UOI/MoD does a
Volte Face on its own orders! Where are we heading?
CDAO Pune has credited arrears of rank pay (IV CPC) of serving officers who were Capt to
Brig as on 1/1/1986. By doing so CDAO has not followed the orders given by MoD
vide its letter of 27 Dec 2012. Even initial refixation of Basic Pay in terms
of para 6 (a) (ii) without deducting rank pay has not been done. Arrears have
been confined to only IV CPC. The pay of those officers who transited from
IV CPC to V CPC to VI CPC and in terms of para 8 of the ibid implementation
letter also have not been refixed. A clear violation of its own orders by its own
implementing agencies who have become a law unto themselves. Where will all
this lead to or is leading to?
CDAO’s action is laudable as this was the ‘appreciated’
course of action as visioned/brain stormed by RDOA. So, RDOA is not surprised.
UOI/MoD/CDAO have moved one more step closer to the pre planned action of RDOA.
Further developments awaited!!
64 comments:
what will be the next action as the offr cadre feels shortchanged again . is contempt of court petition being filed.
The question arises, if the refixation without deducting rank pay as mentioned at para 6(a)(ii) of SAI has not not been done, as the blog post states, what arrears could possibly have arisen even for IV CPC alone?
There is a need for clarity here.
....In 1986 1 US $ = Rs 12.5
....In 2013 1 US $ = Rs 53.5
1..~~~RDOA has to intimate SC the HISTORICAL EXACT VALUE of Rs 200 in 1986 being given as arrears in 2013 by PCDA by incorporating COST of LIVING INDEX by taking help of CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT...
2...~~~RDOA has also to question the disbursal details of 1600 Crores in the NEXT HEARING
Can any one who has received the calculation sheet from Pcda(o)upload it,so that it can be analysed. Cda(o) has intimated that calculation sheet would be emailed to the officers as and when they receive the arrears.
Col Pardaman Singh
Dear Brotherens,
We were n are warriors.joined AFS as a passion for motherland. all these while we were fighting knowened enemies, but we had enemies in disguise the fact is clear now. what next? is it for money we are to raise our arsanal or for the dignity each citizen is entitled. how can we claim to be dignified knowing fully well that civilian govt. employees delebratly injured our dinity by lowering pay which is the yard stick for relative seniority.
my question to RDOA remains:-
1) why knowing fully well of the intention of those group, the contempt was not filed.
2) why atleast now it cannot be filed.
3) why can't we take it to the people of our country. because it is through their tax payment their servants have become self styled masters.
4) what is stopping RDOA from exposing this on the tv channels.
RDOA should detail some representative to liaise personally CDA(O) Pune and ascertain the real reason for non compliance of G of I Order and highlight the same on blogger.It is futile to give halfcoocked information.It is my sincere advise to avoide further tension for heavily tensed old pensioners.
Sir,
Would it be appropriate to ask CDAO CDAOthrough RTI
(a)If it has followed the orders given by MoD letter of 27 Dec 2012 in totality if not what aspects and reasons.
(b) If initial refixation of Basic Pay in terms of para 6 (a) (ii) without deducting rank pay has been done.
(c) If the pay of those officers who transited from IV CPC to V CPC to VI CPC and in terms of para 8 of the ibid implementation letter also have been refixed.
If approved CDAO can be flooded with these queries.
Alok
@Alok, yes you can write a RTI application. PCDA (O)under Sec 4 (2) (c)is obliged to "Publish all facts while formulating policies or announcing a decision that affects the public and (d) Provide reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons."
(@) Sunlit, Sir very valid point, what arrears if ^ (a) (ii) is still in operation. Obviously it has been deleted. Nodal officer of the Air Force Central Accounts Office (mobile 09650591865) has stated to a colleague of mine that they do not expect the entire process to be completed before April 2013.
RDOA is probably awaiting listing of the UoI application to the Hon'ble Supreme Court for extension of the 12 weeks period for completing implementation.
