Feel free to contribute on burning issues concerning the armed forces. Contributions would be acknowledged - Use the 'Comments' tab or email navdeepsingh.india[at]gmail.com. No operational/business/commercial matters to be discussed please. Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained. Information on this blog is opinion based and is neither official nor in the form of an advice. This is a pro bono online journal in public service related to issues, policies and benefits, and the idea behind it is to educate and not to create controversy or to incite. Be soft in your language, respect Copyrights.

Monday, September 29, 2008

Unimpeachable proof that Lt Col is equivalent to Non Functional Selection Grade (NFSG) of the Civil Services : flaws on Pages 73 & 74 of the 6th CPC

-

(Again I may remind readers that the below mentioned should not be construed being against any particular service. This is merely a presentation of logic and facts. Differ if you may but with civility and counter-logic. And sorry if you find this a little technical, there was no other way)

The basis of pay equation of military ranks with grades of the civil services is reflected on Pages 73 & 74 of the 6th CPC report in the form of a historical comparison. But in my humble opinion, the equation tables presented on the ibid pages are not a correct expression of relativity.

This post by BeeCee made me re-visit history. The said pages of the 6th CPC report present a play of numbers while dealing with the Non-Functional Selection Grade (NFSG) of the Civil Services. While mentioning the 3rd CPC (an apt one to one comparison since there was no rank pay then), it has been mentioned that the Civil NFSG in the 3rd PayCom was Rs 2000-2250. But this is just one third of the story since there were two other grades too in NFSG which have conveniently not been mentioned, these were :-

Rs 1650 – 1800

Rs 1800 – 2000

The scale of a Lt Col was interpolated between the two @ Rs 1700 – 1900

Two pay commissions later, both the above mentioned 3rd CPC NFSG scales were converted into Rs 14,300-18,300 by the 5th CPC while Lt Col was placed in Rs 15,100-18,700.

A point of comparison would also be the grade of Commandant (Assam Rifles) (3rd CPC scale : Rs 1800-2000 / 4th CPC scale : Rs 4100-5300) which was specifically mentioned by the 5th CPC as a post tenable by officers of the rank of Lt Col and then granted the S-24 scale of Rs 14,300-18,300 by the same CPC.

So if we keep aside the self created interpretational comparison tables of the 6th CPC on Pages 73 & 74, then this is what we get :-

3rd CPC
NFSG : Rs 1650-1800 & Rs 1800-2000
Lt Col : Rs 1700-1900

4th CPC (which for the first time ‘really’ granted an edge in status to military officers keeping in view the longer length of service required to reach comparative grades)
NFSG : Rs 4100-5300 & Rs 4500-5700
Lt Col : Rs 4700-5900

5th CPC
NFSG : Rs 14300-18300
Lt Col : Rs 15100-18700

6th CPC
NFSG : Rs 37400-67000 with Grade Pay of Rs 8700
Lt Col : Rs 15600-39100 with Grade Pay of Rs 7600

Deputation of Military Officers to civil posts :- While the MoD, for organizations such as MES, DRDO and DGQA has never maintained a clear stand on equivalence, the equation becomes clear and evident by perusing rules of deputation in various other establishments. As explained above, the 5th CPC itself stated that Lt Cols were deputed to the post of Commandant (AR) which was held by AR Cadre officers in the scale of Rs 4100-5300 revised to Rs 14300-18300. The Bureau of Civil Aviation Security, on the other hand, maintains that Majors of the Army are to be deputed to NFSG posts carrying the scale of Rs 14300-18300. You can see their rules by clicking here. The Ministry of Home Affairs also confirms the placement of the rank of DIG between a Lt Col and a Colonel. Some PSUs equate both Lt Colonels and Colonels with the rank of DIG (Click here to see) whereas certain Public Sector Banks equate Colonels with the rank of DIG for employment / deputation purposes (Click here to see). The 6th CPC however contends that a DIG is equivalent to a Brig while an NFSG officer is equal to a full Colonel !!


The equivalence of Lt Col with NFSG cannot be ignored in light of the following :-

(a) Historically, successive pay commissions till the 5th have roughly equated the pay of Lt Colonels with the NFSG of the civil services, there was no reason why 6th CPC should have followed a different route. Moreover, Colonel which has now been equated with NFSG is a functional and not a non-functional rank.

(b) Not many would know that to retain near parity with civil services in 14th year of service (NFSG), a Group of Officers (GOO) set up by the govt to resolve 5th CPC anomalies in paragraphs 48 & 49 of their report, had recommended officers from the civil and defence services in their 14th year of service to have a parity in pay. In fact the GOO had stipulated parity between Majors in 14th year of service and NFSG officers. This parity established by the GOO has been undone by the 6th CPC.

(c) The rank of Lt Col is achievable in 13 years in the defence services and same is the case with the NFSG of the All India Services (Indian Administrative / Police / Forest Services) and also with most organized Group A services.

(d) The comparison tables articulated on Pages 73 & 74 have no official sanctity and are a result of a self created interpretation, two examples of anomalous facts :


(i) In the table for 3rd CPC, STS has been shown equated with Capt but in the 4th CPC, Capt has been conveniently shown as shifted a step and rank lower and equated with JTS. Is this supported by any statement in the 4th CPC ? Absolutely not !. There is not an iota of reference in the 4th CPC wherein it has been stated that the rank of Capt is being downgraded from the 3rd CPC level.

(ii) In the tables for NFSG during the 3rd CPC, the Pay Commission has conveniently only mentioned the highest NFSG in the civil services and completely eliminated from the table any mention of other two NFSGs. Yes there were three grades of NFSG for the civil services while the report has mentioned only one.

(e) Naysayers have commented that Rank Pay is not to be added into basic pay for comparison purposes. How wrong they are !. Rank Pay was carved out of basic pay by the 4th CPC wherein a running integrated pay band of Rs 2300-5100 with different minima points for each rank was brought into practice for 2/Lieut to Brigadier. Hence all ranks were in the same pay band with fixed minima for each successive rank and a differentiating rank pay for each. To say that rank pay is not to be added into basic pay for status or equivalence would mean that all ranks from 2/Lt till Brig had the same status since they were in the same scale. Is this an intelligible argument ?. SAIs issued after the 4th and 5th CPCs also clearly provide that Rank Pay is a part of Basic Pay for all purposes.

(f) Traditionally, in departments under Ministries other than MoD, Majors and Lt Colonels have been deputed on NFSG posts and Lt Colonels and Colonels have been deputed on Super Time Scale posts interchangeable with the rank of DIG as becomes clear from this, this and this.

(g) The Warrant of Precedence equates a Lt Col with a Superintending Engineer of the Central Engineering Services and a Conservator of Forests of the Indian Forest Services. An SE has been granted Pay Band-4 with a Grade Pay of Rs 8700 whereas a Conservator is in Pay Band-4 with a Grade Pay of Rs 8900. As is widely believed, Lt Col is not a time-scale based rank. Only those officers are promoted and selected to the rank of Lt Col who meet the promotion criterion including passing of departmental courses and examinations.

Are the services not justified in demanding to be treated equal if not special ?

Contrary to popular perception, the Ministry of Defence is supportive of the logical demands of the services. There have been attempts to create fissures between different elements of our defence set-up by a section of the media, but the political leadership as well as the military leadership is much too mature to fall into such a trap. In fact, it is the genuine demand of the services of setting up a committee of political executive to look into the anomalies that has been accepted and the report is expected by the end of October.


-

80 comments:

Col VT Venkatesh(retd) said...

Maj Navdeep
Onc again a great post & thanks for the same

Anonymous said...

Dear Sirs,
I just happened to surf a particular net with link (http://www.marablog.net/2008/09/29/sixth-pay-commission-unreasonable-demands/#more-889). The bastard is trying to wage a war of different kind. Can we track and pin him down?

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Major Navdeep for putting across a rather complex issue in simple words for everyone to understand the glaring disparity.

digvijay said...

Whoever has done the study has done very good job , well done

smm said...

dear navdeep sir

you ask the youngsters, about 90 percent of them are not aware of their entitlements. actually army officers are all KOOP MANDUKS and they are being made fools in the name of emotiones.if this country can not give our due what is the need to show any additional enthusiasm carry out any thing. we are just govt servant why can't we behave like a typical govt servant. and their are lot of ways to show all the CHATAKS army officers their real place who are more bothered about their promotion and not about their subordinates. Do you think the cols will perform alone for Gens without the capts and Majors. but the problem is that all youngsters all KOOP MANDOOKS who does not know even their basic pay.
so if you do'nt know-you do'nt deserve to get.

