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

No Identity Proof needed while booking Tatkal tickets

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans

No Identity Proof needed while booking Tatkal tickets from 1st September 2015 – Railway Ministry issues press Release

Ministry of Railways has scrapped the proceedure of enclosing photocopy of identity card or indicating its number at the time of purchase of Tatkal ticket.  However the anyone of the person(s) in the list of the Tatkal ticket has to produce anyone of the documents listed below at the time of travel as shown by persons travelling on normal bookings.
Press Information Bureau
Government of India
Ministry of Railways
17-July-2015 17:38 IST
Ministry of Railways decides to remove the condition of providing photocopy of identity card or indicating its number at the time of purchase of Tatkal ticket. 
The modified Tatkal provisions to come to effect by 1st September, 2015. The exact date of effect will be notified separately. 
Ministry of Railways has decided to modify some of the rules pertaining to purchase of tatkal tickets.  Under the modified rules, there will be no need to furnish photocopy of proof of identity while booking Tatkal ticket from computerised reservation counter or to indicate its number at the time of booking of Tatkal ticket at the counter or through internet.
In addition,  as per the proposed changes, in case of ticket booked under Tatkal scheme, one of the passengers has to produce anyone of the following proofs of identity in original during the journey, failing which all the passengers booked on that ticket will be treated as travelling without ticket and charged accordingly : –
i)    Voter Photo Identity Card issued by Election Commission of India.
(ii)   Passport
(iii)  PAN Card issued by Income Tax Department
(iv)  Driving Licence issued by RTO
(v)   Photocopy Identity Card having serial number issued by Central/State Government
(vi)  Student Identity Card with photograph issued by recognized School/College for their Students
(vii) Nationalised Bank Passbook with photograph
(viii) Credit Cards issued by Banks with laminated photograph
(ix)  Unique Identification Card “Aadhar”
(x)   Photo identity cards having serial number issued by Public Sector Undertaking of State/CentralGovernment, District Administrations, Municipal bodies and Panchayat Administrations.
These modifications will come into effect by 1st September, 2015.  The exact date of effect will be notified separately. 
As per extant instructions for undertaking journey on Tatkal tickets, the passenger at the time of booking a ticket from PRS centre has to provide a photocopy of identity card which he/she will carry during the journey. The number of this identity card is indicated on the ticket as well as reservation chart and during the journeythe passenger has to carry the same original proof of identity failing which he/she is treated as travelling without ticket and charged accordingly. In case of passengers booking ticket through internet, the number and type of identity card to be carried by the passenger during the journey is indicated at the time of bookingof ticket and the passenger has to carry the same original proof of identity during the journey failing which all the passengers are treated as travelling without ticket and charged accordingly.  These provisions are now being modified as mentioned in the first two paragraphs.
 ****

0 comments:

Post a Comment

One Rank One Pension – For and Against – Indian Express Article

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans

One Rank One Pension – For and Against – Indian Express Article narrates the need for implementing OROP and also the negative effect on the Country’s economy as a result of recurring financial burden

OROP — or One Rank, One Pension — means that every pension-eligible soldier retiring in a particular rank gets the same pension, irrespective of his date of retirement. As of now, soldiers who retired more recently receive more pension than those who retired earlier. This is because pensions are dependent on the last salary drawn, and successive pay commissions have raised salaries.
Thus, a Colonel who retired after the Sixth Pay Commission recommendations were accepted in 2006, gets more than a Colonel who retired when his salary was computed on the basis of the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission.
OROP, though promised by both the UPA and NDA, is yet to be implemented, triggering emotional, countrywide protests by ex-soldiers. Sushant Singh explains the arguments for and against OROP.
OROP – Explained – Interesting Video explaining the concept of One Rank One Pension

Discussions favouring OROP:

Compensation for early retirement, and a national obligation.
The nation needs a young Army, necessitating early recruitments and retirements. Soldiers have short careers — a jawan retires at age 35, while a civilian can work until he is 60. To make up for their shorter working lives, without lateral absorption into another government job of the same grade and status, veterans need compensation that is comparable to what a soldier of the same rank retiring today would get from the government.
A curtailed career results in denial of longer service at higher pay and, therefore, higher pension. Soldiers are denied the opportunity to earn more increments and promotions, as well as the benefits offered by more recent pay commissions, which significantly affects their pensions.
OROP can address all of this. There is also the emotional argument. Defence forces personnel give up their best years to the service of the nation and society, suffering hardships of military life — and, at the end of their service, face limited opportunities for re-employment.
Many defence personnel, both serving and retired, feel that their contribution to the nation and society is not adequately recognised or appreciated. Their terminal benefits bear no resemblance to the realities of life in the civilian world. A nation cannot allow its soldiers to feel that it does not care for them. OROP is essentially an obligation of the Indian nation towards its soldiers — and the price it must pay for maintaining a standing Army.
OROP would send a strong emotional signal to soldiers and veterans.