In that hearing, could we expect that RDOA would (1) draw the attention of the Hon'ble Judges as to the reason cited in its prayer by UoI, and (2) the incorrect method of implementing the orders of the Court in IA 9/2010 in TP (C) 56/2007?
Dear Serving/veteran officers,
The following s the text of CDA(O) flash news
Calculation sheet/Due drawn statement will be forwarded shortly on email-id of the officers, who have been paid arrears on account of difference of rank pay, consequent on the Honorable S.C judgement.”
CDA(O) has admitted in its flash news that they paid "difference of rank pay" and not difference in earlier fixed and refixed basic pay.
Let CDA (O) explain as to which Court Order or Which Govt/UOI Order says payment of difference of rank pay. They must also tell us as to what does difference of rank pay mean?
These are what the capabilities and intelligence of civil services.
@Col MS Raju:"Let CDA (O) explain.."; Let the calculation sheets reach the Officers. Those calculations will explain what PCDA(O) means. What is the point of querying them here?
Dear all, first let me congratulate RDOA for the "see thro'" and foreseeing ability.
Now this time the case, i am sure ,will be so strong and vital, that many in the babudoms heads should roll.
v.sundaresan
@Corona8
For me no need of making any comments without having seen some evidence in some documents. It has already reached. Am talking about the flash news by CDA(O). Did any one tell them to pay the difference of rank pay? Why cant we book CDA(O) for changing the text of Honourable courts judgements and the MOD instructions. How can CDA(O) take the law in their own hands of paying difference of rank pay which is not in conformity neither with Honourable courts pronouncements nor with MOD instructions? It now appears that they paid the difference of rank pay till next promotion only and not even for entire duration of IVth CPC. It is not MOD, it is CDA(O) which has paid dirty roll now. Who has asked them to pay the difference of rank pay? Let us not leave CDA (O) now. We got a tail and let us reach the head to destroy the evil against AFs.
RDOA must exposed every one involved on TV channeles after taking the case of contempt of court immidiatly
@Col MS Raju:"..It has already reached.."; What has reached? Have CDA made the refixation in your case by again deducting Rank Pay contrary to the judgement? If you are not aware, then what do you mean by"It has already reached"?
Will you start filing court cases on the basis of a CDA web-site 'flash'??
@Col MS Raju and Corona8, please work this out - a Capt on 1.1.1986 was paid Rs 54,000 as arrears after deduction of income tax (average rate 30%).
This is from the pay slip. Detailed sheet is being sent separately and so I will have more information, may be in a week at most!
I really feel very sad that even the CDA is acting against
u too cda?
v.sundaresan
@Satyam Never Jayate
A captain was not in the tax liability, if at all some senior captains paid IT in 86 & beyond they were in the IT slab of 10% liability.
The RP arrears now being paid was an income of 1986 era not 2013 era. Payment in 2013 of income gained 20 years back in rupee value of those days and recovery of IT in rupee value of 2013 is against not only the laws but also against social norms. Now taxable income of Lt Cols and above has gone up above 10L with a liability of 30% IT. It is totally injustice of recovering 30% of arrears towards income tax liability. If the arrears are paid in present day rupee value, then govt is most welcome to deduct 30% of arrears towards IT.
@RDOA
Sir, the hearing for extension of time is a blessing as the intention of UOI/MOD/CD can be exposed that is to further harrass . They are doing a slip shod payment to avoid interest as once they pay whatever the interest part will cease on that day and we will have to take it up again involving time & effort directly with CDA.The methodology ie basis of calculation and covered period (IV& CPCs)) being applied should be sought to be made clear by UOI/MOD and the short payment made should draw penal interest. They have totally gone against their Affidavit given in HSC which is contempt Regards
@Satyam Never Jayate: We need to know what unrevised bp the capt was drawing as on 31st Jan 86, how the original fixation had been done at the time of IV cpc and what the present refixation is. That is why I've said presently, why speculate based on rather vague assumptions?
@Col MS Raju: "A captain was not in the tax liability"; There we go again!
