Tuesday,
6 December 2016
Most of the Pre 2016 pensioners will suffer heavy loss in Revised
Pension, if the Option 1 recommended by the Seventh CPC is denied to them.
It was after 20 years that 7th CPC recommended parity between past
pensioners and those retiring after 1-1-2016 under Option 1 which means
consideration of increments earned while in service as detailed in Para 10.1.67
of the Report. This objective of PARITY (Recommended by Commission after
examining all factors in depth in Chapter 10) is fulfilled only with the
implementation of option 1 without any dilution/deviation. Non implementation
of option 1 on the plea of non availability of record in a few cases will have
the following adverse effects:
i) Pre 2006 pensioners, in particular, who are victim of modified
parity will suffer a much bigger loss compared to the post 2006 retirees
because in their case the basic pension which is multiplied by 2.57 in the
interim phase takes into accounts their increments before retirement. This
aspect has been examined in the case of Pre & Post S 19 pensioner as an
example. From the Table 1 given below, it will be clear that the reduction in
pension for post 2006 pensioner is of a uniform small magnitude as compared to
the loss increasing exponentially with each increment lost in case of pre 2006
pensioner. Similar is the case in other scales also
ii) 7th CPC has considered pre 2016 pensioners as one homogenous
group (Para 10.1.53 refers). It means that all pre 2016 pensioners have to be
treated alike. But with denial of option 1, pre 2016 pensioners will get
divided into two groups i.e. Pre 2006 and Post 2006 Pensioners - which violates
the settled law of equality between the equals.
iii) In many cases, Option 3 gives much lower pension compared to
option 1 recommended by 7th CPC. This will be clear from Table 2 below. Where a
comparison has been made between two options.
Encls: 2 Tables
TABLE-
1 SHOWING LARGE REDUCTION IN REVISED PENSION OF
PRE-2006
PENSIONERS COMPARED WITH POST-2006 PENSIONERS
IF OPTION 1 IS DENIED
ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE OF
LEVEL 11 (Scale S 19 - PB3)
|
|||||||
POST
2006 PENSIONER
|
PRE
2006 PENSIONER
|
||||||
Incre-ments
|
Pay
with incre
ments @ 3% pa
|
Corres
ponding
Existing pension
(col. 2/2)
|
Re
vised
pen
sion with MFof 2.57
|
Pen-sion
for
L
11
as per matrix table
|
Redution
in
pen
sion
with
denial
of
Option
1
(col
5-4)
|
Revi
sed
pen
sion with MF
of 2.57
|
Redu
ction
in pen
sion
with denial
of
Option 1
(col
5-7)
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
0
|
25200
|
12600
|
32382
|
33850
|
1468
|
32382
|
1468
|
1
|
25956
|
12978
|
33353
|
34850
|
1497
|
32382
|
2468
|
2
|
26735
|
13367
|
34354
|
35900
|
1546
|
32382
|
3518
|
3
|
27537
|
13768
|
35385
|
37000
|
1615
|
32382
|
4618
|
4
|
28363
|
14181
|
36446
|
38100
|
1654
|
32382
|
5718
|
5
|
29214
|
14607
|
37540
|
39250
|
1710
|
32382
|
6868
|
6
|
30090
|
15045
|
38666
|
40450
|
1784
|
32382
|
8068
|
7
|
30993
|
15496
|
39826
|
41650
|
1824
|
32382
|
9268
|
8
|
31923
|
15961
|
41021
|
42900
|
1879
|
32382
|
10518
|
9
|
32880
|
16440
|
42251
|
44200
|
1949
|
32382
|
11818
|
10
|
33867
|
16933
|
43519
|
45550
|
2031
|
32382
|
13168
|
11
|
34883
|
17441
|
44824
|
46900
|
2076
|
32382
|
14518
|
1. From the above
table it will be clear, that pre-2006 pensioners, as victims of Modified
Parity will stand to lose more in pension compared to post -2006 pensioners
if Option 1 of counting increments is not accepted by Govt.
2.
The loss in pension for post 2006 pensioners is in the range of Rs.1700 (from
1468 to a max of 2076 as per col. 6) only and is nearly constant , whereas
for pre-2006 pensioners the loss in pension increases by almost Rs.1000/- for
every one increment (Refer cols. 6 & 8). 3. For example, the loss
suffered in pension of pre 2006 pensioner in losing 5 increments works out to
6868 as against 1710 for post 2006 pensioner.
N. P. MOHAN 29-9-2016
|
TABLE
2 SHOWING REVISED PENSION OF SCALE S 29-PB 4
(LEVEL 14) PENSIONERS OF 4th CPC REGIME WITH
& 3RD
OPTION BASED ON NOTIONAL PAY OF SUCCESSIVE
PAY COMMISSIONS
(Para 5 of minutes of meeting held on 6th October, 2016) vs OPTION 1 BASED ON INCREMENTS EARNED |
||||||||
Pay
on retire
ment
|
Noti
onal
pay-5th CPC
|
Notional
pay-6th CPC
(Fitment table-6th CPC)
|
Notional
pay-7th CPC
with
MF OF 2.57-
3rd option
(col.3 xMF)
|
Operative
Pay
of col.
4 in
the
next
cell of
pay matrix
(MOF
OM dt 25-7-2016)
|
Pay
based on option
1 with incre
ments
(
as per pay matrix)
|
Pension
as per option 3
(col.5/2)
|
Pen
sion
as per option
1
(col.6/2)
|
Loss
of
Revised pension
if Option
1 is not
given
Diffe
rence between
Option 1
& 3)(col.8-7)
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
5900
|
18400
|
54700
|
140579
|
144200
|
144200
|
72100
|
72100
|
0
|
6100
|
18400
|
54700
|
140579
|
144200
|
148500
|
72100
|
74250
|
2150
|
6300
|
18400
|
54700
|
140579
|
144200
|
153000
|
72100
|
76500
|
4400
|
6500
|
18900
|
56050
|
144049
|
144200
|
157600
|
72100
|
78800
|
6700
|
6700
|
18900
|
56050
|
144049
|
144200
|
162300
|
72100
|
81150
|
9050
|
6900
|
18900
|
56050
|
144049
|
144200
|
167200
|
72100
|
83600
|
11500
|
7100
|
19400
|
56050
|
144049
|
144200
|
172200
|
72100
|
86100
|
14000
|
7300
|
19400
|
56050
|
144049
|
144200
|
177400
|
72100
|
88700
|
16600
|
NOTE: 1.3rd Option
is not suitable at all. The loss in pension is clear from col. 9.
2. Notional pay in
6th CPC in col. 3 has been taken from the Fitment table issued by MOF (DOE)
on 30-8-2008.
-
Compiled by: N. P. MOHAN 24-10-2016
|
Source:-http://rscws.com
Related Posts
http://www.staffportal.in/2016/12/importance-of-option-1-of-7th-cpc-for-revised-pension.html )
A most simple way of Pension party to all Defence Personnel irrespective of their year of retirement can be done with combining the OROP and the Option 1 of the 7CPC matrix if the method given in "sunlit Blog" is followed. Here the number of increments come in to play and rank anomalies are eliminated wherever confusion arises due to changes in number of year to attain some ranks at lower end.
ReplyDeleteDetails are at the following site:
http://sol-dozdoz.blogspot.in/2016/09/some-notions-of-progression-for-pension.html?m=1
There are a few blogs which must be made official reference material in the 'Government Circles' in the MOD which make so called 'logical blunders' at the decision making end. The 'sunlit' is one of them, with ample labels on different heads and explains in simple words and fails not to confuse the subject. Hope somebody in the authority come across this blog and take cues from time to time.