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)

PROCUREMENT & CORRUPTION IN THE MINISTRY : Arms and the Middlemen

SOURCE:
http://www.asianage.com/columnists/arms-and-middlemen-817

                   Arms and the Middlemen

                                             By

                               Bhopinder Singh

 

 

 

May 10, 2016

"Individual arms deals have long-term maintenance and technology support contracts. The process is bureaucratic and long-winding. Thus, it is prone to influencers who can accelerate and grease palms with ‘speed money’ to keep the deal moving."

Corruption in Indian defence deals date back to the 1948 jeep scandal when the pesky and brazen V.K. Krishna Menon, India’s high commissioner to the UK, ignored the protocols and signed a deal for 200 jeeps with a foreign firm and India only received 155. Since then, Bofors, HDW submarines, “Coffingate”, Tatra trucks and many such deals are symptomatic of the continuing taints that have afflicted the various defence deals.

In almost all these deals, murmurs about the nexus between shady arms dealers and politicians of the ruling dispensations (of all political persuasions) did the rounds.
However, the conviction rate of any Indian politician or bureaucrat of any significance in the defence deals has been virtually zero and the “blacklisting” of tainted firms has resulted in unprecedented difficulties for the Indian defence forces.

Bofors, the Swedish manufacturer was blacklisted in 1987 and the ban was lifted only in June 1999 when Bofors proved its mettle in the Kargil war, albeit, badly crippled for want of spare parts.
A similar experience was faced by the Indian Navy when the German submarine manufacturer, HDW, was suddenly blacklisted on disclosures of kickbacks after having supplied four submarines. The HDW blacklisting forced the authorities to deal with dodgy companies to secure spare parts and keep the fleet operational at exorbitant prices.

Even in the current melee about the AgustaWestland helicopter scam, questions on the maintenance and spare parts of the three helicopters already inducted and the Naval Sea King helicopters abound, with no clarity on managing the eventuality, and its repercussions.
Strangely, efforts to tighten the screws on corruption have only made the process more complex as it gets mired in intrigues that further require “insiders”.

Individual arms deals often run into billions of dollars with long-term maintenance and technology support contracts. The process is bureaucratic, highly competitive and long-winding. Hence, it is susceptible to influencers who can circumvent, accelerate and grease palms with “speed money” to keep the deal moving in a particular direction, till fructification.

Two systemic changes introduced have been the formation of a Technical Oversight Committee, and the almost naïve, honour-based Integrity Pact (since 2006), which has an undertaking by the bidders that they have not paid/will not pay bribes, etc. with appropriate penalties (this was made compulsory for all procurement deals above Rs 100 crore).

Politically, indecision, procrastination or blacklisting could be kosher, but militarily it is disastrous as it perpetuates the risks to the soldiers and the nation. Against an authorised strength of 42 fighter squadrons, the Indian Air Force has only 33 — the tender for 126 medium multi-role combat aircraft (MMRCA) was done in 2007, yet despite Rafale’s selection in 2012, we are still haggling with Dassault Aviation over the base price fixation for the first 36 fighter aircraft in 2016.

There is an urgent need to simplify, shorten and insulate the workings of the core selection team from the competing vendors. This team needs enhanced participation of soldiers rather than tenure-based bureaucrats (the director-general of acquisition, defence ministry, is an IAS officer), and, critically, the answerability of decisions to Parliament rather than the government. This will go a long way in curbing the enthusiasm of ruling politicians, fixers and lobbyists in the ultimate preference of a weaponry, which ought to be decided only on the service requirements.

A fast-track court (perhaps, even military) to convict any individual seen to be meddling in a deal, in a time-bound manner, will ensure adequate deterrence and distance.

Last but not the least is the acceleration of private participation in defence industry to harness the technological, entrepreneurial and cost advantages afforded domestically.

Currently, the much-bandied “Make in India” private industry thrust accounts for less than one per cent of the defence budget, signalling India’s tentative steps towards the new defence procurement procedure. Globally, private sector for defence industry fuels the domestic economy. Even a pacifist country like Sweden regularly supplies armament to countries with questionable human rights track record like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain or Egypt.

At the end of the day, scale of defence deals are reflective of our political abilities (or failures) in managing foreign affairs with our neighbouring countries, as indeed our domestic affairs.

Unsettled international border disputes, multiple insurgencies and secessionist movements within the country and frequent requisitioning of the armed forces for managing natural and man-made disasters is squeezing the capability and capacity of the defence forces to its limits.

