Saturday, December 19, 2015

MOD ; PM chairs Combined Commanders Conference on board INS Vikramaditya at Sea












SOURCE:http://www.narendramodi.in/pm-chairs-combined-commanders-conference-on-board-ins-vikramaditya-at-sea-386407



                   MODI & HIS SPEED WRECKER   


The PM has delivered a very fine address to the 


flag and general officers and to the forces in 


general. Note what he says about OROP. But it 


may turn out to be only lip service if he does 


not control his FM, the loose cannon. He should 

 either sack him or rein him in or he will undo 

all the good that he as PM wants done. He will 

soon be running for cover as there is bound to 

be quite a few skeletons tumbling out of his 

cupboard after Kirti Azad's PC.
















Friday, December 18, 2015

7 CPC :RECTIFICATION OF DEFICIENCIES IN PENSION RELATED RECOMMENDATIONS OF 7th CPC

SOURCE :

 CURTSEY
http://sainikdarpan.blogspot.in/






BHARAT PENSIONERS SAMAJ WRITES 

TO EMPOWERED COMMITTEE OF 

SECRETARIES FOR RECTIFICATION OF 

DEFICIENCIES IN PENSIONRELATED 

RECOMMENDATIONS OF 7th CPC



NO SG/BPS/11/2015




Dated 13.12.2015

Dear Shri. Pradeep Kumar Sinha

Cabinet Secretary GOI

Cabinet Secretariat, Government of India

Rashtrapati Bhawan,

New Delhi – 110 004





Reg : Pension related benefits of civilian employees 

Chapter 10.1 of 7th CPC report.





Ref : Bharat Pensioners Samaj (BPS) representation to 

Shri Arun Jaittley Ji, Honourable Minister of Finance 

Government of India vide its No SB/BPS/10/2015 dtd. 

25.11.15 (copy attached)


Sir,


In continuation of BPS representation vide No

 SG/BPS/10/2015 dtd. 25-11.15 (copy attached) to the

 honorable Minister of Finance GOI following few points

 are put forth for the consideration of Empowered

 Committee ofSecretaries under your chairmanship:



1. Fitment benefit (5.1.27) & {10.1.67 (ii) 2.57

Fitment factor has been recommended for uniform


 application to all employees & Pensioners arrived by dividing

 revised minimum pay by existing minimum salary. Minimum

 revised salary has been worked out on the principle of need

 base minimum wage following Dr Aykroyed formula. of 50s

 which is out dated & smells of colonial mindset. The

 “Normative Family” is taken to consist of a spouse and two

 children below the age of 14yrs. (Husband 1 unit, wife 0.8

 unit and children (2) at 0.6 unit each). Considering wife to be

 .80 unit is nothing but gender bias. In the present scenario a

 wife too put in the same amount of physical work rather may

 be more as compared to husband. She needs more

 nutrients to keep herself fit to be mother & needs more

 clothing. A lady whether she is a wife of a labourer or a

 Secretary to Govt. of India has a basic right to keep her

 reasonably presentable for which she needs some minimum

 add-ons as such treating her to be less than a unit is gross 

injustice.



Similarly growing Children of less than 14yrs need more of

 proteins, fats & carbohydrates, with sufficient exercise &

 field activities for healthy growth. Today they need much

 better & more clothing compared to 50s. Today Nation

 needs healthy & stout young citizens. It is against the

 national interest to restrict their need base minimum

 requirement to .6 units.




The basket of items taken does not take care of digital India’s

 minimum requirement i.e.a smart mob. phone & internet

 connection. The quantities of consumption & rates taken for

 the items in the basket are unrealistic compared to actual

 retail market rates.



In the light of above mentioned facts it is felt that minimum

 salary has been intentionally calculated to be lower to keep

 common fitment factor low. BPS, therefore, appeal that

 minimum revised salary be raised upwards to make it

 realistic.



According to 7th CPC recommendations, 2.57 fitment factor

 is for all employees and pensioners. But, in fact, 2.81 fitmen

t has been given at Secy level by raising existing Salary of

 80000/PM to 225000/per month. This is robbing Peter to pay

 Paul, violative of CPC own recommendation and that of

 Article 14 of the constitution of India. BPS, therefore, appeal

 that 2.81 fitment benefit be provided to all employee and

 Pensioners without any discrimination.





