MEMORANDUM TO THE RAJYA SABHA by NAVY FOUNDATION, DELHI CHARTER’s

The nation that forgets its defenders will itself be forgotten.

Calvin Coleridge

.

PENSIONS BASED ON PRINCIPLE OF EQUAL PENSION FOR EQUALS IN RANK AND SERVICE

.

1. Differentiation in pensions between similarly placed officers and men has been exercising the serving armed forces personnel and the Armed Forces Veterans (AFV) for some years now. Whether one agrees with the modus operandi or not, it is indeed a matter of concern to see the octogenarian veterans descending on Jantar Mantar, from far and near, to hand in their medals or write petitions in blood. It brings no credit to the nation, the Armed Forces or the AFVs.

.

2. In this memorandum we propose to bring out why we are unique and have to be treated separately. Other memoranda have already brought out the background to our demand and set out the demands of the AFVs and we are not repeating those arguments in full here.

.

3. OROP is a much abused terminology and has different meaning, slant and connotation for everyone depending upon which side of the fence you are on. For the ‘interested bureaucrats’ intent on misinterpreting the Lakra judgment, it means same pay for everyone in the same rank and that is far from the truth and that is also not legally tenable. Our demand was given the generic terminology of OROP but what the AFVs are agitating for is ‘the same pension for those retiring from the same rank and years of service and the like, irrespective of the date of retirement. This demand is not anything new and was the norm till ill-intentioned change of rules by the 3rd PC and the side stepping of the Defence Pension Regulations in 1979 through an Office Memorandum. The Report of Secretaries Committee has now quite clearly defined OROP and has been included in the Report dated 30th June 2009, as: “’One Rank One Pension’ implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension be automatically passed on to the past pensioners”.

.

4. Till the 3rd Pay Commission, the armed forces were given Pensions based on Rank and length of service in that rank. Due to the special and peculiar terms and conditions of service, the AFV got 75% of their pay drawn as pension whilst the civilian babus got 33%, for good reasons. The third pay commission, which covered the Defence Services for the first time, against our will, did us a great dis-service and decreased our pensions to 50% and increased those of the Civil Services (CS) to 50 % with further riders on getting full pension after 33 years of service. Further the advantage offered earlier was taken away by adopting a standard 50% of pay drawn for both the Defence Services and the CS. It is clear that rather than be compensated for the harsh conditions of service and early retirement, the sole beneficiary of this equalization was the CS. Defence Services were not represented on the Pay Commission but the CS were.

.

5. In today’s context the pension is no more dependent on rank and now depends on qualifying years of service and emoluments qualifying for pension. This means that even a lower ranking individual can and draws higher pension than the higher ranking one and this anathema in a hierarchical organizations such as the Defence Services. Also because of early retirement we miss out on the benefits of 2 to 3 Pay Commissions and of promotions and if you just compare a soldier to a police constable there is a difference of over Rs 45 lakhs in their life time earnings.

.

The Evil Pay Commissions (PCs)

.

6. Common Pay Commissions. The worst thing that happened to the Defence Services at the behest of the Civil Services (CS) was having a common pay commission for the Defence and the Civil Services against complaints and objections from the service headquarters. This was further accentuated against us by having Civil Services as part of the pay Commission and the Defence Services that numbered many hundred times the CS went unrepresented. Every Pay commission since, has reduced or modified the Defence entitlements and increased or made available others to the CS, who were part of the Pay Commission and then other CS officers in different chairs examined the PC recommendations on file in the Ministries with their own slant. Now, all orders are first issued for the CS and then the approvals examined and modified for the Defence services. Even the Supreme Court has taken note and strongly recommended separate PCs for the Defence and CS. Further, how are the cases projected by the Service Headquarters and the AFVs examined, they go to another , Secretary, Ex Servicemen Affairs and who is a chip of the old block and has no inclination of supporting the causes of the Armed Forces when his own services interests are involved. As the saying goes .. ‘he who chooses the piper, calls the tunes’.

.

7. The growing trend of making our pay and allowances ‘similar’ resulted firstly from the natural CS desire to better their own prospects. The second and more fundamental cause and the bane of the pay and pension of the military lies in CS fear of the Military getting higher basic pay and thereby claiming higher ranking in the order of precedence. The latter has done incalculable harm to the basic rank structure of the Armed Forces through cadre reviews, running pay bands across ranks, grant of rank pay and the like. Today, Military rank structure is totally skewed.

