7 CPC : BHAINSE KE AAGE 'BEEN BAJANA'

SOURCE:
http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation/unhappy-with-7th-pay-panel-armed-forces-write-to-modi/280005.html





      BHAINSE KE AAGE  'BEEN BAJANA'









            BHAINSE KE AAGE  'BEEN BAJANA'

                          

Published on Aug 7, 2016
 

On We The People, we look at the 7th Pay Commission recommendations which puts police and forest service at par with IAS, leaving military out in the cold. How seriously should government pay attention to the disquiet within the military over pay disparities? Can it damage and rupture the larger military-civilian relationship? We also speak to chairman of the commission Justice AK Mathur.


           [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4vNgSFzDkc]

 

 

 

 

 

 UNHAPPY WITH 7TH PAY PANEL, ARMED FORCES WRITE TO MODI 

                                           Ajay Banerjee

                                        Tribune News Service

New Delhi, August 12

 

 

 

 A letter from the services to Modi and Parrikar seeking better wages is not unprecedented. PTI file photo

 

 

A letter from the services to Modi and Parrikar seeking better wages is not unprecedented. PTI file photo

Ajay Banerjee

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, August 12

 

Seeking a quick redress against shortcomings of the 7th Central Pay Commission (CPC), the three armed services — The Army, IAF and the Navy — have collectively written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has not issued the notification in regard to enhanced pay like other Central Government employees, who will get higher wages from September 1. The notification has been held up as issues raised by the three services are being considered.


The three forces have recently sent a collective letter through the office of the Chairman of Chiefs of Staff Committee (CoSC) – the CoSC being the senior most among the Chiefs of the three services. Air Chief Marshall Arup Raha, the IAF Chief, is the present CoSC.

A letter from the services to Modi and Parrikar seeking better wages is not unprecedented. After the Sixth Pay Commission, the services had faced a similar “lowering of status”. The then CoSC, Admiral Sureesh Mehta (now retired) had shot off a letter to the UPA-I regime. A high-powered committee was set up in 2008 under Pranab Mukerjee (then a minister in Manmohan Singh’s Cabinet) to study the matter.

The services, in their letter, have pointed out four key issues that need to be addressed and lift the morale of the forces.

 

 The first is how the salaries of the service officers have been “artificially suppressed”. The formula applied for basic pay fixation is different than the one applied to other Central Government employees. As a result, in each rank the service officers have ended up being lower in pay scales.

In the government, facilities like car, housing, or sanctions for air travel depend upon the basic pay.

The second is the non-acceptance of the demand for non-functional upgrade (NFU). After the last pay commission (the sixth), the government allowed “non-functional scale upgradation” and allowed Group-A officers to get the same scale as a Joint Secretary, but after 24 years of service.

Strangely, the armed forces are neither classified as group “A” services nor are they termed as “Central services” like the IAS or the IPS and did not get NFU. Now, with others getting NFU the gap gets widened.
The third issue is higher military service pay (MSP) for junior commissioned officers (JCOs). They rise from the lower ranks (jawans). The 7th CPC has clubbed the MSP of JCOs and jawans at Rs 5,200. The demand is to have it at Rs 10,000 for the JCOs. The MSP for officers between Lieutenant-rank and Brigadier-rank is common at Rs 15,500.

The fourth main issue is lowering of disability pension. As per the new formula, okayed by the 7th CPC, soldiers/officers with 100 per cent disability will see their pensions reduced from the current levels. However, in case of the disabled of other services their perks will rise.

In March this year, the MoD had conveyed to an empowered committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary that the status, pay and allowances of the armed forces be kept above all other “fighting” arms of the government. Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar had also taken up the case that issues of status, pay and allowances for the forces have to be paramount.

 

 

                                                   RELATED VIDEOS

 

                                               [https://youtu.be/z2uFqCY2pBc]
 

 

 

 

                   [   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZiU2fgFiRBQ ]

 

 

 

                  [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2uFqCY2pBc]

 

 

 

 

 

 

7CPC : THE TARGET IS IN SELF DESTRUCT MODE

SOURCE:
http://swarajyamag.com/politics/the-negatives-of-the-7th-pay-commission-nation-suffers-from-civil-military-confrontation



The Negatives Of The 7th Pay Commission:                             Nation Suffers
                                 From
           Civil-Military Confrontation
                                    By

                        Syed Ata Hasnain



- March 22, 2016.

                             Snapshot

Does the 7th Pay Commission give unfair primacy to the civil services at the cost of the armed forces? Lt Gen Syed Ata Hasnain (retd) weighs in on the issue:

 

 

 

 

Published on Mar 20, 2016

 

While netas play politics over patriotism, soldiers are fighting for pay parity.
 

The seventh pay commission says Indian Police Service and Indian Forest Service will be at par with the IAS, leaving the military behind. On We The People, we debate the pay panel's recommendations. Why this pay divide? Will politicians who are playing patriotic games put their money where their mouth is? In crises like the recent Jat agitation, the Army is often replacing civil administration, but is not being paid as much. Why is this so? Should Armed Forces have a separate pay commission?

 

Sitting somewhere in Islamabad or elsewhere in Pakistan and in fact in many other places where India’s adversaries exist and monitor our social media, television and print media, there must be considerable mirth and much joy. A look at the way in which the 7th Pay Commission recommendations have ignited the civil-military divide in India and brought out the entire issue in the public domain must really be a finger-licking (dipped in 'HONEY')moment for our adversaries. Pakistan’s Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), who I always praise to high heavens for its complete professionalism, would probably in its Monday brief state that it is holiday time;

            the target is in self-destruct mode.