2. Minimum Pension/family pension (10.1.24) (10.1.26): As

 per 7th CPC recommendations revised minimum pension

 will be 50% of the minimum revised salary of Rs 18000/&

 Family pension will be 30% of it i.e. Minimum Pension will

 now be = Rs 9000/PM & family Pension =5400/ Sofar

 minimum pension & Family pension have been the same i.e

. Rs 3500/ if existing minimum family Pension of Rs 3500/ is

 multiplied by 2.57 fitment benefit, it comes to Rs 8995/PM

 BPS request that the matter be look ed into to ensure that

 minimum pension & family Pension remains the same.



3. Parity in Pension between pre & post seventh CPC

 retirees (10.1.53):


The pension formulation under para 10.1.67 (i) option 1

 recommended by the Commission is that all past pensioners

 shall first be fixed in the Pay Matrix being recommended by

 it, on the basis of the Pay Band and Grade Pay at which

 they retired, at the minimum of the corresponding level in the

 matrix. This amount shall be raised, to arrive at the notiona

l pay of the retiree, by adding the number of increments he

had earned in the corresponding pay scale from which he

had retired, at the rate of 3 per cent. Fifty per cent. of the

 amount thus obtained would be the revised pension.



It would be seen that the Commission has recommended

 fixation of the revised pension of the past pensioners

 (without rectifying anomalies of 6th CPC), on the basis of the

 pay scale, after 31-12-2005/Pay Band and Grade Pay from

 which they had retired and not on the basis of the revised

 pay of the post from which they had retired. The concept of

 full parity implies that it is the rank or post held by the

 pensioner which determines his pension and not the pay

 scale. In many cases the pay scales have been up-graded

 after the retirement of the pensioners as a result of Pay

 Commission’s recommendations or otherwise without any

 change in the rank or in the nomenclature of the post held

 previously by them. Advantage of these upgraded pay

 scales was denied to those who retired earlier to such up

 gradation creating disparity in Pension.





The formulation proposed by the 7th CPC will not remove the

existing disparity between the pension of the pre 01-01-2006

 pensioners and those retiring after this date. Such a disparity

 will continue even after the implementation of the formulation

 recommended by the 7th CPC for the fixation of the pension

 of the past pensioners since their pension will be fixed on

 the basis of the pay scale from which they had retired and

 the benefit of revised scale upgraded after their retirement

 will not be admissible to them.



The principle of full parity implies that the uniform pension

 should be paid to all pensioners retiring in the same rank

 with the same length of service, irrespective of the date of

 their retirement. Since the formulation recommended by the

 Seventh Pay Commission will not bring about uniformity in

 the pension of the past pensioners retiring in the same rank

 on different dates, 7th CPC recommendation thus will not

 ensure full parity for all civil pensioners.





Another glaring anomaly relating to pensioners in the new

 Pay Matrix which the Commission has proposed after

dispensing with the existing system of Pay Bands and Grade

 Pay introduced on the recommendations of the Sixth Pay

 Commission. In the proposed Pay Matrix, in place of the

 existing Grade Pay, there are 18 distinct Pay Levels which

 would henceforth be status determiner. Each Level lays

 down the minimum pay, the annual pay progression of 3 per

 cent. and the maximum pay. It is seen that the maximum

 pay in each Level exceeds the minimum pay in the next

 higher Level. This is likely to create a situation in which a

 person retiring from a higher Level will receive pension less

 than a person retiring from a lower Level. A situation may

 arise where a junior may draw more pension than a senior in

 the level above him.




BPS appeals for the removal of the anomalies discussed

 above while taking a decision on the Commission’s

recommendation.




4. Ratio between minimum and maximum: Instead of

 reducing it is raised which is against the preamble of the 

Constitution of Indian Republic. Issue may be revisited.




5. Raising Percentage of pension, based on sustenanceL

 (10.1.24 to 27) Analysis given by CPC is silent on 

sustenance-this is unjustified rejection and may be

 reconsidered.




6. Additional pension at 75yrs of age (10.1.28 to 30) is

 denied only because Defence Ministry did not agree, this is

 rather absurd. If Defence Ministry does not want to have it,

let them not have it. Why make others suffer on this account?





