Major General Mrinal Suman, AVSM, VSM, PhD, commanded an Engineer Regiment on the Siachen Glacier, the most hostile battlefield in the world. A highly qualified officer (B Tech, MA (Public Administration), MSc (Defence Studies) and a Doctorate in Public Administration), General Suman was also the Task Force Commander at Pokhran and was responsible for designing and sinking shafts for the nuclear tests of May 1998.Major General Mrinal Suman, AVSM, VSM, PhD, commanded an Engineer Regiment on the Siachen Glacier, the most hostile battlefield in the world. A highly qualified officer (B Tech, MA (Public Administration), MSc (Defence Studies) and a Doctorate in Public Administration), General Suman was also the Task Force Commander at Pokhran and was responsible for designing and sinking shafts for the nuclear tests of May 1998.
The recent advisory issued by the Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM) supporting the BJP has raised the hackles of many purist veterans, who consider such an act to be sacrilege of the worst kind, and a step towards politicisation of the services.
Is this how we treat our Military?
It is a misplaced conception that ex-servicemen should continue to remain apolitical. Like other citizens, they are at liberty to form a group and seek furtherance of their interests through political means.
Indian ex-servicemen have been demanding `One Rank One Pension`(OROP) for close to two decades. All political parties make promises at election times, only to renege from them when in power.
In its manifesto for the last general election, the Congress party had declared, `The long-pending issue of one-rank, one-pension will once again be re-examined and a satisfactory solution arrived at expeditiously`. But, at the end of its five years rule, it informed the Parliament that OROP was not unacceptable due to `administrative, financial and legal reasons`. All ex-servicemen felt betrayed. BJP`s record is no better. During its rule, it repeatedly ignored recommendations of the Parliamentary Committee on Defence as regards grant of OROP.
The concept of OROP is neither unique nor new. It is already applicable to members of Parliament/Legislative Assemblies and senior judges. Under the provision of `fixed salaries`, senior bureaucrats and police officials enjoy OROP benefits. Even chiefs and army commanders are covered under the same policy. A number of judgments of the apex court have also gone in favour of OROP for ex-servicemen. Being a deferred wage, its rationale is based on the principle, `equal service must get equal payment`. Military service has two components, length and responsibility (rank held). Therefore, for soldiers, it means, equal service and equal rank should get equal pension`, or OROP in short.
Armed Forces don't get a chance to vote!
There are major anomalies in the current pension structure. A Sepoy, who retired prior to 1st January 1996, gets 82 percent lower pension than a Sepoy who retires after 1st January 2006. A pre-January 1996 retiree Havildar gets 37% lower pension than a Sepoy who retires after 1st January 2006, despite the latter being two rungs lower in the military hierarchy.
It must be noted that Sepoys start retiring at the age of 35 years and are left to fend for themselves on a meagre pension in the prime of their youth, with family responsibilities staring them in the face.
Having exhausted all other options and having been taken in by false promises for decades, ex-servicemen gathered under an umbrella organisation IESM to seek justice. According to IESM, demand for OROP is a demand for equity and justice, and not merely more money. IESM started a highly dignified campaign to attract the Government and media attention.
Read more:
Should our forces get political?
No comments:
Post a Comment