.

Why the Military is Different.

.

8. Why is the military different from the Civil Services (CS) or anyone else? –– is a question that needs to be answered, and ‘it happens only in India’. We have never faced a war as a nation and where the country has itself been mobilized or faced conscription and the country at large comes to know what life in the military is. In the West, China, Russia, Japan and elsewhere, nations have fought prolonged wars including for their independence, been through World Wars, losing millions of their kith and kin and suffered conscription and know what it means to be a soldier and lose family members and friends.

.

9. The man in uniform faces stringent service conditions, hardship as a way of life, hostile environment, continuing restrictions and curtailment of fundamental rights. The vast majority think that soldiers get killed or crippled only in war or may be whilst dealing with armed militants. Actually, an even greater number die and get crippled in the course of their daily and often dangerous work.

.

10. The hardship is all encompassing with a non-settled life, frequent transfers and associated trauma of periodically settling in a new place. On an average a soldier who comprise the bulk of the strength, get just one opportunity to have his family with him at his duty station in his entire colour service and no monetary compensation can replace what he lost. The incipient shortages of accommodation that has a long waiting list have continued and will continue as far as one can see.

.

11. The Military man, due to service requirements suffers from early retirement, promotional avenues within the services are limited, re-employment opportunities are limited due to the nature of his education, training and age on retirement. His greatest disadvantage is in the ‘through life earnings’ because of truncated career and which pale in comparison with other government servants.

.

12. In all, 83 per cent of defence services personnel, mostly PBOR retire between the ages of 34 and 37 years. Another 5 to 12 per cent retire at the ages between 44 and 52 years. Only 0.35 per cent retire at the age of 60. While all civil employees serve up to the age of 60 years, they step up to the top of their respective pay bands, get all the three Assured Career Progressions (ACPs) and consequently not only draw increasing pay but end up with much higher pension.

.

13. A comparison of the total amount drawn in terms of pay and pension by a soldier and pay by his counterpart in the civil by the time both reach the age of 60 years is Rs 33.3 lakh more for the civil servant; this figure at the age of 70 is Rs 42.670 lakh. At age 75, it is Rs 47.310 lakh. In the case of a Havaldar, his equivalent in the civil, at age 60, would get Rs 20.261 lakh more and this figure is Rs 26.639 lakh at age 70 and at 75 it is Rs 29.828 lakh. In the case of a Subedar, these figures at ages 60, 70 and 75 years are Rs 13.979 lakh, Rs 18.911 lakh and Rs 21.277 lakh respectively, more for the civil servant.

.

14. A soldier retiring at 35 years of age will live through at least four Central Pay Commissions and suffer their dispensations for retirees. Whereas his counterpart in the civil will not only continue to benefit from successive CPCs while still in service for an additional 25 years, but on retirement will be effected by just one CPC, assuming 70 years as the average age expectancy. Therefore, even after OROP is granted, defence personnel will continue to suffer these gross disadvantages.

.

15. The military man’s constitutional rights are curtailed. These have consequent financial and other repercussions that may not be so obvious. On the one side he is tied for life to the service and even when he has done minimum pensionable service, has no growth potential in the service, he cannot go and look for employment elsewhere to better his financial and social prospects because of exigencies of service. In fact he is bonded for life and this has been a cause for discomfort for some time. On the other, he is denied the right to form unions and demand and negotiate better terms and conditions, on the assumption that the government and the nation will look after and safeguard his interest, always and every time. But when that trust falters, it is bound to open wounds, create fissures, eruptions in unforeseen and unanticipated ways and wise nations would dread to travel that road. The current agitation by a section of the AFV, including some very senior officers who took to the streets, does not bode well for the future or speak well for governance or the political masters.

.

16. The Defence services have to be distinct, elitist, disciplined, ritualistic and must believe that every man is the only one charged with defending the country, is well cared for and when the need arises, true to his beliefs, will willingly sacrifice everything for the common cause, to the last man and the last bullet. Such soldiers have to be mentally conditioned and conditions for the same have to be created in peace time. They have to be treated differently, keeping in mind their search for status, perks, privileges and compensated better for financial independence whilst in service, on retirement and if he is injured or killed, then the welfare of his family he leaves behind.