Given the current status, India’s reliance on international defence deals for critical sustenance and efficacy of the over-stretched and under-equipped defence forces is complete and necessary for at least the next two to three decades (India is the top arms importer, accounting for 14 per cent of the global arms trade).

So with the financial stakes expected to continue running high in the near future (Rs 78,586 crore has been allocated for capital expenditure in the current year’s defence budget), coupled with existing systemic inefficiencies will ensure the curse of “influencers”. Unfortunately, the AgustaWestland narrative is more focused on political blame-game rather than the critical task of simplifying the procurement process with adequate transparency, build-in. The lure for defence deals thrives on the inherent red-tapism and lack of conviction of “influencers” in the multiple scams so far. Meanwhile, the soldiers’ remains exposed, under-involved and inadequately equipped to handle the conventional and unconventional demands that are enforced upon them to guard the borders and within.





The writer is former lieutenant-governor of Andaman & Nicobar Islands and Puducherry

7th CPC & Armed Forces : HISTORY REPEATS AGAIN & AGAIN FOR THOSE WHO DON'T READ HISTORY

SOURCE:
http://www.staffnews.in/2016/05/7th-cpc-armed-forces-will-history.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CGENewsTools+%28Central+Government+Employee+News+%26amp%3B+Tools%29


       HISTORY REPEATS  AGAIN & AGAIN FOR THOSE WHO DON'T READ HISTORY

                                                      Vasundhra

                7th CPC & Armed Forces 

               Will the History Repeat Itself

                                    By

                         Brig Anil Gupta

 

 

Ever since the Seventh Pay Commission report has been made public there has been a sense of great resentment and let down in the armed forces community. While the veterans were battling for justified grant of One Rank One Pension (OROP) the men in uniform were hopeful that the impending pay commission report will deliver justice to them and will set right the unsettled anomalies of the fourth, fifth and sixth pay commissions as promised by their political masters. The battle hardened soldiers were not only surprised by the bomb shell delivered by Mr Mathur Chairman of the Seventh Pay Commission but were also highly demoralised. 

Having learnt from the previous experience of the Indian Air Force, the three service chiefs immediately swung into action to not only douse the simmering fire amongst the rank and file but also to plan a joint strategy to address the government.

 The seventh pay commission not only failed to resolve the pending anomalies of the previous pay commissions but added further salt to the injury by equating the status of the Armed Forces of India with that of the Central Armed police Forces.

It is a pity that the bureaucrats in our country fail to draw the distinction between the Armed Forces and the Police Forces. The Pay Commission also went beyond its charter and has tried to tinker with the terms and conditions of service of the rank and file of the Armed Forces.

 

 The armed forces were harmed both monetarily as well as status/protocol.

Much has already been written in the media on the subject. The basis of the report is a study carried out by Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis, a strategic think-tank, comparing the pay of Indian Armed Forces with that of certain foreign armies of developed countries. The competence of IDSA to carry out such a study is questionable. Moreover, why only the armed forces have been singled out for such a comparison and why not other services like IAS, IFS, Forest, Railways, IPS to name a few? The answer is simple; the study was motivated and designed to reduce the salary, perks and status of the armed forces. But what worries the soldiers is the possibility of history repeating itself. Though every pay commission since 1973 has been unfair to the armed forces major resentment surfaced after the announcement of the sixth pay commission report in 2008. It led to a major showdown between the three service chiefs and politico-bureaucratic establishment. The services requested the then government to appoint their representative in the Committee of Secretaries appointed by the government to look into the various anomalies in the 6th CPC report that were brought to the notice of the government. The request of the Service Chiefs was based on the logic that 30% (nearly 1/3rd) of the central government employees affected by the pay commission belonged to the three services. The request was not granted but an assurance was given that their concerns would be addressed with sympathy and without prejudice. In keeping with the apolitical stance of the Armed Forces the service chiefs conceded but were taken aghast when the report of the committee was announced after approval of the government. The services found that not only were their major grievances not addressed three more glaring discrepancies were introduced in the final Cabinet notification. The three service chiefs not only felt let down in front of the forces they commanded but also badly humiliated. They took up the matter separately with the Defence Minister and the Prime Minister and conveyed the concerns of the Armed Forces. But they learnt to their dismay that real villain was none else than their own Ministry of Defence (MOD) which presented a very weak case without relevant supporting documents to the PMO and Finance Ministry.Incidentally, this was worse than the aftermath of 5th Pay Commission ten year earlier when the armed forces pointed out 48 anomalies out of which only eight had been resolved during the decade preceding announcement of 6th Pay Commission Award. Fortunately, Admiral Sureesh Mehta, a no non-sense officer, was the Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee then. He convinced his other two colleagues to delay the implementation of flawed 6th CPC Report in the Armed Forces. Accordingly, the decision was communicated by the respective service headquarters to their rank and file through a signal message. The message was received with great jubilation by the subordinate units which sent jitters to the politico-bureaucratic nexus as well as received adverse comments from certain quarters in the media.

