OROP: Bureaucrats mock the Military

Posted on October 12, 2012
One Rank One Pension
GOVT’S FRAUD ON EX-SERVICEMEN
By Col (Dr) PK Vasudeva (Retd)
New Delhi, Oct 12 : Ex-servicemen have reason to be angry. The Centre’s grant of Rs 2300 crore to the defence services and its claim that it has moved towards granting One Rank One Pension (OROP), as demanded has sadly proved to be a fraud. The ex-servicemen who have been agitating for OROP for over three decades had an initial sense of relief with the grandiose announcement by the Government last month that the Cabinet had approved their demand, but it was short lived.
Once the details of the decision unfolded, it came to light that the approval is nowhere close to the OROP they had been agitating for. What has been given, albeit grudgingly, does not even meet the provision of the Armed Forces Tribunal Judgements in favour of the Defence Personnel, which is effective since 01.01.2006. Till the 60s, OROP was in vogue as Military Pension, and the faujis got 65 per cent of their last pay because most had to retire in their late 40s/early 50s while civilians got 33 per cent since all served up to 58 years. The 3rd Pay Commission abolished Military Pensions, reduced it to 50 per cent, increased civil pensions to 50 per cent, and added a proviso that to earn full pension a Government servant must serve for 33 years. Thus, most military men seldom got full pension because very few could serve for 33 years, but the civil servants invariably did because they served till the age of 58, and met the criteria.
The perfidy of this rule and shabby treatment meted out to the Armed Forces is indeed unfair. The Supreme Court has already declared that pension is “delayed wages for services already rendered”. Thus, Colonel ‘A’ who retired with 24 years of service at the age of 48 years in 1989 must get the same pension as ‘B’ who retires today at the age of 50 years with 24 years of service. Why must Colonel ‘A’ need to beg when he is only seeking justice as he had to retire at a much younger age than his civilian contemporary who joined the IAS at the same time?
The civilians do not retire with only 24 years service at the age of 50 as they carry on till the age of 60. In fact, the Supreme Court recently was constrained to rebuke the Government for “treating soldiers like beggars”. Regrettably our media, which is the fourth estate and takes up issues, has not cared to highlight the military’s issues.
Indeed, the OROP story has turned out to be a cruel joke on the defence personnel by the Centre. Not for the first time, has the Union Government spread canards, to slow down the momentum of demands, and package implementation of court orders to pass off as OROP. It is a sad state of affairs when our establishment treats its people as though they belong to the other side of the border. The neglect of Armed Forces shall prove to be suicidal for the nation as the morale of the troops is low and god forbids, hostilities erupt with our neighbour. Recall that after his recent visit to J&K, Defence Minister A K Antony had apprised the Prime Minister about this low morale, following which a committee under the Cabinet Secretary was set up to address the anomalies in the defence forces pay and allowances.
However, the OROP issue that has been analysed for over seven months by members of a Committee of Parliament had an awkward situation wherein a Committee of secretaries gave evidence against its grant. Little else could be expected from it and the Prime Minister, Defence Minister and the three Chiefs were apprised of the apprehensions.
Worse, it is a great pity that the demand by three Chiefs to include members from the serving and retired defence personnel in the Committee was not accepted.
At the end, the Government not only has left 39 serious anomalies in pay & pension of defence personnel unresolved, it has also not implemented the judgements of Armed Forces Tribunal & Supreme Court given in favour of defence personnel. This apart, the recommendations of Rajya Sabha Petition Committee on OROP strongly recommending it for the defence personnel too have not been implemented.
OROP basically implies payment of uniform pension to personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement. Consequently, any enhancement in pension rates is automatically passed on to past pensioners.
Officials said the recent package had sought to “bridge the gap” between the pensioners who retired before January 1996 and those who superannuated after that date and was “expected to largely meet the demands on OROP”. However, OROP is meant to ‘remove the gap’ rather than ‘bridge the gap’. There is thus a situation where “a sepoy, Naik and Havaldar have been given an increase of only Rs 400 per month, whereas a sepoy who retired in January 2012 draws approximately Rs 4,000 more than retirees prior to 2006”.
The Supreme Court, in its latest ruling set right another anomaly of the bureaucracy where rank pay granted by the 4th Central Pay Commission was illegally deducted from the pay of the officers of the rank of Captain to Brigadier. A large number of such officers have already died and the number may be 15000 of nearly 40,000 affected. There is all likelihood that the veterans and the next of kin of the deceased officers will be able to get this benefit.
This apart, the 6th Pay Commission gave non-functional upgradation to all the Central services (51) including the paramilitary forces, whereby every officer from these services retire in the grade of additional secretary, irrespective of vacancies. Sadly, the political and bureaucratic leadership seems to have closed its eyes when it comes to the defence services.
Well, playing games with faujis all the time can’t be a coincidence and appears to be a sinister design. It is highly de-motivating factor for the military as it makes defence services a low priority career choice, and weakens the fabric of our national security.,BR> The ex-servicemen propose not to give up their fight and expect the Government to do justice. The fraternity is all set to intensify their all-India protest from December 1, 2012 but in a dignified manner. Will the Government pay heed gracefully? — INFA
(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)
One Rank One Pension: GOVT’S FRAUD ON EX-SERVICEMEN