Col Pardaman Singh said...

Major Navdeep
You have done a commendable job. Weldon keep it up.I think you are the right person to enlighten us about the latest position of anomaly
of rank pay in 4th cpc,which is pending in Supreme Court& which was initially taken up by Major Dhanapalan.
Col Pardaman Singh

ANSHUJ said...

@This for Ms/Mr PRAGMATIC.
(With due permission of Navdeep)

This guy has blocked my comments on his blog just because I was asking some uncomfortable question.

Dear PRAG.
1.As I have said earlier,If you want to say something,learn to listen first.I have been warning you all along that you are indulging in a very dangerous game which is not good for the country.
2.You have been using derogatory language for senior officers of the Forces in the name of REFORMS.
These officers are very dear to all of us and to the entire countrymen.
3.You have prooved yourself to be a charlie by showing your arrogant behaviour.
4.Command over a language does not give licence for sacrilege.Your words are an indicator of pathetic upbringing and mutated genetic inheritance.
5.I am damn serious when I say that you need pshycological evaluation and counselling.I am ready to help you trudge over this problem.You can count on me,Its a soldiers word.
WISH YOU SPEEDY RECOVERY AND SOUND MENTAL HEALTH.

RDS said...

@ Maj Navdeep

Despite several requests from you, some of the commentators on this blog have been crossing limits of decency and are indulging in mudslinging and calling names/abuses. It is my earnest request to all to learn respecting the views of others. As mentioned by you in some other blog “ every single service is playing its part in the system and the discussion should be kept dignified". Abusive or derogatory comments on any service do not reflect correctly on the system as a whole.
Nevertheless, I must appreciate your dedication in pursuing the cause for taking Lt Cols to PB-4. Unfortunately your analysis is largely based on emotions and on misplaced facts. The following analysis presented by me is a presentation of logic and hard facts. You and other commentators are entitled to differ being part of democracy but please maintain decency.

The issue in question has two dimensions, firstly - higher pay for service officers for difficult working conditions, short service career etc. etc. and secondly - status parity.

There is no denying that the people in services deserve better compensation compared to their counterparts in civil employment for reasons known to all and discussed in length on this blog site. Successive pay commissions have accordingly maintained the edge in pay scales for defence personnel. Certain other allowances and facilities are also granted to armed forces on account of special and unique service conditions ( The amount of these compensations may be a matter of debate) . It is also simultaneously true that their can be no direct one to one comparison between the two categories based on pay drawn/pay scales. Both categories have distinct responsibilities/ duties and no direct comparison based on pay drawn is possible and should therefore not be attempted. The pay scales of armed forces therefore cannot be and should not be determinants for the responsibility levels in an organisation.

A functional parity, however could be drawn for organisations where both the service officers and civilian officers work together (viz. MoD/ Integerated HQs of MoD(Army/Navy/AF) , BRO, CDA, DGQA, Naval Armt Service, MES, Survey of India, Coast Guards etc.

Having said that, a few comments on the genesis of your analysis based on your following statement:-
"While the MoD, for organizations such as MES, DRDO and DGQA has never maintained a clear stand on equivalence, the equation becomes clear and evident by perusing rules of deputation in various other establishments."

Firstly - You have talked of historical precedence somewhere on this blog site. For your information and all others following this blog, there is one order of MoD on functional parity between the two streams. This letter issued by MoD in 1948 defines the level of officers for manning various posts by service officers and civilian officers. According to this letter, following equation was established by the Govt. :
AGE- Capt - AEE (JTS)
GE/OC ESD - Major - EE (STS)
CWE - Lt Col - SE (JAG)

Your argument placing Captains in parity with STS and Major in parity with JAG therefore does not hold ground. Now coming to Lt Cols who were being placed as CWE. Yes, it is true that Lt Cols were at functional parity with civilian SEs but only till the time SEs were in JAG grade. A lot of water has flown down Jhelum since then. You will appreciate that Army started posting Cols as CWEs (Please don't repeat the same argument that that it is internal matter of army and should not be an argument to draw parity), AVSC implementation that had the effect of lowering the working levels for Army officers and a new grade for SEs was introduced. The new grade of SEs was in NFSG (i.e equivalent of Director in civil parlance). With sound logic it translates into functional parity between Lt Col/SE/JAG and Col/SE(SG)/NFSG. BRO headed by a service officer realized this equation and issued functional parity orders accordingly as long back as in 1980. Post 5th CPC the grade erstwhile SEs has been converted to the grade for EE SG which is a promotional post for EEs(STS) and SE (SG)granted to those SEs only who fulfil the criteria equivalent to posts in NFSG in Gp 'A' services. Here again the simple logic translates into functional parity between Col/ SE/ NFSG and Lt Col/ EESG/ JAG.

This was about the historical perspective. Now a few instances of present functional parity:-
As per services own orders (AO 8/85) Cols are working in posts tenable by Dirs and Lt Cols in posts tenable by Jt Dirs. Similarly as per Air HQ orders Air Commodores are working as Principal directors and Gp capt (equivalent of Col) are working as Directors. Same is the status of officers working in NHQ as per orders issued by naval HQs. And remember, this status in not forced upon by IAS but ordered by our own bosses in forces.

I hope I have clarified the functional parity as it exists based on historical as well as present orders.

Secondly - You have raised the issue of rules of deputation followed by various organisations. For your kind information the deputation level in most cases is one level higher and in some cases even more than one level higher) than the post one holds in his/her parent department. It is, therefore perfectly fine if Lt Cols are eligible for deputation to posts equivalent to NFSG or even higher in other departments of GoI. Regarding PSUs/Banks no parallels should be drawn as they have their own functional requirements and are governed by different set of rules.

Thirdly - The main issue of grant of PB4 to Lt Cols. The wide difference between PB3 and PB4 which existed between SAG (Jt Secy) and other officers down the chain according to original recommendations of 6CPC has now descended to NFSG and JAG levels. Without passing my value judgement on applicability of NFSG or JAG to Col/Lt Col rank officers the same wide gap which is justifiably unpalatable now exists between these levels. I also agree with the anomaly pointed out by you and other commentators on this blog that Lt Cols were drawing more pay compared to officers in JAG and even NFSG in the pre-revised scales. Whereas the Lt Cols will still be drawing more pay compared to JAG officers but will be drawing less compared to NFSG officers (Read Directors). This is certainly an anamoly but only with respect to pay drawn and not repeat not in status as already explained in my previous analysis. I also agree that this anamoly can not be removed within the existing framework of rules where if an officer who was drawing more pay in pre-revised scales now draws less pay then his pay is stepped up to the extent of shortfall because this rule can only be applied to officers within the same cadre/service.

Now what is the solution?

I have a few suggestions:-

1) The main culprit for this anomaly is the wide gap between PB3 and PB4. Therefore introduce a new pay band PB-3A for JAG/Lt Cols with such a span which removes this anomaly and also reduces this unpalatable wide gap between PB3 and PB4.

2) If creation of new pay band does not find favour with the powers that be, remove the anomaly by stepping up pay of Lt Cols to the extent of shortfall by grant of personal pay by extending the jurisdiction of anomaly rule to between two different cadres/services.

Again let me point out that the above are my personal views without offence to anyone and everyone is entitled to differ.

s rastogi said...

RAW DEAL TO MEDICAL DOCTORS OF ARMED FORCES MEDICAL SERVICES:-MED DOCTORS IN CHS AND CGHS HAVE BEEN GRANTED DYNAMIC ACP SCHEME EXTENDED UPTO SENIOR ADMINSTRATIVE GRADE(GRADE PAY OF RS10000 IN PB-4)FOR THOSE HAVING 20YEARS OF REGULAR SERVICE. ALSO ALL MED DOCTORS IN ORGANISED SERVICES OR HOLDING ISOLATED POSTS ARE COVERED BY DACP.(PARA 12 OFMINISTRY OF FINANCE,DEPT OF EXPENDITURE RESOLUTION NO1/1/2008-IC DATED 29AUG2008) MED DOCTORS OF AFMS CAN ONLY REACH THE RANK OF 'LT COL' IN 20 YRS SERVICE WHICH IS IN PB-3 WITH GRADE PAY OF RS7600 ONLY AS PER THE RECCOMENDATIONS OF THE 6TH PAY COMMISSION.MED DOCTORS OF THE DEFENCE FORCES WORK UNDER SEVERE CONDITIONS OF SAICHEN GLACIER , HIGH ALTITUDE LOCATIONS,CI OPERATIONS ETC AS COMPARED TO THE CIVILIAN COUNTERPARTS.HTIS HAS LED TO A SEVERE LOWERING OF MORALE IN THE MILITARY DOCTORS AND MOST ARE PLANNING TO LEAVE FOR THE WELL PAID PRIVATE SECTOR.THIS GROSS ANOMALY CAN BE CROSSCHECKED BY YOUR SUPPORT STAFF AND BE PUT UP TO THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS GOM,. S RASTOGI

Anonymous said...

