OROP and other issues of Defence Veterans needing urgent resolution

One Rank One Pension (OROP) and issues of concern of Defence Veterans needing urgent resolution – IESM writes to MPs

Dear Veterans,

Letter to Members of Parliament on the above subject dated 02 Nov 2019 is enclosed herewith for your information widest circulation please.

With Regards,

Jai Hind,

Yours Sincerely,

Maj Gen Satbir Singh, SM (Retd),
Advisor United Front of Ex Servicemen &
Chairman Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM)

---

Dated: 02 Nov 2019

ONE RANK ONE PENSION (OROP) & ISSUES OF CONCERN OF DEFENCE VETERANS NEEDING URGENT RESOLUTION

Dear Members of Parliament,

1. We wish to bring to your notice that long pending demand of defence fraternity of OROP has not yet been implemented. Hon’ble Prime Minister and President of BJP Sh. JP Nadda have time and again stated at various forums that OROP has been implemented. With grievously hurt feelings and anguish, we wish to inform you that such statements by our Hon’ble Prime Minister are of serious concern to us. Had the OROP been implemented as per the definition stated by MoS Sh. Rao Inderjit Singh on 02 Dec 2014 in the parliament, the Ex Servicemen would not have been on the road across the country protesting for the non-implementation of OROP. On 31 Oct 2019, Ex Servicemen have completed 1600 days of continuous Protest Movement executed peacefully with dignity, respect and in the best traditions of soldiering.

2. There are serious anomalies in the Govt of India Min of Def Notification No 12 (I)/2014/D (Pen/Pol)-part –II dated 07 Nov 2015 wherein the Govt is purported to have implemented OROP. The serious anomalies have been brought to the Notice of the Govt on numerous occasions, but these anomalies have not yet been rectified. Ex-servicemen were forced to approach Hon’ble Supreme Court for grant of full OROP. Hon’ble Supreme Court in its order dated 01 May 2019 (copy attached). Asked the MoD to resolve the anomalies to the extent possible and the next date of hearing was to take place on 06 Aug 2019. However, the Hon’ble judge hearing the case was busy in hearing Ram Mandir Case and our OROP case hearing was not listed.

3. In the meantime we had a meeting with Hon’ble Raksha Mantri on 01 Jul 2019 and briefed him about Hon’ble Supreme Court order and requested for the rectification of the OROP anomalies. Hon’ble Raksha Mantri assured us for another meeting after a few days for the resolution of OROP anomalies; however, that meeting has not taken place even after writing to Hon’ble Raksha Mantri a number of times.

4. During an Election Rally at Chandigarh President of BJP Sh. JP Nadda stated that his Govt had implemented OROP. The same was denied by Ex-servicemen bodies. To add to our hurt feelings, Hon’ble Prime Minister on 19 Oct 2019 at Rewari in another Election Rally, again stated that his Govt had implemented OROP. We wish to inform that this is far from truth. OROP has not been implemented; what has been implement is One Time increase in Pension. Unless the OROP anomalies are rectified, grant of Full OROP will remain unfulfilled.

5. We also wish to inform you that equalization of pensions of defence personnel was due with effect from 01 Jul 2019 as per Govt Notification dated 07 Nov 2015, but the same has not yet been carried out. The Govt which had issued the notification has not honored its own order of equalization of Pensions after every five years which became due with effect from 01 Jul 2019. We had through a letter dated 03 Sep 2019 written to Hon’ble Raksha Mantri, copy to Hon’ble Prime Minister and three Chiefs and also forwarded the same letter to Secretary (ESW) requesting for immediate equalization of pensions as notified in Govt Notification dated 07 Nov 2015. MoD, instead of implementing equalization of pensions, ordered another committee whose recommendations have not been made public. The outcome of another, “One Man Judicial Committee (OMJC)” which submitted its report to the Govt on 26 Oct 2016 headed by Justice L. Narasimha Reddy, retired Chief Justice of Patna High Court has neither been made public nor implemented.

