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 Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained.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

Sunday, September 13, 2015

Irresponsible Chain Mails on pensions of Jawans and JCOs

Though the instant post was not ideally required, but I feel compelled to throw light on a subject, which, since the last few days has led to a massive disinformation campaign fuelled by irresponsible chain-mails regarding pensionary benefits of ranks other than Commissioned Officers.

As was brought out in the last post on this blog, the Government has issued the sanction order implementing the Supreme Court decision on removal of a pensionary anomaly with effect from 01 Jan 2006, that is, the date of implementation of the 6th Central Pay Commission (6th CPC) recommendations. There have been mails floating around and queries raised that the benefit as granted to Commissioned Officers and Civilians on 24 Sept 2012 has now been applied from 01 Jan 2006 but similar benefit has not been extended to ranks other than Commissioned Officers. Some mails have been nauseatingly abusive towards the Government and some have raised needless irresponsible conspiracy theories.

Let me attempt to clarify this issue for the benefit of readers.

When the 6th CPC recommendations were implemented, the pensions of pre-2006 retirees were fixed at 50% of the minimum of the applicable pay band with effect from 01 Jan 2006 rather than the pay within the pay band for each rank according to fitment tables. This was implemented for all Central Govt pensioners, irrespective of rank or service. This was objected to by pensioners and led to massive litigation since as per pensioners, the pensions were to be based on minimum of pay within the pay band for each rank/grade and not the minimum of the pay band itself.

While this controversy was simmering, the Government introduced a new system of pension calculation for ranks other than Commissioned Officers wherein they scrapped the system of minimum of the pay band but initiated a system of calculation by taking the maximum of the 5th CPC scales fitted notionally into the new 6th CPC pay bands and alongwith enhanced weightages. This new system came into force on 01 July 2009. The weightages were further enhanced with effect from 24 Sept 2012. Hence, the controversy of minimum of pay band vis-a-vis minimum of pay for each rank/grade within the pay band became redundant for ranks other than Commissioned Officers with effect from 01 July 2009 but the said anomaly continued to hold field for Commissioned Officers and Civilians. Ranks other than Commissioned Officers who were now fixed on notional top of the 5th CPC scales w.e.f 01 June 2009 were however hit by the minimum of pay band vis-a-vis minimum of pay within the pay band anomaly from 01 Jan 2006 till 30 June 2009.

On the other hand, in the case of Commissioned Officers and Civilian retirees, the pension continued to be based on minimum of pay of the pay band itself and later the Government itself rectified the anomaly with effect from 24 Sept 2012 and provided that from Sept 2012 onwards the pension would be based on minimum of pay for each rank/grade within the pay band. The letter was issued in Jan 2013 with retrospective effect from Sept 2012. Various Tribunals and more importantly the Delhi High Court however ruled that the removal of the anomaly would have to be effectuated from 01 Jan 2006 rather than the future artificial cut-off date of 24 Sept 2012, and the said decision was ultimately affirmed by the Supreme Court.

In implementation of the decision of the Delhi High Court affirmed by the Supreme Court, the Government has issued the implementation instructions under question. For ranks other than Commissioned Officers, the instructions would apply from 01 Jan 2006 till 30 June 2009 since from 01 July 2009 onwards the anomaly stood removed and rendered redundant since all such personnel were as it is fixed on notional top of scales. For Commissioned Officers and Civilian pensioners, the instructions would apply from 01 Jan 2006 till 23 Sept 2012 since the anomaly was only removed on 23 Sept 2012.

Those who are cursing the Government and Commissioned Officers and Civilian pensioners must realize the contours of the controversy before jumping the gun based on half-baked information. It is for the information of all, that pre-2006 retiree ranks other than Commissioned Officers are granted pensions based on notional maximum while Commissioned Officers and Civilians are granted pensions based on notional minimum within the pay band. The Government letter rather protects the enhanced pensions of Jawans and JCOs from 01 July 2009/24 Sept 2012 and this should have brought joy to such pensioners, even if the arrears are not that massive, rather than disaffection.

