyasagar Veteran's Response. My military common sense tells me the following:- If all anomalies are removed w.e.f. Jul 2009 then why that pension of NCOs has been further improved w.e.f. 24 Sep 2012? Just see the pension of Sepoy of Y group with 15 years’ service as given in various Circulars:- SER NO QUALI- FYING SERVICE PENSION AS ON JAN 2006 AS PER CIRCULAR 430 PENSION AS ON 01 JUL 2009 AS PER CIRCULAR 501 PENSION AS ON 24 SEP 2012 AS PER CIRCULAR 501 ARREARS FROM JAN 2006 TO 30 JUN 2009 PENSION ARREARS FROM JUL 2009 TO 23 SEP 2012 TOTAL PENSION ARREARS 1 15 3,500 4,603 5,102 73,724 28,752 1,02,476 2 15.5 3,555 4,695 5,196 75,519 28,867 1,04,386 3 16 3,625 4,787 5,291 76,669 29,040 1,05,709 4 16.5 3,694 4,879 5,385 77,820 29,155 1,06,975 5 17 3,764 4,971 5,480 78,970 29,328 1,08,298 6 17.5 3,834 5,063 5,574 80,075 29,443 1,09,518 7 18 3,904 5,155 5,669 81,225 29,616 1,10,841 8 18.5 3,973 5,247 5,763 82,376 29,731 1,12,107 9 19 4,043 5,339 5,858 83,526 29,904 1,13,430 10 19.5 4,113 5,431 5,952 84,631 30,019 1,14,650 11 20 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 12 20.5 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 13 21 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 14 21.5 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 15 22 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 16 22.5 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 17 23 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 18 23.5 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 19 24 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 20 24.5 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 21 25 4,182 5,523 6,047 85,827 30,192 1,16,019 22 25.5 4,252 5,615 6,047 82,606 24,891 1,07,497 23 26 4,322 5,707 6,047 79,385 19,590 98,975 24 26.5 4,391 5,799 6,047 76,209 14,289 90,499 25 27 4,461 5,891 6,047 72,988 8,989 81,976 26 27.5 4,531 5,983 6,141 74,092 9,104 83,196 27 28 & ABOVE 4,600 6,075 6,235 75,243 9,219 84,462 What was anomaly and how did it get removed is not explained anywhere! Let me explain this anomaly by taking help of MoD letter dated 08 Mar 2010 which I am reproducing for your benefit. English is a peculiar language and one word here and there changes entire complexion. Therefore let us see whether Min of Def implemented their own letter: Government of India, Ministry of Defence, Deptt. of Ex-servicemen Welfare, No PC 10(1)/2009-D (Pen/Pol) New Delhi Dated 8th March 2010 To The Chief of the Army Staff, The Chief of the Naval Staff, The Chief of the Air Staff, Subject: Implementation of the Government decision on the recommendations ofthe Cabinet Secretary’s Committee – Revision of pension in respect of Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) discharged prior to 01.01.2006. Sir, The undersigned is directed to state that in order to consider various issues on pension of Armed Forces pensioners, the Government had set-up a Committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary. The Committee in its Report have recommended the following for pre-2006 PBOR pensioners - 1.1 Pre-10.10.1997 PBOR pensioners may be brought on par with post-10.10.1997 PBOR pensioners; and 1.2 To reduce the gap between the pensions of pre & post-1.1.2006 PBOR pensioners, following principle may be followed - 1.2.1 Pension of all pre-1.1.2006 PBOR pensioners may be reckoned with reference to a notional maximum in the post-1.1.2006 revised pay structure corresponding to the maximum of pre-Sixth pay commission pay scales as per fitment table of each rank. 1.2.2 To continue with the enhanced weightages awarded by the Group of Ministers (GOM) of 2006. 2. The above recommendations of the Committee have been accepted by the Government and the President is pleased to decide that with effect from 1st July 2009, service pension/special pension/invalid pension/service element of disability pension and service element of war injury/liberalized disability pension (in release cases only) of all pre-1.1.2006 PBOR pensioners of Army, Navy and Air Force (including DSC and TA) shall be reckoned at 50% of the notional pay in the post-1.1.2006 revised pay structure corresponding to the maximum of pay scales applicable from 10.10.1997 of the rank and group continuously held for last 10 months preceding invalidment/discharge. The amount so determined shall be the pension for 33 years of reckonable qualifying service including rank weightage (except for TA personnel) as provided under this Ministry’s letter No. 1(6)/98/D(Pension/Services) dated 3.2.1998 and enhanced vide this Ministry’s letter No. 14(3)/2008/D (Pen/Sers)/Vol-III dated 1.2.2006. For lesser period of qualifying service, this amount shall be proportionately reduced. The amount of pension finally arrived at shall be subject to a minimum of Rs. 3,500/- per month. Let us concentrate on the most important part of the letter i.e. para 1.2.1 and try to understand what actually it conveys:- 1.2.1 Pension of all pre-1.1.2006 PBOR pensioners may be reckoned with reference to a notional maximum in the post-1.1.2006 revised pay structure corresponding to the maximum of pre-Sixth pay commission pay scales as per fitment table of each rank It talks of notional maximum in the post - 01 Jan 2006 revised pay structure. So let us see what is this Revised pay structure for Sepoy of Y Group (in 6th CPC scales). What is the notional maximum for Sepoy of 23 years’ service of Group Y corresponding to maximum in 5th CPC scales of pay? It is Rs 6000. Then by applying 33 year rule pension for Sepoy Gp Y comes to : 6000 x (23 years’ service + 10 years rank weightage)/33 which is Rs 6000 But if you see the pension of Sepoy of Y Group with 23 years’ service in Circular 430 you will find pension fixed is Rs 5523. Is this not wrong figure? Should it not be Rs 6000 which is top of scale? Here also Sepoys have been deprived of their hard earned pension. Let me make table for all of you to prove to you how DAD guys make a Charlie out of faujis. SER NO Rank Maximum pay for 33 years’ service including Rank Weightage as given in Fitment Table of SAI 1/S/2008 Entitled Pension @50% of Pay Pension as per Circular 430 Loss suffered by JCOs and OR without DR per month 1 Sepoy X Gp for 23 years service 14050 7025 6441 584 2 Sepoy Y 12000 6000 5523 477 3 Nk Gp X with 25 years service 15060 7530 6900 630 4 Nk Gp Y 13150 6575 6046 529 5 Hav Gp X with 27 years service 16710 8355 8160 6 Hav Gp Y 14290 7145 7002 143 7 Nb Sub Gp X with 28 years’ service 23020 11510 11510 Nil 8 Nb Sub Gp Y 21350 10675 10675 Nil 9 Sub Gp X with 28 years service 26210 13105 13105 Nil 10 Sub Y Gp 23940 11970 11970 Nil (Source- Via Gp E-mail from Brig S Vidyasagar Veteran)