 

It was Nitin Gokhale who came in open support of the service chiefs and wrote,

“If the said signal, as the communication is called in military parlance, is defiance, then no military chief will ever be able to give assurances to, and take, his men in confidence. Anyone who has dealt with the armed forces will tell you that there is not an iota of truth in the canard that is being spread about the three Chiefs ‘defying’ the civil authorities. Yes, they questioned the bureaucracy’s attempts to wittingly or unwittingly introduce pay and status disparities between the armed forces and their civilian counterparts. Yes they took the matter to Prime Minister but in no way did they defy the government.”

 

The bold stand taken by the three Chiefs had the desired result and the Prime Minister appointed a group of ministers to resolve the grievances of the armed forces. A couple of main points were immediately settled and the services accepted the implementation of 6th CPC. But true to its traditions the MOD continued to play the spoilsport and number of unresolved anomalies were referred to the 7th CPC. As mentioned earlier 7th CPC report rather than assuaging the hurt feelings of the armed forces has further aggravated the anger and resentment.

The continued apathy of the bureaucracy towards men in uniform is perplexing. World over Armed Forces are considered as the last bastion of a nation and are always held at a different pedestal but in our country under the garb of ensuring civil supremacy the politico-bureaucratic nexus has been working against the interests of the armed forces. The soldiers are remembered and honoured at the time of crisis but forgotten soon thereafter. It is the sheer sense of patriotism which continues to motivate the armed forces personnel to continue to shed their blood for Bharat Mata despite the neglect they suffer at the hands of politico-bureaucratic authorities. Knowing fully well that the armed forces are unhappy with the treatment meted to them by the 7th CPC, effort is being made through the media to spread lies.

 

The latest attempt is an article in a leading national daily titled “Our service chiefs may earn more than US generals.”

 

CLICK TO READ "PROPAGANDA" BY

IDSA http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Our-service-chiefs-may-earn-more-than-US-generals/articleshow/52001778.cms

 

 It states that for the first time, the Indian Army Chief and his counterparts in the IAF and Navy will draw more salary than the top general and equivalent in the US based on purchasing power parity (PPP) terms when the 7th CPC report is implemented. PPP based comparison is misleading and flawed. Also, how can the pay of officers of two different armies having different terms & conditions of service be compared? Moreover, the figures quoted in the article were exaggerated as was evident from another news item published a few days later by Asian Age titled “Indian service chiefs earn less than top US general reveals new data.” Such articles are aimed at creating confusion among the rank and file and create distrust among the officers and other rank. No nation, more so India, can afford to have disgruntled armed forces. It is thus necessary that the history is not made to repeat itself by prudent political intervention at this stage and all genuine grievances of the armed forces are addressed sympathetically and without prejudice before approving the flawed report of 7th CPC. The Prime Minister needs to intervene to ensure that the justice is done to the armed forces and the trend of widening rift in civil-military relations is halted without further delay. There is a murmur already doing the rounds among the rank and file that if history repeats itself who will don the mantle of Admiral Sureesh Mehta this time?

 

ADDITION : COUNTING OF PREVIOUS SERVICE TOWARDS PENSION

                      
ADDITION  : COUNTING OF PREVIOUS

          SERVICE TOWARDS PENSION


Further to my recent post, 

  http://bcvasundhra.blogspot.in/2016/05/orop-counting-of-previous-service.html      

  this may interest all those who had served as ORs before getting commissioned.

Dear Sir,

 

In this would like to draw your attention to GOI letter--

 No.

​ ​

1(1)/2007-D (Pen/Pol)

 Government of India 

 Ministry of Defence

 Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare 

 New Delhi

Dated 20th May 2009 and even No. Letter Dated 03rd Sep 2009.

 

 In the first letter dated 20/05/2009 in para 2 (ii) it is very clearly given " full pre-commissioned rank service for working out the qualifying service for determining the revised pension subject of fulfillment of other conditions."  