[ Don't be surprised even if all 'LEAVE' restrictions  may have been relaxed ]
Sunday night’s program, ‘We the People’, on NDTV on 20 Mar 2016, on the 7th Pay Commission recommendations was probably a path-breaking event in the exercise of outreach and sensitization. The ‘us’ versus ‘them’ was out in the open. Right from the Third Pay Commission which saw the reduction of pension and lowering of status (that actually started well before) each such Commission has consciously diluted the military’s standing while the changing environment only added to the responsibilities and expectations from the men in uniform. There is no need to go into history all over again except to mention that the traditional antipathy Nehru had against the Army always colored his judgment. This disdain arose out of three things. First was his belief that pre-Partition, the Army worked for the colonial masters and not for the National movement. Second was his fear that the Army would not remain apolitical and would probably have ambitions of its own. Third remained his utopian idea that India had no enemies and all it needed was a stick wielding police force to manage order.

His perceptions were no doubt reinforced by an ICS oriented civil service who could not have asked for more. The Army leadership was silent and table thumping was not its forte. It never objected to its own virtual disenfranchisement from the national security domain which came to be dominated by the bureaucrat diplomat combine who played on the fears of the political leadership. They assiduously garnered the national security space shutting out all three Services and playing them against each other.


The glorious victory of 1971 created a major dilemma because it was the nation’s victory made possible by the Armed Forces. Adulation among the public was at a high and the personality of senior leaders with ‘spine’ as a major element of their mental makeup was causing concern. It wasn’t a happy situation for the civilian leadership. With this backdrop, since 1972 there has been a systematic campaign to whittle down the image of the Armed Forces and their position. The Pay Commissions could be virtually seen as a means of tying the Armed Forces down with pay being the deciding factor to determine status. With each passing Commission the attempt to complicate the system and leave milestones in forms of unresolved anomalies helped to tie everyone in knots. It’s a great strategy which ensures primacy in pay and status to the civilian while the Armed Forces continue to live and function by their discipline and accountability.


The above was not a narration of history but just a few painful facts which cannot go away from any analysis. Before coming to the actual issues involving pay and status and the arguments of the senior veteran bureaucrats let me reiterate a few things. Decisions which even affect functional efficiency are ignored and just postponed.

Would any member of the bureaucracy have an explanation for the 20-year old representation of the Army that the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) must be distinctive from the Army in accoutrements and at least with reference to the disruptive pattern combat dress?

The issue finally came to a head in the recent agitation in Haryana where the Army had to suffer the ignominy of using placards to identify itself.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          'WARNING FROM 'VASUNDHRA'

 IN 1978 A WESTERN JOURNALIST ASKED AYATOLLAH KHOMENI IF HE IS AWARE THAT HIS AGITATION IS FACING THE SHAH's ARMY WHICH IS BEST EQUIPPED & TRAINED EAST OF SUEZ. KHOMENI's ANSWER WAS SIMPLE- "WHEN WEAPONS ARE REQUIRED IT WILL COME WALKING ON ITS OWN."

       YES "WEAPONS" CAME WALKING IN 1979 IN THE                               CRASH OF IRAN IN 1979

SIR, YES, WEAPONS CAME WALKING FROM THE "THE KOTES" OF LEAST  DISCIPLINED  &   ILL TRAINED POLITICALISED  'PARA' MILITIA FORCES  OF IRAN. 

                                   REST IS HISTORY

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is not a point by point analysis or debate. Sunday’s NDTV program would have helped clear a few cobwebs but equally add a few more. The one issue no bureaucrat seems to be able to explain is the absence of a representative from the Armed Forces on the Pay Commission. They put up a great argument to say that none of the members represent any service. That is as good as burying your head in the sand. When there is continued obfuscation of issues, anomalies of the past remain unresolved and the largest of the organizations has remained dissatisfied with the Pay Commission system, prudence demands that a fresh approach be followed. This is where the political leadership has to step in, otherwise the continuum of burial of contentious issues under the carpet will only lead to a breakdown of the system.



We earlier had a set of military men who gave great credence to acceptance of the word of the civilian leadership. That is changing faster than the members of the Pay Commission or the political leadership would like to believe or have been informed about. In 2012 the military leadership in good faith opted to continue with the old system of the common pay commission for all, placing confidence in the wisdom of the political leadership. It appears they will live to rue that decision.


The bureaucrats on the panel of the NDTV program tried to confuse and confound with two arguments; first that the government needs to do a cost benefit analysis to compare the cost of upkeep of civilian functionaries and that of servicemen; and second that Service officers rose to high ranks and remained in service long enough to earn like all others.

It needed someone to point out to them that the benefit of the cost of upkeep of Service personnel could never be quantified. In fact a visibly upset former Army Chief General VP Malik had to use unusually harsh words to state clearly that it was up to the Government to decide the strength of the Armed Forces and the quantum it could afford for national security. The Cost to Government (CTG) seems to be a carefully adapted strategy by the bureaucracy this time.

 It probably hasn’t seen the end of the day yet and will emerge again in even the Empowered Committee of Secretaries where the three Services go unrepresented yet again. The Government has yet to come out with any credible argument on why this has not happened. In making the second argument the bureaucrats forgot about the percentage approval rates for higher ranks. For public consumption it must be known that at first select rank of Colonel 60-70 percent of the officers are unlikely to be promoted. Thereafter at each higher select rank the number dwindles by more than fifty percent. For an original strength of over 800 officers commissioned in 1974 only twenty or so could make it to the three star rank; they thus retired from ages of 54 to 58 with just 20 or so achieving 60. Contrast this with the bureaucrats where each and every entrant retires at 60 years of age and comparative three star rank with many going up to Secretary (four star equivalent). Leave the officer cadre and you have other ranks among soldiers and equivalent where 80 percent retire at 34 to 37 years. Chalk and cheese, apples and oranges is what the bureaucrats spoke of; that there are no ways by which we could find equivalence in environment, promotion opportunities and ages of retirements so why compare wages. In fact a senior JCO in the audience spoke up and asked for assured re-employment till the age of 60 years for all exiting soldiers as a means of resolving all issues. Then the Servicemen would be at par with civilian counterparts and would demand no higher compensation.


