Definition of Ex-Servicemen

 

Those who were released between 01 Jul 66 and 30 Jun 68 (both days inclusive) –

Any person who has served in any rank (whether as a combatant or not) in the Armed Forces of the Union, has been released therefrom otherwise than by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency

(Authority : Min of Home Affairs Notification No F.14/26/64-Estt(D) dated 11 Oct 1966)

Those who were released between 01 Jul 68 and 30 Jun 71 (both days inclusive) –

Any person who has served in any rank (whether as a combatant or not) in the Armed Forces of the Union for a continuous period of not less than six months and released there from otherwise than by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency

(Authority : Min of Home Affairs Notification No 14/11/68-Estt(D)/Estt(C)dated 13 Feb 69)

Those who were released between 01 Jul 71 and 30 Jun 74(both days inclusive) –

Any person who has served in any rank (whether as a combatant or not) in the Armed Forces of the Union and has been released therefrom otherwise than by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency

(Authority : Cabinet Secretariat, Department of Personnel Notification No 13/3/71-Ests(C) dated 14 Oct 71)

Those who were released between 01 Jul 74 and 30 Jun 79(both days inclusive) –

ESM means a person who has served in any rank(whether as a combatant or non-combatant) in the Armed forces of the Union,for a continuous period of not less than six months after attestation and has been resleased therefrom otherwise than by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency.

(Authority : Cabinet Secretariat, Deptt. of Personnel & Administrative Reforms Notification No 13/24/73-Estt(C) dated 26 Oct 74)

Those who were released between 01 Jul 79 and 30 Jun 87(both days inclusive) –

Any persn who has served in any rank(whether as combatant or not)in the armed forces of the Union for a continuous period of not less than six months after attestation if discharged for reasons other than at their own request or by way or dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency and not less than five years service if discharged at own request.

(Authority : Deptt. of Personnel & Administrartive Reforms Notification No 39016/10/79-Estt(C ) dated 15 Dec 79)

Those who were released on or after 01 Jul 87 –

Any person who has served in any rank (whether as combatant or not) in the armed forces of the Union and was relesased/retired with any kind of pension from Defence Budget or released on completion of specific terms of engagement with gratuity otherwise than at his own request or by way of dismissal or discharge on account of misconduct or inefficiency.

(Authority : DOP&T OM No 36034/5/85-Estt(SCT) dated 14 Apr 87)

Personnel of Territorial Army –

Who are pension holders ;for continous embodied service, persons with disability attributable to military service and gallatry award winners retired on or after 15 Nov 86.

(Autority : DOP&T OM No 36034/5/85-Estt(SCT) dated 14 Apr 87)

Personnel of Army Postal Service –

Personnel of Army Postal Service , who are a part of regular Army and retire from such service (that is directly from APS without reversion to P&T Department) with a pension or who have been released from such service on medical grounds attributable to military service or circumstances beyond their control and awarded medical or other disability pension shall come within the definition of ex-servicemen

(Authority : Min of Defence OM No 9(52)/88/D)(Res) dated 19 Jul 89)

Note : As per Govt. of India, Min of Def/Deptt. of ESW OM No 1(9)/2010/D(Res-I) dated 20/21 Jul 2011, personnel who were on deputation in APS for more than six months prior to 14 Apr 87 would also be considered as ex-servicemen with all consequential benefits.

Recruits – Who are boarded oput/released on medical grounds and granted medical/disability pension. However, the operation of the OM has been kept in abeyance for issuance of notification by DOP&T.

(Authority : Min of Def/Deptt of ESW OM No 12/1/2005/D(Res) dated 01 Feb 2006)

Cadets –

Disabled Cadets have not been accorded the status of ex-servicemen.

(Authority : Min of Def ID No 12/1/2005/D(Res) dated 02/05 Sep 2011)

 Note : The eligibiloity of the person to the status of ex-servicemen will be governed by the definition in vogue at the time of his discharge and will not be affected by the changes in the definition subsequent to the discharge.

