Friday, October 30, 2015

Tables after inclusion of Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA) in the pension of Army Medical Corps, Army Dental Corps and Remount & Veterinary Corps retirees

As informed vide this post of 04 Aug 2015, the Ministry of Defence had issued the sanction letter for inclusion of NPA in the pension of AMC, ADC and RVC retirees who had retired prior to 1996, in pursuance to a decision of the Supreme Court.

The orders for the recovery of the element of NPA from the pensions of affected officers issued earlier also stand superseded with the issuance of the above letter.

The office of PCDA (Pensions) has also issued detailed instructions and tables for release of pension in terms of the above but it seems that many officers are not aware of the same and are still contemplating litigation in this regard.


The detailed Circular of the PCDA (Pensions) can be downloaded and accessed here which may be disseminated to affected officers with an advice not to indulge in litigation in this matter since universal orders already stand issued. While it is perfectly fine to file petitions in those matters where universal directions have not been issued despite settled legal position, but filing cases in matters that stand resolved by issuance of instructions such as the above or on grant of arrears w.e.f 01 Jan 2006 results in unnecessary burdening of pockets of litigants and dockets of Courts. 

3 comments:

  1. DACP?????????????????????????????????????????????????????

    ReplyDelete
  2. WILL THE BENEFICIARIES GET THE INTEREST ON ARREARS

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sir,
    the tables after inclusion of Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA) in the pension of Army Medical Corps.............retirees still show Pro rata reduction of service where the qualifying service was over 20 years but less than 33 years.
    This is not in consonance with Supreme Court Ruling which says that pre 2006 retirees are to be treated at par with post 01.01.2006 retirees and pension has to be paid at Full 50% of Last pay.
    What is the remedy for this ?
    May I have the reference to the Supreme Court judgment on the subject in March 2015.

    ReplyDelete

Leaving a comment on this blog-post is not a guarantee of it being published.

Comments would be strictly moderated and those with personal or generalised slants and harsh language would not be published.

You are requested to bear with the comment editors since the process is subjective and not always under the direct supervision of Maj Navdeep Singh.

Comments with proper identification are encouraged rather than anonymous posts.

Thank You.