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 Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained.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.

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Reality Check : Govt has NOT yet decided on Parity in Pensions

Inboxes of veterans have been flooded by mails announcing the acceptance of the principles of One Rank One Pension (OROP) and Parity in Pensions (PIP). Even certain tables purported to have been accepted by the Govt have been attached with such mails. The triggering factor has been the ambiguous reports on the issue by certain sections of the media.

It would not be proper to rejoice over such tables. Neither would it be proper to take hopes to such levels which result in serious frustration and embarrassment at a later stage.

The govt has not yet accepted or recommended any such tables. The people assigned to the task are still looking into the issue and have not yet decided the matter at hand. In all probability, the new pension regime would be based on a formula or a rank-wise one time increment (OTI) to bridge the gap between past and present pensioners. It is also unlikely that officers’ pensions are made amenable to the new system.

My only request to veterans is to refrain from circulating mails which may raise false hopes and cause (avoidable) discomfiture at a later stage. The committees and our service headquarters are working hard to bring about an acceptable solution and we should stand by them and hope for the best.

25 comments:

Col VT Venkatesh(Retd) said...

Dear Maj Navdeep
The real truth is that neither the committee nor the services hq has any interest in pensioners.
This is applicable not only for AF pensioners but for all types of pensioners.
I was shocked to see that RBI does not even issue a PPO to the widow(MY BIL died & my sister has been told that there is nothing like a PPO & my BIL was a very senior officer in RBI)
I am glad that ESM is the first org to have taken up the struggle.It is a matter of time before the struggle spreads to other org too(Railways for one)
There has to be a rethink on the way the pensioners are paid & treated

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Col Venkatesh

Quoting "The real truth is that neither the committee nor the services hq has any interest in pensioners"

Sir, that my be your perception based on your experience, but is surely not the 'truth'.

Col VT Venkatesh(retd) said...

While I don't know the reason for your defense of the powers that would be ,I am purely going by the past experience of the pensioners.
I would also be very happy if I am proved wrong.
While it would not be correct to quote from personal experience (since it may be biased) even now my pension is paid in two parts(Bangalore) i.e the first part as per annx 1 & the second part as per annx 2( i have to remind the bank every month).I had worked out the tables myself & given to the bank.
The services hq should have liased with PCDA & asked them to pu the tables in its web site.(since i am a software engineer ,I know that it was not much of an effort)
Imagine the plight of lower ranks who can not interpret rules.

Just to take other examples , see the way the banks treat a serving person & a retired person.
The second example is that the Navy & AF have their own pension department while the army is oblivious of the pension agonies faced by army personnel (due to the PCDA)
Please let me know who is responsible for all of the above
Some one would say that people are expecting too much.Actually it is not so.It is just the attitude .Rest every thing follows :)

Ramani said...

what we have seen is that by and large the govt is trying to make do the election promises.
the only problem is that the end result may be a watered down version.
it is still something aint it??
so hope for the best.

Lt Col M P George said...

Lt Col M P George,
I tend to agree with the opinion of Col venkatesh. I am from the medical corps and no organisation be it the cdap or our medical units have been able to clarify/ provide the necessary orders as to what my pension entitilement is with respect to inclusion of NPA entitilement part. The Bank on their part is confused and create maximum hurdles in the revised payments. Why should it take more than a week in this days of computerisation.
I have a practise and do not survive on the pension money, I feel pity and sympathetic to those sincere ex service men who have given their best to the nation and being treated in this way.

Anonymous said...

Dear Maj Navdeep,
I understand that the Supreme Court has issued contempt notice to Def Secy. and CAS for non implementation of Sup. Court Judgment in the case of Maj Generals. My question is whether it will have any effect to expedite Govt. decision on OROP

Anonymous said...

