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 Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained.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, January 5, 2009

Combat duty / ready for Combat duty : ‘Combatant’ explained in PB-4 context

One of the hottest topics of discussion amongst military circles is the stipulation that PB-4 shall be granted to Lt Cols who are on combat duty or who are ready for combat. The various facets of PB-4 not being granted to officers on deputation have already been discussed in this blog here but it is also important to touch on the second issue – the term ‘combatant’.

So who is a ‘combatant’ ? For starters, the term ‘combatant’ is not defined anywhere in any of the Military Acts (Army/Navy/Air Force Act). By convention it includes all military personnel serving under military law except :

a) Members of the Military Nursing Service (MNS)

b) Whole Time NCC officers (Such officers are explicitly mentioned to be outside the purview of military service in terms of Section 10 of the NCC Act, 1948). It may be pointed out here that such Whole Time NCC Officers (who wear Khakhi uniform) are a class separate from Regular combatant Army Officers posted to NCC units.

c) Non-Combatant Enrolled Personnel (NCsE) who being non-officers are in any case not related to our topic

Before there are dissenting voices, the following quote concerning MNS from the 6th CPC report on Page 79 becomes very relevant :

The rates of MSP would however need to be kept suitably lower (4200) keeping in view the fact that MNS officers are not primarily meant for combat duties.

The above statement also goes to show that officers granted a higher MSP of Rs 6000 are primarily meant for combat duties, hence the said higher rate of MSP. All officers including all arms, services, branches and departments of the three services have been granted an MSP of Rs 6000 solidifying their ‘primary combat duties’ status as conveyed by the 6th CPC itself.

Though the term ‘combatant’ is not defined anywhere under law, it becomes clear as a crystal if we rely on international law. Article 1 of the 1907 Hague Regulations relating to War on Land simply defines combatants as all those personnel who are commanded by a particular person, have fixed distinctive insignia, are authorized to carry arms and conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. Article 43 of the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 describes all members of armed forces as ‘Combatants’. Basically, every member of an armed force who is authorised to use an arm (weapon) in an offensive or a defensive role, is a combatant.

Coming back to MNS and to why they are not classically covered under the definition of ‘combatants’. The officers of the Nursing Service need not go into battle or operate weapons though they are supposed to perform duties at nursing stations / hospitals / ambulances at the fringes of battle. Nursing functions in actual battle are carried out by BFNAs who are a part and parcel of fighting elements in battle, and hence classified as ‘combatants’. It is a time tested system wherein in the battlefield, the job of non-combatant nurses is carried out by combatant nursing assistants.

There was discussion on this blog earlier wherein former officers of certain arms and support arms had referred to services such as ASC and AOC as non-combatant branches. This is absolutely incorrect. All members of Arms, Services, Branches and Departments of the ‘Armed’ Forces are Combatants irrespective of the functions performed by them. They are all meant to fight battles and bear arms for the nation. Next time someone would say that pathologists and psychiatrists in the medical services of the central govt are not to be granted PB-4 since they are not ‘surgery ready’. To put it simply, by extending the logic of the 6th CPC, all those who are in receipt of an MSP of Rs 6000 would be eligible for PB-4 too.

So in my humble opinion, all should rest assured that Pay Band-4 shall ultimately be made applicable to all officers of the Army, Navy and Air Force irrespective of the kind of duties being ascribed or performed. The same can logically only be held back from MNS officers and Whole Time NCC Officers. By the way, every soldier in every arm or service is enrolled in the Army through Form-I appended as Appx-1 to Army Rules and this form clearly defines all soldiers as 'Combatants'. Non-Combatants are enrolled through Form-II of Appx-1.

May I also request readers once again to maintain the dignity of the discussion fora. Derogatory references to various services may not be initiated please - neither in the chat box nor in the comments area, otherwise I shall be constrained to moderate comments and messages. Thank You.


Anonymous said...

Primarily, one has to be governed by the Army/Navy/Air Force Acts to be considered as Combatant. MNS and NCC Officers are not fully governed by the ibid Acts. I think this justifies the reason.

Anonymous said...

I think the PMO letter mentioning that Lt.Cols on deputation should be given PB4 only on return to parent arm is only to defuse the situation and existing equation wherein a system is already in place. Also to prevent any future rupture the letter very clearly stipulates that Lt.Cols shound not be sent on deputation at all infuture.whether it is only a temporary measure or a permanent feature, only time will tell.
so I think all concerned need not be unduly concerned.Also Navdeep's explanation on "Combatant" is self explanatory and clear.

Anonymous said...

Is this the meaning of being "Combatraedy"



Some deputy secy needs to sent to Leh (or if not necessary left during night at yamuna bank) and made to sleep in those blankets for a few days..

One Jt Dir of AFQHCS / Dy secy MoD needs to be sent to Mendhar and shot on his buttocks. Then he should be taken to Rajouri Base Hospital in bleeding Conditions in the absence of FFD or shell dressing to make him know what it means.

Look we are stll importing electronic fuzes.... I do not know why EME or DRDO exist..????

This Combat readiness...???

Anonymous said...

Dear friends,
If we go by the definition given by Maj Navdeep, then the decision is applicable across the board. I am sure "combat and combat ready and ofcourse not combat ready ;-)" have some deeper meaning that is hidden at the moment. This could also be a lever designed for future negotiations. I suggest that those who are at helm of affairs should act quickly and clear the uncertainty before the episode takes its toll on morale.

Anonymous said...

"Brothers to war" , do not be "brothers at war".Why wash dirty lenin in the forum and dilute the very objective of having this discussion. As officers we ought to demonstrate matuarity.

Should you compare the army to a corporate set up, the Infantry and other fighting arms is synonym to the sales and marketing department with the supply chain, finance , HR the support arms.Can an organisation run by any individual person/ department??....impossible.Each of you are equally important assigned to undertake tasks exclusive to you but inclusive of organisational interest.We are officers of "The Indian Army"...which has a tradition of rich history and decency...Lets not behave like the pakis.

Anonymous said...

Lets not behave like the pakis...and ...worse still like our very own dubious "babus, lallas, Mamoos and LALOOS.....in the order of precedence.

Jai Hind !!

Anonymous said...


Fresh row over pay orders

MoD delinks rank pay from basic pay
Vijay Mohan
Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, October 23
A fresh controversy appears to have erupted over orders issued by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) on revision of the pay scales of armed forces personnel consequent to the implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission recommendations.

In new special army instructions (SAIs) issued in the past week, the MoD has modified the definition of rank pay earlier admissible to commissioned officers and has de-linked it from the basic pay despite the fact that SAIs issued after the fourth and the fifth pay commissions define rank pay as “part of basic pay”.

Legal experts say that the fresh move of the MoD to de-link rank pay is not only in contravention of approved recommendations of the Union Cabinet, but also against the spirit of the MoD’s own earlier SAIs and court orders.

The revised definition, sources claim, would adversely impact the status of armed
forces officers.

Para 3 (b) of the SAI 2/S/08 issued on October 11, 2008, terms rank pay only as “rank pay admissible to commissioned officers of the three services”.

Earlier, SAI 2/S/87 and SAI 2/S/98 also mentioned that rank pay forms a part
of the basic pay. It is learnt that the service headquarters is taking up the issue
with the MoD.

