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 Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained.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

Monday, September 24, 2012

Cabinet approval granted to pensionary part of the report of the Committee of Secretaries

The cabinet has today approved the pensionary part of the PM appointed Committee of Secretaries.

What has been accepted and promulgated is the same as was placed on this blog on 09 August 2012.

An official press release can also be accessed by clicking here. 

Service pension for various ranks shall now be the following:

For Other Ranks (OR): Add two years in the existing tables which can be accessed by clicking here. For example, to get to know the basic pension  now admissible at 15 years, the amount reflected at 17 years may be seen. 

For Officers: The admissible basic pension for pre-2006 retirees for full service (33 years) shall be as below:-

Lieut : Rs 13,500 

Capt : Rs 15,350

Maj : Rs 18,205

Lt Col : Rs 26,265

Col : Rs 27,795

Brig : Rs 29,145

Maj Gen : Rs 30,350


Anonymous said...

links brokn

Anonymous said...

short changed once again ????. atleast some good for ESM.

Anonymous said...

What it means is the issues of the serving personnel were not discussed or have been deliberated yet. Is it true that as per sixth Pay commission Report all anomalies rising out of 6th CPC Report were to be resolved by 31 Dec 2012 and all outstanding issues then will be passed on to 7th CPC. Now as per the prev rec armed forces were to have a separate Pay commission. That means things like Rank Pay, Grade Pay enhancment and NFU will now be addressed by next pay commission of armed forces as these will be kept in cold storage by the Govt till 31 Dec 12.
And I think we already know the outcome when such issues will have to be deliberated and resolved by a commission exclusively for armed forces.

msc said...

Anything but OROP !!! Th govt will not let the control slip away! Nothing for post 06 retirees and something for post 06 when seventh pay commission is around the corner . This is going to be never ending fight for parity between the old and fresh pensioners . Lage Raho !!

Justin N Christian said...

the veterans r fooled again it is not orop but modified parity and so called 3 yrs suggested weightage is reduced to 2 yrs.

Harry said...

Don't know whether to laugh or cry! :|


Dear Maj Navdeep,

What is the date of applicability of this, so to say increment or modified parity? Would it be applicable from retrospective effect ie from 1.1.2006 or any other date.

Anonymous said...

Glad the veterans got their dues. In fact they have snatched this victory by sheer determination.

Yet its sad that the Govt still hasn't desisted from its short sighted mentality wherein they have completely ignored all issues that were of concern to serving soldiers.

I am sure the mighty officials who draft these press release are so naive as to forgetfully omit adding a single line that say "the balance issues placed before the committee are still under consideration".

The obvious conclusion is "This Chapter is Closed". The obvious logic is "Divide and Rule".

Once the veterans have been silenced, the serving soldiers will automatically loose their voice. And having done this much, the media can be favourably milked.

bidyut chatterjee said...

What has happened to the SC judgement on on Rank Pay for the purpose of pay and pension which is supposed to be acted upon in 12 weeks. Has this been factored in for refixation for pre 2006 pensioners

Unknown said...


Penmil said...

Dear Maj.Navdeep. Thanks for the first post with the details on the pension improvements.
I recall your earlier post, http://www.indianmilitary.info/search?q=CAT+Judgement , where in you said,
“While the CAT has pronounced the judgment in Nov 2011, the same had been pronounced by the AFT in Sept and Nov 2010”
The present ‘enhancement’ of pensions of officers is what the government should have given as per the Cabinet decisions on 6th CPC Recons.
But the government chose to wait for judicial intervention and later a report by CoS to do what was already due.
Hope the date of implementation will be 01 Jan, 2006 and not a date in September, 2012.
May be this is also a sign for civil pensioners of Pre 2006 vintages, that they need not fight the court cases on their pension case anymore.
But it was very disappointing to see that the weight age for calculation of reduction of pensions of other military personnel was not abolished. The weight age has been only increased by two years, for all ranks across the board. Unless full pension for 15 years of service is awarded , we are not anywhere near OROP.

Anonymous said...

only indian government and its bureaucracy can call implementation of award of 6 cpc and its reiteration by hon'ble court as an achievement. All the pensionary benefits approved now have aleady been upheld by various judgements ofthe hon'ble courts and these were in any case to be implemented.

shameful indeed for us indians.

Anonymous said...

@Lalit. Applicability is from a prospective date as per the press release

sl said...

The pre/post AVS-I anomaly in respect of pre-Dec 2004 PC Maj/Lt Col(TS)/Lt Col retirees, with more than 26 years of service, may now have to be dealt wih separately as the pension for this category would now need to be at par with the revised pension of a pre 01 Jan 2006 Col(TS) retiree, viz.Rs. 27795/- and not Rs.26050/- as argued for in this blog-post.

Anonymous said...

is it not possible to approach court for NFU and GP since the govt policy is not consistent wrt civil and military employees.