Half the problem lies in the lack of knowledge among the political class. Worthies should know that military security cannot be wished away; equally a high quality administration and efficient/motivated bureaucracy is a must. Both must be treated at par, compensating where there is fair and acceptable perceived grievance. To assume that the supposed premier civil services should be given triple increments at different stages while the Armed Forces remain laggards in promotion progression and receive single increments all along, is calling for disgruntlement. In a system where basic pay decides status obviously by accepting the recommendation the Services would be axing their own feet for ever.


The Non Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU) system doesn’t appear to be understood by the public because of lack of transparency. The civil services have conveniently linked their pay increments to years of service irrespective of rank achieved. This is a huge outflow of public money irrespective of work output. Promotion in all systems brings higher wages and acts as incentive and motivation for higher efficiency and better qualification. Not so in our civil services where year on year salaries increase irrespective of higher rank being achieved or not achieved. This has led to a piquant situation within organizations where there are uniformed and civilians working together such as in Military Engineering Service (MES) (not Corps of Engineers which is a combatants based organization) and Border Roads Organization (BRO). In these organizations civilian subordinates who earlier earned less than their uniformed superiors received pay increments irrespective of promotions and started earning equivalent to or more than the superiors.



Since status is dictated by pay they refused to have their Confidential Reports endorsed by their superiors on technical grounds of higher status. Such a situation must never have occurred in any other organization in the world. The decision to grant NFFU had obviously never catered for such a situation. The Services were divided on the issue of NFFU. In a strictly hierarchical system you cannot have a superior earning less than the subordinate; it is against all norms of functioning. This issue did not even come up for discussion on the NDTV program for shortage of time and possibly expertise because there are no answers to it.

NFFU [ IT IS HARAM KA KAMAI-Vasundhra ] is bad for the entire system of government machinery and should be done away with. Increments must be streamlined to common application for all personnel, civilian or in uniform. If the Armed Forces are not to be given any favors beyond those which are owed by virtue of the nature of the job as recognized the world over, then special increments must be given to none others.


The public must also be made aware that the 6th Pay Commission still has approximately 22 anomalies to be resolved and once the 7th pay Commission recommendations are adopted these will be conveniently forgotten. What answer does anyone have to the competence and credibility of the Pay Commissions when representations after representation in pensions and pay bands have been shot down by the honorable courts? Will Servicemen ever have belief in fair play and will the civil services officers who form the Pay Commissions ever represent interests other than of their own service? It is very well to argue that such eminent persons are supposed to be even handed in their responsibilities as custodians of values but the proof of the pudding is in the eating.


The Armed Forces may not have chosen the personalities on display in the program but emotions and choice of wrong words can and will work against them. The public has to be informed and informed without rancor, emotion and negativity. People in uniform are supposed to be patient as per their discipline and their families must carry that same value system otherwise the debate will be hijacked by emphasis on the wrong issues as it almost happened on the program.

 
A misnomer unanswered in the program and a linked question thrown at me on social media. How is it that so many Armed Forces officers live in splendor and own high value automobiles and travel abroad, if they claim to be poorly paid. Firstly, the Government of India is a worthy paymaster; that it looks after its employees well is beyond debate. However, there are many propertied people who hardly rely on pay and allowances. In fact that is true even among some jawans. That however, is the exception and not the rule.

Secondly, the glamorous are visible not the sedate – an old adage as much applicable today. Thirdly, service life teaches dignity and helps you acquire it in a transformational way unlike civil services where jobs are many times transactional in nature. The Army’s regimental system creates bonds and a social life which goes beyond the ordinary. All this is observed from outside and perceived as a higher status in standard of living. It actually is but not because of better pay but better organization and ethos.


Finally, to the last word and a revisit to the issue raised in the first paragraph.

The cleavage between the Armed Forces and the Civil Services is increasing by the day. It smacks of national immaturity if personnel selected to man government jobs and function for the national good cannot see beyond the individual good of their own departments; it is indeed a sad commentary.

This is leading to tardiness in government functioning, personality clashes where there should be total cooperation and much disappointment within the public which is forced to take sides based upon who has been able to influence whom at a given point of time.


 

This is a ready-made recipe to play into the hands of our adversaries who would also soon be involved in planting disinformation and playing off one against the other.

The nation should look towards the sagacity of a few good men who can still put service before self. The Government must realize the looming threat of dysfunctional and demotivating influence on its own machinery and hasten to act against it. The first step should be a representative body of respected personalities to comprehensively examine the mismatch in the personnel management system involving pay, allowances and status of government servants. Perhaps even personalities of eminence from outside the government could add much worth to this.



































 

PMR - PRE-2006 - PENSION DELINKED FROM QS OF 33 YRS

SOURCE: 
 CURTSEY EX-SERVICEMEN WELFARE BLOG
http://ex-servicemenwelfare.blogspot.in/

PMR - PRE-2006 - PENSION DELINKED         FROM QS OF 33 YRS

                                                                                                                 UPDATED 30 APR 2016

 33 YEARS RULE FOR FULL PENSION GOES

BACKGROUND :   Shri MO Inasu, an Ex-Servicemen was re-employed in Central Govt Services in Kerala and had retired prior to Jan 2006. He filed a case in CAT Ernakulam, challenging the rule of 33 years. He pleaded that since this rule is not applicable for post-2006 retirees as also in accordance with the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Maj Gen SPS Vains Vs UOI case, the same benefit should also be extended to pre-2006 pensioners. CAT Ernakulam ruled that the said Rule of 33 years violates  Art 14 and 16 of our Constitution as such should be abrogated. After a prolonged legal battle the H’ble Supreme Court upheld the judgment of CAT Ernakulam.

