Saturday, February 22, 2014

OROP Chill ! as of now!

The FM in his Vote on Account speech said that: OROP accepted in principle but it had legal implications and was a sensitive issue and was to be paid prospectively from 01 Apr 2014 with earmarking of 500 crores. He further mentioned of bridging the gaps in pensions of ORs and Majors upwards.

At the face of it, OROP is only accepted in principle. This we have heard n number of times including from the ramparts of the Redfort and inclusion in political manifestoes and in Parliament too. So there is no cause to be elated.

An open house discussion was held under the ageis of the Flags of Honour with Rajya Sabha MP Mr Chandrasekhar in chair. After lot of delibrations/discussions it was unanimously agreed that a Memoranda be sent to the FM which is attached below. Bottom line is ' We have to wait for the Implementation Notification and the fine print.' It was also agreed that the stakeholders should be involved in the finalisation of the implementation instructions. RDOA will be actively involved in this.

 
GRANT OF ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP)


Introduction

1. OROP, an entirely justified and acknowledged demand and yet denied to the defence personnel for over four decades, has finally become a reality. Defence fraternity is indeed grateful to the Govt for accepting the principle of OROP and granting the same to all defence personnel during the Vote-on-Account presentation by the Finance Minister in the Parliament on 17 Feb 2014.

2.       However, lack of details and clarity in the statements made by the Finance Minister during the Vote-on-Account presentation on 17 Feb 2014 has led to diverse interpretation, including apprehensions, among the defence fraternity with regards to implementation of OROP. This in turn raises crucial and critical questions which must be addressed forthwith to instil confidence amongst the defence fraternity that OROP will be implemented holistically and as per accepted definition with no deviation at any stage.

3.       These are listed in the succeeding Paras.

Definition of OROP

4.       One Rank One Pension (OROP) implies that “ uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.”  This implies bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners and the past pensioners, and also future enhancements in the rate of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.

5.       It is pertinent to mention that the above definition of OROP was duly accepted by the Rajya Sabha Petition Committee on OROP which submitted its report to the Rajya Sabha on 19 Dec 2011. Therefore, while being implemented; definition of OROP must remain absolutely consistent with the above.     

Status of Pension of Earlier Retirees as on 1 Apr 2014

6.       OROP has been granted prospectively with effect from 01 Apr 2014. Therefore , the above definition implies that pension of all ranks of Army, Air Force and Navy will be brought up to 01 Apr 2014 and all past pensioners of all ranks with same years of service will receive the same pension as all ranks with same years of services who will retire as on 01 Apr 2014.

7        In essence the fundamental issue which must be confirmed is that pensions of past defence retirees will be equal to that of defence personnel with same rank and length of service and same group retiring wef 01 Apr 2014.

Impact of Future Enhancements in Pay and Pension

8.       Based on the accepted definition , any future enhancement in pension due to implementation of OROP post 1 Apr 2014 , must be automatically passed on to past pensioners.

9.       This aspect needs to be confirmed.

Allocation of Funds

10      Given that OROP is to be implemented as defined above, allotment of Rs 500 crores as stated by the Finance Minister is way too inadequate. There is a need to clarify whether this amount is only the initial allotment and additional funds required to implement OROP for all ranks in one shot, and not piece – meal, will be made available for implementation of OROP.

11.     Also the additional Funds required to implement OROP as defined above must be worked out by the Finance Ministry in consultation with Ministry of Defence, Service Headquarters and all other stakeholders including Ex Servicemen (ESM).

Family Pension

12.     The Defence Family Pension for all ranks, including all types of casualties, at every stage must be equal to the pension drawn by the Pensioner. Ipso facto this implies that there must be no reduction in the pension while granting family pension to Defence spouses and the Next of Kin where entitled , including in case of all types of casualties.

 Date of Implementation

13.     OROP as defined above and with all confirmations in place must get implemented on ground with effect from 1 Apr 2014.

 

Update IV CPC Rank Pay Contempt Petition as on 23 Feb 14

UOI/MoD has filed reply to the contempt Petition / Notice given by RDOA. The reply runs into 231 pages. MoD has sought exemption for appearance of the Bada Babus and have denied each and every averment, statement and submission given in the Contempt Petition. As per MoD the SC order of 4 Sept 12 has been fully complied with in letter and spirit.

RDOA will be filing rejoinder to their reply in consultation with the legal team by coming week. Next date of hearing is on 10 March 2014.

Monday, February 17, 2014

Rank Pay case in Mail Today

Rank pay case exclusive: Babus make veterans wait on older case

Jugal Purohit  New Delhi, February 17, 2014 | UPDATED 21:13 IST
 

Lt Colonel (Retd) BK Sharma (Left)
On a day the UPA's Vote On Account aimed at delivering the long-awaited One Rank One Pay (OROP) to the defence forces personnel, came yet another reminder of the difference between grand promises and their tardy implementation.