That Capt is being paid today. He'll be taxed for the pay arrears at rates and brackets applicable for asst yr 2013-14, not 1986-87. He can claim a refund under sec 89, of course at the time filing his IT return.
Much ado about nothing!
Can anyone post a Working sheet here from where we can analyse what trick has been payed by the UOI. I feel that it is not it is not the fault of the PCDA but an act under direction from higher ups!!
@ Col MS Raju,
Please get the facts right. This is what the income tax slabs were
For F.Y. 1985-86 to 1988-89
Income Level Income Tax Rate
i 0-18000 NIL
ii. 18000-25000 25%
iii. 25000-50000 30%
iv. 50000-100000 40% (+ 5% surcharge)
v >100000 50% (+ 5% surcharge)
So if a Capt received even that Rs 3100 (unrevised thanks to CDA (O) decision to deduct and then add rank pay)per month he got Rs 37,200.
So my sourec and I are not talking thorough our hats/side caps/berets/peak caps!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Q E D
@corona8 -
Capt pre-revised Rs 3100 (2900+ Rank pay 200), post revision 3300+200 + DA on the enhanced anount @ every 6 months from July 86 - 4,8,13,18,23,29,32,38,43,51,60,71, 83,92, 97, 104, 114, 125, 136%.
Since the officer lives in another city and is reticent in mailing me his worksheet, I have obtained this by phone. E & O E
For RDOA,
I have just one earnest request - we are all Armed Forces Officers and understand the SITREP concept.
Please give us the unadorned truth and we respect that you do not wish to, and more important, should not divulge your course of future action.
If indeed CDA(O)'s action was appreciated and as "visioned/brain stormed' then you are giving cause for ABSOLUTELY AVOIDABLE comments and questions of why pro-active action was not taken.
So just the facts, please.
Dear all
seasons greetings.
Now is there a provision to REJECT/REFUSE/RETURN/REFUND the so-called arrears? what happens when we receive or forcbily cda sends to bank whatever the send and claim they have settled the issue?
I peronally think that JUST AS WE ALL HAVE DONE THE UNDERTAKING
TO REFUND THE EXCESS" CAN WE DEMAND SHORTFALL IN OUR ENTITLEMENT WITH PENAL/INTEREST FROM THE pdaS?
Surely there must be some way/method legally(apart from the court petitions)
Suppose if we request our banks/PDAs not to accept the arrears, unless individually we okay it from actual amount of arrears?
CAN THE BANKS ACT ON OUR COMPLAINT THAT THE pda HAVE UNDERPAID? AND IF ACCEPTS THE PAYMENT, IT MAY AMOUNT TO ACCEPTANCE OF THE VALIDITY, CORRECTNESS (OR OTHERWISE OF THE ARREARS?
WWHT DID THE PDA DID NOT GIVE A SIMILAR UNDERTAKING ABOUT PAYMENT OF ANY SHORTFALL?
PL THIS IS AN INDIVIDUAL OPINION AND NOT A GENERAL ONE.
A LOUD THINKING
V.Sundaresan
Ex – IIM Bangalore
@redindiancowboy
There should be some LOGIC in ARREARS DUE CALCULATIONS IN VALUE TERMS
Hello! RDOA
1. GOLD PRICE
a. Gold Price in 1986 = Rs 2140
b. Gold Price in 2012 = Rs 31000
2. VALUE of Rs 100 in 1986 is Rs 1449 in 2012
3. Then how RDOA is settling for just 6% interest that too from 2006 for RANK PAY ARREARS ?
4. There should be some LOGIC in ARREARS DUE CALCULATIONS IN VALUE TERMS which SC has to be appraised of
@Satyam Never Jayate: Your friend would need to do a bit of homework. One has to go into details to get accurate results. Purely for trial, see if the cells in green on this calculator can be filled in from his payslips. The resulting calc and comparison with actual payment could be shared on this blog post for assessing what the matter could be. As the table ends on June 2004, let your friend try out only for the period upto 31 Dec 95 first to check if there is any corelation with the IV CPC arrears actually paid.
