High Court ruling can make the Armed Forces Tribunal infructuous

The Delhi High Court has recently ruled that High Courts are constitutionally empowered to review decisions of the Armed Forces Tribunal, even though the Armed Forces Tribunal Act stipulates that such appeals lie directly with the Supreme Court. The Tribunal was set up for quick redressal of grievances and judicial review of court martial orders, relieving the High Courts of a huge backlog. The ruling defeats this very purpose and takes us back to square one.
High Court ruling can make the Armed Forces Tribunal infructuous by Lt Gen Harwant Singh (Retd)
THE defence services had been clamouring for an Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) for decades, essentially because the civilian courts took years and even decades to decide their cases. These inordinate delays had an adverse impact on discipline, morale and functioning of the military. Take just two cases. The Sixth Pay Commission gave Brigadiers more pension than Major Generals. It took the Punjab and Haryana High Court three long years to address this simple anomaly. Some five years later the case is still doing the rounds of the Supreme Court. Air Vice Marshal Masand, with outstanding service record and a pilot of great repute with the Vir Chakra to his credit, was superseded for promotion to the rank of Air Marshal. Long after he retired, he is still fighting his case in the civilian courts. Perhaps his children will have to continue the fight after he has left the scene.

Since the AFT has come into existence, its benches spread across the country have done a commendable job and have been deciding cases, not only with great scrutiny and application of mind, but with equal promptitude. They are moving quicker that the fast track courts, reinforcing the maxim that justice delayed is justice denied.They have been able to decide cases that have been hanging fire in civilian courts for as long as half a century. Though the AFT is established on the lines of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), they differ in one essential aspect in that the AFT reviews cases of defence services which have separate laws and courts of their own. These courts have full judicial powers. The AFT was set up after long prevarication, dithering and delay, recommendations of the law commission and innumerable articles in the national press pressing for its dire need.

The composition of the AFT was worked out with a view to relate it to the composition of the courts whose verdict, besides other service issues, it would also be called upon to review. This was so because civilian courts are generally not conversant with the military's working, systems, ethos, environment, and the circumstances under which it is required to operate and discharge its duties in peace and war. These special conditions require a rigorous law, quite apart from the general civilian laws. There was a time that for this obvious reason, civilian courts were somewhat reluctant to take on the military's cases. However civilian courts, for no apparent reason, now seem to adopt an altogether different approach.

As per the AFT Act, rulings and verdicts of the AFT can be reviewed only by the Supreme Court. The very purpose of setting up the AFT was to provide a dedicated forum for quick redressal of grievances and judicial review of court martial orders with the provision for just a one-stage review (Supreme Court in this case) for armed forces personnel, as disposal of cases in civilian courts took a long time and this inordinate delay impinged on the discipline and good order in the defence services.

The Delhi High Court, in its recent ruling noted that High Courts are constitutionally empowered to review decisions of the AFT, not withstanding the fact that the Armed Forces Tribunal Act of 2007 stipulated that appeals against AFT's orders would rest directly with the Apex Court. A Division Bench comprising Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Suresh Kait further ruled, "AFT, being manned by personnel appointed by the executive, albeit in consultation with the Chief Justice of India, cannot be said to be truly a judicious review forum as a substitute to High Courts that are constitutional courts and the power of judicial review, being a basic feature of the Constitution, under Article 226 and Article 227 of the Constitution is unaffected by the constitution of the AFT." Further, tribunals can perform a "supplemental as opposed to a substitutional" role vis-a-vis the high courts, the bench held.

The AFT was set up to exercise appellate jurisdiction with respect to orders, findings or sentences of court martial and exercise original jurisdiction with respect to service disputes. This ruling puts the very purpose of having an AFT somewhat infructuous and takes us back to square one. It is in fact, a leap forward into the past. It will bring about the same painful and frustrating delays and their impact on the military's discipline and functioning as they existed before the promulgation of the AFT Act. The Delhi High Court, in its infinite wisdom, deep understanding of the Constitution and legal acumen, has turned the very idea and rationale of setting up the AFT on its head.

Now article 227(4) of the Constitution, on which the Delhi High Court has relied in passing the above noted order, provides superintendence of High Court over all courts/tribunals falling in its jurisdiction but it specifically excludes court martial cases. Therefore and quite simply and logically, it cannot have power of superintedence over the Armed Forces Tribunal that has appellate jurisdiction over verdicts of court martial cases. Further when there is specific provision for appeal against verdicts/orders of the Tribunal under sections 30/31 of the Act to only the Supreme Court, then how could a writ petition be entertained by a high court.

High Courts are already overloaded with work and the backlog runs into a million cases and it is to bypass this legal quagmire and the necessity for quick disposal of defence services cases that the AFT Act of 2007 was promulgated by the government as an act of Parliament and as such became a law, where the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court was in the consultative loop. In case the rulings of the AFT are to be subjected to review by the high courts and later by the Supreme Court then the purpose of establishing the AFT is defeated.

On an earlier occasion, a High Court gave a ruling that court martial should record a "speaking order". Now the composition and working of a court martial is akin to the jury system, which for too obvious a reason does not record a "speaking order". Unfortunately, defence services did not contest this ruling in the Supreme Court and court martial proceedings are now required to be accompanied by a speaking order. The judge advocate, who is on the court martial merely to render advice to the members on purely technical legal issues and has no voting right, is the only one who is qualified to write a speaking order. Consequently the judge advocate has come to exercise undue influence over the court, which in reality and practice has altered the very character and working of the court martial.