 

With Regards 

Capt GC Agarwal 

07/05/2016

NUKES ; Nuclear battles in South Asia

SOURCE:
http://thebulletin.org/nuclear-battles-south-asia9415

         Nuclear Battles in South Asia

                                   By

            Pervez HoodbhoyZia Mian

Pervez Hoodbhoy

Hoodbhoy has taught in the physics department at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad for 40 years and now also teaches at...
More

Subscribe

Zia Mian

Zia Mian is at Princeton University’s Program on Science and Global Security. He is co-chair of the International Panel on Fissile Materials (IPFM).

Subscribe

The armies of Pakistan and India are practicing for nuclear war on the battlefield:

Pakistan is rehearsing the use of nuclear weapons, while India trains to fight on despite such use and subsequently escalate. What were once mere ideas and scenarios dreamed up by hawkish military planners and nuclear strategists have become starkly visible capabilities and commitments. When the time comes, policy makers and people on both sides will expect—and perhaps demand—that the Bomb be used.

Pakistan has long been explicit about its plans to use nuclear weapons to counter Indian conventional forces. Pakistan has developed “a variety of short range, low yield nuclear weapons,”   claimed retired General Khalid Kidwai in March 2015. Kidwai is the founder—and from 2000 until 2014 ran—Pakistan’s Strategic Plans Division, which is responsible for managing the country’s nuclear weapons production complex and arsenal.

These weapons, Kidwai said, have closed the “space for conventional war.”

Echoing this message, Pakistani Foreign Secretary Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry declared in October 2015 that his country might use these tactical nuclear weapons in a conflict with India. There already have been four wars between the two countries—in 1947, 1965, 1971, and 1999—as well as many war scares.


The United States, which at one time deployed over 7,000 tactical nuclear weapons in Europe aimed at Soviet conventional forces, has expressed alarm about Pakistan’s plans. Amplifying comments made by President Barack Obama, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest explained in April 2016 that

 “we’re concerned by the increased security challenges that accompany growing stockpiles, particularly tactical nuclear weapons that are designed for use on the battlefield. And these systems are a source of concern because they’re susceptible to theft due to their size and mode of employment. Essentially, by having these smaller weapons, the threshold for their use is lowered, and the[re is] risk that a conventional conflict between India and Pakistan could escalate to include the use of nuclear weapons.”


Responding to US concerns, Kidwai has said that “Pakistan would not cap or curb its nuclear weapons programme or accept any restrictions.” The New York Times reported last year that so far, “an unknown number of the tactical weapons were built, but not deployed” by Pakistan.
India is making its own preparations for nuclear war. The Indian Army conducted a massive military exercise in April 2016 in the Rajasthan desert bordering Pakistan, involving tanks, artillery, armored personnel carriers, and 30,000 soldiers, to practice what to do if it is attacked with nuclear weapons on the battlefield. An Indian Army spokesman told the media, “our policy has been always that we will never use nuclear weapons first. But if we are attacked, we need to gather ourselves and fight through it. The simulation is about doing exactly that.” This is not the first such Indian exercise. As long ago as May 2001, the Indian military conducted an exercise based on the possibility that Pakistan would use nuclear weapons on Indian armed forces. Indian generals and planners have anticipated such battlefield nuclear use by Pakistan since at least the 1990s.


Driving the current set of Indian strategies and capabilities is the army’s search for a way to use military force to retaliate against Pakistan for harboring terrorists who, from time to time, have launched devastating attacks inside India. In 2001, Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed claimed credit for an attack on India’s parliament. India massed troops on the border, but had to withdraw them after several months. International pressure, a public commitment by Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to restrain militants from future strikes, and Pakistan’s threat to use nuclear weapons if it was attacked caused the crisis to wind down. Following the 2008 terrorist attack in Mumbai by Pakistan-based militants, General Deepak Kapoor, then India’s army chief, argued that India must find a way to wage “limited war under a nuclear overhang.”


