As everyone would know, the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 08
March 2010 had decided the rank pay case in favour of commissioned officers of
the three services and had ruled that rank pay was not to be deducted from the
pay scales of defence officers. The application filed by the Defence Ministry for recalling the order was also not accepted by the Court and the final judgement was rendered by the SC in September 2012.
Clearly knowing that the crude bluff played out on the
pay and status of military officers ever since the 4th Central Pay
Commission (CPC) no longer remained sustainable in view of the judgement of the
Apex Court, the Union of India quickly constituted a committee to look into the
financial implications of the judgement, and then in an unprecedented move,
approached the Court again with a prayer for recalling the order and hearing
the matter afresh.
The above was submitted to the Hon’ble SC through a detailed affidavit filed by
the Ministry of Defence which inter alia
stated that the implementation of the judgement would involve rehashing of not
only the 4th CPC scales but would affect the 5th and the
6th CPCs. It was also pointed out that it would alter payment of all
consequential and resultant benefits of officers and their families wherever
applicable. Further in a recently filed affidavit seeking extension of time for
implementation of the judgement, the Defence Ministry stated that the
implementation of the judgement relates to three successive pay commissions,
that is, 4th, 5th and 6th CPCs and also
affected the benefits of officers who had retired prior to 1986. All this is on
record. Notwithstanding the above mentioned affidavits, even logically
speaking, naturally the pay-scales needed to be upgraded through the three pay commissions
leading to enhancement of the pay and status of defence officers since the
deduction of rank pay from the pay scales had been declared illegal.
As is known to all, the contentions of the Defence Ministry
were not accepted and the Court stuck to its earlier order of March 2010 with
the only modification that the interest component on the arrears would be
granted from 01 Jan 2006 instead of 01 Jan 1986.
However brushing all of the above aside and in contravention
of the spirit of the judgement and also in utter breach of their own affidavits
and statements before the SC, the Ministry of Defence has issued the final
letter of implementation today, which basically, in effect, only grants the
below mentioned :-
“….and to re-fix the initial pay of the concerned officers of the Army,
Navy and Air Force in the revised scale (integrated scale) as on 01-01-1986 as
per Para 6 of those instructions without deduction of rank pay appropriate to
the rank held by the officer on 01st January 1986….”
The above stipulation of implementation also has an innocuous looking variation than what was decided by the Court and which becomes clear from Para 2 of this letter itself. While the Court had ordered re-fixation of pay 'with effect from 01-01-1986', Para 6 of the implementation order of the MoD grants it to officers 'as on 01-01-1986'. Subtle variation which makes world of a difference. The judgement which was to have cascading effect on fixation of pay and pay-scales after 01-01-1986, that is with effect from the 4th CPC, continuing till date, has been effectively rendered applicable only for those persons who were in receipt of rank pay as on 01-01-1986.
The MoD letter also states that no changes would be made
in the instructions issued after 5th and 6th CPCs except
to the extent of re-fixation necessitated due to fixation as on 01 Jan 1986. This simply means that there would be no upgradation of scales or change in the implementation instructions except that for those affected officers as on 01 Jan 1986 who remained in service as on 01 Jan 1996 or 01 Jan 2006, their re-fixation within the existing tables based on the fitment formula would be affected while switching over from 4th CPC to 5th CPC and then from 5th CPC to 6th CPC tables, but within the same scales. This of course is a natural consequence of the stipulation of fixation as on 01 Jan 1986 and nothing additional.
So there you have it. The Defence Ministry totally ignoring
the character of the judgement as well as its own commitment before the Court,
and perhaps also the draft instructions that may have been submitted by the
three defence services to the Ministry for implementing the judgement in letter
and spirit. No change in pay scale, status or even the scales after the 5th
and 6th CPCs has been notified.
The victory has been rendered redundant.
Are the defence services not a part of this nation, or do
they need to continually hanker after their own government for what is
rightfully theirs, time and again, while in service and then after retirement
and then even after death?
Now over to how the Services HQ react to this sacrilege.
87 comments:
Maj Navjot, Is this correct? What about Para 8 of the letter?
clearly para 8 states any changes due to refixation as on 86 will be applicable to officers in 1997 2006 also 86 officer will be a major in 1997 if the major gets pay as on 1 june 1997 14000 a offr who picks maj rank in 2005 will also get 14000 its cyclic i think navdeep sir has missed the seq lets wait for rdao comments
Para 8 is a typical 'confusing letter' which would never be issued for matters affecting their own breed. In any case, the Offrs commissioned after 1/1/86 would have benefitted by a measly amount of approx 16000/ upto 1/1/96. what needs to be seen is how is the basic fixed as on 1/1/96. Since the Basic Pay scales have not been changed, everyone would reach the upper band of the scale and stagnation increments will be given after 2 years in the same Basic Pay. SMART MOVE WITH MAXIMUM CONFUSION AND MINIMUM PAYOUT.
Dear Anony
Please read again. It states that there would be NO CHANGE in the SAIs, meaning thereby no change in SCALES.
What it says is that the change would be in fixation within the scales if necessitated. The same has been clarified in my post itself. This simply means that once the pay of officers who were Capt to Brig as on 01-01-1986 is refixed and if they continued to serve during the 5th and 6th CPCs, then the re-fixation would be done accordingly as a domino/cumulative effect, but within the existing pay scales.
Hope this clarifies.
