Tuesday, June 7, 2016


PCDA (P) Allahabad letter dt 19 APR 16_Calculation o.pdf

Dear Smt Damayanthi Garu,

1.   Trust intelligence and logic of these DAD personnel and you will have this kind of illegal, incorrect and blatantly false fixation of pension of all ranks in OROP. I am aghast at low level of intelligence of these DAD persons and amused at the way they work out important issue like OROP pension. This is because they are civilians and have no idea of pay and pensions as is proved by the letter of PCDA (Pensions) Allahabad No: G-1/M/Misc/VIII dated 19 Apr 2016 on fixation of pension of Majors in OROP.

2.    Kindly go through their letter dated 19 Apr 2016 (enclosed). Pl see examine the warped logic at para (b) and (c) of their letter which are totally illegal, arbitrary and blatantly wrong. I do not think you need any explanation.

3.   I am listing out illogical and incorrect method of pension fixation of Majors in OROP carried out by PCDA (Pension) Allahabad for Majors.

4.   Pension Reduction. First is Pension Reduction of Major with lower qualifying service. To earn pension officers have to put in 20 years’ service. Commissioned Officers get the rank of Maj after putting in 6 years’ service from date of commission thanks to AVS Committee which reduced number of years to get time scale ranks upto Col (TS) w.e.f 16 Dec 2004. Para (b) of PCDA (Pensions) letter cited above says that where in pension of Maj with more qualifying service in calendar year 2013 say of 26 years’ service is available and Major of 20 years is not available (in calendar year 2013), then pension of 20 years Maj will be reduced by 3% per year to arrive at pension of Maj with 20 years’ service. Here also your DAD guys do not understand the difference between Pay and Pension. Pension is half of pay. If pay goes up by 3% every July, madam, a 5th Standard child knows pension goes up by 1.5% per year. Conversely pension is to be reduced by 1.5% from 26 years QS to 20 years QS. But these illiterate DAD personnel will not understand such simple arithmetic. So the reduction per year for Major of 20 years should be 1.5% per year i.e. 6*1.5 = 9%. If say Major of 26 years QS gets Pension in OROP at say Rs 20000, then pension of Major with 20 years’ service should be = Rs 20000 x (100-9)/100 = Rs 18,200. Whereas these DAD personnel worked out at = Rs 20000 x (100 – (6x3))/100 = Rs 16,400 pm. This causes loss of pension to Majors.

4.     Pension Enhancement. Conversely if the pension of Major with lower qualifying service say 20 years in calendar year 2013 is available and pension of Major with 25 years’ service is not available then logic and law demand the same method adopted for fixation of pension i.e. increase by 1.5% per year should be done to arrive at pension of Major with higher qualifying service. To cite another example. If Pension of Major with 20 years’ service is Rs 20,000 then pension of Major with 25 years’ service is to be increased by 5 x 1.5 = 7.5%. DAD personnel do not have any idea of judgment of hon’ble Surpeme Court in Maj Gen SPS Vains Vs UOI, 2008. It is not you bring up pension of higher QS Maj to that of Lower QS Major. Please make it a point to all Officers of IDAs to read relevant judgments on pensions and pay of defence services personnel to know how pension is to be fixed. Kindly send them on temporary duty to Secunderabad and I will teach them.

5.    Another anomaly PCDA (Pensions) Allahabad have done is to MNS Officers. Their argument is no Maj MNS retired in 2013 so there is no table for enhancement of arrears in OROP for pre – 2006 Capt and Maj MNS officers. This is again illogical and illegal. If Lt Cols MNS can get benefit of OROP pension and Maj of regular commissioned officer can get enhanced pension in OROP why not pre – 2013 Maj MNS. You are forcing pre – 2013 Maj MNS to knock the doors of AFTs. 
6.    You will get answers from PCDA (Pensions) Allahabad that now a days there are no Majs with 20 years’ service as they become Lt Col with 13 years’ service. This is again partially false interpretation. There are SL, SCOs and RCOs in Army. Similarly Branch Commissioned Officers in IAF and SD Officers in Navy. They are JCOs, NCOs and Other Ranks (Sep and L /NK) who get commission as officer after putting lot of service as non- officer. Some of them get commission after they put in 15 to 20 year as non – officer. When they serve for 6 years post 16 Dec 2014 as a commissioned officer with their OR service, they get pension of Major if combined service is 20 years.