OROP: SCPC anomalies partly addressed

What is One Rank One Pension?
One Rank One Pension would be clear if we look at one Army family that had two generations serving the nation at two different periods for the same length of time in the same capacity as Havaldar, and yet earning two different pensions. Rajesh Kumar, an Army man, lives just about 200 kilometre from the capital in the village of Beri. A small family of three, his father too served in the Indian Army. Havaldar Zile Singh is the veteran of two wars. He spent 16 years 27 days in the Army, retiring in 1977. Meanwhile, Havaldar Rajesh Kumar saw no wars but served in several conflict zones. He spent nearly the same time – 16 years 10 months – in the force and retired in 2009.
Roughly the same time in service, roughly the same hardships, but the father earns Rs 7,304 as pension, while Rajesh earns Rs 10,736. It’s this difference, between a pre-96 retiree and a post-2006 retiree that is at the heart of the conflict and the demand for One Rank One Pension.
The SCPC Anomalies has been partly rectified which has been announced as meeting "One Rank One Pension" goal...read the Government's twisted announcement...
One pension one rank announcement by Center
Tuesday, September, 25 2012 - 10:29
NEW DELHI: The government approved a Rs.2,300 crore per year (about $430 million) proposal to fix the anomalies in the pay and pension of 1.3-million strong defence personnel, 2 million ex-servicemen and another 400,000 military widows, in a bid to assuage their hurt over the Sixth Pay Commission recommendations implemented in 2008.
"The union cabinet has approved the recommendations of the committee headed by cabinet secretary (Ajit Seth) for benefits to ex-servicemen on four issues. The financial implications of the improvements made as per the cabinet decision on the four items are broadly estimated at Rs.2,300 crore per annum," a government official said here soon after the cabinet meeting.
"These are expected to largely meet the demands of the defence pensioners on 'one rank - one pension' (OROP)," the official said.
The approved proposals would be implemented "from a prospective date and payment made accordingly," the official added.
The committee, set up on July 13 this year on orders of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, submitted its report on Aug 8 this year.
The government had tasked the committee to look into issues of defence personnel such as common pay-scale for in-service junior commissioned officers and other ranks and initial pay-fixation of lieutenant colonels, colonels, and brigadiers of the army and their equivalents in the other two armed forces among others.
Its remit also included ex-servicemen's issues such as OROP (that all retired officers of the same rank and service tenure should get the same pension), enhancement of family pension, dual family pension, and family pension for mentally and physically challenged children of armed forces personnel on marriage.
On OROP, the demand of the defence forces and ex-servicemen associations is that uniform pension be paid to the personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension be automatically passed on to the pre-hike pensioners.
The difference in the pension in the same rank occurs on account of the number of increments earned by the defence personnel in that rank. There is also a difference between the pensioners who retired before and after Jan 1, 2006 when the sixth pay commission recommendations were made applicable retrospectively belonging to a particular rank.
The UPA government, since 2004, has on two previous occasions taken decisions to narrow the gap in pensions of personnel who retired at different points of time, particularly those belonging to the ranks of junior commissioned officers (JCOs) and soldiers (other ranks or ORs).
On the issue of OROP, the cabinet approved bridging the gap in the pension of pre- and post-Jan, 1, 2006 JCO/OR retirees by determining the pension of pre-Jan 1, 2006 retirees on the basis of notional maximum for ranks and groups across the three services as in the case of post-Jan. 1, 2006 retirees.
With regard to family pension, the pre-Jan 1, 2006 commissioned officers, honorary commissioned officers, JCOs/ORs would be hiked based on "the minimum of the fitment table" instead of the minimum of the Pay Band. It was also approved to provide 60 per cent of pension to families of retired JCOs/ORs after their death post-retirement. To retired JCO/OR families getting enhanced family pension or special family pension would be entitled for 100 per cent of the personnel's pension.
Dual family pension too would be allowed to those personnel, who had civilian service too post military service retirement.
Family pension will be continued to mentally/physically challenged children of defence personnel even after their marriage.
One pension one rank announcement by Center

OROP Joke: Government attempts to Mollify the ESM

Taking steps for one-rank, one-pension demand: Govt
TNN | Sep 27, 2012, 02.02AM IST
NEW DELHI: Stung by trenchant criticism of ex-servicemen who have called the Rs 2,300 crore pension package announced for them "a joke and mere eyewash", the government on Wednesday said it was taking "steps in phases" towards meeting the eventual aim of one-rank, one-pension (OROP).
"The journey towards the OROP goal is a continuous process. Despite the country's critical financial position, the government came out on Monday with the Rs 2,300 crore package for ex-servicemen," a senior official said.
"This is the third time that the government has increased the pensions of ex-servicemen after the 6th Pay Commission. On implementation of the latest package, the pensions of officers will go up from 10% to 28% (Rs 565 to Rs 3,741 per month), while that of other ranks will increase by 9.7% to 13% (Rs 500 to Rs 800 per month). Dearness relief would be payable in addition," he added.
Ex-servicemen, however, are furious with the government for trying to project the Rs 2,300 crore pension package as the fulfillment of their long-pending OROP demand, which basically means payment of uniform pension to personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement.
"The OROP story has turned out to be a government joke. The government has just rectified anomalies created by bureaucrats in earlier pay commissions. They in any case would have been enforced through court orders," said a retired major-general.
The government, on its part, said family pensioners have also been given the benefit of enhanced pensions, ranging from an increase of Rs 242 to Rs 2,500 depending upon their existing pensions.
"Moreover, defence and family pensioners will also benefit from dual family pension and family pension to mentally/physically challenged children even after marriage," the official said.
Taking steps for one-rank, one-pension demand: Govt
Related Reading
Ex-Armymen cry foul over ‘misleading’ pension plan

OROP: Military Veterans Remain Skeptical

Published on 24 Sep 2012 by ibnlive India's nearly 23 lakh ex-military personnel have a reason to celebrate. The government has finally conceded their demand for One Rank One Pension. It means that the military personnel will draw the pensions depending on the rank at which they retired, and not the date of their retirement. http://ibnlive.com/livetv

OROP: Misleading announcement by Government

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2012
'One Rank One Pension: Misleading Announcement By Govt': Ex-servicemen Cry Foul, Write To PM
"Hon’ble Prime Minister,
1. The grandiose announcement by the Govt that One Rank One Pension has been approved by the Cabinet was met with lot relief by the Ex servicemen who have been agitating for its acceptance for more than 30 years. However, this sense of relief was short lived as the details of the decision unfolded and our fears brought before you vide our letter dated 18 Jul 2012 became a reality (Copy of the letter enclosed). What has been given, albeit grudgingly, does not even meet the provision of the Armed Forces Tribunal Judgements in favour the Defence Personnel which is effective from 01.01.2006. This decision is from a prospective date.
2. Sir, OROP even at the risk of repetition, is “Defence Personnel with the same rank and same length of service must draw the same pension irrespective of the date of retirement and any future enhancement would be automatically granted to them”. This also means that no senior defence person should ever draw pension less than his junior. Sir, It further means “Removal of the Gap” and not Bridging the Gap. To illustrate, a Sepoy, Naik and Havlidar have been given an increase of only Rs 400 per month, whereas a Sepoy who retired on 31.01.2012 draws approx Rs 4000/- more than those retired prior to 2006. Similarly, major disparity still exists in the officer ranks. This, we feel, is primarily due to non inclusion of members from Defence Personnel in the committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary, a request which the three Chiefs made to the Raksha Mantri but was not accepted.
3. Sir, the Ex servicemen expect the Govt to do Justice to them. This announcement has further disillusioned the Ex Servicemen fraternity who have decided to intensify their protest in a dignified manner on All India basis.
With Regards,
Yours Sincerely,
Maj Gen (Retd) Satbir Singh, SM"
Maj Gen (Retd) Satbir Singh,Vice Chairman of the Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement has written to the PM, Defence Minister, and the three service Chiefs. He has been spearheading the movement for the past 6 years plus.
'One Rank One Pension: Misleading Announcement By Govt': Ex-servicemen Cry Foul