Anonymous, "major in 2005 will also get 14000". This would only be applied if a junior offr is drawing more pay than a senior and not vice versa. And each offr would now have to find out on his own if his junior is drawing more pay and follow it through MS Branch to CDAO!!!!. HAPPY HUNTING
Navdeep, But the 5th CPC also had the same clause of RP being Deducted during fixation. Did this judgement not highlight this illegal deduction? If it is not implemented for offrs who were not Capt to Brig as on 1/1/86, then a fresh court case would have to be filed by all for the judgement to be implemented for others. If So then the courts will be flooded with 40000 cases soon.
"But what about an officer who was a Lt on 01 Jan 1986 and became a CAPT in 1988. Will he get nothing by this order"..........Please clarify.
Dear Navdeep
Thanks a lot for the update.
For the time being I dont know what I will get. Seeing your blog since its inception and reading comments something confusing like this was expected . Only we were hoping like hell Babus may ? change. But Alas they eat and have the cake too. Great. Hats off to them and to you more for always bringing out these anomalies.
GURDEEP SINGH
GROUP CAPTAIN (RETD )
Thanks.Sharing your input with others
we all have been made a fool on this matter, like on so many other issues. As regard the services response, dont expect much from our future governors and ambassadors ..... I think we must learn to simply lump it down our throat. The kind of leadership(military and civilian) that we have this was expected. Knowing our systems I personally never believed that this would come through. Rather i was shocked when i was told this.
Anony, forget the figures for a minute. The Govt order implements the decision only for those who were Capt, Maj, Lt Col, Col or Brig AS ON 01-01-1986, and if they continued to be in service on 01-01-1996 and then 01-01-2006 then their re-fixation would get affected on these dates WITHOUT ANY CHANGE in scales. This is what Para 8 means. Officers who retired prior to 1986 or who were commissioned after 1986 or who were not between the ranks of Capt to Brig do not get any benefit, in any manner whatsoever. Also even the 4th CPC scale does not get enhanced and neither does the status.
@Satyam at 6:46
@Anony at 7.13
The appreciation by Navdeep Sir is totally to the point. The order would not give any benefit to pre-86 or post-86 officers and would only give benefit to those in receipt of rank pay on the date of 01 Jan 86. We would be jointly taking up the matter with the MOD on Monday itself.
If i go by Maj Navdeep's reply it does not stand to logic by any stretch of imagination.Its a very wrong interpretation of this order. The officer who was in service on 01/1/1986 but was not capt on that effective date will not get anything9as per Maj Navdeep)..that means when that officer becomes Capt, may be in Mid 1986 or Jan 1987......he will draw less pay than a Capt(who was a Capt on 01/01/1986) and will continue to draw less in future till his retirement.....no this does not happen from any logic. I do not think Maj Navdeep has applied himself properly. And if MOD takes a stand on lines of Maj Navdeep.....even a Insane person will give them a kick...Can Maj Navdeep clarify this as to Why an officer commissioned prior to 01/01/1986 but not Capt on this date will be overlooked. Waiting for logical reply please.
@Anony at 8.14
It seems you have no knowledge of how pay progression takes place so leave it at that. Of course if a person gets promoted later he would draw lesser pay, where is the doubt. The sarkari order only deals with pay fixation from 3rd CPC over to 4th CPC where the rank pay was deducted from fixation. The Government simply says that the deduction would not be made from pay of officers who were in receipt of rank pay when shifting from 3rd CPC scales to 4th CPC, that is officers of particular ranks from captain to brigadier and equivalent. Please update your knowledge before commenting on platforms where expert help is at hand or be inquisitive and ask people rather than commenting badly on what has been stated.
Navdeep Sir, can you please check the IP addresses of all these anony posts, are these from the same person.
@Satyamev Never Jayate
Sir,
Your ID is REVERBERATING in my ears!!!
Who so ever you may be.please stop becoming a DARGA...My clarification as asked was not from a person like you who knows not a fig about it is arrogant......please cill.....my doubt was for Maj Navdeep to clarify......typical mentality.......PLease relax and don't post these senseless words"
Sirs,
The sum of Rank Pay was also deducted while fixing pay under 5th CPC wef 01/01/1996. Service Chiefs should take strong action to highlight this injustice with MOD so as to get justice for all officers.
It would appear the GOI letter necessitates a re-visit to some of the assumptions made previously .
But, if the deduction of rank pay was wrong at the time of IV CPC, the manner in which deductions were made for V CPC would be equally flawed.
Besides, the UOI had reportedly stated in an affidavit that the calculations for V and VI CPCs would need to be revised.
So what happens next?
Dear Navdeep
Not me to ask. But anyway as someone said please check IP of Annoy ppl. I just want to know why hide the identity. I always feel I am what I am and I proud of it.So why not declare it openly.
GURDEEP SINGH
GROUP CAPTAIN (RETD )
I totally agree with what all Maj Navdeep has written & interpreted. The biggest concern is - if this is the way the bureaucracy hoodwinks the highest court of the land, what can you expect from them - NFFU, OROP, DACP will always remain a mirage.Convinced beyond doubt that these issues will never be allowed to see the light of the day if rank pay case is treated with such disdain by the bureaucracy.
I am follower of your blog since last two years. My son is interested in joining Armed Forces. What advise should I give to him?
"..why hide the identity.."
That's strange from someone also posting as Anonymous :-)
Our Govt is deaf & dumb. Only way is to go for contempt of the court.We all should join hands with DSOA & I am sure Navdeep will also help us out.
Col Pardaman Singh (www.beetelbite.com)
1.please tell him to become a Homeguard & serve his IAS& IPS bosses well.He will be much better there.
