The Committee of Petitions of the Rajya Sabha has invited memoranda on the subject of ‘One Rank One Pension’.
The committee would undertake consultations with the society before rendering its report.
The Petition on which the Committee has acted upon is available on the official website of Rajya Sabha.
A detailed note has also been issued to various newspapers and the same alongwith other details can be accessed by clicking here.
Suggestions may submitted to the committee within a period of 15 days and may kindly be kept confidential by the persons submitting the same. Veterans and other members of the public may not kindly float the submissions to the committee on the internet on any other public fora.
25 comments:
All Defence personnel irrespective whether serving/retired must send their views.Todays serving is tomorrow's exserviceman and sooner or later it will affect you.
OROP in simple terms means that two persons retiring in the same rank with same years of service must get the same pension irrespective of the date of retirement.Due to early retirement there is loss of earning as all do not reach top of scale.The inhibition that other govt services would also demand the same is a tactic of the boos to beat OROP.All civ employees serve till 60yrs so they earn more pension.Comparitively ORs retire between 37 to 45 yrs and 95% of officers at the age of 54yrs.
Please do not forget to give your views.
All confidential opinion to be sent to:
Shri Rakesh Naithani,Jt Dir,Rajya Sabha Secretariat,Parliament House Annexe,New Delhi 110001 Tele:011-23035433(o), 23794328 (Telefax); Email:rsc2pet@sansad.nic.in
As seen in
http://rdoaindia.blogspot.com/2011/04/one-rank-one-pension-orop.html
Lot has been written on the subject. Govt knows fully well it's obligation towards ex servicemen but for Babudom playing a spoil sport to show their superiority because a politician is not conversant with the facts and listens to Babus. Sad commentary because despite promises from highest in politics and despite orders from highest courts and representations by AFT, government shuts her eyes.
Dear Navdeep,
In my opinion you are best qualified and experienced on the subject of ONE RANK ONE PENSION. Please prepare a suitable Representation In English and in Hindi On your blog for down loading,signing and dispatching by speed post. I am sure thousands would do so. All of us are not well versed with the legal intricacies involved in drafting such representation on such an Impotent Issue.I will be eagerly looking forward to download the Representation . Jay Hind. ID
@Satt's Corner
Difference of 60 years to 54 years is too meagre to justyfy or otherwise. The most effected party is non - officers in defence forces. Not only they retire by 37 to 45 years but retire much earlier between 15 - 25 years service. Hardly 10 - 15% reaches the stage of 37 - 45 years that too specific aim of securimg an honorarian rank.
Mis-representing is always evident when it comes to ORs. They are always misused by authorities or superiors to further their cause on the pretext "morale of soldier, and denying them their rightful on the excuse of "Command 'N' Control."
The four demands were sent to Govt just after the VI pay commission, OROP was one among them besides Lt Col PB-4 issue.
Once a copmromise was reached on Lt Col - PB 4, Officers cadre was more than happy to dump OROP and other demands and execuse of morale of soldier vanished.
After 6th pay Commission most of Army Officer retd at rank of Col( election/TS)at age of 54, but in comparison to civ counterpart Army pers miss out not only six year of pay but also six increments and an assured higher grade pay of Rs 8900, which results in initially lower pension and later fixation of pension at lower scale.
OROP should mean same pension for same number of years of service + weightage,without any ceiling of 33 years etc..........Rank is also meaningless to some extent as serice requirements for promotion to various ranks have been changing with time.
for example there were NO provisions for time scale promotions to Colonel prior to Dec 2004...so many officers with much more service had been retired as Lt Colonels.
Same way , limiting service + weightage to 33 years for maximum pension ,does not sound logical.
If 50% of last pay is pension on 33 years service; For more service, propotionately higher pension should be given.
Same logic should apply to JCOs and NCOs....
Basically number of years of service rather than rank should be the criteria for pension.
Differentiation based upon date of retirement must be abolished and all pensioners with same rank should get same pension irrespective of their date of retirement
One rank one pension would be a half measure without the adjusting two of the the biggest hurdles of all i.e. the seniority of Army Officers vis-a-vis their other counter parts in Government services . This should take into account the number of years put in without being superseded or overlooked for the next rank and equate the Armed Forces at par with their counterparts with equal number of years in the bureaucracy without being overlooked/superseded for the next rank . The Police should definitely one rung below without considering how many stars they decorate themselves with !!The second is reservations in the jobs across the board to include the Private Sector . This must be a compulsory part of their social responsibility .Unless these measures are implemented, one rank one pay will just touch the tip of the ice berg !! Colonel Ajai Saxena
It would benefit veterans following this Blog and desirous of making submissions, to be apprised of the standard formats, salutations, honorifics etc to be used in the drafting of a memorandum for this purpose.