To avoid inevitable delays in the finalisation of defence services cases dealt by the AFT, in case these are subjected to review by the High Courts as well, the order of the Delhi High Court must be contested in the Supreme Court by the service headquarters. The need for early disposal of defence services cases hardly needs any emphasis.
The writer is a former Deputy Chief of the Army Staff

Fact File
The Armed Forces Tribunal was inaugurated on August 8, 2009. It came into being after the Armed Forces Tribunal Act was passed by Parliament in 2007.
The Act provides for adjudication by the tribunal of disputes and complaints about commission, appointments, enrolment and service conditions in respect of those covered by the Army, Air Force and Navy Acts, respectively, and hearing of appeals arising out of orders, findings or sentences of court martial. The Tribunal has original jurisdiction in service matters and appellate jurisdiction in court martial matters.
In addition to the Principal Bench located at New Delhi, it has eight regional benches comprising one or more courts at Kochi, Jaipur, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Lucknow, Guwahati and Chandigarh.
Each court is held by a two-member bench comprisng the judicial member, a retired High Court judge and an administrative member, a retired service officer of the rank of Major General or above. This enables the court to draw upon legal as well as service expertise while deciding cases. Most cases pertaining to armed forces personnel that were earlier pending before various High Courts have been transferred to the AFT.

Quote — unquote
"The Sixth Pay Commission gave Brigadiers more pension than Major Generals. It took the Punjab and Haryana High Court three long years to address this simple anomaly.
The Tribunal is moving quicker than the fast track courts and it has been able to decide cases that have been hanging fire in civilian courts for as long as half a century.
The judge advocate has come to exercise undue influence over the court, which in reality and practice has altered the very character and working of the court martial."
High Court ruling can make the Armed Forces Tribunal infructuous

The Armed Forces Tribunal throws up its hands

Please read the below trail mail. (Regarding The Hindu news of 02 Feb 11)
So, what does one do? Earlier in Nov 2010, Justice Mathur of the Principal Bench AFT, Delhi (de-facto boss of all AFTs) had said at a seminar that of 4000 cases filed by veterans since the inception of AFTs a year ago, in 3600 cases judgements issued have been favourable to the veterans and against the Govt but, sadly, the Govt has not acted upon even one of the judgements. He had felt that the AFTs would serve no purpose unless it is given more teeth - power to get its judgements implemented. It is a sad story, every way.
Brig VA Subramanyam (Retd)

The Hindu 02 Feb, 2011 New Delhi by J. Venkatesan
New Delhi: The Armed Forces Tribunal, New Delhi, has expressed its anguish over lack of powers to get its orders executed. Many a time it has found itself helpless as its orders are not being implemented by authorities, said the Tribunal.In a brief order, the Tribunal, comprising Chairperson Justice A.K. Mathur and M.L. Naidu, said it had issued notice to all authorities including the Defence Secretary but to no avail. “The orders are at the mercy of the authorities; if they wish, they can execute and if they do not wish, they may not. This is a serious thing which has already been taken up with the government, but without any result.” No provision in Act

The Tribunal said: “We feel that we are handicapped because we do not have powers to issue civil contempt to get the orders of the Tribunal executed. It is sad that the power of civil contempt has not been given in the Armed Forces Tribunal Act. It may be an error or omission or may be deliberate… We feel helpless in the matters.”The only power to prosecute a person for criminal contempt had been given under Section 19.

“It is a very strange state of affairs and we are sorry to say that we cannot help the petitioner [in this case in which the order passed on January 25, 2010 has not been implemented so far].”

The Tribunal had ordered the Army to reinstate Fayaz Khan, after quashing a summary court martial that dismissed him from service as a religious teacher in 25 Rajput Regiment on charges of having links with Islamic terror groups.

Pointing out that the lack of civil contempt power was greatly hampering its functioning, the Tribunal said a recommendation had been sent to the government for making an amendment in the Act. The Tribunal granted leave to the petitioner to approach the Supreme Court, which could give proper directions to make it functional and effective.
Armed Forces Tribunal throws up its hands

Maj Navdeep Singh clarifies...
AFT has powers of contempt and can take coercive action in case of non-implementation of its orders: Kerala High Court

IESL serves ultimatum to centre

Ex-servicemen to gherao Parliament for "One Rank One Pension".
Jalandhar | Saturday, Dec 4 2010 IST
Indian Ex-Services League (IESL) today served an ultimatum to the Centre that ex-servicemen in lakhs will gherao Parliament if their demand for 'One Rank One Pension' was not accepted by February 18 next year.

Interacting with mediapersons here, Bhag Singh, president of the IESLs Punjab and Chandigarh chapter, said the IESL had achieved partial success of 'One Rank One Pension' whereas 30 to 40 per cent cases were yet to be settled.

He said the league had interacted with the Defence Minister, Minister of State for Defence besides the President during 2009 but to no avail. On October 21, the Minister of State for Defence attended a conference organised by the league where he again interacted separately with the league members.

He said 'One Rank One Pension' nod had already been given by the Prime Minister during his speech from the historical Red Fort on August 15 this year.