Dear Sirs
Some people in the same blogs were earlier scolding Politicians and IAS for the anomolies but now after formation of committee headed by same politicians, they are hoping that something positive will come. Isnt it a paradox? Its just a eyewash as Civilian Directors have got what they desired as they are accepting their revised pay with effect from Sept 2008 and can not be reverted back. Committee will take its own time to deliberate and then Model Code of Conduct will come in force.. Only next Govt can decide.

Anonymous said...

LETS us maintain some decency in dicussion, calling names is lowering our own status.x or y has given his views or someinformation availabe with him.JUST by this information the pay of any service personal will not be decided.we are forgetting one important issue here,so called well whisers, RETIRED GENS are taking up this issueof parity now,what they were doing while they were in service.IN late 80s and nineties ihave seen several letters from higher formations stating,that pay of officers is placed at a higher footing ,because of their nature of duties.WHAT these GENS have done WHEN pay of officers was being brought down.IDONT want to COMPARE WITh any civilian payscales .BUT will say only one thing the pay scales of officers were one step higher from 2nd LT TO BRIG. IN THIRD PAY COMMISSION.

Anonymous said...

GOOD home work ,but differ with you, NAVADEEP. LT.COL 1500-1900.(BY SELECTION) .TIME SCALE 1800(FIXED)_26 YEARS. iam in possession of a pay slip ofmy CO,IN early eighties. I AM WRONG OR YOUR WRONG, if you are right, than iwill inform then my CO who has retired closely watching ,to fight it out.

Anonymous said...

@Rastogi, AMC -LT.COL.--11YEARS. COL. 24YEARS(time scale).selection---(24YEARS+).

Anonymous said...

@smm, IT is josh. you and i were also like that in younger days those at higher fmn know that after 35 ,all are white elephants.

Anonymous said...

Pl find link of established equivalence in DGQA http://www.dgqadefence.gov.in/noticeboard.php?id=39

Anonymous said...

@6pm anonymous ,thanks. DOWN LOADED FROM THE SITE .DY.DIRECTOR(LT.COL/PSCO. PSSO CADRE-13500-400-15900+1600(RANK PAY).=DQAS-12OOO-375-16500.THIS POST HAS BEEN REDESIGNATED AS JOINT DIRCTOR.------JOINT DIRECTOR(COL/PSCO) 15100-450-17350)+2000.=DIRECTOR-14300-400-18300.(MOD LETTER NO-17(2)2007/D(QA)DT06 DEC2007

RS Katoch said...

Dear All

One serious point to the notice of one and all that a X-Group Sergeant of IAF was in 5000- 6500- scale but in 6th CPC he is being degraded as he is put in 5200 (Now)equivalent scale by giving him 2800/- as grade pay. (Where as all Civil Govt Employees in 5000/- scale are given 9300-34800 with 4200/- as Grade Pay). And it is stated in report that X-GpX Sgt is given 1400/- as X- Group pay thereby he is compensated but this X-Gp pay is given across board to all X-Group Ranks and putting in 5200-20200 with 2800 instead of 9300-34800 with 4200 even 1400 GpX pay is adjusted in grade pay itself (required 4200 but given 2800 difference 1400). What about 4100 difference (Authorized 9300--given 5200=4100) then where is compensation. Only X-Gp Sgt is at loss.

Every one is talking about the cause of Lt Col only. Even all the three Chief are talking about the Lt col and comparing with Civil. Good data is being given in this support. But no one talks about GpX Sgt. He was in 5000 scale and his civilian counter part are put in 9300-34800 with 4200 grade pay and he is put poorly in 5200-20200 with 2800 grade pay. Is it justified? If he can not be compared with civil then at least put him in the scale of Artificer III – I 9300-34800 with grade 3400.Artificer III was drawing near the same to GpX Sgt. We expect much from this present Chief who is first transport pilot to hold top post in Air force. It is better to fight for cause for GpX Sgt too. Request you all to raise the concern of GpX Sergeant in the entire forum. These poor PBOR do not have any forum to speak and those who are above them speak for themselves only. Even their Chiefs are also not speaking for their cause but only concern to them is officers pay protection. Our chiefs are satisfied with PBOR pay structure. What an irony? Why Air Force Chief is not raising the concern of GpX Sergeant Cause.

Anonymous said...

Rank pay not to be added to determine status.pl check MOD ID appended below:-
MINISTRY OF DEFENCE
D(MS)
Subject : Status Equivalency between Service Officers and Scientist in DRDO

***

1. Reference minutes of the meeting held on 3-6-99 circulated vide MOD I.D. note No. 10417/RD/Pers-6/1115/D(MS)/99 dared 15-6-99
2. The matter with respect to status of Rank pay has since been resolved and it has been decided by the Government that the rank pay will be taken into account for determining the entitlement of the commissioned officers of the three services to financial benefits concessions etc including retirement benefits. However, the rank pay will not be taken into account for determining the status. Further action in the matter may be taken in accordingly.


Sd------

(A.K. Sethi)
Under Secretary (MS)


Chairman PPDC
FOR DRDO
Mod ID. No. 19(19)/99-D(MS), dated 4-5-2000

Anonymous said...

u r right KATOCH

Anonymous said...

@anshuj..

best option is not to go to PRAG'S BLOG..he sings his own song..so let him do that..just dont react..he survives on our comments..so deny him that..

THIS IS A REQUEST TO ALL

Ajith said...

First you give a SDA for breakfast, then you make it an EDGE for lunch, after that you carve out a RANK PAY from the basic for the dinner and then you happily swallow that and prop up a MSP for dessert. And then you give the poor chap a lecture on parity and status. Is there any Bureaucrat out there who is not a Hippocrate.

Ajith said...

@ Maj Navdeep
Thanks for this post. Yor analysis is quite revealing. Only if someone hand a copy of this to the GoM. I think in the face of such hard facts and glaring anomaly, the job of GoM should be that much easier.

To the commentator in rds at 1:21 PM
While appreciating your effort at portraying a lower parity (functional as you would call it) for the Lt Col and equivalents and granting your right to keep your views and opinions, I am sorry to say Sir that you are missing the point by a mile.
Somewhere in your arguments you said. " I also agree with the anomaly pointed out by you and other commentators on this blog that Lt Cols were drawing more pay compared to officers in JAG and even NFSG in the pre-revised scales. Whereas the Lt Cols will still be drawing more pay compared to JAG officers but will be drawing less compared to NFSG officers (Read Directors). This is certainly an anamoly but only with respect to pay drawn and not repeat not in status as already explained in my previous analysis."
The kind of parity and status that you are talking about without the support of commensurate pay scale is rubbish. In this country pay scale determines the status. All pay commissions have also based their findings on this premise. Even VI CPC is no different. It is a different matter that they interpreted it (or twisted ?) to suit their pre conceived but ill conceived logic.Dont get carried away by some functional parity which hold good only to suit local conditions that may come in to existence from time to time.
Sir, the writing on the wall is clear. Lets stop pretending now.

Anonymous said...

Good Facts brought out. It is surprising that our elite bureaucrates who decide future of others were unaware of these facts. Politicians had there incompetance to play with. Forces too, are responsible as they never pursued or checked their status prior to declaration of the pay commission. Seeing no urgency on part of government it is still doubtful that forces will get their due. The declaration of adhoc arrears appears to be a well disuised bait to calm the media and public reaction and to let Diwali pass by.

Anonymous said...

@anonymous September 29, 2008 8:44 PM

Our debate is getting broader and now we have a DRDO scientist joining the issue here. Dear sir,it does not behove you to open your mouth here as you are the biggest beneficiary of this rotten committee of secretaries exercise. You can anyhow become a Sc E in 10 years(PB 4)and may I ask you what do you do for deserving that?Answer: Precisely hold on to the coattails of these Babus who distrust the Indian soldier so much that they are ready to sleep with the enemy to put us down. And sir the MOD note you have shabbily posted here is the direct result of this soldier syndrome of our IAS babus.So, Aap ki to lottery lag gayi hai, Maaja karo and dont try to rub salt on our wounds. qayamat ke din hum aap se bhi hisaab lenge. And mind you, qayamat kafi kareeb aa gayi hai. Jai Hind.

