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 Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained.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, December 13, 2012

While the Saint sleeps…..

On numerous occasions I’ve pointed out on this blog and OPeds as to how lower level functionaries in the Defence Ministry are making a mockery of the system and ensuring that benefits and welfare related schemes for defence personnel, disabled veterans and military widows are surgically scuttled before they reach the tables of decision makers. The minds of the competent authorities are confused and breached by these mischief mongers in a way difficult to describe.

Earlier this year, I had pointed out to Sh AK Antony how the system was being taken for a ride by some of the officers in the MoD, but despite the fact that the Services HQ officially and in writing agreed with what I had stated, the officers in question were not confronted or taken to task, of course which is in line with the best traditions of the Ministry of Defence.

I am left with no option but to describe in detail to the readers of the blog the contents of my letter and demonstrate how certain quarters of the Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare (DESW) of the Ministry of Defence have not only misguided the Defence Minister of this country but also the judiciary and Parliamentary bodies. When the top political executive and constitutional bodies can be hoodwinked, the fate of the foot soldier or his family can well be imagined.

Please spare a few moments and go through my below reproduced letter minutely. It may be noted that my letter was not just based on hearsay but substantiated with evidence on each and every point by way of certified annexures and appendices. And this my friends is only the proverbial tip of the iceberg.


A. The Raksha Mantri                                                 
B. The Chief of the Army Staff                                   
C. The Defence Secretary
D. The Secretary, Ex-Servicemen Welfare (ESW)
                                                                                                               04 Jan 2012


1.    Being involved in, and as a keen observer of pensionary and welfare-related policies for defence veterans, I am perturbed by certain events at the Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare (DESW) of the Ministry of Defence (MoD) which, crudely put, are resulting in the entire department being held ransom by its staff at the lower rungs.

2.      It is no secret that despite the well-meaning intentions of the Raksha Mantri and the higher echelons of the Ministry of Defence in general, and the Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare in particular, defence veterans remain unhappy with the functioning of the system with regard to their welfare and pensionary benefits. The reason is not far to seek – the entire set-up and the purpose for which it had been conceptualised has been hijacked by lower level functionaries of DESW who not only scuttle every single positive move, including those emanating from the top, but also derive sadistic pleasure out of doing so. And in the process, this has not just harmed the interests of the veteran community but has also resulted in deception of the political executive, the Services HQ, top brass of the MOD, judicial bodies and even the Parliament.

3.     What I have said above is not merely hearsay but the reality. If you could kindly carefully peruse the points enumerated below with specific incidents and the documents annexed herewith which would substantiate what I say, it would be crystal clear that efforts originating from all stake-holders have effectively been sabotaged by a couple of officers who are involved in making false and incorrect noting-sheets for perusal of the competent authorities and who seem to be running the show, with all others, you and me included, ultimately becoming puppets in this gloriously deleterious spectacle.

4.      I would like to particularly point out issue-wise the following to you, with evidence:-

(a)  The issue of grant of pension of regular Naib Subedars to those Havildars who were granted the Honorary Rank of Naib Subedar, misleading statements made before the Supreme Court and back-tracking thereon :

·         As you may be aware, the 6th Pay Commission recommended and the Govt implemented the grant of pension of Naib Subedar to Havildars granted the honorary rank of Naib Subedar, but the same was only done for post-2006 retirees. The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) at Chandigarh however held that the same needed to be notionally extended to pre-2006 retirees also. The judgement of the AFT was affirmed by the Supreme Court and thus attained finality. Against legal opinion, the DESW however still insisted on filing more appeals before the SC on the same subject and in one of the cases, the Department made the then Solicitor General record a misleading statement before the Court that the said benefit was only extended to those Havildars who were granted the Honorary rank prior to retirement (See Appendix A) and hence should be restricted to only such cases.

·         The truth however is that the said Honorary Rank of Naib Subedar is ALWAYS granted AFTER retirement and never prior to retirement. The Army HQ protested in writing about this misleading statement (Appendix B) time and again requesting for rectification, and so did some ex-servicemen organisations (Appendix C).  However, no action was taken by the lower staff of DESW. When questioned under the RTI Act (Appendix D) as to who had briefed the Solicitor General into making the said incorrect statement and whether the Army HQ or any other organisation had taken up the case for rectification, one Sh XXXXX, Under Secretary of the DESW, falsely replied (also Appendix D) that the department had not briefed the Solicitor General into making the statement before the SC and that the Army HQ or any other organisation had not taken up the issue with the DESW regarding the incorrect statement made before SC for correction.