@Satyam Never Jayate: Further to my previous suggestion. If the bp of your friend was fixed (please don't mix up rank pay here) by IV cpc at 2900, then he has to enter 3100 in col "new basic post judgement" for jan 86. If IV cpc had fixed his basic pay at 3100, then he has to enter 3300/- for jan 86 in that same col. Don't mix up bp+rp again. Rest of that column would be filled up based on the increments he'd have got from 01 jan 86 onwards as per the scale. I hope that is clear.
WE MUST FILE CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE AGAINST THE CDAO BY NAME.
col sherry
@sc:"WE MUST FILE CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE...."; How have PCDAO been contemptuous? Please enlighten everyone. Please list out the details, point wise, regarding your pay re-fixation that goes against the letter and/or spirit of the judgement.
@corona8, thanks but the officer is unable to help.
@Red Indian Cowboy,
Bang on. RDOA should ask for the disbursal details of the 1600 Crores claimed earlier.
That should cook their goose.
@ Ram Subbu
You are absolutely correct with regards the diminished value of RUPEE since 1986, but the other party was expecting RDOA to challenge the order, drag the case and delay implementation indefinitely, I guess.
There are many offrs who are in a great hurry to file contempt of court case. However it would be prudent to have patience and watch to what extent HSC orders are implemented. Till date even UOI have not been able to implement in totality, its own orders issued on 27 Dec 2013. Let PCDA(O) work out arrears in r/o of retd offrs as per their wisdom and make payment. Thereafter after getting the detailed work sheet, we should plan further action by seeking suggestions from all quarters. I personally feel that Honble court now be requested to initiate suitable action against the erring executives who are causing intentionally great loss to the nation by way of extra interest to be in large numbers of cases
A involved and gung-ho celebration of victory has now lead to dispirited opinions expressed by experts of good, better and best calibre. Why don't we wait for RDOA to send, as some one else mentioned, for SITREPs? Of course SITREPs can only be there if there is some action.
Till then............well, I will look for other windmills!
@Rajax. (Bang on. RDOA should ask for the disbursal details of the 1600 Crores claimed earlier).
UOI mentioned this amount in their appeal in IA9 on HSC judgement of 08.03.2010, HSC in its judgment of 04.9.2012 brought down the burden on exchequer by reducing the interest period from 1.1.86 to 1.1.2006. Then the burden on exchequer came down to almost one-third of what UOI sad in its IA 9.UOI achieved its aim but we could not achieve it.
@RDOA
Sir,
Is there any lacune in the earlier judgement of Kerala HC which has been accepted by HSC for implementation which the UOI/MOD are trying to exploit? Does the wording "Similarly placed officers " cover only till the IV CPC as Maj Dharmapalan retired during the currency of IV CPC ?.Regards
Why does every one (with the exception of Dhoop) sound so despondent? The skirmishes finished when UoI dragged all similarly placed officers through the Writ Petitions, Transfer Petitions and the Interlocutory Application in TP (C) 56 of 2007 and the Supreme Cort confirming the order of 8.3.2010 i.e. grant rank pay with retrospective effect from 1.1.1986.
MoD with the same grace it has consistently shown, after being told by the Single Judge of the Kerala High Court in 1998 that it misunderstood the Resolution of 1987, contested the case and then compelled similarly placed officers to fight for justice (probably under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution).
MoD has upgraded the skirmish into a battle by the order of 27.12.2012 which again shows its misunderstanding of the order of the Apex Court.
Probably, just probably, the tactic is to tell the Apex Court that "we have paid x number of officers (without mentioning that they are all serving officers who are prevented by the Army, Navy and Air Force Acts from contesting or protesting against the Orders of MoD)and they are all happy," so why are these retired officers protesting?"
It is a moot point if it would have been better if the legal team and RDOA, that felicitated us and were in turn showered with encomiums, had expedited the hearing of the UoI's application for extension of time limit to implement orders of the Apex Court.
