One Rank One Pension the right of the ex-servicemen, first. Why?

In the recent TV Panel discussion,



few speakers were advocating that the civilians and the ex-servicemen both deserve the One Rank One Pension.

The defence personnel have the first right over the OROP. This has no link with any other service what so ever. No other service personnel give a commitment of their life, body and limb in the service of the nation.

Very nice views of ‘BCV’ on

Oct 4 2012

WHY OROP ONLY FOR MIL & not 4 others:

“When someone volunteers for the military, they do more than just sign on for a career that may have its difficulties and dangers. They’re asked, in effect, to embrace those dangers, and from that moment on, to waive their fundamental right to preserve their own lives. The Declaration of Independence tells us that all men have the right to life, liberty,and the pursuit of happiness, but those who volunteer for military service effectively give up those rights.
Once in the military, their lives belong to the nation.Their time, their comfort, and ultimately their lives are subject to the whims of their military superiors, who,in turn, are subject to the whims of elected civilian leaders”.
Oct 5 2012

sunlit2: @BCV:”..WHY OROP ONLY FOR MIL & not 4 others..”; Very important aspect. Proud to have faced all the hazards and dislocations of military life. So, that’s not an issue. But fair is fair. Two hard facts justify pension parities: Truncated Careers AND the Steep Pyramid. ……

Balanced View
Undoubtedly the defence personnel have the first claim on the OROP. Govt. can give OROP to the civilians (but paramilitary/CPOs be given OROP before the other civilians) after having given it to the ex-servicemen. As such nearly all the IAS/Group A officers have been granted  One Rank One Pension through backdoor of the NFU since all will be retiring in the pension of the Secretary/Addtl Secy. Also the Govt. has sanctioned the OROP to the Service Chiefs, Vice Chiefs and officers heading the Commands. 
The seniormost officers of the Armed Forces appear to have forgotten the sacred teaching of FM Chetwode:-
“The safety, honour and welfare of your country comes first, always and every time. The honour, welfare and comfort of the men you command, come next. Your own ease, comfort and safety comes last, always and every time.”
That truly epitomizes what a solider stands for and what he should be. Selfless service for the nation and its people is a soldier’s brief, which he is trained to follow unfailingly.
How can the Service Chiefs, Vice Chiefs & the Officers heading the Commands draw/enjoy one rank one pension when the same has been denied to the officers and the men under them?
No doubt, the top is selfish and is worried about its own welfare more than anything else. This is a disturbing trend in the Armed Forces.

Unhelpful attitude against military. Apex court comes to the aid of defence personnel.

by Lt-Gen Harwant Singh (retd)

ON September 4 the Supreme Court gave a landmark judgment, which goes against the Ministry of Defence (MoD). The 4th Central Pay Commission (CPC) gave defence services’ officers up to the rank of brigadier rank pay in addition to the basic pay. The MoD, working in consultation with the CDA (O) and in a most arbitrary manner and without any authority, deducted the rank pay from the emoluments of thousands of the effected officers. That was in the year 1986. From then onwards all efforts to get the MoD to undo this gross injustice have been opposed by it. In this machination and subsequent cussedness have been involved the top bureaucrats in the MoD and successive Defence Ministers. From 1986 till now, a large number of defence services’ officers have died, some during the Kargil war, without getting their rightful dues.

A gutsy Major from the South fought it out in the Kerala High Court. Not willing to relent on its mischief, the MoD went in for a review petition, which too was rejected by the Supreme Court. It took the officer over a decade to get this injustice undone. This was followed by innumerable appeals in most high courts of the country by the officers who had been denied their rank pay. The Supreme Court in its wisdom ordered that all these be clubbed and brought before it. A spirited group called the Retired Defence Officers Association (RODA) obtained a favourable order from the Supreme Court on March 8, 2010. Thereafter, the MoD sought recall of the Supreme Court order. Then on subsequent 10 occasions the Solicitor-General of India sought adjournments, stretching the case to September 2012.

The Solicitor-General told the highest court of the land that the defence services headquarters too were opposed to giving back the rank pay to these officers. However, the defence headquarters gave in writing to the Attorney-General that they did not oppose the grant of rank pay and, on the other hand, fully supported the case of these officers. This letter from the defence headquarters falsified the position of the Solicitor-General and, in fact, he stands exposed for an act of perjury. Consequently, the MoD, throwing all norms of fair play to the winds and in a brazen manner, tried to “arm-twist” the defence services headquarters in asking it to withdraw this letter to the Solicitor-General, which the defence services headquaters declined to do.