·         This reply of Sh XXXXX, the appendices obtained under the RTI Act from the Services HQ would show, is utterly incorrect since the case was repeatedly taken up by various authorities for rectification with even the then Secretary approving it, and the sad part of the entire issue which becomes clear from Appendix B is that the above named XXXXX was fully in picture and was one of the signatories on the oscillating minute sheets on the subject. The question then also arises whether the Solicitor General could have acted in vacuum on his own in making an incorrect statement without any briefing by the DESW?, which naturally is not possible. It is clear from the above that the Army HQ and also other organisations had promptly taken up the issue but still Sh XXXXX not only provided false information under the RTI Act but also kept the entire system, the Solicitor General and also the Supreme Court in the dark about the reality even on being pointed out. What did he gain by cheating poor ex-servicemen?

(b)  Statement before the Parliamentary Standing Committee of the 15th Lok Sabha tabled on 03-08-2011 related to the pendency of cases :-

·         A report appeared in the media that a statement was made before the Parliamentary Standing Committee that only 303 judgements passed by Courts / Tribunals had not been implemented by the MoD and the blame for lack of promptness of implementation was tacitly put on the Army HQ. Firstly, the number of 303 is totally incorrect. The actual figure must be more than 2500. (It would be in the fitness of things if you could call for the figures from all Services HQ). Secondly, when the MoD was confronted under the RTI Act with this news-report, a reply was initially given that no such statement had actually been made and that a reply was merely in the drafting stage. The Lok Sabha Secretariat however provided a full copy of the statement which is annexed as Appendix E in which the Army has been blamed for non-promptness in implementation of judgements. Thirdly, it is common knowledge that it is not the Army / Services HQ who delay matters but the DESW, which, due to over-reliance on opinion of lower level staff does not take decisions on cases projected by Services HQ for policy resolution after judgements on particular subjects by judicial bodies. RTI replies have shown that multiple issues referred by the Services HQ are pending for resolution at the DESW even after in-principle approval by the Secretary ESW. It is also learnt that the Defence Secretary had been informed, just before Mr Chaterjee took over as Secretary DESW, that all judgements have been implemented and no contempt petition was pending. This is also far from the truth and it is a fact that 90% of judgments are not implemented unless a contempt or execution petition is filed thereby leading to multiplicity of unnecessary litigation.

(c)   Spreading canards amongst veterans that it is the Army HQ which files appeals in verdicts favourable to ex-servicemen and not the MoD :-

·         It is again common knowledge, as also explained in the preceding paragraph, that the Services HQ have time and again projected many cases to the DESW involving amendment to policies adversely commented upon by Courts and the stake holders. The Services HQ have also many-a-times recommended and directed that appeals should not be filed in certain pensionary matters but still the DESW has remained adamant opining that its policies are sacrosanct and that judicial pronouncements are not correct. Not only that, ex-servicemen organisations are being informed that the MoD has always remained in favour of implementing judgments and not filing appeals and it is the Army HQ which files appeals. Moreover, as explained in the earlier paragraph, various important policy decisions are pending with the DESW which are not being resolved despite requests by the Services and affected veterans. It is being officially incorrectly portrayed that appeals are filed only on recommendations of the Services HQ in consultation with Ministry of Law. This stand has not only been mentioned in meetings but also expressed in writing; one of the examples is attached as Appendix F.

(d)   Evidence of wrong file-notings leading to skewed decisions by competent authorities, with special reference to the ‘broad-banding’ case :-

·         The lower staff of the DESW prepares false and incorrect file notings which lead to clouded decision-making at the top. It is well appreciated that senior officers do not have the time to go into minute details of all issues but the least that can be done is that stake-holders could be consulted as is being effectuated by the Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare (DoPPW) on the civil side leading to a democratic decision making process, and the amount of application of mind could be intensified. One such glaring example is the subject of ‘broad-banding’ of disability element of pension which was introduced to curtail medical subjectivity and which was only extended by the MoD to invalided out personnel and not to superannuated personnel or those who were released on completion of terms of engagement.