At the moment, it is quite sad that RDOA only writes "Taken for a ride",(how come?) "Bubble bursts" (who created that?) and "agony increases" instead of advising us that that it will go about its endeavour to seek justice in 6, or 10, or 20 weeks while advising others not to step over the line because "RDOA knows best."
Really bamboozling!
@All Bamboozled:"(with the exception of Dhoop)"; I don't see how bemoaning one's lot over vague misfortunes, the parameters of which are not even known, can be of any help.
Till the actual refixation statements are delivered, there's very little to be gained by getting agitated and 'declare' legal war based on nothing except frustration.
But, you have absolutely nailed it by stating the need for updating all affected. Armed with hard facts, others can be in a better position to offer useful suggestions.
Ref serial 25 dated 2 Feb 2013 at 8.12PM.the working sheet given by CDAO be place on RDOA blog. let us study and consolidate comments for further actions and contempt of court,till such time led CDAO do their work.. Asking bank not to accept payments is not a good suggestion.any lapses on the part of CDAO can be handled subequently .Major issue of is to deal GOI and RM executives. I am confident RDOA planning suitable action and proper dividant shall be seen in near future. We all shall strengthened RDOA morally and finacially by remmitting subscribing the menbership fee,
@Murarilal Agrawal:"working sheet"; It would be nice if such a document exists. If it does, RDOA would probably have access. But, each refixation statement would be different, depending on the rank and service as on 01 Jan 86. We need to wait for those statements to come through.
But, certainly, as you say, RDOA could consider making a legal move of some sort in case the delay looks like being a prolonged one.
Going off track a bit..but as many pers might be affected so a small news regarding re excercising ur option of pay commission..
For info for offrs promoted between Jan to Jun 2006 & one time increment cases. The central govt pers have been given fresh opportunity to re excercise the option for revised pay scale (ie from 01 Jan 06 or dt of promotion or from new increment) to fill up by 31 Mar 2013.GoI MoF letter No 10/2/2011-E-11(A) dt 03 Jan 13. CDA was refusing to do it on my enquiry. Now let us hope our MoD which last time took five months for the increment letter acts faster..Imp as 31 Mar is not far off for affected pers to revise their options.
From Hindustan Times
Rohinton Nariman has resigned as Solicitor General of India. Nariman sent his resignation letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, with a copy to union Law Minister Ashwani Kumar, sources here said Monday. Though the reasons that triggered Nariman's resignation are not immediately known, sources said that he and the law minister were not on the same page on certain issues, and Nariman was upset with the way government instructions were reaching him.
Nariman was appointed solicitor general in July 2011, after his predecessor Gopal Subramaniam resigned, protesting Nariman's appearance in the 2G scam case before the Supreme Court.
The solicitor general is the prime lawyer of the central government in the Supreme Court.
Nariman reportedly left for Mumbai after submitting his resignation.
Dear all.
this link below is jera hat ke and for many of us will be new thing..
http://indiamydreamland.blogspot.in/2013/01/tricks-played-by-various-government.html
@HS Dogra... thanks, that was truly enlightening.
@Bhushan - Regarding Option of re-fixation.
1. I do not think the option to re exercise fixation w.e.f would be of any good to us. I can say for my case and others can calculate for their case as well.
2. I was commissioned on 11 Jun 2005. Due to the earlier anomaly, I was given benefit of 6CPC from Jul 2007 (after one year) and obviously, I got less arrears. In the bargain, my basic was fixed at Rs 18600/- (10,000*1.86). 10,000 was my Basic Pay (9600) as on 01 Jul 2007 + Rank Pay (400 for Capt).
3. Now coming to revision of option. If I decide to re fix my pay from 1.1.2006 then:-
(a) Pay on 1.1.2006 as per 6th CPC will be - (8250+300)*1.86= 15903 rounded off to 15910. Here 300 is that one time increment which the new order is all about.
(b) Pay on 1.7.2006 to 31 Jun 2007 will be 15910+ 3% of (15910 + 5400 + 6000)=16730(rounded of to nearest ten). Here 5400 is the grade pay, 6000 is MSP and 3% is the annual increment (uniform across all ranks) as per 6cpc.
