Culpability for Wastage of Funds by the Army Commanders

Reference: Army chief, top generals wasted crores, shows defence ministry audit
Response
Culpability for Wastage of Funds by the Army Commanders by Major General Mrinal Suman
Elements inimical to the services are at it once again. Senior army commanders are being accused of wasting crores of rupees through improper purchases made under Special Financial Powers of the Army Commanders. As per the press reports, a post-audit has been carried out of 55 transactions pertaining to financial years 2009-10 and 2010-11 by the Controller of Defence Accounts. The audit report has estimated the total loss to be to the tune of Rupees 103.11 crores. It is a serious indictment and deserves elaboration.
With a view to impart enhanced autonomy in administrative and operational functioning, various financial powers have been delegated to the Army Commanders. As per the recommendations of the Committee on Defence Expenditure, the Ministry of Defence decided in November 1991 that exercise of such delegated financial powers should be with the concurrence of local financial advisors. It implies that such delegated financial powers are neither absolute nor discretionary, and can be exercised by the Army Commanders only with the prior consent of their Integrated Financial Advisor (IFA).
The system of IFA aims to reduce delays and provide pre-contract expert advice to the executives for ensuring financial prudence and prevent irregularities.
Role of Financial Advisors
Commanders have to obtain prior financial concurrence of their IFA before incurring any expenditure as there is no provision for ex-post facto acquiescence.
IFAs are tasked to carry out a careful and intelligent scrutiny of all proposals involving expenditure from the public funds to ensure economy, efficiency and propriety in public finance. Before according financial concurrence, it is their duty to seek complete and comprehensive justification for the proposals. They are authorised to even challenge the necessity for incurring projected expenditure for a given purchase.
Unless IFA accords Acceptance of Necessity and approves the quantity to be procured, no proposal can be progressed. He questions the proposed mode of tendering and checks the list of prospective vendors. All tender documents are vetted by IFA prior to their issuance.
Most importantly, IFA is always a member of the Commercial Negotiation Committee and participates in the following functions:

Appraisal of bids as regards commercial terms, delivery schedule, performance warranty, guarantee terms and acceptance criteria.

Determination of fair and reasonable price of the product. Preparation of a ‘Comparative Statement of Tenders’ to determine lowest bidder. Undertaking negotiations with the lowest bidder to obtain best possible terms. Diligent drafting of contract to safeguard Government’s interests.

Post-contract management to monitor adherence to the terms of the deal and timely invocation of penalty provisions in case of default.

As is obvious, IFA exercises total and all-encompassing oversight over the complete procurement process. He can stall any procurement proposal if not convinced of its financial propriety.
The Question of Culpability
The said audit report faults the Army Commanders for disregarding guideline while buying foreign equipment, procuring equipment from Indian agents, accepting equipment rejected by another army entity and purchase of Chinese products which may have been embedded with malignant software.
As seen above, IFAs guide commanders at every stage of the procurement process and keep a close oversight. If that be so, onus for rendering faulty financial advice or clearing faulty cases rests on them. They should be asked to explain alleged irregularities and infirmities. How can an Army Commander be blamed for adhering to the advice of his IFA? If that be so, why have IFAs at all?
Most outrageously, the audit report states that the local financial advisors are intimidated by military officers in command. One has not come across a more preposterous and bizarre statement. No IFA ever gets intimidated. On the contrary, they are overbearing, domineering and suffer from an acute ‘rank-equivalence-complex’. They keep comparing their pay scales with those of the service officers to draw equations with different ranks. This complex manifests itself in their condescending attitude as they tend to assume the role of dispenser of favours while according financial concurrence. Therefore, the question of their getting intimidated is all baloney.
Inadequacies of the Current Dispensation
It is incongruous that a duly pre-audited procurement process is found to be flawed in post-audit. Interestingly, both pre-audit and post-audit are carried out by the officials of the Defence Finance and their roles are inter-changeable.
Unfortunately, the prime reason for the current weakness of the system is the failure of the Defence Finance officials to deliver. They are expected to act as defence financial advisors but are ill-equipped for the task.
They know nothing about the armed forces, their equipment and functioning. Worse, most are equally ignorant of financial management tools. During a survey of the educational qualifications of the top 50 Defence Finance officers, it was seen that most of them did not possess even elementary knowledge of finance/economics – only 8 percent had studied economics at the post-graduate level. Most were post-graduates in subjects like Political Science, English, Sociology and Sanskrit. Such officials cannot be expected to grasp minutiae of financial imperatives and perform defence economic advisory functions.
Finally
Let us look at the unenviable position of the Army Commanders. They have been asked to follow the advice of their IFAs while exercising their delegated financial powers. They are justified in assuming that all procurement proposals vetted and cleared by IFAs are in consonance with the Government rules and regulations. Therefore, it is absurd that the Army Commanders be held responsible for any alleged irregularities or omissions.
It should be for IFAs to justify the procedure followed. They and they alone should be held accountable for faulty advice and oversight. Quite appallingly, IFAs disown any responsibility under the plea that decision making is the prerogative of the executives and they cannot be held accountable for the same. It is a most ludicrous excuse.
The fact of the matter is that the armed forces are a soft target. The said audit report is a part of the well-orchestrated campaign to denigrate them through planted selective leaks.
Comment: No Army Commander will sign a purchase order unless the FA certifies that every thing is in order. The media has lost all perspective and is out to make headlines even at the cost of reputation of senior army generals. The nexus of IFA Officers and dealers/ spurious vendors need to be investigated.
Of Matters Military - Probity and Formation Commanders
Of the last dozen cases of corruption that we heard about, how many involved officers from the EME, ASC or Ord? It is common knowledge in formations today that the 'meat' lies in op wks, S&S Imprest, ACG/ATG, MI Fund and CHT Fund. Rations and spares are passe.
Probity and Formation Commanders