Arguments against One Rank One Pension:

The arguments against OROP are based on administrative, financial and legal complications in implementing the scheme.
In 2011, the Defence Ministry told the Koshiyari Committee that records going back further than 25 years were no longer available — a major administrative “difficulty in introducing the concept”. There are cases where soldiers who retired in the 1940s are still being paid family pensions, and it will be administrative impossible to reconcile the nearly 20 lakh cases over such a long period for OROP over any reasonable timeframe.
The Law Ministry told the committee that “if today’s pension and emoluments are passed automatically to somebody who retired 30 years ago, there will be inherent discrimination against terms and conditions of service which would lead to discrimination under the Constitution”.
A related aspect: people who retire in the same rank often earn different pensions because they may have served for longer periods in that rank. A Colonel who serves for 12 years in that rank will earn more pension than someone who served for 4 years as Colonel. Equating their pensions was unlikely to withstand a legal challenge. The financial argument is about the long-term cost of implementing OROP.
Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar’s estimate of Rs 8,300 crore is only a one-time payout. This amount will increase substantially every time a new pay commission makes its recommendations, with all old pensioners being paid at the new rate. There is also the likelihood of civilian employees, such as the Central ArmedPolice Forces and the state police forces, raising the demand for OROP. Finally, there are fears that civilian employees who moved to a contributory pension scheme in 2004 might demand a reversion to fixed pensions, thus unravelling the whole system. That, perhaps, is the strongest argument against setting aprecedent with OROP.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Steps for conducting inquiry in case of allegation of Sexual Harassment

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans


F. No. 11013/2/2014-Estt (A-III)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training

North Block, New Delhi
Dated July 16th, 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Steps for conducting inquiry in case of allegation of Sexual Harassment

Undersigned is directed to say that during the meeting of the Chairpersons of Complaints Committees with Secretary (Personnel) on the 16 th April, 2015 it was suggested that the Department of Personnel and Training may prepare a step guide for conduct of inquiry in complaint cases of sexual harassment. Rule 14(2) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 lays down that the Complaints Committee established in each Ministry or Department for inquiring into complaints of sexual harassment shall hold such inquiry as far as practicable in accordance with the procedure lain down in these Rules.

2. The annexed guide on “Steps for Conduct of Inquiry in complaints of Sexual Harassment” is intended to give the procedure as prescribed in the rules/instructions. This is, however, not intended as a substitute for reference to the Rules and instructions. Members of the Complaints Committees and others who are required to deal with such inquiries should acquaint themselves with Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, and instructions issued thereunder.
( Mukesh Chaturvedi)
Director (E)

Steps for Conduct of Inquiry in Complaints of Sexual Harassment

Complaints Committees

l. Complaints Committees have been set up in all Ministries/Department and organisations under them in pursuance to the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Vishakha case. As per Section 4(1) of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013(“the Act”), the Internal Complaints Committee (referred to as “Complaints Committee” hereafter) is to be set up at every workplace. As per Section 4(2), this will be headed by a woman and at least half of its members should be women. In case a woman officer of sufficiently senior level is not available in a particular office, an officer from another office may be so appointed. To prevent the possibility of any undue pressure or influence from senior levels, such Complaints Committees should involve a third party, either an NGO or some other body which is familiar with the issue of sexual harassment.


What is Sexual Harassment?

2. “sexual harassment" includes any one or more of the following acts or behaviour, (whether directly or by implication), namely:-

(i) physical contact and advances; or
(ii) demand or request for sexual favours; or
(iii) sexually coloured remarks; or
(iv) showing any pornography; or
(v) any other unwelcome physical, verbal, non-verbal conduct of a sexual nature.

3. The following circumstances, among other circumstances, in relation to or connected with any act or behavior of sexual harassment may amount to sexual harassment:
(i) implied or explicit promise of preferential treatment in employment; or

(ii) implied or explicit threat of detrimental treatment in employment ; or

(iii) implied or explicit threat about her present or future employment status; or

(iv) interference with her work or creating an intimidating or offensive or hostile work environment for her; or

(v) humiliating treatment likely to affect her health or safety.


Workplace defined:
4. As per Section 2(0) ofthe Act, the following places are included within the ambit of the expression “workplace”:
(i) any department, organisation, undertaking, establishment, enterprise, institution, office, etc. -established, owned, controlled or wholly or substantially financed by funds provided directly or indirectly by the Central Government;

(ii)hospitals or nursing homes;

(iii) any sports institute, stadium, etc., used for training, sports or other activities relating thereto;

(iv)any place visited by the employee arising out of or during the course of employment -including transportation provided by the employer for undertaking such journey;


Initial relief
5. The Committee will also have the powers to recommend:-
(a) to transfer the aggrieved woman or the charged officer to any other workplace; or
(b) to grant leave to the aggrieved woman up to a period of three months.
(The leave will not be deducted from her leave account.)

Complaints Committee to be Inquiring Authority
6. As per Proviso to Rule 14(2) of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, in case of complaints of sexual harassment, the Complaints Committee set up in each Ministry or Department etc. for inquiring into such complaints shall be deemed to be the Inquiring Authority appointed by the Disciplinary Authority for the purpose of these rules. Complaints Committee, unless a separate procedure has been prescribed, shall hold the inquiry as far as practicable in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Rule l4.