The new “disparity” has come to light even as a high-level committee comprising three Cabinet ministers constituted to look into pay-related issues raised by the armed forces is yet to submit its report.

According to officers, rank pay was carved out of basic pay of military officers by the Fourth Pay Commission, when a common scale was introduced for all ranks from second Lieutenant till Brigadier.

The rank pay was added into the basic pay as a differentiating factor. The addition of rank pay as a part of basic pay was approved by the Union Cabinet and also notified in SAIs issued by the MoD.

Sources claimed that there were still instances wherein civilian officers posted to the MoD, by their own interpretation, refused to add rank pay into basic pay for status comparison purposes, despite the fact that courts of law had also ruled rank pay to be an integral part of basic pay.

While the tussle over the status of Lieutenant Colonel and Colonel vis-à-vis equivalent civilian officers continues, the Jodhpur and Chennai Benches of the Central Administrative Tribunal have, in a case filed by MES officers, already held that directors and superintending engineers of the Central Engineering Services are junior to full Colonels and are equivalent to Lieutenant Colonels.

In the meantime, the Central government has started implementing pay progression parity for all Group A organised civilian officers with the IAS but the defence services have been kept outside the purview of the new scheme.

The pay achieved by 100 per cent civil officers in 16 years is achievable by
less than one per cent military officers and that too after 33 years of service,
sources said.

Anonymous said...

The uninformed vapourings of a disgruntled IDSE cadre, found on Suresh Mehrotras website. Note the crack about administrative jobs in Area HQ/Staff appointments. Apparently he feels that staff appts at HQ should be tenable by IDSE fellows.

Such writings are not to be taken note of, rather pitied. But it is also of some use to know of them, because it shows the gap in perceptions. It is up to us to educate and convince our bretheren in other government services, that the armed forces are a dangerous career, and while today they may feel they are getting a raw deal vis-a-vis the services, in truth, it is not at all the case.

Yeh Dil Mange More ,PB - 4 PB - 4

"You may have seen many trade union movements but none can match that of Armed Forces .All Lt Cols in combat or ready to combat working in parent units given PB-4.A dispensation for Lt Cols working in other departments as a one time measure also made for granting PB - 4 with a condition that in future no Lt Cols to be sent to other departments .Here lies the catch .PB - 4 taken by falsely claiming that Lt Cols are cutting edge of Army .In fact Lt Cols (of Corp of Engineers )who finally superseded after 16 years of service ,is not posted to unit i.e. Regiments as he is no more motivated enough to be of any use to Army /combat duties except that he is a trained hand .So he is finally dumped in Military Engineer Services where he remains till his retirement getting all Military perks and doing nothing related to combat .He is also not very useful to Military Engineer Service as he hardly has any experience of MES work .He also has no motivation to learn MES work .
So now if Lt Cols are no more to be sent to other department ,where will this so called cutting edge ,will be adjusted .This is the problem specific to Corp of engineer ,but other Arms like infantry /Artillery etc also have but they are able to adjust their superseded Lt Cols in Administrative jobs like that in Area HQ /Sub Area Head quarters /other Head quarters.
This is the reason it is still not acceptable to Army. Government should be very careful in dealing with so called disciplined forces as they are not happy till they get what they want when they sense that Government is weak (They take generosity as sign of weakness ).We are in process of going Pakistan way where Army is the most powerful arm of government and they do not even listen to elected government. For their demands they will put up umpteen no of lies ,they will take perks in name of combat and majority of time remain in departments like MES .I wonder where is the constitutional right of "Equal pay for Equal work" ? A civilian officer /subordinate who is much more cued up and more motivated ,can do and is doing double the work at half the Pay .
The other argument of bullets on chest and hardship ,is concerned than it is the PBORs who are most affected but they have no voice .This will continue till they are made their own umpires
I hope someone in government is listening"

Anonymous said...

Please also visit www.idse.org, the IDSE's cadre website, and see the sort of trash and chugli chori they keep posting against service officers. Note please the constant letters to the defence secretary asking him to "Direct engineer in chief" to do such and such.

Heres a sample:

Sh. Vijay Singh
Defence Secretary
Ministry of Defence
Govt of India
South Block
New Delhi - 110011


Respected Sir,

1. Military Engineer Services (MES) is an inter service organisation under Min of Defence. MES provides works services both for project works and maintenance works to all the wings of Defence like Army, Air Force, Navy, DRDO, DGQA, Ordinance Factories etc. Officers from Army (Corps of Engineers) and civ officers recruited through UPSC work together in this dept.

2. The Directorate of Civilian Personnel Administration in E-in-C’s HQ comprises of DG (Pers) (Civilian HAG level), DDG Pers (Brigadier), Director Pers (Colonel), Staff Officer Gde I (Lt Colonel) and SO II / SO III (Maj /Capt). It can be seen that except one post at the top all the lower posts in this directorate are held by Army officers, in spite of the fact that this directorate deals with administration of civilian officers.

3. Therefore Min of Defence vide letter No. 16(2)/98/D(Works) dt 02.11.2001 had issued orders, with a view to have right mix of Army and civilian officers in this directorate, that the posts of DDG (Pers) and Dir (Pers) will be alternately held by civilian and Army officers. When the incumbents in these posts completed their tenures it was expected that one of these posts will be given to civilian officers. Unfortunately, in spite of our representations, E-in-C’s Branch has not implemented these MoD orders on one or the other pretext.

4. It is requested to direct E-in-C’s Branch to implement the Govt Orders in the interest of the organisation and fair play / justice.

Thanking you,
Yours sincerely

( V K Reddy )
Dated : 02 Apr 2008 Secretary

Anonymous said...

Heres another one, demanding from the defence secretary, that Superintending Engrs be allowed to write Lt Cols ACR's!

You see, this is how the wrong impression is circulated in the MoD. The idea of not posting LtCols to MES has also originated here. And this business of "Combat" postings for army officers has long been an MES whine. A long term propaganda campaign has been in progress. What is it matched by by the army? Silence.

Sh. Vijay Singh
Defence Secretary
Ministry of Defence
Govt of India
South Block
New Delhi - 110010


Respected Sir,

1. Please refer E-in-C’s Branch letter No. B/50201\MIS (Civ) dt 8 Aug 07 (copy enclosed).

2. It is to bring to your kind notice that Lt Colonels are posted to MES in the appointments of Dy CWE / Garrison Engineer (GE) and report to Commander Works Engineer (CWE). A CWE supervises the work of Dy CWE and GE. This appointment of CWE is manned by Colonel of Army or Superintending Engineer (SE) a civilian officer.

3. E-in-C’s Branch vide letter referred above directed that CWE when held by a civilian officer (SE) cannot write ACR of a Dy CWE or GE if these are held by Lt Colonels, without prior permission from MS Branch. This ibid letter states that SE and Lt Colonel are equal in rank and therefore as per Army Order No AO/45/2001/MS a CWE (SE) has to take prior permission of MS Branch to write ACR of his subordinate officer Dy CWE or GE when held by Lt Colonel.

