Monday, January 7, 2013

Fwding of Details to CDA(O) Pune

All Retired Officers are requested to fwd details to CDA (O) as given in their website if not already done.http://pcdaopune.gov.in



 

24 comments:

Harry said...

@RDOA,

Sir,

1. Stoic silence from RDOA office bearers on the next course of action is not very reassuring for most of the members of AFs fraternity. :(

2. Possibly there is nothing to be shared at this stage.

ravi mahajan said...

same here. RDOA has this blog to share the action with all its members. We were shouting hoarse of going for contempt case.

BTW, when is the date set for hearing "request of GoI for extension of time" ?

aaa said...

though out of context, however, for information of all

please note that government has allowed re-submission of option by government employees who had earlier given option for 6cpc wef 01 jul 2006 or date of increment and NOT from 01 january 2006. pleaze go to link
http://finmin.nic.in/the_ministry/dept_expenditure/notification/misc/CCS_rules_2008_03012013.pdf

Secondly, government has allowed grant of one additional increment in the same grade pay but higher responsibility posts (applicablel to civilian officers) refer Finance Ministry Office Memorandum No.10/02/2011.E.III/A dated 07.01.2013. Which means that if a Dir level officer (8700 GP) is posted as DDG or equivalent, then one additional increment will be given. Defence services will not have any thing like that.

The issue related to NFFU for civilian employees. See the link below and the urgency with which this issue is going to be addressed , see the link [http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/Vague-govt-rule-leads-to-mix-up-of-seniority/Article1-985945.aspx]

good luck to defence services...

manjot said...

I suppose RDOA is planning to shut up for the moment . Take the money its members get and then file whatever contempt etc ... So as not to prolong the wait for some section of us .

Satyam Never Jayate said...

From The Tribune, Chandigarh

Armymen to get fourth pay panel arrears with Jan salary
Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, January 6
Even as the manner in which the Ministry of Defence has gone about in implementing the Supreme Court order on anomalies pertaining to rank pay consequent to the Fourth Pay Commission has kicked up a fresh controversy, the government will start paying arrears for the same from this month.

A communiqué issued by the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts, Pune, states that payment of arrears to serving Army officers affected by the aforementioned judgement would be made along with the salary for January 2013. Where affected officers have retired from service, the payment of arrears will be made from first week of February 2013 onwards, after due verification of requisite details of residential address, bankers, PAN and pension payment orders.

The orders affect officers holding the ranks of captain to brigadier as on January 1, 1986. Sources in the defence accounts department said the determination of arrears is a “complex exercise” and the arrears for each individual would be different depending upon the dates of promotions and period of service. There is no common formula that could be applied across the board.

The instructions to implement the Supreme Court judgement were issued by the MoD last month, following which veterans pointed out a twist in the instructions that makes the apex court’s orders largely redundant.

The Supreme Court had in 2010 ruled that rank pay, first introduced by the Fourth Pay Commission, is to be included as part of basic pay for the purpose of calculating emoluments, allowances and benefits. Contrary to the recommendations, the orders issued for implementation of the Fourth Pay Commission had deducted rank pay from basic pay, causing financial loss to officers.

All About Bureaucrazy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
WG.CDR.V.SUNDARESAN(RETD) said...

Sir, this is the joke of the year.
How many of the officers in capt to brig rank in 1986 are there still in service(even after 26 years) as on today to receive the arrears along with their pay of Jan,13? may be couple of top generals/air marshals/admirals.
v.sundaresan

Satyam Never Jayate said...

@Wg Cdr Sundaresan,

Captains - age 26 years on 1.1.1986 would be 52 years old and ready either to retire as a Colonels at age 52 years or be Brigadiers; similarly a few Majs (age 31 on 1.1.1986) would have become Maj Gen on or before 1.1.2006 looking/awaiting promotion for Lt Gen.

But why lose sight of those who became Captains, Majors or Lt Cols from 2.1.1986 to 31.12.2005? There would be about many officers still serving, maybe as Majors + Lt Cols (TS) cadre strength 13889), Cols (cadre strength 3310) and Brigadiers (cadre strength 796).

And about 8000 in the Navy and Air Force (equivalent ranks).

HS dogra said...

WG.CDR.V.SUNDARESAN(RETD) ,
sir,
could we send the same info to AFCAO as they haven't yet asked any info from air force veterns .

Ravi Rao said...

I request the IESM & RDOA to send copies of letter from Gen Satbir Singh addsd to RM also to President, PM, CJ of Hon SC, UPA Chairperson, Leader of Opposition & All MPs to highlight how Hon SC judgement is being manuplated by the Beaurcracy to bellittle Vetrans & affected Serving Personnel of the Armed Forces of the Nation.
Regards
Col (Retd) Ravi Rao

Satyam Never Jayate said...

