Saturday, July 13, 2019

*JAIPUR STAY*

Dear All.    Just sharing a piece of information.. 

In Jaipur we have a upgraded Sainik Vishram Graha in Banipark next to Army Main Gate /MH.. 

with 40 well furnished rooms of which 20 are for offiicers with AC.

 The charges are Rs 300 / for retired and Rs 400/ for serving.

and OR and JCO with family are charged Rs 70 and Rs 100/.

its centrally located with mess facilities. 

Can be booked on 0141-2206971,  9460695574.

the facility is really good and well maintained. We had to literally pursue with the state government to do it up.

They also have rooms for pets.

Give it vide publicity. 

(Source - Via e-mail)

THE RULES PLAYED BY THE BABUS

Hi All,

This is not only humorous; it says things as they really are !  May be repeat for some, though !.

Bala
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Rules of the Babu Game(A hilarious one from Sri. Avay Shukla, IAS)

        I have for some time been convinced that Moses (of Old Testament fame) was the original bureaucrat. The anecdotal evidence is convincing. He offered to his peoples the Promised Land—and then made them wander around in the desert for 40 years. He was adept at beating around the bush, till one of them caught fire and he called it an act of God! He was wont to deliver sermons from raised areas which no one understood. And here’s the clinching one—he framed the 1st set of Conduct Rules, which came to be known as 10 Commandments. And a fine set of rules they are too, except perhaps for that one about not coveting thy neighbour’s wife, which contradicts a subsequent sub-rule which exhorts one to love thy neighbour, and we all know that the later rule supersedes the earlier one.

      The true descendent of Moses is the IAS, not the state of Israel. An IAS officer is at his best when he is drafting all manner of rules—if they are incomprehensible, he is happy, and if they are unimplementable, then he is overjoyed. 

I’d like to share a few I’ve had the good fortune to encounter during my career.

        Have you wondered why government servants are so short-sighted? It’s the rules, stupid! In the early eighties I was posted as a joint secretary in the finance department at Shimla. My duties involved approving claims for medical reimbursement. Those days contact lenses were deemed to be a cosmetic procedure and their expenses were not reimbursable. One day I received a claim from a High Court judge who had contact lenses fixed. I promptly took the file to the finance secretary. The secretary looked at me with a cunning grin and said: “Approve it!”. I was aghast, just as Moses must have been when he saw the Israelites worshipping the golden calf.

“But the rules, sir ...” I blurted. And then the finance secretary explained: “Avay, you must understand the rules which govern rules. The most important rule in government is the rule of precedents. A precedent, once set, is sacrosanct, notwithstanding all other rules. Once you allow something for one person you cannot deny it to others. So let this judge have his bloody contact lenses—after all, how can a lowly finance secretary refuse a mighty High Court judge? And hereinafter all of us can also have contact lenses!” And that’s how contact lenses are now reimbursable. We now have more IAS officers adorned with the lenses than starlets in Bollywood.

         Rule number two: In 2007, after years of subsisting on bread and water, I finally built myself a cottage in Mashobra, intending to spend my dotage refreshing my knowledge of the birds and the bees. I applied for a gas connection from the Civil Supplies Corporation for the new house. It was refused: two connections could not be given in the same name, and I already had one in my house in Shimla. The MD of the Corporation was my neighbour and I pestered him till he came up with a solution: he would be able to sanction a second connection if I gave an affidavit stating my wife intended to divorce me and was living separately from me in Mashobra! I was stumped.

       Firstly, government servants cannot go around swearing affidavits with the same gay abandon that our MPs and MLAs do at election time. Secondly, I had no intention of separating from my wife, having hung on to her for dear life for 30 years. Thirdly, once she started living separately who knew what might happen?—she might get used to the idea! Fourthly, Mashobra has a lot of retired defence services officers who spend all their time looking for lost golf balls and single women. No, this was not a good idea at all, I told my wife. She asked for two days to consider the suggestion! Finally, of course, she agreed with me. She confided later that she was tempted by the idea but decided against it because then who’d make the bed tea in the morning, or take the dog for a walk?! So we didn’t use that particular rule after all: instead I went and bought a cylinder and regulator on the black market.