4. In this connection it is brought out that the issue of equivalence between Army Officers and Civilian Officers in MES is under active consideration with MoD at the highest level. In the case of Border Roads Organisation (BRO) this issue has been decided recently by MoD vide Gazette Notification dt 12 Feb 2007 wherein Colonels have been equated with SEs. Therefore E-in-C’s Branch cannot unilaterally decide that the SE and Lt Colonel are equal. The ibid E-in-C’s Branch letter is bound to create chaos and lead to collapse of command and control system thereby causing irreparable damage to the organization.

5. It is to inform you that without exception all the Dy CWE / GE posts in the department are held by Lt Colonels as per AV Singh Committee report numbering 250 (Appx). Therefore no restrictions should be imposed for writing of ACRs or else Lt Colonels should not be posted to MES as Dy CWE / GE.


- 2 -

6. In view of the above, it is requested to direct E-in-C’s Branch to cancel the ibid letter in the interest of the organization.

Thanking you,
Yours sincerely

( V K Reddy )
Dated : 01 Nov 2007 Secretary

Copy to :-

1. Lt Gen RR Goswami - for info and necessary action
Engineer-in-Chief please
Military Engineer Services
Integrated HQ of MoD (Army)
Kashmir House
Rajaji Marg
New Delhi 110 011

2. Sh J B Sharma, DG (Pers) - for info and necessary action
Military Engineer Services please
Integrated HQ of MoD (Army)
Kashmir House
Rajaji Marg
New Delhi 110 011

Anonymous said...

And here is one, insisting that Colonels cannot do this and that.

Sh. Vijay Singh
Defence Secretary
Ministry of Defence
Govt of India
South Block
New Delhi - 110010


Respected Sir,

1. Military Engineer Services (MES) is an inter service organisation under Min of Defence. MES provides works services both for project works and maintenance works to all the wings of Defence like Army, Air Force, Navy, DRDO, DGQA, Ordinance Factories etc. Officers from Army (Corps of Engineers) and civ officers recruited through UPSC work together in this dept.

2. The post of Chief Engineer is a very important appointment at the level of SAG Grade (Rs 18400 - 22400). This post is held by a civilian officer of SAG grade or an Army Officer of Brigadier rank.

3. It is to bring to your kind notice that the post of ‘Chief Engineer Cochin Zone’ is presently occupied by an officer from Army of rank ‘Colonel’ and the incumbent is exercising full technical and financial powers of a Chief Engineer. Normally an officer in the rank of ‘Colonel’ holds the post of CWE (Superintending Engineer). Therefore, a Colonel holding the post of a Chief Engineer is an irregularity. This practice is highly objectionable and illegal and is likely to be objected by Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG).

4. Therefore, it is requested to post an eligible officer a Brigadier from Army or a Civilian CE in the post of Chief Engineer Cochin Zone at the earliest.

Thanking you,
Yours sincerely

( V K Reddy )
Dated : 15Mar 2008 Secretary

Anonymous said...

And here is the origin of so many problems: Please see the last point, which is, unless I am mistaken, a blatant lie.

Propaganda has value in modern warfare. Say something enough times, and eventually it becomes the truth!

Tele : 9999884370
Sh. A K Antony
Hon’ble Minister of Defence
South Block
New Delhi - 110010


Respected Sir,

1. Military Engineer Services (MES) is an inter service organization under Min of Defence. MES provides works services to all the wings of Defence like Army, Navy, AirForce, DRDO, Ordinance Factories etc..

2. Indian Defence Service of Engineers (IDSE) an organized Gp ‘A’ service comprising of 1025 Gp ‘A’ Officers is the largest engineers cadre of MES. Our grievances / anomalies on 6th CPC recommendations are submitted herewith as Appx ‘A’ in the form of memorandum for your perusal please.

3. The memorandum may please be forwarded to the Empowered Committee of Secretaries set up by the Govt. to look into the anomalies of sixth CPC.

Thanking you,
Yours sincerely

( V K Reddy )
Dated : 19 Apr 2008 Secretary

Copy to :-

1. Lt Gen R R Goswami
Integrated HQ of MoD
E-in-C’s Branch
Kashmir House
Rajaji Marg
New Delhi

2. Shri J B Sharma
DG (Pers)
Integrated HQ of MoD
E-in-C’s Branch
Kashmir House
Rajaji Marg
New Delhi

President :
Sh NK Sharma
Tele : 9999884361

Vice President:
Sh PK Jain
Tele : 9999884362

Secretary :
Sh VK Reddy,SE
Tel : 2569 2391 (O)
: 2569 1037 ®
: 9999884363

Jt Secretary:
Sh RK Gautam
Tel : 2301 9018 (O)
: 24517071 ®
: 9999884364

Sh Naveen Kumar
Tel : 2301 9022 (O)
: 27304257 ®
: 9999884365

Council Members:
Sh MK Gupta
Tele : 9999884366

Sh P Maniyar
Tele : 9999884368

Sh Neeraj Mehrotra
Tele : 9999112731

Sh Kamal K Arora EE(SG)
Tele : 9999884369

Sh Kamal Nayan
Tele : 9999884371

Sh VK Gautam
Tele : 9999884370

Military Engineer Services (MES) is an inter services organization under Min of Defence. MES provides works services to all the wings of Defence like Army, Navy, Air force, DRDO, Ordinance Factories etc. Indian Defence Service of Engineers (IDSE) an organized Gp ‘A’ service comprising of 1025 Gp ‘A’ Officers is the largest engineers cadre of MES. Grievances / anomalies on 6th CPC recommendations are explained in the subsequent paras.

1. Parity of SEs (Superintending Engineers) with Conservator of Forests : The point was considered by 5th CPC in detail at Para 50.45 and the parity with conservator of Forests was cemented further by the commission as already established by all the earlier commissions. But while recommending the scale the commission erroneously recommended separate scales for SEs and Conservator of Forests. The extracts of the 5th CPC is reproduced which is self explanatory.

“50 45 We would, however, like to make an exception only in the case of Superintending Engineers. It is a fact that the Second CPC had already established a parity between Superintending Engineers and Conservators of Forests by granting them both the scale of Rs. 1300 – 1800. This parity was cemented further by the Third CPC which observed that “ For the post of Conservators of Forests we recommend the scale which we have recommended for the Superintending Engineer grade of the Central Class I Engineering Service viz. Rs. 1800 – 2000.” For the selection grade of Conservators of Forest, the same commission stated that “ a selection grade of Rs. 2000 – 2250 should be introduced for the Conservator of Forests, on the same principles as recommended for the Selection Grade in the Central Class I Engineering Service.” Taking into the account the significant role of engineering services in the nation-building process and the fact that the promotion prospects in engineering cadres are rather bleak, we recommend that NFSG of Rs. 4500 – 5700 should be converted into a single functional scale for Superintending Engineers and the scale of Rs. 3700 – 5000 should instead be the non functional JAG for Exe. Engineers. However, in order to avoid too fast rate of promotion in certain cadres to this grade, it is further recommended that promotions to the scale of Rs. 4500 – 5700 would be permitted only on completion of 13 years of service in Group ‘A’. Although the above recommendation is being made in the context of CPWD engineers, it is clarified that this dispensation will be available to all Engineering cadres in the Government.