Please do not go by chain-mails being circulated based on half baked information of self styled experts since reliance on such information leads to needless frustration based on non-existent controversies.

Thank You.



Dear Major Navdeep,

I sincerely thank you for such an eloborate clarification for our Jawans and JCOs. It is pity that educated NCOs/JCOs having IT knowledge are cursing the Government. They will soon realise their folly, when Government notification is issued for OROP.

Further, DESW has annexed tables alongwith its order and it is hoped that PCDA will issue circular soon.

I wish you God speed for doing yeoman service. May God bless you.

With warm regards,

Major M R Panghal

Unknown said...

Major saab, you are right, but then it should be reflected for everyone who received the increment wef 24 -9 2012. In my case it hasn't happened. How is that

GaviniVN said...


Thanks a lot for the post. You have clarified, touching all aspects.

Thanks again.

rajesh gill said...

you have given the justification but that is wrong govt has made the mistake when considering the matter of PBOR because the which are issued by the MOD is not as per VIth CPC recommendation they have just multiply the old pension with 2.26 factorise formula which is totally wrong I can give you prove for that I am an Ex petty officer from the Indian Navy my basic pension was Rs. 1696 as on 31 Mar 2003 then it has increase to Rs. 1782/- then after adding DP it comes 2673/- then on 01-01-2006 Rs.4027 and now as per table it is 4186/- in any other formula it never comes less. my old minimum basic pay was Rs. 4320X1.86 =8040+2800(grade pay)+2000(MSP) =12840/2 =6420/- should be minimum as per VIth CPC recommendation I dont know how MOD has calculated and further PCDA also not noticed it. sir please sort out our problem

with thanks

Rajesh Gill
Ex petty Officer
Inidan Navy

HFO MP Sharma said...


Thank you for clarifying. Hony Commissioned Officer (H/Lt, H/2Lt/HFO) were made equal to Sub Maj/MCPOII/MWO) wef 01 Jul 2009. ........ HFO MP Sharma

Justin Christian said...

i feel the weightage of lac is taken wrongly it should be 12 in place of 10.. ....

can u throw some light " IS IT CORRECT OR A MISCALCULATION"...

Capt. NC Poojary said...

The clarification given by you will clear all doubts raised
by all veterans below the commissioned officers rank and they may not raise any objectionable comments here onwards. Thank you for your clarification.

sunlit said...

Since it is proving to be such an emotive issue and considering the false premises, based on which, agitated frames of mind are finding expression on the web, it would have been in order for the Government to amplify, within their notifications, the advantages previously accorded to JCOs and Havildars, with a clear explanation that others i.e. Commissioned Officers and Civilians would only be catching up now.

It can't be said that people who issue letters and circulars in these matters do not possess the foresight to be able to see what would create needless disaffection and angst when such documents are notified.

It brings to mind the recent example of the furore generated over the insertion of the "VRS issue" in the statement on the other matter of OROP. That raises the question, in whose interest is it to play with feelings by pitting one section of stake holders against another?

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...

For Justin Christian above:

The weightage applicable w.e.f 01-01-2006 till 01-07-2009 is 10, 8 and 6 years for Sepoys, Naiks and Havildars respectively.

For Rajesh Gill:

Your appreciation of the rules is incorrect. And in any case, if you are getting a pension higher than the tables using the multiplication factor of 2.26, then that stays protected. For more information on the formula applicable from 01-01-2006 till 30-06-2009, you may peruse Govt of India letters issues on 11th and 12th November 2008.

sgt jaipal vashist said...

Thanks for clarification,sir but it is nowhere reflected in notifications that pension s after calculartion will be given pro-rata linking with 33 yrs service for pre-2006

SSY said...