0 comments:

Post a Comment

I DON’T WANT TO GO TO JANTAR MANTAR

, by indianmilitaryveterans

 Sareshth Kumar September 28 at 9:55pm When I was commissioned and got my wings in December 1970, I was told that the officers do not discuss two things- politics and pay. To discuss ither was considered bad manners. I did not. By the 25th of every month, my pay used to be over and I would somehow survive till the first of the next month. I still considered myself to be rich. I did not pay attention, when in 1973 the pension of the armed forces was reduced from 70% to 50%. I did not know that the pension of the civilians was increased from 30 % to 50 %! I did not even know that it was the IAS which was formulating all these rules. The thought that it was done after the armed forces had won the 1971 war never occurred to me. The thought that it was done after Gen. Manekshaw, as popular as Indira Gandhi in those days, had retired never occurred to me. I never knew that as compensation, a bait- OROP had been dangled for the armed forces. I was not supposed to think money-I did not. I enjoyed the challenge posed by my beautiful love – The Seahawk—referred to as ‘Flying Coffin’ by some ill informed guys. Along the way, I lost some friends in air crashes It was part of the game. Money had nothing to do with it. I heard about the sailors sharing houses two/three families to a house. I heard about the waiting list for accommodation being one year plus everywhere. I did not pay attention. There were the three service chiefs and a host of senior officers out there to ensure that all my problems would be well looked into! I was happy doing my job. Life on board the submarines was tough, but we had tough guys to take it on. Sailing on small ships, big ships, aircraft carrier, temporary duties at short notice, no reservation in the trains-yet you manage to reach for your duty on time, no accommodation in the messes/ships-all these were part of life. Manage what you can. Crib about the rest if wish to. But get the work done! That was the motto. Life went on. I was happy in the service. One day I took premature retirement because I had reached the level of my inefficiency. The navy gracefully gave me fair amount of money. And I was entitled to pension-for life. The pension was sufficient for about 40 % of my and my family’s survival needs. For the rest, obviously I had to work. I was 45 and fit to work for many more years. For the first time the thought came to my mind-if I was in civvies always- how it would have been? But I was too proud to feel any regret. The navy had looked after me well. Those Jawans/sailors and airmen who had to leave at the age of 35 or so, certainly had it tough. But they were all capable of making their lives again. We all had joined of our free will knowing the pros and cons-isn’t it? That there was something like OROP- I only heard in passing.Never gave it a thought. After all if there was something that I should have got, the three service chiefs and the senior officers would have ensured that I get it! I heard about veterans returning their medals to the president’s office. (The supreme Commander of the Armed Forces never had time to meet those anguished, graying men.) I wondered why? Then I heard a name-Dhanapalan. Read his story. The army chief had asked him to meet separately when Maj Dhanapalan asked a question about pay anomaly during one of the presentations. To meet separately-obviously to put him in his place. Dhanapalan did not go to meet him. Instead he went to the court after retirement. And court asked that he be paid some lakhs of rupees because injustice had been done to him. Individuals went to the courts. ESM organisations sprouted all over India. They merged and divided and then merged again and went to the Supreme Court. One day, I heard that the Supreme Court had decided that injustice had been done to me! And I was to be compensated monetarily for what the GOI had been cheating me of. My revised pension was to be given to me. The mirror of my faith cracked a little. The senior officers could not do it? They had no authority or insufficient will? What was it that had forced the retired service personnel to go to the courts? I kept hearing about agitations launched by the veterans. Never went for one. I was different! I was/am the last defence that my country has got against external threat and internal problems. I could not go on the streets like a common agitator!! Surely, there were other ways and other senior officers who would ensure that injustice is not done to me or those who come after me. I heard about a prime ministerial candidate promising OROP in 100 days of his party coming to power. 100 days came and went. One day my daughter castigated me not going to Jantar Mantar, where a dharna had been in progress for many days. She asked me, if I shall refuse the benefits which I shall be getting because of the struggle of all the veterans who were sitting on hunger strike at Jantar Mantar? Out of curiosity I went. Then I went again and again and again. And I changed! I learnt and am still learning. There I saw Col Inderjit Singh who first took up the OROP issue in 1982. He is more than eighty years old and comes everyday for the dharna in his wheel chair. And Satbir Singh, who has made this as the mission of his life. He has been ridiculed, threatened, ignored, but possesses a ‘never say die spirit’. And a widow in her nineties-still waiting for OROP. On 26 August, Dushyant Dave, president of the Supreme Court Bar Council came with all the office bearers. They pledged support to the ESM and promised to fight for OROP on their behalf, free of cost. They assured us that the Government will not go to the court. If they did, they will lose in the third hearing. In my visits, the main thing that I learnt was that I was quite ignorant about what OROP was. And then the thought came to me, that there is a vast majority of ex-servicemen intent on not sullying their image by taking this route- because they are even more ignorant than I am! They have zero knowledge about the issues involved in OROP! An insidious thought entered my mind, “For forty one years, I and those who were before me, did not hit the streets. Who got us OROP?” The answer was a painful-No one! It was apathy by all concerned. We did not think money and the powers that be, quietly-not only denied us money but also kept downgrading the armed forces. And those upon whom we had been depending - were helpless! It was announced when the prime ministerial candidate faced a huge turnout of ESM at Rewari.” Everyday there are 15 or more ESM/ladies on hunger strike at Jantar Mantar. Hundreds of officers and men are present there every day. I have seen Lieutenant Generals and senior air force officers at the dharna. Not many naval personnel though. ‘OROP will be announced soon, before the Bihar elections.’ They told me at Jantar Mantar. It was! It was announced by the defence minister before the Bihar elections were announced and after the ESM made it clear that they would go to Bihar and intensify their agitation. The defence minister of the country said that those who had taken VRS, will not get the benefits of OROP! VRS?? It was clarified that those who had taken pre-mature retirement will not get the benefits of OROP. A master stroke to divide the ESM! But ESM retaliated by saying, “We do not leave our dead behind in war-you expect us to leave our living brethren behind!” And I learnt that at every stage, everyday new strategies were being drawn by the guys sitting in the South Block and the North Block to ensure that OROP is given with as little grace as is possible. The representatives of the Ex Servicemen have been called many times for discussions. During the discussions, concessions have been sought from them and obtained. And then the powers that be go back and include one more clause detrimental to the definition of OROP. I heard that the PM had said words to the effect that OROP was being given out of the hard earned money of the poor of this country! I wonder-out of whose hard earned money the MPs are paid their salaries!! They waste session after session- day after day complete monsoon-winter sessions are washed off without transecting any business! There is no mention of poor of the country paying for their callousness! I was also given to understand that the three chiefs and a select band of the senior officers along with the top babus are already under the ambit of what is called OROP for us. I am an ignorant man-always ready to aplogise for my lack of knowledge. At Faridabad, the PM reiterated the intention to implement OROP in it’s original form. And that those who had taken pre-mature retirement will not miss out. They was happiness that the pre-mature retirees will get it. Next day there was a news item in TOI-statement by a babu-‘NO they will not get it.’ Till to date, no denial of this news item from any government source. Is it possible that a babu can overturn what the PM said? Then I tried to recollect. At no stage had the PM clearly said that ‘ALL’ the premature retirees will get it! The speech was worded in a way that left scope for doubt. I also learnt about seven anomalies that still need attention. I do not understand why this is happening? On 12 September a rally was held at Jantar Mantar. I went for it. There were thousands upon thousands veterans and ladies present. Was the total number 20,000/30,000? How does it matter! There were a large number of media personnel/vans present to cover the event. It was announced from the stage that the government had muzzled the media. Buses had been stopped at the border. No reporting of the event! It was not reported anywhere. Was the media under instructions to blow up any untoward incident at the meet! The demonstration has been peaceful-for more than 100days!! I am bewildered. Why does my own government refuse to give me what is mine (everyone in uniform)! Why do they refuse to give me what has been agreed to forty three years ago! Why do they refuse to clear-in it’s original form-what has been promised by successive governments, looked in to microscopically by a parliamentary committee, agreed upon by two-all party parliament approvals, found in order by the highest court of the land and agreed to by the present government. I was/ am the last line of defence that my country has against external aggression and internal problems. I am different. I don’t want to go to Jantar Mantar!  (Source- Via e-mail)