Anonymous said...

the government is doing nothing.see the article in timesnow.

Anonymous said...

EDGE was given over civilian pay scales ,for various reasons ,like nature of duties ,postings,field areas,separation and etc .IN course of time this has slowly eroded. A CM SAID ,it is just like any other service and has with drawn all benefits given for service personal.Recently,highest court of this land has pronounced a JudgeMENT,as per this the service rendered in three services need not be counted for seniority in civil service.what our BOSSES at MOD . are doing! when rank pay was craved out of basic pay what mod was doing!see the mess created now.SAME willbe of MSP ,LITTLE later.

Anonymous said...

WE ARE blaming IAS FOR THE present situation,but the main culprit is srikrishna.HAD HE NOT GOT THE BRIGHT IDEA OF PAY BAND ,GRADE PAY ,THIS HEARTBURN,BITTER FIGHT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED.SRIKRISHNA HAS INCREASED THE DISPARITIES IN PAY.

yogesh said...

The blogs in support of forces are totally devoid of facts and figures. Such twisted versions in information war as unleashed by war veterans are not good for country. We do not have any war with any other country , does not mean that they plan such an offensive against Government. Let us not be so selfish and negate fact.Try to be a gentlemen and not a snigger.

Anonymous said...

great post. someone pl put the info across to the latest three member panel set up to review the anomalies.

Anonymous said...

Great Analysis. For all those who are accusing you of using emotions, which is not correct, please take them to original warrant of precedence, which was truncated at JS = Maj Gen at an later date. The original WOP the next serial after JS = Maj Gen was ICS offires with 33 years service ( the number of years may be wrong, need checking up, but it is somewhere there)= Brigiders in command of their brigades and similarly the WOP goes on like that.

See the degradation of the Service officers over the years viz a viz WOP.

Your analysis is to the point.

Daljeet said...

Dear Maj Navdeep,

I am attaching a small poem for you to possibly send to all the media to read and understand, if they can.
Col DS Gill
-----------------------------------
Tribute to a Soldier killed by a terrorist
Daddy's Poem

Her hair was up in a pony tail,
her favorite dress tied with a bow.
Today was Daddy's Day at school,
and she couldn't wait to go.

But her mommy tried to tell her,
that she probably should stay home.
Why the kids might not understand,
if she went to school alone.

But she was not afraid;
she knew just what to say.
What to tell her classmates
of why he wasn't there today.

But still her mother worried,
for her to face this day alone.
And that was why once again,
she tried to keep her daughter home.

But the little girl went to school
eager to tell them all.
About a dad she never sees
a dad who never calls.

There were daddies along the wall in back,
for everyone to meet.
Children squirming impatiently,
anxious in their seats

One by one the teacher called
a student from the class.
To introduce their daddy,
as seconds slowly passed.

At last the teacher called her name,
every child turned to stare.
Each of them was searching,
a man who wasn't there.

'Where's her daddy at?'
She heard a boy call out.
'She probably doesn't have one,'
another student dared to shout.

And from somewhere near the back,
she heard a daddy say,
'Looks like another deadbeat dad,
too busy to waste his day.'

The words did not offend her,
as she smiled up at her Mom.
And looked back at her teacher,
who told her to go on.

And with hands behind her back,
slowly she began to speak.
And out from the mouth of a child,
came words incredibly unique.

'My Daddy couldn't be here,
because he lives so far away.
But I know he wishes he could be,
since this is such a special day.

And though you cannot meet him,
I wanted you to know.
All about my daddy,
and how much he loves me so.

He loved to tell me stories
he taught me to ride my bike.
He surprised me with pink roses,
and taught me to fly a kite.

We used to share fudge sundaes,
and ice cream in a cone.
And though you cannot see him.
I'm not standing here alone.

'Cause my daddy's always with me,
even though we are apart
I know because he told me,
he'll forever be in my heart'

With that, her little hand reached up,
and lay across her chest.
Feeling her own heartbeat,
beneath her favorite dress.

And from somewhere here in the crowd of dads,
her mother stood in tears.
Proudly watching her daughter,
who was wise beyond her years.

For she stood up for the love
of a man not in her life.
Doing what was best for her,
doing what was right.

And when she dropped her hand back down,
staring straight into the crowd.
She finished with a voice so soft,
but its message clear and loud.

'I love my daddy very much,
he's my shining star.
And if he could, he'd be here,
but heaven's just too far.

You see he is a Marine
and died just this past year
When a roadside bomb hit his convoy
and taught Americans to fear.

But sometimes when I close my eyes,
it's like he never went away.'
And then she closed her eyes,
and saw him there that day.

And to her mothers amazement,
she witnessed with surprise.
A room full of daddies and children,
all starting to close their eyes.

Who knows what they saw before them,
who knows what they felt inside.
Perhaps for merely a second,
they saw him at her side.

'I know you're with me Daddy,'
to the silence she called out.
And what happened next made believers,
of those once filled with doubt.

Not one in that room could explain it,
for each of their eyes had been closed.
But there on the desk beside her,
was a fragrant long-stemmed pink rose.

And a child was blessed, if only for a moment,
by the love of her shining star.
And given the gift of believing,
that heaven is never too far.

With love and pride I was humbled
Take the time...to live and love.
More soldiers are coming home draped in their flag.

Daddy's Poem

Thank a soldier or a veteran today. Lest we forget.

ToTheDeath said...

@ Daljeet
Pretty stunning!
But, sadly, they can never understand it. And we all know who THEY are, don't we!

Anonymous said...

@12.30pm,why discuss about wop of BRITISH LEGACY River Ganges has carried much water along with it . ASper records a LT.COL WAS drawing before INDEPNDANCE RS1500/ NOW equal to lakhs no may be crores. IF you happen to meet any person who is in late eighties,his reply will be BRITISH RULE WAS better than present day democracy.

Anonymous said...

HEARD THIS.
BSF has objected the way Armed Forces has put across their demand for resolution of pay annomalies(India tv).
Not amused,knowing that top hierarchy of BSF is drawn from IPS.
They are using the shoulder of BSF to fire the retaliatory salvo.

AN APPEAL TO BSF BROTHERS.

You should use similar tactics for getting rid of these jokers who come and sit on your head.They do not have any moral right to head a force about which they do not know abc.The day you have your own head, all of your problems will get resolved.
We sympathise with your working condition because it is not different from ours.

patriot said...

@Daljeet. Brought tears to my eyes. But that's probably because I'm serving the cause out of my desire to defend the motherland. There are many who are not serving for money.Let some good sense prevail over the countrymen to stop this campain against the honour of those in service of the motherland.Wish everone spares a thought and learn to respect the warriors.

Anonymous said...

WELL DONE NAVDEEP. LOOKING FORWARD FOR SOME GOOD NEWS. KEEP IT UP.

Anonymous said...

dear all
para military forces job is much more difficul than army.army is like a big corporate house ,has media in pocket and infinite resources.above all they are under illusion that they are only serving the nation and others are all doing time pass .in disguise of discipline we have seen worst type of trade unionism and blatant blackmail .CPMF deserve what they have got and their job is more difficult

Anonymous said...

Dear Commentators,Pl update yourself about the existing equivalence in R&AW:

No A-162/2/80-DOII
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
CABINET SECRETARIAT

BIKANER HOUSE(ANNEXE)
SHAHJAHAN ROAD
NEW DELHI-11

11 Jan 1991

TO,
Shri Gautam Darooah
Joint Secretary
Cabinet Secretariat
New Delhi
Sub:Grant of Deputation allowance to Armed Forces officers and Personnel on Deputation to R&AW,ARC and SSD under Cabinet secretariat
Sir,
1. I am directed to refer to this secretariat’s letter of even number Dt 16.5.90 addressed to Shri R Swaminathan , the then Principle Director, DG(Security)Cabinet ,on the above subject and to convey the sanction of the President that the period of deputation of Armed forces officers and Personnel to R&AW and DG(S) under Cabinet Secretariat shall be three years subject to the terms and conditions stipulated in the aforesaid letter. However , the normal tenure of three years shall be extendable by another two years .In such cases or further after a scrutiny by a committee of secretaries provided it is intended to absorb the officer in these organizations viz R&AW and DG(S).