(Source- Govt employ diary)

Govt to soon come out with fresh norms for disability pension based on recommendation of a committee headed by former Adjutant General of the Army, Lt Gen Mukesh Sabharwal (Retd).

Posted: 03 Jul 2017 05:49 AM PDT

  

Press Trust of India|New Delhi July 2,2017LastUpdatedat 11:22 IST

 The Government has decided to remove existing "anomalies" and come out with a specific percentage-based system for granting disability pensions to Army, Navy and Air Force personnel sustaining injuries in the line of duty.

 

The decision has been taken in view of the long-standing demand of the armed forces that the current system of determining disability pension needs an overhaul.

 

Official sources said the Government has finalised a new slab-based system which is aimed at addressing most of the concerns of the armed forces that is expected to reduce litigation against the Government.

Under the existing mechanism, 30 per cent of the last salary minus the dearness allowance is given as disability pension to those sustaining 100 per cent disability. 

The pension amount reduces depending on specific percentage of the injury and sources said the affected personnel often take legal recourse, alleging discrepancies in determining quantum of injury.

 

As per the new slab-based system, security personnel with 20-50 per cent disability will be considered 50 per cent disabled while those with 50-75 per cent bracket will come under the 75 per cent disabled category. 

Any personnel with more than 75 per cent disability will be considered 100 per cent disabled.

 

So all the eligible disability pensioners will be considered under three broad categories and accordingly pensions will be determined. 

"It will be a robust system and will address long-pending grievances of the armed forces," a senior official said. 

 

Explaining the new system, he said, "Any person with 50 per cent disability will get half of the total pension being given to a person with 100 per cent disability under existing mechanism." 

The Government had started giving disability pension with effect from January 1, 2006 to those who had taken pre-mature retirement due to injuries sustained in line of duty. 

The changes being introduced to calculate disability pension are based on recommendation of a committee headed by former Adjutant General of the Army, Lt Gen (retd) Mukesh Sabharwal.

 

The mandate of the committee was to suggest remedial measures to reduce litigations and disputes in various courts relating to disability pension.

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

(Source- Voice of Pensioners Blog)

COMMEMORATION OF KARGIL HERO

18 years after we lost our son in the Kargil war your mail was most thoughtful.  Thanks.  It is this support that has sustained us through these years. Young men like Vijyant did what the nation expected of them –their duty.   Actually, the war in Kargil brought the best in the Indian nation –those like Capt Vijyant, who fought bravely and fell honorably to redeem India `s sanctity& the countrymen who showered their love & their support for the brave hearts.  We of course feel proud though we also live with the pain of a young son lost as any other parent, every day of our life. Kargil is already a distant memory.  We don’t want the legacy of the young men like Capt Vijyant to fade and be lost to a coming generation of Indian, who have a right to know what their previous generation did and be inspired.  With this in mind we created this web site.  We therefore request u to kindly pass this site on to all ur friends & relatives. So far as u are concerned we have no doubt that as and when India needs, you, you will rise to greater heights.  However, for & from those heroes and martyrs a few lines; -              WE ARE DEAD SHORT DAYS AGO WE LIVED    SAW SUN RISE FELT SUNSET GLOW               LOVED AND WERE LOVED AND NOW WE LIE    ON THE SLOPES WHERE YELLOW ROSES GROW. TAKE UP OUR FIGHT WITH THE FOE, To U WITH FALLING HANDS WE THROW                   THE TORCH BE YOURS TO HOLD IT HIGH…………………. Thanks, Yours’s MRS V N Thapar AND Col V N Thapar  (SOURCE : Voice of Pensioners Blog)

DESW ORDERS : ENTITLEMENT RULES FOR PENSIONARY AWARDS, 1982 - IMPLEMENTATION OR ORDERS OF HON’BLE COURTS/AFTs IN NANA BY SERVICES CASES

F.No. 4(17)2015/D (Pen/Legal)

GoI Ministry of Defence

Deptt of Ex-Servicemen Welfare D (Pension/Legal)

Sena Bhawan, New Delhi

Dated 29th June, 2017

To
The Chief of the Army Staff
The Chief of the Naval Staff
The Chief of the Air Staff

Subject: - Implementation of orders of Hon’ble Courts/AFTs in Neither Attributable to Nor Aggravated (NANA) by service cases

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order dated 02.07.2013 in Civil Appeal No. 4949/2013 filed by Dharamvir Singh Vs Union of lndia & Ors. held the following:-

I. The question whether a disability is attributable or aggravated by military service is to be determined under “Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982”.