Anonymous said...

vsir,pl cofirm that weightages are applicable to only upto the rank of havidars or across he board?

Anonymous said...

What more could be expected from thieves.

A Lt Col pre 2006 retiree is already getting basic pension of Rs 25700/- now the least interested lot made it Rs 26265/-. Does OROP Mean just increase of Rs 565/- in basic pension of a Lt Col. Silly Govt, Silly people, silly mentality. We the armed forces officers are not beggars like the Govt. Let the bureaucrats keep this money, at least they can have some change in their purse/pocket for petty expenses.

What the govt defined OROP is "On One Rank One Pension, the demand of the Defence Forces and Ex-Servicemen Associations is that uniform pension be paid to the Defence Forces personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension be automatically passed on to the past pensioners". Same pension for same rank with same length of service. But how come a Lt col with 26 yrs of service and another Lt Col with 38 yrs of service are getting same pension, can any body explain. How can it be justified. This politicians and bureaucrats never understand and accept our contentions, they accept only the slap by legal courts. Let us go to the court now as to how two same ranking officers one with 38 yrs of service and another with 26 yrs of service are getting same pension.

Ridiculous Govt, ridiculous bureaucrats trying to make AF officers too ridiculous. Let us not become so.

Let us get united and file a case in Honourable Supreme Court.



Dear all, now we can forget the rank pay judgement implimentation. The GREAT SG will tell the Hon'ble SC that "ALL PROBLEMS ARE ALREADY SOLVED AND THERE IS PEACE, PROSPERITY AND HAPPINESS ALL OVER THE DEFENCE FORCES."
So the whole case stands written off.
I request RDOA be ready to file a contempt case if ever the SC judgement implimentation is not done before the dead-line ie 04 Dec12.

Maneesh Joshi said...

Thank you very much, Navdeep for the Arm offrs pension. Could you do so for the Naval and Air Force pensioners too; quite a few of my relatives, including my own father, would be benefited. Thanks in advance

Rahul said...

Well, something is better than nothing. My dad is 80 years old. He retired in 1980. So he will get a few thousand rupees more. Look at it as pocket money.
Nobody gets everything.

Anonymous said...

According to PIB release 2 year weightage is given to the ranks of sepoy,naik and havildar.What about JCOs??

Anonymous said...

Dear Navdeep sir,
I seldom noticed a mis- information in huge information given by you in this blog.But this time unfortunately!You have said"(For Junior Commissioned Officers and Other Ranks (JCOs/OR): Add two years in the existing tables)".But if I am not wrong it is not for JCOs but only for the Sep , Nk , & Hav as per the GOI press release "(the weightage of qualifying service in the ranks of Sepoys, Naik and Havaldar would be increased by two years)" Thank you.
G C Sen

Anonymous said...

The admissible basic pension for pre-2006 retirees shall be as below:-

Lt Col : Rs 26,265

Is it the same for Lt Col (TS) also?

corona8 said...

@Maneesh Joshi:"..Could you do so for the Naval and Air Force pensioners too.." :-/

O Brother!! Anyone with a services background would know about equivalent ranks .

corona8 said...

@Anonymous:"...another Lt Col with 38 yrs of service..."

Oh really! Which country and what service did this Lt Col belong to?

But, it can be justified. The justification is in the truncation of our careers. The whole concept of "Equal Pension" is centered around that.

bidyut chatterjee said...

The details are not yet out. However, i am sure they have taken us for a ride, and have only implemented what the AFT had directed long ago. There is no mention of NFU which they have given to themselves, and denied the same to the Armed Forces. This too they would not have done, but for the prodding at PM's behest. The yawning gap in pension between a Maj and Lt. Col has not found any mention. Then the Rank Pay judgement, i don't know how that has been factored in, because with the implementation of RP there is bound to be some change.

Anonymous said...

all, please see PCDA(O) website where they have posted a link on rank pay issue. they have brought out that capt to brig as on 01 jan 86 will be eligible and have asked for certain details.

look at them. simple issue like one additional increment for personnel whose increment was due from Feb to Jun has still not been implemented by them for which the orders were issued on 01 Aug 2012 on the pretext that they have not received the same from CGDA.
However, rank pay case where there is a talk of formation of implementation committe and issue of government letter on the issue, PCDA(O) has been more than proactive and taken out the link given above with a view to pre-empt issue of government letter accordingly. It is such a big farce going on. I hope there is someone who cares for faujis, all these people are living off the faujis but they are not for them. What a shame.

Anonymous said...

Pl check cda o pune website for their requirement.

PBOR said...

something is better than nothing. thanks to Rakshamantri and political fraternity. Varna apno ne toh duba diyaa hota

Anonymous said...

The two year weightage has been given to post 2006 pensioners also. Than how can we bridge the gap in pension of pre and post 2006 pensioners on the contrary gap will be widened further. Govt. has again rub the salt on our wounds.