Para 8 - the last four lines appear to be clear as far as fixation of pay as of Jan 96 and as of Jan 06. That is to say that no changes are required to SAI issued for implementation of 5th and 6th pay commission repectively except "TO THE EXTENT OF THE NEED FOR RE-FIXATION OF PAY AS OF JAN 96AND JAN 06 NECESSIATED DUE TO RE-FIXATION OF PAY AS ON JAN 86"
I Just realized that English is a foriegn langauge for most Babus at MOD. Probably a hindi version will throw more light. Ha Ha
My apologies for calling you Maj Navjot and not Maj Navdeep. I wish I could state that it was the after-effects of the GoI letter but then I would give it too much credit that it does not deserve.
Now, the legal point - Does the UoI's additional affidavit that mentions in Para 30 that revisions in pay etc would have to be made in 1996 and 2006 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court not including this in its order give the MoD/MoF that loophole?
Your reply would be most valuable.
Maj Navdeep
I am not able to see the order by clicking on it.
May it be possible to post it on your post itself.
Thanks.
Lt Col (RETD) A K Jain
An important point is whether the Govt. letter in any way makes it clear the "rank stages" in the IV CPC running scale stay unchanged. To fix the basic in the running payscale of IV CPC without deducting the rank pay would entail fixing the BP of, say a Major just promoted around 01 Jan 86, at a point on the running payscale which would be higher than the rank stage of 3400/- specified in the scale.
For the time being, let's put aside the V and VI CPC issues and just focus on this particular matter. Those other issues can come up later. But this is the starting point and has never been fully clarified.
More details are in the hyperlink I had provided in my previous comment.
maj navdeep,
this is the time than any time before, when people like you need to advise as to how to approach the issue from here on. how it is possible that after so much time (25 years) and discussions, hearings, affidavits etc, we have such a situation once again. is it the case that the defence officers need to involve in court cases for everything. well, i sincerely pray that your knowledge and acumen will be put to good use in this case.
Order of 8.3.2010 states, “We have carefully perused the judgment dated 5.10.1998 of the learned Single Judge as well as judgment dated 4.7.2003 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala and we respectfully agree with the reasoning given therein for grant of rank pay (emphasis mine) retrospectively from 1.1.1986”?
The instant order also quotes Writ Petitions filed in 2006 in different High Courts. Am I reading too much that those were filed during the currency of 5th CPC and therefore a cut-off/eligibility date of Capt to Brig as on 1.1.1986 is incorrect? Couldn’t it be that the litigants said to themselves and their lawyers, “if rank pay was wrongly deducted in 4th CPC, then it is also being wrongly done now (5th CPC), so let us file using the Maj Dhanapalan case as precedent?”
Para 2 of the Supreme Court’s order of 4.9.2012 states, “On thoughtful consideration of the entire matter, we are satisfied that the order dated March 8, 2010 does not require any modification or variation…..”(emphasis mine). It could include that the reasoning given in 8.3.2010 is also correct.
As one reads the Supreme Court’s order of 8.3.2010, one would notice that Sunil Kumar Chand & Ors (petitioners filed a Writ Petition (Civil) No. 96 of 2009 i.e. after 5th CPC but maybe before 6th CPC. Other Writ Petitions were combined/linked with TP (Civil) 57 of 2007 are WP 34 of 2009 (K.K.Rohatgi & Ors) etc.
And, the Supreme Court’s orders of 4.9.2012 mention WP 268 of 2010 (Arun Kumar & others), TP (C) 11 of 2010 (Lt Col PRK Murthy), TP 14-19 of 2010 (Brig PKK Menon & Others Etc, Etc) and many others.
Interestingly, the Supreme Court only refers to Maj Dhanapalan’s case in the context of payment of interest on the arrears.
Nowhere does the Supreme Court order state that only those between the ranks of Capt and Brig on 1.1.1986 and who continued to serve till 1.1.2006 will get the arrears but all those who were or became Capt to Brig up to 31.12.2005. Their pay will be re-fixed as is stated in Para 8 and 9 of the instant letter.
I am ready to be educated on my illogical and irrational thinking.
dear navdeep, you have hit the nail on the head.the only sad issue is it hurts that we are unable to ask/seek and get from the GOI/babudom what we truly deserve.it is indeed a shame that we have to beg for what should have come our way automatically.
My only regret is that not a single senior officer from the three services must be reading your insightful articles or views. can you somehow ensure your blog and views presented here reach the higher echelons somehow ????cynics will anyway tell that they will read it and sleep over it.
if we all do not wake up in time (to smell the coffee ), just wait for the 7th pay commission or the proposed military pay commission which might actually be a wolf(read babu) in sheep's clothing. we will certainly be woken up rudely then since the armed forces and their status/pay structure will be slaughtered. only divine intervention can save us ...
let us begin to pray to god almighty from now...or else, we will all be made to wake up finally one day and smell the coffee and be forced to gulp it down too,albeit as a bitter pill without any sugar.
regards, sherry(navy)
Another issue that needs immediate attention is did the Hon'ble Supreme Court state anywhere in the judgement that only the rank pay deduction at the time of IV CPC was to be reversed? Rank pay was deducted at the time of V CPC also, and in the case of Maj Dhanapalan that did not matter as, I think, he had retired pre-maturely before V CPC.
But, as far as the implementation of the judgement on the RDOA litigation goes, this act by GOI involving non-reversal of the rank-pay deduction at the time of V CPC appears to be contrary to what is in the judgement, viz. requisite reversal of deduction of rank pay wef 01 Jan 86.
Col Raghbir Singh.