II. A member is to be presumed in sound physical and mental condition upon entering service if there is no note or record at the time of entrance. in the event of his subsequently being discharged from service on medical grounds any deterioration in his health is to be presumed due to service.

III. If no note of any disability or disease was made at the time of individual's acceptance for military service, a disease which has laid to an individual's discharge or death will be deemed to have arisen in the service.

IV. If medical Opinion holds that the disease could not have been detected on medical examination prior to the acceptance for service and that disease will not be deemed to have arisen during service, the medical board is required to state the reasons.

2. In view of the above judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, matter for implementation of orders of Hon'ble Courts/AFTs in respect of Armed Forces Personnel in NANA cases was taken up with Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance for consideration. Deptt. of Expenditure has agreed to implement those orders of Hon’ble Courts/AFTS where all legal remedies have been exhausted. In cases where appeals are pending or could be filed, the legal remedies may be exhausted and thereafter, if the appeals are dismissed, the Court/AFT orders may be implemented.

3. Accordingly, I am directed to convey the approval of Competent Authority in Ministry of Defence for implementation of orders of Hon'ble Courts/AFTs in Neither Attributable to Nor Aggravated (NANA) by service cases as under:-

a. Service Hqrs. may await the orders of Hon'ble Apex Court in those NANA cases in which SLPs/Civil Appeals have already been filed. In case Civil Appeals are dismissed, Service Hqrs. may issue absolute sanction at their level with the approval of competent authority.

b. Service Hqrs. may implement the orders of Hon’ble Courts/AFTS in NANA cases by issuing absolute sanction keeping in view the order dated 02.07.2013 of Hon’ble Apex Court in Dharamvir Singh's case (Civil Appeal No. 4949/2013).

c. In those NANA cases in which conditional sanction have been issued by the Service Hqrs. with the approval of competent authority in MoD, Service Hqrs. may convert conditional sanction into absolute sanction with the approval of competent authority.

This issues with concurrence of MoD (Fin/Pen) vide U.O. No. 1631/Fin/Pen dated 21.06.2017.                                                                    

                                                                                        sd/-

(Ajay Kumar Agrawal)

Under Secretary to the Govt. of India

(Source: DESW.gov.in [pdf] as published in http://www.staffnews.in/2017/07/entitlement-rules-for-casualty.html#ixzz4ldVIGNoL)    

A reluctant step, but an important and landmark step nevertheless by the Ministry of Defence for Disabled Soldiers probably ending the dark era of en masse appeals against disabled soldiers

PLEASE CLICK TO VIEW THE ORDER OF MINISTRY OF DEFENCE ON NANA CASES

As regular readers would be aware, the issue of declaring disabilities of soldiers as “Neither Attributable to, Nor Aggravated By Military Service” (popularly known as NANA cases) has been a vexed one. While the rules on attributability and aggravation are quite liberal, their interpretation has been literal, leading to denial of disability and special family pensionary benefits to disabled soldiers and families of soldiers who die due to some disability while in service.

Despite several judgements by the Supreme Court, High Courts as also followed by various Benches of the Armed Forces Tribunal, benefits were denied to such disabled soldiers, and on the contrary, multiple appeals were filed against favourable verdicts rendered by Courts.