0 comments:

Post a Comment

OROP: Why ex-servicemen continue to protest

, by indianmilitaryveterans

The Centre has informed the Supreme Court that it has complied with a 2008 judgment regarding the implementation of the One Rank One Pension (OROP) on Tuesday, but almost three weeks after the government announced an OROP roll out, the ex-servicemen’s agitation at Jantar Mantar is far from dying down. The ex servicemen claim that the government-announced scheme is anything but OROP. The definition of OROP accepted by the government in Parliament has equal pension for officers retiring in the same rank with equal length of service. In his September 5 announcement, the Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar said that OROP would be implemented with retrospective effect from July 2014 and with 2013 as the base year. What this essentially meant was that that the veterans’ pensions shall match the pensions of those retiring in 2013 and that they would be given the arrears from July 2014. The government also announced a one-member judicial committee to address the likely anomalies in the scheme. Most importantly, the scheme, written order of which is slated to be rolled out within a month, will involve revision of pensions every five years. The government’s interpretation of OROP is unacceptable to the ex- servicemen community. They believe that each of these clauses is a violation of the basic definition of OROP as outlined by the Bhagat Singh Koshiyari Committee in 2012. For instance, the five-year revision of pensions implies that a veteran’s pension will remain unchanged for five years. This will create multiple pensions for officers of one rank given that for five years – the gap between two revisions – many new retirees will leave the services with different pensions. The ex-servicemen jokingly term the government’s five-year revision proposal as One Rank Many Pensions and still demand an annual revision. Disagreement also continues over the judicial committee, as the ex- servicemen are seeking a five-member committee rather than the proposed one-man committee — with three of their own members, one representative from the government and one nominated member. Last but not the least, there is a strong distrust of the bureaucracy. In fact, the government’s announcement to omit premature retirees from OROP – a clause which was reversed later – was viewed by veterans as a “last minute effort by bureaucrats to create troubles” in OROP. For its part, the government has remained silent on the subject since its announcement of the roll out on September 5. Everything now depends on its final call in the order expected in October

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Have followed Supreme Court order on OROP: Govt

, by indianmilitaryveterans

The Centre on Monday informed the Supreme Court that it has complied with a 2008 judgment for implementation of the One Rank, One Pension (OROP) principle for retired armed forces personnel. Additional Solicitor General Pinky Anand apprised a bench led by Justice T S Thakur. In its affidavit, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) stated that it has abided with the mandate of the top court and issued a pertinent government order on August 10. In February, the government was given three months by the court to implement its order, and the period expired in May. RELATED SC gives Centre 6 more weeks to implement OROP Behind One Rank One Pension scheme delay, worry about small hike for jawans Plea seeks more powers for AFT; notices issued On this, the MoD said: “Due to procedural process and the fact that number of agencies were involved in issuing government orders for implementation (of the court order), the compliance could not be done within three months. But the delay is neither intentional nor deliberate, and is deeply regretted.” The government was facing a possible contempt proceeding over its failure to comply with the seven-year-old judgment. The issue in this case was whether there could be a disparity in payment of pension to officers of the same rank because they had retired prior to the introduction of the revised pay scales. Effectively ruling in favour of the OROP, the apex court had held no defence personnel senior in rank could get a lower pension than his junior irrespective of the date of retirement. “The object sought to be achieved was not to create a class within a class, but to ensure that the benefits of pension were made available to all persons of the same class equally. To hold otherwise would cause violence to the provisions of Article 14 (equality) of the Constitution,” it had ruled in 2009.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

