SCPC: OROP- Pension Parity, Bridging the Gap?

One rank one pension issue not addressed, anomalies continues: Ex-servicemen
New Delhi; 08 July 2009
The Indian Ex-servicemen's Association on Wednesday said that Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee had 'not even remotely addressed' the issue of One Rank One Pension (OROP) in the budget. The finance minister had effectively created three distinct classes of pensioners instead of the prevalent two.

In a media statement, the IESM, the umbrella body for ex-servicemen in the country, said that ' a skilfully crafted statement by the Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee on the long standing demand of the Defence Forces for OROP while presenting the 2009-10 budget, has created an erroneous impression that OROP has finally been granted by the Govt. "Nothing could be further from the truth," said Major General Satbir Singh, Vice Chairman of the IESM.

By bringing pre-1996 pensioners at par with the post -1996 pensioners, the Finance Minister had only rectified a 13-year- old anomaly, which should have been done long ago, Major General Singh said. Revised pensions announced after the Sixth Pay Commission had created three distinct classes of pensioners; pre-1996 retirees, Jan 1, 1996 to Dec 31, 2005 retirees and post Jan 1, 2006 retirees. As a result, similar personnel in each class received widely differing pensions.

The IESM has been agitating for OROP or that all retiring military personnel get the same pension irrespective of the year of retirement.

Equity and natural justice demanded that these artificial distinctions should have been removed whenever pensions were revised. In a litigation relating to equity between pre and post 1996 defence pensioners, even the Supreme Court had ruled in Sept 2008 that such distinctions violated Article 14 of our Constitution.

Importantly, the distinction between pre and post 2006 pensioners remains unaddressed. The IESM says that the OROP demand was, only for removal of this distinction. "Such indifference of the government towards the defence forces and veterans is all the more galling, when viewed against the President's statement, assuring early resolution of OROP, at the recent combined session of the Parliament. And, what is one to make of repeated statements of the MoD and the Raksha Mantri that the gap in pensions between the old and new pensioners will be substantially reduced and pensionery benefits of officers and jawans brought as close to OROP as possible?" Major General Singh said.
One rank one pension issue not addressed, anomalies continues: Ex-servicemen

One rank, one pension
A skilfully crafted statement of the Union Finance Minister, Mr Pranab Mukherjee, on the long-standing demand of the defence forces for one rank, one pension has created a wholly erroneous impression that the demand has finally been granted by the government. In fact, the available information indicates that the issue has not been even remotely addressed.

By bringing pre-1996 pensioners on a par with the post-1996 pensioners, the Finance Minister has only removed a 13-year-old anomaly, which should have been done long ago. Revised pensions announced after the Sixth Pay Commission had created three distinct classes of pensioners. As a result, similar personnel in each class received widely differing pensions. Equity and natural justice demanded that these artificial distinctions should have been removed whenever pensions were revised. Importantly, the distinction between pre-and post-2006 pensioners remains un-addressed. It needs reminding that the demand of the defence forces and defence pensioners for one rank, one pension was, in fact, only for the removal of this distinction. Such indifference of the government for the defence forces and veterans is galling.
Maj-Gen SATBIR SINGH (retd), Vice-Chairman, Indian ESM Movement
Letter to Editor: The Tribune