Paths to destruction. It could come to pass that Pakistan’s army uses nuclear weapons on its own territory to repel invading Indian tanks and troops. Pakistan’s planners may intend this first use of nuclear weapons as a warning shot, hoping to cause the Indians to stop and withdraw rather than risk worse. But while withdrawal would be one possible outcome, there would also be others. It is more likely, for instance, that the use of one—or even a few—Pakistani battlefield nuclear weapons would fail to dent Indian forces. While even a small nuclear weapon would be devastating in an urban environment, many such weapons may be required to have a decisive military impact on columns of well-dispersed battle tanks and soldiers who have practiced warfighting under nuclear attack.
India’s nuclear doctrine, meanwhile, is built on massive retaliation. In 2003, India’s cabinet declared nuclear weapons “will only be used in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian territory or on Indian forces anywhere … nuclear retaliation to a first strike will be massive and designed to inflict unacceptable damage.” According to Admiral Vijay Shankar, a former head of Indian strategic nuclear forces, such retaliation would involve nuclear attacks on Pakistan’s cities. Kidwai describes such Indian threats as “bluster and blunder,” since they “are not taking into account the balance of nuclear weapons of Pakistan, which hopefully not, but has the potential to go back and give the same kind of dose to the other side.” For nuclear planners in both countries, threatening the slaughter of millions and mutual destruction seems to be the order of the day.


There are also risks short of war, of course. Nuclear weapon units integrated with conventional forces and ready to be dispersed on a battlefield pose critical command-and-control issues. Kidwai believes that focusing on “lesser issues of command and control, and the possibility of their falling into wrong hands is unfortunate.” He claims “Our nuclear weapons are safe, secure and under complete institutional and professional control.” The implication is that communications between the nuclear headquarters and deployed units in the field will be perfectly reliable and secure even in wartime, and that commanders of individual units will not seek—or have the capability to launch—a nuclear strike unless authorized.


It is difficult to believe these claims. Peering through the fog of war, dizzied by developments on a rapidly evolving battlefield, confronting possible defeat, and fuelled by generations of animosity towards India as well as a thirst for revenge from previous wars, it cannot be guaranteed that a Pakistani nuclear commander will follow the rules.


Add to this the risks in what now passes for peacetime in Pakistan. The Strategic Plans Division may dismiss fears that its nuclear weapons will be hijacked. However, the military has rarely succeeded in anticipating and preventing major attacks by militant Islamist groups in Pakistan. Look no further than the May 2011 attack on Karachi’s Mehran naval base. The attackers, who may have numbered up to 20 and had insider help, “scaled the perimeter fence and continued to the main base by exploiting a blind spot in surveillance camera coverage, suggesting detailed knowledge of the base layout,” The Guardian reported. It took elite troops 18 hours to regain control of the base.


It is also unclear how the officers who are in charge of Pakistan’s military bases and those who make security-clearance decisions are chosen, and whether their own commitment to fighting Islamic radicalism is genuine. In 2009, the former commander of Pakistan’s Shamsi Air Force Base was arrested for leaking “sensitive” information to a radical Islamist organization. In 2011, a one-star general serving in Pakistan’s General Headquarters was arrested for his contacts with a militant group. In a religion that stresses its own completeness, and in which righteousness is given higher value than obedience to temporal authority, there is room for serious conflict between piety and military discipline.


Grasping at straws? A first step to reducing all these nuclear dangers is to prevent an escalation of tensions. This must start with Pakistan tackling the threat of Islamist militancy at home and preventing militant attacks across the India-Pakistan border. The outlook is mixed on both fronts. Pakistan’s army accelerated its war against radical Islamist groups after a 2014 attack on an army school in Peshawar that killed more than 140 students and staff. Despite military claims of success, though, responding with massive force and inflicting countless deaths will not resolve what is at its core a political and social problem. Ending the threat of radical Islam in Pakistan will require sweeping changes in public attitudes and major policy reversals in many areas. These are nowhere in sight.


To its credit, Pakistan has recently been more forward-leaning in dealing with militants who attack India. Following the assault on India’s Pathankot airbase in January 2016, Sartaj Aziz, foreign affairs adviser to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, made the surprising revelation that a mobile phone number used by the attackers was linked to the militant group Jaish-e-Mohammed based in Bahawalpur, Pakistan. To collect evidence for possible legal action against Jaish-e-Mohammed leaders, Pakistan sent a fact-finding mission to Pathankot with the approval of the Indian government. This kind of cooperation by the two governments is unprecedented.


Rather than limit cooperation to crisis management after an attack, Pakistan and India could agree on a South Asian version of the Open Skies Treaty to provide each with limited access to the other’s air space for surveillance purposes. India has an interest in monitoring possible militant camps within Pakistan and border areas where militants may cross. Pakistan seeks early warning in case India is preparing to mount a surprise attack. The 1992 Open Skies Treaty, covering the United States and fellow North Atlantic Treaty Organization members and Russia and its former Soviet and Eastern European partners, allows for controlled surveillance flights with agreed instruments such as photographic and video cameras, radar, and infrared scanners. The goal is to promote “greater openness and transparency in their military activities” and “to facilitate the monitoring of compliance with existing or future arms control agreements and to strengthen the capacity for conflict prevention and crisis management.” The United States and other parties to the Open Skies Treaty could share their technical tools and flight management experience with Pakistan and India, as well as what they’ve learned about the value of the agreement.