Deprived and Disabled ESM seek Justice

Ministry of Defence 03-September, 2012 15:30 IST
Deprived Section of Ex-Servicemen
Ex-servicemen with service less than 15 years are not entitled to pension as it is a mandatory requirement for a Personnel Below Officer Rank to render 15 years and for Commissioned Officers 20 years qualifying service to earn pension. Minimum qualifying service is an essential criterion for pension in the Government.
The Short Service Commissioned Officers who are not pensioners are eligible for certain schemes of DGR like Training, Security Agencies and other self-employment schemes. Ex-Defence personnel with more than 5 years of service are entitled to CSD canteen facilities available in units / establishment apart from being employed as security guards. Some grants out of Raksha Mantri Discretionary Funds is also provided to non-pensioners upto the rank of Havaldar.
This information was given by Minister of State for Defence Dr MM PallamRajuin a written reply to Shri Gopal Singh Shekhawatin Lok Sabha today. HS/HH/NN (Release ID :87211) Deprived Section of Ex-Servicemen
Related Reading
Relief for ex-servicemen

‘Ex-servicemen opting for higher grades should discard benefits’
By Express News Service - KOCHI 14th September 2012 10:47 AM
The Kerala High Court on Thursday held that the ex-service men preferring for higher grades after opting for civil pension should discard the retirement benefits of military pension.
A Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Manjula Chellur and Justice A M Shaffique passed the order while considering an appeal filed by the state government challenging a Single Bench order which permitted the pensioners not to remit the pension benefits.
The court made it clear that to avail of higher grade in the service, the Kerala Service Rules should be followed. “The statutory provision in question is Rule 8(c) of Part III of the Kerala Service Rules which makes it clear that ex-servicemen re-employed in civil services shall be allowed to count their military service, which is non-pensionable or pensionable under the Military Rules, but which is terminated before a pension has been earned in respect of it. War/military service is a pensionable service and pension has been earned by the incumbent in relation to such service, the same shall not be reckoned for the purpose of civil pension,” the court said.
The court also made it clear that for considering the reckoning military services along for higher grade in the state service all the pension benefits should be remitted.>br> ‘Ex-servicemen opting for higher grades should discard benefits’

Pension for ailing ex-serviceman
By Express News Service - KOCHI 17th September 2012 12:03 PM
The Armed Forces Tribunal Kochi bench has directed the Central government to disburse the disability pension to George Varghese of Kollam who sustained a disability during the military service within three months.
The bench comprising judicial member Justice Shrikant Tripathi and administrative member Lt General Thomas Mathew passed the order while considering a petition filed by George Varghese of Kollam seeking pension on the ground that the disability occurred due to military service.
Counsel for the petitioner C R Ramesh submitted that Varghese suffered bronchial asthma during the course of service and the medical board opined that disability suffered by the petitioner was attributable to military service.
The percentage of disability was 30 per cent.
The Central Government denied pension on the ground that he had himself sought for the discharge from the army on compassionate grounds.
The bench asked the state to grant the pension benefits from October 2008.
Pension for ailing ex-serviceman

HC refers service matters of armed forces to AFT

Saturday, September 22, 2012, Chandigarh, India
Saurabh Malik/TNS Chandigarh, September 21, 2012
The Punjab and Haryana High Court, by passing a single order, has referred “all service matters concerning members of the armed forces” to the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT). The “matters” involve pension and other retirement benefits pending before the HC.
The significance of the order can be gauged from the fact that the HC has disposed of, through the order, nothing less than 31 writ petitions filed by Army personnel “pertaining to the disability pension, dismissal from service, etc.”
The bunch comprised writ petitions against the orders passed by the CAT and Regular Second Appeals against the judgments and decrees of the courts below.
Taking up the petitions by Naik Prem Singh and other petitioners against the Union of India and other respondents, a Division Bench of the HC asserted the petitions pertaining to the disability pension, dismissal from service, etc. of Army personnel fell within the definition of “service matters” as defined in Section 3(O) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007.
The bench added: “At the outset, counsel for the respondents have raised a preliminary objection by placing reliance on Section 34 read with Section 14 and 3(O) of the Act. A conjoint reading of these Sections would show that all service matters concerning the members of Armed Forces, involving pension and other retiral benefits, pending before this court are required to be transferred to the AFT, Chandigarh Bench, which is constituted for this jurisdiction”.
HC refers service matters of armed forces to AFT

Armed Forces Tribunal will be under Law Ministry

Paralyzed armed forces tribunal. notice to ministry of defence Kudos to Navdeep Maj Navdeep Singh who clarifies the status of the Paralyzed AFT
Armed Forces Tribunal will be under Law Ministry
Clash of interests is being cited as the main reason why this tribunal must be removed from under the Ministry of Defence.
SUMAN SHARMA NEW DELHI | 9th Sep 2012
he Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) is all set to come under the Ministry of Law, instead of its parent body, the Ministry of Defence. The Supreme Court gave a directive to this effect in 2010 as it felt that the MoD could influence the tribunal's judgements since the latter dealt with decisions pertaining to the ministry. To ensure that fair judgements were given, the Supreme Court, in fact, directed that the administrative control of the AFT and all other tribunals should not be under their parent ministries. It recommended that the tribunals should be placed under one single nodal department, preferably the Department of Legal Affairs.
The SC directive has been under consideration ever since. But the matter got a fresh lease of life with Law Minister Salman Khurshid's recent statement in Parliament that the government was looking at the possibility of removing these tribunals from under their parent ministries and putting them under the Ministry of Law.
Clash of interests is the main reason why these tribunals need to be removed from under their parent ministries. To give an instance, the members comprising the AFT use the various facilities offered by the MoD, but are also required to pass orders against the ministry in the cases coming to them. An RTI query by a retired army officer revealed that the MoD funded AFT chairperson A.K. Mathur's foreign trips worth lakhs of rupees. The AFT also makes use of the infrastructure offered by the MoD to function: the land on which the AFTs are constructed is given by the MoD. The ministry gives the AFT members facilities such as the CSD (Canteen Stores Depot) cards. These are canteen cards that can be used to procure grocery and other household items at subsidised rates from all military canteens.
A senior retired army officer working as an administrative member at one of the AFT benches told this newspaper, "The AFTs should be under the Ministry of Law so that they can give fair judgements. Litigants are always afraid that fairness will go missing as the AFTs function from MoD land and do not have their own premises. Funds for the AFTs are also sanctioned through the MoD. The CSD cards given to the members are actually a privilege."
The Armed Forces Tribunal enjoys the status of a High Court, and came into being in 2009. Each court consists of a judicial member and an administrative member. The administrative member of an AFT is always a retired senior officer, usually a three-star officer. A source told this newspaper, "These retired officers usually know the applicants approaching the Tribunal. This increases the chances of the Tribunal's decisions being influenced. So their decisions are unlikely to be fair. This debate to delink the AFT from the administrative powers of the MoD has been going on for a long time."
Armed Forces Tribunal will be under Law Ministry

Army shoots itself in the foot

Personnel policies: Army shoots itself in the foot
Military officers are quick to blame bureaucrats, but it is their own arbitrary and parochial attitude and policies, without any understanding or training for administration, that are to be blamed. In the bargain, the military becomes its own greatest enemy by Maj Navdeep Singh