OROP and collateral damage

, by indianmilitaryveterans

THE OROP movement is an unprecedented landmark for the defence forces in the Indian context. Never before were issues pertaining to the forces relegated to the streets of Jantar Mantar for national and political attention. The impact on the morale of the veterans and the forces due to the procrastination, political hardball and ostensible bargaining (on something that was agreed to in totality as part of electoral commitments by both the NDA and UPA, subsequently ratified by Parliament, and then reneged on flimsy grounds like administrative difficulties and fiscal impropriety) has been deliberated ad nauseam and assimilated by the nation; the forces in particular. While the final verdict on the justness of the OROP, as accepted by the government (fine print still awaited), from that of the construct earlier envisaged and accepted, is still out there, but there are far more consequential fault lines that have emerged out of the procrastination that needs immediate and the highest level of national and executive assuaging. These fault lines are borne of the fundamental ignorance or apathy towards appreciating the construct, structure and ethos of the soldiering comity and its inherent concept of ‘indivisibility’ amongst its rank and file. The OROP movement showed the forces of the land, air and sea to be an integrated setup of an extended family that incorporated all the serving and retired soldiers and officers from the three services. Unexpectedly, and perhaps unwarrantedly, a lesson to the political masters on how an ex-airman from Tirunelveli, along with an ex-sailor from Uttarakhand was seen cheering on the ex-soldier from Punjab, on the fasting dais! All through, they maintained an impeccable code of expressing dissent and refused to entertain any violent, political or mutinous undertones (despite the high-handedness of the police and gross insensitivity of political pundits and armchair experts on matters, military). Ironically, the decorum and the unity in diversity of the protest was a walking, talking personification of the lofty idea of ‘India’, or as all soldiers who swear by the holy grail of the Chetwodian code, “The safety, honour and welfare of your country comes first, always and every time. The honour, welfare and comfort of the men you command comes next. Your own ease, comfort and safety comes last, always and every time.” However, the first clear casualty post-OROP is the ‘us-versus-them’ tonality that has posited the bureaucracy against the defence services and their interests. Worms came out of the woodwork and the systematic degradation of the defence forces over the years has got established and rubbed in — an undesirable civil-military equation in any democratic setup. Delay in the implementation and the interim bargaining has only hardened stands and a deeper mistrust has set in. In an increasingly fragile and active national landscape, where the services of the forces are often solicited by civilian masters in quelling natural and manmade disasters, unrests, insurgencies and protests, it does not augur well for the umbilical cord of trust between the civil and military, to look at the other as the literal, ‘other’. The second key fault line is the unfortunate discourse of comparative work conditions and finger-pointing among the military and the paramilitary, a hitherto healthy respect, has got mutually affronted with lazy attempts by the vested interests in driving a tactical wedge between the two. Our national borders are onioned with layers of intra-military-paramilitary security rings and flanks that have had a tradition of seamless respect, understanding and operational deployment among each other. Today, we potentially acknowledge each other, not as those fellow-brother-in-arms, but as one from a fundamentally different organisation with disparate attributes, work conditions and governmental treatment. However, the most serious threat of collateral damage is one of the officer-soldier divide that could implode the fighting spirit (read abilities) of our forces. Historically, factually and rightfully, they have prided themselves as an unparalleled fighting force, where the officer leads his men from the front. This bond is sacred, with enough and documented facts about the ratio of officer-to-soldier mortality in battlefield, for the Indian defence forces to be among the highest in the world in modern history. Kargil is an example in recent history. This very microcosm was almostbreeching with simmering canards of selective interests among differing ranks (officers vs soldiers) in the OROP movement. It is a crevice, fraught with unimaginable implications. Ironically, a few feet away from the main protest tent on Jantar Mantar was an alternative OROP setup that sought a very specific and restrictive agenda, unlike the more holistic and unified voice of the initial OROP genesis. Time and delay ultimately led to factionalism among the veterans and their principal movement — albeit not on these lines. But, this danger did show its ugly face and its residual impact lurks around the corner, with the implementation of OROP still pending. It strikes at the very heart of the organisation’s capabilities. So far, the officer-soldier bond has never been divided or questioned. Yes, there have been specific and serious flare-ups, even quasi revolts of units (like in ’84), but these are attributable to a charged up political, social or civilian rationale. Adding to the cauldron was the unnecessary and occasional political one-upmanship, the forced quasi-unionisation (and now factionalism) of the protest process that was imposed by procrastination and the reduction of the Kargil Diwas and 50 years of the 1965 victory to a political tamasha, and an eye sore was playing out in the near vicinity of the corridors of officialdom with an 84-year-old soldier being roughed up by a Delhi policeman. Potentially, this very edifice of the forces and their operational imperatives are susceptible to various types and levels of inter-governmental tensions and worse, spectres of self-combustion. OROP is a saga of an avoidable delay, which achieved nothing for the protagonists of procrastination. Therefore, implementation within the committed time frame would have spared the nation, the government and the forces the unnecessary brush to their collective pride and honour. The forces were struggling with deficiencies of manpower, equipment, armaments — OROP may have inadvertently added ‘fighting spirit’ to the list. ‘Indivisibility’ and nationalism form the basic DNA of a soldier’s foundation. The OROP impasse has drifted the narrative towards serious collateral damage that needs immediate course correction beyond financial calculations of pension. This fighting force of veterans and serving combatants feed and march on the incalculable levers of ‘India first’ and pride — reminiscent of the motto of the regiment of the Artillery, Sarvatra Izzat-o-Iqbal (forever with honour and glory). It is this very izzat that has been wounded and that needs to be restored as soon as possible. — The writer is a former Lt Governor of Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Puducherry

0 comments:

Post a Comment

One Rank One Pension Protest Continues for 105th Day

, by indianmilitaryveterans

New Delhi: The protest over One Rank One Pension (OROP) continued for the 105th day today, with around 50 ex-servicemen observing relay hunger strike. The veterans were supported today by Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) member and actor Gul Panag, who appealed to the government to "unconditionally" fulfil OROP promises the way soldiers serve the nation. "Armed forces personnel never retire... Even if you take premature retirement, you do so after completing your pensionable services and that is also because the country wants to keep their army, navy and air force young," Ms Panag said at Jantar Mantar. Show Full Article "But you can be recalled anytime for five years and even when you apply for VRS (voluntary retirement scheme), whether or not you get it now or after four years is not in your hands," she said. The veterans organised a rally in Dehradun today. According to the ex-servicemen, the OROP given by government is flawed as it is "One Rank Five Pensions" instead of being One Rank One Pension. The veterans are now demanding that government should remove the anomalies in the OROP scheme that has been announced. The OROP scheme announced by Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar will take 2013 as the base year to calculate pensions and the date of implementation will be July 1, 2014. The period for review is five years, a major point of difference between the government and the ex-servicemen. The veterans say this will make it 'one rank five pension' and differences will pile up every year. Another major point of contention was the government's decision to keep those who take voluntary retirement out of the ambit of the scheme. However, both the Defence Minister and Prime Minister Narendra Modi later assured that people opting for premature retirement will not be left out of the scheme.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

OROP Protest: Gul Panag Appeals To PM Modi, Asks Him Not To Break Veterans' Morale

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans
NEW DELHI -- Actress and AAP leader Gul Panag today alleged that despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi's "light clarification" on the One Rank One Pension issue, there is still ambiguity left over the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS).
Panag, daughter of retired Lt Gen HS Panag, appealed to the government to "unconditionally" fulfil OROP promises the way soldiers serve the nation, as she claimed that veterans were actually given "One Rank Five Pension".
She was addressing the war veterans, who have been protesting for over 100 days at Jantar Mantar.
Panag alleged that the government's Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) is a non-entity as there is nothing voluntary about it. She said that despite the Prime Minister giving light clarification over the issue, there is still ambiguity related to VRS.
"Even if you take premature retirement, you do so after completing your pensionable services and that is also because the country wants to keep their Army, Navy and Air Force young.
"But you can be recalled anytime for five years and even when you apply for VRS, whether or not you get it now or after four years is not in your hands," Panag, who contested Lok Sabha polls on an AAP ticket, said.
On September 6, a day after the government announced implementation of OROP, Modi had said some people were trying to "mislead" the armed forces, particularly on the issue of premature retirement.
"Jawans in the army have to retire after 15-17 years of service. A few people think they will not get OROP....they are misleading you by terming it as VRS (voluntary retirement scheme)....
"But if anybody gets OROP, jawans will be the first.... Those injured, those who had to compulsorily leave they will get OROP. And the Prime Minister who loves the army cannot even think of depriving such people of OROP benefits," Modi said at a rally in Faridabad.
Panag asked the government to fulfill the promises "completely".
"When a soldier pledges his life to protect his country, he does it fully without any conditions and this is what we expect from the Prime Minister also, that the promise he made to us, he should fulfil it completely, not without any conditions.
"What the government has given in the name of One Rank One Pension is actually One Rank Five Pensions," Panag said.
The former beauty queen also said that when the Prime Minister speaks of giving a befitting reply at the country's border, it is these soldiers who put their life at risk to guard the borders.
"When the PM says that 'mooh tod jawab diya jayaega' (befitting reply will be given), who does this? It is the soldiers who are deployed full time at the borders, and these soldiers would be ex-servicemen tomorrow. The PM should not break their faith and morale," she said.
The AAP leader also asked why the Defence Minister had not sent out any government notification regarding OROP even three weeks after the announcement was made.
Panag also sought to correct those who call the OROP a sentimental issue, saying that those who join the defence services do it for their passion for the nation and not as any other job.
Source : Click here