6. We appeal to our elected representative, Hon’ble Members of Parliament to raise our issues of concern in the coming winter session and ask the Govt to grant Full OROP to the defence personnel, a demand which is long pending, though it had been accepted by both NDA and UPA Govts but not yet implemented. Our Hon’ble Member of Parliament, with anguish we wish to say that “any country which does not respect its soldiers is doomed to fail”.

Please grant Justice to Soldiers.

With Regards,

Jai Hind,

Yours Sincerely,

Maj Gen Satbir Singh,
SM (Retd), Advisor United Front of Ex Servicemen &
Chairman Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM)
Mobile: 9312404269, 01244110570
Email:satbirsm[@]gmail.com
(Source Via e-mail)

Source: ex-servicemenwelfare.blogspot.com

Also check the following links related to this topic:

One Rank One Pension (OROP) – Supreme Court Order Dated 01.05.019

One Rank One Pension – Implementation Instructions & Tables Issued

OROP Circular No. 555 Issued By PCDA – Incompatible With OROP Order Of Defence Ministry

Anomalies In One Rank One Pension – Letter To Defence Minister

OROP For Defence Pensioners – Correction In Concordance Tables Issued For Pre-2016 Pensioners

read more

Oped for Times of India | No need to vilify OROP or disability pensions: Problem of burgeoning military pension bill has practical solution

 

Burgeoning Military Pension Bill- the need for practical solutions

There is a need for ingenious solutions rather than vilification of concepts like OROP or Disability Pension

Major Navdeep Singh

Defence spending is again in news, and with it the common censure of the allocation being consumed mostly by pay and pensions. While we may choose to weigh in with emotional calls of soldierly pride and sacrifice et al, dispassionately seen the hazard the pay and pension bill poses is not easy to ignore. But then the solution does not lie in a maladroit approach of demonising concepts such as ‘One Rank One Pension’ (OROP) or disability benefits.

The heavy bill and its ascension with every pay commission is indeed a cause of worry. Though the defence services have been trying to shed some of their manpower, it is unlikely that this modest curtailment would result in significant savings.

So what is the solution?

The straight response would be to drastically expand the concept of Short Service Commission (SSC), making it more attractive and less exploitative, and also introduce a Short Service Engagement scheme at jawan level with contributory pension, while concomitantly reducing the permanent staff under the existing defined pension (OROP) system. This arrangement can result in maintenance of military strength at the current levels but greatly reduce the pension bill.

Currently, officers are being offered SSC of 10 to 14 years after which they are compulsorily released without any pension, except those who opt (and are selected) for permanent commission. Previously, officers were allowed to exit after 5 years. Needless to state, the current structure leaves them at crossroads without pension or guaranteed employment almost in middle age with peak family commitments. The way out of the quagmire is simple. Such SSC officers must be made members of a contributory pension scheme under the National Pension System (NPS) as is now applicable to civilian employees. Officers under the Short Service Appointment scheme of Indian Coast Guard are already members of NPS, denying the same to their military counterparts is anyway incongruous. There is also a requirement to protect their status or seniority if they opt for civil government employment after release. Similarly, there is a need to introduce a Short Service Engagement scheme for recruitment at lower ranks- individuals who will serve for 10 years and then released with NPS benefits and “ex-serviceman status”. Obviously, these Short Service schemes would be voluntary and concurrent to regular entries which shall continue to be on OROP dispensation. However, gradually the number of the former may be amplified and the latter reduced.

The establishment would have to find ingenious, albeit practical and non-exploitative ways, to reduce the bill, and demonising OROP or disability pensions is not one of them. OROP is mandated by the Cabinet and was promised by successive governments to cater to the massively curtailed tenure of defence personnel who start retiring in their 30s. There is no going back on it. The way out is to reduce future OROP beneficiaries by rationalising permanent staff.

Similarly, the recent furore over disability pensions was unpleasant. Frequent transfers, regimented lifestyle, curtailment of freedoms and inability to cater to domestic commitments result in aggravation of common medical conditions in soldiers, a reality all militaries face globally. Finding ways to reduce disability benefits is a cloddish approach which will not curtail the incidence of disability. Rather, the attempt should be to introduce policies to reduce stress & strain, provide comfort and succour to soldiers to reduce the prevalence of disability and consequently disability benefits. It would be imprudent and indeed irrationally unique for us as a nation to attempt to vilify military disabilities to save pennies rather than making lives of soldiers better.

