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 Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained.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, July 6, 2009

Parity in Pensions announced : Applicable to PBOR only, as signified earlier on this blog

A new regime of Parity in Pensions is to be brought into place and the same has been announced in the Union Budget. As signified on this blog earlier, and contrary to the many tables floating around, the new system would be made applicable to PBOR only.

The quantum of increase would be put into public domain soon. The same is expected to be based on a 'set amount' stipulation for each rank. The date of implementation may not be 1-1-06 but 1-7-2009.

Bridging the gap between retirees of varied vintage (especially pre and post 2006) was the aim of the govt, which to an extent seems to have been addressed. Pensions of pre-97 and post-97 pensioners have also been rationalised. Disability / casualty pensionary awards are also being rationalised.

Complete authentic details would be uploaded on the blog only when officially released by the Govt.


Ex Sgt Gavini VN said...

Sir, you have once again proved right,exactly as posted in ur blog a month ago as the demand was just and reasonable. Hope to find the New Pension details of PBORs soon from your blog first.

Sir, the PMO had recommended a Separate Pay Commission for Armed Forces on 01 jan 09, which might be constituted in 2016! Pending this, the MOD may ask for an exclusive Armed Forces Anamolies Committee to set right all the anamolies arising out of VI CPC recommendations in respect of all Armed Forces Personnel matters. There is an AF Tribunal recently set up to deal with judicial matters. I wish, inter alia, Maj Navdeep Singh should be part of this committee.

Thanks and may GOD bless you,sir. Ex-Sgt Gavini VN

Anonymous said...

Pre 2006 PBOR pensioners were bigger loosers vis-a-vis their counterparts post 2006 retirees & it is heartening that some parity will come with this announcement.Wish well for PBOR, they are our part offcourse. But a very cunning move on the part of Govt by segregating officers and PBOR. Hope the fight for parity in pension for all will continue till finality.

guest said...

Yes Navdeep, It would be most probably applicable from 01 Jul 09. Probably with this new regime for PBOR, I beieve that the enhenced pension for post 01 Jan 2006 PBOR has also been addressed with.

Anonymous said...

the govt seems bent upon creating a serious breach amongst the commanders and the commanded!!! is it intended to state that the govt cares 'two hoots' for the officer category, notwithstanding their sacrifices!! dont the officers die for their country?? it is atrocious!!

Col VT Venkatesh(retd) said...

Dear Major Navdeep
I could gather so much from your earlier post & probably you were a party to it (since you seem to know exactly about the outcome)
Not providing parity to Officers seems to be a political decision since it was perceived by congress that the Officers ESM had supported BJP.This was expected & i had said this earlier too
ESM Officers are considered to be a spent force & hence not worth bothering about.Time will tell if it is so
Double whammy for ESMs. i.e retiring at an younger age & getting no parity with Post 2006 pensioners.



Harry said...

@ Maj Navdeep


Wonder whats the charm left in joining Armed Forces as an officer for any younster? No parity in status with civilians yet, regardless of PB4 victory for Lt Cols! And now No Parity in pension for old veterans also!!

Hopeless state !

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Col Venkatesh

I wish I were a part of this.
In that case I would have recommended OROP not only for commissioned officers but also for all central govt employees including civilians.

Col NR Kurup (Retd) said...

This is not the time to crib about officers not being included. Why don't you think for a fraction of second as to what all are gone through the minds of PBOR when Lt Cols were put on PB4 with fat incease and arrears. Let the government be happy that they have succeeeded in punishing officers for joining hands with BJP and creating a divide and rule policy with AF.. It is immaterial. Do you remember that our Hon'ble Defence Minister has openly proclaimed few months back that the OROP issue as closed chapter? What made them this change of mind. The Officers have come to the street claiming OROP. They have succeeded in getting the full support of BJP. The UPA govt dare not say NO now. The officers can wait. First let the PBOR be happy. Now that we know how to tackle the government, we can always find ways and means to get our legitimate right. But please dont crib about PBOR getting OROP now.

gurdarshan singh said...