Dear Sir, The tables enclosed with the circular No. 547 are based on the minimum of pay fixed for that rank in the respective payband and it is not on the basis of notional maximum. For example JWO minimum pay starting with 18340 (Post 2006) and notional maximum for JWO is 23020. The maximum pension shown for 28 yrs of service for JWO is 9170 where as it should have been 11560. Thanks and Best Regards

Navdeep / Maj Navdeep Singh said...


Read the post again.
I never said that the tables are based on notional maximum.
These tables are based on minimum of pay of the said rank within the pay band rather than the minimum of the pay band itself. These tables replace the earlier tables issued on 11/12 Nov 2008 which remained applicable till 30-06-2009. The change over to notional maximum takes effect from 01-07-2009 and is not linked with this controversy.

Sgt Vashist,
It goes without saying that this is linked with 33 years service. This is not an independent letter but is to be read with pre-existing conditions.

Unknown said...

dear navdeep sir when circular for casualty pensioners issued by mod or pcda. please inform. 1.1.2006 to23.9.2012

reskaria@gmail.com said...

Dear Major Sab,
Whatever it may be, do PBOR can expect any arrears for the period from 01 Jan 2006 to 30 Jun 2009 ?

Skaria (Nb/Sub (PA) retired in 2000).

corona8 said...

@SSY: "...tables enclosed with the circular No. 547 are based on the minimum of pay fixed for that rank in the respective payband and it is not on the basis of notional maximum....

In other words, do you want OROP, or something close to it, from 01 Jan 2006 itself? Well, I hope you get it. Perhaps it will give others a chance to ask for it as well.

suresh tahiliani said...

Dear Major Navdeep Singh,
Great job done, keep it up.

Wg Cdr S K Tahiliani

Venkatesh VT said...

Dear Maj Navdeep
When i saw the tables of Sepoy,Nks & Havs i was a little surprised to see that for service till about 20 years Sepoy,Nk & Hav are getting the same pension.Hence i reconstructed the tables in Excel based on basic,weightage & number of years of service & full pension period as 33 & I saw that for the minimum of the pay scale ,the resultant pension for NK & Havs are less than that of a sepoy.

The reason is not far to seek.It is due to weight-age factor being 10 8 6 f or Sepoy,Nk & Hav respectively

What the babus seem to have done (wrongly or rightly) when they saw that the Havs & Nks will get less pension (based on full pension for 33 years of service) than Sepoy they have increased the pension of such Nks & Havs to that of a sepoy so that Sepoy does not get more pension in the same way that Maj Gens pension was earlier made equal to Brig pension
From what i know that has been declared illegal by the SC.Hence can you throw the light on whether Hav & Nks pension should be made eqaul to Sepoy's pension or their pension should be fixed higher .
Only you may be able to answer this question due to your legal acumen.

AS written in your face book page i dont claim to understand their pay scales well enough though i am trying to improve my knowledge & work out things correctly.

Amarsingh Yadav said...

Good Evening Respected Major Sir,
sir what is the ruling of HSC regarding Delinking or 33yrs.... Is there any such ruling .. or not .. if yes..Is it for post 2006 or for pre 2006 too

Brig K. S. Grewal (Retd) said...

Very elaborate clarification, apt questions by veterans and answers by Maj Navdeep.


Sir Ji with reference to MOD circular dated 3rd Sep 15 para 6 it is mentioned at the end that " dated 17.01.2013 is paid". Whereas in PCDA Circular 547 para 7 it is mentioned as"dated 17.01.2013 is lower". Mod letter has also been appended below PCDA Circular No 547. Does not it makes a difference. Secondly PCDA Circular 548 and C-144 clearly reflected to pay the arrears wef 01.01.2006 where as in PCDA 547 it is arrears if any ..... it means some thing is fishy there....thanks please

Anonymous said...

This is likely to cause discontentment among ESM who expected arrears at the rates of pension applicable wef 24 Sep 2012 from 01 Jan 2006 rather than 24 sep 2012. Moreover while PCDA circular No. 547 covers rates of service/family pension, it does not cover cases of Special Family Pension and Liberalised Family Pension which as per rules in vague has to be 120% and 200% of service pension respectively. Thank you.

vajir singh nain said...