OROP: The viral mutates to a damp squib

80th Raising Day of IMA and OROP
MONDAY, 01 OCTOBER 2012 00:17 BRIGADIER (RETD) CS THAPA
The news regarding one-rank-one-pension first emerged on the ticker around 7.30 and by 8.30 pm it went viral, thanks to mobiles.
There is a trust deficit between the veterans and the Government and none was keen to pour out the bubbly even though a neutral press was saying so, every one wanted to see the fine print. The veterans are further divided into the haves and the have-nots, or the ‘we’ and ‘they’ between those that retired before or after the sixth pay commission. The pre-veterans refused to believe it and sure enough they were proved right the moment the fine print was out. The fiasco regarding the one-rank-one pension clearly shows the misleading tendencies both of the Government and a Press which does not verify before broadcasting -- all this shows the establishment in a poor light. This is at best a gap removal exercise -- the OROP is miles away. A jawan has got a paltry increase of four hundred rupees, is that what costs the exchequer Rs 2,300 crores? The farmers got Rs 42,000 crores from UPA-I as loan waiver and the State Government electricity boards got a waiver from UPA-I for transmission losses (means stealing electricity) and the soldier for all his sacrifices gets peanuts. All this clearly shows that the veterans have a long way to go -- as long as there is babudom, we all need to read the fine print. The Tehri area has a large number of ex-servicemen one has not heard the issue of OROP being thumped on the table by any of the Tehri Parliamentary bye poll candidates- wonder if it matters to them.
Closer home, the Indian Military Academy gets ready to celebrate its 80th Raising Day, and it’s been a long journey for the Academy. The Academy has seen a passage that has been eventful and is getting ready to be dressed for the occasion. The event is likely to be a two-day event, needless to say most of us are looking forward to a good round of golf and the celebrations the next day on October 1. Such occasions normally start with a solemn ceremony wreath laying at the war memorial in honour of those who sacrificed their today for our tomorrow, and other events such as the sound and light display in front of the Chetwode building followed by dinner. One has learnt that the CM is attending the sound and light display -- wonder how he finds the time in the middle of electioneering?
The last time one attended the sound and light display it was when my friend Raj Sujlana was the Commandant. Raj is busy now recruiting people in Punjab but the sound and light legacy that he left behind is going to be seen all over again.
Forty years ago when one passed out of the Academy it was producing officers for a victorious army. The mood was different and the Academy was the connoisseur as far as officers’ training was concerned. The Americans were licking their wounds of Vietnam andPakistan was a dismembered state. The seventies and early eighties were iconic years as far as operational thought and plains warfare in the army was concerned
Then came the rebound, by Pakistan burning the Kashmir flame and starting the strategy of death by a thousand cuts, the academy had to modify its curriculum. Counter Insurgency (CI) operations and small unit operations took center stage due to a proactive media, during that stage one was a battalion commander at IMA. The academy responded well with a CI operation capsule and other changes. Suddenly Kargil dawned and the blood and guts story of the academy was highlighted. Its tough physical training had stood the test of high altitude and high endurance, some of the bravest of the brave were just out of the academy our cadets of yesterday are national heroes of today, and the academy had delivered again.
Today in its 80th year the academy again stands at crossroads. The road ahead is difficult and full of challenges. The current requirement is of a soldier scholar whom the academy is trying to nurture and bridge the intellectual gap. There are many challenges that the academy faces, needless to say it can be a separate topic of discussion but the nature of warfare is changing and the academy has done well to take measures to address this change. It becomes difficult to make changes in established mindsets and set norms therefore; one does not grudge the commandant, but he is up to doing the needful.
There is an air of expectancy as a lot of changes have been carried out to the curriculum. The bulk of the Academy has shifted to South Campus and Gentleman Cadets go scurrying about their training. The academy still attracts good material because the academy is over subscribed and there is a marked difference in the body language of a third term GC about to pass out to that of a first termer, but language skills are definitely on the decline.
The challenges for the academy not withstanding most intend to line up our stomach with butter as we wait to see the sound and light display. I know for a fact that all events done on the drill square ground in front of the Chetwode are always nostalgic and memorable; it’s the ambience of the surrounding. No wonder how many passing out parades one may witness, the last one is always the best so also will be the sound and light display. As my wife and I walk down for dinner to the new South campus mess we always miss the old mess, it was so cramped that we met one another out of sheer lack of space.
80th Raising Day of IMA and OROP

POWs: Court directs UOI to be proactive and provide relief to NOKs

It was on 23 December 2011 that the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court rendered a landmark judgement in a Writ Petition filed by the late Lt Gen Jagjit Singh Aurora and others in the year 1999.
Besides other reliefs that were sought, the case was filed by the late General praying that the Govt may be directed to treat all missing Prisoners of War (POWs) as “on duty” for all intents and purposes till their date of retirement. It was also prayed that the Union of India be directed to take up the issue of the missing personnel with the International Human Rights Committee.
The High Court, through a very detailed and extensive order, which at places recorded bone chilling details on the subject alongwith all related evidence on the matter, directed the Union of India to approach the International Court of Justice in this regard and also to pay all retirement and service benefits to the kin of the missing personnel as if they had retired on superannuation.
The detailed judgement on the writ petition which was ordered to be treated as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), not only traced the entire length and breadth of the issue but also dealt with accounts of individual cases.
The Ministry of Defence, though has challenged before the Supreme Court the part of the order which dealt with directions to the Govt to take up the case with the ICJ, has however implemented the other part which dealt with treating the missing personnel on duty and releasing benefits to the kin as if they (the missing personnel) remained on duty till their respective dates of retirement.
The Defence Ministry has already forwarded the order for implementation to the Services HQ who in turn have asked the respective Record Offices to immediately take requisite steps.
The entire judgement of the High Court can be accessed and downloaded by clicking here. Posted by Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh at 7:42 PM
Govt of India implements the landmark orders of the Gujarat High Court in a PIL filed by the late General Aurora

OROP: Government likely to accept four demands

As per news article by Tribune News Service the govt. may accept following 4 demands related to Armed forces pay fixation & One Rank One Pension issue:
1. Armed forces be given non-functional upgradation (NFU) to match their counterparts in the IPS, IAS and paramilitary forces.
2. The grade pay can be looked into.
3. It has agreed that a common payscale be evolved for in-service jawans.
4. It has agreed on removal of all anomalies towards one rank one pension (OROP).
Meanwhile, a fresh calculation has been ordered following a Supreme Court judgment relating to a 25-year-old pay-related case filed by Major Dhanapalan. The court ruled in his favour to correct the anomaly and will impact all officers who were serving then and now.
Read full article on Tribune [click here]
One Rank One Pension: Govt may accept 4 demands
RELATED POSTS

One Rank One Pension - Lok Sabha Q&A

'One Rank One Pension' for Ex-Servicemen is unlikely to recommend

One Rank One Pension: Service chiefs meet Cabinet Secy

Government may not allow defence representatives in pay panel

Outcome of Meeting for Armed forces and One Pension One Rank issue.

Meeting today to discuss pay, pension of Armed forces and One Pension One Rank issue.

Pay and Pension issues of the Armed Forces

Ref: Cabinet Committee Recommendations
Warrant Officer P.R. Balathilakan, MSM September 18, 2012 at 5:15 pm
We the Ex-Servicemen are eagerly waiting to know the outcome of the report which has been submitted by the Cabinet Secretary’s Committee to the Hon’ble Prime Minister relating to Pay and Pension issues of the Armed Forces personnel. The report is stated to have been submitted during the last quarter of previous month. Since the Committee has stated that the points are to be met immediately, then why there is delay in announcing the recommendations. Hope, the authorities will take a note to make the report public soon.
Warrant Officer P.R. Balathilakan (Retd.) MSM

OROP: UPA under siege will it collapse the issue?