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Shame on Chetan Bhagat: OROP views dishonour Indian Army

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans
I did not read Chetan Bhagat's article in the Sunday edition of The Times of India on September 15, 2015 till this Monday when my father brought it to my notice. Being a retired army-man, he felt hurt that a national daily of such popularity should publish what he felt was an unresearched, insensible and insensitive article. A number of veterans have already responded to Bhagat and invited him to debates based on facts and a proper analytical study of the one rank one pension (OROP) situation which he has chosen to ignore, instead sharing and replying to senseless abusive articles to gain sympathy. What really irked me and made me write this one week on, was his banal refusal to accept any logic put forward for his benefit and the issuing of statements such as "And while I have no confirmation, the mob style social media attacks show there is political backing to this ex-servicemen protest."
As the daughter of a family that has served in the armed forces, I felt humiliated and slighted that someone with the kind of following that Bhagat has should refer to ex-servicemen as a mob. We - the children of parents in the armed forces - take great pride in our parents and this kind of attack on the honour of our tribe is not easy to digest, given the kind of sacrifices made by our families (especially our mothers). So, I chose to attempt a reply.
Bhagat asks readers if it is time to use the mind and not the heart when harsh economic realities have to be faced and decisions taken. God forbid, if the soldiers at the front start to apply logic and back out when faced with the bullets of either the enemy or the terrorists, will Bhagat, then, ask them to act in concert with their heart? One is compelled to think of the Pakistani establishment as an analogy. It has long been known and fairly well-established that the Pakistani establishment uses terror groups against India, particularly over the Kashmir issue. These terrorists are called "freedom fighters" by the Pakistani spy agency Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). However, they become "terrorists" when they strike inside Pakistani territory.
Bhagat need not have looked far to see how the government plans its expenditure. Shortly, elections are due in Bihar and Prime Minister Narendra Modi had promised a Rs 1.65 lakh crore special package for the state's development while asking people to vote for the BJP. Bhagat chose to blinker himself to such shenanigans. If the amount pledged by the prime minister was part of planned expenditure for Bihar, why was it not released as part of a routine budgetary exercise? And, if not part of planned expenditure, where is it being sourced from? Compared to this, an amount annually required for the OROP is a drop in the ocean, just seven per cent of the Bihar special package. How do such ironies skip the attention of an IIT and IIM alumnus who has made a niche for himself in the world of literature? Isn't Bhagat pulping his own reputation?
To cap it all, Bhagat is the son of a retired army officer and has been criticised by his father. Instead of raising questions about the justified demand by the armed forces veterans of their right, Bhagat should have brought out the pusillanimity of the entire media which has completely blanked out the OROP agitation by the veterans. Oh, how naïve of me. How would Bhagat earn his honorarium for the article, since the media wouldn't touch it with a barge pole!
Source :Clich here

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Government proposes independent Commission to recommend MPs’ salaries

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans


Inter-Party forums in Legislatures to enhance coordination for better functioning

All India Whips’ Conference at Visakhapatnam to discuss these issues
The Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs has proposed a 3-member independent Emoluments Commission to recommend salaries and other allowances for the Members of Parliament. This proposal is contained in the Agenda Notes prepared by the Ministry for the two day All India Whips’ Conference to be held at Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh during September 29-30, 2015. The Conference will be chaired by the Minister of Parliamentary Affairs Shri M.Venkaiah Naidu.

Chief Whips and Whips of various parties in Parliament and state legislatures will also discuss establishing inter-Party forums in Legislatures for better coordination to enable effective functioning of legislative bodies. Delegates will also discuss the utility and shortcomings of the MPLADS (Members of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme) in the light of its implementation over the last 32 years and make suggestions and recommendations.

The Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs, in the Agenda Notes for the Whips Conference stated that “The setting up of an independent Emoluments Commission for recommending the salaries and allowances of the Members of Parliament will not only put to rest the public outcry and media criticism over MPs themselves deciding their salaries, it will also provide an appropriate opportunity to take into consideration the huge responsibilities and the important role they play in our representative democracy. It would ensure that recommendations on Parliamentary salary are reached in a fair, transparent and equitable way. Once there is consensus on setting up of the Commission, the Salary, Allowances and Pension of Members of Parliament Act,1954 will suitably amended”.


The general principles suggested by the Ministry for determination of salary should be:

i. Salary should not be so low as to defer suitable candidates or so high as to make pay the primary attraction for the job;

ii. Salary should reflect level of responsibility; and

iii. Those with outside interests should not be deterred from entering Parliament, those who chose to make Parliament a full-time career should be adequately rewarded to reflect their responsibilities.

Presently, as per Article 106 of the Constitution of India, salaries of MPs are determined by the Act of 1954, amended from time to time. The last revision in salary of MPs was made in 2010 and MPs presently get a basic salary of Rs.50,000 per month. Salaries of Members of State Legislatures are decided as per Article 195 of the Constitution.

As per a comparative analysis of Members of Parliament in 37 developing and developed countries, basic salary of MPs is in the range of Rs.7,952 in Tunisia to a high of Rs.6,16,675 per month in Israel. MPs of only in six countries i.e Tunisia, Venezuela , Sri Lanka, Nepal, Haiti and Panama are drawing salary less than that of Indian MPs.

As per a survey conducted by Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) of 138 chambers from 104 Parliaments, 69 chambers indicated that it is the Parliament which determines the salaries of Members, in reference to another salary scale. 31 of these stated that MPs’ salaries are determined in reference to the Civil Service salary scale. In case of Bhutan, Namibia and the UK House of Commons, salaries are determined by independent bodies.

While referring to the growing challenges of House management further to increase in the number of parties in the legislatures, the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs, in the Agenda Notes has stressed the need for enhancing floor coordination for better functioning of legislatures in the country. In this regard, the Ministry has proposed an inter-Party forum in Parliament and every state legislature to freely discuss various issues to be included in the list of Business of the House ahead of every session.

Presently, there are 6 National Parties, 53 State Parties besides 1,737 Registered/Unrecognised Parties in the country, of which, as many as 37 political parties and groups are represented in the 16th Lok Sabha.