        Most IAS officers have very high levels of schadenfreude, and love nothing better than to see the proletariat squirm; nothing else can explain this last rule I’m about to share with you. One of the consequences of having a large government is that you also have a large number of pensioners who steadfastly refuse to kick the bucket. Pension rules stipulate that every July a pensioner is required to submit a “life certificate” attesting to the fact that he is still alive (being brain dead is no disqualification for a government pensioner, on the assumption that most of them were in this condition in any case while in service). 

       This life certificate can be attested by any gazetted officer or by the bank manager. The system worked very well till a few years ago when some bright finance secretary in Shimla decided that the attestation would have to be done by a Patwari (revenue official) instead.

       Now, a Patwari in the mountainous regions of Himachal is a mythical figure. They are more difficult to spot than the snow leopard: it’s easier to track down a man-eater than locate a Patwari. 

But rules are rules, and so now the mountain slopes are crawling with pensioners looking for their Patwaris, usually in vain. Some have taken to camping in caves hoping to way lay him one day, others organise havans hoping to be blessed with his presence, still  others seek out astrologers to predict the Patwari’s movements. Drones are employed to sight this elusive yeti. 

But the astute finance secretary, I am told, is a happy man: the outgo of pensions has declined sharply, the mortality among pensioners has gone up to satisfying levels what with all the exertion now required of them, and the budget deficit is coming under control. 

How about giving him a Padma Shri?

Col  NK Balakrishnan (Retd) ,
" SINHGARH",Pulleppady,
Chittoor Road,Kochi-682018

(Source - Via e-mail)


__._,_.___

HON’BLE SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT DATED 11 JUL 2019 IN RELEVANT TO OUR OROP CASE(CIVIL APPEAL NO.10857 OF 2016)


Dear Friends,

         The Hon’ble Supreme Court in another important Judgement dated 11 Jul 2019 in a civil appeal No. 10857 of 2016 by All Manipur Pensioners Association Vs UOI has held that “All the Pensioners, irrespective of their date of retirement, viz. A particular fixed date viz Pre-1996 retirees shall be entitled to revision in pension at par with those pensioners who retired post that fixed date ie Post-1996” (Relevant extract of judgement is enclosed.)

2.       This exactly is our OROP  Case in Hon’ble Supreme Court that any change in the rates of pensions is to be passed to the past pensioners automatically and not periodically as has been notified by the Govt in its Notification dated 07 Nov 2015 which has fixed equalisation of OROP  Pension after every five years.

3.       The above Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgement reaffirms DS Nakra (Supra) case Judgement and Maj Gen SPS Vains and others Vs UOI & Others case judgement dated 04 Mar 2010.

4.       During Meeting on 01 Jul 2019 we had briefed Hon’ble Raksha Mantri on the anomalies arising out of 07 Nov 2015 Notification, Hon’ble Supre Court order dated 01 May 2019 and had requested for the removal of the anomalies before our next hearing in HSC on 06 Aug 2019.

5.       Let us hope for positive response from our new Raksha Mantri Sh. Rajnath Singh Ji who was the President BJP during 2013 and had assured our delegation on 07 Sep 2013 that OROP will be implemented if BJP came to Power.  This was prior to the  15 Sep 2013 Rewari Ex Servicemen Rally addressed by then Prime Minister candidate Sh. Narendra Modi where he had also assured ex servicemen that OROP will be implemented if his Govt came to Power.

            With regards,

Yours Sincerely,
Maj Gen Satbir Singh, SM (Retd)                                                   
Advisor United Front of Ex Servicemen and                                
Chairman Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM) Mobile:9312404269,01244110570                                                  
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extract of Judgement

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 10857 OF 2016
All Manipur Pensioners Association .                                 .Appellant
by its Secy VersusThe State of Manipur and others ..Respondents

J U D G M E N T

8.1 As observed hereinabove, and even it is not in dispute that as such a decision has been taken by the State Government to revise the pension keeping in mind the increase in the cost of living. Increase in the cost of living would affect all the pensioners irrespective of whether they have retired Pre-1996 or Post-1996. As observed herein above, all the pensioners belong to one class. Therefore, by such a classification/cutoff date the equals are treated as unequals and therefore such a classification which has no nexus with the object and purpose of revision of pension is unreasonable, discriminatory and arbitrary and therefore the said classification was rightly set aside by the learned Single Judge of the High Court. At this stage, it is required to be observed that whenever a new benefit is granted and/or new scheme is introduced, it might be possible for the State to provide a cutoff date taking into consideration its financial resources. But the same shall not be applicable with respect to one and single class of persons, the benefit to be given to the one class of persons, who are already otherwise getting the benefits and the question is with respect to revision.