.

Civil Services Personnel – A Comparison

.

17. CS officers who enter through the competitive route have just about everything going for them. For starters, on the basic matters of pay, pension and allowances they get what the man in uniform gets without all the handicaps, problems and having to worry about the future and the care of the family and all the handicaps spelled out for those in uniform.

.

18. They have long tenures in every station, accommodation is not a problem and many have more than one government accommodation against their name. They are assured of promotions unless he has been ‘caught’ and can continue to serve till 60 with many getting extensions to 65 and even beyond. As they draw up the panels and specifications for any post, post retirement many of them are ‘accommodated in government / semi- government / sinecure appointments including as Directors in firms and most of the rest go into service with the private sector because of the knowledge and influence that they wield.

.

19. Rank structure is such that most of them rise to be Secretaries and retire with OROP at top of the scale. The less fortunate are accommodated through the assured progression route, wherein an officer in a particular batch in the CS is promoted over his batch mates, they would automatically move up and get a pay promotion, on a nonfunctional basis, two years later. It could not get any better.

.

20. There seem to be no grounds for the CS to complain about their emoluments or to demand parity with the Defence services and it certainly does not extend to Equal Pay for Same Ranks. We had separate Pay and Pension Regulations and both the Civil and Military should work within separate regulations.

.

Recommendations of Various Committees.

.

21. The logic for OROP is quite apparent. From judicial point of view and from the angle of Legislature, there is definitely a case in the demand of OROP. But whenever a study on OROP has been ordered, the study has been done in isolation with specific exclusion of the affected personnel, namely the Ex Servicemen community. It was done with the wisdom of only the Civilian Government officials, whose concern is, understandably, to reduce the fiscal burden on the Government; to stop the drain from the Government Exchequer. Another and equally valid point has to be borne in mind, while we discuss any issue related to the Services, and that history has shown that the administration yields only to the massive strength of collective bargaining. This is not a palatable option to a large number of the Veterans and a source of strength for their masters to deny them their due.

.

22. Many commissions and committees have examined and agreed to the OROP. For some excuse or the other the bureaucracy fails to notice their recommendations. In reply to the Letter from Mr. Rajeev Chandrasekhar MP, the Raksha Mantri has correctly stated that a number of committees and commissions which were not necessarily bureaucratic committees had examined OROP, but has wrongly contended that the issue was not found acceptable due to various reasons.

.

23. Under paragraph 2 of the Committee of Secretaries Report, the Committee has drawn attention to the recommendations / observations of the following:

.

 Estimate Committee on Resettlement of ESM (1980-81)

.

 Shri Singh Deo Minister of State for Defence of that time

.

 Fourth Central Pay Commission (1986)

.

 High Level Empowered Committee headed by Shri Sharad Pawar the Defence Minister (1991)

.

 Fifth Central Pay Commission (1986)

.

 Inter Ministerial Committee (2004)

.

 The Prime Minister

.

 The Group of Minister (Jan 2005)

.

 Sixth Central Pay Commission (1986)

.

 The Supreme Court Judgment (IESL Vs UoI 1991 1 SCR 158)

.

 The Supreme Court Judgment (KL Rathi Vs UoI 1997(3) AISLJ 207)

.

 Ministry of Law

.

24. However, the Committee, for some reasons has chosen to selectively interpret the above studies but also omit to draw the attention to the observations/ recommendations of the following, which are extremely relevant, important and central to our demands:

.

 The Supreme Court Judgment (DS Nakra Vs UoI 17/12/1982)

.

 The Supreme Court Judgment (Major General SPS Vains Vs UoI Special leave petition No. 12357 of 2006)

.

 Parliamentary Standing Committee for Defence (Para 99 of the Report 2003)

.

25. It is not as if that no one has got OROP. The senior most Civil Service officers have given it to themselves as has been given to the Judges, MPs, MLAs, DGs of Police and a handful of AFVs too. What do the other governments of the important nations do for their armed forces? They all, without exception give OROP, provide separate Pay Commissions and separate Regulations for Pay and Pension and in Britain, there is even a Standing Commission that grants annual pension increase to the AFVs.

.

A thankless country remembers God and soldiers only during war and adversity, civilized nations honour their Soldiers even when there is no war

.