Sir Ji आपसे मेरा एक निवेदन ह आप ब्लॉग पर कम आने लगे हैं और यहाँ वहां से लोग भर्मित क र देते हैं । कुछ चतुर लोग ऑफिसर और अन्य रैक में नफरत फ़ैलाने का काम करते हैं। ऑफिसर के बिना जवान और जवान के बिना ऑफिसर अधु रा सा ह । हमारा फोकस एकता पर भी होना चाहिए वन रैंक वन पेंशन बाद में पहले आपसी रिश्ते वही हों जो सर्विस में होते हुए रहें हैं ।

जय हिन्द

हवलदार क्लर्क वजीर सिंह नैन
एक्स 11गार्ड्स रेजिमेंट


Dear Major Sir,

1. Thank you very much for your elaborate comments on pension of JCOs/OR.

2. I am a retired JCOs of X Group. My retirement date is 01 Apr 2004. After 6th Pay Commission my pension was revised as Rs 11066/- per month and wef 01 Jul 2009 my Basic Pension was revised as Rs 13105/- and since then I am getting revised pension with DAs applicable from time to time.

3. In the letter of MoD as well as circular of PCDA my pension is showing as Rs 10280/- which is less.

4. Please clear whether I will get arrears wef 01 Jan 2006 or not. It is not understood on issue of Govt letter for all why MoD has made fitment tables for JCOs/ORs only whereas in case of officers and civilian all instructions have been issued for payment of Officers as well as civilians.

5. Please clarify.

Thanking you,

Sincerely yours,

Ex Sub & Hony Sub Maj Ram Milan Pandey
Mobile No : 9873240634

HARDEV said...

It is question of interpretation but the language need to be understood as follows.

Para 2 of PCDA Circular 547 is only a hedge is not decider

The deciding para is 2 in GOI MOD Leter No 1(4)/2015 (II)-D (Pen/Pol)Dated 3 Sep 2015& Par of PCDA Circular 547.

It is not to be interpreted as minimum of pay in the pay band but interpreted as " it shall not be less than minimum of pay in the pay band" since this was only prevailing at that time.

It is to be interpreted as only "minimum of the Fitment Table for each Rank & Group" & same also to be used fore calculations

The effective Tables have been supplied only contains the basic pension does not include other elements like Grade pay, MSP & X-Group pay those need to be added as 50% wherever applicable.

Grade pay of the Rank on which retired is only understood as Rank pensioned.
(If the Rank on which retired,Rank last held,is considered then it is in fact topic of OROP)

Jai Hind
JWO Hardev Singh Retd


Dear Major Sir,

1. Thanks for your elaborate clarification on Pension of JCOs/OR.

2. I am a retired JCO of X Group. My date of retirement is 01 Apr 2004.

3. After 6th CPC my Basic Pension was fixed as Rs 11066/- and again wef 01 Jul 2009 my Basic Pension was revised as Rs 13105.

4. As per MoD table my pension has been lowered as Rs 10280/-. Not understood why pension redused.

5. In this case I think I will not be able to get arrears on pension whereas officers and civilians are being given arrears. Not understood why table has been made by MoD in case of JCOs/OR only. I think that matter should be cleared otherwise it is so confusing.

6. Please clear.

Thanking you,

Sincerely yours,

Ex Sub & Hony Sub Maj Ram Milan Pandey
Mobile No : 9873240634

ranjan said...

Dear Sir, As per circular-547 ( Pre-2006 ) any arrear will be cradited in PBOR account s

Tukaram V Manerajurikar said...