Gentleman cadets during their passing-out parade at the Indian Military Academy, Dehradun. The obstructive, inward-looking conservative approach has to go, times are such. Camaraderie has been the hallmark of defence services but the same is not just meant for the battlefield but for normal day-to-day life too which actually and practically affects personnel and their families
Humans are alike. Wearing a uniform may suppress, but not fully insulate them from corruption, greed, power-play et al, vices inherent to human race. But besides grit and courage, what sets military personnel apart from the others is the sharp ability to self-destruct and to invent self-defeatist masterstrokes as far as welfare, manpower and personnel policies are concerned.
Whichever side one may be, what the Army Chief's age row has brought fore is that there is a belief doing the rounds, factual or fictional, that meticulous, surgically incisive processes are constantly at play where careers of those who may pose a future threat are played with crudely and ruthlessly and all this happens behind closed doors under a cloak of secrecy marked 'national security', which is not actually in consonance with the age of transparency we live in. The lucky few in key appointments have their way and others can only pull their hair in despair. The number of cases pending before Benches of the Armed Forces Tribunal and other Courts, and the kind of strictures passed on such matters bear testimony to the chaos at work. It is yet another matter that even in well-rounded verdicts, the system, out of egotism, tries its best to wear out its own personnel by litigating till the highest court.
Arbitrary attitude and policies
While military officers are quick to point fingers at the bureaucrat, it is their own arbitrary and parochial attitude and policies, without any basic understanding or training for administration, that are to be blamed. In the bargain, the military becomes the military's own greatest enemy.
The examples are many. Recently the Supreme Court reportedly reprimanded the Army for creating artificial hurdles for its own officers when an appeal was filed against a lady officer of the Judge Advocate General's Department whose case had been allowed by the AFT granting her promotions and permanent commission. Till date, the Army, based on an internal artificial interpretation by the Military Secretary's Branch, is promoting Short Service Officers commissioned prior to 2006 as Captains in nine years of service while those commissioned after 2006 are being promoted to the same rank in two years. The impediment was not created by with the Ministry of Defence, but by the Army. When the Military's medical establishment was directed by Courts to grant medical facilities to its elderly retired Emergency Commissioned Officers based on an already existing Government Order, the Army itself was quick to challenge it before the Supreme Court. Imagine, the Army approaching the Supreme Court with a prayer that the same Army may be directed to withdraw medical facilities from its own officers, some of them in their 80s.
When the Navy and Air Force vouched for implementation of the Non-Functional Upgradation for the defence services, as already applicable to civil services, which guarantees the pay of a Lieutenant General in a time-bound manner to superseded officers, the Army was the first to oppose putting across the banal argument that if implemented there would be 'no charm for higher ranks'. When all Doctors of the Central Government were granted a 'Dynamic Assured Progression Scheme', the Army itself tooth and nail opposed its implementation for its own doctors on the pretext that doctors would then start getting higher salaries than other officers.
Faulty interpretation of rules
While the civilian establishment is constantly blamed for degradation of status of military officers, the Army, in the Military Engineering Services (MES) itself places senior promotee military officers of the rank of Major and lady officers of similar rank as Assistant Garrison Engineers, an appointment tenable by Subedar-equivalent civilian officers, while directly commissioned officers of the rank of Major with much lesser length of service are posted on higher appointments such as Garrison Engineers, all again based on an artificial, faulty and forced interpretation of existing rules.
Recently, based on a decision taken by the Prime Minister, young army officers, both Permanent and Short Service Commissioned, up to 35 years of age with 5 years of service and in fit medical category, were sought for lateral induction into the Indian Police Service through a statutory gazette notification. But rather than moving with the times, the Army Headquarters, based on an outdated policy promulgated in 1987, issued a circular pointing out that only those Permanent Commissioned Officers would be permitted to apply for the IPS who had only two years of service left (that is, who were 50 years old), or who were in low medical category, or who had completed 18 years of service but had not passed their promotion exams. Needless to say, it's a no-brainer that all such categories 'allowed' by the Army HQ were actually ineligible to be inducted into the IPS as per the notification.
Whenever there is a welfare oriented proposal or proactive personnel policy under consideration of the Government which elements in the bureaucracy would not like to see implemented, they simply throw it in the court of the defence services for a consultative process for they know that first the Army, Navy and the Air Force would start struggling between themselves, and then the fight would shift inter-se between the fighting Arms, then it would be fighting arms versus support arms and finally arms versus services. The end product would be zilch resulting in sniggers from the ringside.
Shedding obstructive approach
So where does the fault lie? Is it because of the stiff competition and ACR oriented 'smile up - kick down' culture or is it because of plain lack of understanding of finer aspects of personnel management and lack of administrative acumen or downright foolhardiness? The answer is hard to find. It seems that in a nation with the psyche of public servants deriving power by imposing obstacles, red-tape and impediments in the ordinary life of a common citizen, officers holding key appointments in the military feel powerless when they compare themselves with their civilian counterparts. Hence the only way to feel powerful is by posing hindrances in areas of policy where the pen can be used as an authoritative instrument of damage, and that damage unfortunately is restricted to within the uniformed services. As a sequel, creation of restrictive clauses and provisos becomes a tool of ego empowerment through which the policy writer feels potent. Liberal construal is abandoned for sadism and a sub-culture emerges where cribbing is rampant and peer happiness is not tolerated.
The Army has to wake up and smell the coffee. The obstructive, inward-looking conservative approach has to go, times are such. Camaraderie has been the hallmark of defence services but the same is not just meant for the battle field but for normal day to day life too which actually and practically affects personnel and their families. A recent positive example would be the strong efforts of the Army's Personnel Services Directorate in reducing litigation and convincing the Defence Ministry to withdraw appeals filed against its disabled soldiers bringing succour and kudos to the organisation. The positivity must spread and must spread fast to other spheres, otherwise the self-inflicted injury to the heretofore seemingly strong foundation would make the organisation a laughing stock leading to a spectacular derailment of the only institution every Indian has been unconditionally proud of.
Bare facts

Supreme Court recently rapped the Army for creating artificial hurdles for its own officers in a case related to the promotion and grant of permanent commission to a woman officer.

The Navy and the Air Force vouched for non-functional upgradation,as applicable to civil services, that would grant pay of Lt Gen to superseded officers, but the Army opposed it.

When all central government doctors were granted Dynamic Assured Progression Scheme, Army opposed it for its own officers.

In MES, the Army places Majors and Lt Cols in appointments tenable by Subedar-equivalent civilian MES cadre.