Ex Sgt Mukesh Vaid

Tukaram V Manerajurikar said...

No OROP. Dual Family pension and Modified Parity but still no OROP. Other issues/anamolies are pending with Govt.

corona8 said...

@Anonymous:"...please see PCDA(O) website..."

This is a blog post on the COS report and you have chosen to make comments on the Rank Pay matter.

Hats off to PCDA(O) anyhow. Now Officers are expected to dig up their own payment records so the civilians of CDA can draw their own pay and pensions in their non-truncated careers of thumb-twiddling.

Let's see how the IN and IAF establishments deal with this.

Anonymous said...

What about Honorary commissioned JCOs? They are not mentioned anywhere.

Anonymous said...

some people have written that something is better than nothing. In my view, such people actually deserve nothing. it is this mentality of our generals which has brought the faujis to this state. wake up please.

look at the PCDA(O). these people do not get disturbed from their slumber inspite of reminders. here they have decided for themselves that rank pay judgement is applicable for officers holding rank of captain to brigadier on 01 jan 86. who has given them the authority to interpret it this way. Will it not be contempt of the court if turns out to be incorrect. Well, PCDA(O) is playing games by pre-empting any positive interpretation of the judgement on behalf of the bureaucracy. Ek hi theli ke chatte batte hain sab. Fauj ka namak khate hain and fauj ke liye kuch bhi nahi karte.
We hope RDOA has taken note of this game by PCDA(O) and a strong rebuttal will be given by them to all concerned.
Pay cells as usual would be silent watchers.

manu86 said...

Hi all, there should be no doubt for offrs commisioned after 01/01/1986 as the pay fixation as on 01 jan 96 was also wrongly fixed by deducting the rank pay. offrs commisioned after jan 86 will also get approx 2 lac arrears.
now comes the issue of pay fixation in 6th cpc. there is no way that lt col will not be given GP 8700 as civilians in 14300-400-bracket have been given GP 8700. the fixation will also have to be revised upwards as per the fixation table. Arrears of 6th pay and arrears from jan 06 due to wrong fixation will also have to be given. otherwise the govt will have to face another litigation in the courts

Anonymous said...

@ All Concerned and in perticular Heads of Various ESM Organizations,

From latest Press Relese and various blog posts regarding the subject matter, understand, under the pretext of modified parity, Commissioned Officers are likely to be granted pension considering minium of the pay for the rank, in a pay band. This would be reasonable for all ranks other than the rank of Maj and equivalent, since most affected lot are these officers retired pre 01-01-2006/ AVS I.

As very rightly broughtly out by Bidyut Chatterjee, yawing gap of Rs 8000 plus will persist in the basic pension of Maj and Lt Col retired pre 01-01-06. Surprisingly such an vital issue has not been finding its deserving mention, in any communication by and to the concerned authorities. If this is left unattended now, I am affraied
this unacceptable difference shall further be enhanced and cemented in VII th CPC.

In view of the above, it is strongly felt that, our efforts are required to be intesified towards following actions immediately, by approching appropriate authorities seeking;

A. OROP in its totality wef 01-01-2006.

B. In case of Commissioned Officers, in the light of latest supereme court decision, New Pay Structure (running pay scale if need be) instead of existing pay bands of VI CPC be worked out prior to arriving at minium of pay, for perticular rank, for the calculation of revised pension.

C. All Maj & Equi officers retired prior to 01-01-2006, with or more than 25 yrs of total / pensionable service be considered at par with Lt Col (TS), for calculation of minium pension,
to arrive at OROP figure (since all officers with 13 yrs of service make to Lt Col, post AVS I).

D. Some resonable rationale also be worked out for the ranks of Lt, Capt and Equ for fixation of pension proportionately, as mentioned above at C.

All above mentioned deserves immediate attention and collective action of you all ESM Organisation Heads, to take up suitably with UOI/ MOD before they approve and force, some hapazard measures as OROP.

Intend to request Maj Navdeep Singhji for suitable/ legal advise/ course of action, to handle this issue on war footing.


One Of Lt Cdr(Retd.)

Anonymous said...

Please clarify about JCOs.

Anonymous said...

All officers commissioned post 1986 (as also those who were 2Lts/Lts) are requested to immediately write or e-mail PCDA because the circular on the website seems totally absurd.

These dues should be applicable to everyone commissioned from 1986 till 2006 as per my understanding.

Or has CDA somehow destroyed documents only of the 1986 commissioned officers?

Skewed OROP, complete exclusion of issues concerning serving soldiers...and now this narrowest interpretation of SC judgement...it seems there is a well orchestrated scam that has been unleashed on all of us.

sl said...

Here is a link to Mr. Karan Thapar's programme related to the subject on IBN Live.

Anonymous said...