ANOTHER VIEW ....
As per constitutional provisions and interpretation of events since 1950,Chiefs have no jurisdiction or control on pensions-it is MOD of GOI .Chiefs only ex comd &control as head,he can task ,promote/demote ( even in that beyond a stage thro MOD )...etc.
Therefore the assumtion among ret fauji that Chief is for everything,(that was while in service) is misplaced.He is only an intermediate agency/advisory.
Chiefs only matter for pay and allowences (again limited role).

So is: that com or COS .They have been merely tasked by the GOVT by those visible compulsions.

I reality they are neither concerned nor bothered about real issues. They will as usual do "that type of babugiri " resulting and creating more problems/anomolies.
They have neither mind nor intentions to find an amicable and just solutions to those unresolved issues .They have not even heard IESM which was at forefront of the current movement.What can one expect from such comms-their past record is so bad.
The tamasha of all those tables being circulated by self-styled activists is visible on the net.

Col AML said...

Navdeep

While on the point of the reality check and concern of authorities on pension matters - I am taking the liberty of digressing a bit.

I am a NRI Col retired 9 yrs ago. Till date CDA(P) has NOT given me 7 yrs weightage (as a Col). I have written 20 mails to CDA(P) including complaints by snail/regd. mails etc to Army HQ. Not a single one has been responded.

May I solicit some practical advise to force CDA(P) to give a response.

Col AML

Anonymous said...

@ Col AML
Try the RTI.
@ Col Venkatesh
The tables are part of the govt letters on pension which are posted on PCDA website.

Col VT Venkatesh(Retd) said...

@Col AML
Can you send me your case details so that I can try to solve it
You may send it to venks@vsnl.com.Please give me your bankers address too

Col AML said...

@ Col VT Venkatesh

Thanks - Very Kind of you. Will send you the details shortly. Any advise / help will be very useful. In fact I have already exhausted all conceivable options

@ Anonymous

I approached my High Comsn for RTI but their response was that Govt of India has still not finalized processes for NRI

Col AML (Veteran)

Anonymous said...

dear aml 7 yrs weightage (as a Col)is automatic .you can tell your banker they have got the table you can also check the table in pcda site they have got phone no .you speak to them they will solve your problem

Anonymous said...

I think Veterans get a raw deal to an extent because, as individuals we are never encouraged while in service, to get into details of personal entitlements. Now for example, all Lt Cols retd after Jan 06 are still running pillar to post for their correct scales and commutation...Its been a year almost and dues are no where in sight. Guess how much can they possibly 'retire in peace'...

Col AML said...

@ Anonymous

Thanks for your advise.

I have been trying ringing my Bank from the remote corner of the globe but no prize for guessing it has been virtually impossible to get through

The Manager advised me by a cryptic email that please ask the CDA(P) to amend your PPO with weightage endorsed!

I managed to get through CDA-P on phone after umpteen attempts. Response of the guy was no need for PPA to have weightage endorsed in PPO as this is natural!

Col AML said...

Unfortunately, we have a 'Chalta Hai' attitude imbibed in our nature across the board. This attitude has become worse over the years rather than improve!!

Well, one has to see how in developed countries people pride in doing the small things 'efficiently'. Not to say that all things in developed world are good. But, I often wonder why these countries have become 'developed' and why we remain 'developing' despite our obvious abilities.

In my perception, the evident answer is this 'pride in doing small things efficiently, which contributes immensely to make the difference.

Col VT Venkatesh(retd) said...

@Col Malhotra
I received your mail.
I have checked your pension details & they are correct.
I have sent you a mail also

Col AML said...

@ Col Venkatesh

I have not received your email response

May I request you to re-send please

Col VT Venkatesh(retd) said...