9.      In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, we are of the opinion that the controversy/issue in the present appeal is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of D.S. Nakara (supra). The decision of this Court in the case of D.S. Nakara (supra) shall be applicable with full force to the facts of the case on hand. The Division Bench of the High Court has clearly erred in not following the decision of this Court in the case of D.S. Nakara (supra) and has clearly erred in reversing the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge. The impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench is not sustainable and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside and is accordingly quashed and set aside. 

The judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge is hereby restored and it is held that all the pensioners, irrespective of their date of retirement, viz. pre1996 retirees shall be entitled to revision in pension at par with those pensioners who retired post-1996.The arrears be paid to the respective pensioners within a period of three months from today.

10. The instant appeal is allowed accordingly. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
                                                              ……………………………………J.
                                                                              [M.R. SHAH]
NEW DELHI;                                                   ……………………….J.
JULY 11, 2019.                                                 [A.S. BOPANNA]
  
(Source : Via e-mail)

Wednesday, July 10, 2019

UPDATE ON OROP AS ON 26.6.2019 : INFO OBTAINED THRO RTI BY VETERAN SGT MAHANANDA BISWAS AIRWARRIER

Dear all, 

Please go thro liesurely the below noting papers/docs obtained by Veteran Sgt M Biswas thro RTI from Min of Defence. 















(Source : Via e-mail)

Wednesday, July 3, 2019

E-PPOs ISSUED BY DAV : from 16-5-2019 TO 21-6-2019.

Dear all, 

The List of ppos issued upto 21 Jun 2019 by DAV is furnished for the info of all concerned:

Please click the link below:


http://iafpensioners.gov.in/PensionerLogin//images/pdf/PPO.pdf


(source : HFO Sukumaran mention in Voice of Pensioners chatbox)

Havildars and Hav ACP-I also get financial benefit by OROP - 2018 which CGDA wants to deny


Dear Brig Kartar Singh Sir,

1.      I got few PPOs of those Havildars retired as Havildars drawing pension of Havildars in calendar year 2018. I also got Havildars ACP – I who draw pay and pension of Nb Sub and retired in calendar year 2018. I made the table comparing the pension of Pre – Jan 2016 pensioners and those retired in calendar year 2018. You can see that the Pre – 2016 pensioners draw less pension in 2018. Therefore, the argument of CGDA that pensions having been equalized on 01 Jan 2016 need not be revised by OROP – 2018 is totally illogically and absolutely false statement. This has been deliberately made by them to deny OROP – 2018.
Gain in Pension for Pre - 2016 Pensioners by OROP - 2018
Ser No
Rank & Gp - Y
QS (Yrs & Months)
Pension Sanctioned in 2018 
Average Pension in 2018
Pension in OROP - 2013
Pension in Jan 2016 = OROP x 2.57
Gain Due to OROP - 2018
1
Hav
15
20,711
20,753
7,550
19,404
1,350

Hav
15
20,795

7,550
19,404
1,350
2
Hav
15.5
21,022
21,022
7,598
19,527
1,495
3
Hav
16
21,337
21,606
7,598
19,527
2,079

Hav
16
21,874

7,598
19,527
2,079
4
Hav
16.5
21,657
21,657
7,598
19,527
2,130
5
Hav
17
21,657
21,657
7,598
19,527
2,130
6
Hav
17.5
21,657
21,657
7,598
19,527
2,130
7
Hav
18
21,657
21,657
7,655
19,673
1,984
8
Hav
18.5
21,657
21,657
7,693
19,771
1,886

Hav
19
21,657
21,657
7,693
19,771
1,886
9
Hav
19.5
21,657
21,657
7,693
19,771
1,886
11
Hav
20
22,507
22,403
7,795
20,033
2,370


