To
Shri Pranab Mukherjee
Hon’ble the President &
The Supreme Commander of the Armed
Forces.
CC:
Hon’ble the Prime Minister,
Hon’ble the CJI,
Hon’ble the RM,
Smt. Sonia Gandhi,
some Leading Media houses
SUB: OROP, VOLUNTARY RETIREMENT CASES,
BHRAM, AND CLARITY
May it please your honour,
Apropos of
my representation / appeal dated 5.9.2015 to your honour, appended to the
instant mail, it was a great delight to see in the media the clarification
promptly issued on 6.9.2015 by none else but Hon’ble the Prime Minister,
apparently to allay the apprehensions of many a veteran who would have raised their
concerns, and amongst whom my voice was also a humble one.
Sir, the
flip side of the said prompt response, however, was that the Hon’ble PM’s
clarification could only be interpreted in one single way and that is, ‘OROP is
intended not to be given to the armed forces pensioners who have not
superannuated or invalidated (invalided) out of service’.
Mr. Narendra
Modi had resented, ‘VRS kaa Bhram failaya jaa rahaa hai,
opposition ke dwara’. For a change he wasn’t right, as the seed of this so
called Bhram was sown by the Raksha Mantri himself on
5.9.2015.
Even on
6.9.2015, the said Bhram remained but in a slightly modified
form that the OROP would apply not to those pensioners who chose to hang their
boots before their superannuation had arrived. As if these pensioners have
overnight become outcast and were liable to be ostracized for some ‘offence’
they had purportedly committed years back.
Sir, there
is a well laid down procedure of your government for ‘retirement at one’s
own request’. It is not a procedure to deal with any offender. It doesn’t
contemplate imposition of any sanctions, embargos or any forfeiture on the
applicant.
Leaving
service on one’s own volition (duly approved by the government) is one’s
fundamental constitutional right. Is it to be, later in time, treated as an
offence, attracting penalties, forfeiture, and sanctions?
The question
is, is it a Bhram that the armed forces retirees other than
the superannuated and the invalided, are not intended to be given the OROP?
This Bhram has firmly come into my mind after hearing the PM
and RM themselves, and not any opposition leader (s). And I don’t intend to
spread this Bhram, to disadvantage the Hon’ble PM’s party in the
forthcoming and already planned Bihar election. I want to forthrightly urge you
the constitutional authorities to forthwith clear the air on this point. And
having installed you as such, as a citizen, I do want to assert my right to
expect you so to do.
Conversely,
if it is not a Bhram, I want to humbly ask if the law related to
the pensioners could be flouted in such casual manner, disregarding the
Constitution, statutes and the relevant Supreme Court judgments on the subject
? It is known that the governance always has political undertones, but then can
one be rash, let one first succeed in making a law consistent with the
Constitution, and think of imposing it only then, whether the people like it or
not.
Sir, there
is no gainsaying that your honour has at his command all the legal brains of
this country including even the Supreme Court, to ascertain what is legal and
what is not. And so is also the case with the all powerful Government of India.
Besides, no one knows better than you the constitutional authorities, what is
right and what is good.
I,
therefore, urge your honour for clarity and transparency. Today a large number
of armed forces pensioners who did not superannuate or invalided out of service
need the clarity and transparency. They are shocked as to why this should
happen to them. They are also apprehensive if, at this rate, your government
tomorrow would not pass an order to scrap their pension altogether
A copy of
this mail is being sent to the Congress President as also some Media houses, as
they happened to be referred to in this mail.
With
profound regards
Wg Cdr A K
Aggarwal (Retd.)
K-89, Sector-25, Noida – 201301 (U.P.)
Cell: 9871102287
(A Prematurely retired armed forces pensioner)
Presently: Advocate on Record in the Supreme Court of India
B.E. (University of Roorkee, 1979)
M.Tech. (IIT Delhi, 1985)
LL.B. (Jeevaji University, 1998)
10.09.2015
CC:
Subject: OROP: A Humble Representation
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2015
To
Shri Pranab Mukherjee
Hon’ble the President &
The Supreme Commander of the Armed
Forces.