In view of the above it is requested that the Pay scales of SEs be placed in the pay Band of PB4 (i.e. Rs 39200 – 67000 ) with the Grade Pay of Rs. 8400.


- 2 -

2. Pay band of Addl Chief Engineer (Rs. 16,400 – Rs. 20,900) from PB 3 to PB 4
Gross injustice has been meted to the Addl Chief Engineer (Pay scale S-27 Rs 16,400 – Rs 20,900) by placing them in PB 3 where as other pay scale S-28 (Rs. 14,300 – Rs 22,400) has been placed in PB 4. This will result in a glaring anomaly which is explained below by an example.

“One Addl Chief Engineer is presently in the pay scale of Rs. 20,900 (say he has reached the max of pay scale). He will be fixed as per 6th CPC at Rs 36,370 + grade pay in the pay band of PB3. Another officer in the pay scale of S-28 (Rs. 14,300 – Rs 22,400) is at the lowest pay of Rs 14,300. This officer as per the 6th CPC will be fixed at Rs 39,200 + grade pay. Thus an officer of scale S-27 who was drawing Rs 6,600 (Rs 20,950 – Rs 14,300) more in the pre-revised pay scale will be drawing Rs 2830 less in the revised pay scale as compared to the officer of S-28 scale.

In view of the above, it is requested that this pay scale (S-27) (Rs. 16,400 – Rs 20,900) may please be placed in the pay band of PB-4

3. Military Service Pay (MSP) for MES Civilian Officers: The status of civilian officers of MES is neither civilian nor Military in true sense. All the disadvantages are available to them. They have to under go frequent transfers as Military personnel and serve along with them even at difficult area like Srinagar, Sonmarg, Leh etc without any benefit. As such whenever they are posted to such locations the MSP should be provided to them. However they may not be payable to them in case posted to peace areas on the similar lines of the military counterpart.

4. Acute shortage of officers in Army - Withdrawing of Army officers from civilian organizations :-

(a) Army is short of about 12000 officers and therefore regiments are starving for officers. At the same time large number of Army Officers are posted to many civilian organizations like :-

(i) Military Engineer Services (MES)
(ii) DRDO
(iii) Director General Quality Assurance (DGQA)
(iv) Survey of India
(v) Border Roads Organisations.

(b) Military Engineer Services is basically a civilian organization. At officers level 50% of the posts are occupied by Army Officers and 50% by Civilian Officers. At Gp ‘C’ and Gp’D’ level 97% of staff are civilians.

- 3 -

(c) 5th CPC vide para 33.15 recommended gradual civilianization of this department so that Army Officers are utilized for core functions of Army. Extract of 5th CPC recommendation is given below :-

“ We find that the Armed Forces have deployed their manpower in several areas not related to their core functions. If the Armed Forces withdraw from such areas the manpower released can be utilized to meet the reported shortages of officers and men in the three services. Our specific suggestions in this regard as under :

The Armed forces need not divert their manpower to organizations like Survey of India, Directorate General of Quality Assurance, Defence Research and Development Organisation, Military Engineer Services, Border Roads Organisation, etc. There should be a gradual civilianization of all these organizations and the officers can be used for core functions.”

(d) In view of the above Army Officers may be withdrawn from the above mentioned organizations and utilized in Army regiments to make up the acute deficiency being faced by Army. To start with the present ratio of 50% may be reduced to 25% in MES immediately to tide over the shortage of officers in Army.

5. Injustice to middle level officers :-

(a) It is disappointing to note that the pay of middle level officers of STS, JAG, JAG (NFSG) has been fixed at much lower as compared to Jt Secy and Addl Secy level. The details are as under

Sl No. Level Pre-revised pay Revised pay Jump
1 STS 10,000 17,400 1.74 times
2. JAG 12,000 20,880 1.74 times
3. JAG (NFSG) 14,300 24,890 1.74 times
4. Jt Secy 18,400 43,280 2.35 times
5. Addl Secy 22,400 48,990 2.19 times

(b) From the above it is evident that gross injustice has been meted to middle level officers. Therefore it is requested that minimum jump at all levels be kept at least 2.35 times.

- 4 -

6. Delinking cadre review proposals which are already in pipe line from 6th CPC :- The commission had clarified that the cadre review is beyond the scope of commission and accordingly the cadre review proposals of MES were being examined at various levels. However the commission in its report at para 1.2.13 has recommended that creation of additional posts in SAG and above in future has to be strictly on functional consideration and such posts should invariably be created outside the cadre to be filled by method of open selection. This type of blanket ban may be applicable to general Gp ‘A’ cadre posts but the same may not be applicable to technical posts. It is clarified that the posts in MES are technical being engineers.

Once the report of the commission is examined and implemented the fresh cadre review proposals may not be initiated by the administrative ministries in the line of recommendations of the commission. However the proposals already in the pipe lines which are in advanced stage may not be stopped rather they should be completed expeditiously delinking them from the recommendation of 6th CPC.

7. Grade pay of Gp ‘A’ cadre posts :- As on today the status of JAG level officer is equal to colonels of Army and similarly STS level officer is that of Lt Colonels. As per the 6th CPC the status has been downgraded by one step for Gp ‘A’ civilian officers.

Therefore it is requested to increase the Grade pay of JTS, STS and JAG levels to Rs 6100, Rs. 6600 and Rs 7600 respectively.

Anonymous said...

dear Navdeep

"One of the hottest topics of discussion amongst military circles is the stipulation that PB-4 shall be granted to Lt Cols who are on combat duty or who are ready for combat...."

The so called PMO letter has slighty diferent stipulations from above "or who are ready for combat"

The first para of this PMO letter talks about "or holding ready to combat jobs" as a criterion for grant of PB4 & GP 8K even in their parent service.

I feel that here the term "Jobs" is very important. It gives a meaning that the person may be a combatant and ready for combat but he should be physically performing the job which is ready to combat to qualify.


Anonymous said...

Dear Maj Navdeep,
Kudos on taking so much of efforts.
Any info on DACP being extended to Arrmy Doctors

Anonymous said...

To anonymous at 10:19 AM. Please stuudy GS pamphelets and role of each arm/services before commenting nxt time. What has EME to do with importing of electronic fuses. Seems that u are a freshly commissioned offr from Mil Farms/APS.

Anonymous said...

there has to be some difference between fighting and non fighting arms of armed forces. Difficulty faced by infantry and armoured officers is far more than that by ASC,EME,Engineers,military farm etc. Further difficulty faced by officers posted on tenure to BRO,DGQA,MES,DRDO etc is negligible.
Rather then saying bad words for others we shall face the reality.
Everybody knows the quality of MES though at higher level it is manned by service officers. I think to get best out of our money MES shall be closed down and we shall resort to outsourcing.

Anonymous said...

MAj NAVDEEP It appears that your discussion and blog has become mouth piece of IDSE officer.mes should be merged with CPWD,when they can execute border fencing,why not other work.SEND all civilian officer to cpwd but their is problem CPWD will give correct bill of light,than how officer will pay.Mess fund will be consumed in light bill only.AND OTHER THOUSAND POINTS >THUS FORGET FIGHT FIND WORKABLE SOLUTION

Anonymous said...

