Dear all
The Ministry of Defence has yesterday issued the
notification for grant of pensionary awards based on the recommendations of the
7th Central Pay Commission. The same
can be downloaded and accessed by clicking here.
While there is
good news for regular pensioners in the sense that the Government has decided
to grant a fitment of 2.57 on the pension drawn by pensioners as on 31 Dec
2015, which includes 'One Rank One Pension' (OROP) pension drawn on the said
date, the notification very regressively has reduced the amount of disability
benefits admissible to disability pensioners. They have relegated the rates to
the ‘slab system’ as was prevalent prior to the 6th Central Pay
Commission thereby placing defence disability pensioners at a sharp
disadvantage as compared to civil disability pensioners.
My analysis on
each entry in the notification:
1. Revision of
Pension of pre-7th CPC retirees: A good move. Both options accepted. The first option of notional
pension based on fitment as per service in the pay level in which the person
had retired has been accepted subject to feasibility study. The second option
of multiplication fitment of 2.57 of the pension as on 31 Dec 2015 has been
implemented with immediate effect. This translates into OROP X 2.57. One must
congratulate the Defence Services Headquarters, especially the Adjutant General
of the Army, for ensuring the judicious implementation of this aspect. This
also puts an end to the needless rumour-mongering that OROP shall not be
configured with the new pay commission modalities.
2. No comments
required.
3. No comments
required.
4. Pre-2006
Honorary Naib Subedars: The stated
position of the 7th CPC that this ‘closed matter’ may not be
reopened has been accepted by the Government. This is clearly not in order. It
may be recalled that while post-2006 retiree Honorary Naib Subedars were paid
the pension of a Regular Naib Subedar, the same was refused to pre-2006
retirees. This statement of the 7th CPC and its acceptance is
legally not in order since there already is in force judicial dicta, upheld
till the Supreme Court, providing that pensions of pre-2006 Honorary Naib
Subedars are also to be calculated based upon the pay of a regular Naib
Subedar. The non-acceptance of this issue means that litigation on the subject
shall continue since the anomaly has not been addressed.
5. No comments
required.
6. Pension of
Territorial Army personnel: This issue has
also been addressed by way of judicial verdicts and should have been resolved
by the 7th CPC.
7. No comments
required.
8. Disability
pension rates: This is the single most condemnable
recommendation by the 7th CPC which has strangely been accepted
by the Government. Frankly, I never thought that this regressive recommendation
would ever be accepted. While recommending this aspect, the 7th CPC
had made unfounded and uncharitable remarks against disabled soldiers by
casting aspersions on those who have incurred disabilities while in
service. I had discussed the issue in detail
earlier on this blog post dated 21 Nov 2015. While the heading of
this entry is “Enhancement in rate of disability pension”, it has actually
resulted in a massive decrease resulting in a payout even lower than 6th CPC
rates. The 6th CPC had removed an anomaly wherein disability
pension was being earlier calculated based on percentage of pay for civilians
but on slabs for defence personnel. This (the slab system) was leading to an
enormous discrimination between civilians and defence personnel except at lower
ranks where defence personnel were getting a slightly better deal. The 6th CPC
hence equated civilians and defence personnel after which in both cases the
disability pension was directed to be calculated on percentage basis (30% of
emoluments for 100% disability). A protection clause was further introduced so
that the lower ranks did not face any disadvantage due to the percentage
system. All anomalies were therefore addressed for all ranks and all sections
of employees. The 7th CPC, based on totally vague and
unsubstantiated grounds, which should have been actually expunged from the
report itself, recommended the reversion to the slab system. This is totally
uncalled for and should be strongly contested by the Defence Services HQ by
requesting the Raksha Mantri to immediately review these
orders. The arbitrariness of this decision becomes evident from the following
chart:
(100% Disability)
Rank |
Rates under the 6th CPC as on 31 Dec
2015
|
Rates applicable after the 7th CPC
as on 01 Jan 2016
|
Lt Gen
|
Rs 52,560
|
Rs 27,000
|
Head of Central Armed Police Force
|
Rs 52,560
|
Rs 67,500
|
9. Broad-banding of
disability pension: The Government has accepted broad-banding
of disability pension for cases other than invalidation, that is, all cases
irrespective of manner of exit. But the catch is that this has only been made
applicable from 01 Jan 2016 whereas the anomaly arose from 01 Jan 1996 which
the Supreme Court adjudicated. Hence, regrettably there would be no change or
reduction in litigation for claims of broad-banding from 01 Jan 1996 till 31
Dec 2015 as mandated by Supreme Court orders. Practically this helps only those
who retire on or after 01 Jan 2016 while for the rest the legal position for
claiming benefits remains the same.
10. Enhancement of
old age pension for disability and war injury pensioners: The strangest part of this entry is the fact that the Defence Services
had indeed asked for this, and the commission actually rejected it and the
Ministry of Defence has accepted that rejection. I say it is strange because
the Government had already clarified way back in 2010 that additional old age
pension very much applies to disability and war injury pensioners. Hence the
Defence Services HQ had demanded and the 7th CPC and the
Ministry of Defence rejected something that stood granted and clarified way
back in 2010 by the Government which becomes clear from this letter issued in 2010 which can be accessed by
clicking here. This single instance should be an indicator
enough of the expertise and institutional memory available at various echelons
of our systems. Unfortunate, to say the least!
11. Disability
Pension to “Neither Attributable to, Nor Aggravated by Military Service” Cases: The recommendation of the 7th CPC is redundant in this
aspect since the Supreme Court and various High Courts have already ruled that
in case a person is fit at the time of enrollment, then any disability arising
during service is deemed to have a connection with service thereby entitling a
him/her to disability pension.
12. No comments
required.
13. No comments
required.
14. No comments required.
=========================================================
(Source- Maj Navdeep Singh Blog/Via Gp e-mail from Chander Prakash Vet)
(Source- Maj Navdeep Singh Blog/Via Gp e-mail from Chander Prakash Vet)
Government has decided to grant a fitment of 2.57 on the pension drawn by pensioners as on 31 Dec 2015, which includes 'One Rank One Pension' (OROP) pension drawn on
ReplyDeleteThe above,posted by Vet Chander Prakash, creates a confusion. The second method of calculating revised pension does not mention OROP rate effected from 1 july 2014 but the rate applicable as on 31 Dec 06.m There is no mention of 31 12 2015 anywhere in the notification.
Can you kindly clarify?
of course it is not there under 'recommendation by the commission' but read carefully under column 'decision of government'. 31 dec 2015 is mentioned clearly there.
Delete@JWO SUKUMARAN NAIR RV, VET. Pl see the Annexure below the Govt Res. at Point No.1 and Decision of Govt against it. It is very clear, the pension as on 31.12.2015 is to be multiplied with the factor 2.57. And absolutely there is no clarification. The above post is from Maj Navdeep Singh (Retd)butfwd by Chander Prakash vet.
ReplyDeleteThe so called OROP was given in Mar 2016 with its arrears.
DeleteHowever 7th CPC benefits and the same reiterated by Govt resolution dated 30 Sep 16 is merely amplifying the 07th pay commission award which could have imagined the OROP (a separate body/ instrument) effect/ award .
I will be happy to receive any enhancement but the logic is important.
GaviniVN sir, I apologize for the over sight. Thank you for correcting
ReplyDeleteThough 33yrs. de-linking provision is mentioned in the notification yet appendix shows pension pro-rata reduced.what might be the new full pension as on 31 .12.2016 which is still pro rata reduced? Kindly throw some light!
ReplyDeletePro rata is the KAVACHA KUNDALAM of MOD
ReplyDelete