Well... on a personal basis, I am not getting anything substantially more than what I am getting now. My qualifying service is 27.5 years. My basic pension after 6th CPC was fixed at Rs21,417. Now with basic pension fixed at Rs26,265 (for full 33 yrs service), my basic pension works out to 26,265 x 27.5/33 = 21,888, which is an increase of just Rs471. Cruel joke being played by GoI.

Anonymous said...

Our military doctors are more of "medical officers" as the saying goes.They think no end of themselves.Their thinking is exactly like the BABUs in civil.They do not perceive the complex nature of operations which effect our fighting force.The latest is ECHS.DGMS policy is making life of veterans cumbersome when it comes to hospitalisation.Hospitals are giving second hand treatment to ECHS patients because of iterference from the military specialists.Power of strike ones fate has gone into their head.High time they too are sorted out.
Wg.Cdr.Bhattacharya(retd.in 1988)

Anonymous said...

Increase of basic pay is less than one third of DA. It is certainly very bad for PBORs and Lt Col. It is a great joke. In many cases it doesn't cover the train/bus fare from home to Polyclinic.

romel said...

there is nothing in it,it is an eye wash.

Unknown said...

Dear All,
The rise given to Jawans and Lt Cols can not even cover the cost of conveyance to visit ECHS Polyclinics. They have to visit Polyclinics atlest 3 to 4 days for giving the samples for tests, collecting it and further report for treatment to the specialists.

Anonymous said...

The present three services chief is a very polite and humble leader. He has done a lot towards the welfare of the lower rank personnel. Earlier policies allowed the lower rank personnel to apply for group 'B' post on completion of 15 years service. He has amended the existing policy so that service privileges are not misused. However PBOR can till apply for group 'C' & 'D' category job on completion of 19 yrs of service for their easy resettlement. PBOR can expect many more in the coming years...

Anonymous said...

Dear Maj Navdeep Singh,

Since there has been no more followers and no comment posted on this blog from 11:17 PM of 25 Sep, I think ESM community lost faith in the authenticity of information published by you.

It is one thing to be hard core Fauji and altogather different to be a practicing lawyer. Hope you understood the point.

We wish you all the best, for continuing your Chaplus methodology, to remain popular through incorrectly handlling the burning issues of straightforward and humbly inocent ESM community.

You could succesfully diminish the tireless efforts, being put up by the Heads of Organisations Like IESM, where in Officers of the rank of Lt and Maj Generals have been interacting with PM,RM, MOD babus and Serving Chiefs of the Armed Forces, to actually attain resonable and deserving material gains to the suffering ESM Community.

Better be realistic or stop your shop, before it is too late for your apparent reputation.

Jay Hind and Jay ESM Community.

Anonymous said...

Lt Col,by time scale.As per P&A Regn 1954,DSR,RA - it is substantive promotion to the rank of Lt Col after completion of 24/25/ yrs of service earlier and later after 21/13 yrs ,varied during period 1948-2o12.With abolition of lowest rk of second lieut and revision (rev terminology)of unit cdr rk to Col,the lowest rank in sel grade; what is the point in referring to those substantive Lt Col as some TS-totally irrelevant,out of context,mischievous .......etc.the services HQs ,MOD and CDAs have abdicated their responsibility of issuing appropriate equation/amendment/correction.they obviously delay ,defer and want these people to go with presentations/representations/appeals /court cases.another cause of this is the staff at various levels are all by sel gde rks who are not concerned and effected .
Terms and conditions of svc (prospectus) of those yrs clearly state that offrs are promoted to the rk of unit cdr(Lt Col earlier ) by time scale. So called some AVS committee is due to emergence of these facts.
Further with time scale prom to COL and with NFU in other GOI services of the country,HOW OUTDATED AND IRRELEVANT ARE WE WITH THIS LT COL ts.In fact all those Lt Col sel rks are eqivalent to COL sel.SUCH GLARINGLY VISIBLE FACTS ARE NOT VISIBLE TO MOD,SER HQS AND PCDAS. This is for info of visitors in this forum.
thanks f u reading ...with regards.

Vasundhra said...

Dear Anonymous of @September 26, 2012 11:37PM "Since there has been no more followers and no comment posted on this blog from 11:17 PM of 25 Sep... "-- Who ever u r though it doesn't make a difference but 4 sure u r not a Soldier because when a SOLDIER has to speak out HE/SHE does not take the cover behind ANONYMITY if u r a guy in Uniform than it can be attributed to a cardinal MISTAKE by selectors, if U R a paid persona than I can advise u r wasting u r time here. In BIBLE 'Anonymous' is Known as JUDAS & in Hinduism he is called SUGREEV and in HISTORY such characters are confined to firing squad once the job is over. CHOICE IS YOURS

Sumithra Chidananda said...