20
22,299
22,403
7,795
20,033
2,370
12
Hav
20.5
22,507
22,507
7,795
20,033
2,474
13
Hav
21
22,507
22,507
7,795
20,033
2,474
14
Hav
21.5
22,507
22,507
7,795
20,033
2,474
15
Hav
22
22,507
22,507
7,795
20,033
2,474

Hav
22
21,219
22,507
7,795
20,033
2,474
16
Hav
22.5
22,507
22,507
7,795
20,033
2,474
17
Hav
23
22,507
22,507
7,795
20,033
2,474

Hav
23
21,219
22,507
7,795
20,033
2,474

Hav
23
21,219
22,507
7,795
20,033
2,474
18
Hav
23.5
22,507
22,507
7,795
20,033
2,474
19
Hav
24
22,507
22,507
7,808
20,067
2,440
20
Hav
24.5
22,507
22,507
7,808
20,067
2,440
21
Hav
25
22,507
22,773
7,808
20,067
2,706

Hav
25
23,038
22,773
7,808
20,067
2,706
22
Hav
25.5
22,507
22,773
7,808
20,067
2,706
23
Hav
26
22,507
22,773
7,995
20,547
2,225

Hav
26
23,038
22,773
7,995
20,547
2,225
24
Hav
26.5
22,507
22,773
7,995
20,547
2,225
25
Hav
27
22,507
22,773
7,995
20,547
2,225
26
Hav
27.5
22,507
22,773
7,995
20,547
2,225
27
Hav
28
22,507
22,773
7,995
20,547
2,225
Havildar Gets Pension of Nb Sub Pension due to MACP



1
Hav ACP - I
15
22,507
22,507
8,740
22,462
45
2
Hav ACP - I
15.5
22,507
22,507
8,740
22,462
45
3
Hav ACP - I
16
22,507
22,507
8,740
22,462
45
4
Hav ACP - I
16.5
22,550
22,550
8,740
22,462
88
5
Hav ACP - I
17
22,550
22,503
8,740
22,462
41

Hav ACP - I
17
22,456
22,503
8,740
22,462
41
6
Hav ACP - I
17.5
22,550
22,550
8,740
22,462
88
7
Hav ACP - I
18
22,550
22,503
8,740
22,462
41

Hav ACP - I
18
22,456
22,503
8,740
22,462
41
8
Hav ACP - I
18.5
22,550
22,550
8,740
22,462
88
9
Hav ACP - I
19
22,550
23,109
8,740
22,462
647

Hav ACP - I
19
23,668
23,109
8,740
22,462
647
10
Hav ACP - I
19.5
22,550
22,550
8,740
22,462
88
11
Hav ACP - I
20
24,725
24,725
8,755
22,500
2,225

Hav ACP - I
20


8,755
22,500
2,225
12
Hav ACP - I
20.5
24,725
24,725
8,755
22,500
2,225
13
Hav ACP - I
21
24,725
24,827
8,853
22,752
2,075

Hav ACP - I
21
24,929

8,853
22,752
2,075
14
Hav ACP - I
21.5
24,725
24,725
8,934
22,960
1,765
15
Hav ACP - I
22
24,725
24,725
9,005
23,143
1,582

Hav ACP - I
22


9,005
23,143
1,582
16
Hav ACP - I
22.5
24,725
24,725
9,338
23,999
726
17
Hav ACP - I
23
24,725
24,725
9,338
23,999
726
18
Hav ACP - I
23.5
24,725
24,725
9,338
23,999
726
19
Hav ACP - I
24
24,725
24,725
9,429
24,233
492


2.      The above tables gives every Havildar some financial benefit which CGDA wants to deny. Min of Fin (Expenditure) might be very happy to see no additional funds are required for OROP if it is abolished altogether. We have to demolish this weird argument by facts which I have been able to bring to your notice. I hope you received similar mail from me on how Sepoys, Sepoys with ACP – I, Naiks, Naiks ACP – 1 also get financial benefit by OROP – 2018.
3.   With this ammunition I provided to you, fearlessly engage your Bazooka and get justice to all retirees by getting them OROP - 2018.

Warm Regards,
Brig CS Vidyasagar (Rtd)
TSEWA- 140
040-48540895
9493191380 (Mobile connectivity is very poor in my residential complex. Use Land line please)
Pl See T SEWA Blog for regular updates at https:// www.tsewa.org

(Source _ Via e-mail)