Sir It is not understood as to why GOI was in hurry to give the Maximum Fitment benefits to PBORs only on 01.07.2009. GOI could have waited till 17.01.2013 for giving the benefits of Cir. No. 501 to PBORs also alongwith Civilians and Officers. In that case I Sgt. Gp Y could have got benefit of 6420/- (15 years) wef 23.09.2012 as EOFP for Next of Kin in Cir No. 502 dated 17.01.2013 shows 15 yrs SGT pension as 6420 only. Further Family pension of 30% as on 01.01.2006 was 3852 hence 3852/3into 5=6420 only.So I could have got the arrears of 6420-3636 now. Whereas my pension is not fixed at 6420/- but on 5301/- only And I am going to suffer the said loss for no fault of mine. Please through some light and advice.Thanks in Advance Sir.


Sir, the question here is: what does minimum of pay for each rank/grade within the pay band mean? In my opinion it means the pay fixed while a person is appointed or promoted to that rank/ grade. It is not necessarily to be calculated on the minimum of the pre- revised scale. It can even be calculated on the notional maximum as is being done in the case of PBORs, as per Rules. The fitment table for PBORs notified vide PCDA circular 471, is calculated on the notional maximum and effective from 01.01.2006. The same calculation was followed to revise our pension on 1.7.2009 and 24.09.2012. What is then the logic in denying it from 01.01.2006, sir?

Kindly enlighten us sir?

Sgt MPKaran

sgt jaipal vashist said...

I have posted this to various querries raised on FB
suppose you are a sgt of y group retired after 15 yrs
your pay scale was 4320-85-5595
supreme court order says that you should get pension wef 01.01.06 as per the following formula( minimum of the fitment table)
this figure is for 33 yrs service and it will be decreased proportionally as per the service.
all commissioned officers and civilians are getting pension as per this formula wef 24.9.12 and now they will get this pension from 01.01.2006
On the other hand only PBOR (rpt) PBOR are getting pension from 01.07.2009 on the highest of fitment table as per this formula
4320-85-5595( taking the highest of pay scale)
this figure is for 33 yrs service and is to be decreased as per lenth of service.
The weightage is enhanced for two years for us wef 24.9.12
Now tables in circular 547 are made taking the calculations as per ist formula will be getting till 01.07.2009. All employee are getting the pension on same formula .
Actually we should be thankful to Government that they have protected our pension of maximum of pay scales wef 01.07.2009 because all other employee and even our commissioned officers are getting pension on minimum of pay scale and we will continue to enjoy on highest of pay band

Anonymous said...

As per PCDA(P) Allahabad circular No. 547 dated 11 Sep 2015 Pensions/Family pension ESM have been revised taking effect from 01 Jan onward. However, foresaid circular does not cater for enhancement of rates of SPECIAL/LIBERALISED Family Pension which is as per policy in vague has to be 120 percent/200 percent of service pension applicable to any rank at a particular length of service.
Appropriate competent authority may kindly be approached to include revision of rates of SPECIAL/LIBERALISED Family pension on the lines of PCDA Circular No. 547 dated 11 Sep 2015 wef 01 Jan 2006, thereby ensuring justice to the affected widows.

Anonymous said...

@Rajesh Gill,

Go through all pension rules / notifications.

kesavan parthu said...

there is lot of confusion after circular 547 most of us drawing pension how & when they
are going to pay arrears

ex-sgt kesavan

spanner50 said...

The blog-post states, "...but the said anomaly continued to hold field for Commissioned Officers and Civilians...".

Now, though the blog post rightly deals with some rather incorrect assumptions on part of those getting upset about what they feel is "discrimination", it does mention anomalies affecting commissioned officers.

I feel a more detailed blog-post on the subject would greatly benefit all retirees, especially in connection with still-existing anomalies related to pension fixation, such as this one that became glaringly obvious when PCDA circulars were issued based on MOD letters mentioned on this blog. http://ow.ly/StEzg

Surinder said...

Many thanks Mr. Navdeep for detailed clarifications.

But I couldn't understand how the Govt. can publish such tables which are showing lesser pensions than the MOD letter 11-11-2008 (which came soon after VI CPC).

