25th
January 2016
Shri Manohar Parrikar Hon’ble Raksha Mantri 104,
South Block, New Delhi
Change
of Definition of OROP
in Various Correspondence of DESW Noticed
in Various Correspondence of DESW Noticed
Dear Sh Manohar
Parrikar Ji
Pl refer
to:
1. MOD letter
no 12(01/2014-D (Pen/Pol) dated 26 Feb 14
2. MOM of the
meeting chaired by RM on 26 Feb 14 to discuss OROP
3. Reply of
MOS Defense Sh Rao Inderjit Singh Dated 2 Dec 14 in a written reply to Sh
Rajeev Chandrashekhar in Rajya Sabha
4. GOI press
release dated 5 Sep 15
5. GOI letter
no 12(1)/2014 dated 7 Nov 15 and
6.
GOI letter no 12(01)/2014-D(pen/pol)- Part–II
dated 14 Dec 15
GOI has accepted
following definition of OROP in the letters dated 26 Feb 14 and MOS statement
in Rajya Sabha dated 2 Dec 14.
One Rank One Pension (OROP) implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces 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 to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners. This implies
bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners and the
past pensioners, and also future enhancements in the rate of pension to be
automatically passed on to the past pensioners.
However in the Press
Release dated 5 Sep 14, a phrase has been added at the end of the OROP
definition “at periodic
intervals”.
Definition of OROP
given in 5 Sep Press Release is given below:
One Rank One Pension (OROP) implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces Personnel
retiring in the same rank with the same
length of service, irrespective of
their date of retirement. Future
enhancement in the rates of pension to be automatically
passed on to the past pensioners. This
implies bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners
and the past pensioners at periodic intervals.
This
phrase has probably been added to justify pension equalisation every five years
as is being propagated by the MOD.
Again,
another attempt has been made to change/ distort the definition of OROP in GOI
notification dated 7 Nov 15. OROP definition given in 7 Nov letter is
reproduced below.
One Rank One Pension (OROP) implies that uniform pension be paid to the Defence Forces Personnel
retiring in the same rank with the same
length of service, regardless of their date of retirement, which implies
bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners and the
past pensioners at periodic intervals.
I am
sure you would notice subtle progressive change in the language of definition
of OROP, wherein the line “This implies bridging the gap between the
rate of pension of the current pensioners and the past pensioners, and also
future enhancements in the rate of pension to be automatically passed on to the
past pensioner” has been changed with the line “This
implies bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners
and the past pensioners at periodic intervals”.
It further states as one of the salient features that it has
been decided that the gap between rate of pension of current pensioners and
past pensioners would be refixed every five years.
This
completely changes the definition of OROP and if implemented in its changed
form, it will deprive past pensioners of monetary benefits and will completely
destroy the definition of OROP and in turn, destroy the very soul of OROP.
UFESM
(JM) believes that this change in the definition in OROP has been inserted only
to justify pension equalisation every five years. Pension equalisation every
five years is against the definition of OROP and is a matter of serious concern
for all Ex-servicemen. The correct and acceptable situation is that pension
equalisation must be done as soon as pension of two soldiers with same rank and
same length of service is noticed to be different and it must be equalised
immediately. Ex-servicemen are ready to accept pension equalisation every year
only to make administration of this concept easily implementable. Incidentally,
any computation can be easily achieved on press of a button in today’s computer
era – and this needs no emphasis.
However
the matter did not end at one instance of change of definition of OROP, it has
been once again repeated in GOI letter dated 14 Dec 15 “OROP implies that
uniform pension be paid to the Defence Forces Personnel retiring in the same
rank with the same length of service, regardless of their date of retirement,
which implies that bridging the gap between the rate of pension of current and
past pensioners at periodic intervals”.
The GOI
letter dated 14 Dec 15 is the notification for the formation of one-man
judicial committee. It is a matter of great importance that if incorrect
definition is given to the Chairman of anomalies committee, he is bound to work
within the constraints given by MOD and will thus give his recommendations as
per incorrect definition given to him. This will be gross injustice to
ex-servicemen. Ex-servicemen might be justified to think that these changes are
a planned move for the vexed problem of OROP in view of the past experiences in
which meanings of Honorable Supreme Court orders were changed by making subtle
changes in the decision of HSC.