CC:
Hon’ble the Prime Minister,
Hon’ble the CJI,
Hon’ble the RM
SUB: OROP, LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF THE SUBJECT OF
THE ARMED FORCES RELATED PENSION, BLUNDERS BY THE
GOVERNMENT AND FUTURE RAMIFICATIONS.
May it please your Honour,
As
an ordinary citizen, it is my proud privilege to address Hon’ble the President
on this dually auspicious day of Shri Krishana Janamashtami & Teachers’
day, and a President who has shunned being addressed as ‘Your Excellency, Your
Highness’ etc. and who is very much like an ordinary citizen like us, a
teacher, an advocate, having had a long track record of an exemplary public
life.
My
respectful greetings to your honour and to the other constitutional & other
authorities to whom this mail is addressed.
We
are also equally fortunate to have a Prime Minister, working round the clock
for keeping up to his commitments to the nation and its people, with great
innovation, accountability and strict control on the workforce at his command.
Announcement
of OROP has come about on this dually auspicious day, undoubtedly as a result
of mid-night oil burning by the team of your government, after 42 years of mere
lip service and fooling around if I may use such a light word.
The
OROP announcement would have certainly cheered up the 26 Lakh odd armed forces
pensioners / family pensioners and over 12 Lakh serving soldiers, had it not
been for a ‘silly’ lapse committed by the team, that appears to be borne out of
lack of understanding of the pension of the armed forces of the union.
VRS
or Voluntary Retirement Scheme, is something unknown to the armed forces. There
is no golden handshake in the armed forces. In fact a soldier regularly and
routinely remains in what is called a ‘reserve’ (to serve at the call of
nation) for several years after retirement even. VRS is applicable to the PSU
Banks and the other PSUs where employer & employee divorce each other by
mutual consent in lieu of a monetary offer (call it alimony). There is no
pension thereafter as the deal is done once and for all.
In
the armed forces, on the contrary, all receive pension when they hang their
boots, which in the words of Hon’ble the Apex Court, is a ‘differed pay’ &
and not a ‘dole’. Only the ‘short service commission’ officers do not get
pension.
Today
our Hon’ble Defense Minister announcing that ‘those who took VRS will not be
entitled to OROP’ gave a very sad impression that the person is yet to
understand what the armed forces and the nuances related to its governance are.
He could not face the nation eye to eye, lacked conviction while making a short
pronouncement, stuttered and left as if wanted to escape.
VRS
is a term unknown in the parlance of the armed forces and secondly there are
lakhs in the defence force that call it a day before superannuation but
definitely after completing the ‘full pensionable service’ which is 20 years as
per the latest norms of your government. It is paradoxical to say that OROP
(Rank & Pension being the only constituent elements whereof), will not be
given to one who holds a ‘Rank’ for life and who has earned ‘full pension’ i.e.
who left active service only after completing full pensionable service as per
the current norms, just because he chose to retire before superannuation.
Sir,
your government could have avoided embarrassing itself in full public gaze even
though it seemed under heavy pressures perhaps from some vested interests/
lobbies etc., if not out of sheer lack of understanding of the subject.
Be
that as it may. We are aware that courts are there to set right the mistakes
routinely committed by the governments inadvertently or many a time
deliberately, perhaps in a bid to defer the repercussions of their own
promises/pronouncements, during the term of their government. We are also aware
that the courts have traditionally been doing such a job as a matter of routine
rather than exception. But the moot question here is, whether the government is
here to deliberately indulge into things that would invariably lead to mass
litigation for years? Hon’ble the Apex Court as also the other courts of
record have, time and again, cautioned the governments to play a model
employer, to desist from unwarranted litigation and in particular to refrain
from dragging soldiers to the court(s).
I
am hopeful that your honour and Shri Narendra Modi being at the helm, things
might not just be left in the unconcerned hands of the file pushing babus, as
the country has been witnessing for decades after decades. I hope for a more
apt and astute handling of this issue.
With
profound regards
Wg Cdr A K Aggarwal (Retd.)
K-89, Sector-25, Noida – 201301 (U.P.)
Cell: 9871102287
(A Prematurely retired armed forces pensioner)
Presently: Advocate on Record in the Supreme Court
of India
B.E. (University of Roorkee, 1979)
M.Tech. (IIT Delhi, 1985)
LL.B. (Jeevaji University, 1998)
No comments:
Post a Comment