Dear Civil Pensioners/ their Associations/Federations/ all others who cherish human values!,
THIS IS ONE OCCASION ON WHICH WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CONVEY OUR GRATITUDE TO THOSE RETIRED SOLDIERS/ MILTARY VETERANS WHO SERVEED OUR NATION AND US-ITS PEOPLE BY SACRIFICING THEIR LIVES/ BY GIVING THE BEST PART OF THEIR EARLY LIVES FOR THE SAID CAUSE AND IN DEFENCE OF OUR NATION/ ITS INTEGRITY & LIBERTY. PL SPARE NO EFFORTS TO SPREAD THE MESSAGE AND ALSO SEND THE MEMORANDA SUPPORTING THE GRANT OF OROP TO ALL THE RETIRED MILITARY VETERANS WITHOUT ANY DISPARITY OR DISCRIMINATION. OUR GOVT./ ITS PENSION-DEFENCE-FINANCE & OTHER MINISTRIES ARE IN THE HABIT OF PUTTING FORWARD THE EXCUSE THAT "RETIRED CIVILIANS" WILL ALSO DEMAND SIMILAR TREATMENT AND HENCE GREAT FINANCIAL BURDEN WILL HAVE TO BE FACED ETC. SUCH "LAME" AND "UNTENABLE" EXCUSES ARE FOR THE "LESS EDUCATED" AND "GULLIBLE" AND THE ONLY RESULT WE EXPERIENCE IS THAT "TOP FEW CIVILIAN ELITE PENSIONERS OF THE COUNTRY" ENJOY THE MAXIMUM PENSIONARY BENEFITS ON RETIREMENT WITHOUT ANY RHYME OR REASON. LET US SHOW OUR SOLIDARITY BY HELPING THE CAUSE OF THE "OROP" AND HON MP RAJEEV CHANDRASEKHAR'S INITIATIVE THRU THE COM OF PETITIONS OF RAJAYA SABHA.PL ACT AND SUPPORT. REGARDS. V NATARAJAN, PRESIDENT,PENSIONERS' FORUM (AFFLTD TO AIFPA (REGD), CHENNAI); ASSOCIATE MEMBER, RREWA(RREWA), GURGAON; MEMBER CGS29PA (REGD), DELHI
Did the Government not feel the need to ask for public opinion before increasing the salary and allowances of Members of Parliament ?
Yes - totally agree we all must send our opinions. Could domeone clarify :-
Is it necessary to send two copies of opinions - one in English and another in Hindi - to be counted? or just one in English would do?
SORRY ANONYMOUS, I m copying your comments (true indeed) and pasting it here again to reiterate the real issue
“Difference of 60 years to 54 years is too meagre to justyfy or otherwise. The most effected party is non - officers in defence forces. Not only they retire by 37 to 45 years but retire much earlier between 15 - 25 years service. Hardly 10 - 15% reaches the stage of 37 - 45 years that too specific aim of securimg an honorarian rank.
Mis-representing is always evident when it comes to ORs. They are always misused by authorities or superiors to further their cause on the pretext "morale of soldier, and denying them their rightful on the excuse of "Command 'N' Control."
The four demands were sent to Govt just after the VI pay commission, OROP was one among them besides Lt Col PB-4 issue.
Once a copmromise was reached on Lt Col - PB 4, Officers cadre was more than happy to dump OROP and other demands and execuse of morale of soldier vanished.”
Sir
the comments has to be sent to a Joint Director. What is the surity that he will forward all the comments. Its all is just a eyewash. Most of the Generals when they were serving never spoke where as now they want to become leaders.
Govt is reluctant to grant OROP on the plea that all cent govt retired pers will ask the same .If so, then let the govt add total increment which would have been due for the remaining years(60 years)along with basic pay wile fixing pension after pay commission for def retd pers .This will be more than OROP and there will be no logic for civs to represent as they have already got pension calculated upto 60 years .Govt can not denoy this as it stands logic.
Major Navdeep u r the best on the subject . Please preapare the paper and put on the blog for all of us to put our signatures.
If possible-keeping in mind the constrain of time- the issue of inflating the ranks in the garb of AVS Report be re-examined because it has done no good for the health of the AFs in any respect. Upto the extent bulk of the officers will stay at Coy Cdr level, & will get promoted at the time of retirement only.Due to this policy armed forces are suffering both financially and in promotion. There are retired Lt Cols who commanded Bns and are today drawing the pension of a coy cdr, that also of 13yrs weightage. Majors who commanded Coys are getting six years weightage of a ERSTWHILE Captain. CURSED was OUR YOUTH THAT WE WERE SERVING THIS TYPE OF MIND SET WHICH DID NOT EVEN WINK WHILE CHEATING THE OLD SOLDIERS IN THEIR SEVENTIES & EIGHTIES. IT IS A CHEATING PAR EXCELLENCE which pales even the Greatest Cheat NATWAR LALL
@ Anonymous 12 Apr 4:36 pm
Sir, you said, "Govt is reluctant to grant OROP on the plea that all central Govt retired pers will ask for the same .If so, then let the Govt add total No of increments which would have been due for the years remaining after forced retirement (i.e till 60 years) along with basic pay while fixing pension after pay commission for def pers. This will be more than the OROP and there will be no logic for civs to represent as they have already got pension calculated upto 60 years. Govt can not deny this as it stands to logic."