Besides other issues, this issue was also deliberated upon and discussed in detail inParagraph 2.2.1 of the Report of the Committee of Experts constituted by the then Raksha Mantri on directions of the Prime Minister, for reducing litigation involving the Ministry of Defence and strengthening the mechanisms for redressal of grievances, of which I too was a Member. The following were the recommendations of the Committee to this end:

In view of the foregoing, the Committee notes and recommends the following:

(a) According to rules, as also endorsed by the Supreme Court, a benefit of doubt regarding ‘attributability/aggravation’ or ‘service-connection’ needs to be granted to any disability arising during service [See Paragraph 32 of Dharamvir Vs Union of India (supra), Paragraphs 15 & 16 of Union of India Vs Rajbir (supra)]. The same however can be denied when it is shown that the disability is due to a person’s own gross misconduct or negligence, illegal activity, substance abuse or intoxication. The same is also a universally acceptable norm in all democracies [See Rule 105 of US Code 38 (supra)]. The same benefit is also admissible in ‘death’ cases due to in-service disabilities leading to entitlement of Special Family Pension for families. The said proposition is also agreeable to all stakeholders including the medical side with the apex medical body, the MSAC, also on board.

(b)  There is no linkage with ‘peace’ or ‘field’ service as far as attributability of disabilities is concerned and any such differentiation locally put across by the office of DGAFMS in the past or professed by any other authority is illegal, contrary to Entitlement Rules, contemptuous towards decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and also against Regulations for Medical Services in the Armed Forces (See Para 33 of Dharamvir Singh Vs Union of India and Regulation 423 of RMSAF). So for example, if a soldier develops Heart Disease while in service, the benefit of doubt needs to be extended to ‘service-connection’ and the claim need not be rejected on grounds such as ‘served in peace area’ or ‘cause unknown’. The claim can only be rejected in case of a note of disability at the time of entry into service or reasons such as ‘heavy smoking’ or ‘lack of dietary control leading to obesity and heart disease’ are recorded, if applicable. Otherwise, the presumption operates in favour of soldiers, as per rules and as held by the Supreme Court.

(c)  Broadly blaming domestic reasons for psychiatric disabilities arising during military service is against common knowledge and unethical since domestic reasons are bound to give rise to stress and also to aggravate the same in soldiers because of the very fact that due to military service they remain away from their families most of the year and cannot hence cope up with all familial requirements efficiently by virtue of their being absent from home. Putting the blame on ‘domestic reasons’ not only gives out a message that the organisation is simply washing its hands off the responsibility towards such soldiers but also results in denial of pensionary benefits to such affected soldiers and their families. The issue already stands addressed in K Srinivasa Reddy Vs Union of India (supra) and also explained in detail in the preceding paragraphs by us. The said principles and causative factors of stress also stand endorsed by way of DO letters written to Chief Ministers by successive Raksha Mantris, which of course has also not resulted in desirable results and needs renewed efforts.

(d) All concerned agencies should realize that non-grant of “attributability” or “aggravation” on flimsy grounds results in denial of pensionary benefits and consequently denial of a life of basic dignity to disabled soldiers. While it may be just a casual stroke of a pen for a medical board, it may be a question of survival for a soldier or his family. The exercise needs to be undertaken in a common-sense oriented, practical, liberal and scientific manner. Guidelines, if any, may not operate in derogation of actual rules and need to move with the times as per global norms based on scientific studies. The lack of transparency in past amendments in the “Guide to Medical Officers (Military Pensions)” wherein the said amendments do not even carry the footnote of the study or the basis leading to the change/amendment is highly avoidable and so is the tendency not to honestly reproduce the actual rules in the said guide and eliminating important parts such as the erstwhile Para 47 of the 2002 version which has vanished without trace and without reasoning and the spirit of which needs to be restored. All authorities, including Medical Boards shall decide attributability/aggravation on a case to case basis as per law laid down by the Supreme Court based on the interpretation of actual rules and ground realities of the inherent stress and strain of military life, rather than the mathematical guidelines of the Guide to Medical Officers or locally issued instructions and DO letters written to medical boards.