On the PM’s directives, military officers below 35 years were sought for lateral induction into the IPS, but the Army, citing an outdated circular of 1987, put a spanner in the works. The writer practises in the Punjab and Haryana High Court Click here for the Tribune article

OROP: Government counsel misleading the Supreme Court

Read in conjuction with:

OROP twists, turns and twirls

Raw deal to the Armed Forces by Lt Gen SK Bahri
Subject: IESM Gov Body 07 Jun evening
Dear Colleagues,
I had a meeting with Mr Salman Khurshid, the Minister of Law & Justice today. I apprised him of the unfortunate fact of the government challenging each and every judgment of the lower courts that go in favour of the ESM. I explained details of the disability broad banding case where a judgment of the AFT has been challenged despite instructions of the Defence Minister (issued on 06 Mar 2012) to the contrary. He was also apprised of the government counsel misleading the SC in many cases, such as in the case of Hony Naib Sub (leading to a judgment that only those pre 1.1.2006 Hony Naib Sub be given the pension of a regular Nb Sub, who get the Hony rank while being in service).
On the point of the goverment dragging its feet in not implementing the SC judgment, I gave a concrete example in the form of a written handout on the ongoing rank pay case, with a request that either the government withdraw its appeal and implements the SC judgment of 08.03.2010 or the solicitor General be made to attend the next hearing on 04.09.2012 so that the case is finally disposed of. He promised to look into all these points.
Making use of the opportunity, I also sought his help as a Cabinet Minister in prevailing upon the government in sanctioning OROP. He wanted to understand the various nuances of OROP which I explained. I mentioned to him about my letter to the Congress President in Oct 2011 where I had said non-grant of OROP may affect the ESM voting pattern in Assembly and Parliamentary elections, further underscoring the fact that this may have happened in the recent elections in UP and Punjab. I also mentioned that anti Congress sentiments of the ESM may be even stronger during the 2014 Parliamentary elections. He promised to do what he can.
Best regards,
Lt Gen Raj Kadyan
Chairman IESM
Comment: All ESM organisations need to be apolitical. The Politicians know that the armed forces and their families just constitute 1% of the total population. Even out of this percentage Serving and Veterans do not bother to vote. Even if 50% vote, it is meagre and well under 0.5% of total Voters. The impact will be near negligible except for the states like Punjab, Himachal, Haryana and Rajastan where perhaps the voters percentage may exceed marginally by a percent. "Service before Self" must be the motto of all ESMs and being balanced will pay dividends in the long run. The Government intent is to make monkey of the Armed Forces. All Political Parties (except for few Independents) treat Armed Forces like the Nation's super Police Force and not as a Professional Army. The long Battle with insurgency is a quid pro arrangement between Government and Military- former reducing the sheen of the professional army and later to ensure the selected Officers are annointed for gallantry awards with decorations for guaranteed promotions (in most cases fakes go as real). This arrangement suits the Political Community as it constantly diminishes the image of the Military. The Officer Shortage will continue to haunt till the Glamour of Professional Army is restored. This is not likely to happen in the near future. Incidently Pandit Nehru trusted the Malabar Police more than the Military during the 1962 conflict (Krishna Menon propped up the calibre of Malabar Police). Nothing has changed... MOD, MHA, PMO, MEA have more trust on the PMF's than on the Indian Military... their scope and range is enlarging much more than their mandate... here we are reminded of Nidhi Razdan's Left Right and Centre refrain... "Let us look at the Bigger Picture".... maybe we will get the true reflection!

One Rank One Pension: Babu's Spin the Government

Himachal ex-servicemen to honour Army Chief V K Singh
Press Trust of India / Dharamsala May 15, 2012, 00:05
The Himachal Pradesh ex-servicemen's league will honour Army Chief General V K Singh on May 25 here for his stand on the alleged corruption in the armed forces.
"The working and the retired band of soldiers in the state are impressed with the General, the way he has exposed the ugly underbelly of the corruption in the forces," Chairman of the state ex-servicemen's league, Major Vijay Singh Mankotia said.
Stating that Himachal Pradesh was the only state in the country to get four Param Vir Chakras, he said the families of soldiers who have given the supreme sacrifice will be honoured by the Army chief on the day.
The demand for 'One-Rank, One-Pension,' and other issues will also be raised at the rally on May 25, he said.
Himachal ex-servicemen to honour Army Chief V K Singh
Read more
Gen VK Singh to address ex-servicemen on May 25 Tribune News Service

Centre in agreement with principle of ‘One Rank One Pension’
The Ministry of Defence is in agreement with the principle of ‘One Rank One Pension’ demand of the ex-servicemen, said Chief of Army staff General V K Singh.
Addressing a rally of the ex-servicemen here, he said the implementation of the One Rank One Pension involved an expenditure of Rs 1300 crore.
He added that the implementation could not be made time bound as such decisions had to pass through several levels of the government before becoming a reality.
The government had, however, agreed to the demand, he added.
Gen Singh also said that he had introduced several plans to bridge the gap between the veterans and the serving army officials.
To sort out their demands he had set up a ‘Veteran Cell’ in the Army two years ago. He conceded that it was the duty of the Army to ensure that the rights of the ex-servicemen were taken care of.
Assuring the ex-servicemen “You will certainly get your rights and will not have to ask for it”, the Chief of Army staff said, 20 more centres would soon be set up in Punjab under the ex-servicemen contributory health scheme.
The army chief further said that he had written to the government to restore the old system of Canteen Store Departments (CSD) to the Army as the current system was not working to the satisfaction of the defence personnel.
Later talking to media persons, Gen Singh when asked about his letters to the Government on the issues of corruption and the inadequate stores in the armaments, Gen Singh said that the ball was now in the court of the government.
“I have done my duty, now it is for the government to act”, he added.
Centre in agreement with principle of ‘One Rank One Pension’

86-yr-old WW II veteran wins pension

Bhartesh Singh Thakur, Hindustan Times
Chandigarh, February 20, 2012
Providing succor to 86-year-old World War II veteran, Chandigarh bench of Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) allowed his petition and granted him pension.
Ishar Singh, a resident of Yamunanagar, joined signal regiment of Royal Indian Army on December 27, 1942. For serving the nation, he was awarded War Medal and Indian Independence Medal.
Ishar retired on April 12, 1948 as he was declared medically unfit to serve further. He was suffering from osteoarthritis of the spine.
The 86-year-old was granted disability pension at Rs 6 per month. It was stopped on April 12, 1950 as his disability had fallen below 20%.
Ishar made efforts and made representations to Army authorities for continuing his pension but in vain. He was brought before a re-survey medical board in 1989 which also ruled that his disability was lesser than 20%.
He had no source of income as he was illiterate. He was sustaining on agriculture in his village. His service element was not given as he had served for less than 10 years as per the rules when he retired.
"In March 2011, he approached All India Ex-servicemen Welfare Association (AIEWA), which took up its case through its legal aid scheme. In October 2011, the petition was filed. A notice was issued to union government. In its reply, the government replied that there was no record available of the World War II veteran as the same had been destroyed," said Bhim Sen Sehgal, Chairman of AIEWA, who represented Ishar Singh in the court.
He added, "As per the change in the policies in 1968 and then in 1973, invalided soldiers should get service element. And later Supreme Court judgments also put a stamp on it, which removed the cut off dates."
The court took the documents-service record, pension book and certificate issued by re-survey medical board, submitted by Ishar Singh as evidence in the case.
The bench comprising justice NP Gupta and Air Marshal SC Mukul (retd) allowed the service element of disability pension but restricted the arrears to three years from the date of filing the petition in AFT.
86-yr-old WW II veteran wins pension