·         This was done despite the fact that unlike the civil services, defence pensionary rules ordain that all personnel who are released in low medical category are to be deemed as invalided out from service for disability pension purposes. Moreover while issuing the policy; it was probably not appreciated that medical subjectivity and rigidity in calculating disability percentage equally afflicts invalided out as well as other personnel who are released with a disability pension. It is important to point out that till the 5th CPC, invalided out and other released / retired / discharged personnel of the defence services were receiving an absolutely equal amount of disability element, but this long standing parity was disturbed by introduction of broad-banding only for one section, that is, invalided out personnel.

·         What is disturbing in this issue is the fact that again the above mentioned official XXXXX, Under Secretary in DESW, prepared a noting sheet in one of the cases (obtained under the RTI Act and attached as Appendix G) in which he falsely and wrongly stated that disabled personnel who are released / superannuated / retired / discharged are not even entitled to normal disability element of pension but are entitled to only to a lumpsum compensation. This false observation went upto the top and was not questioned and was ultimately accepted.

·         The truth however is that all personnel retiring with a disability connected with service are entitled to disability element and the controversy was only restricted to broad-banding which had been granted after 1996 only to those who are invalided out. Disabled personnel however do  have an option of lumpsum compensation but that is in lieu of disability element and if at all such an option is exercised, then disability element is not admissible (See Paras 8 & 9 of MoD Letter dated 31st Jan 2001- extracted as Appendix H). Hence lumpsum compensation is not mandatory but optional. Nobody in the chain ever questioned this officer as to how he made such a false statement.

·         It is also learnt that despite the fact that two judgements have been rendered in favour of veterans on the subject of broad-banding by the Supreme Court (Civil Appeal 5591/06 KJS Buttar Vs UOI allowed on 31-03-2011 and Special Leave to Civil (Appeal) CC 5450-5451 UOI Vs Paramjit Singh decided on 04-04-2011) and the fact that the Army HQ has refused to file appeals in cases of similarly affected personnel, still again based on incorrect noting sheets the staff of DESW is trying its best to mislead the system by convincing to file appeals in the SC which is not only morally, but also ethically incorrect. While vide Appendix F it was publically stated that it is only on the asking of the Army HQ that appeals are filed, here is a perfect example where the DESW is going out of the way against disabled veterans despite refusal of the Army HQ in this regard and despite authoritative latest SC rulings. I would also like to point out to you that the predecessor of the current Secretary ESW, Ms Neelam Nath, at one time had approved in principle an amendment in policy in this regard but again her approval was scuttled by misleading notings on file portraying that personnel who retire with a disability are not entitled to disability pension at all and hence broad-banding is not applicable to them.

(e)  Exaggerated and misleading public projection and wrong inputs to the Defence Minister :-

·         It would not be an understatement to suggest that most of the notings sent upwards play havoc with the understanding of the senior staff. Even the Raksha Mantri is not spared by spin-doctors in the DESW. To take a recent example, in speeches prepared by the DESW, the Raksha Mantri, on more than one occasion (Appendix I) stated in public that ‘keeping in view the valour and sacrifices of defence personnel’, the Ministry had decided to provide them with Rs 3000/- per month as Constant Attendance Allowance (CAA) and disability / war-injury pension. What is objectionable is the fact, that firstly, CAA, war-injury pension and disability pension have been admissible from times immemorial and there is nothing new in these concepts. Secondly, CAA is also now admissible to civil central govt employees and has no connection with ‘valour and sacrifices of defence personnel’. Thirdly, CAA is not granted to all disabled personnel as projected but only to those who are 100% disabled. Fourthly, it is not the DESW that had enhanced the CAA to Rs 3000/- but the same was done on recommendations of the 6th CPC and it was equally done by the DoPPW for civilian pensioners also. Fifthly, even the concept of disability pension is not unique for the defence services and has been in vogue since the 1930s for civil pensioners too under the Central Civil Services (Extraordinary Pension) Rules.