The Solicitor-General, as a last ditch attempt, pleaded that the restoration of rank pay be ordered to only those officers whose cases are before the court. Ignoring this mischievous plea, the Supreme Court, on September 4, 2012, ordered that all the effected officers (their number is in thousands) should be paid their dues starting from 1986 to now and taking a lenient view of the MoD’s plea of financial constraints made by the Solicitor-General, reduced the period of interest, which starts from 2006 instead of 1986, and at 6 per cent interest.

The Fifth CPC took away the “running pay band,” which, on the hints of resignation by the three service chiefs, was granted by the Fourth CPC and was introduced to somewhat compensate for extremely limited promotions. In the case of the Sixth CPC, there are 39 anomalies that are still to be resolved. The grant of bounty of Non-Functional Advancement to all Central services officers by the Sixth CPC and denying the same to the defence services officers is not only scandalous but also blatant display of bias against them.

Instead of extending a supporting hand to the defence services, the MoD has in almost every case related to pay and allowances and the status of defence personnel been taking an adversial stance. In the case of the Second Central Pay Commission, (CPC), the MoD fielded the case of pay and allowances of defence personnel “as given”. In the case of the Third CPC, the defence services were not permitted to present their case before the Pay Commission on the specious grounds that the same will adversely effect their discipline! While the absurdity of this stance by the MoD is detestable, the fact that this arrangement was accepted by the services chiefs is equally distressing. In the subsequent CPCs, the defence services could get no support from the MoD and on the other hand its despicable act of illegally depriving the officers of their rank pay in the case of the fourth CPC needs no further elaboration.

The MoD’s stance has always been unhelpful to the military. Such a sustained attitude of the MoD has created deep fissures in its relationship with the military. There is palpable mistrust of the ministry among the armed forces. The adverse fallout of this relationship, at one level, relates to national security, and at another it impacts on the military’s commitment and motivation. The Ministry of Home Affairs fights tooth and nail to promote the interests of, say, the Central Police Organizations ( CPOs-inappropriately called para-military). As opposed to this, the MoD operates in a motivated manner against those of the military. This adversial stance of the MoD has become so visible in that the CPOs, in pay and allowances, are far better placed than the military. These policemen, unlike soldiers who retire at 35 years of age, retire at the age of 60 and further end up getting much higher pension, etc.

This attitude of the MoD towards the defence services has created a climate of mistrust, animosity and disharmony between these two major components of the government. This hiatus has had adverse effect on the pace of modernisation of the military as well.

The Supreme Court judgment of September 4, ordering the government to pay up the amount due to the affected officers starting with 1986, needs to be taken to its logical end by bringing to account all those officers who were responsible for this mischief, including those who have since retired, and ones who have continued to follow the same line. It is time some accountability was jacked into the government functioning, and those who function in an arbitrary and irresponsible manner are hauled over the coals.

The writer is a retired Deputy Chief of Army Staff.

Good news! Some hope from the Committee of Secretaries


Armed forces’ pay fixation: Govt may accept 4 demands
Tribune News Service

New Delhi, September 16
The government is keen to accept at least four of the armed forces’ demands on fixation of their pay and pension. 
The high-powered committee set up by PM Manmohan Singh has given its ideas wherein it has accepted that some of the demands of the forces need to be met immediately as there are glaring anomalies, sources said.

Sources said the committee has recommended that the armed forces be given non-functional upgradation (NFU) to match their counterparts in the IPS, IAS and paramilitary forces.

The grade pay is another issue, the committee has suggested, can be looked into. Thirdly, it has agreed that a common payscale be evolved for in-service jawans. Lastly, it has agreed on removal of all anomalies towards one rank one pension (OROP).

Meanwhile, a fresh calculation has been ordered following a Supreme Court judgment relating to a 25-year-old pay-related case filed by Major Dhanapalan. The court ruled in his favour to correct the anomaly and will impact all officers who were serving then and now.

This had to be factored in before a final announcement. The PM can still make changes as Defence Minister AK Antony was very keen on resolving matters at the earliest and in favour of the forces.

The committee headed by Cabinet Secretary Ajit Seth was formed following an intervention from PM Manmohan Singh on July 8 this year.

The forces protested that they had no representative; the committee specially met the three service chiefs. Its mandate was to deal with six issues of serving officers and jawans and another four issues relating to those who retired.

Sources said the committee was unanimous on payscale for jawans, OROP, grade pay and NFU. The most serious was the NFU issue. The Sixth Central Pay Commission (CPC) recommendations were out in October 2008. The IAS in the post of Joint Secretary (JS) to the Government of India was made eligible for a grade pay of Rs 10,000 a month on completing 22 years of service.