2. Further ,for the purpose of this sectt’s above sited letter the rank equivalence of the Defence service officers on deputation to R&AW will be as follows:-

(i)Major/Lt Col -under Secretary
(ii)Colonel -Deputy Secretary
(iii)Brigadier -Director
(iv)Major General-Joint Secretary

3. These orders will take effect from the date of issue of this letter.

4. This issues with concurrence of Integrated Finance vide their Dy No 3/Dir F (S-1) dated 1.1.1991

Yours faithfully

Sd xxxxxxxx
(A Nath)
Director(SR)

Copy to:
1.Principle Director DG(S)
2.Director ARC
3.Director SSD

Sunil said...

@Commentators
Pl post your opinion about Brigadier equated to Director as per existing equivalence afzin cabinet sectt

loverboy said...

@anonymous at 10:02 pm @ sunil. should we then presume that Directors of RAW, IB, CBI etc.. should be equivalent to brigadiers. why havent you responded to the the other letters that navdeep has posted bringing out the equivalence. the moral of the story is that you people have been doing this degradation over the last so many years, now enough is enough , lets go back to the original WoP which is still in force. someone very rightly said, you people dont deserve the great armed forces that this country has. i would only add to say that you deserve an army like pakistan which would put you all in the right places deserved. hurts doesn't it? your attitude hurts us too.

robin said...

I have seen this mail from a veteran in another group.Thought this is worthy of sharing.There are disparities in Major rank as well. I donot know whether these informations have been brought to the notice of service HQ




REMOVAL OF DISPARITIES OF DEFENSE PERSONNEL.
1. It may be noted that the defense services persons, while putting across their grievances while quoting pay parities, they never mean any thing against the IAS officers, Para Military Services officers or any one else. Rather, they are happy to note that all these officers have been given their legitimate due for which they are fully satisfied.
2. It is needless to emphasize that the financial benefits to the defense persons definitely have to be kept in mind. This is emphatically important considering their service conditions and low retirement age. However, may they be officers or PBOR, their prestige, dignity and honor is rather that of more importance, which must not be compromised, destroyed, degraded and tarnished as has been done in the notified 6th Pay Commission Report. This statement is evident from the fact that the seniority and status of all the Govt. employees will be determined by the Grade Pay of all the officials in accordance with the 6th pay commission report.
3. Nevertheless, the three Chiefs of Defense Services have pointed out the Pay Parities with vivid disparities in the Gde. Pay of some of the defense officers of the rank of Lt. Cols., Lt. Gens. and equivalent ranks of all three services, especially in comparison to IAS Officers and Para Military Officers. It has been categorically pointed out by the three Chiefs of Defense Services, the proposed pay parities will have adverse effects during the joint operations.
4. With due apology, this is to point out that in addition to the above disparities, there are still number of more grave disparities in the cases of officers of the ranks of Majors, captains and Lieutenants, and equivalent ranks of all three services as well as trainees of these services.
5. You may kindly see that the pre-revised scales of pay of civil services officers falling in S-21, S-22, and S-23 and equivalent posts of officers of Para Military Forces were much less then the pay scale of Majors and equivalent ranks of all three services. Irrespective of this fact; in accordance with the 6th pa commission report notifications, the Civilian Officers of the categories mentioned ibid are given the Grade Pay of Rs. 7600/-, where as all officers of the rank of Majors and equivalent ranks of all three services have been given the Grade pay of Rs. 6600/- only. Further, the Chief Nursing Officers of Para Military Services, the Principals of schools, Education Officers, Assistant Directors and Managers, whose pre-revised scales were 10000-15200; all of them have now been given the Grade Pay of Rs. 7600/-, whereas, the officers of the rank of Majors and equivalent ranks of all three services, earlier drawing much higher pay scale than them, have been given the Grade pay of Rs. 6600/- only.
6. The degradation of Defense Services Officers does not end here itself. If you peruse the VI CPC report and notifications thereto. You will see that the 'Vice Principal Grade I' and Post Graduate Teacher Grade I of schools whose pre-revised scale was 8000-13200 are now given the Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/-, but in the case of the officers of the rank of Captains and equivalent ranks of all three services, whose pre-revised pay was much higher than the officials mentioned above are given Grade Pay of 6100/- only. Likewise, the pre-revised pay scale of the officers of the rank of Lieutenants and equivalent ranks of all three services was starting from Rs 8250/ which is more than the officials mentioned ibid, their Grade Pay is given just Rs. 5400/- only.
7. It is emphatically and forcefully verbalized that all the Pay Bands and Grade pay given to the Defense Officers should be made applicable to them after rendering the same period of service as that is applicable to the IAS Officers and Para Military Officers. There must not be any discrimination in this regard.
8. Further, it may be seen that when any officers or officials of Central or State Govt. join any service in any post, they start getting their full pay and allowances from the day they join the service. Their entire service is counted for increments, promotions and retirement from the first very day. They are paid their full pay and allowances and all other benefits of service during their training period, irrespective of duration of their training. Contrary to this, the Officers and PBOR of Defense services are paid just stipend only during the period of their initial training. Also, this period is not counted for giving increments, promotions and retirement. Such a big discrimination and injustice must not be done to the defense services personnel alone.
9. The 6th Pay Commission and the Govt. has very kindly recommended and accepted the prolonged and long standing/awaited demand of Military Service Pay ('MSP') of defense personnel. But, it is highly unjustified as to why the MSP should not be applicable w. e. f. the day, the 6th pay commission is effective. Were the soldiers not the part of defense forces and/or they have not been performing their duties from 1 Jan 2006 onward? If they are legitimate part of defense forces and have been performing their duties since 1 Jan 2006 and the 6th Pay commission is since effective from 1 Jan 2006, the MSP must be given to them w.e.f that very date and the arrears whatever may be due, should be paid accordingly.
10. Further, Military Service Pay is since the Pay, it is highly illogical not to consider it to calculate dearness allowance and increments on this pay. It may be noted that the Central Govt. has agreed to pay dearness allowance on the Transport Allowance. It is surprising to note that when the tpt. allowance is an allowance and not the pay, the dearness allowance is permitted on it, but the MSP is the Pay, yet, it is not considered for the purpose. Hence, the Govt. must reconsider its decision to pay dearness allowance on MSP as well as, it must be included to calculate increments w.e.f. 01 Jan 2006 please.
11. One Rank One-Pension issue has been long outstanding. This matter is most judicious and deserving since the service personnel including officers retire at a very early age and none of them finds any avenues for discharging their entire responsibilities and living after their retirement. They are totally dependent on their pension only.
12. At the time of implementation of pay commission report, there occurs a big disparity in the pension of present and previously retired ex-service persons retired from the same rank. The pension of presently retired person is fixed based on 50% of last 10 months average pay after rendering total period of service by him. In the case of persons retired before the implementation of pay commission report, their pension is re-fixed based on minimum of the new pay scale of the rank/post from which they retired, irrespective of any amount of period of service they had rendered before their retirement. The entire period of service they rendered before their retirement is completely ignored. Consequently, there becomes a wide gap of eligibility of pension between the present/future and previously retired persons, though in both cases, they retired or will retire from the same rank. This is absolutely in contravention to the Apex Court's recent decision. Considering this fact as well as Apex court judgement, the authorities must bear in mind the rank and period of rendered service while re-fixing the pension of all persons who retired before implementation of pay commission report. In accordance with this analogy, the authorities must consider the pensionable pay of a serving person after the period of service that was rendered by a retired person for re-fixing his pension on implementation of any pay commission report. If pension is ever re-fixed against this principle, it will be contrary to the Apex Court judgement.
13. Previously, the defense service officers, who could not get selection grade rank of Lt. Col and equivalents rank; they used to get this rank after rendering 21 years of service. Such officers were denied rank pay of Lt. Col and their pension was fixed without including the rank pay of this rank. It is of utmost importance to note that presently, all officers of defense services attain the rank of time scale Lt. Col after rendering 13 years of service, and they are entitled full pension, considering their basic pay and rank pay. Further, after implementation of sixth pay commission report, they will get their full pension after including running pay of applicable "band pay, grade pay and MSP'. The previously retired officers since attain the rank in question after 21 years and present ones, get this rank after 13 years, there must not be any discrimination in the past and present officers of the rank of Lt. Col. while fixing/re-fixing the pension in either case.
14. The present minimum service required for officers to be eligible for pension is 20 years. The short service commissioned officers, who are asked to leave service after 10/14 years, are not eligible for pension. The pension for such officers should be considered, though it may not be full pension as is applicable for the officers who retire after rendering 20 years or more service. It can be commensurately less in comparison to minimum 20 years requirement. However, such short commissioned officers, who voluntarily seek retirement after stipulated period or before 20 years may not be considered for this purpose.
15. In view of the foregoing, a most sincere and earnest appeal is made to the Prime Minister, External Affairs minister, who is the Chairman of special review committee for the purpose, Defense Minister, Finance Minister and all other authorities to do justice to the Defense Officers and PBOR of all three services to look into the matter judiciously, restore their status and dignity and give them their due as suggested below:-
(a). In the cases of Lt. Generals, Lt. Colonels and PBOR, as taken up by the Chiefs of three Defense Services.
(b). In the case of the officers of the rank of Majors and equivalent ranks of all three services, the Grade pay of Rs. 7600/- be given.
(c). In the case of the officers of the rank of Captains and equivalent ranks of all three services, the Grade pay of Rs. 6600/- be given.
(d). In the case of the officers of the rank of Lieutenants and equivalent ranks of all three services, the Grade pay of Rs. 6100/- be given.
(e). Give full pay, allowances and Grade Pay to all the Officers and PBOR of Defense services during the period of their initial training as is being done in the case of other Central and State Govt. Officials.
(f). The Pay Bands and Grade pay given to the Defense Officers should be made applicable after rendering the same period of service as that is applicable to the IAS Officers and Para Military Officers. There must not be any discrimination in this regard.
(g). In accordance with Hon' able Apex Court's recent decision; the Govt. must bear in mind to ensure to fix the pension of officers previously retired or retiring hereafter in the same rank of Lt Col. may it be time scale or previous selection grade or any other same rank without any discrimination.
(h). The short service commissioned officers, who are asked to leave service after rendering 10/14 service years, be made eligible for pension, which may be commensurately less in comparison to 20 years.
(i). Considering the fact explained at Para 12 above as well as recent Apex Court judgement, the authorities must bear in mind the rank and period of rendered service while re-fixing the pension of all persons who retired before implementation of pay commission report. In accordance with this analogy, the authorities must consider total pensionable pay of a serving person after the period of service that was rendered by a retired person for re-fixing every retired person's pension on implementation of any pay commission report.
17. If suggestions above are accepted, it is assured that it will have great impact to raise the morale of Defense Services Personnel and attract desired, rather better talents to join Military Services, thus huge vacancies of officers, existing since long, will be made up. This will prove to be in the best interest of the nation and national security.
Thanks.
Yours truly,
Jassu

