Consequent to our appeal , we are of the opinion that the guidelines, rules , regulations and mechanism of 6 CPC to benefit civilians, army officers and PBOR are same and uniform but implementation of those guidelines is prejudiced and biased. Execution of these orders of 6 cpc for PBOR,s is discriminatory.
It would not be out of place to mention that 6 cpc recommended three ways for pension fixation for pre 2006 pensioners and they are as follows:-
1. Present pension was to be multiplied by 2.26 ( no mention of 33 yrs)
2. 50% of last pay drawn ( the formula of 33 yrs was applicable and pro rata reduction if service less than 33 yrs and also included weight age )
3. 50% of Min of pay in the pay band + grade pay,( here there was no condition of 33 yrs and clarificatory notes of 03.10.2008 and 14.10.2008 quashed by legal authorities including SC )
It was here that 6 cpc stipulated that pension fixed by above 1 and 2 methods will not be less than 50% of min of pay in the pay band and Grade pay including MSP and X pay for defense personnel. Minimum Fitment Tables mentioned in cir 542 as per SAI 01/.S/2008 Tables No 8,9,10,are sufficient to show that 50 % thereof must be pension for 15 yrs for PBOR,s. This condition is mentioned everywhere but not IMPLEMENTED. Kindly refer cir 547,cir 542 wherein ‘ SERVICE PENSION IS MENTIONED AS 50% AND FAMILY PENSION 30% OF MINIMUM OF FITMENT TABLES BUT AMAZINGLY PRORATA REDUCTION WAS UNWHOLESOMELY INTRODUCED AND OUR PENSIONS REDUCED.Madam, how can it be that NOTIONAL MAXIMUM MADE UP FROM UPPER END OF 5 CPC AS PER CIR 471 AND MINIMUM FITMENT TABLES MADE UP FROM LOWER END OF 5 CPC AS PER SAI 01/S/2008 ARE APPLIED FOR 33 YRS AND PRORATA REDUCTION.
It is logical that notional Maximum are devided by 33 and multiplied by no of years of service but how can a person be made to believe that Min Fit Tables made up from lower end of 5 cpc which is applicable for a fresh joinee be devided by 33 and made it Pro Rata.It was only a condition by 6 cpc to protect modified parity and if it would have been implemented properly but for clarificatory notes of 03.10.2008 and 14.10 .2008 having been quashed by court, the need for CSC committee would not have arisen but clarificatory notes of 03.10.2008 and 14.01.2008 played a rogue and led to short fix our pension. Now every thing is clear but still PBOR,s are discriminated. Now let us illustrate our points based on the facts and guidelines in the MOD letters and PCDA circulars.Let us proceed circular wise.
It says service pension 50% and family pensin 30 % of Min fit tables. A nb sub GP X Min fit table is 18340 and 30% thereof is 5502 family pension for 15 yrs and also refer to cir 502. How 50% of 18340 is 5558/- for 15 yrs why not 9170/-,
A sepoy GP X Min fit table is 12240 and 30% thereof is 3672 for family pension for 15 yrs and also refer to cir 502. then how 50% thereof is 4637 for 15 yrs for a pensioner and not 6120 for 15 yrs. THE SAME ANOMLY EXISTS IN ALL CASES.
It is Govt record to show that pensioners have been highly indiscriminated and taken for granted.It is a well established fact that family pension cannot be more than the pension of a pensioner but enhanced rate of family pension clearly shows that it is more than even 110 %to 140 % more than our pension in spite of the facts in Para 4 of cir 502 that ENHANCED RATE OF FAMILY PENSION WILL BE 100% AND ORDINARY RATE OF FAMILY PENSION WILL BE 60% OF PENSIONERS PENSION . IT MEANS THAT ENHANCED RATE WILL BE EQUAL TO THE PENSION OF PENSIONERS.Enhanced rate of family pension of nb sub GP X for 15 yrs is 9170/- but pension of a nb sub GP X for 15 yrs is 6974 and the same results are for other PBOR,s.
It is earnestly requested to look into the anomalies and correction be made and cir 547 be accordingly modified giving 50 % of min fit tables for 15 yrs to the benefits of PBOR.
Cir 430 & 501 & 571
Our pensions were improved upon on 01.07.2009 and 24.09.2012 under CSC committee as per cir no 430 and cir 501 taking help of cir 471 and the court ordered to implement the same wef 01.01.2006 but a new cir 547 with illegal figures was circulated. The cir would have been issued as per conditions mentioned therein ( 50 % service pension and 30% family pension which is correct but service pension not properly mentioned)It is argued that the court order is not applicable on Notional Maximum made up from upper end of 5 cpc then how the same is applicable for LT and Capt whose min fit tables are also made up from 104 % more from the upper end of 5 cpc? . the recourse is taken of Hon LT and HON Capt.s Min fit Tables and it has resulted to them in manifold benefits such as dis pension, war injury pension,liberalized pension , service pension and perhaps for serving officers also.see cir 542
After going through the contents mentioned above, we are compelled to think that PBOR,s are highly indiscriminated. We hope our meeting with you Madam will draw attention of our administrators to pay attention to our appeals and correct the anomalies mentioned in our representation.
Thanks & Regards
The chairman Gen secretary
Members of Delegation