Need for investigation
7. The Complaints Committees may act on complaints of sexual harassment when they receive them directly or through administrative authorities etc, or when they take cognizance of the same suo-moto. As per Section 9(1) of the Act, the aggrieved woman or complainant is required to make a complaint within three months of the incident and in case there has been a series of incidents, three months of the last incident. The Complaints Committee may however extend the time limit for reasons to be recorded in writing, if it is satisfied that the circumstances were such which prevented the complainant from filing a complaint within the stipulated period.

8. As mentioned above, the complaints of sexual harassment are required to be handled by Complaints Committee. On receipt of a complaint, facts of the allegation are required to be verified. This is called preliminary enquiry/fact finding enquiry or investigation. The Complaints Committee conducts the investigation. They may then try to ascertain the truth of the allegations by collecting the documentary evidence as well as recording statements of any possible witnesses including the complainant. If it becomes necessary to issue a Charge Sheet, disciplinary authority relies on the investigation for drafting the imputations, as well as for evidence by which the charges are to be proved. Therefore this is a very important part of the investigation.

Dual Role
9. in the light of the Proviso to the Rule 14 (2) mentioned above, the Complaints Committee would normally be involved at two stages. The first stage is investigation already discussed in the preceding para. The second stage is when they act as Inquiring Authority. It is necessary that the two roles are clearly understood and the inquiry is conducted as far as practicable as per Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. Failure to observe the procedure may result in the inquiry getting vitiated

10. As the Complaints Committees also act as Inquiring Authority in terms of Rule 14(2) mentioned above, care has to be taken that at the investigation stage that impartiality is maintained. Any failure on this account may invite allegations of bias when conducting the inquiry and may result in the inquiry getting vitiated. As per the instructions, when allegations of bias are received against an Inquiring Authority, such Inquiring Authority is required to stay the inquiry till the Disciplinary Authority takes a decision on the allegations of bias. Further, if allegations of bias are established against one member of the Committee on this basis, that Committee may not be allowed to conduct the inquiry.

11. In view of the above, the Complaints Committee when investigating the allegations should make recommendations on whether there is a prima facie substance in the allegations which calls for conducting a formal inquiry. They should avoid making any judgmental recommendations or expressing views which may be construed to have prejudiced their views while conducting such inquiry.

Decision to issue Charge sheet, and conducting Inquiry
12. On receipt of the Investigation Report, the Disciplinary Authority should examine the report with a view to see as to whether a formal Charge Sheet needs to be issued to the Charged Officer. As per Rule 14(3), Charge Sheet is to be drawn by or on behalf of the Disciplinary Authority. In case the Disciplinary Authority decides on that course, the Charged Officer should be given an opportunity of replying to the Charge sheet. As per Rule 14(5), a decision on conducting the inquiry has to be taken after consideration of the reply of the charged officer.

13. If the Charged Officer admits the charges clearly and unconditionally, there will be no need for a formal inquiry against him and further action may be taken as per Rule 15 of the CCS (CCA) Rules.

The Inquiry-stages
14. In case the Charged Officer denies the charges and his reply is not convincing, the Charge sheet along with his reply may be sent to the Complaints Committee for formal inquiry, and documents mentioned in Rule l4 (6) will be forwarded to the Complaints Committee. As per Section 1 1(3) of the Act, for the purpose of making an inquiry, the Complaints Committee shall have the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 when trying a suit in respect of the following matters, namely:-
(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath;
(b) requiring the discovery and production of documents; and
(c) any other matter which may be prescribed.

The Section 11(4) of the Act requires that the inquiry shall be completed within a period of ninety days.

15. The Disciplinary Authority shall also in terms of Rule 14(5) (0) appoint a Government servant as a Presenting Officer to present evidence on behalf of prosecution before the Complaints Committee/ Inquiring Authority. The listed documents are to be sent to the Presenting Officer. The Complaints Committee would, thereafter, summon the Presenting Officer and the Charged Officer. As a first step, the charged officer would be formally asked as to whether he admits the charges. As mentioned above, in case of any clear and unconditional admission of any Article of Charge, no inquiry would be held in respect of that Article and the admission of the Charged Officer would be taken on record. The inquiry would be held, thereafter, in respect of those charges which have not been admitted by the Charged Officer. The Charged Officer is also entitled to engage a Defence Assistant. The provisions relating to Defence Assistant are given in Rule 14(8).

16. The Inquiring Authority is, thereafter, required to ask the Presenting Officer to have the prosecution documents, listed in the Charge Sheet inspected by the Charged Officer. Copies of such documents, if not only given to the Charged Officer, would be handed over to him. The Charged Officer would, therefore, be required to submit a list of documents and witnesses which he wants to produce in support of his defense. The Inquiring Authority would consider allowing such documents or witnesses on the basis of their relevance. Normally, any document or witness which reasonably appears to be relevant and helpful in defense may be allowed. Once the documents have been allowed, the Inquiring Authority would send a requisition for these documents to the custodian of such documents.

I7. When the regular hearing commences, the Inquiring Authority would ask the Presenting Officer to produce the documentary evidence. Such documents as are disputed by the Charged Officer have to be proved by the witnesses before they are taken on record. The undisputed documents would be taken on record and marked as exhibits.