     Therefore those officers/JCO and ORs  who cannot mark up their QS for 33 Yrs even by including the rank weight-ages, such  that all Sepoys who serve upto 15 years (extended by two years), Naiks and Havildars who cannot serve up to  33 years minus the Rank  Weightage (Sepoy = 12 years; Naik = 10 years; Havildar = 8 years) as also who proceed on premature retirement would benefit in pension by knocking down this rule. Ministry of Personnel, Pensions and Public Grievances has therefore been in the process of obtaining Govt sanction to remove this restriction of 33 years to all Pre–06 retirees for over 8 months which has so been obtained.

     The Govt has finally issued orders to delink the Rule of 33 Yrs for Pre-2006 Retirees in line with the Recommendations of the 6th CPC for Post -2006 retirees which is placed below. The signed copy can also be downloaded through the link as placed there. PCDA(P) will soon issue implementation Circular for the Armed forces personnel. It has already issued Circular C-149 (Placed Below) for payments to be made to Defence Civilians.

HOW IT EFFECTS THE LESS THAN 33 YRS QS CASES - The principle behind delinking of QS for revision of pension for Pre 2006 retirees is the Supreme court ruling that "NO  PENSIONER WILL GET PENSION LESS THAN 50% OF THE MINIMUM PAY IN PAY BAND (MP-in-PB)  plus GP and MSP"  corresponding   to the rank and group of pensioner, as for the post 2006 retirees. There will thus be no pro rata reduction below this "MP in PB". It means that the pension cannot be less than half of one's emoluments should he/she retire soon after being promoted or without earning any increment what so ever on completion of minimum qualifying service.

      Therefore where ever one is getting pension lesser  than this half of "MP-in-PB" the same stands to revision upwards. These figs of MP-in-PB  must be known to every one from various instructions. The QS however still remains linked for pensions which are more than the MP-in-PB  like the pensions of Post 2006 retirees and the pensions under the OROP Scheme.

REVISION OF PENSION- Consequently PCDA(P) will soon issue instructions to Banks for the revision of the pension of all the Fauji PMR cases or where the officers, JCOs and ORs have not completed 33 yrs of service before retirement. It means that all Pre - 2006 retirees will get the same pension irrespective of the Qualifying Service  (QS) they had rendered upto the time the OROP scheme got implemented. To cite an example the full pension of a Lt Col with 28+5=33 years of service with rank weightage under 6 CPC has been Rs 26265/-pm, therefore, those who took premature retirement with less than 28 years of service will also get Rs 26265/- per month as Basic Pension upto 30 Jun 2014. The difference in pension paid and payable will be arrears from 01 Jan 2006 to 30 Jun 2014.  With these provisions the Table given in PCDA (P) Circular No 500 will reduce to 2 lines only as below.

HOW TO WORK OUT ARREARS. We have endeavoured to give a very simple method of knowing your arrears that may accrue both for JCOs and ORs as well as for Officers. The first and foremost is to know your basic pension what you are getting. Most of the pensioners would know the same however one can easily calculate or verify  the same 'Without Tears' as follows in case its not sure:-

1.   Note down the pensions from your pass book you got for the months of Jun, Jul, Dec 2015 and Jan-2016 before deduction of any TDS. The amount credited for Jun and Jul-15 should be same as also for Dec-15 and Jan-16. In case your commutation payment is still being deducted please note the figure per month for the purpose of understanding let us suppose this amount to be Rs 4422/- pm. In case you have already paid for the commutation take this figure to be ZERO in place of 4422/- . Hypothetically let us also assume that you  received Rs  44741/-  for Jun as well as for  Jul 2015  and Rs  46125/- for Dec-15 and Jan 16.

2.   You will  calculate your basic pension with this data as under :-

   (a)  From Jun & Jul - B P =  (44741+4422)/2.13 = 23081
    (b)  From Dec & Jan – B P =   (46125+4422) divided by 2.19 = 23081
   (Here 2.13 and 2.19 are constants corresponding  to DA rates at     that time)

3.   Hence you basic pension entitled is Rs 23081/-(This is, by the way,    

the fig for Lt Col with QS 22 Yrs as given in PCDA (P) Cir No 500.)

4.   In order to work out your arrears proceed as under:-

(a)    Difference 26265 - 23081 = Rs 3184 PM

(b)   Arrears from 01 Jan  06  to 30 Jun 14 with DA incl = 3184 x 143.40 = 456586/-(143.40 is a constant - For details see CONSTANT M.F Below).

(c)    TOTAL  = Rs 456586/- 

5.   Similarly by the said method any one can work out his own arrears, The full Pension for various Ranks of Pre-2006 Vintage under 6 CPC (PCDA (P) Circular Number 500) are given in succeeding paragraphs.

"HAPPY -  खुशयां मनाओ और सुप्रीम कोर्ट का शुक्रिया करो "

CONSTANT M.F (MULTIPLICATION FACTOR).    In order to avoid month wise complicated calculations either manually or using Excel Sheets in Microsoft Office in Windows OS which is not every ones cake, our Maths Wizard has simplified the long Array of each month and the DA rates from time to time (t2t) has derived the constant factors together for a particular period. Constant 143.40 is for the period from 01 Jan 06 to 30 Jun 2014. The constant for the entire period of 6th CPC for 10 years from 01 Jan 06 to 31 Dec 2015 has been worked out to be 181.74 which can be used by the affected pensioners mostly our Civilian Pensioners.

      The amount of difference multiplied by this constant will give you the total amount for the period having taken into account the DR rates for each month pertaining to the period.