Lateral induction of soldiers to other organisations such as Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) has also been propagated by successive pay commissions but opposed by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). Perhaps the reason might be valid to an extent. CAPFs would not want military veterans parachuting into their ranks and blocking their career progression. But then there could be a solution by simply raising a separate organisation of military veterans under the MHA and employ them for duties configuring with their past expertise or utilize them for national reconstruction roles or executing government schemes.

The military pension bill is not an unruly monster, however what is required to tame it is a balanced but determined and humane political executive, and it seems the current Raksha Mantri might just fit that description.

The author is a high court lawyer and writes on law, military and public policy.

read more

No need to vilify OROP or disability pensions: Problem of burgeoning military pension bill has practical solution

Defence spending is again in the news, and with it the common censure of the allocation being consumed mostly by pay and pensions. While we may choose to weigh in with emotional calls of soldierly pride and sacrifice et al, dispassionately seen the hazard the pay and pension bill poses is not easy to ignore. But then the solution does not lie in a maladroit approach of demonising concepts such as ‘One Rank One Pension’ (OROP) or disability benefits.

The heavy bill and its ascension with every pay commission is indeed a cause of worry. Though the defence services have been trying to shed some of their manpower, it is unlikely that this modest curtailment would result in significant savings. So what is the solution?

The straight response would be to drastically expand the concept of Short Service Commission (SSC), making it more attractive and less exploitative, and also introduce a Short Service Engagement scheme at jawan level with contributory pension, while concomitantly reducing the permanent staff under the existing defined pension (OROP) system. This arrangement can result in maintenance of military strength at the current levels but greatly reduce the pension bill.

Currently, officers are being offered SSC of 10 to 14 years after which they are compulsorily released without any pension, except those who opt (and are selected) for permanent commission. Previously, officers were allowed to exit after 5 years. Needless to say, the current structure leaves them at a crossroads without pension or guaranteed employment almost in middle age, with peak family commitments.

The way out of the quagmire is simple. Such SSC officers must be made members of a contributory pension scheme under the National Pension System (NPS) as is now applicable to civilian employees. Officers under the Short Service Appointment scheme of Indian Coast Guard are already members of NPS, denying the same to their military counterparts is anyway incongruous. There is also a requirement to protect their status or seniority if they opt for civil government employment after release.

Similarly, there is a need to introduce a Short Service Engagement scheme for recruitment at lower ranks – individuals who will serve for ten years and then be released with NPS benefits and “ex-serviceman status”. Obviously, these Short Service schemes would be voluntary and concurrent to regular entries which shall continue to be on OROP dispensation. However, gradually the number of the former may be amplified and the latter reduced.

The establishment would have to find ingenious, albeit practical and non-exploitative ways, to reduce the bill, and demonising OROP or disability pensions is not one of them. OROP is mandated by the Cabinet and was promised by successive governments to cater to the massively curtailed tenure of defence personnel who start retiring in their 30s. The way out is to reduce future OROP beneficiaries by rationalising permanent staff.

Similarly, the recent furore over disability pensions was unpleasant. Frequent transfers, regimented lifestyle, curtailment of freedoms and inability to cater to domestic commitments result in aggravation of common medical conditions in soldiers, a reality militaries face globally. The attempt should be to introduce policies to reduce stress and strain, provide comfort and succour to soldiers to reduce the prevalence of disability and consequently disability benefits. It would be imprudent to attempt to vilify military disabilities to save pennies rather than making lives of soldiers better.

Lateral induction of soldiers to other organisations such as Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) has also been propagated by successive pay commissions but opposed by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). Perhaps the reason might be valid to an extent. CAPFs would not want military veterans parachuting into their ranks and blocking their career progression. But then there could be a solution by simply raising a separate organisation of military veterans under the MHA and employ them for duties configuring with their past expertise, or utilise them for national reconstruction roles or executing government schemes.

