Memorandum to Rajya Sabha for Grant off OROP

To Shri Bhagat Singh Koshiyari, Member Rajya Sabha.
(Through Shri Rakesh Naithani)
Jt Director Rajya Sabha Secretariat,
Parliament House Annexe,
New Delhi 110001).
.

MEMORANDUM IN RESPONSE TO PUBLIC INPUTS SOUGHT WITH REFERENCE TO PETITION PRAYING FOR GRANT OF ONE RANK ONE PENSION TO THE ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL

.

Introduction

.

One Rank One Pension is an almost 3 decades old demand of the Ex Servicemen (ESM). In recent times, they have taken to public protests in pursuance of the same. Dharnas, Hunger Strikes, Returning medals and memorandum signed in blood being sent to the Supreme Commander- The President, are some disturbingly visible and pro-active methodologies adopted by them to draw attention to their angst on the issue.

.

The above protests, peaceful so far, have dangerous portends. One that they would positively impact on the ‘serving’ since even after retirement, the ESM continue to retain an umbilical chord with their Regiments, and Secondly, how long the current leadership of these movements would be able to control their flock. It is therefore necessary that a solution to this issue be found.

.

Background

.

The conditions of service of faujis (term includes Army, Navy and Air Force personnel) are unique.

.

1. Their constitutional rights are curtailed to a large extent. Deprived of their Freedom of Speech, and the Right to form a Union, they cannot project their difficulties and speak of injustices caused to the, eg during Pay Commissions etc.

.

2. This curtailment has unfortunately manifested itself in being denied access/ presence in committees at which issues related to them, eg Pay Commissions, Department of Ex Servicemen Welfare, are discussed/ formulated.

.

3. Their Conditions of Service are extremely tough, and opportunities to live and bring up a family extremely limited. On an average a fauji moves on posting / turnover with his unit once in two years. This is in contrast with civil services that offer years of continuity in station of posting. While logically it would call for a better and more empathetic approach in pay, perks and pension, there is an unfortunate effort to ‘balance’ the two, wherein the civil services come off better (eg Disability Pensions, Widow’s Pension etc which were made upwardly better before becoming applicable to faujis).

.

4. To maintain a ‘Young Profile’, the fauji is retired early, as an Operational Imperative, for no fault of his. 90% of faujis retire between age of 35-42. Sepoys retire in their 30s, JCOs in 40s and Officers in 50s. Only a very few- about 0.1% or lesser, retire at age 60. This is in contrast to all other Government services that retire at 60, and specially in Civil Services, carry on for another 5 years average, on re-employment.

.

Case for OROP

.

1. Due to the early retirement, the faujis’ pension is fixed at a very early stage of his career, and is obviously low.

.

2. Retiring early, they miss out on benefits of at least 2-3 Pay Commissions that he would have seen if he had served till age 60 years. A Sepoy consequently loses approx 48 lacs by the time he is 60 years of age, in relation to a Civil Services compatriot/ Police constable who would have joined at same time that he did.

.

3. If life expectancy is taken to be 75 years, then by age 75, the Sepoy would have lost 60 odd lacs in relation to his compatriots in Civil Services and Police. The irony is that this is despite the hardships and travails faced by a soldier, some of which have been brought out in earlier paragraphs, pointing to a relatively better compensation.

.

4. A fauji retires (Age 35-42) when his family responsibility is the largest, in contrast to the civil services who retire at 60, when all family responsibilities are all but over. Considering life expectancy of 75, a fauji has to face up to 35-40 years of retirement as against a civil services employee who has to face up to just 15, and that too after his basic responsibilities are over. He just has one more residual Pay Commission, while a fauji has lost 5.Is this not ironical, that instead of finding favour, he loses out instead?

.

5. It is extremely unjust to ask a fauji WHY he should be given One Rank One Pension, when there is a precedent of Members of Parliament, Judges and Secretary level civil services are already drawing equal pensions despite whatever dates they may have retired on. This is precisely what faujis are seeking through OROP. This is extremely discriminatory to faujis. It is relevant to point out that while over 95% of direct entrants to Civil Services make it to Secretary rank by the time they retire, only less than 0.1% Defence Officers make it to Army Commander rank, eligible for the privileged group in receipt of standard pension.

.

6. Till the 3rd Pay Commission, the concept of Military Pension was prevalent in Defence services, wherein, equal rank and equal length of service meant equal pensions. Till that time, in recognition of their services conditions and the factors discussed earlier, a fauji received 70% of last pay as pension, as against 33% in case of Civil Services. The existing order was changed, to not only remove the concept of Military Pensions, but also the advantage offered to them earlier, was taken away by adopting a universal 50% of pay drawn as the standard matrix for both Defence services and Civil Services. It would be apparent that far from being compensated for their harsh conditions of service and early retirement, the beneficiary of this equalization was the Civil Services instead!!

.

7. Made aware of above typical problems and the Fauji angst on the issue of denial of OROP, the legislative assembly of Punjab and Himachal Pradesh have passed unanimous motions in support of grant of OROP to Defence pensioners. Similar recommendations have also been made in successive Standing Committees of Parliament on Defence, the latest being the one headed by Shri Satpal Ji Maharaj. Broad concurrence on the issue also exists amongst all political parties, who have at some time or the other declared support for OROP in their election manifestos/ promises. It is reasonably clear from this that OROP has the backing of the People of India, reflected through the legislative.

.

8. With the above background, it is sadly obvious that the case is being stone walled by the bureaucracy- the MOD in particular. Considering their role is to ‘look after’ the interests of the Servicemen, this behaviour is weird and not conducive to inspiring confidence in the minds of the class of people they are chartered to attend to. Each appeal/ protest over anomalies in Pensions/ OROP is generally handed over to a Committee of Secretaries (COSS), who in most cases has caused the anomaly in the first place. The consequence is identical to that when the jury and accused are the same. An illustration of this phenomenon, as applicable to OROP is attached as Annexure A to this memorandum.

.

Conclusion

.

Military service is fraught with hardship and a non settled family life. Tenets of justice and fair play would point to the need to treat them differently and compnese them with better pay and pensions. Unfortunately this is not so in India, where in a more or less hostile approach seems apparent in the portals of power, wherein not only reasonable compensation is denied to the Forces, but also when anomalies are pointed out, instead of rectification, more anomalies are interjected while dealing with thoss that were pointed out.

.

OROP is an urgent and just demand, now pending for over 3 decades. Its early implementation would be a morale raising and motivating factor for the Defence services that may even attract more youth to join the Forces.