The Conference will also deliberate the implementation of MPLADS scheme, introduced in 1993-94, under which funds being provided for each MP has increased from Rs.5.00 lakhs to Rs.5.00 cr in 2011-12. All India Whips Conference was conceived as early as in 1952, to provide a suitable forum for periodical meetings and mutual exchange of views on matters of common concern and to evolve standards to strengthen Parliamentary Democracy.

Whips of both the ruling and opposition parties play an important role in informing MPs about the business of the day, ensuring their attendance and formulating a collective opinion of the Party on major issues. They also interact with the presiding offices and Secretariat of the House on behalf of their parties to ensure coordination.

Since the first All India Whips Conference held in Indore in 1952, periodicity of the Conferences varied mostly from 2 to 11 years. Minister of Parliamentary Affairs Shri M.Venkaiah Naidu has desired to hold Whips Conferences regularly and the 16th such Conference was held last year.

AAR


(Release ID :128217)

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Union Minister VK Singh assures speedy implementation of One Rank One Pension

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans
Union Minister V K Singh on Saturday gave the assurance of speedy implementation of One Rank One Pension (OROP) scheme for the benefit of ex-servicemen.
The government is committed for the welfare of ex-servicemen and the One Rank One Pension will soon be implemented, a government release quoting Singh said.
The former Army Chief, who was at Pithisar village in Churu to attend a function, also underlined the importance of a permanent seat for India in UN Security Council which, he said, has become “necessary with the change of time”.
Meanwhile, the minister asked the people of Shekhawati region, from where many move to Gulf countries for work, not to seek the services of unauthorised agents to go to foreign countries.
“Many people go to Gulf countries and some of them also face problems there. To avoid such problems, do not trust unauthorised agents,” he said.
The Union minister was received by Rajasthan Parliamentary Affairs Minister Rajendra Rathore at Churu.
Source : DNA India

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Can Central Government Employee do the business or Life Insurance Agency as a part time ?

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans

As per the CCS Conduct Rules 1964, Government servant cannot occupy / participate in part-time job or any other business.  CCS Rules 1964 clearly defined in Rule 15 (1) (d)
Rule 15 : Private trade or employment
(1) Subject to the provisions of sub-rule (2), no Government servant shall, except with the previous sanction of the Government-
(a) engage directly or indirectly in any trade or business, or
(b) negotiate for, or undertake, any other employment, or
(c) hold an elective office, or canvass for a candidate or candidates for an elective office, in any body, whether incorporated or not, or
(d) canvass in support of any business of insurance agency, commission agency, etc., owned or managed by any member of his family, or
(e) take part except in the discharge of his official duties, in the registration, promotion or management of any bank or other company registered or required to be registered, under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956) or any other law for the time being in force, or of any co-operative society for commercial purposes.
(f) participate in or associate himself in any manner in the making of-
(i) a sponsored media (radio or television) programme; or
(ii) a media programme commissioned by Government media but produced by a private agency; or
(iii) a privately produced media programme including video magazine:
Provided that no previous permission shall be necessary in case where the Government servant participates in a programme produced or commissioned by Government media in his official capacity.
(2) A Government servant may, without the previous sanction of the Government,-
(a) undertake honorary work of a social or charitable nature, or
(b) undertake occasional work of a literary, artistic or scientific character, or
(c) participate in sports activities as an amateur, or
(d) take part in the registration, promotion or management (not involving the holding of an elective office) of a literary, scientific or charitable society or of a club or similar organisation, the aims or objects of which relate to promotion of sports, cultural or recreational activities, registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860), or any other law for the time being in force, or
(e) take part in the registration, promotion or management (not involving the holding of elective office) of a co-operative society substantially for the benefit of Government servants, registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912 (2 of 1912), or any other law for the time being in force:
Provided that –
(i) he shall discontinue taking part in such activities, if so directed by the Government; and
(ii) in a case falling under clause (d) or clause(e) of this sub-rule, his official duties shall not suffer thereby and he shall, within a period of one month of his taking part in such activity, report to the Government giving details of the nature of his participation.
(3) Every Government servant shall report to the Government if any member of his family is engaged in a trade or business or owns or manages an insurance agency or commission agency.
(4) Unless otherwise provided by general or special orders of the Government, no Government servant may accept any fee for any work done by him for any private or public body or any private person without the sanction of the prescribed authority.
EXPLANATION- The term ‘fee’ used here shall have the meaning assigned to it in Fundamental Rule 9 (6-A).
Rule 15A (7)
Enforcement of the restriction against canvassing by Government servants of the business of Life Insurance Agency, Commission Agency owned or managed by members of his family.
Sub-rule (1) of rule 12 of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1955 (Now rule 15), inter alia lays down that no Government servant shall, except with the previous sanction of the Government, engage directly or indirectly in any trade or business or undertake any employment. It has been further emphasized in the ‘explanation’ thereunder that canvassing by a Government servant in support of the business of insurance agency, commission agency, etc., owned and managed by his wife or any other member of his family shall be deemed to be a breach of this sub-rule.
2. In spite of specific provisions in this rule, during the past two years quite a number of cases have been reported to the Special Police Establishment in which Government servants have been found carrying on life insurance business on their own or in the names of their wives or dependent, etc.
3. It appears that the Government servants have either not realized the full importance of the above rule or are willfully ignoring it. This rule should, therefore, be brought to the notice of all Government servants under the Ministry of WHS etc., and the importance of observing the rule impressed on them.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Expected Dates for 7th pay commission Report