  • Armed forces be given non-functional upgrade to match their counterparts in the IPS, IAS and paramilitary forces
  • Grade pay can be looked into
  • A Common payscale be evolved for in-service jawans
  • Anomalies be removed towards one rank-one pension

Peanuts for the Air Warriors, Soldiers & Sailors

Adapted from:-

Why soldiers have a right to be angry (12 Jul 2012)

by Nitin Gokhale



Name of allowance for Air Warriors / Commissioned Officers, Soldiers, Sailors)  Air Force, Army, Navy Central Armed Police Force/Central Govt employees
Para allowance (for Spl forces and Para personnel) Rs 800 to 1200/pm Rs 7,200 to 11,000/pm for COBRA Battalions (commando battalions)
Disabled employees Thrown out of service immediately Govt has to retain them till 60 yrs under Disability Act
Kashmir/NE Regional HRA Nil Double HRA
When posted in Peace stations in NE like Shillong, Aizawl, entire Sikkim and Ladakh Nil 12.5 per cent of basic as Spl Duty allowance,; double HRA, hardship allowance 25 % of basic pay (for IAS officers of UT cadre) and detachment allowance of Rs 300 per day for all CAPF personnel
Home loan Rs 2.1 lakh Upto Rs 7.1 lakh
HQ allowance Nil Rs 4,000
Instructor allowance (in NDC, War Colleges etc) Rs 1800 for Col & above Rs 19,000
Non-functional upgradation Nil JS Pay at approx 22 yrs. Add Sec pay at 32 yrs
Outfit allowance Rs 3,000 (per three years—8 Uniforms) Rs 7,500 per three yrs
Deputation allowance 5 per cent of basic pay 10 per cent of basic pay


NFU (Non-functional upgradation), frequently asked questions

DOP&T released FAQ on Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU)




Point of doubt


1 What are the recommendations of 6th CPC for grant of Non-Functional Upgradation to for Officers of Organized Group A’ Services? The Government should, consider batch-wise parity while empanelling and /or posting at Centre between respective batches of IAS and other organized Group A services with the gap being restricted to two years. Whenever any IAS officer of a particular batch is posted in the Centre to a particular grade carrying a specific grade pay in pay bands PB-3 or PB-4. grant of higher pay scale on non-functional basis to the officers belonging to batches of organized Group A services that are senior by two years or more should be given by the Government.
2 Whether the recommendations of 6th CPC have been accepted by the Government? Yes. This will also be applicable to the Indian Police Service and the Indian Forest Service in their respective State Cadres for which the relevant cadre controlling authorities will issue the orders, (Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure Notification dated 29th August, 2008 refers)
3 When were the guidelines on NFU issued by DOPT? DOPT have issued instructions on grant of officers of Organized Services in OM No. 14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) dated 24th April, 2009.
4 To whom the instructions are applicable? NFU is applicable to the officers of Organized Group A services in PB-3, PB-4 and in HAG scale also where there is such a Grade in the Service
5 From which date the grant of NFU to officers of Organized group A services is to be made? The benefit is based on the recommendations of 6th CPC and will be available w.e.f the date of posting of IAS officers in various grades on/after 01.01. 2006.
6 What are the eligibility conditions to be met for grant of NFU? The terms and conditions for grant of NFU are prescribed in the Annexure to the OM dated 24.4.2009. As per the same all the eligibility criteria and promotional norms including ‘benchmark’ for upgradation to a particular grade pay would have to be met at the time of screening for grant of higher pay scale under these orders.
7 What is the definition of the term ‘Batch’? For the purpose of grant of NFU the ‘Batch’ for direct recruit officers in the induction grade shall be the year following the year in which competitive exam was held. In subsequent grades the ‘Batch’ would remain the same provided the officer is not superseded due to any reason. In case an officer is superseded the officer would be considered along with the ‘Batch’ with which his seniority is fixed.
8 Where the entry of officers in Organized Group A Service by DR is at STS, JAG level, how the ‘Batch’ shall be reckoned? In respect of officers entering Organized Group A service by DR at STS, JAG level, they shall be assigned the benefit of ‘Batch’ corresponding to the ‘Batch’ of the officers with whom the seniority is clubbed.
9 Whether the benefit is available to Group B officers inducted into the Organized Group A service? Yes. Such officers shall b assigned the benefit of ‘Batch’ corresponding to the batch of the ‘direct recruit’ officers with whom their seniority is clubbed.
10 Whether the officers can exercise option regarding date of fixation in the higher scale as provided in CCS(RP) Rules? Provisions of CCS(RP) Rules, 2008 will apply.
11 Whether retired employees are eligible for the benefit of NFU? Retired officers who are other wise eligible as on due date shall be considered for the benefit of pay upgradation.
12 Whether the scheme is applicable to Scientists, Doctors, etc. who are covered by their own in-situ promotion schemes? Non-Functional Upgradation and other in situ promotion schemes are separate schemes and it would not be desirable to mix one with the other. The benefit of NFU to Organized Group A Services shall not be applicable to the officers in those Organized Services where FCS and DACP Schemes are already operating and where officers are already separately covered by their own in-situ Career Progression Schemes.
13 Whether DOPT OM dated 13.4.2010 on communication of ACR prior to 2008-09 is applicable while considering cases for NFU? The instructions issued in this Department’s OM dated 13.4.2010 on communication of ACRs prior to 2008- 09 shall be applicable for considering cases of NFU also.
14 What is the due date of upgradation if found unfit on the date assigned to a batch? If an officer is not found eligible during a vacancy year and is found fit in the next vacancy year, NFU may be granted from the 1st April. i.e. the 1st day of the next vacancy year.
15 How to consider cases where the officers do not meet the qualifying service in the vacancy year in which the batch is covered for non functional up gradation? If an officer does not meet the eligibility requirement as on the 1st January of the corresponding vacancy year then such officer is to be considered for grant of NFU in subsequent vacancy year on completion of qualifying service w.e,f. 1st April, i.e. 1st day of the next vacancy year .
16 How the NFU shall be given in respect of officers given penalty? The NFU becoming due after the expiry of the penalty period may be granted w.e.f. the due date as per DOPT instructions. In respect of officers for whom NFU becomes due before the expiry of the penalty period, the same may be granted from the day next to the date on which penalty gets over.
17 Whether the instructions regarding counting of past Group A service at the time of lalteral entry on DR basis to higher grades as per DOPT OM dated 1.9.98 shall be applicable for grant of NFU also? In view of the provisions on meeting the prescribed eligibility criteria and promotional norms in DOPT OM dated 24.4.09. these instructions shall be applicable for the purpose of grant of NFU also.