@HS Dogra, please visit indianairforce.nic.in, click on AFCAO and you will find two running messages asking for similar information.

Also please visit Air Force Association site and check on "News' or "latest" and you will find the same - a letter from AOC AFCAO, a format and an undertaking.

Else please put your email id on this blog and I will email them to you.

Satyam Never Jayate said...

Majors, Lt Col equivalents may wish to visit

http://pcdapension.nic.in/6cpc/Circular-14.pdf

SATPAL SHARMA said...

Sir,
The link to the letter by our superiors Maj Gen Satbir Singh SM to RM is as below:-

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/48nda/message/17174
sir,
we gave our youth to our country. never cribbed for any thing. we obeyed every orders. we were and are detterent for our nabouring countries.
It is very sad to note that we are treated indefferently despite SC recognising our due legitmacy.
please read the letter.
jai hind.

All About Bureaucrazy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
All About Bureaucrazy said...

1. In my personal opinion, and I reiterate that, it is my personal opinion, RDOA would do itself, its members and non-members a great service if it could clarify doubts of all those who advise, react, suggest course(s) of action for RDOA.

2. RDOA treated GoI/MoD letters of 26.11.2012 and 27.12.2012 differently, some say indifferently. The jubilation and consequent euphoria of the order of 4.9.2012 has been scaled down to a level of asking officers to fill in the format and send the same to PCDA (O).

3. A detailed reading and comments by RDOA of the 4 CPC recommendations and subsequent SAI/SNI/SAFI 1/S/1987 (which are not available on the internet) as well as the 5 CPC recommendations and the SAI/SNI/SAFI 2/S/1997 (available on internet)would probably help us understand where exactly every one stands (and not "kitna milega") in the matter.

4. If the GoI/MoD letter became aware during the process of filing and arguing IA 9 of 2010 in TP (C) 56 of 2007 to the 4 CPC recommendations and its incorrect interpretation, and has made corrections vide the GoI/MoD letter of 27.12.2012, then has it again misinterpreted the 5 CPC recommendations and continued the error of 4 CPC?

5. Or, is there an issue about rank pay and how/whether it (4 CPC rates) is to be deducted from emoluments for fixation after 5 CPC because 5 CPC states that it should be deducted? If it is the factual status then can we only expect a higher re-fixation of Basic Pay and DA but no rank pay?

6. Yes, the contempt of Court issue vide Sec 2 of the Act remains, especially as UoI assured completion of payment within 12 weeks of the order.

7. RDOA may want to think things over and advise us - members and non-members - if there was any/ were many misinterpretation(s) by either side.

Harry said...

@Col Ravi Rao (retd)

Sir,

1. Letters have been endorsed in the past on many occasions to the various 'worthies' you mentioned in your comment but TO NO AVAIL.

2. May be this time we need to think really 'out-of-the-box' and IESM may consider petitioning Kiyani?

sunlit said...

@All About Bureaucrazy: I feel RDOA have done a fairly wonderful job of seeing the entire matter to a successful stage. This may, or may not, be the final stage as far as the "IV CPC Rank Pay" litigation goes, but its a very very significant milestone.

Any note of defeatism, or of feeling let down, is definitely not called for.

Its surprising that when a victory cum thanks-giving celebration ought to be in progress there are voices seeking reasons and explanations. This would only gladden the hearts of those who have been contesting our rightful dues all along. The fact is these forces have received a set back and ought to be the ones feeling crest-fallen, not us. Why are we handing over our cup of victory to the vanquished on a platter?

There are a number of blogs, and I attempted to do my humble bit, on the subject. Likely consequences to calculation of revised emoluments and possible effects on pay-scales have been speculated upon. Unfortunately, some of the clarifications that were received from the RDOA team on the chatroll on Maj Navdeep's blog have now been lost.

Perhaps a more permanent record can now be kept in respect to various queries and clarifications on the matter.

john_co said...

RDOA has done a commendable job in pursuing the rank pay case continuously and bringing to a successful end in Supreme Court. CONGRATS. But please see that it will end only when the helpless retired officers get it in their bank account.
You may take such issues in future too.
Regards,
Wg Cdr CO John (Retd)

All About Bureaucrazy said...

@sunlit, let me reply certain remarks
I have remained a staunch supporter of RDOA and therefore regret a contrary impression

There isn't any note of defeatism, or of feeling let down, but pragmatism is called for.

Its not surprising that when a victory cum thanks-giving celebration ought to be in progress and we read Bubble Bursts, there will be voices seeking reasons and explanations.

Kautilya and Sun Tzu said that in victory the victor should introspect more than the the vanquished. So am I wrong?