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans


Expected Dates for 7th pay commission Report
Comrades,
There are lot of enquiries about the 7th CPC report submission. Let us examine the following facts.
1) The 7th CPC had issued following statement in July 2015 in its website http://7cpc.india.gov.in/ . Even today the same status is existing.
“Further to the memorandum received from a variety of Organisations, Federations, Groups representing civil employees in the Government of India as also from the Defence Services, the Commission has had fruitful and wide ranging discussions on relevant issues with all stakeholders. Such interactions have now been concluded. Valuable inputs have been received and the work of compilation and finalization of the report is underway, so that the Commission completes its task in the time frame given to it. Accordingly, any future requests for meeting with the Commission will not be entertained.”
This shows clearly that the 7th CPC wanted to present its report on 28th August 2015 itself with no extension of time.
2) On August 7, 2015 National Council (Staff Side) Secretary Comrade Shiva Gopal Mishraji met the Chairman, Seventh Central Pay Commission, Shri Ashok Kumar Mathur and Secretary, Mrs. Meena Agarwal. It was assumed that the report of the VII CPC, as was promised for 28th August this year, may be delayed by one month.
This shows that the 7th CPC was delayed only one month..
3) Many news papers including Danik Bhaskar, Times of India, NDTV CNN IBN, Hindu etc had reported that the 7th CPC will be submitting its report on 30th September 2015 itself.
4) The 7th CPC chairman had informed in a PTI interview Justice Ashok Kumar Mathurji had stated that “The Commission will submit its report by the end of September,”
5) The Hon’able Finance Minister had also informed the 7th CPC report will be submitted shortly.
6) The 7th Pay Commission has asked for a two month extension from the government. That the Commission is hoping that the government would take a call on One Rank One Pension, so they could modulate their own formulation in terms of pay revision. Now the one rank one pension issue has been resolved, but the formal orders are not issued, it will be issued only next month. After the issue of the OROP orders then 7th Pay Commission will submit its report.
7) Now four month extension of term of 7th Central Pay Commission is made the Union Cabinet chaired by the Hon’able Prime Minister, gave its approval for the extension of the term of the 7th Central Pay Commission by four months up to 31.12.2015. The Government had issued notification on 8th September “The Commission will make its recommendations by 31st December, 2015. It may consider, if necessary, sending reports on any of the matters as and when the recommendations are finalized.”
8) Now the delay in submission of report and its implementation will be there and actual benefit of 7th CPC will occur only from April 2016. As Government will constitute its own committee to study the implementation of the 7th CPC report and issuing orders. It will benefit the Government as allowances effective date may be from April 2016 instead of January 2016.
9) When will the 7th CPC submit its report? There are three possibilities now on submission date.
a) If the 7th CPC feels that the assigned work has been completed it can submit its report any time, it’s only up to the 7th CPC and the Central Government. If the 7th CPC report is completed and ready for release as per paper reports then in these case the 7th CPC can directly submit its report to the Finance Ministry on 30th September without publishing the report in public due to Bihar elections. If election commission gives clearance then the 7th CPC report will be made public.
b) There is one more possibility is that the 7th CPC report will be submitted after Bihar elections ie after November 6th.
c) Last option is that report will be submitted only in December 2015 only.
We sincerely hope the 7th CPC report will be submitted at the earliest and the Central Government will implement the report at the earliest, so that the aspiration of the Central Government employees are taken care by the Central Government.
Comradely yours
(P.S.Prasad)
General Secretary
Source: http://karnatakacoc.blogspot.in/

0 comments:

Post a Comment

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Pay Commission to submit report soon. Fake news of D.A. merger becomes viral
As per recent media reports, Seventh Pay Commission is ready with its recommendations on revising emoluments for nearly 48 lakh central government employees and 55 lakh pensioners, and will soon submit report to the Finance Ministry.

Earlier in August, the government had extended Commission's term by another four months till December 31 to give recommendations.

"The Commission is ready with recommendations and the report will be submitted soon," according to sources.
Source : NDTV
It is also being clarified that the fake signed copy of pay commission report is totally bogus. No such report has been submitted yet.
Fake news of D.A. merger
A fake news of D.A. merger has become viral in social media in the last couple of days. It is being cleared for our viewers that these news (of fake orders) have no authenticity at all and as the commission is at it's final stage and report is awaited at any time, it will be most unlikely that Govt. will adopt any interim measure at this point of time.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Central Govt. issued order for D.A. with effect from 01.07.2015

, by indianmilitaryveterans


The union cabinet had decided on 9 September, to release an additional installment of DA and dearness relief (DR) to pensioners with effect from 1 July 2015. Thus, the central government employees as well as pensioners are entitled for DA/DR at the rate of 119% of the basic with effect from 1 July 2015.
In this regard Ministry of Finance issued order on 23rd Sep for payment of enhanced D.A. alongwith the arrears from 1st July'15 to serving employees in cash.
Click here to download the order
Click here for Railway Board D.A. order

0 comments:

Post a Comment

“Forwarded as Received”

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans


Though my last post was also on chain mails, I have realized that irresponsibility on social media and cyberspace is now assuming dangerous proportions with rumour-mongering at its peak which is not only resulting in frustration amongst the military community but also unethical and unmilitary name-calling which can have far reaching consequences on reputations of people and morale of serving personnel and veterans.

While most of us have been forwarding mails and messages in good faith, still it is our bounden responsibility not to put into orbit material which is unverified or which causes unnecessary heartburn, especially amongst serving personnel, or results in slander of personalities. The term “Forwarded as Received” does not suffice and ends up damaging and harming the entire scheme of things as we perceive.

Some very recent examples of immaturity on the net, with mass circulation, can be recalled here:

Forwarding of a message that a senior officer at the Army HQ was responsible for inserting the prohibitory “Pre-Mature Retirement” (VRS) clause in the draft letter for OROP. What could be further from truth? Why on earth would someone do that? Have we ever wondered before forwarding such silly stuff on private and social media!!!

Circulation of a patently false message that a young Major who lost his life in an unfortunate incident during battle inoculation was not evacuated on time because senior officers precluded his evacuation.

Spreading canards about a Colonel whose wife is serving in the Indian Defence Accounts Service (IDAS). The officer’s reputation has been unnecessarily sullied without even an iota of truth. Even if on hypothetical assumption, the officer’s wife, in her official dealings, may have had an opinion or perception about the concept of OROP which may not have been configured with the actuality, how could the officer be blamed for the same and how could canards be spread about his service life, career and posting profile?

Spreading disaffection about senior officers and how they accepted the ‘Apex Grade’ after the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC) resulting in “OROP” for them and how they should refuse to accept the ‘Apex Grade’. Before spreading such half-truths, people should have realized that officers from the Apex Grade are in receipt of OROP by default, not by design. The pension of past retirees is calculated on the minimum of the new pay grade and since the pay grade of such retirees is fixed, the 50% of the minimum in their case results in a fixed pension for past as well as current retirees by default. Moreover, this fixed pay concept is not new and has been in place since times immemorial. For example, during the 4thCPC, it was Rs 8000 fixed, during the 5th CPC, it became 26000 and during the 6th CPC it was upgraded to Rs 80000. This concept was not introduced by the 6th CPC. Rumour-mongers have also not realized that such officers also suffer in a way since on reaching the ‘Apex’ level, they do not get any enhancement of pay in service and their pay remains fixed without any further increment.

Spreading my old oped of the year 2012 by forging the date as 2015 and stating to the world that the Services HQ are still opposing Non Functional Upgradation (NFU) for the military officer cadre. My old oped had merely stated the restrictive view existing at one point of time in the Services HQ. After a series of deliberations, all three Services HQ were firmly of a view in favour of NFU, and still are, and have fully stood behind the concept. Please ignore emails castigating the Services HQ for not supporting NFU since there is no truth in them. My opeds may be sharp but those are meant to move the system into motion by stirring them out of inertia, and not to pinprick. My opinion, which is meant for positive movement ahead, should not be used as a tool to shame.

Spreading mails regarding false and imaginary calculation tables which are either lesser than what is admissible thereby resulting in disappointment or which are much higher than entitlement thereby resulting in raising false expectations.