FAMILY PENSION - There will be no change for Ordinary Family Pension since the same had already been de-linked from the 33 yrs of Rule for full pension and was termed as Min Guaranteed Family Pension (MGFP).

OROP SCHEME. Since the OROP Scheme has equalised the pensions of all retirees prior to 2014 this  new development of delinking the 33 Yrs rule will effect only up to 30 Jun 2014

JCOs & ORs . Since the pensions of JCOs & ORs were not based on minimum pension of pay in pay band wef July-2009 as given in PCDA(P) Circular number 430, it is not yet clear as to how this will affect their pensions. However we have tried to give a simple method of knowing your likely arrears as mentioned in the succeeding paragraphs in case one has been getting pension lesser than the "MP-in-PB" figures shown in charts and tables in this post.

         It may have shortcomings as such we will seek input and views of veterans who are in better picture on the issue of JCOs and ORs. It is requested that further feed back on this be posted under the COMMENTS in this post. Please do write your Rank, Name and Email  ID at the end of your comment as otherwise our reply may not be forthcoming.

                                                                 

OFFRS:- BY ADDING THE RANK WEIGHTAGE OFFRS GET FULL PENSION i.e  50% OF MINIMUM PAY IN PAY BAND WITH THE SERVICE AS UNDER :-

These are the minimum figures of Pension  based on 50% od the Pay in Pay Band in respect of officers as given in PCDA (O) Circular Number 500 including Grade Pay and Military Service Pay. The Rank Weightages are shown under the Qualifying Service Figures in brackets as for for various ranks.

MEDICOS . In case of Medical Officers the figures as given in circular number 24 be taken as the 50% of Min of the Pay in Pay Band and arrears calculates as above. An extract of the table is placed below:-

JCOs AND ORs:- (INCL EQUIVALENT RANKS OF IN & IAF)

This data pertaining to minimum of pay in pay band ("MP-in-PB") for all groups and categories of JCOs and ORs and their equivalent ranks Navy and Air Force has been extracted from Circulars of PCDA (P) issued during the currency of  6 CPC is placed below in the table for the convenience of All Ranks other than officers.

These then are the figures of Minimum Pension  for  a Rank, Group and Categories  irrespective of the years of service rendered by various ranks. In case one is getting more than these figures will continue to do so, however, where ever one has been getting lesser than these figures will be entitled to the benefit of this Delinked Rule, Full Pension for PMR Cases.

All other tables corresponding to 6th CPC  are also available in this blog site and can be viewed under the post "PENSION JCOs & ORs (ARREARS)"   at http://signals-parivaar.blogspot.in/2015/05/pension.html

HOW TO GO ABOUT CALCULATION OF  ARREARS OF JCOs & Ors:- With coming of this rule the arrears will be due to those persons who have been receiving Pension lesser than the 50% of "Minimum of Pay in Pay Band" wef 01 Jan 2006 to 30 June 2014 ie upto the date of implementation of the OROP Scheme.

2.  Hence the first and foremost item to know is the "Min of Pay in Pay Band"  pertaining to your Group and Rank. The above chart has been derived from various Circulars issued by PCDA(P). Do intimate in case there be some changes and modification is needed.

3.   The amount by which you have been getting lesser than this amount is the Basic difference now payable per month.

 
4.   In case of JCOs& ORs three Circulars ie 547, 430 and 501 are important. There will thus be three differences corresponding to periods as under :-

       (a)   Difference between MPinPB and figures in 547 from 01 Jan 2006 to 30 June 2009.

      (b)   Difference between MPinPB and figures of circulat 430 from 01 Jul 2009 to 23 Sep 2012.

(d)   Difference between MPinPB and figures of Circular 501 from 24 Sep 2012 to 30 Jun 2014.

5. Note down these figures where ever  they are less than the MPinPB. However in case they are higher than the MPinPB these are not to be taken into account and the difference be taken as Zero.
6.   Multiply these three differences with Multiplication factors as under to add period and DA:-

  
       (a)  01 Jan 2006 to 30 Jun 2009   =   46.02.
       (b) 01 Jul  2009 to 23 Sep 2012.  =   57.62
       (c)  24 Sep 2012 to 30 Jun 2014.  =   39.76

7.  Add the results these are your likely Arrears:- Let us understand with the help of example of  "Nb Sub / JWO / CPO"  of  "Y" Group. retired with 20 Yrs of service.

(a)      The "MPinPB" for Rank & Gp is Rs 16660/- hence the BASIC PENSION is half of it i.e  Rs 8330/-

(b)     Pensions as per Circulars = 547 is Rs 6311,  430 is Rs 8088/- & 501 is Rs 8088/-

(c)      Differences  (1)  8330-6311= 2019,   (2)  8330-8088= 242,  (3) 8330-8088= 242

NOTE - In case  the pension figs of the Cicular are more than the "MP-in-PB", No arrears are due in such a case for the period and the current pension which is more than "MP-in-PB" will continue.

   Arrears :-  
         (1)      2019X46.02=92914,
         (2)       242X57.62= 13944,
         (3)       242X38.76= 9622,
                      TOTAL  =  116480    Its simple , Isn't it.

COMPARITIVE TABLE JCOs AND ORs - VARIOUS CIRCULARS
NOTE  -  WE ARE EXTREMELY GRATEFUL TO VETERANS WHO HAVE SENT US FEEDBACK ON THE SUBJECT. ANY FURTHER OBSERVATIONS AND CORRECTIONS ARE MOST WELCOME PLEASE PEN THEM UNDER THE COMMENTS HERE UNDER. 
     

KINDLY DO GIVE YOUR RANK,  NAME &  EMAIL ID UNDER YOUR NOTE, WE WILL BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS YOU WITH YOUR RANK APPROPRIATELY. 