With due regards to your analysis, here are extracts

5TH PAY COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
Pages 1912 to 1916

Recommended Pay Scales

147.35. Keeping the above considerations in view and in the light of the abolition of the rank of 2nd Lieutenant proposed by us, we recommend the following pay scales for service officers upto the rank of Brigadier:

Pay Scales Rs

Lieutenant 8250-300- I0050
Captain 9600-300- 14000
Major 11600-325-14850
Lt.Col 13500-400-I7I00
Colonel I5100-450-17350
Brigadier 15350-450-17600

In addition, the following rank pay may be granted:

Rank Pay

Captain 400
Major 1200
Lt. Col I600
Col. 2000
Brig. 2400

Fixation of Proposed Pay Scales

Para 148.1. We have made recommendations with regard to fixation of pay in the proposed scales in respect of civilian employees in the relevant chapter. The method of pay fixation on revision of pay adopted by earlier Pay Commissions for civilians and service personnel was more or less identical. The Fourth CPC while following a similar dispensation for civilian and Service Personnel had given specific illustrations of the manner in which pay for service personnel should be fixed especially in the context of the introduction of integrated pay scales for Service Officers

Para 148.2. We have deliberated over the manner in which service pays should be fixed and in order to ensure equality of treatment suggest that the method of fixation of pay on revision recommended for civilian employees may also be adopted for service personnel. For Service Officers upto the rank of Brigadier who are to be brought on to regular scales of pay from the existing integrated scale, we suggest that for fixation of pay the existing rank pay may be taken into account but pay in revised scales be fixed after deducting the revised amount of rank pay. While the method of fixation and illustrations given for civilians would apply mutatis mutandis to PBOR and Service Officers of the rank of Major General and above, the following illustrations indicate the manner in which pay should be fixed for armed forces officers upto the rank of Brigadier:

Illustration No. 1
I . Rank Major
2. Pay + Rank Pay (Rs.3400+600) Rs .4,000
3 Stage in the scale 1st stage
4 D.A. at index avg. I510
+ Interim Relief Rs 5,680
5. Existing emoluments Rs. 9,680
6, Add 20% of (Pay +Rank Pay) Rs. 800
7.Total Rs. 10,480
8. Pay after deducting revised Rs. 9,280
Rank Pay Rs. I 200
9. Pay in the revised scale Rs 11, 600 + 1,200 Rank Pay

Illustration No 2
I Rank Lt Col
2 Pay + Rank Pay (Rs.4500+800) Rs 5,300
3. Stage in the Pay of Lt. Colonel 7th Stage
4. Dearness Allowance at index avg.I5IO+lnterim Relief Rs 6, 513
5. Existing Emoluments Rs 11, 813
6. Add 20% of (Pay +Rank Pay)
Rs 1, 060
7. Total Rs 12, 873
8. Amount after deducting
rank pay Rs 11, 273
9. Pay in the revised scale Rs 13, 900 + Rs 1600 Rank Pay
after adding one increment

Illustration No. 3

1 Rank Colonel
2. Pay + Rank Pay (Rs.5100+1000) Rs 6,100
3. Stage in existing scale 5th Stage
4. DA at index avg. 1510+IR Rs 7, 370
5. Existing emoluments Rs. 13, 470
6. Add 20% of (Pay + Rank pay) Rs 1, 220
7. Total Rs 14, 690
8. Amount after deducting Rank Pay in the revised scale of Rs. 2000
Rs 12, 690
9. Pay after adding one increment Rs 15, 550 + Rs 2,000 Rank Pay

Continued

All About Bureaucrazy said...

continued
FIXATION OF INITIAL PAY IN THE REVISED SCALES – 5 CPC: SAI/2/98
Para 5. Fixation of Initial Pay in the revised scale will be regulated as under:-
(a) (i) An amount representing 40% of the basic pay including stagnation increments, if any, and rank pay wherever applicable in the pre-revised scale, shall be added to the “emoluments” of the officer.

(ii) After the existing emoluments have been so increased, an amount equivalent to the rank pay, if any, appropriate to the rank held by the officer on 1.1.96 at the rates prescribed in Para 3(a)(ii) above shall be deducted. Thereafter the officer’s pay will be fixed in the revised scale at the stage next above the amount thus computed.

Note:- In case of officers holding acting rank as on 1.1.96, the pay shall be fixed at the stage in the revised scale appropriate to the acting rank held by him, provided the officer has completed the minimum number of years of qualifying service, prescribed under extant orders, for promotion to substantive rank. Otherwise, the pay shall be fixed in the revised scale appropriate to the substantive rank of the officer. However, on completion of prescribed minimum number of years of qualifying service for substantive promotion, the pay shall be fixed in the appropriate pay scale of the acting rank held. The officer shall draw the rank pay of acting rank actually held.

(iii) Officer who became substantive major on or after 1.1.96 shall be granted the scale of pay of Lt Col on their stagnation for one year in the revised scale of Major. Such officer will, however, continue to draw the rank pay for Major.