·         Hence when the senior most political executive in the Ministry can be made to believe and project wrong facts, God save the others !!!. It has been the constant endeavour of certain elements to make the public believe that the DESW is going out of the way for the welfare of veterans while the truth is, especially as explained above, that most of these benefits are already available to civilian employees also, and on the contrary, a majority of welfare related moves reach a road-block at the lower level of the DESW. It is the will of the bottom of the chain that ultimately prevails.

(f)  False statement before the Parliamentary Committee on Petitions of the Rajya Sabha (142nd Report) submitted on 19-12-2011:- 

·         While dealing with the subject of enhanced pensions for defence personnel, the DESW pointed out (See Para 6.1, enclosed as Appendix J)  that they were faced with an administrative difficulty in processing the case for One Rank One Pension (OROP) since documents of defence pensioners are destroyed after 25 years. This statement is incorrect, false and misleading. Documents are destroyed after 25 years ONLY in respect of NON-PENSIONERS as per Regulation 595 of the Regulations for the Army. Moreover the Pension Payment Orders (PPOs) are retained during the entire life-time of a pensioner and then the family pensioner. Was the DESW attempting to project that pensions for defence personnel are stopped after 25 years since the documents are destroyed?. The aim behind such a banal statement cannot be understood. If a particular pensioner is being paid pension on the basis of a PPO, naturally his/her rank and length of service would be available in the records. The officer responsible for preparing this excuse of 25 years which is not applicable at all to pensioners should be taken to task for attempting to mislead a Parliamentary Committee.

(g)  Non-adherence to National Litigation Policy and misleading statements before the Courts apparently because of incorrect briefing of govt counsel by the DESW : -

·         The National Litigation Policy promulgated by the Law Ministry provides that the Govt shall be a reluctant litigant in pensionary matters, but the same has not had any effect on the DESW. Moreover, the DESW staff has a history of wrongly briefing Govt counsel on matters of pensionary benefits in Courts thereby leading to decisions which are based on incorrect or incomplete facts. The most recent example has been enumerated in point (a) above and a list of such decisions is enclosed as Appendix K.

·         Some examples are as follows – In Secy MoD Vs Ajit Singh, it was stated before the SC that the person involved was not entitled to disability pension since he had less than 10 years of service. The reality is that there is no requirement of minimum service for disability pension. In UOI vs Jhujar Singh where the SC was examining the grant of disability pension on account of an injury sustained on leave, the Court was not informed about similar SC decisions in the past.  In UOI vs Ajay Wahi, the SC was not informed that the impugned rule that was being examined already stood amended, and so on.

(h)  Finding Excuses to put in limbo all welfare related proposals projected by the Services HQ and Ex-Servicemen Organisations :-

·         The lower staff of the DESW looks for excuses to either reject or to procrastinate on the proposals related to welfare of veterans. This is clear from the fact that more than 20 pension related proposals, some supported by authoritative verdicts of Courts, remain pending for issuance of policy decisions by DESW. One of the oft used delaying tactic is that opinions are sought from the office of the Controller General of Defence Accounts (CGDA) or the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions) which are merely auditing and accounting agencies and have no role to play in policy formulation or decision making. In fact, most of these agencies view such issues from a narrow and restricted point of view and are reluctant to have a positive outlook.

·         On the civil side, is it ever expected that the DoPPW would seek opinion from the Central Pension Accounting Office (CPAO) for taking such decisions? This, of course, is never the case. The openness and democratic system of functioning reflected by the DoPPW runs counter to the attitude of the DESW. While the former runs on Result Framework Documents (RFD) in which the time-period of decision making is completely defined, the latter runs on the ‘delay and deny’ spirit at the lower level. While the former places all important meetings, policy decisions and govt letters on the internet on the very day of issuance, the DESW does not even ensure their physical circulation to stake-holders or agencies. Again, the will is not lacking at the higher levels, but the system is being held at ransom by lower level officials and their ability to record false and incorrect notes.