Dear all, It seems to me illogical conclusion. How can it be that rank pay of Capt up to the rank of Brig on 1-1-86 will be added in their Basic pay for calclucating the DA and not for others who were Lt on 1-1-86 and promoted after 1-1-86 and their rank pay will not added and has also been deducted for calculating the DA and also for those joined the forces after 1-1-86. Rank pay of all officers has to be added in their basic irrespective of their promotion to avoid litigants. Please clarify. Thanks & Regards
Col Raghbir,
Dear All, It seems to me illogical that how can rank pay to Capt to Brig as on 1-1-86 will be added to the baisc for calculation of DA and for others who have been promoted to the rank Capt after 1-1-86 or joind the forces after 1-1-86. The rank pay of all officers has to be added to their basic for calculating the DA. Please clarify. Thanks and Regards
@Col Ragubir
Sir,
What is illogical to you (and all of us) is pretty logical to the Govt and the babudom as their aim is to restrict the financial outgo to the barest minimum.
Therefore, as Maj Navdeep has already pointed out in the updated post, a subtle variation of the SC order has been mischievously effected in the letter i.e. instead of 'with effect from 01-01-1986', Para 6 of the implementation order of the MoD grants it to officers 'as on 01-01-1986'.
Now those who were Lts on 01 Jan 86 would have NO rank pay so they have been left out very cunningly. Govt is making it very convenient to effect change in basic of only those affected as on 1 Jan 86.
Well, logical certainly not but sinister, YES TRULY !
@Col Raghbir Singh; @Harry: The more one thinks about it, the clearer it becomes that the interpretation of the judgement, as incorporated in the Govt. letter, is that the matter relates to the deduction of rank pay from the revised emoluments while fixing the basic pay at the time of IV CPC and to nothing else.
The logic seems to be that the fixation of basic pay was wrong as the litigation of Maj Dhanapalan had established and only that fixation now needs to be corrected as per this interpretation of the judgement.
Dear Maj Navdeep,
There is another letter (available at http://scm-bps.blogspot.in/2012/11/decks-getting-cleared.html which says w.e.f. 1.1.86 (see page 2). This letter also quotes the other letter of even number dated 26.11.12. Kindly throw some light.
Finally the Govt’s order granting dues to the officers of armed forces which have been withheld illegally since last 20 plus years, reads as.. “ re-fix the initial pay of the concerned officers of the Army, Navy and Air Force in the revised scale (integrated scale) as on 01-01-1986”
The Supreme Court Judgment which reads in plain language as “ with effect from 01-01-1986” which the babus determined to judge as “as on 01-01-1986”.
Why do the bureaucracy have to judge the judgment of supreme court rather than complying with it…?
Well….. that is because the bureaucracy is not accountable to anyone…. Not even to the Supreme Court of India. This very issue in the first place was cooked up by the bureaucracy, but no punitive actions for the wrongdoers were mentioned in the judgment by the honourable court for their willful scheming, manipulation and denial of dues….. that is where we are.
Is it tenable to judge the judgment of the Supreme Court? May not be constitutionally tenable…. but who is here to protect the Constitution of India?
We have forgotten the officers of the same course but one getting acting rank of Capt being of infantry and posted in field and other being of OAS. How do you sort out this diffference.
Sir, unless the pay scales as which has been made AFTER DEDUCTING RANK PAY in 4th cpc is amended, no arrears will accrue to offrs commissioned after 1/86 upto 1/1/96. They will get arrears from 1/1/96 only, which will come after the govt is again prodded. But the issue is the 'domino effect' wherein the civilian counterparts have gone much ahead. If you go back to the GConnect arrears calculator, you will see that a civ with 14300 basic got arrears of approx 6 lac plus. How much did our lt col with 13500+1600=15100 get? 3.6 lac odd. see the difference. And he is in GP 8000 whereas civ is 8700.
JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED..
Is there no mechanism at the behest of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India that monitors cent percent correct interpretation and implementation of the verdicts passed by the Apex Judicial Body of the country? There must certainly be one in place if not existing.
Also, the implementing authorities in the GOI would have duly consulted the law experts in the same Government machinery and outside it as well prior to finally issuing an Order; because improper or halfhearted implementation should amount to Contempt of the Verdict issued out by the Hon'ble SC after such an elongated litigation.
There cannot be different scale of pay for those who were capt to brig as on 1/1/86 and others who were promoted after that date. For instance capt as on 1/1/86 will have basic pay 3000 and those promoted later than that date will have basic 2800. Similar flaw was there in 5th CPC. This the domino effect in 6CPC.
By the judgement and Govt order-
1.para 6 a (1) of 1/s/87 is in and para 6 a (11) is out. i e, int (BP) pay for Capt,Maj & Lt Col will be up by Rs 200,600 &800 (max)on 1.1.86 .
For Col &Brig it would be around 4500 & 4950 plus 1 or 2 inc of 150, if they were at more than 1950 of 3 CPC. slightly above Lt Col as it was at 3 CPC.
2.Keep adding annual increments up to 1.1.95 and re fix pay on 1.1.96 as per that 5 CPC formula , with in the scales and rk pay as given (doubled). similarly for 6 CPC.
That is my understanding. rest the GOVT would keep on issuing further amplifications where ever there is problem .
REST , INDIVIDUALS AND ORGS HAVE TO DERIVE BY DIVERSE PROCESSES AND METHODS. PSE DONT EXPECT RDOA AND SOME DANAPALAN TO DO EVERY THING FOR EVERY BODY. YEAH , IT IS EFFORT AND STRUGGLE .THE WISE AND INTELLEGENT AS SEEN ON THESE BLOGS HAVE TO .....Bala
The GoI/MoD letter of 27/12/2012 states in para 1 that the Special Instructions of the Army, Navy and Air Force (SAI/SNI/SAFI) of 1987 in Para 6 (a) (ii) stated “After the existing emoluments have been so increases, an amount equivalent to the Rank Pay, if any ……….will be deducted.”