@Col Malhotra

I just did a quick check .I found that your initial pension fixation has been done correctly(absolutely no errors).Though PPO does not mention your qualifying service they have indeed calculated it with 7 years weightage.((30/33 *17202)/2=7950 rather than ((23/33*17202)/2=5995)
If you want ,I will send you the detailed calculation in an excel sheet later.
Please let me know you revised pension after VI pay commission so that I can check that.
How ever if your basic pension has been fixed as 20264& if we take 22 % DA ,you should be getting 25475/ which is the right amount for VI PC.
There is a talk of OROP which may increase the pension if the govt accepts OROP.
Hope i have been able to clarify your doubt.
with best wishes
Venkatesh

Anonymous said...

dear aml pcda is right 7 yrs weightage (as a Col)is automatic however as per annex table 2 it is only qualifying service which is your actual service you can see the table in this site in pension heading Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions) finally takes on the ruckus being created by banks The PCDA(P), Allahabad, has finally taken banks to task in respect of pensions of Pre-06 pensioners.

As we all know, there are two methods of calculating pension :

Old Basic Pension X 2.26

OR

50% of Minimum of New Pay Band + Grade Pay + Military Service Pay

Pensioners have an option of selecting the one of the above which is more beneficial. The first option is represented by Annexure-I of MoD Letter dated 11 Nov 08 while the second one is represented by Annexure-II (Annexure-III for PBOR). Banks were however not understanding some rudimentary stipulations of the MoD letter and were simply using Annexure-I for calculation of pensions. The office of PCDA(P) has now issued detailed instructions to all concerned banks to take remedial measures – the same can be viewed and downloaded by clicking here. The PCDA(P) has also pointed out that such actions of banks are affecting the morale of veterans. Detailed instructions on pension consolidation have also been conveyed to the banks. It has also been communicated that Lt Generals who have retired as Army Commanders / Vice-Chiefs are to be granted a higher pension. This was important since most banks are unaware of the difference in status, pay and pension between Lt Generals and those Lt Generals who have retired as Army Commanders / Vice-Chiefs or equivalent. Confusion about Groups of PBOR has also been clarified.

Officers of the rank of Lt Col have sent many emails stating therein that this particular circular is still showing their pensions in accordance with Pay Band-3. I would urge all such officers to relax since the SAI for serving officers has not yet been issued and retirement benefits would only be notified after the necessary promulgation is undertaken for serving Lt Cols. In any case, officers are bound to receive their arrears w.e.f 01 Jan 2006 hence there is nothing to lose. It is just a wait for a few weeks more and that’s about it. There is no conspiracy theory at play as some would like others to believe.
Posted by Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh at 7:04 AM 29 comments
Labels: Pension, Policy and Benefits

Col AML said...

Thanks @ Col Venkatesh and Anonymous for your painstaking efforts and response





Dear Col Venkatesh

I have sent you the GoI tables by mail

The Bank Manager confirms to me that they have applied 23.5 yrs qualifying service for me as against 30.5 yrs due to PPO discrepancy

So as per GoI tables correct fixation for 30 yrs is Rs 26,050 + 22 % DA

Please let me know if my interpretation is correct. Incidentally my course mate with identical service span is getting Rs 26,050 + DA

Also , please send me the excel sheet as mentioned by you as it will help me understand the pre-6CPC calculations

Rgds

Col AML

Ramani said...

@anonymous @ 12.29pm 3 july,
the SAI ws issued long time back.this same blog carried the info.it is based on this that the salaries for all serving ltcols and pensions for allpre 2006 ltcols have been revised.

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

@Col AML

The weightage is pre-included in the tables. So if you are looking at 23.5 yrs at the table, the same in fact contains the pension as is admissible to 23.5 yrs + applicable weightage. Hence no need to hold any wrong grudges against the bank or the PCDA(P).

Regards

Navdeep

Anonymous said...

COL AML YOUR PENSION 24077 PLUS 22DA

Col AML said...

Navdeep

That clarifies. Though, the 'grudge' is definitely there and cannot be discounted as the Bank and CDA-P must and should clarify to pension queries rather than be non-responsive!!!!

Col AML said...

@ Anonymous

Thanks, really appreciated- that is explained very clearly by you