CLICK - RETURN TO HOME PAGE

******************   ****************   **************   ********  ******* ******
PCDA CIRCULAR NUMBER C-149 - REG PAYMENT OF ARREARS BY DELINKING THE QS FROM REVISION.
****************************************  ****************************** 

OFFICE OF THE PR. CONTROLLER OF DEFENCE ACCOUNTS (PENSIONS)

DRAUPADI GHAT, ALLAHABAD- 211014

Toll Free No. 1800-180-5321

Circular No: C-149 

No:-Gl/C/0198/Vol- V/Tech

O/o the Pr.C.D.A. (Pensions)

Draupadighat Allahabad -211014

Dated: - 08/04/2016

Subject: Revision of pension of Pre-2006 pensioners - reg.

Reference: This office Important Circulars No. 102 dated 11-02-2013 & C-144 dated 14-08-2015.

Attention of all Pension Disbursing Authorities is invited to above cited circulars wherein instructions had been issued for implementation of GOI, Ministry of P,PG and pensions, Deptt of P&PW OM No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A,) dated 28 January, 2013 w.e.f 01.01.2006. According to these orders "The revised pension of the pre-2006 pensioners shall not be less than 50% of the minimum of the pay band+ grade pay, corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which pensioner had retired, as arrived at with reference to the fitment tables annexed to Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure OM No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 3oth August, 2008, subject to the pension so arrived will be reduced pro-rata, where the pensioner had less than the maximum required service for full pension as per rule 49 of the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972 as applicable before 1.1.2006 and in no case it will be less than Rs. 3500/- p.m".

(2) Now, GOI, Ministry of P, PG and pension, Dept of P&PW have further issued order under their OM No. 38/ 37/ O8 P&PW (A) dated 6th April, 2016, that "The revised consolidated pension of pre-2006 pensioners shall not be lower than 50% of the sum of minimum of the pay in the Pay Band and the Grade Pay (wherever applicable) corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale as per fitment table annexed to Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure oM No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 30th August, 2008 without pro-rata reduction of pension even it they had qualifying service of less than 33 years at the time of retirement." Accordingly, Para 5 of the OM dated 28.01.2013 would stand deleted. The arrears of revised pension would be payable with effect from 01.01.2006.

(3) In case the consolidated pension calculated as per Para 4.1 of OM No. 38/ 37/ 08-P&PW (A) dated 01-09-2008 is higher than the pension calculated in the manner indicated in the OM dated 6th April, 2016, the same (higher consolidated pension) will continue to be treated as basic pension.

(4) All other conditions as given in OM No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A) dated 1.9.2008, as amended from time to time shall remain unchanged.

(5) All pension disbursing authorities (PDAs) are therefore, requested to revise the pension in affected cases in terms of Govt. OM No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A), dated 06-04-2016 w.e.f. 01.01.2006. Payment made w.e.f. 01.01.2006will be adjusted against the arrears now being paid and these cases may be reflected in the monthly account sent to this office as ‘change item’.

(6) Where the PDAs are in doubt in regulating the payment of revised pension under these orders, the cases with full details of pensioner and PPO number etc. may be referred to Audit Section of this office for advice and further action.

(Dr. Upinderbir Singh)

Dy.CD A (P)

***************************** ***************************
MINISTRY OF PPG & P ( DEPT OF P & PW LETTER DATED 06 APR 16
****************   *******************************************

No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A)

Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions Department of Pension & Pensioners' Welfare

3rd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan Khan Market, New Delhi-110 003. Dated the 06th April, 2016

OFFICE  MEMORANDUM

Snb:-  Revision of pension of pre-2006 pensioners - delinking of revised pension from qualifying service of 33 years.

    The undersigned is directed to say that as per Para 4.2 ofthis Department's  OM of even number dated 1.9.2008 relatingto revision of pension of pre-2006  pensioners w.e.f.1.1.2006, the revised pension w.e.f. 1.1.2006, in no case,shall  be lower than 50% of the sum of the minimum of pay inthe pay band and the  grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. A clarification was issued vide DoP&PW OM of even No.d/d 3.10.2008 that the pension calculated at 50% of the minimum of pay  in the pay band plus grade pay would be calculated at the minimum of the pay in the pay band (irrespective ofthe pre-revised scale of pay) plus the grade pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale.

2.  Several petitions were filed in the Central Administrative Tribunal, Prl Bench,New Delhi inter alia claiming thatthe revised pension of the pre-2006 pensioners should not be less than 50% of the minimum of the pay band + grade pay, corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which pensioner  had retired, as arrived at with reference to the fitment tables annexed to Min of Finance, Department of Expenditure OM No.1/1/2008-IC d/d 30.8.08

Hon'ble CAT,Principal Bench,New Delhi vide its common order dated 1.11.11 in OA No.655/2010  and 3 other connected OAs directedto re-fix the pension of all pre-2006 retirees w.e.f. l.1.2006  based on  Resolution  d/d 29.8.08 of  the  Department  of Pension  &Pensioners'Welfare and in light of observations of Hon'ble CAT in that order.

3.  Orders were issued vide this Deptts OM of even number dated 28.1.2013for stepping up of pension of pre-2006 pensioners w.e.f. 24.9.2012 to 50% of the minimum of pay in the pay band and GP corresponding to pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner retired. Para 5 of this OM provides that in case the consolidated pension/family pension calculated as per para 4.1 of 0.M. No.38/37/08- P&PW (A) dated l.9.2008 is higher than the pension/ family pension calculated in the manner indicated in the O.M. d/d 28.1.2013 the same (higher consolidated pension/familypension) will continue to be treated as basic pension/family pension.