The wide variation in pension of pre-2006 and post-2006 pensioners in the ranks of Sepoys, Naiks and Havildars(Equivalents) will continue in the operative period of the 6th CPC, even after the recent modified parity exercise by the Govt. It may be narrowed down in the future pay commission, if the same pattern of Pay Band system is continued. Still the variation will always be there as pensioners do not get yearly increments like service personnel.

the Sepoys, Naiks and Havildars(Equivalents) will benefit by around Rs.400/- in basic pension per month or so. The prospective date of this increase may be from 01 Jul 2009. JCOs(Equivalents) may not be much benefit from the above order.

However, Hony Commissioned Officers of the rank of LTs and Capts(Equivalents) their maximum pension will raise to Rs.15465/- and Rs.16145/- per month from Rs.13500/- and Rs.13850/- per month respectively. The prospective date of this increase must be from 01 Jan 2006 as their minimum fitment table is Rs.10500(fixed) for Lts and Rs.10850 (fixed) for Capts(Equivalents).

The prospective date of increase for Commissioned Officers should also be from 01 Jan 2006.

sl said...

@Anonymous (Sep 25): "..at par with Lt Col (TS)...";
Your comment again demonstrates how we under-rate ourselves. Any pre Dec 2004 Maj retiree with 21 years of sevice who would have been eligible for getting the rank of Lt Col(TS) after Dec 2004, if had continued to be in service, should have his pension pegged at the same level as a pre VI-CPC Lt Col(TS).

In fact, any pre Dec 2004 retiree Maj/Lt Col(TS)/Lt Col with 26 years of service, who would have been eligible for getting the rank of Col(TS) after Dec 2004, if had continued to be in service, should get a pension of a pre VI-CPC Col(TS) with equivalent service.

Please see this blog post.

mskhuranaa said...

कोई हमें यह बताये कि हवलदार से ऊपर वाले जे सी ओ लोगों के लिए भी कुछ मिलेगा क्या?

Anonymous said...

Further to earlier comment on those time scale rks,it is relevant to Maj and Capt of earlier yrs with 13/6 yrs-are same as Lt Col and Majof present day.sorry for beeing annoy as i could not get that some url/name aspect. Well,i am Bala.

romel said...

it is eye wash

Anonymous said...

Anony 26th sep @ 2337

what you have said about the author of this blog is condemnable in the strongest terms. This blog itself has brought about changes which the entire army could not bring about since independence and let me tell you the info avlbl here is much more than all three services and all esm orgs combined in india. What you are saying shows you are just a frustrated soul. being within the system let me assure you that had this blog not been active after VI Pay commission, Lt Colonels would have been languishing in Pay Band-3 and it is only due to efforts of navdeep sir that we have gained pay band-4 for lt cols which has not only helped majority of serving people but also all pensioners who retired in lt col rank. so please keep your thoughts to yoruself, these are not appreciated here.

for navdeep sir :- please do not approve comments such as the one by this anonymous poster here, such comments spoil the atmosphere.

Ratnakar said...

Hi Navdeep,

A small query. I took pre-mature retirement as a Wg Cdr inNov 93 after completing 21 yrs service.
My Basic pension now is 21807. Can you please let me know what my revised pension as per the new scales would be?
Wg Cdr Y Ratnakar

Anonymous said...

"Government gets close to the goal"

I think Mr. Inder Malhotra wrote his article before reading the fine print of the Govt orders.

manu69 said...

Gentlemen-a few aspects for deep thinking and action which affects both serving and retired. although this post is concerning pensionary benefits there is a deep link which needs to be understood.
2. There is no anomaly for offrs commisioned after 01/1/86 as they are governed by the new pay scales. A note in the SAI reads as under
-Note :- The aforesaid option shall not be admissible to any officer who was/is commissioned or promoted in the Army on or after 01 Jan 1996, and such an officer
shall be allowed pay only in the revised scale of the rank/post to which he is commissioned/promoted.
3. The same clause as above would be in the 4th CPC SAI also.( i do not have a copy of the SAI)

4. The logic of giving 40% of the Basic pay & old rank pay and then deducting the revised rank pay as per 5th cpc also seems flawed as can be seen below.
a. capt-1.4*200 = 280 400
b. maj-1.4*600 = 840 1200
c. lt col *800 = 1120 1600
d. Col *1000 = 1400 2000
e. Brig *1200 = 1680 2400

5. offrs commisioned after 1/1/86may get the difference of old & revised rank pay which will have to be seen on implementation by cdao.