I have recentely come across your blog I fell I am in touch with the latest happening in The Indian Army It is good that parity in pension Applicable to PBOR has been announced
I hope the Govt also announces the parity in disability pension too inclusive officers.

Col VT Venkatesh(retd) said...

@Maj Navdeep
Actually AF personnel deserve OROP & all others do deserve pay parity with post 2006 retirees.I am sure govt will finally yield on this.
The govt has very cleverly trying to segregate the Officers & the PBORs.
@Col Kurup
Your comments about Cribbing is a good joke.You probably don't realize the reason for Offrs not getting OROP .It is not just about officers or PBOR.It is about the treatment meted out to AF personnel.
More over we don't even know what PBORs have got.If the govt was so committed we would have got every thing right in the first place.It is only after lot of struggle that govt has come around to OROP.
More over you are talking as though you have got no fat arrears.
Don't be hypocritical in your approach.Lt Cols have been given PB4 justly.Please go through old posts to understand why it was done.
Every one deserves a fair share in society & the share should not be doled out as charity.It has to be done in a dignified manner.ESMs have to take to the street to achieve their aims.This itself has earned a bad name for the AF community.On the long run this will become counterproductive.
Actually if the parity was maintained right from the beginning between pre 2006 & post 2006 ,all these issues would not have cropped up.
I am sorry to put personal remarks since you have not understood the issue & terming it as a crib.
If money alone was the issue with PBORs, every thing would be ok.Unfortunately it is not so.I am saying this from my personal experience while trying to get many PBORs settled in civil life.(this is even true for many Officers).AF widows are even in worse condition

Penmil said...

Dear Maj.Navdeep,
Has the real problem been addressed in this solution labelled OROP?
The budget speech had this mention.
"......Based on the recommendation of the committee headed by Cabinet Secretary on 'One Rank-One Pension' (OROP), the government has decided to substantially improve the pension of pre-January one, 2006 defence pensioners below officer rank and bring pre-October 10, 1997 pensioners on par with post- October 10, 1997 pensioners.....".
".....Based on the recommendations of the Committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary on OROP, government has decided to substantially improve the pension of pre 01.01.2006 defence pensioners below officer rank and bring pre 10.10.1997 pensioners on par with post 10.10.1997 pensioners. The decisions to implemented from 01st Jul, 2009 and will cost the Government more than Rs 2,100 crore annually....".
But what had been asked was pension, calculated at 70% of the pay drawn at retirement instead of 50% of the pay as was granted by the government on the recommendations of 6th CPC, for all Post 2006 PBOR pensioners.This does not appear to have been announced.
But what has been announced now is a parity between pre and post 10-10-1997 pensioners.This no doubt, is over due and had been a part of the eventual parity between the pensioners on both sides of the divide of any pay commission recommendations.
And still no parity between those who were pensioned off after 10-10-1997 and prior to 01-01-2006 and those retired after 01-01-2006.
You ask for 'x' that is just and due to you and you are given 'x' minus 'a' minus 'b' !

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Col Venkatesh

Actually, we are suffering from a delusion of persecution and can never be happy as a class.

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...


Parity between pre and post 1-1-06 pensioners HAS been addressed.

Penmil said...

Maj Navdeep @8:29 PM
If thta parity has been granted,it is a great news!

Harry said...

Well... Firstly, we all must feel happy about our men!! But why is it not being given wef 01 Jan 2006? If the govt has dithered in making up its mind why should veterans suffer financial loss?

Secondly, by attempting to drive a wedge between offrs and men, the govt has displayed condemnable intent of worst kind!! So Shameful !!

@ Maj Navdeep

Sir, ONLY you seem to be convinced about non-applicability of OROP for offrs. Why don't you please share your LOGIC with all of us? I'm sure it will calm a lot of agitated minds! You would surely wanna do that, won't you?

Col VT Venkatesh(retd) said...