Foreign media on UPA's new vulnerability
Jim Yardley, Gardiner Harris, The New York Times | Updated: September 19, 2012 15:58 IST
New Delhi: The turmoil surrounding India's national government intensified on Wednesday, with a growing number of regional partners threatening to withdraw their support from the government and a former ally calling for the prime minister to seek a fresh electoral mandate.
Following the announcement by Mamata Banerjee, the populist chief minister of the state of West Bengal, that her party would formally leave the government on Friday, another member of the government, Muthuvel Karunanidhi, said his party would support a nationwide strike on Thursday called by opposition parties to protest policy changes announced last week by the governing coalition, the United Progressive Alliance. Mr. Karunanidhi controls 18 votes in Parliament, just one fewer than the total controlled by Ms. Banerjee.
Meanwhile, Ram Gopal Yadav, a major leader of the Samajwadi Party, which controls 22 votes in Parliament, said that his continued support of the governing coalition was no longer assured. "This government has lost credibility and can't take our support for granted," he said, according to media reports.
Ms. Banerjee has given the government until Friday to reverse new economic measures, including ones that would allow multinational giants like Walmart and Ikea to build major retail outlets in India, or face the withdrawal of her 19 lawmakers from the coalition. Since Parliament is not in session, there is little risk of the government collapsing immediately. But if Ms. Banerjee follows through on her threat, the governing coalition must rely on Mr. Karunanidhi, Mr. Yadav and others to avoid early elections.
Read More: Foreign media on UPA's new vulnerability- click here

Armed Forces win Battle in Supreme Court: Reactions

Ref: Rank Pay- AF win battle in Supreme Court
Comments

Baba Tiruvalam 1 week ago
While one is happy that the finally justice has been given to the serving and retired officers, it is sad that some people had to wait for over 25 years to get this justice. It is pertinent to point out that in the meantime many who were waiting passed away and were cheated out of their legitimate dues. It was not any thing to do with legal interpretation. It was mere arithmetic interpretation. Even if a mistake was committed at some level in 1987 when this was being implemented, why was the Govt reluctant to correct the mistake when it was pointed out during Maj Dhanapalan's case until relief was given to him by Kerala High Court initially and then the Supreme Court subsequently when the Govt appealed against the decision of the Kerala High Court. Subsequently also they had resisted extending the benefit to similarly affected officers. It took 5 long years and several hearings at the Supreme Court to reach the verdict given today. All along the Govt machinery including the MOD and the Law ministry did not see the wisdom in withdrawing their appeal gracefully. At-least now will the Government show graceful acceptance of the verdict and pay the arrears as ordered before some more of the affected officers kick the bucket?

The Patriot
It is unfortunate that in a democracy like ours the armed forces are being treated like this. They remain the last and only institution left that the nation can depend on in a crisis. The recent happenings in the Army are a clear indication that all is not well with the armed forces too. One wishes that the babus and politicos keep off the armed forces. The recent amendment to the constitution giving reservation in promotions is a further blow to the very secular foundation of this country, just imagine babus promoted thus exercising control over the armed forces, like they say-vinasha kale , viperetha budhi!

freudneo1 week ago
To grant a benefit of just 1500 crores to its armed forces... govt fights for 20 years ! n themselves siphons off thousands of crores in just two years ! Wow... what a democracy we are living in!

Bidyut Chatterjee
The Judgement did make us happy,but we would be happier still, if the bureaucracy and the lower babus were penalised for feeding the Courts with wrong and misinformation. 50% of their pay and allowances should have been deducted to compensate for the delayed justice which was only because of them. This would partly meet the cost involved to implement the Judgement.
Armed Forces win long outstanding battle inSupreme Court

Rank Pay: Landmark Judgement exposes MOD's immodesty

Unhelpful attitude against military
Tuesday, September 18, 2012, Chandigarh, India
Apex court comes to the aid of defence personnel
by Lt-Gen Harwant Singh (retd)
ON September 4, 2012 the Supreme Court gave a landmark judgment, which goes against the Ministry of Defence (MoD). The 4th Central Pay Commission (CPC) gave defence services’ officers up to the rank of brigadier rank pay in addition to the basic pay. The MoD, working in consultation with the CDA (O) and in a most arbitrary manner and without any authority, deducted the rank pay from the emoluments of thousands of the effected officers. That was in the year 1986. From then onwards all efforts to get the MoD to undo this gross injustice have been opposed by it. In this machination and subsequent cussedness have been involved the top bureaucrats in the MoD and successive Defence Ministers. From 1986 till now, a large number of defence services’ officers have died, some during the Kargil war, without getting their rightful dues.
A gutsy Major from the South fought it out in the Kerala High Court. Not willing to relent on its mischief, the MoD went in for a review petition, which too was rejected by the Supreme Court. It took the officer over a decade to get this injustice undone. This was followed by innumerable appeals in most high courts of the country by the officers who had been denied their rank pay. The Supreme Court in its wisdom ordered that all these be clubbed and brought before it. A spirited group called the Retired Defence Officers Association (RODA) obtained a favourable order from the Supreme Court on March 8, 2010. Thereafter, the MoD sought recall of the Supreme Court order. Then on subsequent 10 occasions the Solicitor-General of India sought adjournments, stretching the case to September 2012.
The Solicitor-General told the highest court of the land that the defence services headquarters too were opposed to giving back the rank pay to these officers. However, the defence headquarters gave in writing to the Attorney-General that they did not oppose the grant of rank pay and, on the other hand, fully supported the case of these officers. This letter from the defence headquarters falsified the position of the Solicitor-General and, in fact, he stands exposed for an act of perjury. Consequently, the MoD, throwing all norms of fair play to the winds and in a brazen manner, tried to “arm-twist” the defence services headquarters in asking it to withdraw this letter to the Solicitor-General, which the defence services headquaters declined to do.
The Solicitor-General, as a last ditch attempt, pleaded that the restoration of rank pay be ordered to only those officers whose cases are before the court. Ignoring this mischievous plea, the Supreme Court, on September 4, 2012, ordered that all the effected officers (their number is in thousands) should be paid their dues starting from 1986 to now and taking a lenient view of the MoD’s plea of financial constraints made by the Solicitor-General, reduced the period of interest, which starts from 2006 instead of 1986, and at 6 per cent interest.
The Fifth CPC took away the “running pay band,” which, on the hints of resignation by the three service chiefs, was granted by the Fourth CPC and was introduced to somewhat compensate for extremely limited promotions. In the case of the Sixth CPC, there are 39 anomalies that are still to be resolved. The grant of bounty of Non-Functional Advancement to all Central services officers by the Sixth CPC and denying the same to the defence services officers is not only scandalous but also blatant display of bias against them.
Instead of extending a supporting hand to the defence services, the MoD has in almost every case related to pay and allowances and the status of defence personnel been taking an adversial stance. In the case of the Second Central Pay Commission, (CPC), the MoD fielded the case of pay and allowances of defence personnel “as given”. In the case of the Third CPC, the defence services were not permitted to present their case before the Pay Commission on the specious grounds that the same will adversely effect their discipline! While the absurdity of this stance by the MoD is detestable, the fact that this arrangement was accepted by the services chiefs is equally distressing. In the subsequent CPCs, the defence services could get no support from the MoD and on the other hand its despicable act of illegally depriving the officers of their rank pay in the case of the fourth CPC needs no further elaboration.
The MoD’s stance has always been unhelpful to the military. Such a sustained attitude of the MoD has created deep fissures in its relationship with the military. There is palpable mistrust of the ministry among the armed forces. The adverse fallout of this relationship, at one level, relates to national security, and at another it impacts on the military’s commitment and motivation. The Ministry of Home Affairs fights tooth and nail to promote the interests of, say, the Central Police Organizations ( CPOs-inappropriately called para-military). As opposed to this, the MoD operates in a motivated manner against those of the military. This adversial stance of the MoD has become so visible in that the CPOs, in pay and allowances, are far better placed than the military. These policemen, unlike soldiers who retire at 35 years of age, retire at the age of 60 and further end up getting much higher pension, etc.
This attitude of the MoD towards the defence services has created a climate of mistrust, animosity and disharmony between these two major components of the government. This hiatus has had adverse effect on the pace of modernisation of the military as well.
The Supreme Court judgment of September 4, ordering the government to pay up the amount due to the affected officers starting with 1986, needs to be taken to its logical end by bringing to account all those officers who were responsible for this mischief, including those who have since retired, and ones who have continued to follow the same line. It is time some accountability was jacked into the government functioning, and those who function in an arbitrary and irresponsible manner are hauled over the coals
. The writer is a retired Deputy Chief of Army Staff.
Unhelpful attitude against military

CSD: Defence canteen products under scanner

The CDA believes that Hygiene is not the only matter of concern. The defence auditor has also objected to the 'arbitrary and opaque' manner of functioning of the CSD, leading to 'poor quality products with little brand value' being supplied to the defence personnel.