6. The outgo of 1600 cr as per my analysis would be for the following:-
(a) Arrears of rank pay who were from capt to Brig as on 01/1/86.
(b) No arrears admissible for offrs commisioned after this period as rank pay has been considered in the pay fixation.(except the diff as at 4 above)
(c) NOW COMES THE INTERESTING PART WHICH IS LINKED TO THE INCREASE GIVEN TO PENSIONERS NOW. With rank pay now part of basic the 6th cpc fixation anomaly comes into play. The starting pay is wrongly fixed as we are entitled higher basic in 6th cpc fitment table for capt & above.
(d) Civilians with basic of 14300 placed in PB4 with GP 8700 and starting fitment at 39690.
(F) civilians with 14300 were given arrears of 6th cpc of approx 6.5 lac whereas Lt Cols got 3.8 lac approx - please check the arrears slip recd from cda(o).
(h) since the basic pay will now be increased and higher fitment given to serving offrs - the pension increase doled out to pensioners gets neutralised.

i hope as hell that i am wrong in my logic


Anonymous said...

I think a lot of us are jumping the gun.let us wait for the full ordes to come when we can analys and act.
Major Navdeep has done yeomen service which nobody else has done. we are all grateful to him and Maj Danapalan who took the first step.
So it is not fair to criticise. I think Anonymous has in frustration said something he must be regretting.

Capt Sharma said...

Dear Mr Manmohan Singh,
Hon'ble PM of India,

I having been trained by the nation for operation of Nuclear Powered Submarines at a cost of Rs 50 Lakh to govt exchequre, found myself at the age of 54 years, mentally, physically capable of giving back to the nation, through my specialised expertise( which in any case could not have been given by any tom dick & harry), to help build upon the nations security environment by continuing in a design job where I was employed prior to my retirement.
Yet, I was retired at the prime of my life at age 54 on 31 Mar 2005. If that was not enough, I today find myself getting 50% lesser pension than those friends in armed forces who retired after 9 months.

Is that justice?

When I compare myself with you, I find that Nation is quite happy having you as Prime Minister despite having had numerous life saving heart operations on the way to your advance age of 80 years.
If you & the nation can not give equivalant pension for same rank, please find ways and means to keep Armed Forces people employed till the age of 60 years, if not 80 years as being enjoyed by your good self so that this demand of OROP can be buried for good.

With warm regards & best wishes
Capt Sharma

Tukaram V Manerajurikar said...

Sir, I am thankful to Little OROP and Dual family pension by this Govt. Hope to achieve Full OROP in VIIth Pay Commission or before 2014 Election.

Anonymous said...

good OROP/PIP, thanks to IESM & IESL, COL SS SOHI and others...good, very good...SATISFIED SOLDIER

Anonymous said...


As per announcement made by the Govt, the increase in the officers basic pension is 10% to 28%, but a Lt Col drawing Rs 25700/- as basic pension is given an increase of Rs 565/- which is not even 2.2 percent of the basic pension. How come Govt say the increase is 10% to 28%. Why the Govt made such an announcement when they know it is not true.

OROP defines same amount of pension for same rank with same service in number of years. Before the Govt attempts to lay pavement to this OROP they should first regulate the pension that a longer service person gets pension over and above the shorter service person in the same rank, which the Govt has not done so far.

A Lt Col (Selection Grade) with 38 years of service and a Lt Col with 26 years of service (Time scale or time bound) both retired in year 2005 are not getting same basic pension after 01 Jan 2006. Is there any logic in this. I am sure this is happening in every rank. When a longer service person is not getting anything above the shorter service person in the same rank how can we expect the promises of the Govt that their recent announcement is hitting towards OROP.

This shows that the Govt of politicians and bureaucrats (babus) are either illiterate and lacking knowledge or they are over smart. We in the defence call our clerks as Babus how can we expect the babus of our nation can have knowledge and understanding of Class One Gazetted Officers. Forget it.

Dear Veterans, let us not beg, from Babus, as the Govt knows only one language, ie slaps from legal courts. Let us take legal course of actions.

Anonymous said...

@ Manu 69,
I may like to correct a few errors in your suppositions ad seratum.
1. The Rank Pay anomaly arose due to incorrect fixation of Basic pay in changing from 3rd to 4th CPC iro of officers of the rank of Capt to Brig and equiv. The incorrect fixation resulted in the downgrading of these ranks vis a vis their civilian equivalents. While the 4th CPC was applicable wef 01 Jan 1986, it does not affect only the officers who were in service as Capt to Brigs as on 01 Jan 1986 but all officers who would be in these ranks in thereafter too have been affected. Your issue at Para 1 needs to be reviewed accordingly. If your interpretation is true then there would be two different scales for officers of same rank in the same service, which is against the basic norms of the country. Just because Govt has fixed the Pay wrongly/erroneously, it cannot insist that the anomaly thus created will not be corrected and all officers who become Capt to Brigs after 01 Jan 1986 will be downgraded. It is not teneble and the anomaly needs to be corrected.

2. The Para referred is applicable in respect of certain increments etc which have been provided to some personnel to correct any anomalies arising out of pay fixation but does not imply that
known anoamlies will be insisted upon.


