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 Legal advice/litigation related issues would strictly NOT be published or discussed or entertained.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, August 25, 2016

Latest on dispensation of the “33 Year” rule

I have seen a slew of angry messages regarding non-issuance of the letter dispensing with the “33 Year” rule for earning full pension for defence pensioners. It may be recalled that the letter for civil pensioners was issued in April 2016 as informed by this post published on 07 April 2016. Further the reasons for further delay were enunciated by this post of 05 June 2016 but it seems that impatience takes the better of sane thought as a result of which venomous mails and messages are floated and even comments with unparliamentary language were left on this blog strangely as if it was the fault of the blog for the delay in issuance of the letter.

A little knowledge is dangerous they say.

While the orders for civilians were issued for the dispensation of the 33 year condition for full pension in April 2016, what most do not know is that a problem of interpretation arose soon thereafter even for civilian pensioners wherein it was not clear to various agencies whether the said dispensation would also apply to service element of disability pensioners. In other words, a question arose that would those in receipt of service element of disability pension also be allowed full pension, irrespective of length of service, that was earlier admissible only to those who had completed 33 years of service, or would the dispensation be allowed only to regular pensioners?. The problem was more extreme for defence pensioners since most of the affected pensioners with less than 33 years of service are not those who have retired with a service length between 15/20 and 33 years but those who are in receipt of disability pension and have been released with less than pensionable length of service.

It is now recently, this month to  be precise, that a clarification has been issued by the Department of Pension & Pensioners’’ Welfare (DoPPW) after due sanction from the Ministry of Finance that the said rule shall apply to service element of disability pension also, thereby now clarifying the issue in toto.

Of course unlike the DoPPW, the Ministry of Defence would have to issue a letter with separate detailed tables because of the inherent difference in the system of calculation of pensions for ranks other than commissioned officers due to which protection clauses would have to be introduced.

More than officers who have taken pre-mature retirement, the fresh dispensation is expected to appreciably be of much benefit to other ranks released with a disability with less than pensionable length of service.

Readers are requested to be patient and not spread discontent amongst the military community. In any case, as informed earlier also, the arrears are to flow from 01 Jan 2006 and the delay hence hardly matters. 

25 comments:

Sainathan said...

Maj Navdeep,
Thanks for the clarification. As you have rightly said, the arrears would flow from 01 Jan 2016. My only question is, why is the MOD keeping everybody guessing? A simple communication from whosoever is responsible that work is in progress would have greatly helped assuage the feelings.

surya narayan pandey said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Manohar AM said...

I understand that there is a problem in deciding this issue by the Department of Pension & Pensioners’’ Welfare. A decent press note about the progress and expected unintended delay for this could have avoided all the heat burn. Alternatively, they could have mentioned in the orders issued for civilians that separate orders will be issued in due course as it was done in the 7CPC notification for civilians. This measure might have calmed down the veterans tempers knowing that their case is not neglected by the Department of Pension & Pensioners’’ Welfare.

Dhirendra Pandey said...

respeted navdeep sir, in responce to your last two words " HARDLY MATTERS' , sir, I know some ex servicemen so desperate for little legitame dues , one fellow is waiting to switch business from cyber cafe to hardware, other fellow in wait to get her daughter married, sir not all but some poor ex servicemen , God forbid are in verge of developing mental illness , due to hope , which is not comeing true. sir defnetly it is nor your neither blogs fault, but sure you will get lot many blessings , if this matter exepedited ,Not atall to blame you , but please keep in mind , those unfrtunate ex serviemen also in mind while posting . thanks

Balbir Singh said...

Dear Sir

Thank you for your kind revert.

But how many months you keep on pacifying the poor PBORs who had been waiting these pre 2006 arears.

Earlier faulty 547 circular and now unending wait?

Hope this wait ends soon.

Thanks
Balbir Singh

A k set hi. 11 jsw said...

Sir this promise is a repetition of what u said on 5 june" it is on its way " please realize that what emanates from u is taken as gospel truth

A k set hi. 11 jsw said...

U promised the same on 5 June and v take your word as true

Jogen Lekharu said...