Anonymous said...

dear sirs,
It may not be correct to say that civilian officers of all the departments become directors in 13 years . it varies from department to department. For example in a interservice organisation like MES civilian engineer officers of IDSE cadre
who have been recruited through central engineering services exam conducted by UPSC are at Joint Director level ( JAG Scale) even after physical service of 20 years repeat 20 years and if 2 1/2 years of waiting after appearing in exam is also taken then it becomes 22 1/2 years whereas counterpart service officers of Corps of Engineers become Col. after 16 years of service. You may yourself see how far it will be justified to equate a civilian officer of 20 years service with a service officer of Major's rank (Each Army officer become Major in a time bound manner after 6 years service).Every service whether IAS, IPS, IFS, Engineering, Scientist, Teachers , Defence etc. are important for nation and have different roles to play. Every officer knows all the pros & cons of a service when he joins it. Every service is tough in its own sphere.
Is it not a fact that Army is posting Brigadiers as Director in DGQA which is a NFSG Level post being manned by civilian officer having pre revised scale of 14300-18300. On one hand Brigadiers are happily going as Directors on the other hand you are asking parity of Lt. Col with civilian director level officer. In a democratic country like India demands shall be made based on the facts and law of the land shall be respected by one and all.

Anonymous said...

dear sir,
Fundamental right of equal pay for equal work is enshrined in Constitution of India.
Civilian engineer officers of MES who after physical service of more than 20 years are stagnating at Jt. Dir level in PB 3 DRAWING total salary of 44300/- whereas a counterpart service officer of 20 years service in MES is Col. and drawing salary of 65000/- + 6000/- MSP + FREE RATION + FREE ACOMODATION + FREE ELECTRICITY + 90 DAYS Annual leave for the same work as that by civilian officer. Should the Principle of same work same pay shall not be applied in MES?.

Rohit said...

Such thanklessness and disdain!! I wonder if we need to serve anymore- PB4 or not.

I am sure that some 'anonymous' and "rds" will be able and willing to take on our job as we have been taking theirs' on in MES, BRO and other orgs.

Anonymous said...

@ Rohit

Why do you want exchange of job. Keep your job to yourself and let civilians do their job. Why do u want to have appointments earmarked in all civil departments where the job can be accomplished more efficiently and economically by civ counterparts. Think of complete civilianisation of redundant jobs of running ASC, running messes in CAT 'A' & 'B' estts, military farms, corps of engineers(Wks stream) and leave them to professionals in the field. This way armed forces can offset to some extent the perceived shortage of officers. And let me assure you, the nation will not mind paying higher to its defence officers if they keep themselves to their core tasks and get rid of unnecessary flab.

Of course without any offence to anyone.

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Anonymous @ 10.02 PM, 30 Sept 08

The said letter pertaining to RAW is no longer in force. Pl check your facts. And regarding Brigs joining as Directors, in certain organizations, one post is tenable by various ranks and grades so it is no big deal for a senior officer to be deputed on a post on which a junior officer from another stream is posted.
For your kind information, even SAG officers with a Grade Pay of Rs 10,000 can be posted as Directors to Govt of India till the time they are empanelled as Joint Secy to Govt of India under the central staffing scheme(CSS). Being from the MES you should know better since the CSS is now applicable to MES too :-)

Anonymous said...

@Maj navdeep
It will be worth gaining knowledge that SAG offrs drawing Grade pay of Rs 10000/- are also being posted as Directors in the grade pay of Rs 8700/-.To me it is a Paradox of highest oreder i have not seen it happening so far.Pl cite some example.
In addition pl give ref of the R&AW letter under which their letter Dt 11 jan 91 has been cancelled.

Anonymous said...

In MES Col and SE(Direcor) can be posted to executive assignments which is tenable by either of them ie Commander works Engineers wheras as soon as they are posted to Zones/Command in Staff appointments Col is made one rank senoir to the SE(Director) without any value addition to the rank of Col or value reduction to the ran of SE (Director).Again a paradox.
In this ref Pl ref Hon'ble supreme court judgement in case of Civil Appeal No 2697/2007 in the matter of Tejshree Vs Prakash Parashuram Patil and othrs.Quote
"If orders of transfer substantially affect the status of an employee,the same would be violative of the conditions of service and thus illegal,transfers must be made to equivalent post"
Therefore transfer/posting can never be made to a post which is lower in status of the traferee.

Anonymous said...

Dear friends

1. If the Lt Col was drawing more than a Sc'E' / NFSG/ SE - then did the COS have specific cabinet sanction to alter the parity in its report -- or was this hidden deep in the 1000+ page report and pushed thro' the cabinet ?. If and when the Govt agrees to set right the delibarate anomaly -- who is accountable for this imbroglio ? - will an enquiry be instituted against those wise pepole from the erswhile pay commission cell -- who are now comfortably positioned in the expenditure dept ?

2. How did the wise committee decide to unilateraly reduce the weightage for pension in the case of jawans - citing that their absorbtion into para military was recommended - when the actual recommendation remained only on paper -- isnt this irresponsibility and callousness ? -- will somebody be held accountable ?

3. If defence was such a great job- why have 5000+ officers asked for early retirement - without VRS? -whats the figure in other govt depts?

Anonymous said...

Maj Navdeep#7.02
Extending your argument further of tenebility of a post on deputation.How a command failure will happen when people from armed forces go on deputation to coast guards and similar organisations in CPMF. BTW, deputation results in holding a post either equivalent or higher. The CSS also results in deputation to higher or equivalent post except for IAS officers who are deputed in centre as per their central empanelment and not as per post held in state.Pl get your facts right. And yes,pl give specific answer to specific query.

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Anonymous @ 8.13 AM

Quoting anonymous "BTW, deputation results in holding a post either equivalent or higher. The CSS also results in deputation to higher or equivalent post except for IAS officers who are deputed in centre as per their central empanelment and not as per post held in state.Pl get your facts right. And yes,pl give specific answer to specific query."