7.      Madam, I request you to seek explanation from CGDA with their method of pension fixation. Majors of pre – 2013 will go to AFTs challenging this illogical, incorrect and unlawful method of pension fixation in OROP. It will only waste your precious time in defending indefensible method of pension fixation carried out DAD personnel. You should spend more time to redress grievances of 24.5 lakh pensioners instead of defending law suits in various AFTs. Your DAD personnel fixed incorrect pension of Majs in 6thCPC and it was improved upon by hon’ble Supreme Court in 2009. The history, Madam, I can assure you, will repeat. TSEWA is bound to go to AFT, Delhi on this method of pension fixation carried out by PCDA (Pensions) Allahabad and is sure to win it. Govt of India will be forced to pay interest of 8% in arrears from July 2014 after three months from day of delivery of Judgment. Why do you want to waste peoples’ taxes ?

8.    My last submission for your kind consideration. DAD personnel are not capable of fixing pensions of Defence pensioners. Whenever such situations arise like pension fixation in 7th CPC, kindly make use of services of expert Ex-Servicemen like Air Mshl SY Savur, R Adm Alan O’leary, AVM RP Mishra, Brig SKS Rana, VSM, Gp Capt Sushas Phatak, WO Thiru Chelvam and Sgt S Kantaiah to see such incorrect and illegal method of pension fixation is not repeated which leads to plethora of legal cases.


Brig CS Vidyasagar (Rtd)



  1. Thank you, Brig CS Vidyasagar Sir, for high lighting the so-called knowledge of illiterate Babus on Def Pen. However, you have missed one important point and that is hypothesis of "TERMS OF ENGAGEMENT" of Hony Flying Officers, as mention at page 15, Annexure X of PCDA (OROP) Circular 555. Airmen are promoted to Hony Fg Offr after rendering meritorious service of 35 to 40 yrs but only 22 to 32 yrs service is taken into account for OROP Pension. Rest of the service is not taken into account for (OROP) Pension. It is also against natural justice to deny pension for ACTUAL QUALIFYING service. Some of we (HFOs) took up this matter to OMJC but U/S at DESW has assigned our petition to Dustbin.

  2. Sir,In the cace of PBOR also they had done blunder mistakes.For example the basic pension of Naik from 15 years to 24 years is7170.No any service incriment at all.Really the word meaning "one rank one pension".