5.      The idea behind informing you about the above is that it may kindly be ensured that all of us do not become pawns in the hands of a couple of officers who are bent upon taking the entire system for a ride. Governance should not become a joke and our thought-processes may not be mortgaged to mischief-mongering of a handful.  Most of such officers are resentful of the fact that the govt bestows upon defence personnel certain additional benefits which are not available to civilian personnel. Petty issues such as availability of subsidised liquor and groceries from Canteens become pin-pricks and encourage sadism. Moreover, since the Department has not, as a matter of practice, made any of the stake-holders a party to the decision making process, the voices of end-users remain unheard and this has a disastrous effect because the ones making noting-sheets are not affected by any of the policies under examination and thus take no interest in positively dealing with the same. The situation is reverse in the DoPPW on the civil side where the ones processing and taking policy decisions are themselves affected by the policies they are dealing with.

6.     It would be in the fitness of things if you could kindly take personal interest and go into details of this subject, inquire into the matter and take action against officers who have deceived the Parliament, the Courts, the MoD, the defence services, defence veterans and the public at large. That would be the greatest service to the nation and actual ‘welfare’ to ex-servicemen which in theory has been envisaged by the so-called well-intentioned but poorly executed Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare.

                                                            Thanking You,
                                                                                                (Navdeep Singh)

Copy for independent action to :

1. Chief of Air Staff
2. Chief of Naval Staff
3. Rajya Raksha Mantri
4. Adjutant General
5. Director, PS-4 (Legal)
6. Secretary (Personnel)
7. Secretary-in-Charge, DoPPW

Enclosures :

Appendices A to K, as above


sharu said...

brilliant letter sir.. but will anyone in this great country read it and take suitable corrective action ???? only time will tell..THE GREAT DAMOCLES' SWORD OF 7TH PAY COMMISSION AWAITS IN THE WINGS!!!!!regards..sharu

Anonymous said...

so disheartening to know all this. hopefully some day people responsible for this sad state of affairs will realise and repent.. to say the least.

let us pray for the happiness of those who take pride in denying the legitimate dues to their own defence services

PBOR said...

its totally unbelievably that lower staff can enter in to such mis-adventure at his/her own. cant believe

jinjon said...

can we have access to the appendices in your blog.

Anonymous said...

Dear Maj Navdeep

Once again u have proved that u r the ONLY saviour of Ex Defence personnel. What a pity state of affairs .It is amazing how some MOD human beings ? behave. U have made it amply clear to all concerned. There is hardly anything I can add, except wait that some day our so called bretheren in MOD will wake up to realties and hopefully do the needful in correct and appropriate manner. AMEN

Gurdeep Singh
Group Captain (Retd )


I strongly feel that these lower rung officials shud be taken to task by filing "Perjury" cases against them wherein they have told blatant lies in their affidavits before the apex court.SC shud take cognisance of such misgivings and haul up the higher ups with exemplary punishment.Then only detrance will set in. These Mr XXX shud be shunted out from MoD and case filed against him for misleading courts and higher officials.Mr XX contract as OSD shud be terminated forthwith.

Anonymous said...

You deserve kudos for the great service you are doing to the armed forces personnel and the country. Your communication should awaken our senior leadership to take to task certain mischievous elements who have pursuing a sinister agenda against the armed forces veterans in general and the disabled veterans in particular. All the best to you

Abhi said...

Thank you sir for this is a Genuine fight
A fight worth fighting for.
I really hope that serious cognizance is accorded to this letter of yours and that we can help circulate this information to more and more citizens.

Curiously you have blanked out the name of the DESW officials, rather it is strongly recommended that we name them specifically, with proof its not Slander any more.... and it is recommended to even lodge FIR against the individuals for wrongful actions in public office.
we could circulate this to all friends we know,
A Request: the letters in Appces mentioned above may also be put online with the links to lend additional credibility.

May God Bless You Sir.

Wish our Generals were like you. Some are. We constantly wait with bated breath to see if they might take the fight to the tiger...soon???

Regards to all readers. Pl join in making this into a crusade cos its a fight worth fighting for. Its our men we fight for...no?

guess something like this is written in some motto that often goes around in ...the Academies....

Chetwode Motto...how many of our seniors remember....most of us wonder....(they remind others alright)

You sir.....are the breed that we Salute with all our hearts!

Jai Hind.

Wg Cdr(Retd) IP Singh said...