4. Your figures did not take DA (111%) in to consideration, and so the amounts are incorrect. Correct figures are calculated by 1.4 {(BP+old RP+(DA on old BP+RP)}-new RP and thus the figures for a Capt will be 591 and 400 and not 280 and 400. Calculations are as follows

1.4 {200 +(200*1.11)}
=1.4{200+222}= (1.4*422) = 590.8 or 591

5 No comments
6. No comments except for the issue of Lt Col who should have been in a higher Grade in 5th CPC than 14300 and thus eligible for G of Rs 8700 in6th CPC.

Further an important issue missed out by most is that 5th CPC resulted in reduction in Scales- IG Scale of 4th CPC merged with JS scale along with its attendant vacancies resulting in IGs who were equiv to Brigs in 3rd CPC became equiv to JS/MAj Gen with 100% Time scale promotion (due combination of 4th CPC and 5th CPC) while the Services only merged 2nd Lt Scale, which was only a scale for Trainees, with Lt Scale. Thus 5th CPC should have actually provided Maj Gen Scale to all Armed Forces officers by TS. The major downgradation of Armed Forces officers was a combination of 4th and 5th CPC and 6th CPC has only put it all together. We therefore need to get the 4th and 5th CPC right especially now that we have got an opportunity after the SC has agreed that 4th CPC was improper.

May I request Navdeep to look into this issue. My email is rajivchoudhry_in@hotmail.com

I am Rajiv Choudhry

sl said...

@Anonymous:"..calculated by 1.4 {(BP+old RP+(DA on old BP+RP)}-new RP...";
40% of only unrevised(basic+stg+rp) were added. The DA was not in the 40% component.

manu69 said...

@Rajiv Choudhry,
1. Sir i agree. this link elaborates it clearly http://sol-dozdoz.blogspot.in/2012_09_26_archive.html and this http://rdoaindia.blogspot.in/search?updated-min=2012-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&updated-max=2013-01-01T00:00:00-08:00&max-results=26
2. my reading of the rank pay admissibilty is that it is a fixed amount admissible for each rank. IT IS CONSIDERED PART OF BASIC PAY FOR ENTITLEMENT OF DA ETC. the DA amount included the DA admissible on rank pay also. hence the figures given. You can see the various options here http://sol-dozdoz.blogspot.in/2012_09_26_archive.html.
2. by following your justification we would be adding the rank pay of 4th cpc and also of 5th cpc which would not be in order.
3. As regards your saying that we have downgraded our ranks, i would say that THE OTHERS HAVE UPGRADED THEMSELVES WHILE WE ARE WHERE WE WERE. A classic case of a glass of water being half empty or half full. WE HAVE NOT CHANGED OUR RANKS - THE OTHERS HAVE.
4. this is where we will keep having differences between serving pers and ESM, IF WE TINKER WITH OUR RANKS OR THE TIME TAKEN TO ATTAIN THESE RANKS.
5. We should analyse the outcome in seeking OROP carefully while at the same time maintaining PAY PARITY.

Sumithra Chidananda said...

Answer to the query of 28 Sep 2012 from Wg Cdr Rathnakar. Your basic pension will be upgraded to Rs.22,286/- per month from Rs.21,807/-. Arrears on an increase of Rs.479/- per month in basic pension from 1.1.2006 to 30.6.2012 comes around Rs.47,360/- including DA.

In general, an increase of Rs.100/- per month in the basic pension, the arrears from 1.1.2006 to 30.6.2012 comes to around Rs.9880/- including DA. If it is from 1.7.2009, the arrears up to 30.6.2012 comes to around Rs.5280/-.

SSS10 said...

Understand grade pay was fixed in 6th CPC as approx 40 % of end of pay scale. Discussions on this may also expose anomaly of fixation of lower GP vis-à-vis civilian corresponding pay scale..
Now with Rank Pay being integral part of Basic pay , even in 6th CPC following glaring anomaly can be seen
After analyzing civilian pay scale there seems to be direct relationship between annual increment of 4th CPC and Grade Pay fixed in V CPC. The GP-Increment -Pay scales are as follows 12000-525 -S 30; 10000-500-S 28,29; 8900-450- S 26,27 ; 8700-400-S 24,25 7600-375-S 21, 22, 23 and so on…….and all Lt Col with Annual increment of 400 in pay scale of 15100-400-18700 ( V CPC) were fixed with S 23 (Civilian scale 12000-375-18000) where as it should have been fixed with S 25 (Civilian scale 15100-400-18300). Hope This input was made available to learned CoS ! tasked to resolve Grade pay anomaly.

Since Rank pay was not considered as part of BP by 6th CPC (and also by subsequent anomaly committee), end of Pay was taken as lower thereby fixing lower Grade Pay. Further, for the purpose of reducing no of pay scales, pay scales of similar annual increments in 5th CPC were bunched together and given same Grade Pay in 6th although having different end of pay scale. What I am trying to bring out is that Grade Pay was fixed lower than equivalent civilian scale on both account i.e by Annual Increment or by End of respective Pay scales(incl Rank Pay)… Main question which remained unanswered …Do we have to fight another long legal battle to resolve this glaring anomaly or will it be done automatically post this famous Rank Pay verdict ?