Other Cogent Considerations

.

26. CS and the bureaucrats have long been envious of the "status in society" of military personnel and their approval by the public. The civil servants fail to recognize the sacrifices made by the military and their families and there has long existed a culture of jealousy towards the Armed Forces within the CS in general and the Ministry of Defence in particular and anything to do with National Security, which they regard as their territory. There is not one senior defense officer in any position of power in the national security apparatus. As far as AFV affairs are concerned, it is a travesty of justice that all our proposals go before an ‘interested and motivated’ party, the Secretary, Ex-servicemen’s Affairs, what can be expected of him?

.

27. General Sinha (former Governor of J&K) earlier this month wrote in a newspaper article “the nation’s ultimate weapon, the Army must never fail the nation. The Indian Army has been performing this role admirably; executing the nation’s will but never imposing its will.

.

‘Yet the fear of the man on horseback has haunted our political leadership and has been exploited by the civilian bureaucracy for its vested interests”.

.

This has led to the neglect of the Armed Forces by the political masters in many ways and isolated it from any role outside the service and with the levers of power. The armed forces have No role in the portals of power. Indian Armed Forces must be extremely poorly led, mentally ill equipped and lack cerebral power that there is none and there has never been any senior officer in a meaningful national role including and particularly on security matters. It is a sad commentary and a failure of the top defense and political leadership through the years and is now on display on the issue of OROP. The nation can throw lakhs of crores in scams, in subsidies, to keep bankrupt PSUs afloat, to win political brownie points and elections, but can’t spare a few thousand crores on the welfare of the defence forces personnel, who lack leadership and a political constituency –– a telling commentary on our priorities.

.

28. Few countries have used their military might, more than India to defend their borders and maintain order within. With a history of four wars since Independence, incessant insurgencies and expanding terrorism, India should be imparting lessons to the world on the importance of maintaining a powerful and motivated military. From Siachin to Arunachal to Kanyakumari, for anything too serious or too dangerous, be it, natural calamities, epidemic, riots, disruption of essential services, failure of civil administration –– even for salvaging the national honour in fiascos like the CWG –– the Government and the people alike have always turned to the Armed Forces for solutions and they have never belied nation’s faith in them.

.

29. As mentioned earlier, having been deprived of important constitutional rights the armed forces reposed full trust in the party and the Government in power and since independence there was, earlier, never an occasion when this faith was broken. It is for the first time that this faith has been breached and AFVs supported by the serving community has taken to the streets and it could, in future, result in fearful consequences as the safety valve of trust is no longer operating. We just have to see the winds that blew in the Tahir Square or more recently across the Jantar Mantar and mind that everyone has limits to patience and the suffering he can take.

.

The pension of a soldier, world over has been more in the nature of a compensation paid by the people in recognizance of the sacrifices by a soldier and his family, in the performance of the Duty in the defence of the Nation. The compensation cannot be measured against any scale. It is the Nation’s contribution to a soldier out of gratefulness, as a possible due within the limited resources available.”

.

-Standing Parliamentary Committee.

If this was true then Supreme Court would not have been pained, to say (on 1 April 2010) “We regret to say that Army officers and Army men are being treated in a shabby manner by the Government.”

Conclusion

30. In view of the foregoing, the GOI (read CS) arguments for declining implementation based on administrative, financial and legal stand fully compromised. The un-necessary alienation of some 3 million AFVs and many millions of their brethren is an un-necessary self-inflicted wound by the polity. Similarly, the CS demand for parity with the military also stands demolished.

.

31. We therefore recommend that OROP should be extended to the Armed Forces, to all ranks, PBOR and Officers, across the board. There should be a provision to the effect that any future enhancement in the pension would be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.

.

Navy Foundation - A Brief

.

Navy Foundation is a pan India organization of retired Naval Officers established over two decades ago for the revival of Maritime interest in the Country and to generate its awareness in the minds of the people. The President of India is the Patron in Chief.

.

At New Delhi we regularly conduct seminars and lectures to highlight maritime interests and security concerns. We also render help to the needy and provide assistance for charitable, social and philanthropic causes. We also take up causes of Naval Veterans, their families and their welfare.

……………………………………………………………………………………..

Navy Foundation DC, 53 Kota House, New Delhi 110011 Mob 9811668776

21 April, 2011