(e) Cases of feigning of disabilities where none exist should be dealt with strongly and medical boards should also be extra careful in examining cases where individuals have reported with a medical condition just prior to retirement or release.

(f) The current approach shows that despite clear cut law laid down by the Supreme Court and also the spirit of the rules, there is resistance in accepting the settled legal position based on hyper-technical hairsplitting reasons. The concerned authorities must accept gracefully and with all humility the law laid down by the Apex Court and come to terms to the same since an approach of resistance is not only against law but also at odds with global practices for disabilities incurred during military service.

(g) It is further recommended that henceforth in medical boards, all disabilities arising in service may be broadly dealt with on the anvil of the above practical realities, all appeals pending against such disabled soldiers filed in the Supreme Court be withdrawn immediately and pending or future litigation in Courts and Tribunals related to past cases of disabled soldiers may be dealt with by Government lawyers in judicial fora on the basis of Supreme Court decisions as above, except in cases of gross misconduct, negligence, substance abuse or intoxication, on a case to case basis. Needless to state, the same principles also apply to deaths while in service.

Based on the position as above, the Ministry of Defence has finally issued a policy letter for implementation of Court orders granting disability pension to disabled soldiers, which can be downloaded and accessed by clicking here. While the Ministry has fully accepted judicial dicta as emphasized in the above recommendation, what is strange is that in Paragraph 3 of the said policy, though the Defence Services Headquarters have been asked to implement Court orders and also grant absolute sanctions while implementing the same (as against Conditional sanctions pending appeal, as was the case in the past), the Ministry has still not shown a large heart as far as withdrawal of the pending appeals are concerned, and on the contrary, rather than asking the Defence Services to withdraw the said appeals, the Ministry states that ‘absolute sanctions’ be issued on dismissal of the appeals already pending in the Supreme Court. The question arises that when the recommendations of the Committee are unambiguous on the subject and so is the law declared by Constitutional Courts, why should the pending appeals be pursued till ‘dismissed’, and why not simply withdrawn with full humility?

These are questions to which there are no answers. Notwithstanding this, we should stay positive since not only will this ensure a faster implementation of Court orders related to disability pension, it also, in all probability, marks the closure of a dark era of en masse appeals against disabled soldiers, and I am sure the remaining issues shall also be ironed out soon.

Must place on record my gratitude to Mr Manohar Parrikar for initiating these reforms leading us to a better today. 

 (SOURCE : INDIAN MILITARY - SERVICE BENEFITS - MAJ NAVDEEP SINGH BLOG)

A MUST READ FOR ALL EX-SERVICEMEN : SHUN YOUR NEGATIVE THOUGHTS, BALLONED EGOS, MOVE FORWARD WITH POSITIVE CHANGES OF TIMES --OR GET

Sirs, 

    I fail to understand why we are clamouring over one another to malign the Jantar Mantar agitation at the drop of a hat. In a recent post an Ex-Army Cdr commented on whether the serving lot needed advice from ESM.

Yes Sir, they do.

Being cocooned, they are fed a lot of gibberish as evident from the recent letter in circulation about the non-applicability of NFU to maintain status. They will only feel the effect of their silence when they retire and strive for civil nirvana. But that time the clock would have been set back and the effects of the One-time-increment a.k.a the present day OROP would have worn off.

We as Indians vote to power congenital scamsters and even deify them as Netas, yet are very hypocritical and resort to slander when it comes to one of us. Why?  

I am of the opinion that whatever form we have got OROP in is due to the actions at Jantar Mantar. When the momentum was with ESM there was a slander campaign and infighting. Just what the Doctor ordered for the babus & Netas to augment their depleting anti-Fauj vitriolic armory. For God’s Sake! If one feels he is doing a good job why do you need to slander, overtly or covertly – Just do your good work--------- B**Ls to the rest as we say in the army.

But No, we had to squabble – General Vs General, Men Vs Officers, ESM Group Vs Another and between Politically aligned ESM groups. And, at a time when the iron was hot and the momentum on the gallop. Just that last lap and the adversary would have buckled. But no – the hurdles were raised.