Curry, toothbrushes, pasta and whisky are under scrutiny after the Controller of Defence Accounts charged that the canteen did not follow guidelines, including hygiene checks.

Read more: Click here

No Military representation on the High Powered Committee

Government not to allow defence representatives in pay panel, say sources
August 5, 2012
Government not to allow defence representatives in pay panel, say sources
New Delhi: The government has reportedly refused to accept the demand of the armed forces to allow military representation on the High Powered Committee, which has been formed to resolve the anomalies in the pension and benefits for the defence personnel.
Top sources at the Centre have told NDTV that the government cannot agree to the demand as the panel was formed during the sixth pay commission and now it’s a little too late to allow defence representatives on board. The Prime Minister is expected to make an announcement on the issue in his Independence Day speech on August 15. The sources added that the panel, which was formed by the Prime Minister, will have to address the concerns of the armed forces in the way issues were handled during the sixth pay commission.
Navy Chief Admiral Nirmal Verma had reportedly written to Defence Minister AK Antony last week, objecting to the panel headed by the Cabinet Secretary.
Source: NDTV
Comment: Maybe the Government is right. Senior Officers from AHQ are only interested in their own pay and perks. The representation should be from Senior JCOs and NCOs to directly interact with the Cabinet Committee. Senior Officers credibility is diminishing day by day. Previous track record from 1986 till 2006 is proof of their standing. Corrupt Generals cannot influence or impact any improvement in pay package for the Military.
Government not to allow defence representatives in pay panel, say sources
Ministry of Defence
One Rank-One Pension The gap between past pensioners and their youger equivalents retiring from the armed forces does not necessarily keeps widening with every successive pay commission. Over the years several improvements have been made in pension of past pensioners. The pension of past pensioners have revised in accordance with recommendation of each successive Pay Commission, as accepted by the Government. The Sixth Pay Commission had recommended fitment formula and modified parity for past pensioners, in order to reduce the gaps, which were accepted by the Government.
Pension Improvement is an ongoing process and considerable improvements have been made in the pensions of armed forces personnel. The Group of Ministers (GoM) had in 2005 improved the pensionary benefits of PBORs. On the recommendations of PMO, a Committee was set up under the Chairmanship of Cabinet Secretary in June, 2009 to look into the issue of ‘One Rank One Pension and other related matters. After considering all aspects of the matter, the Committee keeping in mind the spirit of the demand, suggested several measures to substantially improve pensionary benefits of Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) and Commissioned Officers, which have been accepted by the Government and orders for implementation of all the recommendations have been issued. These are available at www.pcdapension.nic.in.
This information was given by Minister of State for Defence Shri MM PallamRaju in a written reply to Dr.RajanSushantand others in LokSabha today.PIB
One Rank One Pension

Labyrinthine corruption in CSD Canteens: Jawans sold spurious and date expired foodstuff

Courtesy: Mail Today
Buying defence canteen products? You might be compromising with your health
Abhishek Bhalla
New Delhi, Sunday, September 2, 2012 | 09:27 IST
Families of defence personnel buying cheaper beverages and grocery items from the canteen stores department (CSD) may be compromising with their health.
The Controller of Defence Accounts (CDA) has questioned the quality of products being sold at the CSD at subsidised rates.
According to the laid-out guidelines, food items, liquor and beverages have to be scrutinised for hygiene standards. This, the CDA believes, is not being done at the CDS. Hygiene is not the only matter of concern. The defence auditor has also objecting to the "arbitrary and opaque" manner of functioning of the CSD, leading to "poor quality products with little brand value" being supplied to the defence personnel.
Here is an example of the bizarre functioning. A floor wiper manufacturer is also a supplier of Kesaria Thandai in the defence canteen.
These issues have been highlighted by the CDA in its recent correspondence to the Ministry of Defence. "It is incomprehensible how a wiper manufacturer is accepted to supply thandai to the CSD and that too without factory inspection and hygiene report," one of the communications between the Defence auditor and ministry said.
Mail Today is in the possession of a series of letters sent by Savitur Prasad, principal controller, CDA, to the ministry questioning the functioning of the CSD.
The communication made available to Delhi based RTI activist Subhash Agarwal indicts the canteen for being "wrapped in corrupt practices, thereby cheating several families of defence personnel dependent on it". The CDA points out that the defence personnel are forced to buy low-quality products from unknown firms. Nargis tea, Preet Lite cooking oil, Valeda herbal cream and Nuzen Herbal gold hair oil are just some of the lesser- known brands that are common at the CSD. Objecting to the "ineligible" firms supplying products to the canteen, the CDA said: "It's a travesty of faith that age-old loyalties of defence personnel have been breached." This is not the first time the CSD has faced flak for its operations.
The Comptroller and Auditor General had highlighted the "irregularities" in the CSD in its 2010-11 report.
"Evidence gathered in the audit indicated that in the absence of relevant controls, there was a significant risk of sale of perished stores to the consumers. From 2003 to 2009, out of 11,254 samples referred to the composite food laboratory, 349 (3.1 per cent) were found unsatisfactory. It took about 1 to 13 months for the groceries and two months for food items to obtain the test results. By that time, the stock of unfit items was sold," the report said.
The Defence auditor, in its May 16, 2012, communication, has reiterated the objections.
"I am writing to highlight the malady that ails the Canteen Stores Department and requires immediate attention. Instead of groping in the dark about the functioning of the CSD, which is considered to be a mascot of organised procurement system, an insight will reveal the labyrinthine corruption prevailing in the organisation," the letter read.
Defence officials, though not displeased with the CSD products, want quality check of every item.
"If the CDA is constructive in its approach there is no problem. We definitely need the highest level of efficiency in the working of CSD. In the past also there have been charges that sub-standard products are being sold at the canteen. They (CSD) are supposed to have quality checks and they should be carried out," a former naval officer, Commodore (retd) Uday Bhaskar, said.
Buying defence canteen products? You might be compromising with your health
Click here to read all about the CSD with links
Comment: The spurious and unhygienic foodstuff sold in CSD canteens is also finding its way into the civil market. The electrical products sold are also sometimes fakes. The ISI marking is given based on bribes palmed off to the Testing Agencies. The sole Mission of CSD is to spin money by any corrupt means. The MOD and AHQ are party to duping the Jawans. The complete civilian military nexus needs a shake- up and complete overhaul from top to the lower rung. The CSD Depots are filled with RATS and Scumbags.