Forces Law Gazette

Sunday, March 11, 2012
Forces Law Gazette : Issue No 2 (March 2012) now available on www.lawgazette.net
As promised, the second issue of the FORCES LAW GAZETTE (FLG) is out and now available for free download at www.lawgazette.net
The download link is placed on a verified host and is virus-free.
For those who joined us late, the FLG is a free, non-commercial quarterly newsletter on law and allied issues related to uniformed forces. The gazette covers not just India but other democracies as well. FLG is available for free download and distribution. The current issue covers legal and other topical subjects till March 2012.
Through this post, I would also like to thank everyone for the positive feedback on the first issue. The stupendous number of downloads shows that our efforts did not go waste.
Contributions in the form of articles are welcome and may be sent to me through email for publication in future issues.
Readers can also click here to directly download the current issue of the gazette without visiting the FLG website.
The next issue is due for June 2012.
Posted by Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh

AHQ documentation and profiling of Officers puts COAS in the dock

Govt's next battle: Against army chief
Ajai Shukla / New Delhi January 1, 2012, 0:13 IST
The UPA government, still smarting from the Lok Pal Bill fiasco in the Rajya Sabha, already contemplates its next battle. Business Standard has learnt that the Chief of Army Staff (COAS), General V K Singh, plans to petition the Supreme Court on Monday after the Ministry of Defence (MoD) yesterday rejected his statutory complaint asking for his date of birth to be reconciled.

The army chief contends (supported by 19 documents, including matriculation and birth certificates) that he was born on May 10, 1951. That makes him eligible to serve till May 31, 2013, when he would retire after completing 62 years that month. The Adjutant General’s (AG’s) Branch, the army’s official record keeper, supports that date. But the Military Secretary’s Branch, which handles promotions, has him born on May 10, 1950 and, therefore, due for retirement on May 31, 2012. The MoD has ruled that the latter date is correct.

“The chief will leave on January 5 for an official visit to Myanmar. Before that, he would like to file his writ petition, to which he is entitled as a citizen of India,” says a close aide to Singh.

Sources close to Singh describe him as “extremely bitter” at the government’s “backstabbing” over this issue. They say Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee was mediating with the army chief on behalf of the government. After Singh refused the offer of a post-retirement ambassadorship or governorship, retorting that this was a matter of honour, Mukherjee is said to have asked the chief to wait till January 16, 2012, when a face-saving compromise would be worked out. To the army chief’s surprise yesterday, the government rejected his petition.

Approached for comments, Mukherjee’s office admitted the finance minister met Singh yesterday, in a closed-door one-on-one meeting. But the official denied that the date-of-birth issue was discussed. “So many people discuss different things with the finance minister. We cannot reveal what they talked,” the official said.
Govt's next battle: Against army chief

COAS to resign ahead of tenure?
General Singh is consulting legal experts, including three former Chief Justices of India, and they have strongly supported him. Sources say the Army chief has two options: Either to go to the Armed Forces Tribunal, or move to Supreme Court directly. The Supreme Court is already hearing a Public Interest Litigation over the issue.

Sources also say that General Singh has also not ruled out resigning ahead of his tenure ending on May 31, 2012 - the date which the government has now decided.
Read more at: click here

Tailpiece
... a ministry headed by “honest” Antony, we have an unexplained sum of Rs 600 crore being paid as “business charges” by the UPA government to an Israeli arms manufacturer. Till date, the government has not explained what this money is about.
Antony vs Army Chief: When honesty is not good enough by R Jagannathan Jan 3, 2012- click here for the full story

Forces Law Gazette

This day, 16th December, is militarily a significant date for the region.
To fill up the vacuum in a very apposite space, I feel pleased today in announcing the release of the first issue of the ‘FORCES LAW GAZETTE’ – a free, non-commercial quarterly newsletter dealing with law & allied issues related to uniformed services of not just India but other democracies as well. Meant more for general reading than use in Courts, the Gazette would consist of three broad categories:
(1) Law Related to Uniformed Services,
(2) Developments & Miscellaneous, and
(3) Contributions & Articles.

The Gazette would remain available through www.lawgazette.net for free download and distribution in pdf format. Of course, the link is also available on my blog Indian Military Info
Bouquets and brickbats are welcome on the comments section on the FLG webpage.
Readers are welcome to distribute and forward this email, and also the Gazette, freely and non-commercially without any inhibition or copyright concerns.
I, the Editorial team and the contributors hope to effectively sustain the concept with the next issue due in March 2012. Contributions in the form of articles are welcome and may be sent to me by email for publication in future volumes.
Thank You,
Major Navdeep Singh
Advocate, High Court

Armed Forces Tribunal clarifies Liberal Family Pension

Armed Forces Tribunal orders pension to mother of jawan who died in Siachen Karthika Gopalakrishnan, TNN | Sep 22, 2011, 01.10AM IST

CHENNAI: A woman, whose 27-year-old armyman son died after contracting a fatal illness while serving at the Siachen Glacier, is still awaiting his pension. Pointing out that she is fully entitled to the benefits, the regional bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal in the city has directed the authorities to speed up the process. A bench of Justice A C Arumugaperumal Adityan, member (judicial), and Lt Gen (retd) S Pattabhiraman, member (administrative) passed orders.

Hellan Sagayamony from Nilgiris district had moved the tribunal when she did not get any relief even three years after her son's death. Her son A Stalin had enrolled as a sepoy in the Madras Regiment on January 28, 2002 and posted to high-altitude regions, including Siachen Glacier, between October and December 2007. While serving at the international border and the Line of Control, he developed breathing problems due to the extreme cold.

Though Stalin was given medical treatment by the doctor at the post, he was later evacuated to the field hospital where he was diagnosed with 'High-Altitude Cerebral Edema' (HACE) and placed on the "dangerously ill" list. He was transferred to the Command Hospital, Chandimandir in Haryana and then to the Army Hospital (Research & Referral), New Delhi on January 24, 2008. He died the next day due to spontaneous intra-cerebral hemorrhage.

With his death classified as "battle casualty", claims for liberalised family pension (LFP) and ex-gratia payment were made to the principal controller of defence accounts (Pension), Allahabad, but both were rejected on the ground that death was due to stress and strain and not due to climatic conditions.

LFP can be claimed when death takes place during action in a war, war-like operations, border skirmishes, operation against terrorists and other such actions. However, Stalin's dependents were sanctioned a special family pension, which is given when the cause of death is attributable to military service. The pension is lower than the LFP. An ex-gratia payment is made for death occurring due to accidents in the course of performing duties.