The two countries should also prepare in case things go wrong. The 1999 Lahore Agreement committed Pakistan and India to “notify each other immediately in the event of any accidental, unauthorised or unexplained incident that could create the risk of a fallout with adverse consequences for both sides, or an outbreak of a nuclear war between the two countries, as well as to adopt measures aimed at diminishing the possibility of such actions, or such incidents being misinterpreted by the other.” The question is, who will each side call and how? One possibility is a direct line of communication—a hotline—from Pakistan’s Strategic Plans Division chief to the head of India’s Strategic Forces Command. There are other hotlines, and they are not always used or used wisely, but in a crisis this may be better than relying on television, Facebook, Twitter, or Washington.
Progress towards even such limited measures will confront the fact that in both India and Pakistan, nationalist passions forged over seven decades are being reinforced by the institutional self-interests of emerging nuclear military-industrial complexes and their political patrons and ideological allies. The United States and Soviet Union saw such deepening militarization during the Cold War. The institutional forces and ideas—what the great English anti-nuclear activist, thinker, and historian E.P. Thompson called “the thrust of exterminism”—proved so strong that even when the Cold War ended, and the Soviet Union fell, the Bomb remained. With expansive and costly nuclear arsenal modernizations underway in the United States, Russia, and the other established nuclear weapon states, the Bomb now seems ready for a second life. Increasingly subject to the same exterminist forces, South Asia may be locked in its nuclear nightmare for a very long time.


















 

OROP : COUNTING OF PREVIOUS SERVICE TOWARDS PENSION

               OROP : COUNTING OF PREVIOUS                   SERVICE TOWARDS PENSION

No.Sangam Cell/complaint/Officer/2016

 

: 27/04/2016

To

Capt. M.G. He~e (Retd)

No. 24, Sena V har

Kammanahali ain Road

Bengaluru-56 3

 

 

SUB: - Issue of Corr PPO in respect of Capt. M.G.Hegde (Retd).

Ref:- Grievance No. DOPPW/E/2016/3151 dated 12/04/2016.

 

Kindly refer to your letter No. dated 02-03-2016 with PCDA(P)Grievance No. G-15880 dated 19/04/2016. In this connection it is intimated the Qualifying service in the

6th CPCCorr PPOwill be issued as under:- 

 

(1) As per AO 56/2001 para (I) states that in the past there was a provision for counting of pre-commissioned service in the ranks of the Armed Forces and civil department of Govt. of India towards pension of permanent commissioned officer. Prior to 01 July 1966, only one half of such pre-commissioned service was being counted for pension. It was raised to two third

w.e.f. 01/07/1966 and full w.e.f. 01/07/1986.

(2) The issue of counting pre-commissioned service was revised by the fourth central pay commission and Govt. of India issued orders for counting of full pre-commissioned service on or after 01/01/1986, vide Note No.(4) under para 5 of Govt. of India ,Ministry of defence letter No.1(5)/87/D/(Pen/Sers) dated 30/10/1987 which reads as follows.

The weightage is auto calculated as per the table under Cir No. 500. Hence No separate information is required to be given. The same will be available on the Public domain of the PCDA(P) Allahabad/Govt of India letter No.1(6)/1998/D(Pen/Ser) dated 30-20-1998.

Your contention of all the case of pre-01/01/1996 case will be dealt as per order on the subject i.e. Prior to 01/07/1966 Qualifying service of OR will be V2 of the gross OR qualifying service to commission service. After 01/07/1966 and up to 31/12/1985, 2/3rd of the qualifying service, and from 01/01/1986 full qualifying service will be added to the commissioned service.

In your case you have retired on 10/04/1979. Hence the net qualifying service to be added in the cornrnissioned service is 2/3rd of gross OR service (i.e. 2/3rd of 07years 05 month ll days= 4 years ll month 21days)
 

Encl! : As above k-Sq..- .

AO(SANGAM CELL)

 

 

N.O.O.

Copy  to:-

Brig. C 5 Vidyasagar(Retd) Pr sident TSEWA

Regt No. 495/2015,Register f socy, Hyderabad

Plot No.16, Bajrangnagar Copy