FLASH

Invites regional ESM organizations to get affiliated with AFVAI to strengthen the movement Further.Please contact at afvaindia@gmail.com #

FLASH

WATCH THIS BLOG REGULARY FOR LATEST NEWS ON ONE RANK ONE PENSION & OTHER SERVICE BENEFITS RELATING TO EX-SERVICE PENSIONERS #

Thursday, 1 October 2015

"1:2200000 Ratio" - Discrimination against JCOs & NCOs in the matter of 01.01.2006 arrears.

1:2200000 Ratio" - Discrimination against JCOs & NCOs in the matter of 01.01.2006 arrears.
Perhaps none of us have clearly understood the issue involved and how the JCOs & NCOs are discriminated on the matter.
A minimum fitment table is nothing but the minimum pay in the revised pay band for each rank/ grade plus grade pay, MSP and X group pay,wherever applicable, that a person would minimum draw when he/ she is appointed or promoted to that particular grade/ rank.
The minimum pay in the pay band  is calculated on the basis of the minimum of the pre-2006 scale and applies to all those who were in service as on 01.01.2006 and appointed/ promoted thereafter.
However the minimum fitment table for the purpose of calculation of minimum guaranteed pension could be either the same table as applicable to fixation of minimum pay or a different table prepared as per the provisions of the relevant pension Rules. This applies to all the pensioners of the same category irrespective of their date of retirement with effect from 01.01.2006.
The minimum guaranteed pension in respect of commissioned officers who have retired  prior to 1.1.2006 and post-2006, except Lieutenants &  Captains is 50% of the minimum pay fixed on appointment/promotion to each grade/ rank on or after 1.1.2006. In the case of Lieutenants and Captains, it is much more than 50%  the minimum pay fixed on appointment/ promotion. The reason for the higher MGP for these two ranks  is not explained anywhere.
The Minimum Guaranteed Pension in respect of JCOs & NCOs retired prior to 1.1.2006  should be 50% of the fitment table as applicable to post-2006 pensioners which has been notified vide PCDA circular 471. This has been calculated @50% of the pay arrived on the basis of maximum of the pre-2006 pay scale applicable to each grade/rank plus grade pay, MSP & X group pay wherever applicable.
Only one fitment table (Circular 500) lis used for determining the minimum guaranteed pension in the case of commissioned officers retired prior to 1.1.2006 and after 1.1.2006.
However 2 different tables are used in the case of JCOs & NCOs - one for post-2006 pensioners (circular 471) and the other for pre-2006 pensioners (circular 547). The net impact of this twin MGP is that the pension of pre-2006 pensioners wef 01.01.2006 is substantially lower when compared with post-2006 pensioners.
The following illustration will explain this:
The MGP of a group X sergeant with 15 years of service and 6 years weightage retired on or after 1.1.2006 is 9145÷33×21= 5820/-
The MGP of a group X sergeant with 15 years of service and 6 years weightage retired prior to 1.1.2006 is 7445÷33×21=  4738/- stepped up to 4883/- at par with the pension of  group X,  LAC  with 15 years of service & 10 years of weightage.
There is a difference of 5820 - 4883= 937/-. In terms of arrears there is a difference of 937×46.02=43121/-.
Further the recommendations of the committee of secretaries to enhance the weightage of NCOs by 2 years with effect from 24.09.2012 should have been made applicable from 01.01.2006 as the MOD has done with  recommendations made in the same meeting of the committee of secretaries regarding revision of pension of pre-2006 retired Majors who have stagnated and completed 21 years of service. This recommendations was also made only in Sep 2012 but made applicable retrospectively from 01.01.2006 vide MOD letter no 1(13)/2009/D(pen/pol)  dated 24.09.2012. Why similar treatment was not meted out to the recommendation concerning enhanced weightage of NCOs???
Also the weightage of JCOs was not enhanced at all resulting in great injustice to them.  The logic of giving only 5 years uniform weightage to JCOs, while the officers upto the rank of Cols had a weightage of 7-9 years, is not clear.
This has also resulted in substantial reduction in the pension of NCOs & JCOs effective from 1.1.2006 and a loss of another 60000/- in terms of arrears to the group X sergeant in the above illustration.
Further the argument of Maj.Navdeep Singh that the minimum fitment table of JCOs & NCOs were prepared on the top of the pre revised scale and therefore they are not eligible for arrears from 1.7.2009 is selective and biased. Then how come the minimum fitment table of Lieutenants and Captains which was prepared on higher than top of their pre revised scale  are eligible for arrears from 01.01.2006?
There are glaring and verifiable discriminations meted out to JCOs & NCOs on this matter, resulting in huge and permanent financial loss to them. Consequently the widows of JCOs & NCOs are also put to severe hardship and financial loss.
If the authorities are not prepared to hear our plea and rectify the above anomalies we may be left with no option but to knock at the doors of courts for justice.
Until then we also have no option but to put up with these discrimination and injustice.
Sgt MPKaran
President