(c) Pay on 1 July 2007 will be calculated as follows
(i) Pay on 11 Jun 20007 will be 16730 + 850 (Increment on account of promotion to Captain which comes out to be 3% of 16730+5400+6000)= 17580
(ii) Pay on 01 Jul 2007 will be 17580 + 3% of 17580+5400+6000(annual increment) = 18450.
(d) Hence, If I refix my pay in 6cpc from 1.1.2006, My Basic pay on 01 Jul 2007 will be Rs 150/- less than what it was earlier. I will get some arrears (approx Rs 36000) tough but I will get less pay every month for life. The deficit will keep increasing with each year including losses on account of DA
I will gratefully accept any observations on the above calculations. My view is that the Govt saved money by giving us 6cpc after one year of the date on which it should have been implemented and now is this eye wash on one time increment and option of re fixation of pay. Please calculate carefully before you exercise this option. Thanks
@Bhushan
One amendment to my calculations. Since MSP was applicable w.e.f Sep 2008 and not from 1.1.20006, Hence please subtract Rs 6000 from calculations above. That way Pay on 1 Jul 2007 would come to 17890, Rs 710 less than what was fixed as per earlier fixation. LOL.
Dear Shri Rohinton F. Nariman, I can write this now that you have resigned as the Solicitor General of India. You may recall all the arguments you put forward on behalf of the UoI/MoD in the Rank Pay Case (IA No.9 of 2010 in TP (C) 56 of 2007).
You stated in the Hon'ble Supreme Court that your client, UoI/MoD would complete payment of arrears within 12 weeks of the date of judgment i.e. 4.9.2012.
We, the similarly placed officers, were sure that if the Ld SG himself is giving an assurance, then it would be honoured. You would not be surprised that MoD has made its orders based on its own interpretation that the Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld, on 4.3.2012, Maj Dhanapalan's case in which UoI's SLP 5908/2005 was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2005 itself.
We are still waiting for the payment.
Jai Hind
@ HS Dogra.
Perhaps very few AFP know that the anomaly of “Minimum pay OF the pay-band” and “Minimum pay IN the pay-band” had already been decided by various AFT’s in favour of AFP wef 1.1.06.
This had already been intimated by me quite some back on RDOA blog.
The litigation is now pending before Hon’ble SC by an appeal by GOI (Civil Appeal no. 8875 & 8876 0f 2011). The case was last listed for 4.2.13.
A similar favourable judgement was given by CAT also (in case of civilians) and is similarly pending befor Hon'ble Delhi Court.
Shirimans NARIMAN jee,earlier GOPAL...jee as SGs played havoc with us by such skillful/expertise of arguments of evasion/deception/denials... -- they received/earned /made enough money from Govt/public money for their so called eloquent indulgence / services of saving present govts money and denying legitimate dues of soldiers who had ensured prosperity and getting fatty rich of all sundry by their vigil and sacrifices since 1947.Now in their relinquishment they should retrospect.THE TRUTH IS SUCH SERVICES ARE RENDERED TO ANY BODY WHO EVER WOULD PAY -NO REGARD TO FACTS/TRUTH/RIGHT /WRONG/NATIONAL INTEREST/PUBLIC INTEREST/PUBLIC GOOD......it is called-lawyer /satyawadi/nayawadi/in temple of justice. All Hon"ble conveniently assigned chairs - CHAIRMEN/CHAIRMAN in MOD in the present context.
@ Bala, please check and see on internet. The ld law officers earn a pittance compared to what they would charge as appearance fees if they were not with the Govt.
Add further-
One of them or both of them namely shiriman NARIMAN jee and shiriman GOPAL....jee should be engaged by any individual veteran/RDOA/iesm/any other esm/ group in areas/issues of veterans cases of pay/pension matters.If some one can give me e mail id I would approach for their valueble , learned and expert ( experienced ) legal opinion/services - of course fees would be payable,reasonably or at par with GOI payment.No problem !!
ANY VETERAN /ESM CAN APPROACH .