Top bureaucrats, including former defence secretary and present Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) Shashikant Sharma, Secretary RS Gujral, Arunava Dutt and Priti Mohanty were ordered to appear in the apex court to face contempt petition moved by the Retired Defence Officers Association (RDOA). Not only did they not appear in the court, they in fact sought from court time to file their side, causing much heartburn to the veterans fighting this long battle.
 What did the SC say?
Accusing the bureaucrats of 'deliberate and intentional non-compliance' with the apex court's earlier order of September 2012, the RDOA had filed a 49-page contempt petition before the SC. Acting on that, the deputy registrar of the SC had issued an order on November 27, last year mandating these bureaucrats to remain present in court. In fact, the SC order went further and mentioned, "You shall attend the court in person on the above mentioned date and shall continue to attend the court on all days thereafter to which the case against you stands adjourned and until final orders are passed on the charge against you. HEREIN FAIL NOT."
 
"None of them appeared," said Lt. Col (retd) BK Sharma of the RDOA. "The Solicitor General appeared on their behalf and said they will file a reply today. Court said okay and gave another two weeks, if we would like to file anything as response. The court should have taken suo moto cognisance of this asking why, despite the court asking them to appear in person they did not remain present," he added.
"This is a much older case in which even the Supreme Court has closed the issue. There is no accountability for those in charge of implementing it. This is money due to us for al most 30 years ago and yet there is no resolution in sight," added Brigadier (retd) Dharam Prakash, active member of the Indian Ex Servicemen Movement (IESM).
The RDOA had filed a 49-page contempt petition in this case on account of what they believed was deliberate and intentional non-compliance with SC's order of September 2012.  
What is the Rank Pay case all about?
The case, famously known as the Rank Pay case was initiated by Major AK Dhanapalan when he aprached the Kerala High Court in 1998 praying that as per Govt of India resolution, 'rank pay' was admissible to army officers in addition to their integrated scales. Since this was to take place since 1.1.86 i.e date of implementation of the fourth pay commission, court allowed him re-fixation of his pay from that date without deducting his pay based on rank pay -  a practice which was taking place then. Subsequently, the RDOA took up this case on behalf of retired officers against whom the MoD lost all appeals and petitions before all courts, including the SC.
 

Update:IV CPC Rank Pay Case as on 17 Feb 14

The Contempt Petition in the IV CPC rank pay filed by RDOA was heard today in Court No 2 ( Justice RM Lodha), Item no 9.

Solicitor General appeared for the UOI. He informed the Court that the UOI will file reply before the day's proceedings ends on the Contempt Notice. The Court agreed to the request and also gave 2 weeks time to the Petitioners (RDOA) to file rejoinder if any. The case would be heard thereafter.
Deduction: It would take another three weeks before the case is heard. Also what reply the UOI gives will have to be analysed and reply filed within two weeks by RDOA.

None of the four contemnors (Secretaries) appeared in the Court. Senior Advocate Mr Jagdeep Dhankhar appeared for RDOA.

As per Info available the file pertaining to the infirmities raised by COSC has been sent to the Law Ministry for views of the Attorney General. 

Tuesday, February 4, 2014

Voting: Armed Forces Personnel

ELECTORAL TANGLE

EC won’t allow def staff to vote at posting place

Bharti Jain TNN



New Delhi: Months after the then chairman of the chiefs of staff committee, N A K Browne, wrote to the Election Commission seeking the right of members of the armed forces to be registered at the place of their posting just like a general voter, the election panel has positioned itself against the proposal.
    Sources in the EC told TOI it was disinclined to allowing soldiers to vote from their cantonments or military stations, as the results in such constituencies could be influenced by the sheer number of such voters on the rolls rather than the locals’ preference.
    The risk, an EC official said, was more in Jammu & Kashmir and northeastern states like Arunachal Pradesh and Sikkim, which are thinly populated but have heavy military presence. Besides, in many constituencies in Kashmir, where the voter turnout could be very low, the participation of the local military unit may alter poll results.
    “How can one rule out the risk of a ruling dispensation trying to influence results by getting a large unit, like a brigade, to relocate to a particular area just six months before a poll?” asked the EC official.
    The EC may present its arguments against allowing defence service voters to vote from the place of their posting to the defence and home ministries when their representatives meet here on Tuesday to discuss the issue. While arguing for a status quo that treats service personnel differently from ordinary voters in the coming Lok Sabha elections, the commission, however, will insist on cooperation of the armed forces to make the postal ballot and proxy voting mechanism more effective.
    There is, however, a view in the EC that internet voting facility for the armed forces and embassy staff could be considered.
    For the full report, log on
    to www.timesofindia.com