Col Singh alleged that the government was still playing the game of hide and seek with the serving and retired army persons. He said the country was surviving at the cost of Armed Forces both during war and peace. He asked when the government had given 'One Rank One Pension' to IAS and other cadres then why the armed forces were denied the facility. -- (UNI) -- 04DR67.xml
Ex-servicemen to gherao Parliament for'One Rank One Pension'

Ex-airmen seek one-rank one-pension
by Special Correspondent, The Hindu
Association for constituting panel to look into grievances
Demands free site for poor ex-servicemen
Coimbatore: The Tamil Nadu Ex-Airmen Welfare Association has urged the Centre to implement the system of one-rank-one pension. In a release, the ex-Airmen Association said that a resolution to the effect was passed at a general body meeting held here recently.
Property tax
Another resolution urged for constituting committees comprising Defence Minister and Chiefs of the three Armed Forces to regularly look into their grievances. The association also urged the State Government to exempt them from paying professional and property tax as it was done in the neighbouring States. They also sought free house site for poor ex-servicemen.
Office-bearers
The following have been elected as office-bearers of the Association for a year at the meeting: S. Nithyanandan (President), G.E. Meyer and V. Subramanian (Vice-Presidents), G. Sankaran (General Secretary), C.K. Durairaj and M. Mallikarjuna (Joint Secretaries), K. Durairaj (Treasurer), K. Jagadeesan (Legal Advisor).
Ex Airmen seek One Rank One Pension

Will the Armed Forces Grievances Redressal Commission be Toothless?

ARMED FORCES GRIEVENANCES REDRESSAL COMMISSION (AFGRC)
Dear Sir,
Please find a short writeup on the apprehensions of AFGRC and its linkage to the IV pay commission rank pay case. RDOA thought it prudent to let veterans know. It is requested that it be put on RMS for info and wider circulation. Delibrately names have been left out.
with regards
secy rdoa

Dear Veterans
There are mixed reactions, both euphoria as well as apprehension/ misgivings on the formation of the Armed Forces Grievenances Redressal Commission. Justice M Katju must have given a deep thought over the matter and in his wisdom he felt that there was a need of such a commission to address the anomalies/ grievenances of the armed forces with every case coming to the judiciary and the executive failing to perform its duty. The armed forces have been given equal weightage in the nomination of members along with the judiciary, first of its kind in independent India and we as members of the armed forces should feel proud about it.
Some veterans feel that the commission is toothless and is only recommendatory in nature. Let me tell you that nobody is born with teeth. They come out with age. The Women’s Commission is also recommendatory but yet is doing wonders. So let us not sit on judgement over a commission which is yet to take shape. We can keep our gun powder dry till the commission starts showing results.
Lot of emails have been exchanged over the outcome of the IV Pay Commission Rank pay anomaly case and what could/should have been done. The fact that Justice Katju refused to refer the case to the commission and recall his order is proof enough that his judgment is sound and the case is on solid footing. On behalf of RDOA I would request the veterans to refrain from giving conflicting views or suggest ideas to the UOI. Facts of the case are known to RDOA and our advocates are capable to handle the case.
Lastly to say that the credit of the AFGRC does not go to RDOA but someone else. RDOA is not for scoring brownie points. Our aim is to get relief and we are persuing it relentlessly. We want the problems to be resolved and we are working to that end. Means can be anything. We are confident that the AFGRC would do its job judiously. In the words of Kautilya let the Mauryan Empire be given a chance to look after the welfare of its soldiers before it looses its morality to rule.
Secy RDOA

Redressal of Grievances of Defence Pensioners

Effective redressal of the grievances of the Defence pensioners has been the constant endeavour of Government to strengthen the mechanism for prompt disposal. In this regard, following steps have been taken:

Action has been taken by the agencies concerned with pension sanction and disbursement viz. Service HQrs, Record Offices, Pension Sanctioning Authority and Pension Disbursement Agencies to computerise the records

Pension sanctioning at Principal Controller of Defence Accounts ( PCDA( P) is fully computerised . PCDA( P) has placed the relevant orders and instructions relating to pension in their web site (www. pcdapension.nic.in ) which also provides a calculator so that the pensioner could find out correct entitlement.

Regular Defence Pension Adalats , six in a year , are organized in different parts of the country to redress the grievances of the Armed forces pensioners near to place of their residence/work. In addition, mini pension Adalats are held by the Defence Pension Disbursing Offices ( DPDOs ).

All branches of the Public Sector Banks and 4 Private Sector Banks have been added to the existing pension disbursement network

A single window system has been introduced in DPDOs to facilitates hassle free and prompt release of first payment cheques or any working day after retirement.

Endorsements of family pension in PPO of pre – 1989 retirees, numbering about 2 lakhs were pending. A special drive has been launched for joint notification of family pension in these cases.

Role of Medical Adviser (Pension) has been dispensed with for adjudicating disability pension claims w.e.f . 1.9.2005. As a result, the recommendations of IMB/RMB, as approved by the prescribed authorities would be treated as final unless the individual himself asks for a review.

Periodical Resurvey Medical Board for continued grant of disability pension has been done away with. Now, a one time board known as Re-Assessment Medical Board will be held, whose recommendation shall be final and for life, unless the individual himself asks for a review.

ECOs/SSCOs would now get service element at par with Regular Commissioned Officers for the purpose of disability pension, which provides that they will get service element for the entire length of service rendered as against upto the date of occurrence of disability.

A copy of the specialists' opinion on the percentage of disability attributability /aggravation would be provided to the individual at the time of IMB/RMB.