My first principle is that I do not shoot off without 'getting my facts right'. Secondly, please do not try to bombard us with your half baked facts. Regardind deputation to a lower post, kindly peruse even the latest post 6th CPC guidelines on http://persmin.gov.in/WriteData/CircularNotification/ScanDocument/2_22(A)-Estt(P-II).pdf
See para 1(g) of the above and you'll get your answer. Perhaps you need to get your facts right. SE was and is equivalent to a Lt Col even today as per MoD. If you are so sure about the superior status of SEs then why hasn't the MoD issued any order till date despite so many requests from the MES fraternity. Please do not take it against MES though.
I however agree with MES officers when they say that Colonels should not be posted as DCWEs etc, it is indeed a burden on the exchequer besides being degrading.

Anonymous said...

It would be an interesting exercise to findout the answers to the following - before extolling the great perks and benefits of defence service?

How many officers from the IAS, IFS, IPS, Engineering services, Scientists etc have applied for early retirement and have been refused the same by the Govt ?.

In such cases - do they therafter accept the decision and continue attending office or - take recourse to CCS rules and take 5 years leave ?

This should answer the posts on this thread - asking any defence officer to quit and join any multinational - If only that were possible ??

Lastly -- Defence personnel are sent on deputation to other civil organisations -- so that in the cases of hostilities or natural calamities like earthquakes, floods, fires -- when the local staff are missing -- as usual -- atleast the uniformed man is available on site to salvage the pride of the country and the lives of the hapless souls.

Anonymous said...

@anonymous 8.34am, iam posing to yoU SAME question ,how many service officers seconded to DRDO, SURVEY OF INDIA,DGQAS,ETC,,have taken VRS.

Anonymous said...

A request to Maj Navdeep.

Dear Maj Navdeep

I have been following your blog quite regularly and it has been an eye opener. I have a request. If you can carve out a few moments from your precious time, please educate us on the complete pay and parity structure. If possible, run it as a series for ignorant blokes like me. There are too many govt orders and letters floating around that make putting things in perspective very difficult.

In our jingoism of being bonafide patriots, we forget about emoluments and adapt happy go lucky attitude. This pay commission has been an eye opener as to what our own govt thinks about us. There is no bigger crime than ignorance and I will request you to help us come out of it. Thanks in anticipation. ksk_0@rediffmail.com.

Namrata & Rajkumar said...

@anonymous 08:54

you have answered your question yourself... the job is so COSY in these organisations that even service officers posted over their don't ask for retirement..

Namrata & Rajkumar said...

@MES officers
The main contention of defence officers is that if other group A (All India Service) officers move to PB 4 in 13 years of service, so should be the case for a LtCol(the post attained after 13-14yrs and the highest attained by most of the officers)as well.
As stated by some MES officer in earlier post if you move to PB4 after 20yrs then you should take up the case with concerned authorities and get the anomaly corrected instead of countering genuine demands raised by services..

Anonymous said...

is it not possible for the chiefs to request the supreme commande of the armed forces to look into the matter or another option would be to request the cong high command directly since mostthings are controlled by these two high profile womin of india

Anonymous said...

@Namrata&amp ;Rajkumar, who is comparig at whom! SERVICES ARE COMPARING WITH civilins.IF LT.COL is placed in HIG + also civilians are not concerened ,as long they are there in uniformed service.IF come to org ,like DRDO, SURVEY INDIA, MES ,ETC IS a problem.Present problem of LT.COL IS CREATION OF YOUR OWN BOSSES/MOD. PLEASE SEE MOD .NOTIFICATION.Anamolies have been rectified as per ------------------------------------------------.please re read the notification.

Anonymous said...

@anonymous1.30pm THANKS ,for enlightening us .NOTIFICATION SAYS ,GRADE PAY FROM CAPT.TO BRIG. has been modified as per DEFENCE SERVICES.

Anonymous said...

@namrata&amp,rajkumar,you are welcome to this cosy world as a civilian,if interested only.Best wishes inyour struggle for pb 4.

RDS said...

@ Navdeep

I am yet to see any comments on my post of September 29, 2008 1:21 PM from your side. I hope by now you have reconciled and will come out with a better justification or a suggestion to remove the anomaly for Lt Cols.

Best wishes.

Anonymous said...

The above action of services was seemingly for following:a) Parity of Lt Col with DS. Officers were being paid equal to or little higher than pay of their equivalent civilian officer's next higher rank to compensate for service hardships, risks etc. Therefore their rank parity remained with their eqv civilian officers (i.e. Col=Dir), their pay parity was with next higher rank of civilian counterpart. In case of LtCol, the diff of pay between two adject rank i.e. DS and Dir is so huge that the incremental benefits incl MSP is not enough to bridge it. Earlier the diff of pay of these two ranks were bridged by incremental benefits incl MSP eqv components. The diff of pay in all other adjacent level is bridged effectively by MSP and other benefits. Therefore the problem at this level only. Therefore the problem was to correct this diff in these two adjacent levels and it was for everybody at these levels and not only forces. Therefore the demand as projected as degradation was wrong.

It is clear there is nothing wrong as far as parity is concerned. The problem is mainly about huge pay difference between PB3 and PB4 which has created the anomaly.

Rohit said...

@Anonymous @ 12.36 am 01 Oct

My query was straightforward, Mr Anonymous. Will you take on our job, if and when the need arises, or will you turn yellow.

Don't give me the "Professional" angle. Let's see how many of you are willing to take on assignments which deal with design and planning aspects, where your civil qualifications will be put to test. The army has adequate qualified civil engineers of their own to take on the execution especially of the simple 2-3 storey structures which you execute for us.

Further, where is the guarantee, that if we leave the Corps of Engineers (works stream) to the 'Professionals", the honourable professionals will not proceed on casual leave/ medical leave, whenever their presence is critical? We see it happening at all times in MES.

I am sorry, I could not respond to you earlier.

Anonymous said...

dear anonymous 5 oct 08 5.50 pm,

For your kind notice many engg. organisation being run by civilians for example CPWD, CWC, CEA,TELECOM are far more professional and efficient than MES being run by Armed Forces.
Engineering is knowledge and not danda. If you see technical competance of engineers taken through SSB then you can yourself judge how much quality an engineer with approx 60 percent marks can give as compared to engineers with 75% or more marks being selected in above mentioned civil deptt. you may also see the performance of public sectors like NTPC, IOC, ONGC, BHEL etc. which are being run by civilians.
thanks

Rohit said...

@ Anonymous
Engineering is not 'Danda'. But is it a 'Dhanda'?

Mate, the 75% type engg knowledge which you possess, will be greatly appreciated if you opt for the design and planning appointments in BRO and MES and not so much for execution and contracts, in which your 75% type engg expertise is wasted.

Trust me, my precious, the 60% type SSB qualified Army Engrs are capable to execute your expert designs and implement your detailed plans.

We do come across each other in our mixed offices and sometimes while doing post graduation at IITs. Don't we take your pants off?

Anonymous said...

dear rohit,

please don't get agitated. facts are facts and can not be changed.
Engineering is not only design and planning but real engineering is execution. if one don't have proper engg knowledge and are ignorant about specifications his contribution in execution will be minimal.

better leave the mixed organisations like drdo, bro, mes, survey of india which can be managed very well by civilians and go to regiments for which you are recruited for.

thanks

loverboy said...

@anonymous 6:57 am, sorry to boutt in. no offence meant but have you seen the quality of construction of mes? the output of drdo is there for the entire country to see. i think it was a mistake to take civilians in the first place in the mil organisations. pl. go and show your talent in IOC, ONGC etc.., till now they are in profit, they'll go down too. pl understand that service offrs are posted to mix org. to keep them running as per service reqt. that we have as such given too much of leeway is obvious by the results you have produced. i really dont know about bro but drdo, survey of india officers when on ships are absolutely flat. they are not even capable of leaving their bunk for trials, who does the job there my dear friend? so much for execution. i am still looking for the genesis of induction of civilian officers in MES etc..

Rohit said...

@Anonymous 06 Oct

Pl widen your vision. The Services are not just the officers from the corps of Engineers. In fact the corps does not constitute even 10% of the officer cadre.

Secondly, army officers are commissioned and not recruited. Of course, you may not find any difference in your present state of mind.

Third, as put fwd fittingly by Loverboy, the quality of your output does not give us any confidence, that you have it in you to do the job.

I hope you understand that you are the bottom rankers in the IES exams with the top graders joining Railways, CPWD and other departments of the government.