Anonymous said...

This is Rajiv

@ Manu and Sunlit,
Agree with Sunlit in respect of formula for Pay fixation adopted by V CPC ie, New BP=1.4[{Un-Revised Basic+Stagnation Pay}+Un_Revised Rank Pay]+DA+IR-New Rank Pay . AS far as my understanding goes the formula results in ensuring that the methodology adopted in fixing BP and RP by IV CPC is extended to V CPC mutatis mutandis. The V CPC formula for Civilian counterparts was , New BP=1.4(Old BP+Stag) +DA+IR which basically gave a 40%of old BP as increase in BP as a whole compared to 20% in IV cpc. Since civilians had no RP or for that matter their equiv of RP ws already part of BP and continued to be so, their new BP fixed included that part also as per calculations. However for AF officers' RP was shown separatey but the DA and IR applicable was merged together alongwith dues on BP. Thus while the V CPC calculated the emoluments similarly for AF officers by adding the old RP, it also decided to double the old RP as new RP. The new RP should actually have been = 1.4*Old RP+(DA and IR on old RP) Again as in IV CPC, the V CPC also culled out the new RP from the new BP.
2. In so far as Post SC order is concerned, the correct BP of IV CPC needs to be finalised. For present lets call this correct BP of IV CPC as IVBP and separate out the DA and IR on BP and RP as BDA/BIR and RDA/RIR respectively. Thus the V CPC emoluments should have been the total of new BP and new RP as follows:-
(a) New BP=1.4 (IVBP+Stag)+BDA+BIR
(b) New RP=1.4*IVRP+RDA+RIR
2. While I agree witht the `Glass Half filled', by culling out the RP from BP the IV CPC actually downgraded the BP of the AF officers. The upgradation of civilians happened in the V CPC wherein they upgraded the IG rank from Brig equiv to JS? Maj Gen equiv. With the RP case being won, the parity should be restored and made applicable for all officers wef IV CPC irrespective of Date of Commission/Promotion. Anything lesser would lead to Post 01 Jan 86 Capt to get lesser BP than their civ counterparts until 01 Jan 96 and then catch up in V CPC. This will lead to another problem since now the Af officers will suddenly jump above some civilian officers.
3. Manu I agree with you regarding the Pay like IPS. I feel that our biggest problem is our obsession with ranks and thus linking our Pay with it. We have so many ranks and we don't want to reduce them which results in the problem of Pay Scales. We missed the opportunity in V CPC. While we should agree to have same number of Pay Scales as IAS/IPS and separate the Ranks from Pay Scales. If considered essential to retain for `Command and Control' they can be an internal issue of Services and made appointments. At the end of the day its all about maintaining parity with civilian counterparts.

Anonymous said...

Dear Corona8,

@Anonymous:"...another Lt Col with 38 yrs of service..."

Oh really! Which country and what service did this Lt Col belong to? You made this statement in your comment. Where are you friend, are you really a defence person. Don't you know that permanent commissioned officers commissioned from the ranks went up to Generals. What to talk of just Lt Cols with 38 years service. Shut up. Never make any comment when you do not know.

The service rendered in ranks counts 100% towards officers service and towards pension of commissioned officers. Do you know where is it written. Dont make any comments which you are not aware of. If you are a retired officer I think I don't know how you spent in service without knowing such rules and regulation.

The officer whom you commented is me and am an author for books on accounts, audit and management audit. I served for 38 years and retired in the rank of LtCol (Selection Grade) do you have any objection. When you dont know never make any comment. Be within your means.

corona8 said...

"I served for 38 years and retired in the rank of LtCol (Selection Grade) do you have any objection."
LOL! :-()
Now there's one with a few chips on the shoulders, besides all the ranks he's held in those 38 years.

Lighten up buddy. No one is attacking your accontancy, audit skills or even your basic arithmetic for having arrived at that magic figure of 38 years.

Your manner and cultural standards of exchanging comments are another matter, altogether, though nothing to do with me. Just saying, if you know what I mean.

sudhir said...

sir,please clarify for AMC officers whether NPA is being added in the basic pension.It is 25% of the basic,and cumulatively will be a big sum.
Lt Col SW Deshpande,AMC Retd

Unknown said...

OROP has to do nothing for JCO's !!

They have been left aloof and made fool. Illogical dispartiy raised by this lame OROP.

For JCO's the order has mentioned no change. If that is the case, why they have been using the word " for JCO's and PBOR's ".....makes no sense.

Lame government with lame policy , and ll be followed by poor implementation.....need to see JCO of all forces recognizing the fact and taking the issue furhter.