In para 3, the letter of 27/12/2012 states “….refixing the pay of the petitioner w.e.f. 1.1.186 without applying the aforesaid provision contained in para 6 (a) (ii)…………i.e. without deducting the Rank Pay ……
In para 6, the same letter states “……………..the sanction of the Government is hereby communicated to modify the provisions contained in para 6 (a) (ii) of the SAI …. Insofar as it relates to deduction of Rank Pay……and to re-fix the initial pay of the concerned officers of ……in the revised scale (integrated scale)………as on 1.1.1986 as per para 6 of those instructions without deduction of Rank Pay ………from the amount worked out under para 6 (a) (i) thereof.
In para 7 the ibid letter states “……in all other respects there shall be no change in the provisions of the aforesaid SAI, SNI, SAFI of 1987….” Please read that again "in all other respects."
The concluding words of para 8 “………no change in SAI, SNI and SAFI issued on 19.12.1997 and 11.10.2008 & 18.10.2008………”except to the extent of the need for re-fixation of pay as on 1.1.1986 and 1.1.2006 necessitated due to re-fixation of pay as on 1.1.1986 in terms of these orders.”
Paras 9 and 10 speak about the revision of DA, Interim Relief, Dearness Pay and Non-Practising Allowance as well as pensionary benefits, etc.
Does the 1998 SAI etc have a similar clause as Para 6 (a) (ii) as those of 1987? If indeed there is such a clause, then haven’t the concluding words in Para 8 already provided the solution of overruling? The crux of not deducting Rank Pay from the pay scales arrived at and then adding the Rank Pay to the lesser amount
Tks Friends for the info.
I have an issue here?? I was commissioned in 1976 and was Flt Lt on 1.1.86 and became Sqn Ldr in Apr 87. So as per the GOI I will benefit to the extend that I will get an increment of 200 w.e.f 1.1.86 and 600 w.e.f. 1.4.87.
I took premature retirement in 2001 after putting in 25 yrs service and was Wg Cdr(select) at that time. As such my pension has been refixed to 24922 in 6th CPC.
This is just to inform all who are in my situation that there will be NO change in the present pension, as we have been fixed based on minimum of rank pay in 6th CPC and what ever increase we may get, the total will definitely be less than minimum at which I am placed.
Wishing a Happy New Year to all Bloggers!!
Regards.
@Dasila
Sir,
Firstly, warm greetings and hope you are doing fine!
Now coming to the point made by you saying that there could not be two different scales for officers from capt to brig as on 1 Jan 86 and those promoted after that date.
Unfortunately, the answer is contrary to expectations. Even after 6th CPC those who were Lt Cols prior to 01 Jan 2006 were fixed at Rs 38530 as Basic Pay in PB 4 and others who were promoted after 01 Jan 2006 were given Basic Pay of Rs 37400 (i.e. bottom of PB 4).
So there won't be anything unusual or unprecedented if the Govt did that in the instant case.
Secondly to answer query by anonymous on a coursemate being acting capt in field. Well here we are ONLY talking of substantive ranks. Acting Capt WON'T benefit from this Sarkari meherbani.
The judgement, dated 8-3-2010 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as quoted in the GOI letter, states, "..grant of Rank Pay retrospectively from 1-1-1986..."; So how does that not warrant a change in those instructions, issued at the time of V CPC, which deducted the new rank pay, wef 1-1-96, from the revised emoluments rank pay which included only the old rank pay?
I'd tried to highlight the matter here.
From Wg Cdr (Retd.) Gurmeet Singh
It is very important that Supreme Court should be approached and requested to clarify if the two sets of wordings "with effect from 01 January 1986" and "as on 01 Jnauary 1986" legally mean the same thing or there is different meaning. Logically in vioew of the final judgement of Supreme Court on the subject, it should become applicable for all officers who were getting rank pay on 01 January 1986 and also for officers who got promoted therefater and started getting rank pay. Automatically in pay commissions of 1996 and 2006 calculations of total emoluments should be by including the applicable rank pay in the basic pay. Maj Mavdeep and the other officers spaerheading the genuine case of all other brother officers from the three services should initiate by requesting the honourable Supreme Court the necessary clarification at the earliest.
Let us not just concentrate that who is benefitted and who is not but take a concerted and joint effort for all under the guidance of Maj Navdeep
DK
@Harry Sorry the diff in pre and post 1.1.2006 Lt Col basic is due to three, two or one increment given to the pre 2006 Lt Cols that too by clubbing the Lt Cols of seniority 2000-01,2002-03,2004.2005 respectively.
wg cdr gurmeet Sir ji above,
Is there any need for clarification? With effect from 01january1986 means that it is effective from that date to everyone.
The present form of letter seems to violate the core direction of the Supreme Court.
If our basic pay was fixed in 96 and 06 after first deducting the then existing rank pay and then as per the SC judgement it has to now added and arrears paid.
I was a Flt Lt in 86 and Rs 200 was deducted; Sqn Ldr in 96 and Rs 600 was deducted and being Gp Capt(TS) Rs 1600 was deducted. So will my pay will get increased by 2400 and pension by Rs 1200?
Pl educate me.
@samy
Sir,
You may like to recheck. A Lt Col with 13500(BP) + 1600(RP) pre-2006 has been fixed at 38530(BP) + 8000 GP) unlike the one promoted after Jan 2006 who gets 37400(BP) + 8000(GP)
"... then as per the SC judgement it has to now added and arrears paid...."