What is required to tame the military pension bill is a balanced but determined and humane political executive, and it seems the current defence minister might just fit that description.

DISCLAIMER : Views expressed above are the author's own.

AUTHOR

Navdeep Singh

The writer is a high court lawyer and author

WRITE FOR TOI BLOGS

TOP COMMENT 

(1)

No easy or swift solution suggests itself. However, with increasing life spans, a way will have to be found to limit the expenditure on pensions, now about one trillion. With proper training and orientation, retiring jawans are ideal for induction into the CAPF. Not an issue on which undue deference should be shown to their career planning and progression.

read more

OROP REVISION SCENARIO :- AN ANALYSIS BY BISWASDA FROM THE RTI REPLY RECEIVED BY HIM

Ranks up to Havildar and equivalents will get maximum benefit in OROP-2. Lesser the service--more the benefit. X-Gp ESMs will have some extra benefit as x-pay has been hiked in 7 CPC. Nb Subedars with lesser service will have marginal benefits. For higher ranks and higher QS :- I can not say anything positive. Post-OROP pensioners getting lesser pension than Pre-OROP will be brought to same level. For Higher ranks and higher QS, if the average of max & min falls below one's present pension, his present pension will be protected.
 This is not my wild prediction, but based on analysis of data. ESMs who will have marginal or no benefit will surely be disappointed, but there is nobody to blame on. After all, OROP is all about bringing the pension of past pensioners to the level of present pensioners. If present pensioners are drawing less, what can any committee do?
 Total 42506 Nb Subedars have retired after OROP-1- i.e., after 01.07.2014. Out of them 35732 (84.06%) are drawing lesser than Pre-OROP pensioners. These are 100% authentic figures. Now you can understand the possibility of hike of NB Subedars in OROP-2. However, Some of the NB Subeders with lesser service will have marginal benefits. X-Gp Nb Subeders also will have some benefits.
Out of post-OROP retirees, Sepoy 5.05%, Naik 1.93% and Havildar 3.01% are getting lesser than Pre-OROP pensioners. So there will be substantial increase for these three ranks and their equivalent ranks. For X-Gp hike will be a bit more.

read more

SHORT BRIEFING BY BISWASDA FROM THE VOLUMINOUS RTI REPLY RECEIVED BY HIM

UPDATE   ON  OROP-2  REVISION  AS PER  RTI  REPLY  RECEIVED  BY  EX-SGT.  M. BISWAS

Today after long wait I got the so-called 107-page document from Ministry of Defence in reply of my RTI. As it is not possible to scan and publish the scanned copies of such voluminous data, I will give my fallowing observations and impressions for the information of eagerly waiting ESMs.

1.     Most of the information provided are inter-departmental correspondence before formation of OROP-2 committee. Majority of these documents are already available in the environment in terms of my earlier RTI reply and RTI reply received by Air Marshall Savur (Retd.)

2.     OMJC Repot is not tagged to OROP-2 and OROP-2 committee will not take OMJC Report into account for revision.

3.     Two meetings have taken place by OROP-2 Committee and the deliberations have been forwarded to RM, RRM, Sec. to RM, ESW and many others for their comments. Nobody has replied yet and it seems that nobody is in a hurry to settle the OROP-2 issues.

4.     I have not got the minutes of the OROP-2 committee meetings but from the inter-departmental correspondence I came to know that CGDA has raised two issues. One: the terms of reference of OROP-2 committee were to fix the modalities and methodologies of OROP-2. So they are not obliged to make the table. Two: there is no officer of TRIPAS in the committee, so how it is possible to reach a conclusion for OROP-2?

5.     Letters have been sent to Army, Navy & Air Force pay-cells to supply latest live data of 2018 retirees and presumably they are working on it.

6.     I found the role of DESW is positive, as they are sending reminders that the stipulated period of one month for submission of report is surpassed.

7.     DESW is kind enough to give me copies of a few confidential letters, which I can not reveal here for legal reasons.

8.     My overall impression is: OROP-2 train is slow-moving but surely on track and we may have to wait for a few more months to know the outcome and get our arrears credited to our Bank Accounts.

read more