Examination of Witnesses
18. Summons would. thereafter, be sent to the witnesses listed in the Charge sheet. The Presenting Officer may choose to produce them in any order he finds appropriate. These witnesses would be examined in the inquiry in the following manner. The examination in chief would be done by the Presenting Officer where the Presenting Officer may ask questions of the witness to ascertain the facts. The witness would, thereafter, be cross-examined by the Defense. After the cross-examination, the Presenting Officer would be given an opportunity to re-examine the witness. In the examination in chief, leading questions are not allowed. These are however allowed in the cross examination.

19. The procedure of Inquiry requires Opportunity to the Charged Officer to cross-examine all the witnesses that appear on behalf of the Prosecution. Failure to do so may be construed as a denial of reasonable opportunity to the charged officer, resulting in vitiation of the Inquiry. If the complainant appears as a witness, she would also be examined and cross-examined. The Inquiry Officer may however disallow any questions which are offensive, indecent or annoying to the witnesses, including the complainant.

20. If Inquiring Authority wishes to ascertain some facts for clarity, he may pose questions to the witnesses. This should however, be done in such a manner as to not show any bias for or against the Charged Officer. This has to be done in the presence of the Presenting Officer and the Charged Officer/Defence Assistant. No inquiry should be conducted behind the back of the charged officer. The witnesses will be examined one by one, and the other witness who are either yet to be examined, or have been examined are not allowed to be present during the examination of a witness.

Daily Order Sheet
21. The Inquiring Authority would also maintain a document called Daily Order Sheet in which all the main events of the inquiry and including requests/representations by the Charged Officer or the Presenting Officer, and decisions thereon would be recorded. For example (i) if the Charged Officer refuses to cross-examine the witnesses, this should be recorded in the Daily Order Sheet (ii) the Daily Order Sheet should record that the Charged Officer had been advised that he has the right to engage a Defense Assistant (iii) it should also be clearly mentioned that the Charged Officer was aIso informed as to who are eIigible to assist him as Defense Assistant. (iv) the Daily Order Sheet should also record in case request of the Charged Officer for engaging a particular person as Defense Assistant is disallowed in the light of the existing instructions. Daily Order Sheet should be signed by the Inquiring Authority, Presenting Officer and the Charged Officer/Defence Assistant.

Defence Evidence
22. After the prosecution evidence is over, the Charged Officer is required to submit his statement of defense. In this statement, the Charged Officer is required to briefly indicate his line of defense. After this. the Defense evidence will be taken. The evidence will be produced in the same order as the prosecution evidence. First, the documents allowed by the Inquiry Authority would be taken on record and then the witnesses called and their examination, cross-examination and re-examination done. The onIy difference here would be that the Examination in Chief would be done by defense while the cross-examination would be done by the prosecution. The defense would then have the Opportunity of re-examining the witness.

General Examination of the Charged Officer
23. After the Defense evidence is over, the Inquiring Authority shall ask Charged Officer as to whether he wishes to appear as his own witness. In case he does so, he will be examined like any other defense witness. In case however, he declines to do so, the Inquiring Authority is required to generally question him. At this stage due care is required to be exercised that as per Rule I408) the purpose of this stage is to apprise Charged Officer of the circumstances which appear to be against him. This is to enable the Charged Officer to explain them to the Inquiring Authority. Presenting Officer and the Defence Assistant do not take any part in the General Examination. Charged Officer may not be compelled to answer questions during examination by the Inquiring Authority.

Brief
24. After this, the Presenting Officer would be asked to submit his brief. A copy of this brief would be given to the Charged Officer. Both the Presenting Officer and the Charged Officer may be allowed reasonable time for submission of their brief.

25. The Inquiring Authority then writes the Inquiry Report in which the evidence in support of the charges and against them will be examined. The Report should be a speaking one clearly bringing out as to the evidence on the basis of which any particular conclusion has been reached. Based on this analysis, the Inquiring Authority will give its findings on the Articles as proved or not proved. In case any Article of charge is proved only partially, then the Inquiring Authority should record the extent to which that Article has been proved.

Powers of the Committee to make recommendations
26. Normally, the Inquiry Officer is not allowed to make any recommendations in his report. Here the function of the Complaints Committee acting as the Inquiring Authority differs. The Complaints Committee may however, make recommendations including what has been mentioned in para 2 above:
(c) to grant such other relief to the aggrieved woman as may be prescribed; or

(d)to deduct from the salary or wages of the charged officer such sum as it may consider appropriate to be paid to the aggrieved woman or to her legal heirs.

Any amount outstanding at the time of cessation of the services of the charged officer due to retirement, death or otherwise may be recovered from the terminal benefits payable to the officer or his heirs.

Such compensation will not amount to penalty under Rule 11 of CCS (CCA) Rules in terms of the Explanation (ix) to Rule 11 inserted vide Notification of even Number dated 19-11-2014.

Committee may recommend action to be taken against complainant, if the allegation is malicious, or the complainant knows it to be false, or has produced any forged or misleading document.