@Anno January 5, 2009 4:47 PM

Dear Sir,

Ask your "Army Development Gp", an EME Org, how many studies and funds have been spent on "Electronics Fuzes" or ask DRDO IAT, Pune. I would stop at that and not go beyond that. Suffice it to say that much...

Even if one is from MF or APS, that can not be a matter of insult as you intended.

If we do not have elctonic fuzes and EME carries efforts to develop technology on that, will that amount to changing GS pamphlets..??

I do not know why instead of taking things logically and in correct perspective, we are inclined to defend the enclosed Empires. If a junior officer, do not do it...

Nevertheless, never mind...my apologies if I heart your EME sentiments which appears to be larger than the intrests of Army and Country.

Anonymous said...

I am recident of cpwd QRS.They only do authrise work but our senior officer needs unauthorise work ,thus we need MES.but as a GE number of LT COL are working under SE and at that time they have no problem but problem comes when they are posted in staf why? No logic we must gracefully accept prime minister decision otherwise there will be no difference between us and PAKI army as they also do not listen to their political leadership

Anonymous said...

My Dear Navdeep, Engr offrs and MES Chors,

That piece on Mr Mahrotrs web written by an IDSE shod is indeed in poor taste.

MES guys must realise one thing that it is indeed bad for them that Lt Col will not be posted to them. Indtead Cols will be posted.

Now soon Engr will make Cols in 15/16 years. If Command of MES unit is taken as their command reports, which it will be, then MES now will be filled with Cols.
MES now had it.

Secondly post AVSC II, Col(TS) will be 20 years of Service. Posting Col(TS) is not forbidden.

Soon MES will be filled with Colonels, a higher grade rank and good enough to rogger many in MES including SEs.

This PMO injenctin is going to work to the benefit of ENGRS and Army ? MoD. Perhaps MES will be under Contrll now.

IDSE is celebrating but soon they will cry for ages for what harm they have done to themselves..!!

MES can not be given up by Army. It is unrealistic dream of IDSE. With Lt Col around, IDSE had some leaverage. Now MES being filled with Cols and remaining there till retirements, it is going to be atough time for IDSE..

So Cheers...

Anonymous said...

Whatever wonderful definitions of Combat and ready for Combat or deputation Major Navdeep has given with lots of research and dedication, the CDA(O) Pune will come up with strange meaning to it or will send it back for the government for clarification :p..

That will take a LOTS OF TIME :)

Anonymous said...

Come on guys dont let the discussion degrade...While all the fingers are not same, none can replace the other. Learn to respect each other. At least dont create an embarrasing sit for Navdeep. he may have to dump this if u countinue f...g.

Anonymous said...

Dear Maj Navdeep
You had indicated that min pension of Lt.Col with PB4 will be 25,700/-. But I think it will be 26,260/- Lt.Col's minimum pay will have to be fixed at 38, 530/- not at 37,400/- as civilians who were drawing 15,100/- in the scale of 14,300-400-18,300 have been given 38,350.It is pertinent to mention that Col's starting pay is fixed at 40,890/- corresponding to civilian's 17,100/-

Anonymous said...

Dear SB..

Fixation of Pay and taking Min of the scale are two different thing.

For fixation minimum of scale plus one increment is the rule. This increment is for those who are serving.

For Pension it is 50 % minmum of Scale + GP + MSP.

There is difference between the two.

That is my understanding and I could be wrong.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

@Anonymous 7:46
Civilians with staring pay of 14,300/- & 14,700/- have been given 37,400/-

Anonymous said...

Dear friends,
A lot has been discussed about combat or ready to combat. The dictionary meaning of Combat from websters world disctionary is
" Combat: to fight, contend, or struggle",
"Combatant: 1. Fighting, 2. ready or prepared to fight"

With this meaning there should not be any doubt and there is no scope for interpolation or extrapolation.

With no streach of imagination officers is BRO, MES, DGQA, DRDO, NSG, NCC etc can be brought under the perview of Combat or ready to combat.
I feel units on WE only can be interpreted as combat or ready to combat. And accordingly eligible for PB4 else all are PB3.

Anonymous said...

Are Pakistani terrorist "Combatants" or "ready to Combat"....??

What does PMO think..??

Anonymous said...

Anony 2:18 seams to have a poin.
any taks on it ?

Anonymous said...

Is this PM Combat ready?
His EAM certainly is a 'combatant' going by his brave statements!

Anonymous said...

@ Navdeep &all

It seems the issue of pb4 to Lt Col & equivalents has been reduced (atleast on this blog) to battle of wits between civilian(read IDSE)offrs and Corps of Engr offrs as if service officers in other branches of armed forces are not affected or as if MES consists of IDSE(about 1000 in number) only. I would like to be enlightened as to how the Lt Cols will be benefited status wise if IDSE or rather all civilians in MES are done away with. Ditto for BRO. By making an SE report to a Col in MES/BRO(Organisations controlled by service officers)Does a Col really become senior/superior to a Director(IAS/Non IAS)?

Rajababu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

Anybody who is looking for a bullet up his arse is combat ready.
So, I guess both PM and EAM are combat ready.
While they are at it, they may remember the first rule of CI ops - friendly fire has right of way!!

Rajababu said...

Dear Adv(Maj) Navdeep,

I am fresh on this site as in the services it is said that this blog talks only about facts and not craps. Thanx for educating all of us and saving us reading the voluminous service regulations/ rules.

At the outset i feel that the service rules and regulations have been created with loopholes that invariably serve as an escape route by virtue of their text(jumble of words)in English. No wonder English is a wonderful langauge of convenience and interpretation.

This is the same weapon that is effectively used by Babus and Career diplomats who virtually create/avoid war by the stroke of their pens. Therefore, the saying pen is mightier than the sword holds good here.

Dont u feel that there needs to be distinction between a man weilding a pen and the one who weilds a sword. I thats so then we should have a separate pay comission not decided by babus but by ourselves.

To do that we need to cleanse the MOD of the babus and man them with service officers. what they can do even we can do. this will bring a level palying field for the services with no babus interventions in house.

Secondly i want to address this MES debate in my own way. A man in uniform may be temporarily serving in an organisation like MES but will generally heed the call for duty when the hour beckons. So the question is will the civilians also take up arms and fight?? Try ordering them and they will shoot hundred representations to the President of India.

The fact of the matter is MES and other civilian organisations were only created to offer support and services to the main combatants which they should remember and never exceed their brief. They should not try to become the commander-in-chief or the Engineer-in-chief by equating their no years of experience or by virtue of serving with combatants. they may be serving together but not necessarily doing the same jobs. So the job defnition is of vital importance/significance here.

The most important and serious reasons for the IDSE cadre getting under the skin is that with more army officers posted to the units their Kamayi/Mr 10 % will dwindle(i dont mean the EME offrs are saints they have been caught red handed many times!!!) The day the CBI starts catching these IDSE chaps then they will start feeling the heat.

You can ask any MES contractor hell tell u that "upar se leke neeche tak khilana padta hai saab" So every body wants have a pie of this cash cow namely MES. As per conservative estimates a GE in a prominent station makes on an average of 3-4 crores in his tenure!! dont be surprised gentle men these are facts told by the same IDSE chaps.