@Maj Navdeep
I have no delusion/illusion about myself & that is why I am a very happy man .At the same time I have no delusion about the struggle ahead.(Hope i am not sounding like a Left wing leader which I am not)
But being part of a great system which has taught us every thing,it makes me unhappy when I see others from the org suffering be it offr,jco or ORs.
Talking in your legal terms , end results of acts of commission & omission are the same to an AF personnel & the ignorant pensioner can only suffer in silence since he has never learnt any thing about his pension while in service.(for e.g. the Col from Newzeland who had posted his pension problem in your blog recently.Though actually the PPO was correct, he had no clue since he was concentrating on his army job while in service as most of us do.)
What delusion are you attributing to the Maj who took up the job of teshildar & got bashed up.Of course he did not get bashed up for being a Maj.(Of course it did prove that in the land of soldiers viz Punjab even a Maj has no real defense.

It is only some offrs & JCOs who are articulate ,understanding & helpful who can bring some relief to others.
While the grant of parity to PBORs is a very welcome move,this is only tip of the iceberg & there is a long struggle ahead.This I hope is realized by all.
Of course our methods have to become more sophisticated & not crude & direct.
This is where we need to take help of people like you with a legal background.

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...


Will do that at the right time.

Col VT Venkatesh(Retd) said...

While there may be some doubt about OROP for Offrs/AF, there is absolutely no doubt about parity between old & new pensioners.
This is true not only for AF personnel but for all pensioners.
This is not a new issue.This has happened with 1996 pensioners too.Maj gens went to court & won the case .Now there is even a contempt case against the govt connected with this.
Our problem is that we do not have enough legal acumen at the top level.Our cases are never projected well since you need a sharp legal mind with real legal acumen by the person projecting the case.JAG branch may of some help here.But no body gives them the authority.
In the end the truth gets distorted or the senior officer is sacked & the rest fall in line.
Remember what happened to Gen Sinha after he got us the free rations in 1982.
We should also be prepared to come out with real facts & figures for pay & allowances for AF personnel, with out comparing it with any civilians i.e do thorough research.
I happen to read the pay commission recommendations of IPS & it was an eye opener.
They had given lots of facts & figures which looked pretty convincing.

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Col Venkatesh

The Maj Gens' case was per se not based on the parity issue. It had its origin in the fact that the starting pay of Brigs (on the basis of which pension is calculated) was more than the starting pay of Maj Gens because of Rank Pay

Col VT Venkatesh(Retd) said...

@ Maj Navdeep "The Maj Gens' case was per se not based on the parity issue"
See what I told you earlier.One requires a legal mind in such issues.
Since AF does not have this acumen at the senior level,it has lost out in the race & we seem to be lagging behind all the time.
At the same time I do remember the SC ruling which said that the pension of old & new pensioners should not be different(in lay man's term).That is the fundamental issue in which all pensioners (Civil & Mi )are fighting.
OROP is only the modified version of that for AF ,keeping the service conditions in mind.

Anonymous said...

orop for offrs is not agreed.

only hope now is by delinking garde pay with rank and the same may be based on no. of year of service so that all retire with at least a grade pay of 12000.

Also bring uniform retirement age of 60 for all offrs if OROP can not be given.

Penmil said...

Col. VT Venkatesh(Retd) @9:29 PM
Whatever might have been the case of the Major Generals, the final judgement of the Honourable Supreme Court contained "“….The larger issue involved is whether there could be a disparity in payment of pension to officers of the same rank, who had retired prior to the introduction of the revised pay scales, with those who retired thereafter….”
Maj Navdeep had explained then,"While the case did not directly deal with the principle of ‘One Rank One Pension’, it definitely sets into motion a regime for near parity where there is minimal difference in pension vis-à-vis different retirement dates".
That meant Near OROP(NOROP

Anonymous said...

It is good that Govt has come around to accept OROP , having rejected earlier.Well,to start with it has come to PBOR and for offrs ,it would follow .
Once the Govt is formed as per constitution,they represent all the people of the country ,irrespective of individuals political beliefs.
Should any dispensation,try to devide people ,it would fail measurably ,as history tells us. there may be some temporary gain,but in the long run they will not succede.
Individual citizens have RIGHT to their politicl beliefs and this cannot be forced upon.
I dont see any gain / advantage in restricting legitimate parity of of pensions to officers ,an importenant segment of Armed Forces.By any such perceived policy of devide and rule , failure will be imminent -even mighty BRITISH did not succede. WAIT AND WATCH.

