TO
Ms K. DAMAYANTHI
JS (DESW)
MINISTRY IF DEFENCE
SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI
Respected Madam,
Sub: INJUSTICE METED OUT TO JCO/OR PENSIONERS
We are extremely thankful to you for your meeting with the delegation of AFVAI, on 12th October
2015 to hear our points
of view on PCDA Circular No. 547. You
were also kind enough to call in an official of CGDA during the meeting
to clarify certain
points raised by us on the above
circular.
Madam, we find
it absolutely difficult to accept the outcome of the meeting
for the reasons
explained below and we are formally lodging
our concern for redressal at your desk as first
point of contact
and nodal body for ex-serviceman.
1. In our humble understanding the minimum fitment
table indicates the minimum pay, inclusive of
all elements within
the definition of 'pay’ like
grade pay, military
service pay, X group pay etc, which
a person would receive on his initial appointment or
on promotion to that particular rank irrespective of length of service. It applies even
for nearly ZERO service in the case of directly
recruited personnel. This is exactly the spirit
of minimum fitment
table as illustrated below
For example, an X group corporal of IAF, whenever
promoted to the rank of Sergeant in the pre- 2006 revised
scale of 5000-6500, will receive a minimum pay of 5000x1.86 = 9300 + 2800(GP) -r 2000(MSP) + 1400 (X pay) = 15500/-.
Further, if the Recruitment Rules of Armed Forces provide for direct recruitment of X group Sergeant / Havildar / Petty Officer, then the directly recruited Sergeant / Havildar / Petty Officer
will also get 15500/- from
day one of his appointment.
The minimum
guaranteed pension is nothing but 50% of the minimum
fitment pay. They
are inter- related
and are of same spirit.
2. On careful scrutiny of
CCS(Pension) Rules 1972 and Pension Regulations of defence forces, we will notice
that the condition of ' 33 years for full pension' applies only for computation
of Pension on the basis of the last pay drawn and we do not find any
recommendation of the 6 CPC or the rules made
under CCS(RP)Rules making the condition of 33 years applicable to
minimum guaranteed pension.
3. Another interesting aspect of this 33 years
condition is that it is made applicable to even those
who are not permitted to serve for full term.
The NCOs of the armed forces are discharged early
to keep the forces young and fighting
fit and they
cannot serve for 33 years
even if they
want to. Madam,
how can then such a condition is applicable in their cases?
MADAM,
WE ARE THEREFORE OF THE FIRM OPINION
THAT THE CONDITION
OF 33 YEARS OF SERVICE / PRO-RATA CALCULATION DO NOT APPLY TO MINIMUM GUARANTEED PENSION.
4. The argument
that all those
whose MGP is calculated differently from the minimum
of the pre-2006
scale will not come within the
ambit of the concerned supreme Court orders and are therefore not eligible for arrears
from 01.01.2006 appears selective and is not applied uniformly.The following 2
points will substantiate the above statement:
(a) MOD vide
its letter No. 1(13)/2009/D(pen/pot) dated 24.09.2012 notified that the Majors
and their equivalents who have retired between
01.01.1996 and 31.12.2005 and have completed 21 years of service are eligible to draw pension
as applicable to the ranks
of Lt. Cols
and equivalent effective from 01.01.2006. This decision was only a part of the recommendations of the committee
of secretaries constituted to look into the pension matters of
defence pensioners. But the same has been included under the minimum guaranteed pension
table appended to PCDA circular
no 500 (Foot note -4)
The question here is: does the above
recommendation made by the COS after more than 6.5 years fall within the scope of the supreme
court orders in question and make them eligible for arrears from 01.01.2006 under PCDA circular no. 548?
(a) Originally, the minimum fitment table of regular Lts and
Captains were calculated @ minimum of the pre-2006 scale. However while notifying the MGP of Commissioned Officers
vide PCDA Circular
No 500, the same was shown as 15645
and 16145 respectively. How did the MGP of the above ranks have suddenly been enhanced
is not clear. Assuming that the enhancement cis legitimate, how did the enhanced pension which was calculated
at a higher than even the maximum of the pre-2006 pay scales applicable to the above ranks, fall within the scope of the said supreme
court order and make them eligible for arrears effective from 01.01.2006 under PCDA circular
no. 548?
1.
Madam, on the above analogy, are we not
eligible for such benefit from 01.01.2006, based on the enhanced pension recommended by the COS effective from 24.09.2012?
We have been discriminated and made to suffer silently
in the name of discipline. We think that time had come to find a way out of this situation without
compromising on the professional discipline of the forces. When a serving General
has the freedom to go to court
against the Government of the day and with the establishment
of armed forces tribunal for service related matters of both serving and
retired defence personnel,
it may not be difficult to establish a JCM and SCOVA kind of mechanisms for redressal of our legitimate grievances.
In view of the foregoing we earnestly request your good
self to Review the circular no 547 immediately in the light of the fact that the MGP cannot be
calculated pro-rata and pension of JCO / ORs as corrected on 24-Sep-12 be made effective
w.e.f.1.12006 for computation of arrears.
Examine all the other grievances enlisted above and redress them as early as possible
by constituting a high level
committee with the representatives of JCOs and NCOs included therein;
Examine the feasibility
of establishing a JCM kind of mechanism
for service matters of
JCOs/ NCOs and an SCOVA kind of mechanism for their pension related issues.
Thanking you in advance for
your favourable consideration
CC: Shri Manohar
Parrikar,RM
(Gurcharan Singh Sidhu) Chairman
(Gurcharan Singh Sidhu) Chairman
(Santhosh Kumar Singh) General Secretary
Great Presentation, they should apply their mind and brain to solve this issue.I hope Bureaucracy in our country has good number of professionals too.
ReplyDeleteMadam can not do anything in this subject we should take the help of Hon'ble Court.
ReplyDeleteIn this regard the baurocrates are making us (PBOR) fool for illustrate the imaginary figures in the tables A, B and C in the notification 547. All the officers vetrans have already received arrears from Rs. 3 to four lakhs as per notification 548 and PBOR are waiting 2 to 3 thousands as per notification 547
ReplyDelete