Army Pay Scales: Genesis of the continuing Downgrade

Sixth CPC Report:(vii) Army Pay Scales (1)
Chapter 2.3 of the Report briefly recaptures the historical developments in reference to determination of pay structure for the Armed Forces, starting from constitution of the Post War Pay Committee in 1947 which for the first time attempted to establish relative parameters in reference to Indian Police Service (IPS) and the Central Class I Services but also brought down the pay scales of many Indian Commissioned Officers. The Government subsequently modified pay structure for Armed Forces in 1960 when the Raghuramaiya Committee endorssed the concept of parity with the above referred services as conceived earlier.
The pay structure for Army was for the first time referred to Central Pay Commission (CPC) at the time of Third CPC which recommended merger of the Special Disturbance Allowance (being paid to army personnel since 1950 as a temporary compensatory measure) with the pay, there by making the pay structure for Army slightly better than civilian pay scales. The Fourth CPC accepted the demand for running pay bands and rank pay up to the scale of Brigadier, but the structure was subsequently realtered by Fifth CPC which gave scales on pattern of civilian establishment to the Armed Forces with a slight edge due to difficult working conditions. The recommendations of Fifth CPC which form the basis for existing pay structure are reflected below.

The Sixth CPC has recmmended restoration of Running Pay Bands on the ground that similar structure is now recommended for Civil Services and the possibility of disparity on that account is ruled out. Another important benefit is that this measure would facilitate smoother absorption of ths Short Service Commission Officers (SSCOs) and Personnel below Officer’ Ranks (PBORs) in Central Paramilitary Forces (CPMFs) by identification of analogous posts in the two structures (eg Major and Deputy Commandant in Army and CRPF). It has however added a new component to the salary of armymen under the title of Military Service Pay(MSP) which would be admissible to all ranks upto Brigadier.
The Commission foresees that the MSP shall ensure that the edge enjoyed by the army pay structure vis a vis the pay scales for civilian employees continues. MSP shall be counted as pay for all practical purposes. Although MSP shall not be admissible beyond the rank of Brigadier yet the edge provided by MSP shall continue at subsequent stages since it would be embedded in the pay at subsequent fitment stage. However for purposes of determination of comparative seniority the indicator shall be the grade pay. MSP being a new addition to pay, arrears would not be payable for the past. The Pay Structure as recommended by Sixth CPC is as follows.

Some other major recommendations relate to upgradtion of Scale of pay admissible to Director General of Armed Forces Medical Service to Rs.80000/-(fixed) and the decision to allow the non functional scale of Army Commander to Lt. Generals who do not get the post due to age bar. Similar benefit has been recommended for ofiicers of other ranks who are similarily deprived of promotion due to shortage of tenure. Commsision has however not agreed to increase the scales for Principal Staff Officers posted at Army HQs on the ground that this would affect the relativity with Corps Commanders operating in the field.
Commission has also recommended continuation of existing higher entry grade pay to Lieutant in Army Medical Corps (AMC) as compared to Lieutant in the Army. Higher pay to the extent of 7.5% for Lieutant and 10% for the Captain has been recommened. Regarding Military Nursing Services (MNS) the recommendation is for maintainig parity with the Service cadre Officers. Extension of time bound promotion scheme upto level of Lt. Col. has been recommended for the Officers of MNS and MSP to the extent of Rs.4200/- has also been recommended alongwith benefit of one pay fixation increment at the stage of promotion .The Pay Scales recommended for MNS are given below.

Sixth CPC Report:(vii) Army Pay Scales (1)
Related Reading: Pay scales of the Indian Armed Forces: Click here
Comment: In spite of the slide down of Military Pay Scales, why has the Rank Pay been denied for the last 26 years? This may require a detailed analysis to fix responsibility. The COAS from 1986 till 2008 are equally responsible. Military is apolitical does this mean they are dummies and should kowtow the corrupt system? The seniors on whom one reposes faith are the ones who let down the organisation for their own perks and salaries- own selfish interest. The AHQ is filled with such scumbags- imagine the Army Chief being posted in AHQ for the 12th time! His interests ly elsewhere not welfare of troops. Damn Chetwode Motto!

Rank Pay:: Too little, too late!

Too little, too late!
P M Ravindran | 05-Sep-2012
After outrageously denying justice to Gen V K Singh in a simple matter of his date of birth the apex court now mocks at soldiers with a pretense of justice. Let us get this straight- no citizen goes to courts seeking charity. He goes to courts demanding justice, which is a fundamental right; all those addressing the judges as Lordship and cloaking their demand in terms like Prayers, not withstanding. And in this case justice has been done apparently but falls much short of it.
Firstly Maj Dhanapalan's case was decided more than a decade back. The court did not cover all affected officers in its order then.
Secondly, now it has taken 10 years to decide this case when the precedence had been set and the facts, laws and precedences of the issue had already been established through a long drawn judicial process itself.
Thirdly, the rate of interest is just the barest minimum and not even enough to compensate for the losses incurred by the soldiers, forget about being penal.
And lastly, the date of its applicability is only from 1 Jan 2006- a date that has no relevance in this case. Usually the courts consider the date of filing the petition for the applicability of its orders, though even that is questionable because natural justice demands that it has to be the date of occurrence and especially so in cases like this where all other options have to be exhausted before approaching the courts!
Just to highlight the contrast look at the case of compensating a judge to the tune of Rs 100 Crores in a defamation case and the apex court refusing to entertain an appeal unless Rs 20 Crores is deposited by the media channel which had in any case tendered an unconditional apology for the genuine mistake that had occurred in displaying the photo of the judge which was similar in name to another judge who had been implicated in a crime!
And it also needs to be highlighted that the rank pay was not introduced to give any advantage to the armed forces officers over their civilian counterparts because the fact is that there has never been any such advantage then nor is it there now. It was actually another ploy to keep these officers at a lower station because the rank pay was to be considered part of basic pay only for calculating the allowances and not status!
Pay Rs 1600 cr arrears to army officers: SC tells Centre
Antony supports granting representation to armed forces in pay panel How Fake are our politicians and bureaucrats?

