Ms K. DAMAYANTHI
MINISTRY IF DEFENCE
SOUTH BLOCK NEW DELHI
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