7. Medical facilities: (9.5.18 The Commission’s

 recommendations regarding merging of all postal 

dispensaries with CGHS dispensaries and inclusion of non

 CGHS covered postal Pensioners are welcome.


However, its recommendations regarding Health insurance

 for pensioners do not suit existing pensioners on account of

 no coverage of existing disease without lock-in period, no

 provision of OPD facility, payment of premium and less

amount of coverage.




BPS, wish to draw your kind attention to para 9.5.18 (iii) of

the 7th CPC and request you to creat without delay a

 combined entity of CGHS, ECHS-RELHS which in terms of

 7th CPC would result in a very strong network of health

 facilities for the Central Government employees/pensioners

 across the length and breadth of the country.




8. Fixed Medical Allowance (FMA) (8.1.51) It is granted to

 pensioners for meeting expenditure on day to day medical

 expenses that do not require hospitalization. Keeping in view

 the high cost of medicines & ever rising consultation fee of 

Doctors, BPS urge that the issue be revisited to reconsider

 the demand for raising FMA to Rs 2000/ PM.




Thanking you in anticipation.



With warm regards


Yours sincerely,


Er. S.C.Maheshwari

Secy.Genl.Bharat Pensioners Samaj


C/-MS Vandana Sharma Joint Secy.

DOP & PW for n/a at her level pl.

S.C Maheshwari





































ADM & MORALE : Indian Soldiers’ Unique ‘Unlimited Liability’

SOURCE :: 

 http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/comment/indian-soldiers-unique-unlimited-liability/172173.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=417&v=dTeJMoabSdk




                Indian Soldiers’ Unique

                   ‘Unlimited Liability’


The concept of ‘unlimited liability’ necessitates a soldier’s behaviour to be contrary to his natural human instincts and morally binds him to walk in the line of fire, irrespective of personal danger. And the fundamental import is unmistakably military and Indian in nature.

                                                                                                       -Lt Gen Bhopinder Singh (retd)


It is now a war cry of lakhs of retired defence personnel 

who are tired of waiting for the government to

 implement One Rank One Pension or OROP. 


Eventhough the government has said that OROP will be 

implemented, the war veterans have a basic question - 

when? Betrayed and angry, these armed forces 

pensioners are now thinking about direct action. On The 

Buck Stops Here, some of India's finest war veterans, 

who are leading the charge to ensure OROP becomes a 

reality, join the show. We debate: Is the One Rank One 

Pension stuck in red tape or political apathy? Why has 

the Congress, and now the BJP, dragged their feet on 

the issue?




Watch more videos: http://www.ndtv.com/video?yt


               [  https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=417&v=dTeJMoabSdk  ]




                                          [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrOXl9mqaGM ]





                Indian Soldiers’ Unique

                   ‘Unlimited Liability’


                                    BY

                  Lt Gen Bhopinder Singh, (Retd), PVSM, AVSM


The concept of ‘unlimited liability’ necessitates a soldier’s behaviour to be contrary to his natural human instincts and morally binds him to walk in the line of fire, irrespective of personal danger. And the fundamental import is unmistakably military and Indian in nature.



Indian soldiers’ unique ‘unlimited liability’
Colonel Santosh Y. Mahadik laid down his life in the highest tradition of the Indian military that comes unwritten, unsaid and, more often than not, remains unknown outside of the soldiering fraternity. PTI photo

Last month, when the nation was waking up to the news of the raw gallantry of Colonel Santosh Mahadik, Commanding Officer of 41 RR, who was killed while leading in a fierce counter-infiltration operation in the Manigah forest of Kupwara – a poignant and pertinent point made by the Northern Army Commander was lost in the din. The General said, “The ethos of the Indian Army, the culture of the Indian Army — these are things that are sometimes not very well understood. We have a concept of unlimited liability. A man goes into battle, a man faces terrorists, and he faces them sometimes with certainty that he could lose his life". The fundamental import of the concept of unlimited liability is unmistakably military and Indian in nature — an underlying sentiment that sub-consciously informs the beliefs, customs and practices of an Indian soldier.