Which SC judgement is that :-)
firstly, the govt letter is in order.
secondly, arrears are due only to those offrs who were deprived of the amt of rk pay after IV, V and VI CPCs.Those who picked up the rk later did get the rk pay when it was due.
thirdly, the arrs for an offr who was a Capt on 1/1/86, Maj on 1/1/96 and Lt Col on 1/1/06 would incl
(a) amt of 200+DA up to Dec 95
(b) fixation of 200+ applicable DA
for Dec95 in new scale on 1/1/96
(c) amt of 1200+DA up to Mar04
(d) amt of 1800+DA up to Dec05
(e) fixation of 1800+ applicable DA
for Dec05 in new scale on 1/1/06 less amt of raise due to PB-4.
(f) SI @ 0.5% pm on cum. total of arrs as on 31 Dec 05 wef 1/2/06 up to the dt of payment of arrs.
Pl note: Pay is related to the duties of rk held and is the same for subs/actg rk. Actg Capt that was gtd in fd after 2 yrs of service attracted only one incr as
an incentive but after 3 yrs, the actg Capt was given the BP of 1100/- .
@Maj Navdeep Singh: "..WITHOUT ANY CHANGE in scales.."; I always had my misgivings about the scale matter. To me, it represented one big grey area. But as I had no access to what went on in the litigation, I went along with the popular perception that, ultimately, the scales were required to be amended.
But, did the litigation actually, specifically insist on an amendment to the scales?
But, its true, if the scales are not amended, the whole re-fixation resolution would probably be irrational.
Suppose, the refixation results in a basic salary of Rs.4050/- for a Major with 11 years on 31 Jan 86, and an officer promoted to Maj after the same 11 yrs of service, say a couple of years later, gets only Rs.3400/- as basic because of the scale, how can that be justified? Surely, that would be discrimination.
The 'DGL' floating about the net seems sounder in legal terms. How the GOI letter and the 'DGL' provisions are going to be harmonised can only be clarified by you and RDOA.
well, if its blueberries (pun intended, as compared with peanuts), we might as well contribute our arrears of about 26 yrs to the IAS retd officers & family fund.
For Information of all
1(26)/97/I/D(Pay/Services)
Government of India,
Ministry of Defence,
New Delhi-110 011, dated the 29th February, 2000.
To
The Chief of the Army Staff, New Delhi.
The Chief of the Air Staff, New Delhi.
The Chief of the Naval Staff, New Delhi.
Subject : Removal of anomalies arising from the implementation of the revised pay scales and allowances consequent to the V CPC recommendations – definition of Rank Pay – reg.
Sir,
I am directed to refer to Instructions No. SAI, SNI and SAFI No. 2/S/98 dated 19.12.1997 and to state that the issue of merger of Rank Pay with the pay scales of the
Defence Service officers upto the rank of Brigadier and equivalent has since been reconsidered by the Government in the light of the recommendations of a Committee specially constituted on the above subject and in view of the fact that the Rank Pay cannot be merged with the pay scales for the Defence Service officers and also keeping in view the difficulties being faced by the Defence Service officers with regard to interpretation of Rank Pay, it is clarified that :
"Rank Pay is admissible to the Commissioned Officers of the three Services,holding their rank either in a substantive or acting capacity. It is that element of their pay identified with their Rank, which, in turn, has a relationship with their scale of pay. It is granted separately in recognition of the specific needs of their conditions of service and
command structure. It will consequently be taken into account for determining their
entitlement to such of those financial benefits, concessions, etc, including retirement
benefits, as are directly related to the basic pay or their pay scales."
3. The Army/Navy/Air Force Instructions would be amended accordingly.
4. This issues with the concurrence of Ministry of Defence (Fin) vide their U.O.No.
1/77/99-PA dated 23.2.2000.
Yours faithfully.
Sd/- x x x x x x
(RK Grover)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Maj Navdeep
I have been seeing, rather involved in, pay fixation of pay since IIIrd Pay Commission. I tell you it has been a hare(Defence Personnel) and tortoise(Civilian Personnel)race since then. The tortoise has taken over the hare with his slow and study approach.The edge which Defence Personnel had over Civilian Employees has totally been taken over by civilian employees through their rigorous persuations through JCMs and Unions. It is high time for Defence Forces to understand the psyche of civilian babus, who make policies for Defence Personnel, that they will never digest any extra benefit to the Defence Personnel. Since there is no war for past so meny years, the respect or edge over civilians have been lost. We have to be more beuracratic while drafting our draft policies rather a soldier like approach. We will have to fight our war ourselves for entitlements. It is not yet late that we review the entitlements and privileges of civilians such as 13 months pay to Police,staff cars to Civilian Officers of A & B group, formation of JCM like institution for defence personnel, to be part of various Central Govt Employees Unions to put across our demands/points. All orders on Pay, Pension and allowances issued for central Govt employees should be marked as applicable to Defence Personnel too.
Wg Cdr IP Singh(Retd)
@Gp Capt CRR Sastry: Please recheck your fixation statement for V CPC issued by your Air Force paying agency. I feel Rs.1200/- would have been deducted from the revised emoluments and not Rs.600/-. They'd added the old rank pay, in your case Rs.600/-, and then subtracted the new rank pay, in your case Rs. 1200/-.
I feel they should have added Rs. 1200/- in your case and subtracted nothing.
Let me know if that checks out with your fixation statement.