The advantage of the higher pay scale granted under Assured Career Progression has been given for the purpose of computation of pension. Simplification/liberalization of provisions relating to pensionary matters is a continuous process so that the grievances of the pensioners are reduced considerably and even if there are grievances the same are attended to promptly.
Resettlement & Welfare Schemes

Pension to Armed Forces Personnel
As on April 1, 2007 the number of Defence pensioners is estimated to be about 21.91 lakhs. The estimated budget provision for the year 2007-08 (RE) is Rs.15 ,244 crores. The pension is disbursed through all branches of the 27 Public Sector Banks, 4 Private Sector Banks viz. HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, UTI Bank and IDBI Bank, 640 Treasuries, 61 Defence Pension Disbursing Offices DPDOs), 2 Post Offices, 5 Pay and Accounts Offices (PAOs) scattered all over India. For the Armed Forces pensioners residing in Nepal , disbursement of pension is done through 3 Pension Payment Offices(PPOs).
The budget estimates on Defence pension is as given below:

2006-07(RE) 13806.00 Crores

2007-08(RE) 15244.00 Crores

2008-09(BE) 15564.00 Crores

2009-10(EP) 15800.00 Crores extrapolated

2010-11(EP) 18000.00 Crores extrapolated

IESM: Perseverance- The success formula for OROP

It is necessary that we Ex- Servicemen reduce our rhetoric and silence those who so far are attempting disunion within us- by overwhelming their influence; and who at the same time have acted as if they had all the Veterans in their pockets.

Do not be deterred from your intentions by the fact that this or that majority resolution does not suit you. Such resolutions may be altered in the course of time. But the disgrace of separating here without accomplishing any results can never be blotted out; should such happen it would be equal to a crime against our cause which is the cause of the whole ESM Community. But the form can be found in which minor differences of opinion can be resolved in harmony, which the striving for a higher universally acknowledged ideal, common to us all- our legitimate demands.

Now friends, our sense of duty must be stronger than our self- will; our love for the cause must make us forget personal injustices we may have suffered; our entire thinking, feeling, and wishing must be consumed by enthusiasm for the work of rescue which we have to perform in common with the aim of righting the injustices inflicted on ESM, be it Pension Parity or any other in the interests of our ESM brotherhood.

But perhaps one or other among you may say: “These are but words, phrases which cannot stand before the real facts as they exist.” In answer we need only point to the rich experiences in life that nothing comes without hard work to fight injustices- "No pain no gain". The proof is that what has been achieved till now is because of our perseverance. We must march ahead without looking back!

Lt Col James Kanagaraj (Retd)
Blog Moderator

Civil- Military Relationship: Does governance impact this ethical compact?

Are military professionals unaware of their own civic and strategic illiteracy?

One of the most significant issues facing any democracy today, is the current state of civil- military relations. Why should the relationship between the military and society be of such concern to us? There are two principal reasons.

First, the military relationship to civilian authorities and to society more generally lies at the very heart of what democracy is all about. Democracy, Harry Truman suggested, is "based on the conviction that man has the moral and intellectual capacity, as well as the inalienable right, to govern himself with reason and justice." By the same token, what defines the state, Max Weber observed, is government's monopoly of the legitimate possession and use of force. The military is the principal embodiment of state-centered and -controlled violence. Thus, in a form of government where the people are supposed to rule, civilian supremacy over the military is essential; it is an ethical imperative. Where this relationship fails or falters, the very end of government--"the common benefit, protection, and security of the people," rights of citizens violated, massive and wide scale corruption and injustice--the Government stands in jeopardy. Further, Terrorism, Naxalism, Maoism and right wing fundamentalists are pointers and indicators of the degree of of failing/ falling governance.

Second, the three parties to the civil- military relationship--the military, its civilian masters, and the people themselves--are bound to one another by social contract. "The first principle of a civilized state," said Walter Lippmann, "is that power is legitimate only when it is under contract." A social contract is a mutually binding, though a tacit, set of expectations, obligations, and rights. Because it depends on the ability--and, more importantly, the willingness--of the parties involved to live up to their end of the unwritten bargain, it is, in every sense, an ethical compact- a bond.

What do civilian authorities and the people more generally expect of the military as part of this compact?
Operational Competence.
What Military Expects from the Civilian authorities?
Genuine welfare measures for the Jawans and Ex- Servicemen.

IESL: Joint Letter to PM to address the Pension Disparity created, muddled and sullied by Cabinet Secretary Committee

Joint Letter to The Prime Minister (click me)

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen,
I have received numerous mails from you all appreciating the joint effort put in by all the signatory ESM Orgs in drafting the letter (it was not a single person's effort!) and importantly, being willing to sign it. I regret to say that even though I tried my best to get the Air Force Assn on board with personal calls, mails & SMS's, there was no response. I would like to place on record Brig Gulia's help, despite our differences on many occasions, as he played a major part in this joint effort. It was his initiative to call all organisations for a meeting to discuss the Cabinet Secretary's report on 06 Aug 2009. It was IESL which provided staff support for printing the letters, repeatedly till we got it right. Some suggestions have come to tweak the letter further. Regret they can only be included in the next letter, if any.