International military historians and observers often marvel at the operational daredevilry and leadership of the Indian Army, with Kargil counting amongst the finest displays of operational unit-level and company-level command by relatively young officers and bloodied subedars – a lesser known fact being the Indian combat casualty ratio of ‘officer to men’ to be arguably amongst the highest of all militaries in the world. Not surprisingly, earlier in the year, Colonel MN Rai, another commanding officer of a Rashtriya Rifles unit, went down leading from the front – an intrinsic tenet of unlimited liability.



The etymological origin of the better understood concept of ‘limited liability’ is essentially mercantile and corporate in nature. It is defensive and self-protectionist in spirit, which seeks to absolve the protagonist of any liability beyond the officially stated definition. This is in complete contrast to the more cavalier and noble concept of unlimited liability that offers no such comfort or escapist approval in operational responsibility. This concept necessitates a soldier’s behaviour to be contrary to human instincts and morally (yes, only morally) binds him to walk in the line of fire, irrespective of personal danger. Importantly, no formally signed covenant at the time of joining service spells out any such specific need to face losing life or limb as part of the job – it comes unwritten, unsaid, and largely remains unknown outside of the soldering fraternity.


Across the canvass of public life in the political space, corporate turf and other civilian administrative domains there are myriad instances of leadership exhibiting limited liability in all its sophistry. A well-known corporate liquor baron who until recently was seen personally endorsing a swanky new dream in the form of a brand-extended airline, only to see its disintegration and devastating financial impact on its hapless employees and vendors, till today goes about his flamboyant lifestyle unabated, secure in the legal comfort of a limited liability with no moral bindings or call to honour. Most political virtuosos of legally convicted status tom-tom the oft-repeated and convenient ‘political conspiracy’ line, and prop surrogate candidates in the form of wives, sons, or relatives to retain their fiefdoms – morality be damned. 


A visit to a government set-up for any paperwork or clearance is usually met with cold and sharp explanations of the scope of actions and inactions that define the limits of the said desk or individual on the movement of a file (if at all). But the nature of military service is different – it comes with its own inexplicable and extended codes of conduct, sense of history and Regimental ‘izzat’, uncompromising quirks of culture and ethos, nail-biting training and the seclusion of its barracks, operational theatres and deployment – creating a distinct and unique set of battle-hardened separateness from the mainstream civilian society. Military service is clearly not a job but a calling in life; it subconsciously drives a moral burden on the soldier, who is expected to answer the call to arms at the state’s directive, even at the sure cost of losing a life or limb.


Unlimited liability is also all-encompassing to the soldering eco system that straddles up the chain of command and equally to the men directly under command. It also extends to the veterans, who are afforded higher respect and honour than those still in uniform. An interesting corollary to the same principal is seen in the struggle of the veterans for the OROP cause, wherein literally the struggle is a composite agitation for all three services, soldiers, officers, early retirees, widows, etc. The underlying principle being the cause, ‘Leave no man behind’. 


Structurally for a soldier there can be no selectivity, individuality or limitability of thought and action. However, given the increasingly commercial and transactional leadership dominating the national narrative, it is often commented rather ignorantly and lazily that the soldiers ought to be aware of the risks that ‘come with the turf’ – thereby, invoking a certain justification on the unnecessary hardships and dangers that would be unacceptable for bureaucrats, civilians and political administrators.


The premium in the military uniform is always on ‘going beyond’. Last year, when the lion-hearted Major Mukund Vardarajan of the Rajput Regiment was conferred the Ashok Chakra (highest gallantry award in peacetime action) for counter-insurgency action in Shopian district of J&K, his gallantry citation alluded to the unsaid but sworn commitment of an Indian soldier, ‘…for display of valour beyond the call of duty…’. Yet another Indian Army officer had answered his clarion call towards fulfilling his unlimited liability towards his nation, his regiment, his unit and his men.


For the military, anything short of such conviction and belief systems would be devastating for itself and the nation. The nature of the service affords no second chances, bargaining or discussions in pursuit of the state’s order, making it the most lethal and effective organisation in trying times (a fact that is selectively remembered only in such trying times like the recent flood aid in waterlogged Chennai, when all other governmental functionaries came to a grinding halt). There is a crucial lesson in such selfless leadership concept for all countrymen to imbibe, wherein the country sleeps safe at night with the solid assurance that the military still swears by their unflinching commitment to unlimited liability towards the nation, not because of the prevailing political or civilian leadership in the country, but in spite of the same.


The writer is a former Lt Governor of Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Puducherry