After reading all the comments on the issue, I am now confused. What I have understood in nutshell is The order whatever little will affect only those officers who were in service as on 01-01-86. Secondly, inspite of the fact that 4CPC calculations were wrong and as a result 5th CPC and 6th CPC but then also no change in pay scales will be done.
I may be niave, but is it not against the spirit of the H'ble Supreme Court judgement.
What can be done now??
I have read all the comments on the blog on the issue. In nutshell we have won but then also we have lost. What I understood was that we were wronged in 4th CPC and thus in 5th and 6th. but going through the implementation orders only pers in service as on 01-01-86 that to subject to no change in scales. Very sad. Anybody planing legal recourse.
Dear Friends PCDA(O)will make payment of arrears to the serving Army officers, affected with the above judgement, with the salary for Jan 2013. In case of affected officers retired from service, payment of arrears will be made from first week of Feb 2013 onwards, after the requisite details of bankers, PAN,PPO and address etc. after due verification. In cases where there is a change in pay on the date of retirement, due to the pay revision as per the judgement, the revised pay details will be intimated, within one month of payment of arrears, to PCDA(P) Allahabad for issue of revised PPO.
Col Pardaman Singh
Dear Sir,
A very happy new year to you.
I've been following you on almost all of your post (comments excused).
It's enlightening that the information with regard to benefits have been published.
Whereas, I truly disapprove the tone and tenor of many comments I've gone through.
I am striving to become an officer in Army / Air Force but these kinda comments make me deprive my opportunity. If this continues, I strongly recommend you to propose the MoD not to cry for shortage of Officers.
Jai Hind.
Dear Navdeep,
Is it not a FIT CASE which qualifies for filing CONTEMPT of Supreme Court
Judgement ? where is the requirement of going through a lengthy procedure all over again.
Please give you opinion on the subject.
I was commissioned in 1990, will I be affected from this Mod letter. Pl clarify
Wow,
The GOI letter benefits all those offrs who were drawing rank pay as on 01 Jan 1986. Effectively the letter will silence all those offrs who were capt min at that time would be col(TS) or Senior ranks as of now. Therefore the issue will not be contested again since the senior ranks were benefitted. What a ploy by GOI, devide and rule principle still works! I am sorry for the annonymity.
The appreciation of govt orders on rank pay arrears by Navdeep is partially correct. While much emphasis is being laid on the "as on 01 Jan 86 instead of wef 01 Jan 86, the importance of para 8 is clearly missed. There is clearly no ambiguity. All offrs serving or otherwise as 1997 and 2006 will get addl increment of Rs 200/- and arrears thereof depending upon theit date of commissioning. Revision of pay scales which may have a wide range of financial and other implications has been avoided but govt is fully aware that any denial of rank pay arrears to all others than those in the rank of capt to brig as on 01 Jan 86 will invite serious adverse scrutiny from SC and generate too much pay anomalies within similarly placed offrs. Let us not be seen as constant cribbers who are hell bent in opposing the govt. Wait and watch till Jan end. Col A K Saxena
What is the reaction and response of the Service chiefs to this govt order? Are they doing anything to set things right for those officers who retired prior to 1.1.86 and those who were commissioned after 1.1.86 if the substitution of the words "effective from 1.1.86" by "as on 1.1.86" was a deliberate attempt to deny the benefits to the above two categories? Otherwise what is the option left for these categories of officers?
Dear Navdeep,
If what is being spoken about, which everyone agrees is a raw deal, than should everyone not collectively file a CONTEMPT PETITION against the MOD and GOI citing the points mentioned by you in your blog, after receiving the Arrears (ie after analysing what everyone has received) ? This time the attack should be on the one who has signed the letter on behalf of the MoD & GoI and the ones who signed the petition in the Hon'ble Supreme Court contesting the Judgement, and we seek stringent punishment to them on the grounds of misleading the Hon'ble Supreme court and lieing to them, so that the Hon'ble Supreme Court can punish the offenders and bandicoots such as these, so that no bureaucrat ever tries such unethical practices in future.
Your comments please ?
@COL AK Saxena,,
Dear Sir,
Would like to humbly submit that you are totally wrong.In the realm of babugiri, what is written is all that matters and not what is imagined. Little knowledge is a dangerous thing sir, and exhibition of it,like in this case, can be lethal to the interests of Ex servicemen......
.........You seem to know the "pulse" of the Govt as you have confidently written that Govt will resolve every thing by Jan 13....Would be elated if you could enlighten us on this info
I was a Major on 1-1-86.
I expect to get arrears @ 600 pm + DA from 1-1-86 to 31-12-95.
Thereafter the rate of arrears will depend upon pay fixation wef 1-1-96.
I fail to understand as to why no interest is paid from 1-1-86 to 31-12-05.
A rupee of 1-1-86 did not have same value on 31-12-95.
Dear Maj Navdeep,
1.The armed forces officers both serving and retired and their families remain always grateful for your single handed yeoman service to help us to know the various benefits and also to make us aware how the MOD and the bureaucracy try to cheat us in giving us the legitimate entitlements.
2. I feel it is high time for all the retired armed forces officers collectively file contempt of Honorable Supreme Court judgment against MOD G of I and also against the officers responsible for filing false and misleading affidavits and issuing Govt letters against the spirit of court judgment not only in the present rank pay case but also for various other pending cases like rounding of disability pensions and other issues where the court judgments including AFT judgments have not been implemented. I think Major Navdeep will be kind enough to compile all those cases for us.
3. In addition to filing of contempt petitions the retired armed forces officers through RDOA can consider meeting the Honorable President Of India, Prime Minister of India and Defence Minister of India to apprise them how the MOD and the bureaucracy at every stage try to cheat us and deny our legitimate entitlements by hook or crook so that this can be stopped once for by the intervention of Honorable President of India, PM and DM.