I can also report that the letter has reached the COAS and it has been passed down for action. Thanks to Air Cmde Chandershekhar, who was here from Bangalore, we have got a copy of the letter delivered to the RM by hand. Interestingly it had not been put up to him over the last 15 days. We are also exploring ways to see that a copy reaches the PM, Leader of the Opposition and other MPs. After lapse of say 5 weeks we will go to the press. Ways of financing the advertisements are being considered.

Satish
Lt Gen SK Bahri (Retd) (1st JSW Course)

IESM: Reducing the Pension Disparity is not Pension Parity

Dear Colleagues,
The announcement made by the Government in Jun/ Jul this year in the Parliament, on the enhancement in pension of PBOR, still remains a mere announcement. One sincerely hoped for the increased emoluments of pre 10.10.1997 PBOR to be released before Diwali. That did not happen. Nor is there any indication when the emoluments will be finally released. One may assume that these will come latest by 31 Mar 2010 i.e. within this financial year since a provision of Rs 2144 Crores has been made in this year’s budget. What will be the quantum of increase? This too remains a grey area. The expectation of those dealing with the issue is as under:

Rank (service) Likely new pension
Sep (19) Rs 5,800/-
Naik (24) Rs 6,500/-
Hav (26) Rs 6,500/-
Nb Sub (28) Rs 10,675/-
Sub (28) Rs 11,970/-
Sub Maj (28) Rs 12,285/-

It would be relevant to point out that the above figures as of now are only a deduction from what has been already accorded. Secondly, it is not the expected OROP since these figures do not match the post 1.1.2006 scales.
Best regards,
Lt Gen (Emeritus) Raj Kadyan, PVSM, AVSM, VSM
Chairman IESM

IESM: OROP- A frevent appeal made by Warrant Officer

Dear Brig Kamboj,
The letters written to the President, Prime Minister, Finance Minister, Defence Minister, Cabinet Secretary, Defence Secretary, Secretary Dept. of Ex-Servicemen Welfare and Director of Pension during the month of October, 2009 by Warrant Officer P.R. Balathilakan (Retd.) are enclosed as attachment for information of all Ex-Servicemen in the country. The progress thereof is also being monitored on day to day basis by him.
With regards
Yours truly,
Kameshwar
Kameshwar Pandey
Sub/Maj Hony. Lt. (Veteran)

Appeal by Warrant Officer
Submission of letters, memoranda and presentations to various High Dignitaries have been initiated by Warrant Officer P.R. Balathilakan (Retd.). With his vigorous efforts he has achieved extraordinary rapport on the subject of ONE RANK ONE PENSION with many High Dignitaries icluding all MPs from Kerala, present and past Chief Ministers of Kerala, all Central Ministers from Kerala including Shri AK Antony, Defence Ministers, Private Secretaries of the Hon’ble the President of India and Bureaucrats accessible to him in various Ministries on the above subject.
Click here to read all the Letters addressed to PM and Ministries to quickly resolve the Pension Disparity muddle created by Bureaucrats

SCPC: Maj Gens- Pre/ Post- 2006 Pension Disparity

My Dear Brig Kamboj,
Letter addressed to all veteran Maj Gens/AVMs/Rear Admirals is given as link below.
Maj Gen (Retd) Satbir Singh, SM

Maj Gens' Case Pre & Post 2006 Pension Disparity
Dear Veterans,
1. AVM JK Pathania, a veteran who is also a practising Advocate of Delhi High Court and Supreme Court has taken an initiative to file a court case on behalf of Maj Gens/AVMs/Rear Admirals to ask for removal of disparity in Pension of Pre and Post 2006 retirees.
2. He had issued a legal notice to the Defence Secretary and the three Chiefs on 13 Aug 2009 (copy enclosed).While no reply has been received from the Defence Secretary, he has received reply from Lt Gen V K Chaturvedi, AVSM, SM on behalf of Chairman COSC dated 14 Sep 2009 (copy linked below). He had also sought information under the RTI from PIO, Min of Def vide RTI application dated 13 Aug 09 (copy linked below). The information is yet to be received.

3. AVM JK Pathania has proposed to file the joint case of a group of Maj Gens/ AVMs/ Rear Admirals in High Court/ Supreme Court. For proper preparation of case, he needs to assess the number of veterans who are willing to be part of the group. All veterans of ranks of Maj Gen/ AVM/ Rear Admiral who want to be part of the group may send their particulars to AVM Pathania with copy to me at the earliest.
With Kind Regards,
Jai Hind
Yours Sincerely,
Maj Gen (Retd) Satbir Singh, SM

Click on pages to read content
page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6
page 7
page 8
page 9
page 10
page 11
page 12
page 13
page 14

Men in Uniform are they obiligated to the Ex- Servicemen brethern?

Sent: Wed, 28 October, 2009 8:45:39 PM
Dear Colleagues,
On a family visit to Jaipur we stayed the Night 27/28 Oct with a Regimental battalion. It was nice being back to the freshness, warmth, and orderliness of a cantonment life. During the usual PT time walk through the officers' colony, we could see a noticeable improvement in the living standards. Roads are better maintained, lawns better manicured. More ACs than coolers can be seen jutting out of windows. Cars are bigger and better. Smartly dressed children could be seen rushing to catch the school buses – not the modified cagey trucks but proper buses. Odd Sahayaks could be seen walking Pugs and Danes, which fact is always used as a battering rod by the bureaucrats wanting the facility taken away.