To put an end to all this fingerpointing and allegations i have recommended in many fora that the MES should be disbanded and the services to be outsourced. In this era of BPOs and poeple offering good annual maintenance services why do we still have to support a white elephant like MES. Nowadays the MES chaps do only the job of changing switches,repairing tublights, replacing the washer of taps etc. The majopr works of maitenance like whitewashing, cabling etc are outsourced by MES. Why at all do we need MES then? When we have SAD, SSR and market rates in hand i dont need a MES chap to decide what i want in an office. MES should only be restricted to consultative role and nothing more. then u can see all the jokers falling in line and also see good quality of works. Some good examples of fantastic infrastructure built without MES - DRDO buildings/Accn & Project Seabird. See them to beleive it. MES will have to hang its head in shame. When DRDO can do it being under MOD why cant we??

So much for wishful thinking. But dreaming in day time is always good as it prevents nightmares during the night(said by boxer akhil kumar). It depends on the gennext to turn the dreams into reality. I feel that the MES is going to crumble under its own weight in a matter of time.

Anonymous said...

Generally people have gone astray from the main point of discussion

Well written. DRDO did not do wonders of "Works Services" just like that without MES, they created another organisation for their own purpose called CCE(R&D), which OUTSOURCES 100% of their Contracts, practically being manned by all IDSE people only, just gave a new Name to that Org. Its like, "A cat while drinking milk closes it eyes thinking no one is looking at it", same is the case with CCE, Every Civilian Org is same in this country, no one is special, the earlier people understand the better it is

Anonymous said...

Major Navdeep,
Just a thought!
If we have to take refuge under the much maligned SPC report to logically justify PB-4 in the context of the Combatant/Non-combatant issue, to exclude equivalent MNS from PB-4,then why we were crying hoarse about the logical equivalence given by the same SPC reg. Lt. Col. vis-a-vis Dy. Sec./Jt. Director in Civil Side?
Does it not amount to (sorry to say!)hypocracy?

Anonymous said...

Dear Maj Navdeep

Reference the comments of Anonymous @ January 5, 2009 11:55 PM

I think theres a valid point here. Why try to exclude the MNS from any benefits that may accrue !

After all they are also a part of our extended Army brotherhood ?(Or should that be sisterhood).

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

IMO. The best solution is to

(A) Either completely disband the MES, and set up an Army Works Org. which will set up the contracts for the works projects required.


(B) Turn the MES into a PSU, with a Major General as Chairman, and a civ M.D. For eg, Strategic Works Corporation of India. A corporatised environment will cause much less friction than having an entire auxiliary cadre running things.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Rajababu said...

Anonymous @ jan 05 1128,

VMT I am aware of CC(R&D) but in the case of SeaBird its only Navy and L&T. But the end result should be in the pudding/Icing as long its sweet/presentable. Dont u agree? In the case of MES neither the cake is presentable nor its worthy of eating!!.

We in the services should bother about end results within the cost structures/budgetary layouts rather than getting into the semantics/nitty grittys of the works. Then we can devote time for our actual work(ie. combat/ prepartion for combat)

Anonymous said...

@ Rajababu

'As per conservative estimates a GE in a prominent station makes on an average of 3-4 crores in his tenure!'

I would like to add the following
Think of how much a Chief Engr (Brig/civ CE)with approx 20 GEs under him or the CE Command(Maj Gen) with 5 to 14 Chief Engineers under him or the E-in-C(U Know Who) With over 250 GEs under him must be making. This probably explains why the Combatant Offrs don't want to relax their stranglehold on a cash cow namely MES (to use your terminology). Thanks for educating the uninitiated!

Rajababu said...


Have i ever said combatants are holy cows!! i dont think so!! pse read my entire blog and appreciate the facts rather than between lines.

I still beleive in disbanding the MES and outsourcing and that will not change cos u have to remove the leeches sucking ur blood.

Rajababu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rajababu said...

Its is the MES that has become a spring board/weak link for all the arguments by the IAS/Civil lobby to take potshots at the services.

Further, they do not need any special benefits as for them pay comission or not its always raining money!!!

Any away lets stop MES bashing and get on with our jobs. our views doesnt change the ground realities.

I have also noticed something peculiar about we Indians "We are Reactive and not Procative" The example is this blog only. The moment some new individual like me enters the blog and writes his entitled opinion, the rest wake up from slumber and react. The day we become proactive and appreciate good ideas then only our country will surge ahead.

God Bless and God speed

Rajababu said...

@ Maj Navdeep singh

May i request u or anybody in this fora to tell where i can lay my hands on a downloadable version of V CPC report. I mean Fifth CPC report!!!

Rajababu said...

maj Navdeeep

What have our poor PBORs done. In my opinion they have got a raw deal. Cna u throw some light on it pse

Anonymous said...

For RajaBabu

Download from http://india.gov.in/govt/paycommission.php

Anonymous said...

The level of discussion has reflected one thing i.e completeely missing acknowledgement of Combat roles. Either all Lt col are doing combat roles or there is no combat role?

Let us concentrate on combat appointments , if there is any?

Anonymous said...

I wonder, if all Lt Cols are doing combat roles then for sure all DRDO scientists are also doing combat duties?. They at list justifies their roles where they draw pay, many combat officers appear to combat within themselves or with their common enimies- politicians/civilians/babus etc etc all except faujies? God bless them.

Anonymous said...

If one word can be found for the enlightened solidiers giving their views here it is -self serving soldiers-may this countrymen know it at they earliest. The kind of debate MES corps of engineer officers are entering has exposed their honesty,however wonder is- why still Infantry men embraces them just looking at colour of uniform. The day this department will be given a seperate head may be an infantry men or navy or AF the realty will surface.My advise to civilan babus/IDSE and Engineer officers is please for GOD shake followminimum standars of ethics Thanks

Rajababu said...


VMT for the link

Rajababu said...

Anonymous of the last blog,

guys i dont know what u guys are hiding for atleast give some name while blogging. Anyways by being self centred to the core demand, the end result has been acheived thou albeit partially.

I want the PBORs issue also to be adressed as they have been drastically reduced in stature vis-a-vis civilians.

So i feel that the PBORs are the real combatants whose interests have been marginalised/sidelined.

So will the combatant officers take up their PBORs causes as vociferiously and self centeredly as they did for their cause.

Wake up guys, be proactive and have self consceince. Dont let ur men down

Anonymous said...

Why are we all barking for a bone which the govt is so reluctant to give you? I feel any self respecting officer should stop asking for more pay and ask govt to release them when they put up their papers. They will be paid a fortune outside even at this time of recession. Let this country get the armed forces it actually deserves. Some lessons have to be learned the hard way. I think our IAS lobby and govt have achieved so easily what pakistan and ISI could not in last 60 years- demoralising the Lt Col community, who are the spearhead of operations. Mera Bharat Mahan. May god protect you all.

Rajababu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Rajababu said...


barking dogs seldom bite. if this fauj was in pakistan they would have overthrown the govt for this misdemeanor.

we all know our worth and have tried to get them by fighting against the established IAS lobby for the first time. so lets take some heart and little pleasure out of it.