The Committee may also recommend action against any witness if such witness has given false evidence or produced any forged or misleading document.


27. The Complaints Committee should also remember that as per the Section 16 of the Act, notwithstanding the RTI Act, 2005, information as regards identity and addresses of the aggrieved woman, respondent and witnesses, Inquiry proceedings, Recommendations of the Committee, shall not be published or communicated or made known to public, press or media in any manner. Provided that information may be disseminated regarding the justice secured to any victim of sexual harassment under Act without disclosing the name, address, identity or any other particulars calculated to lead to the identification ofthe aggrieved woman and witnesses.

28. With the above stage, the inquiry would be formally over. The Inquiring Authority should prepare separate folders containing the documents mentioned in Rule l4(23(ii).

Suspension
29. A Government servant may also be placed under suspension before or after issue of a Charge Sheet where his continuance in office will prejudice the investigation, for example if there is an apprehension that he may tamper with witnesses or documents. Suspension may also be resorted to where continuance of the Government servant in office will be against wider public interest such as there is a public scandal and it is necessary to place the Government servant under suspension to demonstrate the policy of the Government to deal strictly with officers involved in such scandals. It may be desirable to resort to suspension in case of misdemeanor involving acts of moral turpitude.

Special provisions to deal with threats or intimidation
30. Disciplinary Authority may also diSpense with inquiry under Rule l9(ii), and action may be taken without the inquiry when the Disciplinary Authority concludes that it is not reasonably practicable to hold such an inquiry. The circumstances leading to such a conclusion may exist either before the inquiry is commenced or may develop in the course of the inquiry. Such situation would be deemed to have arisen:

(i) where the Government servant, through or together with his associates terrorizes, threatens or intimidates witnesses who are likely to give evidence against him with fear of reprisal in order to prevent them from doing so; or

iii) where the Government servant himself or with or through others threatens, intimidates and terrorizes the Disciplinary Authority, Members of the Committee, the Presenting Officer or members of their family.

Disciplinary Authority is not expected to dispense with the inquiry lightly, arbitrarily or with ulterior motive or merely because the case against the Government servant is weak.

Source:http://ccis.nic.in/WriteReadData/CircularPortal/D2/D02est/11013_2_2014-Estt.A-III-16072015.pdf

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Seventh Cental Pay Commission To Submit Report By October 31

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans


New Delhi: The eyes of the central government employees will be firmly glued on the forthcoming seventh central pay commission reports which is likely to be be submitted by October 31 for implementation from April 2016.

The pay panel is likely to finalise and submit its report on salary and allowance hike by October 31, sources said. The members and officials of the panel had made several field tours and collected valuable suggestions, which are all going to be trashed as the Commission winds up its office within three month.

After getting recommendations, the central government may announce to accept it in the budget 2015-16 to implement it from April 2016.

It is expected that seventh pay panel to suggest hiking the tripled salaries of central government employees.

The salaries of central government employees were roughly tripled with retrospective effect from 1996 and tripled once again with retrospective effect from 2006 by the fifth pay panel and sixth pay panel respectively. This shows the salaries of central government employees have tripled every decade.

According to media report says that investors are expecting car bazar to get a boost from the seventh central pay commission’s recommendations from mid-next year on account of getting arrears of rising salaries of central government employees.

The last Pay Commission report had resulted in car sales rising 18 per cent annually between financial year 2009-10 and financial year 2010-11.

The last pay commission was implemented in August 2008 with retrospective effect from January 2006 which resulted in getting huge salary arrears to central government employees to enable them to purchase car from their arrears on loan basis.

They paid margin amount from arrears and installments from salaries but this pay panel will be implemented from January 2016, hence no such huge arrears will be paid to central government employees this time to pay margin amount for car loan. So car bazar will not get a boost from the seventh central pay commission’s recommendations.

Input from  http://www.tkbsen.in/2015/07/seventh-cental-pay-commission-to-submit-report-by-october-31/

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Govt to announce one rank, one pension for ex-servicemen this month

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans
NEW DELHI: The long-awaited one rank, one pension (OROP) for over 25 lakh ex-servicemen is set to be announced this month, with a corpus of about Rs 8,300 crore, after several false starts since the NDA government assumed office one year ago. 

As earlier reported by TOI, the defence ministry had earlier cleared the implementation of the OROP mechanism but it was being vetted by the finance ministry. Defence minister Manohar Parrikar told journalists in Goa over the weekend that thefinance ministry would clear OROP "in a few days".It will then be announced once PM Narendra Modi returns from his three-nation visit to coincide with the first anniversary celebrations of the NDA government on May 26. It will come as a big relief to ex-servicemen, who have been agitating for the OROP mechanism for several years now, with many of them even returning their medals to register their protest against what all political parties have promised but never actually delivered. 

OROP basically implies payment of a uniform pension to personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service, irrespective of their date of retirement. For instance, two officers who served as colonels for seven years will get the same pension even if they retired a decade apart. A colonel with five years in that rank will obviously get lesser pension based on a graded scale. 

The Modi government has defined "military pension" as a category separate from other kinds of pension since soldiers, sailors and airmen as well as their officers, who retire at a much younger age and serve hardship postings, cannot be equated with other government employees. 