MBG said...

The PBOR deserved OROP or PIP fully, perhaps even more than the Officers.However the manner in which it has been done leaves me vaguely disturbed.Is it the Govt. case that Officers are irrelevant & the AF can do without their leadership? Or is it that the Officer class must not be rewarded for what they have done so far on OROP issue? Or is it that they simply donot deserve it. All are damaging thoughts.
Having,apparently,accepted OROP or PIP as a principle,exclusion of any persons from its ambit needs a transparent explanation, if negative thoughts are to be avoided.

Ramani said...

a good beginning.lets hope others also benefit.

Anonymous said...

...Has any one given a thought...
The Budget hikes 2.4 Lakhs exemption to Senior citizens (ie above 60 yrs)...shouldn't it be applicable to all veterans irrespective of age....C'mon they don't let us serve that long...

Harry said...

@ Annony Above @8:39 AM


For Income tax purpose Sr Citizen is the one who is over 65 yrs and NOT 60 yrs as you mentioned (though this age restriction is open to criticism, but nevertheless this is how the law stands as of now)!!

Col VT Venkatesh(Retd) said...

From what I can gaher the Govt has given only some kind of parity for PBOR & not OROP.
Frankly I would like the govt to give full OROP to PBORs & only parity to Officers.
By not giving even parity to Offrs,the offrs may not be moivated to fight for the cause in future .This would be really unfotunate & PBORS again will be he biggest sufferers since it is only the Offr class with superior intellect which can provide leadership & thnk tank to the movement.
One more issue worh mentioning is that even Lt Gens had joined the IESM movement die to percieved neglect.

Capt Roshan said...

Dear Navdeep,

1. OROP for our personnel is certainly a welcome step. At least something has come our way after a long struggle.

2. The first few batches of Regimental commission(RC) officers were granted commission from the ranks of JCOs and then were sent on retirement at the young age of 46 yrs. One wonders at this stage weather getting a commission was really so great.

3. Does OROP for PBORs and JCOs means that they will draw more pension then these offrs. Can you please enlighten us.

Anonymous said...

Col Venkatesh @ July 7, 2009 9:23 AM. Col please don’t bother yourself for PBORs. PBORs have learned to move their cause themselves since the officers have started using their intellect (if they have) for their personal gains and no more command the respect of PBORs.

Ex.Sgt.Gavini VN said...

Sir, You have rightly said that the parity of pre- and post 1.1.96 is now addressed ( vide 2009-10 Union Budget AND AS posted in your blog). The FM' announcement is (1) TO SUBSTANTIALLY IMPROVE PENSIONS OF PRE-1.1.96 PBOR RETIREES (2) BRING PRE-10.10.97 PBORS ON PAR WITH POST- 10.10.97 PBOR RETIREES AND (3) EFFECTIVE FROM 01 JUL 09. Sir, this problem seem to be the handiwork of admin error/official apathy(I.E.PROBLEM CREATED AND NOT SOLVED) committed by the authorised officials. Simply put, in this context, the pensions of PBORs w.e.f. 1.1.96 were fixed on the basis of 5th cpc (e.g.Minimum pension of Rs.375/-(iv cpc)was fixed at Rs.1275/-(increase by 3.4 times formula).But this formula was not applied while fixing the 5th cpc pensions for other ranks.(e.g. my pension of Rs.551/-(IV Cpc) was fixed atRs.1694/-(increased by 3.07times). In the meanwhile,the MOD had revised the earlier I,II,III,IV and V groups of ORs to X, Y and Z w.e.f. 10.10.97, based on ENTRY QUALIFICATION CRITERIA. Therefore, Gp I has became X, Gp II&III became Y and Gp IV &V became Z but the PBOR retirees of pre-10.10.97 were not considered for revised pensions on the new group revisions and NOT IMPLEMENTED BY SERVICES HEADQUARTERS. Hence, there are, 3 divisions now created, pre-1.1.96, pre-10.10.97 and post 10.10.97 PBOR retirees with each different pensions. And secondly, the MOD had, by an order of 1.2.06 issued aptly to IMPROVE THE PENSIONS OF PRE-1.1.96 PBOR pensioners, which had envisaged interalia, a MINIMUM PENSION OF Rs.1913/-.pm. But the PCDA (Allahabad)'s MOST IMPORTANT CIRCULAR NO. 350 prepared tables by simply not incorporating the MOD order of 1.2.06 but simply added the orders of MERGER OF 50% OF PAY AS D.P W.E.F. 1.4.2004. And hence Rs.1275/- (MIN PEN as per V cpc) was not revised to Rs.1913/- (MIN PEN envisaged in order of 1.2.06).(Table of Sep/Naik/Hav Equivlent). Morever, the fixation of revised pensions were entrusted to the PDAs. No corr.PPOs are issued as on date. The net result was total confusion and the PBORs simply do not know what to do. Sir, I have represented the above facts to all concerned till last month including the Def Minister.