Fifty years after 1962, India dwells in denial

PMO’s China fear stalls Mountain Corps

Equal pension is no favour to soldiers

Anil Kaul says the government needs to change its attitude towards the armed forces...
VETERANS,
MY friend, have to choose between being forgotten, mocked or used. As for being understood: never.”
Albert Camus words are ringing true in case of Indian army veterans, who are threatening to intensify their four-year-old agitation unless the government accepts their demand for one rank one pension (OROP) by 15 August.
One rank one pension implies uniform pension for army personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement, and mandates that any future enhancement in the rates of pension be automatically passed on to past pensioners. The demand was raised way back in 1981 and still remains unresolved. The six-member committee under Cabinet Secretary Ajit Seth that has been looking into it, has been asked by the government to finalise its recommendations and submit a report to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh by 8 August. The PM is likely to announce some welfare measures for defence veterans including ‘one-rank-one-pension’ on 15 August. It has already been discussed in detail by a Rajya Sabha Petition Committee headed by Bhagat Singh Koshiyari. Given below are some examples how the recommendations of the Koshiyari committee negate the very spirit of pension laid down by the Supreme Court — that it is not pay but payment for services rendered — and parity in its allotment.
1. “The pre 1 Jan 2006 retirees get the same pension as the post 1 Jan 2006 retirees by matching the three factors that govern the pensions of ex-servicemen i.e. the rank, the length of service and the trade (in case of all ranks below officer ranks only). After this is affected, any future increases be automatically applied to old pensioners. The family, disabilities and dependents’ pensions be included for the purpose of this definition. This, however, does not mean the grant of pensionary benefits such as DCRG and additional value of commutation pension.”
This definition, by no stretch of imagination, includes annual increments in pensions as is given to serving soldiers.
2. Notwithstanding the Rajya Sabha Committee Report that was presented on 19 December 2011, in 2013, a post 2006 retiree Brigadier (equivalent to a deputy secretary) will get more pension than a post 2006 retiree Major General (equivalent to a joint secretary). The protection clause for the Major Generals would have to be applied or Military Service Pay will have to be extended to Major Generals. This is the mess created by the government in the 6th Central Pay Commission. Now compare this with pre 2006 retirees. The pension of a post 2012 retiree Colonel (equivalent to a director), on both time scale and selection grade is Rs 35,841, whereas a pre 2006 retiree Major General’s pension is Rs 26,700. You cannot have three rank juniors getting more pension than the seniors. OROP is being demanded for army personnel because it is a rank-based hierarchy, whose terms and conditions are different from other professions. As such armymen under the same rank and with same years of service should get the same pension irrespective of their dates of retirement and should continue to get it in perpetuity. But in their desperation to fool the unwary veterans, the bureaucrats have added the point of annual increment in pension as per the serving soldiers to the award of OROP. But ex-servicemen (ESM) don’t want annual increment in pensions. A serving soldier gets annual increment for a year’s service, how can a pensioner claim the same for his retired service? OROP, as per the definition given, means full parity with the latest rates of pension for past pensioners. Once granted there are no increments till a revision by a CPC.
3. Successive governments in the past have claimed that OROP was untenable and meeting it would cost a bomb. The anomaly was created by the 5th and 6th Pay Commissions. The Congress had promised OROP in its poll manifesto in 2004. However, the UPA government rejected the OROP demand in December 2008, after which ex-servicemen returned their gallantry medals to the President. Following protracted protests, a committee was set up under Cabinet Secretary KM Chandrasekhar to review the OROP issues. On the panel’s suggestion, the Centre has now agreed to substantially hike the pension of JCOs and other ranks. The pension of such personnel who retired before 10 October, 1997 will be brought at par with the pension of those retired after that date. The pension of those who retired before 1 January, 2006 — including the 1997 group — will be substantially hiked to come close to those who retired after the cut-off date of 1 January, 2006. This is not OROP but near parity.
Soldiers rightfully deserve better than this after the sacrifices they make. The government needs to address this trust deficit in all earnest. Half-hearted measures won’t help.
Kaul, a retired officer, is the author of Better Dead Than Disabled. The views expressed here are personal.
vrcanilkaul(at)hotmail(dot)com
Click here for the original post- Tehelka
Comment: The MOD Bureaucrats having destroyed the command control structure of the Armed Forces are now in the game of reducing Ranks in the Military to a Mockery- Now we see the true results- Revolts in the Services. Will the Defence Minister take Charge?

Supreme Court Order on Rank Pay

Dear Veterans,
The gist of the Supreme Court Order issued on 04 Sep 12, regarding Rank Pay Case of Retired Defence Officers is reproduced below.
Those of you are keen to read the whole order may visit the URL Click here
Thank you
Chander Kamboj

O R D E R
I. A. No. 9 in T.P. (C) No. 56 of 2007:
We have heard Mr. R.F. Nariman, learned Solicitor General of India and Mr. Mahabir Singh, learned senior counsel for the respondents.
2. On thoughtful consideration of the entire matter, we are satisfied that the order dated March 8, 2010 does not require any modification or variation save and except the interest part.
3. As regards interest, on totality of the circumstances including the circumstance that Special Leave Petition arising from the judgment dated July 4, 2003 in the matter of Major A.K. Dhanapalan was dismissed by this Court in August, 2005 and the Kerala High Court had not ordered payment of interest on the arrears of pay, we direct that the interest shall be paid by the petitioners to the respondent @ 6% p.a. from January 1, 2006 instead of January 1, 1986. It is clarified that this order shall govern all similarly situated officers who have not approached the court and also those who have filed Writ Petitions which are pending before various High Courts/Armed Forces Tribunal.
4. We record and accept the statement of the learned Solicitor General that arrears of pay with interest, as directed above, shall be paid to the concerned officers expeditiously and positively within twelve week from today.
5. I.A. No. 9 of 2010 stands disposed of accordingly.
W.P. (C) Nos. 268/2010, 192/2012, and I.A. No. 1 of 2011 in W.P. (C) 34/2009 and T.C. (C) Nos. 11/2010, 14-19/2010, 31/2010, 32/2010, 33/2010 and 35/2010:
The above matters and pending I.As. therein, if any, stand disposed of in terms of the above order passed in I.A. No. 9 of 2010 in T.P. (C) No. 56 of 2007.

.....................J.
(R.M. LODHA)

.....................J
(T.S. THAKUR)

.....................J.
(ANIL R. DAVE)
Supreme Court Order on Rank Pay

Over 10,000 Soldiers Bid Adieu to Indian Army

Over 10,000 Soldiers Bid Adieu to Indian Army
By SiliconIndia | Tuesday, 04 September 2012, 18:00 IST
Bangalore: As disgraceful and discouraging as it can be, over 10,000 soldiers opted out of the Indian Army. The obvious reason predicted is the illusionary relation shared by the Indian Army soldiers and their officers. The issue was very much brought to notice at the Parliament when defence minister, AK Antony said that 10,315 jawans opted for pre mature retirement in 2011 which is far more compared to 7,249 and 7,499 in 2010 and 2009 respectively. The probable cause behind retiring early at 35 as given by Antony is that the educated soldiers look for a better option other than working with the force.
Three incidents of scuffle and stand-offs at different places in these two years created the discord between the officers and the jawans in the hierarchical system. The incidents took place at 226 Field Regiment at Nyoma in Ladakh, 45th Cavalry at Gurdaspur in Punjab and 16th Cavalry regiment at Samba in Jammu & Kashmir. In the latest incident, the Samba sector was led to unrest as a jawan commited suicide. Antony said in a written reply at Lok Sabha, " A Court of Inquiry (COI) has been convened by the Army to investigate the matter," as quoted by the Dainikbhaskar.
According to the statistical reports, total suicides among soldiers were 96 in 2003 which rose to 100 next year. In 2005 a total of 77commited suicide which reached 129 in 2006. The figure was 118 in 2007, 123 in 2008 which fell to 96 in 2009 but once more rose to 115 in 2010.
Antony said that the Government has taken certain steps to enhance the morale of the jawans. The ministry is planning to replace the ‘sahayak’ system with the civillians for the convinience of the senior officers. Even the inclusion of liberalised leave policy, provision of recreational facilities and the participation of psychological counsellors will create a soothing environment to work.
Over 10,000 Soldiers Bid Adieu to Indian Army
Sample this Comment: Straight from a Jawan's Heart
The defence, morale is at all time low, the lungi clad Antony has very poor 'leadership' & vison. The Arms & Equipments, facilities & pay scales are low, jawans still have no family accommodation, they have poor CSD facility - and to add soldier's welfare is just nil, officers have all facilities including free ration, education, free fuel, servants, guards etc etc. So its natural for the repercussions of revolt. Most jawans have now taken up security & admin related odd jobs & are satisfied - gone are the days where JF Rebiero, Vaidyas were held in high esteem. WE saw Presidents like Pratibha aunty doing nothing except giving away trophies & visiting foreign countries blowing Tax payers money.(sic) Posted by:Nair - 05 Sep, 2012