Successive Govts in the past had contended that granting full OROP was neither financially nor administratively possible since it could lead to a cascading effect with similar demands being made by others like paramilitary personnel. But this time, the Govt says military pension has been classified as different from other pensions. The majority of soldiers, for instance, retire when they are just 34-35 years old.

(SOURCE- TOI/SANJHA MORCHA BLOG)

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Misinterpreting OROP - Sunil Jain's column & my reply - Column: Rational Expectations: Short step from OROP to Greece As OROP-type demands spiral, so will pensions—the present value of govt pensions is already 1.2 times GDP - Air Mshl Sy Savur, PVSM, VSM (Retd)

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans

The underlying theme of the One-Rank-One-Pension (OROP) debate is one of a nation needing to do right by its war veterans. The veterans, the argument goes, put their lives at risk to defend the motherland, so surely a grateful nation can ensure they have a decent living? How demeaning it is, the argument goes, that a colonel who retired in 1980 should be getting a pension lower than his son who retired in 2010.


Emotional arguments, however, only obfuscate the issue. A pension is really nothing but a deferred payment of wages, to help those that served—in the army, in schools, in hospitals, wherever—maintain a certain standard of living after retirement. To that extent, it has to be related to the salaries paid during a person’s working life. So, to use the logic of those in favour of OROP, if the country wanted to reward a soldier more, his salary should have been much higher than it was at the time he was serving, there’s no point hiking it post-retirement. In any case, OROP was never a term of service.

And it is not as if the nation is not doing right by its soldiers after they retire, or by its bureaucrats, for that matter. The colonel-father getting a pension lower than his colonel-son conveys the impression that veterans are living in penury, but that is not true for either them or the millions of civilians the government has on its payrolls.
Some examples are worth keeping in mind. In the case of the army, 12 years ago, a colleague’s mother got a monthly family pension of R8,000—her father retired as Lieutenant Colonel—but this is now R40,000. On the civilian side, an additional secretary who retired 5 years ago got R57, 000 as pension then, but gets R75, 000 today. 

A joint secretary who retired in 2004 got R35, 000 as pension then, and this has gone up to R60, 000 today. In the case of a secretary who retired in 1993, the pension has gone up from R4, 000 then to R102, 000 now! Whether for army officers or for bureaucrats, pensions have been galloping and the biggest beneficiaries are those whom have been retired for a longer period of time. Do the same exercise for anyone not employed by the government, whether a humble peon or the chairman of Hindustan Lever, or those who save 24% of their salary in the EPFO—there are 6 crore such people today—and you will find there is no such equivalence, anywhere.

The reason for this is the way the government calculates its wages, and therefore salaries. So, let’s say a person—this applies to joint secretaries, teachers, havildars, colonels, everyone employed by government—retired in 1995 with a basic salary of R10, 000 and a pension of R5, 000 based on the principle of pension equalling half of the last pay. In the case of all non-government employees, this amount would be worth nothing today given inflation in the last 20 years. In the case of government employees, however, the salary/pension is indexed to inflation. So, between 1995 and today, the basic salary—and therefore pension—will be increased every year to take into account inflation.

And every 10 years, a Pay Commission comes and takes care of the rest. Let’s go back to our government employee and assume he was in the middle of a scale running from R8, 000 to R12, 000. Between 1995 and 2005, while the basic would have remained unchanged, the actual salary would keep rising since the inflation-indexed dearness allowance (DA) keeps rising. Now assume the last Pay Commission raised this pay scale to R18, 000 to R24, 000. Immediately, the salary of those at the top end of the pay scale would have risen to R24, 000, with the DA reduced to zero. And then, from 2006 onwards, the DA would have started rising again each year till 2015, when the new Pay Commission comes in.

What happens to pensions? This is where OROP comes in since, once this is accepted for the armed forces, there will be demands to extend this elsewhere also. For people who retired in 2005, the basic salary is reckoned at R24, 000 in our example, as a result of which the pension will be R12, 000—with, needless to say, a built-in DA hike twice a year. Our friend who was in the R10,000 basic salary bracket finds his salary getting hiked to R18,000—the lowest of the new pay scale—as a result of which the pension rises to R9,000, with the DA clock set back at zero for the first year. In the sense of people of the same rank getting different pensions, it looks unfair, but does anyone who worked in 1995 get the same salary as someone in 2015, or get to buy gold at the same price, or property? And, with the next Pay Commission ready to submit its report by October—it is to be implemented with effect from next April—our friend who retired in 1995 will get another hefty pension bump.

Which is why defence pensions have jumped from R11, 250 crore in FY05 to R21, 790 crore in FY10 and R54, 500 crore in FY16; for the government as a whole, it is up from R26,250 crore in FY05 to R60,489 crore in FY10 to R127,507 crore in FY15. To put this in perspective, India’s GDP rose from R29,71,464 crore in FY05 to R61,08,903 crore in FY10 and to R1,25,41,208 crore in FY15—so as a share of GDP, India’s pension bill rose from 0.88% to 0.92% in a decade. As a proportion of total government expenditure, it rose from 5.3% in FY05 to 7.1% in FY15.