The venomous outbursts r d result of MoD's careless attitude nd apathy 2wards AFs obvious from previous examples. Many 6th CPC anomalies were never resolved while 7th CPC already came into effect! Most veterans r ashamed of such treatment unduly I awarded to them. We donot deserve such disparity shown to us for our military service to the country! The present system of redressal of anomalies iro veterans pension is again seemingly heading similar to one experience during d last decade!?

VK Khurana said...

Despite your great personal standing and respect in the ESM fraternity, the explanation as given by you should have formally come from MOD press release if not directly by the Minister. Your explanation, for all its sincerity, still remains unofficial and thus speculative. What and who is keeping the MOD silent, to put the issue in right perspective, if they have genuine reasons for the delay, even if their words may be taken with a pinch of salt.

Kiranur Vivek said...

O.k.understood.the 7th CPC scale pension will take how many more months with what are the reasons,I think now.DL 33,was not thought by me.Railways and other CG persons and pensioners would get from 31.08.2016.

Unknown said...

The MOD could have issued a newsletter regarding what Maj Navdeep posted on the blog. It would have helped in reducing the trust deficit which is building up, hence the venomous rumours. It has taken an inordinately long time to finalise the decision at a time when wars are fought for not more than 20 days and nations are brought down to their knees.

karunakaran a ex havildar said...

major sahib,

this is applicable to those who have come with both service pension plus disability pension or is it admissible to disability pensioners who have come out of service before completing pensionable service I think both categories are eligible

I am very grateful if it is clarified

Raminder Singh said...

Actually Mod or CDA is asking time not for calculating DL 33 but for diluting it. More the time they take more it will be diluted.

Mysore Channappa said...

Very informative & to the point. Thank you Major.

Anonymous said...

when 7th cpc notification for armed forces personnel and ESM is likely to come ?
hope issues like NFU and disability pension are resolved before it is issued .

ragbir singh said...

Sir,I am grateful and a deep gratitude. U r really the slice of solace for we veterans.no other bloggers updates, convincing factors of our plight.GOD MAY BLESS YOU.thanks

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the update . Though just as 7th pay commission proposals are to be implemented excluding the allowances part for now , similarly this "33 " years rule can be implemented for those cases where there are no complications .Arrears from 1--1-2006 means pensioners have grown older and the earlier the arrears are given the better.

K J Singh said...

I fully agree with the views of A Manohar.



KJ Singh

Ramapati Sahana said...

I have been very zealously following your articles and which certainly are very informative and with eye for details.
However find that your writing are ascorbic , admonishing and /or gives feeling as if the world is there to find fault with you.
In our democratic culture with open views we should retort only on personal attacks and/ or on violation of some major fundamental issues.

Cdr. Nitin Deshpande said...

Dear Major Navdeep,
Is there any change in Govt Policy on Disability Pension IT exemption benefit in 7th pay commission report? State Bank of India has started deducting TDS (20%) from all veterans who are in receipt of disability pension and not have been boarded out. Would be grateful if you could throw some light on this. Large number of Veterans are being affected by this.
Regards
Cdr Nitin V Deshpande

Manohar AM said...

Now that a clarification has been issued by the Department of Pension & Pensioners’’ Welfare (DoPPW) saying that this rule shall apply to service element of disability pension also, is it not time to issue orders for others? This is a simple calculation at the click of the button at DoPPW.

ragbir singh said...

Respected NAVDEEP SAHIB .THANKS for commendable services are delivered,the information is always convincing.
Kindly send your E mail ID .thanks

Madabushi Krishnan said...

how long we wait???

Anonymous said...

Is there anomaly pertaining to PBORs which is being projected by services in the latest issues for which the implementation of 7th pay commission is being delayed? It is being highlighted in media that there is no anomaly projected by services for PBOR on the latest issue. If its so, is it justified to deny revised pay to this lower rank personnel who needs financial assistance the most for survival, simply for higher pay packages and status for their bosses?

Ratnakar said...

Sir,
Could you please state as to what is the the present position as one month has passed after your post.