I understand that the above issue is now addressed. And it would be PIP and not OROP. Thanks. Ex Sgt Gavini VN

Col VT Venkatesh(Retd) said...

@Ex.Sgt.Gavini VN
I would like to complement you for your knowledge on pension matters.
If there were more such people , we would come to know the true picture.
While many of us would like to take up the case of PBOR, we do not have the correct information on the details of pension obtained by PBORs.Pleasegive more details so that we become more knowledgable .
I do admit that I have only very limited knowledge of your pension

Col VT Venkatesh(Retd) said...

@Anonymous at 10:03 AM
I do respect your feelings.

Dasila said...

Pre 97, post 97, pre 2006 and post 2006 pension parity can only be commented once full picture is out. However, addressing of pension parity issue for PBOR veterans is welcome. But the intention of UPA2 Govt for not addressing the same issue for officers is questionable. It amounts to clear cut discrimination and adopting the policy of divide and rule which in any case Govt inhirited it from Britishers as legacy. In my opinion there could be two probable reasons for excluding officers for pension parity. One, ESM officers openly supported the BJP as commented upon in this blog by individual officers. Two, vote bank politics. As PBOR veterans are in crore and officers veteran are in thousands, thus leaving officers.

Ex-Sgt Gavini VN said...

to Col VT Venkatesh (Retd),7.7.09,4.42PM.

Sir, Thank you very much for your sweet words and appreciation. I have a little experience as I worked in PC Cells. I shall follow ur advise,sir. Thanks again.

Ex-Sgt Gavini VN

Anonymous said...


I shall be glad to know if something could be done for the unfortunate soldiers who retired untimely and joined the civil serices in Grade C and D services of CG/PSUs/undertakings/Banks but do not get their full military service period counted for their promotional benefits. Have you anything to say on this affairs. Please let me know your comment.

BRIJ said...

Dear Sir,

One more good news from our Defence Minister statement in Lok Sabha on 13 July 2009 ( From Times of India E-Paper)
NEW DELHI: The government has accepted recommendations of the Cabinet Secretary-led panel on "One Rank One Pension" and other related matters concerning the armed forces including Commissioned Officers, the Lok Sabha was informed on Monday. “The decision is now nearer to the goal of One Rank One Pension demand of nearly 1.5 million personnel," Defence minister A K Antony said during the Question Hour.

"Total financial implications on account of benefits to the personnel would be Rs 2,144 crore," the minister added.
"The Committee has recommended inclusion of Classification Allowance for the Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) from January one, 2006 and removal of linkage of full pensions with 33 years from the same date," he said.
The Committee also recommended revision of Lt. General pension after carrying out a separate pay scale for them, bringing parity between pension of pre and post October 10, 1997 for PBOR pensioners and further improving PBOR pensions based on award of Group of Ministers in 2006.
With regard to the separate pay commission, the minister said it has been agreed, and as and when necessary it will be set up in the future.
Antony said the government has also accepted the Committee's recommendations regarding raising the pension amount for those disabled or injured in war.
"After considering all aspects of the issue, the Committee made several recommendations to substantially improve pensionary benefits of Personnel below Officer Rank and Commissioned Officers, which have been accepted by the government," the minister added.