Another way to look at this is what each pension costs. A retired secretary to the government of India today gets a pension of R85,200. LIC charges R1 lakh today from a 60-year old to give a monthly pension of R745—which means a monthly pension of R85,200 is equivalent to a lump-sum payment of R1.14 crore! If the next Pay Commission bumps the pension up to R100,000, say, the lump-sum payment goes up to R1.34 crore. If the government was to fork out a single bullet payment for its total pension bill of R127,507 crore, it would have to pay R171 lakh crore, or 1.2 times FY16 GDP! Imagine how much this will go up by after the next Pay Commission.

It is precisely because of this unsustainable Greece-style pension crisis that, in 2004, the government decided those joining the civil services would contribute a fixed amount of their salary to the National Pension Scheme (NPS) with a matching contribution from the government, and whatever money that earns would be the person’s pension; naturally, this doesn’t grow anywhere as spectacularly as that of anyone employed by the government currently.

This should have been done for the armed forces as well, but didn’t, presumably because the government felt it could bear the burden. No matter what the grievances of the armed forces vis-à-vis the civilians who retire later than they do and therefore get a higher pension, at some point, the government will have to consider moving to NPS for the armed forces since the burden is sky-rocketing and OROP will raise it dramatically. All pensions are a function, as we know, of salaries. So, if a colonel has been in that post for 2 years, he will get a salary—and therefore a pension—that will be different from a colonel who has been in the post for 6 months. Under OROP, the pensions of all colonels will equal those of the colonel who has spent the maximum number of years in the post! If this is now demanded by teachers, babus, paramilitary forces and the police, Greece is just a step away.

sunil.jain@expressindia.com

Dear Mr Sunil Jain,

I start my reply to your piece with a disclaimer – having retired at the level of a Secretary to the Govt of India, I am already in the OROP bracket as indeed are all retired and retiring Secretaries and equivalents. So, I can be a bit more objective.

Let me now begin with your column tail first. The presumption that, say the Col in your example who has been in the rank for 6 months (a post in the Armed Forces is different and examples are Battalion Commanders in the Army, Captain of a smaller class of ship in the Navy and, a Squadron Commander in the Air Force) will be, to quote your column,  “Under OROP, the pensions of all colonels will equal those of the colonel who has spent the maximum number of years in the post!”is the kind of fallacy that is blinding intellectuals like you and leading the powers that be to believe the fallacy.

I am not sure whether you (or your research assistants) had the time to go to the PCDA (P) website, but if you (or your research assistants) did not please do so at pcdapension.nic.in/.Once there please go to the drop down menu Armed Forces Pensioners/Family Pensioners. Once there do take the time to peruse  Circular No. 500 : Implementation of the Govt. decision on the recommendations of Committee on the issue related to Defence Service personnel and Ex-Servicemen – Minimum guaranteed pension to Pre-2006 Commissioned Officers / Family Pensioners  and  Circular No. 502 : Implementation of Government decision on the recommendations of the Committee of Secretaries - 2012 on the issues related to Defence Service Personnel and Ex-Servicemen- Enhancement of Ordinary Family Pension in respect of Pre-2006 JCOs/ORs Family Pensioners.  

In Circular No. 500 please visit Annexures A to G (Pages 7 to 13). You will find tables with the rank (not post) on the top of the X axis and Years of service in the Y axis.

Now let us get back to that example you quoted. Promotions to different ranks in the Armed Forces are – from Lt to Capt & equivalent after 2 years of commissioned Service, from Capt to Major & equivalent after 6 years of commissioned service, from Major to Lt Colonel & equivalent in 13th year of commissioned service and from Lt Col to Col & equivalent in the 22nd year of commissioned service.

Therefore, if one does what the bank clerk does to determine my pension he will place look at the intersection of the X axis (Colonel) and Y axis (22+2= 24 years service) and arrive at the pension of Rs 26111 whereas the Col of 6 months (22+.5 year= 22.5 years) will get Rs 24848 i.e. a difference of Rs 1263 per month.

Now, I travel up your column to the New Pension Scheme (NPS) introduced for the Central Govt employees joining after 1st April 2004. Please bear in mind that the NPS is neither applicable to those who joined Govt service by or before 31st March 2004 nor the Armed Forces personnel.

In 1998, the NDA Govt decided to increase the retirement age by 2 years, ostensibly to delay (or led by erroneous advice) the pay out of increases of pension consequent to the implementation of the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission. What the advisors and the NDA Govt might not have foreseen was that those in service would drawn two more annual increments (and increases in DA) and when they retire in or after year 2000, their pensions would have increased by 50% of the increments drawn i.e. one increment. Incidentally, the earliest that Govt servants contributing to the NPS from 1.4.2004 will withdraw or be paid pensions will be from 1.1.2024 as 20 years is the minimum years of service to be eligible for full pension! In the meantime everyone in Govt service will draw their pensions under the previous rules and regulations!

Be that as it may, I would not like to speculate on why the NPS was not made applicable to the Armed Forces and await a reply to RTI filed on 23rd June 2015.