May be our friends in services would like to know that GREF is the absolute last choice of IES qualifiers and IDSE (MES) does not rank much higher.

I'm sorry to bring this on , but remember, you raised the point on "qualification" .

AK Singh said...

Lt. Col. were never treated at par with Directors
The Public Enterprises Selection Board has been following the following criterion for selection to the Board level posts in the Central PSUs since 1991:
Schedule A posts: Additional Secretary and Lt.General & equivalents
Schedule B posts: Joint Secretary and Major Generals & equivalents
Schedule C posts: Director and Brigadiers & equivalents
Schedule D posts : Deputy Secretary and Lt. Colonel & equivalents.
The Lt. Col. were never treated at par with Directors.

Anonymous said...

dear rohit,

It may be pertinent to bring it to your notice that approx 50000 Engineers sit for IES exam for 200 approx vacancies.First choice is railways but for second choice some give MES & some give CPWD.

In IES one's technical knowledge is tested thoroughly whereas in SSB stress is on physical toughness and boldness rather than on technical skills.

I have got my batchmates in MES through IES as well as through SSB.
It is surprising to note that civilian who has come through IES is at EE level only after physical service of 20 years whereas service officer ( WHO WAS NOT GETTING JOB ANYWHERE ) who has come through SSB has become full Col 3 years back.

ratio of army and civilian officers at class I LEVEL is almost 1:1 and post of E-in -c and all the six command chief are held by army officers.

One may demand higher perks for one's service but one should not cast aspersions on others

thank and God bless you

loverboy said...

dear ak singh, you may enlighten yourself by visiting these :-

http://bcasindia.gov.in/buisness/vc2007/vc0207dbdds.pdf
and
http://www.mahagenco.in/advt_general_man2008.pdf
and
http://syndicatebank.in/downloads/ADVT-CHIEF-SEC-OFFICER-2007.doc

these are late as last year and this year, now pl. dont come up with some cock eyed logic. if you have any doubts get in touch i'll give you more examples.

loverboy said...

http://bcasindia.gov.in/buisness/vc2007/vc0207dbdds.pdf

loverboy said...

@ak singh just add .pdf at the end of bcas link, you'll be able to see it.

Anonymous said...

Comments on this blog keep quoting Pre-6th CPC pay scales of military officers excluding the Rank Pay which was introduced in the 4th CPC, 20 years ago.It must be recalled that when Rank Pay, as a variable element was seperated from the running pay scale that was introduced, and when the pay scales were to be migrated from the 3rd to 4th CPC,it was inferred that the Rank Pay was not an additional pay but a part and parcel of the Pay Scale and hence added to the 3rd CPC pay , to arrive at the 4th CPC pay thus depriving all those who had migrated from the 3rd CPC to 4th CPC of any arrears on Rank Pay.The Rank Pay by its concept and genesis therefore was integral to the basic Pay Scale.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

How can it be now argued, ignoring his/her Rank Pay, that a Lt Col of pre 6 th CPC was not in the pay scale of Rs.15100-18700 ?

Then is it not logical for this scale to migrate with the scales such as Rs.14300-18300 into Rs.37400-67000 with an additional Grade Pay of Rs.8700?

A visit to the Guest Post "6th CPC;less than honest brokers" dated September 26,2008 on this blog is recommended to each one who wishes to understand how the element of Rank Pay is to be understood.

sachin kumar said...

navdeep sir the commandant of a cpmf which u r equating with ltcol is comdt of cisf and not sr comdt who is full coloneland the scale of lt col was never 15100 as told 2 media n/papers and few magazines moreover a 2nd in command is 2ic of a Bn of CPMF and a CPMF comdt commands 1200 pers instead of col commanding not more than 600 pers how a lt col can be equated with commandant leave apart the history

sachin kumar said...

navdeep sir somewhere u said u r not being given parity army is pressurising the country by making such a huge noise army abolished the rank of 2nd lt to get faster promotions like becoming capt in 2 yrs majors in 6 yrs lt col in 11 yrs wat more can be asked a lt col was never equilent to comdt of cpmf and also if at all DIG is bet lt col and comdt then why brig are reemployed as DIG in CPMF want egs BRIG S C VERMA Dy Dir BSF ACY TEKANPUR,BRIG JS LIDDER Dy Dir Cipher n comp at FHQ SSB DELHI
want a response frm u

Anonymous said...

sachin deserves a good kick to bring out ditorted facts.

Anonymous said...

Lt col was never equivalent to any body , right, but better than everybody.

jaswant singh said...

Dear Sir, consequet to the implementation of 6th Pay Commission report, a big parith has been created between the post of Deputy Secretary of CSS and Lt.Col. and Col. in the Army. Prior to the 6th pay Commission,these posts have equal status. But now the Deputy Secretary which is a middle level Officer and a core functionary in Secretariat has been down graded and has been included in Grade PB-3 where as Lt.Col. and Col. has been included in Grade PB-4.This is considered to be gross injustice to this post.
The 6th Pay Commission has recommended a new pay scale of Rs. 15,600 – 39,100 to the post of Deputy Secretary and Director in the Central Sectt. Services as against their Pre-revised Pay Scales of Rs. 12,000-375-16,500 and Rs. 14,300 -400- 18,300 respectively.However, the Committee of Secretaries has revised the Pay Scale of Director in the Central Secretariat Services to that of Rs. 37,400 – 67,000 from Rs. 16,500 -39,100 and revised the grade pay to Rs. 8700/- from Rs.7600/-. And also the post of Director was included in Grade PB-4, whereas no such change was recommended in respect of the post of Deputy Secretary. The pay Scale Lt.Col. who was earlier given the revised pay scale of Rs. 16,500-39,100 has also now been revised to that of Director'Scale and included in Grade PB-4. this has not been done in the case of Deputy Secretary in the Secretariat Servise. I submit few lines showing that there is strong justification for upgradation of the post of Deputy Secretary and its inclusion in Grade PB-4:-
a) The Post of Director was initially created as Selection Grade Post to provide better promotional Avenues to the Deputy Secretaries of the Central Secretariat Services who are Stagnated at the maximum of their Pay Scale and are not likely to be promoted as Joint Secretaries till their retirement. But in the course of time, with the intake of officers of other services on deputation on both these posts. the purpose for which the post of Director was created was eluded. .
b) In the office hierarchical order, though the Director is senior to Deputy Secretary, but the post of Deputy Secretary and Director, both enjoy equal powers, duties and responsibilities in their sphere of official duties/ status. A Deputy Secretary cannot be placed to function under the Director. As against the post of Director or Deputy Secretary either can be posted. For their functions and responsibilities, both are responsible to their immediate boss i.e. the Joint Secretary. A Joint Secretary is only empowered to write Confidential reports of the Deputy Secretary and not the Director. Moreover, no separate duties have been specified in the Office Manual for the post of Director.
c) The post of Deputy Secretary is a middle level Group ‘A’ Gazette Post which has been clubbed with Group ‘B’ Gazette Post and down graded to PB-3 level whereas the same level post of Director, Col. and Lt.Col. has been clubbed with senior level posts and graded as PB-4. Denying the same scale to Deputy Secretary as that of Director, is most irregular and unjustified when both the posts are of equal level and have the same duties and responsibilities.
Moreover the Basic Pay of Deputy Secretary has been raised by Rs. 4,500/- whereas the basic pay of the Director has been raised by Rs. 23,100/- which almost 6 (six) times more than that of the post of Deputy Secretary. No justification is available for this big gap.
3. It is, therefore, requested that the pay scale of Rs . 15600-39100 assigned to Deputy Secretary may please be revised to Rs. 37400-67000 as that of Director and the post of Deputy Secretary may please be upgraded and included in grade PB-4 in order to maintain equal level to that of the post of Director, Col.and Lt.Col.in the Army.

Major Jimmy said...

Dear Sir,

I am a Short Service Commissioned Officer (Corps of Signals), who at the rank of a Major left after 5 years of commissioned service
(plus two years of ante dated seniority, being a technical entry) and joined DRDO as a scientist 'C'.
DRDO Says a Major is equivalent to Scientist 'C'.where as
Army syas a Major is equivalent to Scientist 'D'.
I am trying to convince the Army's stand to DRDO so that I get my initial posting itself as a Scientist 'D'. and receive gross total emoluments comparable to what I had been drawing as a Major in Indian Army.
Where shall I approach for a speedy redressal of grievance - Armed Forces Tribunal or Central Administrative Tribunal.