A Subedar in his 28th Years of service gets 24-25000 in total. The mess waiter, who turned out to be from my own village (and claimed to have been helped by me in getting enrolled), gets a take- home of between 14000 and 15000 a month, that includes Salary, MSP, Grade Pay and Transport Allowance. Incidentally, every serving person is getting Rs 1600 pm as transport allowance.

One can have different views whether the existing salaries are adequate compensation for the dangers, hazards and difficulties of Service life. However, during my interaction, everyone from a Safaiwala to a Subedar Major appeared happy with what he gets.

I was pleasantly surprised that all the serving personnel are aware of the IESM and the efforts being made by it for betterment of the ESM. There was near unanimity that the Army is doing a lot for the serving but is not doing enough for the ESM and someone needs to focus in that direction.

New Members
We extend a very warm welcome to the following veterans and families who have joined the IESM:
Serial/ Number/ Rank/ Name/ Place
01. JC402013/ SUB/ RAMDHARI/ ROHTAK
02. JC1712850/ H CAPT/ WAZIR SINGH/ ROHTAK
03. JC695711/ SUB/ SURAN BHAN SIWACH/ ROHTAK
04. JC100803/ SUB/ BALWANT SINGH/ ROHTAK
05. JC1059527/ H NB SUB/ MAHABIR SINGH/ ROHTAK
06. JC2868263/ NK/ SAT PAUL/ ROHTAK
07. JC3168755/ NK/ SATBIR SINGH/ ROHTAK
08. JC3171050/ HAV/ RAJBIR SINGH/ ROHTAK
09. JC3161619/ NK/ DHANPAL SHINGH/ ROHTAK
10. JC1377478/ HAV/ RAJBIR SINGH/ ROHTAK
11. JC1260804/ NK/ DHIR SINGH/ ROHTAK
12. JC2878358/ HAV/ SAT NARAIN/ ROHTAK
13. JC3178994/ HAV/ SURESH KUMAR/ ROHTAK
14. JC13610280/ HAV/ DHIR SINGH/ ROHTAK
15. JC4543414/ HAV/ BALRAJ/ ROHTAK
16. JC2867579/HAV/ KARTAR SINGH/ ROHTAK
17. JC14290739/ NK/ RANDHIR SINGH SIWACH/ ROHTAK
18. JC3168520/ HAV/ PREM SINGH/ ROHTAK
19. JC3160923/HAV/ SURAJ BHAN/ ROHTAK
20. JC2858760/ NK/ SUMERA/ ROHTAK
21. JC3157571/ NK/ MAHAVIR SINGH/ ROHTAK
22. JC2851675/ RFN/ JAG PAL/ ROHTAK
23. JC2645327/ NK (LATE)/ MEVI DEVI W/O/ ROHTAK
24. JC6882576/ NK(LATE)/ W/O (LATE) BALWAN SINGH/ ROHTAK
25. JC14290043/ L/NK (LATE)/ JAINO DEVI W/O LATE RAJKUMAR/ ROHTAK
26. JC3132731/ SEP (LATE)/ RUKMANI W/O LATE RISAL SINGH/
27. JC2882240/ NK (LATE)/ MUNI DEVI W/O LATE BHIM SINGH/ ROHTAK
28. JC3168068/ HAV(LATE)/ KALA DEVI W/O LATE JAGDISH CHANDER/ ROHTAK
29. JC3144697/ NK(LATE)/ CHANDRO W/O LATE DHANA RAM/ ROHTAK
30. JC6902556/ NK/ MAHA SINGH/ ROHTAK
31. JC6480199/ SEP/ PARTAP SINGH/ ROHTAK
32. JC1448635/ L/NK/ RAMDHARI/ ROHTAK
33. JC6817776/ SEP/ JAGDISH RAI/ ROHTAK
34. JC1085848/ DHARAM VIR SINGH/ ROHTAK
35. JC16395/ RAM SARUP/ ROHTAK
36. JC036637/ SUB (LATE)/ KRISHNA DEVI W/O SUB NAFE SINGH
37. JC1496422 SEP (LATE)/ CHAMELIDEVI W/O SEP SULTAN SINGH/
38. JC14202589/ L/NK(LATE)/ ROSHNI DEVI W/O RAM KANWAR/ ROHTAK
39. JC95346/ SUB(LATE)/ DHANO DEVI W/O GOPI RAM/ ROHTAK
40. JC15051/ SEP (LATE)/ JEEVO W/O JAGI RAM/ ROHTAK
41. JC2571961/ SUB MAJ/ KAMAN SINGH DIWA/ ROHTAK
42. JC218261/ N/SUB/ RANBIR SINGH/ ROHTAK
43. JC1253855/ NK/ UMED SINGH/ ROHTAK
44. JC15177724/ NK/ SUNDER SINGH/ ROHTAK
45. JC36071/ SEP(LATE)/ KASTURI DEVI W/O DIWAN SHINGH/ ROHTAK

Best regards,
Lt Gen (Emeritus) Raj Kadyan, PVSM, AVSM, VSM
Chairman IESM

Damage inflicted on Ex Servicemen due to Rank Upgradation by the Serving Chiefs'

Dear Brigadier Kamboj,
Thanks for the information.
I would like to say that the concept of OROP needs a wee bit modification. The Armed Forces do a great harm to the retirees by upgrading their rank structure e.g. a company, which was commanded by a major, is now being commanded by a Lt Col. While the serving officers may feel elated, see the plight of the old majors who, having put in over 26 years of service, are now being given pension equal to that of a platoon commander (Now Majs). In the revised scheme of things, no one remains major on putting in 14 years of service, and save for those who die in service, no one would be retiring as a major (SL commission officers included). My own battalion lost a number of majors in 1965 and 71 wars; why should their widows get the pension due to deceased platoon commanders as today?