Passing orders, the bench referred to a government order (GO) issued by the ministry of defence on January 31, 2001 which said that disease contracted because of continued exposure to a hostile work environment was a condition under which one could claim LFP. Another GO issued on October 21, 1998 added that the ex-gratia amount had been enhanced from Rs 5 lakh to Rs 10 lakh.

Relying on both GOs: The bench ruled that Hellan Sagayamony was entitled to both allowances and directed authorities to expedite the relief within three months. Failing which, she would be entitled to 9% interest per annum on the arrears.
Liberal Family Pension

Related Reading: Non-pensioners entitled to MH facilities: AFT

Armed Forces Tribunal: Legal Headwind

THE JUDICIARY AND MILITARY LAW
The Armed Forces Tribunal, which came into being in August 2009, provides for adjudication of disputes and complaints about service related matters covering all three branches of the military, including hearing appeals arising out of orders, findings and sentences of courts martial. The AFT has original jurisdiction in service matters and appellate jurisdiction in court martial matters. All cases pending before the High Courts were transferred to the AFT. Its each bench comprises a judicial member, who should have served as a judge of the high court and an administrative member who should have served at a position of major general or equivalent or above. This allows the bench to draw upon legal as well as service expertise.

The biggest drawbacks in the AFT Act is that it the Tribunal does not have the powers of initiating civil contempt, implying that it has no means of ensuring that its orders are implemented by the party or organisation concerned. Further, a recent order by the Delhi High Court that appeals against AFT orders would lie with the High Court and not the Supreme Court as mentioned in the Act, has kicked-up a legal debate. Some say that the purpose of the AFT was to reduce the burden of the High Courts and ensure speedy disposal of cases. Some are of the opinion that if the cases go back to the high court, the purpose of the AFT is negated and things would be back to square one. — TNS
Click here to read more

Veterans Rally to Protest Government Apathy

Veterans to rally, return medals to protest Centre's apathy
Respected Sir/Ma'am,
The following report -- released by the United News of India news agency on November 3, 2011 -- is for your kind perusal.
With regards
Abhi

Veterans to rally, return medals to protest Centre's apathy
Bhopal, Nov 3 (UNI) Veterans of the Indian Armed Forces will stage a Vishal Rally at New Delhi's Jantar Mantar on November 12, under the banner of the Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM), to peacefully protest against the Centre's apathy and negative attitude towards genuine demands.
"The event will commence at 1000 hrs and conclude at 1500 hrs. Thereafter, a delegation will leave for Rashtrapati Bhavan to return medals and submit a memorandum signed in blood to President Pratibha Devisingh Patil (who is the Supreme Commander of the Indian Armed Forces)," IESM Vice-Chairman Major-General (Retd) Satbir Singh, Sena Medal said in a release. IESM Chairman Lieutenant-Gen (Retd) Raj Kadyan, Param Vishisht Seva Medal, Ati Vishisht Seva Medal, VSM; has already written to the President to grant audience. The veterans have decided that in case the President herself does not accept the medals and the memorandum, they will bring these back.
Despite the veterans' peaceful protest movement throughout the country for the past over 40 months, deposit of over 22,000 Gallantry and Distinguished Service medals besides memoranda signed in their blood by over 1.50 lakh veterans to the Supreme Commander and numerous letters and meetings with the Prime Minister, the Defence Minister and other authorities, the Centre has not accepted their demands, the main one being 'One Rank One Pension' (OROP).

Widows of Ex Servicemen discriminated
"It seems that the Centre yields only to non-peaceful agitations. The veterans are getting restless and their patience is running out. Before some misguided and volatile elements resort to unacceptable methods, the Government should grant the justified demands," Maj-Gen Singh felt.The veterans, their families and supporters have resolved to intensify their protest movement across the country to highlight the grave injustice that the Centre is meting out to them by disregard to services rendered by the erstwhile soldiers.
The graver injustice has been done to the defence widows, who are in receipt of family pensions, by excluding them from the ambit of enhancement of pensions of Junior Commissioned Officers and Other Ranks carried out in March last year. Thus the weakest and the most needy segment of pensioners was left out.
The discrimination against the widows caused great consternation among the ESM community. The case was taken up with the Prime Minister by the IESM for extending the enhancement of pension to the widows; the same has not been carried out so far.
"The Centre's indifferent attitude towards the Armed Forces is unexplainable especially keeping in mind the hostile environment prevailing on our borders both at land and sea. A nation to survive in such an environment has to keep its forces well-equipped, well-trained, motivated and contented. It needs to be understood that veterans are the extension of service personnel. Any injustice to veterans also affects the serving soldiers who are future veterans. These aspects need to the holistically addressed," Maj-Gen Singh noted

Court Orders not implemented
Out of the cases filed in the Armed Forces Tribunal, over 90 per cent were won by defence personnel in the past year, but the Government is yet to implement the verdicts. The recommendatory Armed Forces Grievances Redressal Commission -- ordered by the Supreme Court -- which was to be effective from January 15, 2011 has been dispensed with. The apex court passed this judgement after deliberating on the treatment being meted out to the defence personnel by the Centre.
A petition filed by Rajya Sabha Member Rajeev Chandrasekhar (Independent) was being heard by the Upper House's Petition Committee that is not even being mentioned by the Government while replying to questions regarding non-grant of OROP.
"They continue to quote the two-years-old Committee of Secretaries," the veteran explained. The Centre paid "scant heed" to recommendations of the all-party Standing Committee on Defence comprising 31 parliamentarians strongly recommending OROP thrice in the past year.
The manner in which the Government treats recommendations of parliamentary committees and gives credence to the Report of the Committee of Secretaries, who are "biased" against the Armed Forces, speaks of the Centre's "apathy".

Self Defeating Indian Military Manipulates to Degrade Rank and Honour

Indian Army Manipulations Exposed
The question whether it is always the civilian establishment which denies us our dues. The following examples prove contrary.

Grant of higher scale to Lt Gens after the 5th CPC: The 5th CPC saw degradation of Lt Gens by way of placing them below DGPs from the IPS. A case was taken up for the rectification of the anomaly and the Services were offered on a platter that 1/3rd Lt Gens (other than Army Commanders who were already in a higher bracket) could be upgraded. It was refused by us and our stand was- give us 100% or give us none. Now this had far reaching consequences which are there for all to see even today. Rather than taking the offer and then fighting for rest of Lt Gens, we refused it altogether as a result of which all Lt Gens remained lower in pay than DGPs and were again placed in a lower grade (HAG) than DGPs (HAG+) in the 6th CPC. And then post 6th CPC, after much hankering we accepted the proposal of upgradation of 1/3rd Lt Gens to HAG+. The position would have been much better had we accepted 1/3rd after the 5th CPC and a higher figure after the 6th CPC. Who was to blame?, Not the MoD!

Grant of Pay Band-4 to Lt Cols after the 6th CPC: I haven’t stated this openly before, but the greatest resistance for grant of Pay Band-4 to Lt Cols came from within the Army, but the same was thankfully off-set by a stellar performance by the Air Force and Navy. The objection of the Army was that there would remain no incentive for higher ranks if this were to be accepted. A banal argument in light of the fact that we were ready to face a steep degradation in status and pay vis-à-vis civilian counterparts to ensure an imaginary incentive for higher ranks!.