Major Navdeep,
Once again big thanks for the concerns you show for helpless ESM. It is a shame that soldiers are to fight for their pay, pension and allowances in the courts which are otherwise available to other central Govt emlpoyees. I, while in service, have been projecting similar ambiguities through service papers. I shall once again emphasise, as commented on your blog 'tales of two departments' that all DOPPW orders on pay, pension and allowances for central Govt employees be automatically be made applicable to defence personnel to avoid delay and such ambiguities. Defence personnel are paid out of central budget, therefore why there should be another letter from MOD for such pay, pension and allowances.

Lets' continue with our efforts of brining out such issues to the knowledge of policy makers.
Wg Cdr(Retd) IP Singh

indianmilitaryveterans.blogspot.in said...

Dear Sir,
Thank you very much for your great service for the Ex Defence veterans welfare.

We requested to your kind heart please publish the appendices in your blog, so that we can access the same.

Thank you Sir.

Anonymous said...


Harry said...

@Maj Navdeep


I'm just SPEECHLESS! :-O

Synapse said...

Is it not the responsibility of IHQ to take up this issue with Def Minister?
It would be nice if there is periodic newsletter by AG's Branch which updates the Indian Army of all live issues and its progress.

Morale is affected only when there is a perception that nobody is doing anything about the such issues.

Muthukrishnan said...

Dear Navdeep Singh Sir,
Thank you very much for your great service to the ESM community.

Yogi said...

Navdeep has done more than his bit. Now each one the Exsm should petition his MP to raise the issue in Parliament.

Natarajan V said...

Dear Maj NS ji,

What a powerful and authentic exposition on the truthful facts and the emanating injustices mainly due “ to how lower level functionaries in the Defence Ministry are making a mockery of the system and ensuring that benefits and welfare related schemes for defence personnel, disabled veterans and military widows are surgically scuttled before they reach the tables of decision makers”.

It is also unfortunate that because of the above fact “ the minds of the competent authorities are confused and breached by these ................... in a way difficult to describe”.

From my analysis, I do not rule out the possibility that in some cases, the unfair and unjust decisions/ outcome in the system may be due to deliberate or even naïve instructions imparted orally by the higher ups without going deep in to the subject or due to having a blind faith on the lower functionaries beyond a comprehensible limit.

Anyhow, ultimate sufferers are the Pensioners/ Family pensioners and they have to fight for truth and justice up to the HIGHEST LEVELS of JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN THE COUNTRY often spanning over several decades.

Please continue your dedicated services to the men who deserve and deserved.

Warm Regards,

(President, Pensioners’ Forum (affltd to AIFPA (Regd)) Chennai.
Sr Vice President, CGS29(SAG) Pensioners’ Association (Regd) , Delhi.
Associate Member, RREWA (Regd), (affltd to BPS (Regd)) ,Gurgaon.

Suresh Kumar said...

Dear Maj. Navjot Singh,
Facts have been revealed , the Parliamentry Committee & the IESM's should be informed to avoid further blame game.

Anonymous said...

Dear Maj Navdeep
Thank you very much for your contineous efforts for the welfare of ex-defence personnel.It is felt that the complete OROP could be made possible for both pre and post 2006 retirees only if the pension is fixed as 50% of notional pay based on maximum of pay band+Grade pay +MSP for 33 yrs of service.2 yrs weightage in service could be given to Sepoys/Naiks/Havaldars.Others need not be given any weightage in service.

Pokar Ram said...

Dear Major Naveep Singh ji

1. What a fantastic way you have revealed the truth in the so called department of ex-servicemen harassment.

2. I thank the God that you have been given this mind. More than that, I thank you for having used the same for the silent /gagged armed forces personnel/ veterans/ families.

3. May the God bless you for the extremely wonderful service to the cause of the real defenders of the nation but gagged.

MV said...

kudos to you sir..i hope our mighty generals and equivalents also wake up and open their mouth caring lesser to be a bad boy and let the veterans get their dues..wish someone could sort out these babus nice n proper..thnx to you for suck like wonderful efforts

Anonymous said...

Most Senior Officers follow the Principle that " Denial is always a Safer option than granting dues.Denial also gives a false sense of being Powerful"
It is no use blaming the lower rung when the Senior's avoid application of their minds in taking legitimate decisions.

Anonymous said...