Chain mails asking people to file individual cases even in those specific matters wherein judicial intervention has already succeeded and universal orders stand issued by the Govt for all similarly placed individuals or where judicial intervention has already failed resulting in a closure of the issue. (Clarification: Here I am only referring to futility of litigation in those cases where the Govt HAS suo moto already issued universal orders after a particular decision. I am not referring to those issues where despite a favourable judicial decision, the Govt has not issued universal orders)

Also, it is painful to receive messages pertaining to my last post wherein I had attempted to clear the air about pensions of ranks other than Commissioned Officers. It seems that in the melee, affected pensioners have overlooked a very important fact that the new Circulars issued by the PCDA (547 and 548) emanate from a Supreme Court decision stating that pension should not be based on the “minimum of pay band” itself but on “minimum of pay within the pay band” for each rank w.e.f 01-01-2006. It cannot apply to ranks other than commissioned ranks for the simple reason that their pension is based on notional maximum w.e.f 01-07-2009 and hence if the judgement is applied to them w.e.f 01-01-2006, it would result in loss to all ranks since then the pensions would then fall to ‘minimum’ like in the case of Commissioned ranks and all civilians and that is the reason why pensions have been protected for them from 01-07-2009 onwards. They stand to gain only from 01-01-2006 till 30-06-2009 by the Supreme Court decision during which time their pensions were based on the minimum and these new tables would only replace the old tables that were in force from 01-01-2006 till 30-06-2009. If at all there was an anomaly, it was not linked to this Supreme Court decision or these new Circulars and it was on some other issue- it should have been emphasized and taken up that if till 5th CPC (till 31-12-2005) their pensions were based on top of the scales, the same concept should have been extended w.e.f 01-01-2006 rather than from 01-07-2009.

It is bewildering that people are neither understanding the issue nor going into depth of the same and rather sending negative messages to those who are portraying the true picture to them. Rest assured that I am always willing to stand up for our men and women of all ranks unconditionally and that is the reason why this blog has never been officer-specific and neither have been my battles for justice. But I firmly believe in standing up only for causes which are legally sound and also do not believe in circulating sugarcoated mails with trumped-up figures which later cause disillusionment.  

Be careful. Be wise. Let us keep our eyes open. 

Source : indianmilitary.info

0 comments:

Post a Comment

7th Pay Commission likely to recommend up to 30% pay hike for Central government employees, say sources

, by indianmilitaryveterans

 New Delhi: In good news for the Central government employees, the Seventh Pay Commission is likely to recommend a substantial pay hike which could be up to 30% or even more, said sources on Thursday. There will be 5 to 6% performance-based increment every year and those who are under-performing could retire by 55 years of age or after 30 years of service, added sources. House Rent Allowance could also be hiked by 10% to 30%. The Seventh Pay Commission's recommendations will be implemented from January 1, 2016. The Department of Personnel and Training will examine the recommendations and consult the Finance Ministry on them. Its term was extended by four months till December 31 to give its recommendations on revising emoluments for nearly 48 lakh central government employees and 55 lakh pensioners.  The Commission, whose recommendations may also have a bearing on the salaries of the state government staff, was given more time by the Union Cabinet just a day before its original 18-month term was to end. Headed by Justice AK Mathur, the Commission was appointed by the previous UPA government in February 2014. The government constitutes the Pay Commission almost every 10 years to revise the pay scale of its employees and often these are adopted by states after some modifications. As part of the exercise, the Commission holds discussions with various stakeholders, including organisations, federations, groups representing civil employees as well as Defence services. TAP  Related  7th Pay Commission visits Siachen to meet soldiers Other members of the commission are Vivek Rae, a retired IAS officer of 1978 batch, and Rathin Roy, an economist. Meena Agarwal is Secretary of the Commission. The Sixth Pay Commission was implemented with effect from January 1, 2006, the fifth from January 1, 1996 and the fourth from January 1, 1986

0 comments:

Post a Comment

7th Pay Commission: 3 Times Salary Increase, Every July 1 Increment

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans
7th pay commission
7th pay commission salary
Seventh Pay Commission recommendations submitted to the government. These will be decided on December 31 last. Some changes are possible if necessary. Then it will be sent to the finance department. Please tell the commission chairman Ashok Kumar Mathur, Secretary Meena Agarwal, member Dr. Rathin opinion and conscience is prepared by Rock, Government employees salary increase.
Significant new pay commission recommendations, Three-fold increase salaries of officers and employees and each July 1 proposed to increment.
IAS, IPS and IRS officers do the same salary. IPS and IRS officials complained that it would be far lower salaries they receive from the IAS.
Pay Band are 32 employees at the moment. He proposed to be reduced to 13. Pay-band low and the IAS, IPS and IRS Pay Band will be the same. Children Education Allowance
Central government employees from the first class to students in tenth and 11th and 12th of 40 rupees to 50 rupees every month to children education allowance proposal to give.
Physically or Mentally Handicapped Children’s Education Allowance will get 100 rupees. The child is living with parents rather relocated, then proposed to give him 100 rupees.
> If the child is in Hostl get Rs 300 each month separately. The condition that the children were born before 1987, three of them are family and two children since 1987 when it will feature.
What’s new pay-band special?
Grade B and C to the one running pay band.
> Group A posts would be two running pay band.
> Central Secretary and Secretary to the Cabinet proposal to give different scale.
> Pay Band 1 minimum pay scale of 21, 200 rupees. Secretary to the minimum recommended 2 lakh.

Source : Click here for details 

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Seventh Pay Commission to submit recommendations shortly: Report

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans
7th pay commission
NEW DELHI : Seventh Pay Commission is ready with its recommendations on revising emoluments for nearly 48 lakh central government employees and 55 lakh pensioners, and will soon submit report to the finance ministry. 

Earlier in August, the government had extended Commission's term by another four months till December 31 to give recommendations. 

"The Commission is ready with recommendations and the report will be submitted soon," according to sources. 

The Commission, whose recommendations may also have a bearing on the salaries of the state government staff, was given more time by the Union cabinet just a day before its original 18-month term was coming to an end. 

Headed by justice A K Mathur, the Commission was appointed in February 2014 and its recommendations are scheduled to take effect from January 1, 2016. 

The government constitutes the Pay Commission almost every 10 years to revise the pay scale of its employees and often states also implement the panel's recommendations after some modifications. 

As part of the exercise, the Commission holds discussions with various stakeholders, including organisations, federations, groups representing civil employees as well as defence services. 

Meena Agarwal is the secretary of the Commission. Other members are Vivek Rae, a retired IAS officer of 1978 batch and Rathin Roy, an economist. 

The Sixth Pay Commission was implemented with effect from January 1, 2006, the fifth from January 1, 1996 and the fourth from January 1, 1986.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

CSD PRICE LIST

  • CSD-Price-List-for-Volkswagen-Cars---Post-GST-Rates