I feel that there is a case for modifying the concept of OROP which should include equal pension for equal work; after all this is the principle being applied all over in the civil.

There is also a case for requesting the Three Chiefs not to upgrade the ranks arbitrarily as it hits the pensioners badly; they should have simply got the Majors in PB4 and saved the older lot, a lot of discomfort.
With best Regards,
Col MMP Kala, Retd


Dear Brig Kamboj,
This letter (click me) so painstakingly drafted by the indomitable Gen Bahri is, without doubt, the best paper produced by the veterans so far. It is simple, cogent and in fact compelling. I think the rest of us should simply stick to the logic of this communication, without complicating it with any more figures and tables. Perhaps one single example which reveals the imbalance of the current dispensation is in the following relativity:

"A Col (TS) with 26 years service who may have commanded no more than a company has been granted a pension which is just Rs 100 less than a Brigade Commander who had put in 36 years service."

Legal eagles tell me that we have a weak case, in the court of law. But I think that the present dispensation fouls with "natural justice" and I think we will be able to find a competent lawyer who will be able to take on the might of legal cell of the Govt of India.

We also need to continuously remind the serving generals to keep knocking at the doors of those who have the power to act.

The Pay Cell has all but wound up. Before leaving their office, they sent me some tables which I am attaching, for what they are worth.
(Note: The tables mentioned here require some processing before these can be mass emailed. Will be forwarded to all members soon – Chander Kamboj)
With best wishes,
Surjit
Maj Gen Surjit Singh, EME, Veteran, Member IESM Steering Committee

Dear All,
Thanks for circulating the JOINT LETTER, which is very well written. Hopefully it should bring results.

I had read in the blog of Maj Navdeep about 'disparity' in compensation given to a CADET and RECRUIT, when they are boarded out- while undergoing training. There would be some more such issues, which though do not form part of OROP yet have a great bearing on those unfortunate ones, who are affected.

Does our community of ESMs like to bring out such cases to the notice of people, who are still in uniform? These issues, once noticed by our friends in UNIFORM, should form part of normal 'CORRECTIVE DRILL'. At least we should be able to set our own house in order.
Warm regards,
Lt Col Inderjit Singh Gill, Veteran

Ex Servicemen write to PM- Demand Pension Equality

Click on images for readable print
Ex Servicemen write to PM, Demand Pension Justice

IESM: Return of Medals over Pension Inequality- Media reports

New Delhi, Oct. 25 (ANI): Protesting against the inequality in new and old pensions, hundreds of ex-servicemen on Sunday returned their medals to the President of India.

These retired personnel from the three wings of defence forces – Army, Navy and Air Force, also staged a sit-in protest against the non-implementation of equality in pension, popularly known as ‘One Rank-One Pension’.

“We are demanding just equality between the old and the new pension. If two pensioners are put in the same number of years of service, have undergone the same hardships, same risks, dangers, same separation, their services to the country have been same, then their pension also must be same,’ said Lieutenant General (retired) Raj Kadyan, Chairman of Indian Ex Servicemen Movement (IESM).

The ‘One Rank-One Pension’ was introduced in 2009-2010.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, in his speech at the Independence Day, had also stated that pensions of some ranked officers have been improved.

However, according to the ex-servicemen, the government hasn’t issued the orders as yet.

The IESM has been protesting for the last one and half year against the injustice to the pensioners of defence forces.

‘We tried our best initially to make representation to the Government, to meet the leaders and talk to them but nothing happened. Depositing of medal is the biggest hurt that a soldier can express to the government,’ Lt. Gen (retired) Kadyan said.

The ex-servicemen have already deposited 20000 medals with the President. (ANI)
Ex-servicemen return medals over pension equality

IESM News in other Newspapers
Ex-servicemen return medals over pension equality: Kahabarexpress
Ex-servicemen return medals over pension equality: news.indiaid.com
Ex-servicemen return medals over pension equality by ANI on October 25, 2009
Ex-servicemen return medals over pension equality: oneindia

Mon, 26 October, 2009 8:58:46 PM
Dear Colleagues,
Col Kirit Joshipura, who had led the team that went to deposit the medals with the Rashtrapati Bhavan on 25 Oct 2009, had this to report:
Quote
As desired by stg com, i led the delegation of IESM to Rashtrapati Bhavan to deposit medals on 25 Oct. Col Phulka from Patiala though wheel chair bound accompanied me along with lions from Sangrur, Patiala, Barnala, CHANDIGARH AND FEW OTHER PLACES.

THE DELEGATION WAS RECIEVED AT RASHTRPATI BHAVAN WITH GREAT REGARD AND RESPECT. Normally, only police vehecle is allowed. But this time, they allowed Col Phulka's personal car right upto reception on my request. Further, we were allowed to park it just outside reception hall for 30 Mins and also photography was permitted. Col Phulka`s son took photograghs of delegation with box containing medals in the backdrop of Rashtrpati Bhavan.

While handing over the box, I enquired about progress from Mr Jairaman, who accepted medals. He confirmed that President’s office is concerned about this issue and that he would inform us latest progress within a week.