Rank Pay Litigation: MOD is the Culprit to Recall Court Rulings Repeatedly

Re-fix Defence officers’ pay: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court directed the Centre on Tuesday to re-fix the pay of about 20,000 Defence officers from January 1, 1986, without deducting the rank pay and to pay them arrears.
A three-judge Bench of Justices R.M. Lodha, T.S. Thakur and Anil R. Dave also directed the Centre to pay six per cent interest from January 1, 2006 to all the officers, irrespective of whether they had filed petitions before any of the High Courts or Benches of the Armed Forces Tribunal, within 12 weeks from Tuesday.
The Bench directed that all pending petitions before High Courts or Benches of the Armed Forces Tribunal by similarly placed officers would be governed by this order. The Bench rejected the Centre’s application seeking the recall the order of the Kerala High Court, which in October 1998 found no justification in deducting the rank pay and directed the Centre to re-fix the pay.
The core issue is the wrong fixation of rank pay awarded by the Fourth Pay Commission. The element of rank pay was introduced for all ranks from Captain to Brigadier in the Army and their equivalent ranks in the Air Force and the Navy, in addition to pay in the integrated scale. The rationale behind this was to make the Armed Forces an attractive career option and ensure that the defence officers continued to have an edge vis-à-vis their civilian counterparts, keeping in mind the difficult and challenging nature of their job. However, according to the officers, the rank pay was first deducted at the time of fixation to arrive at the total emoluments and thereafter added, after fixation, in the integrated scale. Consequently, the final fixation of the total pay of the officer became on a par with his civilian counterpart’s and the edge was neutralised.
Major A.K. Dhanapalan was the first officer to challenge this erroneous fixation before the Kerala High Court. Thereafter, several petitions were filed by similarly placed officers in High Courts and before different benches of the Armed Forces Tribunal.
After the High Court judgment, the Armed Forces and the Chiefs of Staff Committee had recommended against pursuing the litigation further in the Supreme Court. However, the Ministry of Defence chose to press the application for recall on several grounds, including a total financial liability of about Rs. 1600 crores.
Re-fix Defence officers’ pay: Supreme Court

How Armed Forces Attractive Career was scuttled from 1986

Pay Rs 1,600 crore arrears to Army officers: SC
TNN Sep 5, 2012, 01.53AM IST
NEW DELHI: Assuaging a major grievance of officers upto Brigadier level, the Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Centre to appropriately fix rank pay, introduced to pay them a little more than their civilian counterparts to attract youth to make a career in the Army, and disburse the arrears since January 1, 1986.
A bench of Justices R M Lodha, T S Thakur and A R Dave rejected the Union government's application for modification of the apex court's March 8, 2010, order agreeing with the reasoning of Kerala High Court in the case of Major Dhanapalan. The HC had directed proper fixation of rank pay from January 1, 1986, and payment of arrears with 6% interest.
In abiding by the court order, the exchequer could face a financial liability of close to Rs 1,600 crore as the SC asked the Centre to pay annual interest of 6% to be calculated from January 1, 2006.
This order would apply to all officers of the Army, the Navy and the Air Force, both serving and retired, irrespective of whether they filed petition in court or the Armed Forces Tribunal. The court asked the government to comply with the order in three months.
The grievance of the officers in the Army arose from the wrong fixation of rank pay as awarded by the 4th Pay Commission, in which the element of rank pay was introduced for ranks from Captain to Brigadier in the Army and their equivalent ranks in the Air Force and the Navy, in addition to pay in the integrated scale.
The rationale of this was to make the Armed Forces attractive career option and to continue the edge that was always provided to the defence officers compared to their civilian counterparts due to the difficult and challenging nature of their job profile. However, at the time of fixation, the rank pay was first deducted to arrive at the total emoluments and thereafter added after fixation in the integrated scale. This ensured that the final fixation of the total pay of the officer became at par with his civilian counterpart and the edge was neutralized during fixation, officers had argued through advocate on record Aishwarya Bhati.
This SC order will benefit a large number of officers who were in the rank of Captain to Brigadier in the Army and equivalent ranks in the Air Force and the Navy, between January 1, 1986 and January 1, 2006.
Pay Rs 1,600 crore arrears to Army officers: SC
Comment: This amount of Rs 1600 Crores financial liability to the exchequer is peanuts as compared to gigantic scams like 2G, CWG, Coalgate, Adarsh, Tatra and such like which is a gross criminal loss of Revenue to the exchequer running to over 5 lakh Crore Rupees and above.

Rank Pay: Will the MOD in conjunction with UOI throw more spanners?

LATEST UPDATE
IV Pay Commission Rank Pay Anomaly Case
In the case of Maj AK Dhanapalan Vs Union of India in OP 2448/96, The Hon’ble High Court of Kerela allowed the plea of the officer and held that the deduction of the rank pay was not correct and directed to re fix the basic pay of the officer from 1.1.1986. Appeal filed by the Union of India before the larger bench of the High Court & SLP in the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the judgment was dismissed. Although Govt sanction to pay arrears to Maj AK Dhanapalan were issued, the benefit was not extended to similarly placed officers of the three Services.
Similar cases were filed by a large number of officers in various courts throughout the country. The Supreme Court of India directed that such of the cases be transferred to the apex court. Retired Defence Officers Association (RDOA) has been able to transfer one of the ‘lead cases’ from Kerela to the Supreme Court.
AS ON 04 SEPT 2012
The IV CPC Rank Pay Case was finally heard today ie 04 Sept 2012, in Court no 7, in the court of Hon’ble Justices RM Lodha, TS Thakur and Anil S Dave. The appeal file by UOI for recall of order of the Hon’ble Court dated 08 March 2010 was dismissed by the Court. The court upheld its order of 08 Mar 2010. The Solicitor General spent marathon four hrs to convince the court about the legitimate deduction of the rank pay but was not able to justify the deduction of rank pay and as to fitment of pay of AF officer vis a vis a civilian offr drawing same basic pay as on 1/1/1986.
The said order will be applicable to all affected offrs of the AF wef 01/01/1986 to 01/01/2006 across board. It would also be applicable to all pending cases in various courts and AFT’s across the country on the subject case.
The interest will be applicable @ 6% wef 01/01/2006 and not 1986. This is the only change made by the court. The court has also directed that all arrears should be paid within outer limit of 3 months from today ie 04 Sept 2012.
So, the pay and pension of all affected officers of the AF are set to revise from 01/01/1986.
RDOA Blogspot
SPANNERS PROPOSED BY UOI through Solicitor General as on 11 Jan 2012
The UOI has suggested a big 'spanner' to cause delay in the IV CPC rank pay case. In its affidivit filed the UOI says that the Central Govt is open and willing to constitute an independent commission headed by a retired judge of the Supreme Court to examine the correctness of the implementation of the recommendations by IV CPC related to rank pay as given in para 28.113 of its report and to make recommendations for further improvements to the proceedure for disbursement of pension to retired Armed forces personnel based on Govt orders subsequent to VI CPC recommendations THIS IS PURE HOGWASH AND ONLY TO DELAY MATTERS. RDOA IS NOT GOING TO BUY THIS LINE OF ACTION. Further it says: Apart from the enormous financial implications, actual implementation of the Hon'ble Court's order would involve the following stages;

