Some Highlights
in different colours to be noted
As we
submitted our Report to the Raksha Mantri today, we felt proud as well as
relieved.
Proud,
since we were a part of a historic opportunity initiated almost seven decades
into independence, to not only look into steps for minimizing litigation
initiated against soldiers and veterans by the Ministry of Defence but also to
address the status quo in the various systems of redressal of grievances, and
improvement thereon, for the men and women in uniform and also defence
civilians who so proudly serve us in trying circumstances. Relieved, since the
last few months were heavy on all of us, as we went about this onerous task
diligently and honestly and in great detail within the granted time so that we
do not let you down.
Burdened
by thousands of cases involving the MoD and the dissatisfaction on this
account, the Raksha Mantri had constituted a Committee of Experts for review of
service and pension matters including potential disputes, minimizing litigation
and strengthening institutional mechanisms related to redressal of grievances.
The step was in line with the Prime Minister’s vision that Government
departments should concentrate on core issues of governance rather than wasting
time and resources on unproductive activities. The Committee functioned almost
like a Blue Ribbon Commission by going into minutiae of multiple issues and by
interacting with various wings of the MoD as well as the Defence Services.
The 509
page Report is a result of that hard work for which thanks is due to all
Members, that is, former Adjutant General Lt Gen Mukesh Sabharwal, former
Military Secretary Lt Gen Richard Khare, former Judge Advocate General Maj Gen
T Parshad and Kargil War-disabled and inspirational personality Maj DP Singh.
All of us were equal partners in the final result.
We would
also like to place our gratitude to the Raksha Mantri, Mr Manohar Parrikar, for
not just being willing to take the bold step of identifying these issues which
have caused major heartburn but more importantly for ensuring that only
apolitical personalities with domain knowledge were a part of the Panel and
also ensuring that there was no interference in our functioning and for
encouraging us to render honest, candid and sincere observations without fear
or favour.
We assure
you that we performed our duty without any personal baggage or pre-conceived
notions. Our approach was to make certain that practical on-ground efforts be
made to reduce litigation, especially appeals, and also steps taken towards
maintenance of harmony between employees and the establishment and balancing of
rights of both parties which would lead to an increase in productivity and also
enable the Government to focus upon administration rather than avoidable
disputes with its own human resources. Our approach was conciliatory and we
have consciously postulated only practical, progressive, workable, reformatory
and gradual solutions rather than impractical or knee-jerk revolutionary ideas.
On implementation, we are confident that this Report would result in a complete
legal, administrative, cultural and social shift in the system bringing in
harmony and a calming effect.
In our
Report, which contains 75 recommendations, we have touched upon various aspects
of pension and service matters, discipline, vigilance and promotion
issues, military justice reform, issues concerning civil employees and areas of potential disputes.
We have
already recommended that our Report be made public in the spirit of
transparency. However, till the Report is fully in public domain, the broader
contours of the same can be spelt out.
We have
attempted to identify service and pension related policies, including those
affecting disabled soldiers and widows, which have been interpreted in the
favour of employees and have attained judicial finality at High Court/Supreme
Court level but in which the establishment
is still filing appeals, and have recommended theimmediate withdrawal of all such appeals and harmonizing such policies
and conceding similar cases in tune with judicial pronouncements. This includes issues related to declaration of in-service disabilities wrongly as “Neither Attributable to, Nor
Aggravated by Military Service” by the system and injuries sustained while on
authorized leave. We have taken note of the rising
disabilities due to the inherent stress and strain of military service for
which due benefits must be released. We have observed that the default reaction
of official instrumentalities is ‘to appeal’ in cases decided in favour of
employees and there is resistance to come to terms with the fact that the
officialdom has ‘lost’ a case. Many appeals are fuelled by prestige and
official egotism. We have also expressed concerns regarding over reliance on
finance entities in decision-making and have
stated that at best finance entities can comment upon financial implications
but cannot go into the realm of merits or demerits of subjects which fall in
the domain of medical or legal knowledge. Finance entities cannot override decisions of executive
authorities competent to take those decisions under the Rules of Business or
delegated powers. We have also recommended more role for all ranks in
consultative process concerning pensionary policies.
We have
recommended initiation of greater personal interaction and opportunity of
hearing in the system of formal Complaints and Petitions so as to give a better
role to human interaction rather than the one-way noting sheet method and to
assist in providing outlet and catharsis to individuals related to their
grievances. We have also propagated greater constructive usage of social media,
including initiation of blogs by senior commanders, to promote an interactive
process with the rank and file. We have recommended a face to face ‘collegiate’
system of decision-making in various aspects rather than the file circulation
method. We have recommended more transparency in the system of promotion boards
and matters related to promotions and confidential reports and decentralization
of powers from power-centers that may have emerged and also changes in the
system of dispensation of Military Justice.
The
recommendations in the Chapter of Military Justice Reform include steps that
can be taken without any legislative change such as introduction of permanent
infrastructure for Courts Martial at specified stations to reduce ad hocism and
reduction of Command influence in the process of military justice. We have also
recognized other areas such as lack of adherence to the concept of separation
of powers and independence of JAG Branch requiring statutory or legislative
intervention for which we have recommended a high level Study Group to ensure
that reforms in these very important areas are not ignored and are configured
with the times and the best national and global practices.
We have
also identified that civilians employed in the MoD are unsung heroes on whom
adequate energy is not focussed. We have identified many issues concerning
defence civilians which have attained finality at the High Court or Supreme
Court level which need to be resolved by issuance of corrective policies.
We have
recognized other areas of potential disputes including those of disabled
cadets, women officers and Short Service Commissioned Officers. For SSCOs, we
have recommended the grant of ECHS, reversion to the 5+5+4 system of engagement
with graded grant of benefits and introduction of a Contributory Pension
Scheme. We have also recommended restoration of outpatient medical facilities
withdrawn from SSCOs and ECOs during late 2000s.
As far as
appeals filed by the Government are concerned, we have stated that in the case
of both civil and defence employees/pensioners, the orders of the CAT or the
AFT if rendered in their favour should ordinarily be accepted and appeals by
the Government should only be made in exceptional cases with the High Court
being the last forum for appeal as a matter of policy.
While we
went about our task sincerely, there was a minority which had imputed that the
Committee had been appointed by the Government and hence would be speaking the
language of the establishment. We wish to place on record here that we have
been thoroughly objective in our Report as desired by the Raksha Mantri himself
and we were functioning in an Honorary capacity after squeezing out time from
our respective professions and routines and hence I personally found such
voices not in good taste. The end result is objective and dispassionate and
demolishes that minority view.
More
details on the subject would now be made available by the Ministry of Defence
when the Report is made public. The process of consideration of the Report
would be initiated after 25th December 2015.
We wish
to thank everyone for the unstinting support to the cause of defence employees,
including our men and women in uniform, and we are hopeful of a colossal
turning point from today due to this effort personally initiated by the Raksha
Mantri.
Jai Hind.
Navdeep
No comments:
Post a Comment