Thanks Maj Navdeep once again for sharing the details, the fact about the lower rung bureaucracy of MOD was well known to me as I have personally dealt with a couple of them, you know to get a file cleared once, I was candidly told . . . . File ka pet bharna padta hai... meaning it has to move back and forth many times to make it look that the lower level has applied its mind, obviously no names but it happened in these very corridors of the great MOD, obviously non-forces guys. My work was done that time because I persisted and prevailed with arguments but it took me 28 days to get it done.
But the point I would want to make is that RTI would be toothless if not accompanied with penal action against the defaulters and I can only hope all stakeholders in the matter serving or non serving unite and start approaching the judiciary more often to stem this rot.


Dear Maj.Very illuminating and deep study. I only wish, ALL, INCL. CHIEFS, DO READ THIS.
The pity is in other ministries, the minister takes personal interest on his own and need not be told. the unions are there(PLUS THE OTHER BENEFITS)The lower staff also gets other known and unknown perks. The lower staff look after the interest of the all personnel, both officer cadre and others.
For example, when mamtha was the railway minister, she looked after with vigorous aim and we need not tell about how much Lalu did for the ministry. He was even known to beat management gurus.
Now everybody knows the def.min. is sourceless(except for some big fish)and there is no VOTE BANK GUARANTEE.
Except for Mr.Jagjivan ram,, that too because of the situation then, NO MINSTER TOOK ANY INTEREST.
If the lower staff do any mischief, there is a fear of immediate suspension/transfer and the unions are closely monitoring all.
2.The Govt.must allow union activities in the def.forces also.
2.Unless, the IAS babus get a good report, then only promotions be given.

Anonymous said...

No doubt you have brought all the core issues in a very correct manner.

But i think top bosses in service HQs are also required to leave the selfish interest and raise the issues in a befitting manner.

Anonymous said...

dear sir, I've been an avid follower of your blog. and after seeing the service for 14 years, I'm very sure that nothing is going to happen... The stature of Armed Forces will keep going down...and we shall be made to beg for even basic amenities... its been more than 4 years since the 6th CPC came.. anything happened?? NO !!! and nothing will happen...

sorry if I sound demotivated... I'm 100% motivated regarding my job, but when it comes to expecting anything from our Great Nation and its politicians/babus... sorry, I expect nothing

Anonymous said...

Lets all walk the talk and make efforts to slam these officials with emails, phone calls, and letters.
For detailed contact information click on the following:
Jai Hind!

Anonymous said...

Lets be inspired and educated by the valiant efforts of Maj Navdeep and keep contributing in whatever small ways we can towards ensuring a better future.

You can be a young Capt doing the mandatory C of I for a jawan's Injury Report or a General at AHQ dealing with policy...each one counts.

Kudos Navdeep.

Aviator said...

Bravo Maj Navdeep, Bravo!!!! shall ensure this is given wide publicity in my circle!!!!!!!!
Keep up the good effort!!!!!

leeabrahams2christeffys said...

Dear Maj.Sir, Your sincere efforts in projecting the problems of exservice is highly commendable.i think no one ever spends so much time in studying the matters of exsvc welfare and taken up the matter with higher authorities for corrective action.May God bless u abundantly. Ex Hon.Lt. Abraham

Anonymous said...

Dear Maj Navdeep,
I could not aceess the appendices to this letter.
Very good slap on the faces of the people who matter but leave details to the Babus.
Maj Gen SPS Grewal (Retd)

majornsgill3025@gmail.com said...

GOD is great. HE knows mind of dishonest Govt employees and get their work highlighted through Major Navdeep Singh and Major AK Dhanapalan and those dishonest people are blessed with handicapped and sick children for their such deeds or exposed through IT raids/or they meet with serious road accidents. GOD has his own ways to deal with such officials. Why we pray for their punishments and become parties.

Anonymous said...

hi all,
while the issues brought out by Maj Navdeep are there, is there any one who can give the update on NFFU and other issues(based on committee on diections of PMO) which were supposed to be have been approved. It has now been four months since 15 august 2012 . No one is talking about these issues.

S Chander said...

Thanks for the eye awakening revelations. I commend your efforts in compiling these facts of the lies and misdeeds of Govt officials of MOD. I feel there is a definite need of exposing such officials, at least those who continue to operate, so as to avoid further harm to the interests of armed forces and its veterans. I shall appreciate if the Appendices "A" to "K" are made available in this blog.