Revision of pay of offrs on 1/1/1986, 1/1/1996, and 1/1/2006 with simultaneous revision of all pay linked allowances/benefits.

Calculation of DA on slab basis from 1/1/1986 to 31/12/1995 is time consuming

Revision of retirement benefits (gratuity, leave encashment)of offrs retiring after 1/1/1986

Revision of pension on 1/1/1986, 1/1/1996, 1/1/2006.

Revision of family pension based on revision of pension of offr

Payments to be made to legal heirs of deceased offrs

Interest @ 6 % per annum for upto 24 yrs in each case will have to be calculated and paid. This would be a protracted exercise taking a lot of time and involving huge manpower as each case will have to be examined/ calculated individually.
RDOA comment. UOI is responsible for this faux pas and should do the needful and pay the offrs their legitimate dues. The Court should raise the penalty to 18% for causing unnecessary delays in implementing court orders.

Rank Pay Landmark Judgement boosts the sagging morale of Armed Forces Personnel

Wednesday, September 5, 2012
LANDMARK DAY FOR DEFENCE OFFICERS- RANK PAY CASE - AISHWARYA.
Dear All,
We finally won, this matter was not merely a case but a mission for us!!!
And our patience and efforts were tried to the extreme... despite the earlier final order of the Supreme Court, the fruits of success kept on alluding us since the UOI chose to take the most unusual course of persuing a recall application, which was heard on several dates over the last 2 years.
Today, after marathon arguments from morning till almost rising of the Court and several anxious moments of flips and flops, the Judges were finally convinced and saw through the flimsy excuses of the Govt.
It is my priviledge and pleasure to announce that justice finally prevailed, please see the following note for details and circulate to all retired and serving officers and their kin so they can finally get their dues.
Congrats and regards,
Aishwarya.
Litigation Legend for the Legal Luminaries
LANDMARK DAY FOR DEFENCE OFFICERS- RANK PAY CASE Subject : I.A. NO. 9 IN T.P. (Civil) 56 of 2007 – UOI & Others Versus N.K. Nair & Others.

The aforesaid matter along with connected matter came up for hearing before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India before a Bench of Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.M. Lodha, Mr. Justice T.S. Thakur and Mr. Justice Anil R. Dave before Court No.7, Item No. 9 today i.e. 04.09.2012.

This was an application filed by UOI for modification/directions/recall of order dated 08.03.2010 passed by this Hon’ble Court in T.P. (Civil) No. 56 of 2007 and other writ petitions, by which the Hon’ble Supreme Court had agreed with the reasoning of the Kerala High Court in the case of Major Dhanapalan and directed proper fixation of rank pay from 01.01.1986 and interest @ 6% per annum.

The core issue in these petitions is with regard to the wrong fixation of rank pay awarded by the Fourth Pay Commission by the Union of India.

The background to the core issue is that in the fourth pay commission, the element of rank pay was introduced for all ranks from Captain to Brigadier in the Army and their equivalent ranks in the Air Force and Navy, in addition to pay in the integrated scale. The rationale of this was to make the Armed Forces an attractive career option and to continue the edge that was always provided to the defence officers vis-à-vis their civilian counterparts, owing to the difficult and challenging nature of job profile.

However, at the time of fixation, the rank pay was first deducted to arrive at the total emoluments and thereafter added after fixation in the integrated scale. This ensured that the final fixation of the total pay of the officer became at par with his civilian counterpart and the edge was neutralized during fixation.

The issue is particularly significant since the services have a longstanding grievance that they get a raw deal from the bureaucrats who have systematically worked on ensuring that the historic edge that the defence officers had with respect to their civilian counterparts is first neutralized and eventually reversed. Interestingly, in this case also the Armed Forces (Army-Navy and Air Force) and the Chiefs of Staff Committee had recommended not to persue the litigation further, however, the Ministry of Defence chose to press the application for recall on several grounds including a total financial liability of about Rs. 1600 crores.

Major A.K. Dhanapalan was the first officer to challenge this erroneous fixation before the Hon’ble Kerala High Court in O.P. No. 2448/2006. The Hon’ble Single Judge, Kerala High Court vide order dated 05.10.1998 found no justification in deducting the rank pay and directed the UOI to re-fix the pay without deducting the rank pay. The Hon’ble Division Bench of the High Court also affirmed finding of the Ld. Single Judge and dismissed the Writ Appeal No. 518/1999 of UOI vide order dated 04.07.2003. The UOI challenged the dismissal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court which was also dismissed vide order dated 12.07.2005 in SLP (Civil) No. CC-5908/2005.

Thereafter, several petitions were filed by similarly placed officers before different High Courts and different benches of Armed Forces Tribunal. However, because of the pendency of the aforesaid I.A., the entire issue was in limbo and no benefit had been granted to the deserving officers, apart from the individual case of Major A.K. Dhanapalan.

Today, the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the Application of Union of India finding no merits or grounds. While doing so, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has also directed the UOI to re-fix the pay of affected officers from 01.01.1986, without deducting the rank pay.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has also directed the UOI to pay interest @ 6% p.a. from 01.01.2006 to all the officers, whether or not they have filed any petition before any of the High Courts or Benches of Armed Forces Tribunal, within 12 weeks from today. The Hon’ble Court has also directed that all pending petitions before any of the High Courts or Benches of Armed Forces Tribunal, by similarly placed officers will be governed by this order.

This order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court will benefit a large number of officers who were in the rank of Captain to Brigadier in the Army and equivalent ranks in the Air Force and Navy, between 01.01.1986 to 01.01.2006.

The matter was argued by the Ld. Solicitor General for India on behalf of UOI and defended by Gp Capt Karan Singh Bhati, Advocate-on-record and Ms Aishwarya Bhati, Advocate-on-record on behalf of a large number of individual officers and Retired Defence Officers Association.
Ms. Aishwarya Bhati
Advocate-on-Record
Supreme Court of India.
18 Todermal Road,
Bengali Market,
New Delhi-1
LANDMARK DAY FOR DEFENCE OFFICERS- RANK PAY CASE - AISHWARYA