Please confirm now officers all rank will be OROP as per above.

amit said...

Hands off to the government at least the government has given a little relief to pensioners of pre 2006

Amit Trivedi
Ex- Sgt

Anonymous said...

While going through your blog, I really feel to congratulate you for your such insincere efforts for the veteran soldiers. But sir, I shall be really grateful personally to you, if you could really find out to help those reemployed exservicemen as group c and d staff in CG/PSBs/PSUs. They are not dignified in their present state of affairs since their peers who come from directly from school/colleges are very young and our valiant soldiers are older by 15-24 years. But GOI has not given their due weightage for the purpose of counting their service in their present status. If you could find out any solution, I shall certainly thanks you from core of my heart. Please do consider my request and try your level best help them. Thanking you. Yours sicerely Ex/WO anonymous

Anonymous said...

Dear Navdeep Singhji,

What is the present position of 70 % pensionary weightage to PBORs of Indian Armed Forces as promulgated gthrpough various news channels and news papers of 01 Jan 2009 which was approved by Prime Minister of India based on Group of Ministers recommeendations

Sree Kumar kk

Anonymous said...


I was retired on 01-July 1991 as a Sub Maj (A- Group) of Signal Core in Indian Army. I am not clear about my revised pension after the recent anouncement made by FM in July 2009 (One Rank One Pension).

Can you please let me know my revised pension after 01-July-2009.

Thanks & Regards,
Vijay Singh

Unknown said...

Dear Maj Navdeep, Jai Hind
Being an advocate you have a very busy schedule, however, you are doing a great service to the retired warriors. I can understand the one rank one pension is a very complicated issue but some parity has to be brought between the present and past pensioners. The delay in notifying the one rank one pension to PBORs is not understandable and also the discrimination made between officers and PBORs is deplorable. After retirement who does not suffer the punches of inflation. May the Almighty bless the decision makers with good sense and make them realise their mistake soon.

Kohli my little World said...






Kohli my little World said...




Kohli my little World said...








Grateful for the noble work being carried out by you through this blog.I regularly visit this blog.
I have query regarding fixations of pensions as per 6CPC government agreed for full pension after 15 years(for PBOR) and 20 years(for officers) from 01.01.2006.
I am a pensioner of pre 1996 retired as JWO from IAF after 21 years of qualified service.My pension details are as follows:
1)At the time of retirement pension fixed Rs 1001
2)As on 01.01.96 pension revised(VCPC) to Rs 3035
3)One time improved pension on 01.01.06 to Rs 3065
4)As per government directive banks have been instructed to revise pension at @ 2.26% or 50% of minimum of the pay (in the pay band +GP+'X'GP+MSP) which ever is more.
5)Pension revised wef 01.01.06 (3065*2.26=6928) whereas
50% of minimum (PB+GP+'X'GrPay+MSP)under PBII(i.e. 9300-34800)-50% of(9300+4200+1400+2000)=Rs 8450
While calculatin as per 6CPC 50% of min.of pay in (PB +MSP+GP+'X'GP pay) the factor of 33 years qualitative service taken into the consideration , which is being despensed wef 01.01.2006.
My query is whether it is applicable in my case or not.If it is aapplicable I'll be benefited by Rs.1522 in basic.
Please give your valuable cooments.

Anonymous said...

Sir, It is requested that I have done job 17 years 06 months in Army Postal Service then I re-patriate to my parent department i.e. Department of Post but ex serviceman status not given to me. I am not demanding pension, nor demanding promotion or extra increment etc. But so many years service done in Army and not treated ex serviceman is demoralising. "Bahut Na Insafi Hai". All ex APS pers facing same problem. DSSA Board Ahmedabad Gujarat is not issuing Identity cards like issued to all ex servicemen from Army. They told that Aap Asli Fauzi Nahi the. APS pers are treated as combatant wef 1950 onward. My Army No is 8371614-H Ex Warrant Officer J D Patel. Also achieved three medals from Army. Should I file case in Court for justice. Those who have filed case in AFT they all win the case and getting Ex servicemen facility. Please help me. A line of reply will boost up moral to all ex APS pers