Anonymous said...

All issues being considered by the Committe of Secretaries have been shelved as per word going around. All that it has yielded is the much diluted OROP.

Lt Col (Retd) A N Ramachandran said...

Dear Maj Navdeep,
You have very emphatically and effectively highlighted the wanton and deliberate discrimination being meted out to the hapless veterans in your letter addressed to the RM and others. I salute you for your unwavering focus and sustained perseverance in your quest for securing justice for the veterans.
2. Your letter was dated 04 Jan 2012, which means that the letter was sent almost one year ago. Since then, there has been no resolution of any of the issues raised.Obvious inference is that the MoD has no intention of doing anything about it.To my mind, the situation can change only when serving and veteran representatives are included in the Dept of Exservicemen Welfare. Till then the babus will continue to ill-treat the Veterans.We can only hope that the RM will will eventually implement the required remedial measure.
Lt COL (Retd) A N Ramachandran

rakesh1 said...

Maj NS. well done... keep it up. lets keep the pressure on and issue alive til MoD wakes up. thank you once again.

kush said...

For Navdeep and all brother officers to ponder over and act in whatever way you can achieve the goal. There is an Annual Meeting called Combined Commanders-in-Chiefs Conference which is inaugurated by no less than Prime Minister himself. I think that is the forum where are respective Chiefs should expose these facts for the knowledge of all our Poslitical Masters as to how our armed forces are disfavoured viz-a-viz their civillian counterparts.The Chairman of Chiefs of Staff Commettee should take pride in bringing forward these absurdities and force a discussion to arrive at suitable solutions to solve such problems as and when they crop up annually.If this system of monitoring can be put to practice, I think only then situation may improve.

Spooky Gupta said...

Hi PBOR………I was enquiring from the Queen over phone about the Duchess when Sardari interrupted me to ask if the Pakistani tour was still on. Then came this call from Hafiz…..I was thanking him for the delicious Kabab biriyani when he asked me this straight question….” How is the morale of your fuij..?" That reminds me PBOR…..why no talks about announcements for Republic Day ? The high powered committee chaired by the cabinet secretary in its time bound deliberations for resolution of servicemen’s pay anomaly / grade pay anomaly / NFFU etc has been waiting for 26 Jan13 to make findings public. But there is no buzz anywhere!

msc said...

The proof of the pudding is in the EATING . The taste of victory is sweet . No pudding no sweet ... keep the mighty pen alive .....

Vivek said...

Nice post. I love it. I hope to see more. Thanks for sharing with us.

Anonymous said...

The fault lies squarely with our Top Brass who are ready to sell their souls even for another star/stripe.... It's funny that most of these guys come from certain academies and schools and have been taught about "service before self" for as long as they can remember..........

Wg Cdr Yashovijay Parmar (Retd) said...

Maj Navdeep
I do not think that the Indian State is capable of giving to the soldier the sense of pride and honour that all other Militaries and Governments throught the World do.A Soldier without Pride is a worthless Soldier.
God help the Nation


Govt issued orders for grant of pension as per modified parity method of calculations viz last pay drawn with rank pay x1.86 plus grade pay plus military service pay total devide by two(50%) rounded of to next 10. minimum for major pay 11600+1200 RP=12800x1.86=23810+6600+6000=36410%2=18205.Major with six increments is to be 13550+1200RP=14750x1.86=27440+6600+6000=40040%2=20020 p.m. w e f 01.07.2009(Day grant of M S P) and less Rs.3000 from 01.01.2006.In addition to this IV CPC rank pay and calculations for V CPC & VI CPC will come through may take little more time by RDOA/SC and Lt Col rank pension for majors retired with 13 to 20 years commissioned service to remove anamoly with their brother officers who were granted Lt Col feom 16 Dec 2004(AVS Committee bonaza). Please prey GOD to fulfill your anamolies. Major NS Gill.majornsgill3025@gmail.com

Anonymous said...

This letter needs to be sent afresh to the new Defence Minister. Antony was either not competent or not willing to change the status quo. By the way, please don't expect anything at least from the Army Chief. He's as dumb as they come.