It may please you all to know that all at reception praised IESM efforts and expressed their concern at this unwarranted delay and have asked me to convey their BEST WISHES to IESM.

Best part was that the one who sits at the reception desk in the reception room, said that he would ask his father, retd Sub/ Maj to join IESM.
IESM zindabad. Jai Hind
Unquote

Admittedly, the staff handling the issue at the Rashtrapati Bhavan are not the decision makers. However, they can be reasonably assumed to be the windsock, a kind of barometer of the hierarchical attitude.

New Members
Names of some of the new members from Haryana who joined the IESM family on 25 Oct 20 are listed here: click me
On behalf of the IESM family I extend a very warm welcome to all the new members.
Best regards,
Lt Gen (Emeritus) Raj Kadyan, PVSM, AVSM, VSM
Chairman IESM

IESL: Eliciting OROP status from MoD

Dear Veteran (Brig.) Kamboj,
Regards.Find below a copy of our communique faxed to authorities regarding OROP for underprivileged veterans. Please post the same on 'Report my Signal' blog, if you deem it fit, for the information of underprivileged veterans. I shall be obliged.
Veteran Prabhjot Singh chhatwal PLS Retd.
President,
Indian Ex-Services League, Punjab & Chandigarh,

INDIAN EX-SERVICES LEAGUE PUNJAB & CHANDIGARH
(Regd. under Societies Registration Act XXI of 1860)
3-GURU RAM DASS NAGAR, PATIALA, PUNJAB -147 004
IESL/13/2009 Dt. 23 Oct.2009

To
6th Pay Commission Cell (Army),
Adjutant General Branch,
Room No. 1, 'A' Wing, Sena Bhawan,
Integrated Hq. of MoD (Army),
New Delhi -110 105.
Sub. POST SIXTH CPC DEMANDS
Dear Col. Puneet Kapoor,
1. Please refer to your DO letter C/7086/VI-PCC ( Army ) dt.02.09.2009 in above connection.
2. Please advise the latest position of OROP as announced by the Govt in budget on 06-07- 2009.
3. We further request Ministry of Defence to restrict usage of nasty term 'PBOR' for JCOs, SNCOs, NCOs and other ranks as this section of veterans think it as most humiliating when addressed as such. Some other proper and respectable term may be coined as a substitute to this term.
An early response will be highly appreciated.
Sd/-
(Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.)
President.

IESM: Fighting for Veteran Pension Parity- Surrender of Service Medals

Venue Jantar Mantar Delhi on 25 Oct 2009
Dear Colleagues,
The planned depositing of medals proceeded as per schedule today. Approximately 2000 medals were deposited with the President, by a team of 10 ESM led by Veteran Kirit Joshipura of the Steering Committee. These came from HP, Punjab , UP, Haryana and Rajasthan. ESM from distant places, who could not send their medals due to logistic problems, called up to express solidarity with the IESM pursuit of OROP. Approximately 150 ESM had brought medals from the above States. All the members of the Steering Committee were there to coordinate arrangements.
The event was covered by print and visual media.
Best regards,
Lt Gen (Emeritus) Raj Kadyan, PVSM, AVSM, VSM
Chairman IESM,
IESM: Press Release- click me

IESM: Surrender of Medals on 25 Oct 2009 at Jantar Mantar

IESM: Letter to Raksha Mantri regarding 'OROP' circumnavigated by the Cabinet Secretary

Dear Colleagues,
In our continued pursuit of OROP, a meeting has been sought with the Defence Minister vide our letter dated 23 Oct 09. The letter is reproduced below:
Quote
Dear Hon’ble Raksha Mantri,
During our meeting in March, you had advised that we should work with the RRM since he is handling the issue pertaining to the ‘one rank one pension’ (OROP). The very next day I had written to the Hon’ble RRM offering our assistance in whatever form required.
On 15 July 2009 I had telephonically approached the RRM office seeking an appointment with him so that we could apprise him of the Ex Servicemen reaction on the Cabinet Secretary’s report that had come out. The very next day his office called back to find out the purpose of the meeting, which was conveyed. There has been no further response on the subject thereafter.
The Ex Servicemen were greatly enthused after the Hon’ble President, the Finance Minister and the Defence Minister spoke about OROP in the Parliament. However, the Cabinet Secretary’s report and the government’s acceptance of that report dismayed us greatly. May I request you to kindly grant us a meeting with you so that we can apprise you of the disenchantment of the Ex Servicemen on the non acceptance of OROP?
Brief comments on the Cabinet Secretary’s Committee report are attached for your kind perusal.
With best regards,
Yours sincerely,
Lt Gen Raj Kadyan

Shri AK Antony
Hon’ble Minister of Defence,
104, South Block,
New Delhi – 110 011
Unquote

Best regards,
Lt Gen (Emeritus) Raj Kadyan, PVSM, AVSM, VSM
Chairman IESM

Related links in this blog
SCPC: Pension Parity- Analysis of Cabinet Secretary's Report
IESM: Cabinet Secretary tosses "OROP" out of his court
IESL: Cabinet Secretary brushes aside OROP as " Incorrectly Interpreted"
Committee Report circumnavigates main issue of Pension Parity for Defence Forces
Cabinet Secretary's Committee mutilates OROP out of shape
After thoughts- Pay Commissions & Omissions