4.   Subsequently, in compliance of order dated 1.11.2011of the Hon'ble CAT Principal Bench in OA No. 655/2010,order dated 29.4.2013 of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP (C) No. 1535/2012 and order dated 17.3.2015of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C No.36148/2013, order were issued vide this Depts OM of even number dated 30.7.2015that the pension/Family pension of all pre-2006 pensioners/family  pensioners may be revised in accordance with this Dept's O.M. No.38/37/08-P&PW(A) d/d 28.1.2013 w.e.f.1.1.2006 instead of 24.9.2012.

5.  In accordance with the order issued in implementation of the recommendation of the 6th CPC, the pension of Govt servants retired/retiring on or after 1.1.2006 has been delinked from qualifying service of 33 years. In OA No.715

/2012 filed by Shri. M.O. Inasu, a pre-2006 pensioner, Hon'ble CAT, Ernakulam Bench, vide its order dated 16.8.2013 directed that the revised

pension w.e.f. 1.1.2006 under para 4.2 of OM dated 1.9.2008 would not be rreduced based on the qualifying service of less than 33 years. The appeals filed by Department of Revenue in the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala and in

the Hon'ble Supreme Court have also been dismissed. Similar orders have been passed by Hon'bleCAT/High Court in several other cases also.

6.   The matter has  been examined in consultation with the Ministry of Finance (Dept of Exp). It has also been decided that the revised consolidated pension of pre-2006 pensioners shall not be lower than 50% of the minimum of the pay in the Pay Band and the grade pay (wherever applicable) corresp- onding to the pre­-revised pay scale as per fitment table without pro-rata reduction of pension even if theyhad qualifying serviceofless than 33 years atthe time of retirement. Accordingly, Para5 of this Department's OM of even number dated 28.1.2013 would stand deleted. The arrears of revised pension would be payable with effect from 1.1.2006.

7.   Ministry of Agriculture, etc. are requested to bring the contenwot'these orders to the notice of Controller ofAccounts/Pay and Accounts Officers and Attached and Subordinate Offices under them for revising the pension ofall those pre2006 pensioners who had rendered less than 33 years of qualifying  service at the time of retirementin the manner as indicated above on top priority. Revised Pension Payment Orders in all these cases may also be issued immediately.

8.   All pension disbursing offices/banks are also advised to prominently display these orders on their noticeboards for the benefit of pensioners.

9.   This issues with the approval of Ministry of Finance, Deptt. of Expenditure vide ID Note No. 2(9)/EV/2015,dated 15.3.2016.

I0.        Hindi version will follow.

                                   (SIGNED -  SEEMA GUPTA)                                                                   Deputy Secretary to the Government of India

To

1.    All  Ministries/Depts  of Govt  of India.  (as per  standard  mailing list).

2.      All SCOVA Members

3.      All identified Pensioners Association

Copy to      (i) NIC Cell for uploading on the website of the Department.

(ii) AD (OL), DoPPW for Hindi VersionDOWNLOAD SIGNED COPY -  CLICK
YOUR OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS

Dear Veterans,

1. We at Signals-Family Portal are ordinary people in various matters concerning  serving and Retired Govt Personnel, as such, do heavily bank upon inputs from our readers. Kindly do add, comment and give your observations on this or any other post aimed at improving the posted contents for the benefit of the veterans community.

2. Kindly post these under the comments, we will much appreciate your contribution in this regard.

3. In order to avoid spam and unwarranted or mischievous posts, only such entries will get published where the Person has given his RANK, NAME @ EMAIL ID at the end of his/her text.

4. We will do our best to post our response as quickly as possible after getting the facts vetted from offrs, JCOs and men who are more knowledgeable on particular subject.

With best wishes

Sincerely yours,

Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran)

16 comments:

s ana said...

Respected SIR,your notes above on jco and OR inadequate. My doubt is the full pension wef Jan 2006 as per the above circular if exceeds the one given in july09 and Sep 12 they have to pay us till Jun 2014.In my case full pension ie without prorata wef Jan 06is 6420 but paid wef Jan 06 rs 4186, wef Jul 09 rs4840, wef Sep 12 rs 5301/- and OROP rs 7550/-.PLEASE ENLIGHTEN ME.Thank you Sir.

10 April 2016 at 22:21

Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran) said...

Reply to above Note :- 

As I have already mentioned in the last para we are not sure how the MOD will work out the figures to "Not less than min of 50% of the Pay in Pay Band" because the pensions paid presently are not the Minimum of the Pay in Pay Band for JCOs and ORs unlike the pensions of Officers. These are pro-rata of the maximum pay (Top Of the Entitlement) of the Rank and Group in Pay Band. 

However you are right once we know as to what is that figure it will be paid for the period from Jan-06 to Jun-09, Jul-09 to 23 Sep 2012 and lastly from 24 Sep 2012 to 30 Jun 2014.

I thus will not like to give out a figure which is not authentic, it may be too immature to that presently.

Brig Narinder Dhand

10 April 2016 at 22:43

Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran) said...

FURTHER TO MY NOTE ABOVE.

The current pensions of JCOs and ORs are already above the minimum of the Pay in Pay Band for the Rank and Group as such I am apprehensive of the out come of these provisions.
I shall be grateful in case some one can give us the "Min Pay in Pay band" for each Rank in respect of JCOs and ORs and their equivalents in IN and IAF as per Special Instructions as applicable for 6th CPC.

10 April 2016 at 22:54

s ana said...