It is a cruel joke for all personnel other than commissioned rank.

The Govt should have been atleast published the same Tables which are showing Notional Maximum.

And this prorata reduction is still being carried forward since last almost 10 Years

It seems no one is listening/following to our Hon courts orders.

Kindly advise please.

Anonymous said...

Dear Major Navdeep Singh,

I am very glad that you have been doing a very good job for our Great Veterans.
Small clarifications:
1. Is OROP covered for PMR officers ?
2. When are we likely to get our DA, Arrears of 2006, 50% full service Pension, OROP arrears
and 7th Pay commission Pay .

Shall be greatful if you could throw some light Sir.
Because your messages are more authenticated and correct.

Best Regards
Major P J Rao ( Retd.)

All adm Job said...

Dear Mr. Navdeep and Others,

There are main two anomalies in this letter /circular 547.

1. Basic Pension cannot be linked to 33Yrs of clause and it has to be 50 % of (Basic Pay Minimum of Fitment Table + Grade Pay + MSP) and cannot be reduced on the basis of lesser number years of service than 33 yrs, since letter dated 30 July 2015 as mentioned in Circular 547.

2. Secondly in case Minimum Basic Pay according to Fitment Table is less than the Minimum Basic Pay for the direct Recruits then Minimum Basic Pay will be equal to according to the The Gazette Of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, sub sec (i) No. 470 dated August 29, 2008, Page No. 43, section II, under Entry Pay in the revised pay structure for direct recruits appointed on or after 01.01.2006.

3. Example for para 2, Say Sgt Gp-Y, starting scale as per 5th CPC 4320 then 4320*1.86 = 8040, now since entry basic pay for direct recruits with a Grade pay is 8560 then it should be 8560+2800+2000 = 13360 and 50 of the same is 6680 and thus Minimum Basic Pension should be Rs. 6680/- PM.

Thus tables issued under circular 547 are in-correct and arbitrary in nature and needs to be challenged in court.

Dear Major Navdeep singh please do comment.


Rajeev Behal
Ex- Sgt of IAF

All adm Job said...

Dear Major Navdeep Singh,

The letter dated 30.07.15 and circular 547 are based on the supreme court ruling and OA 655/2010, In which Sc has clearly said the Pension cannot be linked to 33 yrs clause for Pre-2006 pensioners, where as in the current circular under question has again linked the same to 33 yrs of clause. And the purpose and spirit of SC ruling and OA 655/2010 is defeated.

Please do refer Para 12 to 18 and 25 to 30 of OA No. 655/2010.

Thus Circular no. 547 AND ITS LETTER 03 SEP 2015 ARE not correct to the true spirit of of SC orders and once again are in arbitrary and created a new anomaly.

Pension has to be Highest among as per OA 655/2010, as per revised from 01.07.15 or 24.09.12 which ever is more beneficial to the pensioners.

Regards and waiting for your comments on OA 655/2010.

Rajeev Behal

Anonymous said...

It is for Capt NC Poojary. Sir after a long period I have read your comments. Kindly confirm that Hony Lts/Capts would get pension arrears wef 1.1.2006 to 23.9.2012, as their pension was not revised wef 1.7.2009. thanks

P.Vigneshwar Raju said...

Dear Maj Navdeep
I have great respect to you and your site. We get great information from your site but, the way you had been misguiding the Fraternity of JCOs and ORs in couple of your earlier posts is not encouraging. Being an advocate and legal expert I hope you are well versed with the issues of JCOs/ORs. The misinterpretation of minimum pension by linking 33 years of service has been settled by different legal forums. I do not understand why you are bent upon repeatedly telling the fraternity that they are not eligible for minimum pension of 50% of minimum of present scale of the rank. By your above post it is clear that either your pretending to be ignorant or you are in hand in glove with the officers involved in such propaganda. I think you vow an explanation to the above post.

P.Vigneshwar Raju
Supdt of Cus & C.Ex.