AFVAI
KARNATAKA CHAPTER

4 comments:

  1. @ SGT MP KARAN SIR....correct presentation of injustice met out to POTO...
    i have come across some where that upgrading of pension of senior rank with lower rank is ilegal...in other sense do not step up pension but step up THE WEIGHTAGES..

    when this weight-ages were worked out and increased to 10/8/6 and 12/10/8 respectively mainly army rank structure was considered,... but for air force and navy it is different.. so benefit is given to a beneficiary at the cost of a loss to another beneficiary....
    THE WORKED OUT BENEFIT SHOULD BENEFIT ALL BENEFICIARIES WITHOUT CREATING ANY SERIOUS ANOMALY AND MAINTAINING RANK STRUCTURE AND STATUS...

    ReplyDelete
  2. If officers are getting weightage of up to seven years why COS twice left out JCO ranks without increasing weightage and in other ranks case twice it was increased.In 2012 even though it was announced increase in pension for JCOS and ORS practiclly no increment was there for JCOS.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dear sirs, All of you please refer PCDA Circular No 502 dated 17.01.2013 with The Enhanced rate / ordinary rate of family pension tables have been issued vide DESW MOD letter No. 1(14) / 2012 / D (Pen/ Policy) dated 17th January 2013. The pensions have been shown correctly as per the contents of the letter.

    Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions, Department of Pension & Pensioners' Welfare, 3rd Floor Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi-ll0 003. letter No. F.No.38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated the 28th January, 2013 issued for Revision pension for Pre-2006 pensioners is also correctly worked out.
    How come Service pension of JCOs/ ORs becomes less than Enhanced rate of family pension.

    We should get pension as per PCDA circular No 502 dated 17th January 2013.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The role of the Air Force is to fly the aircrafts. Whether fighter or transport, all the flying machines must be kept airworthy, at all the times. The technical airmen do that job, sincerely and dedicatedly but due to the apartheid atmosphere, maximum numbers of technical airmen either ask for premature discharge or go out as soon as they complete their initial bonds. There are only two classes of categories in service. The Commissioned officers and the JCOs/ORs and on the post retirement facilities also the same hierarchy is maintained.

    These technical airmen are not only diploma engineers with 20 years experience but many of them might have achieved a Masters degree in science/Arts or a bachelor degree in engineering. They are offered the pre-release courses for their post retirement career can become a matter of debate or discussions. I do not want to name those courses which don’t have any academic value at all atleast for a diploma engineer having 20 years on job experience, leaving aside their higher qualifications achieved through personal interests. With this mentality and discriminating policies, are we sure that we will be able to become a developed nation in the future? My question to those who do not want to change these discriminating policies, do they enjoy the same treatment when they visit to any developed nation or deployed for a United Nation’s exercise? In some developed countries, upto the rank of Brigadier rank officers and soldiers dine in the same mess and have the same accommodation facilities. That facilitates good mutual understanding between those officers and the soldiers. That is possible only when officers are selected from the ranks onwards as done in some developed countries. Does that seem a dream and arbitrary for us? If that is true then, becoming a developed nation will be also a dream for us.

    During pre-independence British era, we had the whites and the Indians and now we have the officers and the men in the Armed Forces. We got the freedom but the powers only transferred from the white hands to the brown hands and the laws remain the same. British used to take care of their officer’s welfare selfishly and resorted to various disciplinary policies of the subordinate ranks only. I hope, we are not abiding by the same mentality even after 67th years of independence also. We are a completely an independent country now. We must feel proud to be an Indian. Why to follow age old Act and rules? Can’t we move forward with our own sets of rules? Aristocratic rules have no place in the armed forces/flight safety atmosphere. Same way, suppression and oppression also have no place in a democratic country. Equality, opportunity and respect for each and every citizens of this country can only make us a strong global power. What is the purpose of purchasing those costly flying machines or weapons if the soldiers who will operate or maintain those have low morale, sense of prejudice or a sense of neglect? The good politicians and the bureaucrats must step in at the earliest, for the sake of the country’s prosperity, safety and security.

    ReplyDelete

EXSERVICEMEN BENEFITS