  3. Brig CSV , perceptions and contentins on these anomalies are mostly valid with so much of his effort and application of mind.
    .Anomalies are self made ,rather created by those placed persons to deal with these issues at MOD ,DAD ,services HQs as they arbitrarly decide issues of pay & pensions.
    *The issue is disparity of pensions of past & present retirees Of soldiers (all rks).So called OROP is an approach to the vexed issue since 1973 ,when the pensions started on basis of last pay drawn for 10 months.
    OROP was a phrase coined at that time to those conditions of post 1973.
    With revisions of ranks of various appointments /posts namely sec,pl ,coy & unit cdrs from 1984 onwards ,appropriate equalisation factor has to be made in all those tables /charts.
    *With abolition of 2/Lt rk and revision of rks of pl,coy ,unit comd ,the template of present rks cannot be superimposed sqarely /blindly on past rks for pensions.Awkward anomalies of officers pensions upto rk of Col is due to this approach.
    Therefore ,shed this rank regidity .Adopt length of svc as officer to determine notional pay & then pension.Similarly for soldiers,NCOs&JCOs also.
    The perception of that AVS committee of doing some sort of meharbani is absolutely erroneous.This revisions of lowering of service to Capt ,Maj,Lt Col & Col ( as that of Lt,Capt ,Maj & Lt Col only) should have been soon after 4 CPC ,1986.It was delayed from 1986 to to 2004 - 18 long yrs.That was beginning of disparities.Of course Danapalan has corrected to some extent by his rk pay judicial act.
    So called Col ts after 26 yrs svc was same as LtCol ts of 24 yrs Svc prior to 1984. In real terms ,instead of reducing Svc for that equivalent rk ,it is increased by 2 yrs.It is wrong perception to consider there was better revision .In fact this Col ts has to be at 2 yrs difference from the earliest promotion of Col sel rk around 15 yrs. Thus NFU & MACP is taken care of.
    All these AFT cases are due to inconsistent and faulty activity of MOD ,DAD & Service HQs.MOD (incl DAD & set HQS) is evading and abdicating their responsibilities in this area of pay & pensions of soldiers.How infrctuous!
    @ CVS is erroneous on that contention of 1.5% .It is 3% on pay .similarly 3% of pension as pen is at 50% of pay.I.e , increment of 3% on pay for serving and 1.5% of increments for pension or 3% as incremental amount on pension of that fig 20,000.
    Regret for long comment as my intention is to sensitise veteran community with facts and perceptions ,as I feel that some sort of workshop by these active veterans would find solutions to vexed issues.

  4. every rank is like Mr Ramohan nair

  5. Instead of formulating any appropriate methododology to re fix the pension of commossioned captains given the pension of honorary captains on the flimpsy ground that there is no retirement in the rank of captain 2013.Suppose tomorrow the rank of Maj Gen is taken away will the old retiree Maj Gen tobe given the pension of Brigradier.

  6. Sir a very factual and eye opening observations for MOD.
    I would like to put facts on pension fixation for a rank for particular QS for which the actual data not available
    In fact along with increment of 3% in pay in July the pension too is increased by 3% as pension is 50% of reckonable emolument at any QS.It certainly doesn't increase by 1.5% per year as assumed in this blog
    Increments for higher QS can not be done away with under any arbitration by MOD unless there is a stagnation
    Civilian CG employees are fixed their pension just 50% of emoluments last drawn including increments then why this this arbitration with defence personnel
    There can not be any other formulae for fixing the pension other than increasing pension by 3% for every year of higher QS as one earns increment every year in service
    "REAL DATA NOT AVAILABLE" is a mischievous excuse given by pcda to cheat the veterans.It can simply be fixed by increasing or decreasing by 3% from the data available
    In some cases pension is equal from 6 to 10 years difference of QS
    OROP tables are illogical, arbritary , and deliberated by pcda by ignoring the relevant MOD circulars
    I hope the honourable chairman OMJC would view these anamolies judicially not admistratively

  7. "REAL DATA NOT AVAILABLE" is a mischievous excuse given by pcda to cheat the veterans-Partially Mr.Naresh Chauhan is correct.The PCDA is not always wrong as we blame them.
    The records of each and every veteran,especially of the pensioners, is to be maintained by the respective record office of the three forces.Are they ready to furnish the service particulars of veterans to the PCDA? We retired but it did not obsolve them from the prime duty of maintaining the records of the veterans.
    The Navy Pension regulation is not available on line with all the pages,containing the all amendments.Who is responsible for that?Indian Navy or PCDA?

  8. I'm sorry Brig to point out a flaw. Pension is 50% of Last pay. But 3% increment to a major's pay per year does not make pension increase by 1.5 % BUT 3%. You can halve the pay,but you cannot halve the incr %. Take a person whose pay is 100 and another with one increment 103. Their respective pensions will be 50 & 51.50, and 1.50 is 3% of 50.