But a word of caution, the others lagging will soon catch up with us discretely in connivance with the IAS by virtue of special provisions/dispensations.

The focus therefore should be to systematically bring the entire beureaucratic setup in bad light so that cadre is abolished sooner or later for the progress of this country.

Anonymous said...

Corps of Engineer (see exact meaning of corpse in any dictionary) is the real meaning of Engineers of Army.. Dear Maj Navdeep please dont restrict this comment.. I am not a MES Guy but i was in MES and left MES to join CPWD just because of the Lt Cols in MES... just for knowledge sake i want to know how many Lt Cols are posted in MES as SO I (Design) in CE Office? I presume that very few are posted as SO 1 (Design) in CE Office... Mostly civilian Officers are posted to Design Section of CE Office... Why??? just ask army officers?? they have completed (Most of them, some are from IITs who are actually performing very well) their degree from CME and are not confident enough to perform as an Design Officer.. just ask... and last but not least just hand over the maintenance part of any canotmentment to CPWD and you will realise how difficult is to just getting tiled your bonafidw bathroom??? just experiment it to handover to any other organisation than MES.... you people will understand the real meaning of MES.

Anonymous said...

Lt Cols of MES are the most problemetic lot for MES as well for Army as a whole... The MES Guys has no grudge over the Lt Cols or Cols of Arty who are main fighting force of Army and we solitarly salute them and respect them as they are the one because of whom INDIA is INDIA and not bacause of Corpse of Engineers.. just ask them that you have to move to Mendhar for combat duties and they will present tons of representation to President of India for their inefficiency as Combat Ready and still they want Combat Ready Status??? Shame to Indian Army of having them... If any support duties like ASC, MNS, Signals, EME can be outsourced then why not to start with Corpse of Engineers ??? They are the most inefficient lot of Indian Army and they should be outsourced first... my personal opinion in the reference of Indian Republic.

Anonymous said...

Many people in this Blog has compared Army Engineers Vs IDSE Officers and suggested that it should be ooutsourced... fine.. just experiment it and you will realise the exact meaning of outsourcing.. Just for experiment outsource one task to CPWD or any other organisation (for maintenance purpose only) and ask them to replace your geyser or tiles of bathroom and you will realise what authorisation is there for you people... so fight with Govt for more authorisation than to blame IDSE for all...

Anonymous said...


I have just one request to all those who are arguing for/against IDSE and Corps(Let's not demean it by misspelling as CORPSE intentionall or otherwise)of Engrs. Please remember this nation is much larger than any Govt, The Govt is much larger than any Dept be it Armed Forces or any other Dept, Armed Forces are much larger than MES and last but not the least The MES is much larger than any of the constituent cadre including IDSE/Offrs of Corps of Engrs. Belittling/degrading the contribution of any of the constituent cadre is not going to help. What is required is to persuade the Govt to issue unambiguous instructions regarding equivalence(at least functional parity) between civ offrs and service offfs at all levels so that anomalous situation like a Lt Col working under a civ SE (CWE) as GE/DCWE/SBSO but sought to be equated with the same SE when posted in staff can be avoided.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Dear Maj Navneet,
Why all the hussel about MNS in the rank of Lt. Col, where PB-4 is not applicable. Do you mean to say that upto the Rank of Maj the PB will be at parity and only when it comes to Lt.Col that they will not be placed at PB 4 till they become Full Col.
Your argument if related only to MNS cadre is not fully convincing. Please elaborate.
Maj(Retd) Jayant Dutta

Anonymous said...

Leaving out the deputationist from PB4 would only create more problems. What happens to Lt Col/Wg Cdr/ Cdrs who are already on deputation with state governments? Why are they being deprived of this facility? For Maj Navjot--Is there any remedial/legal measure the officer's on deputation can take to be included in PB4? Or can they ask for reverting back to the service? Kindly advice.

Anonymous said...

had it been possible for corp of engg to work without civ ,it would have been done long back .they know their worth and utility of ltcols etal .any way do whatever you can .Map outsourcing results are for everyone to see .we have nothing against infantry ,armoured or arty whose life is really difficult when compared to engrs .excerpts from one blogger are reproduced .have guts to read dissenting voices .comments are removed only when you as a community have no answers


An officer in Corp of Engineers (Army ) generally spends 4 yrs in College of military engineering for doing engineering degree course(though there are plenty of engg colleges in country and people willing to join ) ,2 years in doing M Tech at govt cost (and he gets Rs 5000 /pm allowance thereafter for entire service ) ,one tenure of Military Engineer Service 3 years as GE or OC RCC company in BRO ,few other courses at govt cost ,and one posting in unit 4 years(50% time unit may be in peace) and you get MSP and all other military perks .Once he gets finally superceded after another 3 years ie 16 year total he is posted to only MES no combat role except in case of war when even retd offrs/civ offrs can be called .Still they are not on deputation as they are the player as well as umpire .In MoD ,writ of Def Secy does not run it is Army who calls the shot .So final orders Army Offrs in MES (civilian deptt of MoD ) will also get PB – 4 as they are combat ready .Special list (SL) offrs are always in MES but entitled for all military perks like 3 months leave,free ration,accn ,electricity,water,furniture etc at subsidised rates,MSP and now PB - 4
do not be hypocrats.when you want your offrs in MOD in place of IAS others may have aspirations too .learn to respect others point of view which i think army may have taught.No form of injustice can last long
jai hind jai bharat

Unknown said...

What does Study Leave constitute? Going by this analogy, offrs on study lve are also combat ready and are available to perform their duties.

Anonymous said...

It is obvious that any post which can be manned/taneble both by an army officer or a civilian is the one where PB4 will not be avilable to Lt Cols-both in deputation and in perent service.

Anonymous said...

It is a sad day for country that officers are fighting for injustice. I donot understand why officers donot ask for justice. The army officers in AHQ etc should get the pay an civilian gets occupying same post. Why this discrimnation?. All free ration etc should be withdrawn as soon as an Army officer is posted to Civil post. He/She may be be paid 100 times for doing military duty let hem not ask/get 1INR extra for doing babus work. Why Army has not even one officer to have guts to stand as a civilian, he was born? Why not?. Let us be very clear these are same ful days for any establishment to ask for wrong and it is deep in shame to be happy of it when we get it.......

Rajababu said...

Dear all

Even after three days i find guys are still MES bashing. so much for reactionist reactions. But has any body given a thought of how outsourcinng can be done.

I'll let u know later in a nut shell for all of u to break ur head.

Aapas mein ladna bandh karo aur asli kaam pe lag jao. Its apparaent form the forum that most officers are ignorant about jawans ussues. God save the services!!!

Anonymous said...

Pls clarify, if a Lt Col who is already in PB4 will be demoted to PB3 on being deputed to any organisation say CSD,etc,?

Anonymous said...

Maj navdeep Certain points made in the blog has been removed one of them was use of official vehicle .it was written that you stand at any cant and count number of officer using vehicle for convayance from home to office.I enquried about rule postition and i was surprised to note that even aBRIG can not write a duty that he is using staff car from house to office .Why we do not demand this from govtor as a upright service officer all officer up to BRIG level travel in their own car.I expect a honest answer from you

Anonymous said...