Respected SIR, Namaste. IN IAF MIN OF PAY IN PAY BAND INCL GP AND MSP AND X GP IF APPLICALE FOR X GP. LAC. RS12890/-,CPL RS 13520/- SGT RS 15500/- JWO RS18340. WO RS20560/- MWO RS21970/- FOR Y GROUP. LAC RS 11050/-CPL RS11890/ SGT RS 12840/- JWO RS 16660/-WO RS18880. MWO RS 19360/- FOR Z GROUP. LAC RS10060/- CPL RS10650/- SGT RS12070/- JWO RS15880/- WO RS18080/- MWO RS 19080/- Detailed information Available net also under AFCAO - PAY & ALLOWANCES AIRMAN. Thank you Sir. 12 April 2016 at 09:05

Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran) said...

THANK YOU S ANA FOR YOUR VALUABLE INPUTS WHICH HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED IN THE TEXT OF THE BLOG SITE.
EVERY ONE WILL THUS GET THIS AS THE MINIMUM PENSION IRRESPECTIVE OF THE NUMBER OF YEARS OF SERVICE RENDERED.

12 April 2016 at 10:31

Anonymous said...

Good Afternoon Sir.... 50% of Minimum the Fitment table for Capt = 16145 and Grade pay = 6100,therefore the Revised Pension of Capt = 16145 + 6100 = 22,245 is this calculation Correct... kindly advise... thanks... Capt. Sher

20 April 2016 at 13:49

 Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran) said...

ATTENTION JCOs AND Ors

There have been numerous mails on the Min of Pay in Pay Band in respect of JCOs and ORs and their equivalent Ranks in Navy and Air Force incl some special categories in these two services.
I am happy to obtain the authentic figures and upload in this web post. Please note that your pension will not be less than this irrespective of the length of your service before retirement provided you did the minimum pensionable service.

All the best, you can now get a fair idea of the arrears you will get once the MOD letter and the PCDA(P) circular is out, which again you will find here on this post.

Brig NK Dhand (Veteran)

22 April 2016 at 17:04

Madabushi Krishnan said...

PCDA has issued the circular for civilians, immediately, why they take so much time of the uniformed category?

26 April 2016 at 14:50

Bandaru Narsimharao said...

Sir,
You have been very helpful to many officers and soldiers in a big way.Had this system of communication existed from a combined services team 40 years back,we would not have been at Jantar Mantar today.Better late than ever,today many are more well informed and are getting involved.

WGCDR BNRAO

27 April 2016 at 07:15

 Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran) said...

From: annada sankar ray
Sent: Thursday, 28 April, 2016 12:22 PM
To: nkd616@gmail.com
Subject: full pension or pro-rata pension Good morning sir
I get your email id from signal paribar blog
sir i exserviceman indian navy retire on 31.01.2001(15 years 01 month service) ex petty officer(HAV).
sir i am eligible for arrear from 01.01.2006 to 30.06.2014.
sir pcda circular c149 for defence civilian already issued. for defence personnel when mod or pcda circular issued.
sir please reply i am eligible or not?
thanking you

REPLY As under :-

I understand that you are referring to the Premature cases.
The pensions of JCOs, NCOs and ORs were enhanced wef 01 July 2009
based on maximum of pension of the group and rank and not the minimum
pension as earlier.
We will have to wait for the Govt orders on payment which are under
processing presently.However, if you look up the minimum pension for a Petty Officer in my blogpost under PMR cases, the min basic pension figures are given there as 6420 for Y gp and 6035 for Z group. Therefore, in case your pension during this period had been less than this figure you should be entitled for the arrears of difference.

Brig NK Dhand 

28 April 2016 at 22:44

Capt. SAS said...

Sir... pls refer to my earlier mail on delinking of pension with 33 yrs... as per the GOI letter dated 06 Apr"16 The pension would be 50% of the minimum of the fitment table + Grade pay... consequently for a Capt. 50% of the minimum of the fitment table = 16145 and Grade pay = 6100 hence pension of Capt - 16145 + 6100 = 22,245 w.e.f. 01 / 01 / 2006.. Is this calculation correct ? Please advise.

29 April 2016 at 14:49

Bandaru Narsimharao said...

Sir,
Delinking of 33years of service was announced by Supreme Court close to a month.While civilian received their orders including PCDA(P)
Pensioners .What stop the PCDA (P) from working out the arrears.The calculation are simple and straight,were is the hitch.Time the Govt wake up and start toning the administration.Looks like only the court can step in and order.

2 May 2016 at 08:42

Bhavani Net said...

Respected Sir
Good morning
first of all I like to thank you for your efforts to bring up such a good blog and articles. now to the point. sir GOI not implemented the cpc recommendation SL No 12 in its true spirit so all these litigation are come up and present OM is also a result of it
now also if goi gives a single FIG as MGP to a particular Rank irrespective of LS(from 15-33) again it leads to litigation as the cpc not recommended 50%(MGP) compulsory to all and not recommended removal of prorata also for pre 06 in its recommendations
the cpc recommendation states that the consolidated pension (with MF 1.86) should not be less than MGP so in my opinion the CP which is a prorata pension to be reversed to non prorata and then it should be compared with MGP and which ever is higher to be paid
thanks for giving opportunity to write

please correct me if Iam wrong

9 May 2016 at 07:35

Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran) said...

Can any of the readers respond to the above comment by Bhawani Net.

10 May 2016 at 22:50

Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran) said...

WHILE WRITING YOUR COMMENTS PLEASE WRITE YOUR RANK NAME AND EMAIL ID AT THE END WITHOUT WHICH AS A MATTER OF POLICY AS GIVEN IN THE POST, YOUR COMMENT MAY BE TAKEN AS SPAM.
IF YOU ARE A VETERAN BE PROUD TO MENTION YOUR RANK AND NAME EVEN IF IT IS LAC OR SEPOY.

10 May 2016 at 22:55

Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran) said...

BHAVANI NET DO INTRODUCE YOURSELF IN RESPONSE.

10 May 2016 at 22:57

(Source- Signals Parivaar Blog/Indian Military Veterans blog)