(iv) As a one time measure those who became Substantive Major before 1.1.96 will be granted the scale of Lt Col on completion of 21 years of commissioned service, i.e. in their 22nd year with the rank pay of Major.

(b) If the amount so computed as at sub-para (a) (ii) above is more than the maximum of the revised scale, the pay will be fixe(e) In the case of AMC, ADC and RVC Officers who are in receipt of Non Practicing Allowance (NPA), pay will be fixed in the revised scale in accordance with the provision of sub para (a) above, except that in such cases the term “existing emoluments” shall include only the following :-
(f) Wherein, in the fixation of pay under Para 5 (a) to (e) above the pay of officers drawing pay at more than four consecutive stages in the existing scale gets bunched, that is to say, gets fixed in the revised scale at the same stage, the pay in the revised scale of such of these officers who are drawing pay beyond the first four consecutive stages in the existing scale, shall be stepped up from the stage where such bunching occurs as under by the grant of increment(s) in the revised scale in the following manner :-
(i) For officers drawing pay from the 5th upto the 8th stage in the existing scale - by one increment.
(ii) For officers drawing pay from 9th upto the 12th stage in the existing scale, if there is a bunching beyond the 8th stage - by two increments.
(iii) For officers drawing pay from the 13th upto the 16th stage in the existing scale, if there is bunching beyond the 12th stage - by three increments.

Note 1:- If by stepping up of the pay as in Para 5 (f) above, the pay of an officer gets fixed at a stage in the revised scale which is higher than the stage in the revised scale at which the pay of another officer who was drawing pay at the next higher stage or stages in the same existing scale is fixed, the pay of the latter shall also be stepped up only to the extent by which it falls short of that of the former.

Note 2:- ‘The stage in the existing scale’ referred to in the above provisions regarding bunching, the first stage in the existing scale shall be w.r.t. the maximum pay prescribed for each rank as given below:-

(i) Officers of All Arms and Services except AMC, ADC, RVC, and MNS.
Lt - 2500
Capt - 2800
Maj - 3400
Lt Col (Selection) - 3900
Col - 4500
Brig - 4950
continued

All About Bureaucrazy said...

concluding

(c) If the minimum of the revised scale is more than the amount so computed as at sub-para a (ii) above, the pay will be fixed at the minimum of the scale.

(d) For the purpose of pay fixation, the terms, “existing emoluments” shall include:
(i) Basic Pay including rank pay and stagnation increment(s), if any in the pre-revised scale.
(ii) Dearness Allowance at the Index Average of 1510, (1960=100).
(iii) Amount of first and second instalments of Interim Relief.
(g) Where in the fixation of pay under this paragraph, the pay of an officer who in the existing scale was drawing immediately before 01 Jan 96 more pay than another officer junior to him in the same cadre i.e. same Arm/Service and gets fixed in the revised scale at a stage lower than that of such junior, his pay shall be stepped up to the same stage in the revised scale as that of the junior.
(h) Where the existing emoluments as calculated in accordance with sub-para (d) to
(e), exceed the revised emoluments so fixed in the case of any officer, the difference shall be allowed as personal pay to be absorbed in future increases in pay.

(j) Rank Pay. In addition to the pay so fixed in the revised scale, officers shall be eligible to the rank pay, if any, appropriate to the rank held on 1.1.96 either in the substantive or acting (paid) capacity.

sunlit said...

@All about Bureaucrazy: I have felt all along that for fixing the scales, but more so or fixing the new basic pay within the new scales, the rank pay as on 01 Jan 96 should have been used and there should have been no deduction of the new rank pay from the revised emoluments. Even if using the old rank pay can be overlooked for the sake of an argument, there's no apparent rationale for deducting the new rank pay in view of the principle established in the judgement.

That is why I stated this may well not be the finalstage of progression in the matter.

An immediate task is to see how the paying authorities are, in turn, interpreting the MOD's interpretation of the judgement. Lets see how the calculation is finally done.

Ravi Rao said...

in the 5thCPC every employee is to get 1 increment they for every 3 increments in the 4th CPC scale , hence allthose inthe integratyed scale who were in service willhave to be given a minimum of 3 increments in the 5th CPC pay fixation.
The GOI/UOI once they issue the ammendment to SAI 1/S/87 the judgement will become to all officers commissioned after 1.1.86 or they have to ammend the dates mentioned in para 1 of the SAI which clearly mentions that the SAI will be applicable to officers commissioned after 1.1.86.
UOI/MOD are taking shelter under the words "Similarly placed officers" in the judgement, ie as per judgement in respect of Dharamapalan and Nair who retired prior to 1996.
Regards
Col (Retd) Ravi rao

sunlit said...

@Ravi Rao: It will be clear how fixations and calculations will be done in another 20 days or so, unless, of course, there's a last minute hitch and the MOD letter has to be revised/withdrawm/amended or whatever.