What is the end result?

# The OMJC has submitted its report and the Govt. is busy tinkering with it since there is no pressure upon them to act.

# The actions of the previous Chiefs who were galvanized into staying the implementation of the 7^th PC has now been neutralised by the acceptance of the 7^th PC without resolution of Core issues that had degraded the Defence forces from the 3^rd PC onwards. 

Hark the Death Knell of the much tooted “ Naam-Namak-Nishan”.

We will soon be just another ParaMilitarised Military.

Our adversary – the Babu is a Sly and Wily character. They care two hoots for legal orders. If the Apex court says “remove red beacons”, they subvert the order by introducing upgraded car pennants. 

Therefore, I am quite skeptical about the resolution of grievances by approaching the Court/tribunals. When ESM approach the AFTs our adversary is forewarned and when he gets the gist of arguments of ESM in the Tribunals, the rules of the game are changed and the goal post shifted. So, even after the “tareekh-pe-tareekh” game and the case is won in the Courts the plaintiff will find that the game has changed and the verdict is now obsolete in the new playing field. 

Babus are masters at moving the cheese. It has to be a blitzkrieg where the babu gets no reaction time and the Neta fears a “Kissa-kursi-ka” aftermath.   

Else, Crores will be spent to get a favourable verdict that will be – Nil batta sannata. Prefer to see ESM groups spend it on air tickets than spend it for hallowed obsolescence.

India would never have been a Republic in 1950 had it not been for the combined effort of the ideologies of Bose and Gandhiji. If the Raj was not financially in trouble after WW II our non-violence movement would have been inconsequential. 

If the Defence forces need to redeem their lost Honour then they need to stop quibbling and let each do his own.

Let the JM lot do their bit while the believers of AFT do theirs. Maybe the multipronged approach will yield results.

But if we continue to snipe – we will be the losers.

Regards

Menon  (SREEKUMAR MENON - A RETD ARMY OFFICER) 

(SOURCE- VIA GP E-MAIL)

IESM PROTEST MOVEMENT AT JM AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP)

30 Jun 2017 

Dear Friends, 

1.    You are aware that the OROP Anomalies have not been corrected by the Govt which has adversely affected our Pensions of 7^th CPC.

2.   While large majority of Defence Family  is in favour of continuation of our Protest Movement at JM, a few of us mostly internet users who for the reasons best known to them want JM  to be stopped.  When we ask these persons that we have not got Actual OROP then why they wanted us to move out from JM, they have no answer except that we should take the legal route.  Some of them are satisfied and happy for what the Govt has implemented.

3.  Presence of large number of ESM at JM on 14 May and 15 June 2017 and their overvaluing resolve to continue with the Agitation till Actual OROP is implemented is a factor which should not be ignored while arriving at the decision.

4.   “Restoration of Respect & Justice for Jawan” in our country is far away.  Some extremely derogatory, degrading and humiliating statements by members of the Political Class against the Army in the recent past are cause of serious concern.  The Govt, it seems has not taken the required serious action against the culprits.  The last bastion of the Nation ie Defence Forces are being degraded, humiliated and disrespected.  There is shortage of over 11000 officers and the suitable youth is not being attracted to the Profession of Arms.

5.  While the Rank and File participate in large number, the officers in the required numbers are not coming to JM.  Leaders whether serving or retired have to be leading from the front.  There is urgent and strong need for officers to visit JM on daily basis to fight for the cause of soldiers.

6.  I appeal to the officers, specially seniors to showcase their solidarity by visiting JM as often as possible.  They should suggest alternate options to get Actual OROP implemented and lead the execution of their Plan.

“United we stand Divided we Fall”

With regards,

Yours Sincerely,

Maj Gen Satbir Singh, SM (Retd)                                           

Advisor United Front of Ex Servicemen Jantar Mantar &   

Chairman Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement                              

Mobile:9312404269, 01244110570  

Email:satbirsm@gmail.com   

(Source- Via e-mail)