What an EXCELLENT and thoroughly LOGICAL idea Sir. Simply BRILLIANT and IRREFUTABLE! Hope IESM Bossman is listening !
i would like to bring to the notice of every one that a commissioned officer who completes 20 years of reasonable service can retire as a Lt col or an equalent rank from other services with the pension as admissible. In the past Lt col was on selection basis or after completion of 24 yrs / 21 years of service he was given TIME SCALE Lt col. Hence those who took premature retirement immediately after completion of 20 yrs of service had to go home as Major or an equalent rank from other services.
Since the min service to become sub stantive Lt col has been reduced to 14 yrs of service , all those who retired at 20 yrs commissioned service should be granted Lt col rank and pension accordingly as they deemed to have got that rank if they were in service. This will remove a major anamoly in the rank structure and also pensionary benefits
I fully support one rank and one pension principal so that any one who is one rank can guess what his pension will be .
MAJOR (RETD) ESN Murthy AOC
Only 2 votes for soldiers and rest everyone for Officers concern. This mindset has to change otherwise we are ourself doing a great harm than bureaucrats & Govt.
Untill the condition of 33 years service full service is removed, it is of no use to NCOs. They are already getting almost OROP. Not even 20% will fall above 33 years of service.
One of the comment above is brilliant. Give OROP without any condition of 33 years up to the service of 33 years and those beyond 33 years, their pension can be little bit enhanced. So that even out NCOs below 33 years and same time keeping an incentice to serve further beyond 33 years by virtue of higher pension.
It might be more complicated in term of officers, simply because, Govt have to consider means of bringing those retired majors at par with present Lt Cols wrt AVSC time scale promotion and PB-IV. Otherwise it can not be termed as OROP.
I have reasons to believe that it will be an eyewash or time buying exercise, simply becuase we are sending represetations to very those people with whom we are in dispute i.e. buraucracy.
@Harry:Those are extremely valid arguments. These were also covered, albeit in a slightly different fashion, previously
@murthy:"...all those who retired at 20 yrs commissioned service should be granted Lt col rank and pension accordingly as they deemed to have got that rank if they were in service....."
You are absolutely right. Maybe there is no point in giving the next higher rank in one's retirement, but, actually, the principle of parity in the concept of "OROP" should definitely include equivalence of pensions based on the same rank and service as so correctly highlighted by you.
Now that an officer is entitled to be given the rank of Col(TS) on completion of 26 years, a past Lt Col/Lt Col(TS) retiree with more than 26 years of service should be considered for parity in terms of pension, under OROP, with the present-day Col(TS) retiree.
Ex-NDA18146 CADET BHASKAR GHOSH,NRI(USA) SINCE 2ND AUGUST 2006 PDA(UCO BANK),29 OLD BALLYGUNGE 1ST LANE KOLKATA-700 019REF.2/166/87/D/PEN-C)DT.29 JULY 1998 (DISCONTINUED HIS DISABILITY PENSION WHERE AS THE PRESIDENT IS PLEASED TO DECIDE THAT CONTINUATION OF PENSION ON CHANGE OF NATIONALITY BY NRI PENSIONER EVEN IN THE CASE OF ARMED FORCES PENSIONERS THE ENTITLEMENT TO PENSION WILL REMAIN UNEFFECTED.(AUTH. GOI,MOD PC-5169/AT-P/PC/909/A/04/D(PEN/SERS) DT.06.10.2004)
E mail majghosh2001@yahoo.co.in
father of Ex-Major S C Ghosh
@samaresh ghosh:"THE PRESIDENT IS PLEASED TO DECIDE THAT CONTINUATION OF PENSION ON CHANGE OF NATIONALITY BY NRI PENSIONER EVEN IN THE CASE OF ARMED FORCES PENSIONERS THE ENTITLEMENT TO PENSION WILL REMAIN UNEFFECTED"
Is your comment connected with the subject matter of this Blog post, by any chance? Do shed some light, please.
It is not only ridiculous,awfully bad an example on the part of the related bodies of the Govt.,who have been playing so ruthlessly with the interests of the military veterans.We are in one of the finest democracies of the world where welfare aspects of the three services were being looked into on TOP PRIORITY till recent past, but as of now, the situation is just the other way round and is shocking !Is it that crucial an issue for which a favorable decision could not be taken in the last so many years ! While extending due regards for all Central Govt.Services,I strongly feel that equating the same with the services of Military Combatants is IN NO WAY THE RIGHT CONCEPT for reasons, which need no emphasis, and should be looked into in its ideal perspective by each and every citizen of this country.
A lot of delay has since taken place and in consideration with up-keeping the morale of troops,it will,perhaps,be ideal for the Govt. to decide the issue favorably without any further lapse of time.
Now that the process of submitting memoranda has been completed, perhaps the associations and forums at the fore front on the matter would care to highlight all aspects pertaining to the OROP slogan
Post a Comment