Tuesday, May 17, 2016

ORDERS AWAITED FROM DESW : BROAD BANDING ON DISABILITY/DISABILITY ELEMENT AND 50%PENSION AFTER DELINKING 33 YRS FOR FULL PENSION BASED ON DoPP&W ORDERS


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: DIWAVE Disabled war Veterans <diwave1@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, May 15, 2016 at 9:54 AM
Subject: INFORMATION ON DISABILITY PENSIONS/ OTHERS


Mails have been received from a number of Veterans in regards issues troubling them and the course of action they are required to initiate. Outlined below are some attempted answers to your queries.

1. BROAD BANDING OF DISABILITIES

Consequent to the MoD letter circulating in regards the broad banding of disabilities, it is for your information that the circular/letter in circulation only pertains to those Officers/JCO's/Other Ranks that had approached the AFT and received favourable decisions thereof. This was a result of the Supreme Court Decision on the subject and hence has no bearing on other disabled.

As regards all others effected who have not received the approval of broad banding, we wish to inform Veterans that a separate file for broad banding for all has also been processed and the approval is awaited from Ministry of Finance (Expenditure). Unless that approval is received, orders cannot be issued.

2. DISABILITY ELEMENT FROM 1-1-2006 Upto 24-09-2012 BASED ON FITMENT TABLES

The file, duly cleared by Finance (Exp) is awaited in MoD. However the increase expected will be absorbed after the subsequent intended order on 33 years applicability.

3. ISSUE OF 33 YEAR ORDERS BASED ON DoPPW LETTER>

This order issued for civilians is again based on fitment tables. It is based on Minimum of Pension. As far as Officers are concerned, they draw minimum pension and hence there is no problem in its issue for them. However JCO's & Other Ranks are presently drawing maximum of the rank in pensions whereas the order issued by DoPPW indicates minimum of Pension.

Based on the the anomaly, the same is being studied  and one a solution to this is approved, the orders will be issued.

At the end, may I suggest that Patience is needed by all. We are following up disability issues and will keep everyone on our contact list informed.


-- 
Col H N Handa
President 
Disabled War Veteran's (India)

(SOURCE- VIA E-MAIL FROM COL SS SOHI RETD)

8 comments:

  1. If I am correct there is a SC ruling that cases settled for those litigants who approached the courts and had and received favourable decisions thereof is applicable to similarly placed cases universally. An example is the 6CPC pension revision to the pre 2006 S29 was settled to the litigants first, and then made up for all those S29 scale pensioners. So, your contention that broad banding of disabilities only pertains to those Officers/JCO's/Other Ranks that had approached the AFT is wrong and must be applicable to all affected.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If you you are fluent in English,it is fine.No one compels you to write your view in English.But for God's sake read again what you have written and tell us.I am pointing out the grammatical mistake but the matter.
    " 3. ISSUE OF 33 YEAR ORDERS BASED ON DoPPW LETTER>

    This order issued for civilians is again based on fitment tables. It is based on Minimum of Pension. As far as Officers are concerned, they draw minimum pension and hence there is no problem in its issue for them. However JCO's & Other Ranks are presently drawing maximum of the rank in pensions whereas the order issued by DoPPW indicates minimum of Pension.

    Based on the the anomaly, the same is being studied and one a solution to this is approved, the orders will be issued."

    ReplyDelete
  3. PCDA Circular No.C-149 dt 08-04-2016 has not been received by any PDAs. Hence they have not begun the work of revision of pension wef 01-01-2006 to 30-04-2014 iro pre-2006 retirees. This will have to be followed up for any early results.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sir

    This only for desabled personnel or for PMR as after delinking of 33 yrs clause on minimum pay band also increase the pension. What is delay? Or this not applicable to us.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yes,veteran soldiers do appreciate efforts from some individuals and associations.
    Patience and consolation !
    The fact and point ??.
    File notimgs and briefs cannot go on and on on these matters of soldiers with visible delay ,time and again.This issue was dragged for years .All those bureaucrats and def accounts should have thought of implications and effects much before ,instead of liesurly at snail speed putting file notings now at every body's contentions ; and finally causing unacceptable delays ,by any yard stick on public issues,responsibility and moral standards.
    That min of pay in pay band is a settled for ever.Those who were sanctioned at max by goi , that principle stands. The tables ,thus would get revised to above min on adjudicated aspect of 50% at mim pensionable servoce. That min pensionable ser for some soldiers is 15.
    With this 50% at 20 yrs
    for civilians ,soldiers lost the additional compensatory factor of weightage for mil svc.
    Thus ,the pre existing provision prior to 3 CPC ,1973 of about 75 % of pay for pension stands revoked. That is simply logic,rational and natural. not magic or rocket science !Now,
    We are where we started ( jaise the) with these upward revisions to civil service.
    It is paradox that ,there is delay even at this level of 50% as promptly paid out to civilians ,incl def civilians in MOD.
    That is the fact and point of ibid three issues.
    Further ,awaiting rectification /resolution of raised anomalies of 7cpc recommendations ,veterans issues are are in flux.
    This comment is for assimilation and analysis by one and all.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Presently PBOR are drawing maximum pension from the date of OROP implementation. But they were drawing minimum pension UpTo 30-6-2014 from 01-1-2006. Hence there is no valid reason to hold this CAT and SC order to drink 33 years clause. It is a clear cut indication of scuttle mentioned on pretext of already drawing maximum pension. Let us understand and anslyse the concept of denying qualified entitlement of ex servicemen. PCDA circular C- 149 could not be adhered due to non existent of fitment table for any of the defence forces. All tables were applicable for civil pensioners only. Now that is no need and hope to get anything from MOD. Last option is to file contempt of court to all affected.

    ReplyDelete
  7. When we can expect government orders for non-litigants?

    ReplyDelete