4.Further we can think of entrusting all our court cases to Major Navdeep, who is the best choice to fight our cases if he agrees.
5 I think all the retired armed forces officers will be too happy to share the finance required for filing the court cases and other matters.
Thanks
Lt Col M Raghavan(Retd)
The GoI letter very clearly states that the respective AI, NI and AFI is to be modified regarding status of Rank Pay. Now there cannot be two separate versions of these instructions, one for officers as on 01 Jan 86 and one for all other officers who were capt wef 02 Jan 86.More over the babu lobby has very cleverly published in the news papers also that only a very few officers will be benefited, which is being lapped by all service officers. Interpreting the order and the NI, AFI & AI is upon us, we should do so to our advantage. Also the pay in the navy and the Air force does not involve the CDA. Any reviews Maj Navdeep
Even in these times of the GoI dithering in its even otherwise tepid response to provocations, mutilations and decapitations from across the LoC, it is corridor news that a letter has gone to the Raksha Mantri reiterating the substance of a presentation made on the Uoi/MoD letters of 26.11.2012 and 27.12.2012.
It is now a matter of wait & watch - for the babus in the MoD and MoF and for us "similarly placed officers" till crediting of arrears commences with salary of Jan 2013 for serving officers and retired officers thereafter. The breakdown will have to show us what is credited, as it would be required to file IT returns under Sec 89.
As one commentator has pointed out, the babus have left themselves a hole in the wall in para 8, perhaps anticipating that there would be more to follow apropos the Hon'ble Supreme Court's order of 4-9-2012 and the way it was implemented by MoD.
We might hear more on this, perhaps in the next few days, when the Hon'ble Supreme Court takes up the UoI application for extension and the RDOA's views.
Well, can somebody ask the Defence Minister to give his views on this action by his Ministry? Is he aware or totally oblivious of the development? I was just wondering!!!
going by this judgement by the sc on 04 sep 12, if the pay is refixed for certain officers as on 01.01.1986, does it not imply that the same becomes a policy to be implemented in future, for all the officers commissioning at a later date? if that be so, then all the officers who got commissioned after 01.01.1986 till 01.01.2006 become affected party? isn't it?
So for the arrears everyone was expecting here comes the payslips and looks like we all armed forces personnel have again been cheated as always. No arrears on the order passed by our Apex court, they have tricked us all , as for the offrs serving as of now. The pay has not been fixed as per the SC decision, looks like a fight again to get the right implementation, wonder why they keep doing this. I just want to know whether this will see light of the day or again will be lost in the dark rooms or lockers of the babus who have been exploiting us right from the start.
Its only when the civ take to demonstration as its happening in Egypt that the babus will think of clearing some files of MOD
I still thank the men behind pushing the case for so long. Courts always have been a difficult place to negotiate and the perseverance and effort of those involved has paid.
Again, I sincerely thank all working behind the scenes. May Just prevail and HQs work towards restoring our status as an integral entity instead of resorting to infighting or resolving personal issues of top brass.
I think one way to contain this kind of epidemic being thrown on the armed forces again and again is to file a case personally on the appointment holder who is signing the document and making mockery of the directions of the supreme court. Also since the case is of the 4Th pay commision someone would have signed the document playing smart, he/she should me made accountable also by filing a case personally on the indl whatever best type to stop this menace because even if the indl has died the case should be filed and proper action taken as is done soldiers who are court marshalled even after death in some cases.
Sir can u plz suggest the actions i need to take for resolving basic pay related anomaly for my entire batch.
We are getting the same basic pay as one course juniors due to pay fixation anomaly in VI PC.
Since I am June commission(used to get annual inrement in June every yr prior to VI PC), I was not given an increment on promotion, due in July that yr...however...the December commission offrs gt their increment six months prior in July itself. This resulted in us both getting the same basic pay.
What should be our action to resolve this anomaly?
Maj Amit
Those who have got payslips with arrears could try out this calculator and share a comparison with others to check what the nature of the shortfall is.
i am 81 commisioned and was a capt on 1 jan 86, presently brig. it clearly emrges that i had misunderstood the whole concept of rk pay, expecting handsome arrears. however what i got was mere 33000/ in jan, sad?
Dear Veterans,
Lot of queries are being received by me on the mode of re-fixation of pay on RPR/86, RPR/96 & RPR/2006 and calculation of arrears on RANK PAY.Formula for fixation of pay is given below:-
RPR/86 - A. An amount representing 20% of Basic Pay in the existing Scale shall be added to the "existing emoluments,
B. after the existing e,oluments have been so increased the Pay sall be fixed in the revised scale atthe stage next above the amount thus computed.
For the purpose of "EXISTING EMOLUMENTS" shall include:_
a) the basic pay in the existing scale,
b) Dearness pay, addl DA Ad-hoc DA etc
c) the amount of of Ist and 2Nd instalments of Interim Relief
(Authy : Gazette of India No.12 dt 23 Sep 1986)
In-addition, the RANK PAY is also admissible.
As per the example 1 of the CDA letter , the dif. for a Capt is Rs. 200/-(BP)+ Rs.200/-(RP)+DA
The DA Rate was 4% on1/7/86,8% on 1/1/87 and on 1/7/95 it was 136%.
Due to shortage of space I am not able to the formula of RPR 96/2006
Major AK Dhanapalan , Retd
https://pcdaopune.gov.in/NewsFlash/FAQ/index.html
Post a Comment