Defence Pensions and the amounts quoted include 4 lakh civilian pensioners of the various departments in MoD and not just the retired Armed Force personnel. You may wish to confirm from the Central Pension Accounting Office website to authenticate. Curiously, you have not mentioned that the MoF in its Statement of Revenue foregone for FY 2014-15 has stated Rs 62, 398.6 crores was given away as tax exemptions and incentives to corporates. The website scroll.in states,”….. it is expected to forgo revenue of Rs 589,285.2 crore ($95 billion) in 2014-15 due to exemptions granted to companies and individual taxpayers. This forgone revenue, or tax benefits, is twice the defence budget allocation of Rs 247,000 crore in 2014-15. (Please seehttp://scroll.in/article/711183/why-the-indian-government-is-forgoing-revenues-of-95-billion).

Now to the terms of service and pension, there is a long list but that is for another day but this requires your attention
  
A soldier posted in Kashmir (other than high altitude) and northeast gets no special allowance, whereas a policeman from the CPO gets double house rent allowance (HRA). When posted in peace stations such as Shillong, Aizwal, Sikkim and better part of Jammu and Kashmir, a soldier gets no extra allowance, whereas a policeman from the CPO gets 12.5% of the basic pay as a special duty allowance, 25% of the basic pay as hardship allowance for IAS officers of the UT cadre and detachment allowance of Rs 300 per day for all central armed police forces personnel. None of these allowances are applicable to the Armed Forces. Then there is what is called headquarter allowance of Rs 4,000 for the civil services officials which the officers of the Armed Forces don’t get. While the list of such difference is long, just one more example should drive home the point as to how civil services and the CPOs have feathered their nests. An Armed Forces officer on instructional staff at the National Defence College gets Rs 1,800 per month whereas one from the CPO and Civil services get Rs 19,000 per month. (Courtesy Lt Gen Harwant Singh (retd).

Please also take time to refer to 
www.indianarmyveterans.gov.in/view_file.php?fid=47SubjectTERMS AND CONDITIONSOF SERVICE ..... Auth: Govt of India, Min of Def Letter No 15(1)/83/D(AG) dated 28 Jul 1984 amended

46. Pension is a retirement benefit for government employees governed by a Pension scheme where in a recurring monthly payment for life and a lump sum gratuity is given at the time of retirement. The quantum of Pension and Gratuity is determined with reference to the length of service and last pay drawn. Pension has great significance since it is a measure of socio-economic justice and brings economic security in the fall of life when physical and mental prowess tends to ebb (emphasis supplied).

47. Judicially, Pension is defined as a stated allowance or stipend made in consideration of past service. In the event of death, spouse of pensioner gets a monthly payment for life whereas other beneficiaries get such payment for limited period or for life subject to certain conditions.

Finally, I will address the issue that every other Govt employee or retiree will ask. It is a bogey and I provide you an example.

MoD, in UoI vs Lt Col N K Nair & Others in IA No. 9 of 2010 in TP (C) No. 56 of 2007 in what is known as the Maj Dhanapalan or Rank Pay case, filed an affidavit that if the judgement of the Honourable Supreme Court dated 8th March 2010 was implemented, civilian employees will also demand Rank Pay and the financial impact would be Rs 20, 000 crore (the Armed Forces officers would have benefitted by about Rs 1671 crore). A 3 Judge Bench of the Hon’ble Court on 4th September 2012, did not find any reason to modify/recall/re-hear the decision. Entitled Armed Forces officers were paid arrears but the matter whether the interpretation of the Court’s order and implementation by MoD was correct is sub-judice in Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 328 of 2013 to be heard next on 18th August 2015.  

Hope you will publish this too.

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Seventh Pay Commission may bump up salaries, but IAS has institutionalized the caste system

, by indianmilitaryveterans

Indian Military Veterans
Shortly, the Seventh Pay Commission is expected to hike the salaries of the great Indian bureaucracy. Unless the terms of reference are enlarged in its final stages to ensure one rank-one pension for the retired military personnel, the Commission may hand over its recommendations in about three months. But all that the Commission is qualified is to tinker with the numbers and not respond to the feedback from within. The members and officials of the Commission had made several field tours and collected valuable suggestions, which are all going to be trashed as the Commission winds up its office.

What stares in the face of Indian bureaucracy is the pyramidal caste hierarchy with the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) on top and the rest of the services stacked below them. Merit, experience, domain expertise, efficiency or integrity cannot alter this caste system. The system ensures that only the IAS reaches the top. For instance, among 57 secretaries to the government of Indi ia, there are just two non-IAS officers: one chosen by the President as his secretary and other the insignificant postal department secretary. Sure, there are technical posts held by scientists and legal services veterans but IAS officers hold all non-technical positions without letting even those with domain expertise flourish.


Rat Race

For instance, the Indian Police Service (IPS) officers are most qualified to hold the home secretary's post, a forest service officer is best suited to head the environment and forest department, an Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer is an ideal candidate for commerce or revenue secretary. But the twice-born IAS will not let go of any of these fiefs.

And the IAS by erecting entry barriers for other services has institutionalized the caste system. 

0 comments:

Post a Comment

CSD PRICE LIST

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