@Bala, just go to your browser, type out their names and all the details are there including the email ID and contact numbers.
Best of Luck. If you are successful, Shall join you & contribute one year's arrears as my share for the good cause.
@Bala
Mr. Rohinton F. Nariman,
Solicitor General of India,Ex-officio Member.
E-24, Geetanjali Enclave,
New Delhi – 110017.
Mobile: 9811006897,
Ph. : 011-26693568, 26692155
Email : rohintonnariman@gmail.com
3, KRISHNA MENON MARG, NEW DELHI-110017.
TEL. 011-23017180
FAX. 011-23017118
E-24, Geetanjali Enclave, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi
another address..
M-18, Green Park, New Delhi.
Hai,to both of u. Thank u so much. great pleasure for such interaction and very useful info.
Yeah ! I am waiting for the dust to settle down with all those DESW/MOD letters , their interpretation and implementation by PCDA (o) and PCDA (p) and THEN,plunge into action.
Internet has really helped us to get at things.
For now it is enough to say -all those transitory letters,paras of AIs which are not consistent or in consonance ( negated/violated ) with other basic Rules & Regns ,approvals of GOI,constitutional provisions ,and High courts/ supreme court....etc, stand modified -amended. even null and void-So many recent pronouncements in differentiation of two sets of retires, cut off dates, proper equation of revised rks ....etc would be invoked in diverse forms and approaches.
THE GREAT WEAPON/BASIS/ AUTHORITY IS , THAT SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT AND ORDER AND OTHER ORDERS ALSO..ITS RELEVANCE ,BOTH IN LETTER AND SPIRIT NOT ONLY TO THAT ISSUE OF INTEGRATED AND RK PAY BUT ALSO TO ALL OTHER ASSOCIATED AND RELATED ISSUES ,BEYOND YEAR 96 &2006.
KEEP BLOGGING AND FEEDBACK IN COMMENTS FORUM.
For SATYAM N JAYETE, i always read with - N.I do like the spirit behind and the effort.TRUTH SURFACES IN STRANGE WAYS ,MAY BE DELAYED.
Please clarify the fixation of pay and consequently pension whose BP as on 31-12-1985 was Rs.1750/. It will also follow that consequent to refixation of pay on 01-0-1986 taking the above Basic Pay, the rightful increments that would arise from 1987 would be @ Rs.150/- annually til the officer would have retired, and therefore the quantum of pension would also go up at the time of retirement, and thereafter for the 5th and 6th CPC. These increments that would have been due should be taken into account to arrive at the correct pension at the time of retirement and consequently thereafter...
Please clarify the fixation of pay and consequently pension whose BP as on 31-12-1985 was Rs.1750/. It will also follow that consequent to refixation of pay on 01-0-1986 taking the above Basic Pay, the rightful increments that would arise from 1987 would be @ Rs.150/- annually til the officer would have retired, and therefore the quantum of pension would also go up at the time of retirement, and thereafter for the 5th and 6th CPC. These increments that would have been due should be taken into account to arrive at the correct pension at the time of retirement and consequently thereafter...
Yeah,keep calculating re-fixation of int pay of offrs (on 1.1.86 ) whose bp was at 1750/1800/1850/1900,and these offrs getting increments ,say about 9 of 150 every year , upto 1.1.1995 ,particularly of rk of Maj who were around 35 yrs of age and who have not been promoted to sel gr COL. That fig is the game changer for many to come.
Wait-await for work sheets by PCDA (o)of officers in that svc gp .interact and put up info on the web -then stretch your mental faculties for revisions on 1.1.96 and 1.1.2006. go on.....
@bidyut chatterjee: If the Officer retired at the top end of the Lt Col scale of V CPC, chances are there would be no effect on pension even if the BP on 01 Jan 96had increased due to increase in BP for Dec 95. He would have stagnated at the top end of the Lt Col Scale, though with an increase in BP he'd have reached the top end faster than he did originally.
RDOA is doing wonderful job. Thanks.
Post a Comment