REDRESSAL OF GRIEVANCES OF EX SERVICEMEN

A  letter from Maj Gen (Retd) Satbir Singh, SM Vice Chairman Indian ESM Movement to Shri L. K. Advani, Chairman NDA

.

Dear Shri Advani Jee

.

1. We wish to bring to your notice that the Govt continues to deny the legitimate demands of Defence Personnel. Not only it has not accepted our main demand of OROP, it has hardened its attitude in denying us the due justice. The fact that 4000 cases were heard by the various Armed Forces Tribunals (AFTs) in the last one year and ninety percent (3600) cases had been decided in favour of the Defence Personnel reveals the extent of Injustice. The injustice did not stop here. The Govt has not implemented the judgements. This was recently revealed by the Chief of AFTs Justice (Retd) AK Mathur. If this is the attitude the Govt is showing to the judgements of an adjudicatory body ie AFTs, what will be the outcome of the recommendations which will be made by the recently constituted Armed Forces Grievances Redressal Commission on the orders of the Supreme Court which is only a recommendatory body?

.

2. What recommendations is the Govt waiting for to grant OROP to the Defence Personnel? OROP has been accepted by almost all PMs and RMs since 1983 but it has not been sanctioned. The all parties parliamentary standing committees on Defence have been recommending the grant of OROP; the latest recommendations were made on 07th May 2010 while tabling its report and again, the chairman of the standing committee on Defence Sh. Satpalji Maharaj on 27th Aug 2010 recommended the OROP in his letter to the RM. However, it is surprising that the Defence Minister, recently in parliament while rejecting the grant of OROP quoted that a committee of bureaucrats had not recommended it. This is even more surprising since it raises the basic question of civilian control of Defence Forces. As it should be that the civilian control of Defence Forces means control by the elected representatives of the people ie the parliament and not control by the bureaucrats. It is understood that the elected representatives take assistance of the bureaucrats in the smooth governance of the country, but it does not mean that the elected representative should give in to the designs of the bureaucrats who seem to have been ill-treating the military.

.

3. Also, the manner the Govt is contesting the court judgements given in favour of the Defence Personnel defies all logic. The rank pay judgement in which a serious anomaly of 4th Pay Commission has been corrected by the SC, is yet to be implemented. On the contrary Govt has appealed to the SC for recalling of its decision. The Govt Attorney on 14 Nov 2010, even suggested to the SC that the Govt plans to refer the rank pay case to the proposed Armed Forces Grievances Redressal Commission. The SC judge Sh. Markandey Katju sternly told the Govt Attorney that the judgement on the rank pay has already been given and the Govt petition for recall of decision will be referred to the Chief Justice to be further referred to another bench. Appealing against the judgement of the Supreme Court, to say the least tantamounts to a grossly hostile Government attitude towards the Defence Personnel. It is the Government’s moral duty to withdraw the application and implement the Supreme Court Judgement.

.

4. Why the Govt has adopted negative attitude towards the Defence Forces, is not understood. The Defence Forces are anguished and hurt about the manner their status has been downgraded and they have been given raw deal in their compensation package and emoluments. It is a settled issue that senior defence personnel should never draw less pay and pension from their juniors and the similarly placed defence personnel must get the same pension irrespective of the date of retirement. However, both these settled issues have been seriously violated by the Govt in case of Defence Personnel pensions. Defence Personnel who are three to four ranks junior are getting higher pension than their seniors. A Lt Col who retired post 2006 gets more pension that a Major General and a Sepoy who retired post 2006 gets more pension that a Havildar who retired before 01-01-2006.

.

5. The Govt has been more than unfair to the widows of defence personnel. Ironically, the service widows were kept out of the purview of Government orders dated 08 Mar 2010, where the pensions of Junior Commissioned Officers and other ranks were enhanced. When this was pointed out in a letter to the Hon’ble Prime Minister, the reply from the PMO received through Army Headquarters, is……while citing the Cabinet Secretary’s Committee……..”, No recommendations in respect of family pensions was made by the Committee”. Whatever be the compulsions of the Government to be bound by the recommendations of the subordinate committee that the Government had itself constituted, the decision seems to prefer technicalities over sensitivities. This harsh decision to exclude the most needy has caused great consternation among the entire Ex Servicemen Community. The enhancement of pensions needs to be extended to the service widows without any further delay so that they do not feel discriminated against.

.

6. The indifferent attitude of Govt and the bureaucracy towards the legitimate and genuine demands of the Ex Servicemen has resulted in the veterans having to resort to sit-ins, depositing of medals and signing memorandum to the President in Blood. This adversely reflects on the morale of the serving soldier who feels the same will be his lot after retirement.

.

7. As elected member of the Parliament and Chairperson of the NDA and senior leader of the opposition, we request you to please take up the above issues with Govt and due justice be granted to Defence Personnel :-

.

(a) OROP be sanctioned at the earliest.

.

(b) Pensions of widows be enhanced without any further delay.

.

(c) The Govt must honour the judgement of the Supreme Court in the rank pay case and stop appealing against the judgement on frivolous grounds.

.

(d) The Govt must honour and implement over 3600 judgements given in favour of Defence Personnel by various Courts in the last one year without any further delay. Unnecessary litigation in terms of appeals against the courts judgements be stopped.

.

8. If required these issues be discussed in the both houses of the parliament. A memorandum signed in blood by thousands of ESM which was handed over to the staff at Rashtrapati Bhawan on 28 Nov 10 is enclosed. We look forward to a positive response from you sir.

.

With Kind Regards,

.

Yours Sincerely,

.

Maj Gen (Retd) Satbir Singh, SM

Vice Chairman Indian ESM Movement (IESM)