We
sincerely hope that these changes are probably only clerical errors and not a
planned direction change. We therefore sincerely request you to correct these
mistakes in definition of OROP and give following definition approved by
Parliament to all committees.
One Rank One Pension (OROP) implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces 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 to be automatically passed
on to the past pensioners. This
implies bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners
and the past pensioners, and also future enhancements in the rate of pension to
be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.
We will
be thankful to get a suitable reply from you at the earliest.
With regards,
Yours Sincerely,
Maj Gen
Satbir Singh, SM (Retd) Advisor United Front of Ex Servicemen &
Chairman IESM Mobile: 9312404269, 01244110570 Email:satbirsm@gmail.com
Copy to :-
Sh Arun Jaitley For Information and action please
The Finance Minister
Govt of India, North Block
New Delhi – 110001
The Finance Minister
Govt of India, North Block
New Delhi – 110001
|
When will be getting our pension as per pass declaration the prop will be implemented Wed 1st Jan 2016
ReplyDeleteThe twisted wording in the present definition of OROP is the brain wave of the bureaucrats of the Finance and Defence ministry and not a clerical error as assumed n politeness by the ESM leadership. It will be better to take the OROP issue to the Apex Court instead of pointing the mistakes done by the government deliberately. Our disciplined stance paid nothing till now. It will be better for us to be stern in our actions. Our patience is being treated as weakness by the government, the media and the people of India at large.
ReplyDeleteThe twisted wording in the present definition of OROP is the brain wave of the bureaucrats of the Finance and Defence ministry and not a clerical error as assumed n politeness by the ESM leadership. It will be better to take the OROP issue to the Apex Court instead of pointing the mistakes done by the government deliberately. Our disciplined stance paid nothing till now. It will be better for us to be stern in our actions. Our patience is being treated as weakness by the government, the media and the people of India at large.
ReplyDeleteNews. After a gap of 26 years, an Army dog squad drawn from the Remount Veterinary Corps (RVC) took part, along with their handlers in this year's Republic day Parade: Army puts to sleep its dogs if it is unable to keep up with the rigour of its duty, even if it has a few years of life ahead. The Army generally uses Labradors, German shepherds and Belgian shepherds, depending on the altitudes and weather, besides the nature of the assignment that may include routine patrol to explosives detection. It is a normal practice to euthanise dogs when they are found to be unfit to perform the assigned duty. They cannot be rehabilitated after they retire because of security concerns. Since they are familiar with the base location, it is not ideal that they end up in civilian hands is the reason sited officially. The actual reason for euthanasia is mainly because if the retired dogs were rehabilitated with NGOs and animal welfare organisations would not be able to maintain these dogs with the kind of facilities the Indian Army provided them. According to Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, ordinary dogs could be euthanised only in rare cases, like if they suffer from an incurable disease. But euthanasia of unfit army dogs is a policy decision of the Union government. A day is not far off for the government to adopt the same euthanasia for the retired soldiers to ease the government's pension burden. God and the Soldier, we adore, In time of danger, not before. The danger passed and all things righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted. ~Rudyard Kipling
ReplyDeleteSupreme Court would have been certainly the best place in the first place instead of Jantar Mantar.Sooner the better as that can not be avoided -- like it or not. Confront the government with contempt of court against the earlier court ruling as that can not be satisfied with the current government notification and intentions. At best, wait for the implementation circular ..... if that is released in a month or two...
ReplyDeleteRespected manohar sabji,
ReplyDeleteYou have well explained the mercy killing of army dogs when they are found no longer use, similar manner, what Adolf Hitler adopted to kill jews, certainly Arun jaitley, parikkar and modi would be highly happy to implement the gas chamber grave to demobees, they may spare more money to pay the MPs
The change in definition is certainly not a clerical mistake. They are moulding it according to their intention as the notification exists to review in every 5 years.
ReplyDelete