I joined MES in2007 and left in 2008 as i was selected in Railway.The biggest problem of MES is you look down for advise where as in all outher dept you look up for advise.I worked for one year and my opinion is offier working in MES shoud not get MSP leave apart PB4 for colonel

Anonymous said...

Well said look down look upon. I think this shoud be the slogan of MES

Anonymous said...

Well said "look down and look up". I think this should be the slogan of MES.

Anonymous said...

Ki farak penda bhai log! Don't fight like dogs for an invisible bone. Fight for your country, fight against insult to your izzat, fight corruption, fight the enemy within and outside. Pakis need no better acts of terror! For God's sake differ with dignity and not run each other down! Long live the fauj!

Saras Nair said...

Has the MOD issued an corrigendum on Lt Col being upgraded to PB-4? Kindly post a copy of the same if held.

Anonymous said...

I find most of blogs are on issue relating to ltcols posting to MES/ Border roads etc and their efficiency.I would like to say ltcols are equally competent as Civ who have done M tech and can perform Design officers. But problem lies with MS branch which post them at wrong place.Why an officer with Mtech in electrical engg is posted as SO1(Planning) / SO1(Design) in BRO/MES.He just becomes a signing oficer with no understanding of Civ engg.He also passes his time without contributing techincally. IN BRO all E/M Cadre officers are given only E/M Task but Engr Army officers are just posted in Civ Engg Vacancy without concidering their degree. So Please donot blame individual officer but system who post them or org accept them.Secondly Corruption can not be removed by just changing dress/ color of persons.It is system privilage and individual's intigirity.

Anonymous said...

All sister org viz BRO,MES,DRDO etc needs combatants so that they can function properly. These org will be crippled if there are no combatants offrs/Tps.So the offrs(Lt Cols) posted in any of sister Org by MS branch has to be Considered as Combat/ Ready to Combat without any reservation. As just having good ingredients can not be converted into tasty food without a good cook similarly even if these org having their own good competent officers (just because they perform only one type of job for many years),without excellent experience & efficiency of Lt Cols/Cols(TS) in combating the challenges ,these org, can not compete with other civ org. It is commented upon that Lt cols/Col(TS) have no technical knowledge, I would like to say Most Engr offrs have vast knowledge but firstly that is not utilised by their own civilian bosses who donot want to share workload with army officers due to their own vested interests and secondly they are not rightfully placed ie if an Engr Offr who is M Tech in Electrical Engg/Software engr is posted for construction of Bridge/Runway then what will he contribute technically?. Secondly corruption is not prerogative for only IDSE/BRES officers .Anyone who is posted in such a appointment it depends upon his integrity. One should not feel jealous of them. Laxmi is always moving and money earned through corrupt means is always painful. We should not crib. Salary of an army officer is more than sufficient to lead a honourable life.i only wish that CDA(O) can understand correct meaning of Combat because it is not always necessary to fight with pakistan so as to prove Lt Cols are combat. All Lt Cols posted in BRO/ MES/DRDO are also combating with nature/ public outrage/ scientifically as other officers viz upto Majors or Cols and above are deemed to be combatant. In a recent case CDA(O)has stopped CI allces / Fd area allces for the offrs posted in BRO units on the pretext that offrs are not actively participating CI Ops with weapons and units are static. Though BRO has declared certain HQ as static so that their Offrs(Civ) can draw HRA but kept them as Fd for Army offrs being located in CI /Fd area. All Army officers posted in BRO are at great disadvantage because Civilian BRO pers are claiming SDA(12% of Basic), HRA(30% of Basic) at higher rates( Though staying with families in Temp accn) and army offrs are not getting any allces while serving in Fd /CI areas and performing CI Ops of different nature than fighting with gun. JAI HO CDA(O)!

Anonymous said...

dear friends
what about the travel entitlement for the defence offrs where in 6 pc recommends first ac to major having 6600 grade pay and above but implementation is diff where maj are not included for the entitlement of first ac in travelling by train.

Brig Jasbeer said...

Dear Major,

Your blog have a lot of regular readers. Kindly visit, http://mnscorps.blogspot.com/ and educate the armed forces about the Army Nurse Corps of other nations and the need to foram a Nurse Corps in Indian Army to manage the Nursing Services effectively.

Prsently, the nursing services are managed by the AMC doctors. The Nursing Officers who are required to supervise the work of Nursing Assistants have no authority to control them (they are not superior officers as being members of an auxiliary force). What is required here is formation of a Nurse Corps.

As the Armed Forces have oppened up almost every branch to women, we should now open up the last frontier (nursing officer) to the men also. That is allow men as Commissioned Nursing Officer. The Nursing services were the first arm of the services to have Indian women (since 1927). Why don't we now stary selecting women Nurses as JCOs in such a Nurse Corps. As this is the norm World over.

Kindly educate yourself on these matter. All links about ANC US, UK, Canada, etc are provided in my blog.

With regards Brig Jasbeer (Retd).

Anonymous said...

GREF I understand are governed by Army Act though are not combatants.

The MNS and NCC WTOs hold military rank. Both are not covered Army Act but the MNS are granted MSP - although Rs 1800 less.

Ex ECOs granted NCC WT Commision are considered ex servicemen for the purpose of ECHS and non ex ECOs are entitled MH treatment after retirement. The Section 10 of NCC Act 48 says:

10. Duties of persons subject to this Act. No person subject to this Act shall by virtue of being a member of the Corps be liable for active military service, but subject thereto any such person shall be liable to perform such duties and discharge such obligations as may be prescribed.

The NCC WTOs perform duties identical to Army officers serving in NCC. During emergency they awere assigned duties relating to POW camps post 71 War if I am not wrong. Not a active military duty but peace time military duty ?

In my opinion being covered by Army Act is not the only criteria for making a person elegible for MSP.

Just my POW

Anonymous said...

Applicability of Army/Navy?Air Force Act may not be the sole ctriteria for being combatant. GREF people are covered under Army Act but are Defence Civilians. MNS (Local) are Defence Civilian but are granted MSP although less.

The NCC Officer granted Permanent Commission by virtue of their being under NCC Act, are not liable for ACTIVE military service but liable to perform such duties as prescribed by the Govt of India.

Their pension is paid from Defence estimates. Called Defence Civilian as per PCDA(P) website.

Granted Permanent Commission, held military rank and paid pay (modified) and rank pay as applicable to service officers

Performed duties identical to the duties performed by the regular service officers posted in the NCC.

NCC PC CDR (selection Grade) got more rank pay than the Time Scale CDR I.N. and stood senior to the CDR(TS) of IN posted to NCC.

The PB4 is applicable equally to the TS and SG CDR I.N. subject to minor difference of weightage of QS

May kindly enlighten me as to whether the NCC PC Officers of the rank of CDR/LtCol/Wg CDR should be entitled minimum guarteed pension of PB 4 ?

If your answer is yes - the authority please

and if the answer is no, what is their entitlement ? with reasons pl

Maj Jayant Dutta said...

Maj Jayant Dutta (Retd)

What is the need of the jargon combatant / non-combatant, why cant we drive straight and keep the pay as per Rank. No doubt is satisfies many egos when the Members of MNS/ regular NCC officers etc are denied the benefit.