Higher Grade Pay for Colonel vis-à-vis the rank of DIG: The pay scale of DIG was traditionally placed between the scales of Lt Col and full Col. After the 6th CPC, DIG was placed in a Grade Pay equivalent to a Brig. Despite forceful attempts by the Pay Commission Cells of the three services, the ultimate proposal forwarded to the Govt by the Services contained a demand of a Grade Pay of 8800 for a full Col and acceptance of 8900 for a Brig, thereby tacitly agreeing an inferior role for a Col and equation of a Brig (28 years’ service) with a DIG with 14 years’ of service. We did not seek for Colonel a GP higher than DIG and on the contrary sought a lower GP. If we do not even demand, why would they give?

Non-functional financial upgradation: In the organised Group A Services, after the 6th CPC, all officers are now entitled to non-functional financial upgradation till the scale of HAG (equal to Lt Gen) in case they are not promoted in the ordinary course. Hence, innocuously, unknown to our top brass, almost all civil officers irrespective of actual rank or grade, including those of the MES, are retiring with the pay and pension of Lt Gen while we continue fighting on mundane issues and wasting our energies and intelligence debating on the colour of the curtain in the VIP room (Ganga ???) in the Alpha Mess. There has been a silent takeover by the HAG on the civil side without much fanfare. When this matter was raised by the Air Force and Navy at a time when the Govt was willing to listen, it was shot down by the Army component. Realising the joke that we had played upon ourselves by not processing the proposal when it could see the light of the day, we took it up again, but this time it was rejected by the MoD. So whom do we blame ?

Grant of DACP to military medicos :- When the Govt had approved the Dynamic Assured Career Progression scheme for all doctors under the central govt, there was resistance from our very own PPOC (emanating again from the Army) that this would lead to higher pay to doctors than other officers. It was also foolishly pointed out that military doctors were in receipt of the Military Service Pay also and hence did not deserve DACP. Rather than helping our very own doctors in reaping benefits announced by the govt, we resisted such benefits. On the contrary, we should have smoothly allowed the scheme to be implemented and then could have asked for rectification of other anomalies affecting other personnel. A similar inane bogey was raised in the earlier part of the last century when the Central Govt had introduced Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA) for all doctors. This had led to a protest by the Army HQ that if implemented, the doctors would start getting more emoluments than other Arms and Services. A pity, isn’t it ?

Non-grant of AV Report benefits to SSCOs commissioned prior to 2006 :- When the AV Singh Committee report was implemented, it was implemented for all officers serving in the Army as on 16 December 2004. Later however, our very own MS Branch discovered a ‘ghundi’ and observed that the said benefits could not be granted to SSCOs and WSES officers. When later the SSC scheme was tweaked in 2006 and the terms of engagement were changed from 5+5+4 to 10+4 years, the AV benefits were granted to all those who were commissioned under the said scheme or to those who had opted for the new terms. As a result of this, Male SSCOs commissioned prior to 2006 who are in old terms, including those who were in service in December 2004, are being promoted as quasi-substantive Captains on completing 9 years of service and are retiring in the substantive rank of Lieut even after serving for 14 years while their SSCO counterparts commissioned after 2006 are being promoted as Capt in 2 years, Maj in 6 years and Lt Col in 13 years. Similarly, WSES officers under the old terms are being promoted as Capt after 5 years and are not eligible for any substantive promotion after Capt. When there was hue and cry on the subject, our PS Directorate did take up the issue for rectification but recommended that SSCOs commissioned under the old terms should be made Capt in 5 years rather than the current 9 years !. So there you have it, we are not even magnanimous in demanding our rights. Rather than simply seeking that all officers who were in service in December 2004 or who joined thereafter should be promoted to Capt, Maj and Lt Col in 2, 6 and 13 years as per the universally applicable promotion scheme, we ourselves have been misers in demanding what should have logically flown to us without impediment. So who shall give if we do not even demand ?

Placing senior officers on appointments tenable by junior civilians :- Sample this – while we continue placing Lt Cols and Time Scale Colonels as GEs, the civilian establishment sends only officers with GP 6600 or max 7600 on these appointments. On one hand we theoretically claim that a Superintending Engineer is equal to a Lt Col, while on the other we continue sending Lt Cols and Cols on appointments tenable by even Executive Engineers. We send senior Majors from the SL cadre as AGEs which is an appointment held by Subedar equivalent GP 4600 (Group B) and Lieut equivalent GP 5400 officers from the civil side. We have been posting Majors as BSOs which is an appointment tenable by Group B Officers in GP 4600 who are 4 steps junior. And this is our own doing and cadre management, and then we blame the civilians for degradation of status! Brace yourself for the 7th CPC.
Posted by Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh
Indian Military Masters of Self Defeat: Click here to read more
Comment: Kudos to Maj Navdeep who has delineated the MOD and AHQ- which are literally run by a bunch of self serving stereo stylists sans sensibilities!

AFT: Army Chief can’t terminate services

Grants relief to Lt-Col acquitted by court martial twice
Vijay Mohan/TNS
Chandigarh, September 25
In a significant ruling, the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) today ruled that the Chief of the Army Staff is not vested with any powers to terminate the services of any officer. This power is held by the Central Government alone, which can be exercised in exceptional cases only on the recommendations of the Army Chief.

Granting relief to a Lieutenant-Colonel against whom administrative action was initiated for alleged irregularities despite having been held not guilty twice by a general court martial earlier, the tribunal held that plenary powers under Section 19 of the Army Act read with Rule 14 have been reserved with the Central Government only and these cannot be resorted to by any other person.

The court observed court martial proceedings were held against Lt-Col Harish Kumar twice and on both occasions, the findings were returned as “not guilty” and then administrative action was resorted to under the aforementioned provisions by the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Southern Command.

“Leave aside the GOC-in-C, even the Chef of the Army Staff cannot resort to this power. Therefore, the order passed by the GOC-in-C awarding a severe displeasure cannot be sustained,” the tribunal observed while quashing the order and allowing all consequential benefits to the petitioner.

The petitioner’s counsel, Maj SS Pandey told The Tribune that since he had been acquitted by a GCM twice, no action could have been taken subsequently on the same charges by issuing a show-cause notice and the action of the respondents was arbitrary and actuated with malice.

Pandey said the petitioner was responsible for recruiting civilian labourers in the Ordnance Corps. After the end of the selection process, he received three letters from the Defence Ministry through the Army Headquarters, which contained names of some individuals, seeking help in recruitment. The petitioner had expressed his inability to accommodate such a request. Later, based upon “mild and baseless” allegations, a court of inquiry was ordered to investigate any malpractices in the recruitment.
AFT: Army Chief can’t terminate services