(Mukta Goel)

Original Order :

Good News! PM’s Defence Pay/Pension Panel submits its report.

Pay and Pension Matters of  Defence Personnel

The committee chaired by Cabinet Secretary is comprised of Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister; Defence Secretary; Secretary, Department of Expenditure; Secretary, Department of Ex- Servicemen’s Welfare and Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training. Consequent to change in charge of the then Secretary, Department of Expenditure to Department of Revenue, Secretary, Department of Revenue has also been co-opted as a Member of the Committee. Chief of Naval Staff & Chairman, Chiefs of the Staff Committee made a presentation to the Committee.

The Committee further interacted with all the Service Chiefs (Chief of Naval Staff & Chairman, Chiefs of the Staff Committee; Chief of Air Staff and Chief of Army Staff). The recommendations of the Committee have been submitted to the Prime Minister.
This information was given by Minister of Defence Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri M.B.Rajesh and others in Lok Sabha today.

Not much hope from the Prime Minister’s Pay/Pension Panel for Defence.

Pay, pension issues report yet to be tabled
Ex-servicemen feel the delay indicates government’s unwillingness.
SUMAN SHARMA  New Delhi | 19th Aug

he government’s promise to resolve pay and pension issues of armed forces personnel is yet to be fulfilled. A Committee of Secretaries was set-up in July this year to look into anomalies of pay and pension, and this Committee has not yet submitted its report to the Prime Minister, thereby giving rise to speculation of likely unfulfillment of the recommendations made, in favour of retired and serving personnel.

The Committee, headed by Cabinet Secretary, was looking into five issues pertaining to serving personnel and four issues of retired pensioners. One rank one pension (OROP) has always been a strong demand of retired personnel for which they have been actively fighting for more than four years.

Ex-servicemen feel that the delay is indicative of the government’s unwillingness to fulfill their demands. This Committee has Secretaries from the Ministries of Defence, Finance, Expenditure, Department of Ex-servicemen Welfare and PM’s Principal Secretary Pulok Chatterjee.

For serving personnel, some of the issues this Committee is examining are common pay-scale for in-service non-officer men, initial pay fixation for Lt Col, Colonel and Brigadier equivalent and review and enhancement of grade pay. For retired pensioners the Committee is looking into one rank one pension, enhancement of family pension and dual family pensions, among others.

Retired Major General Satbir Singh. Vice Chairman of Ex-servicemen Movement told this newspaper, “A Parliamentary Committee had earlier recommended OROP to the Prime Minister, but he ignored this recommendation made by 10 MPs, and instead set up a separate committee of bureaucrats, who have not yet submitted their report and also there is no representative from the armed forces in this Committee. A fraud is being played by the PM himself on the defence services.” Satbir Singh, who recently wrote to Satpal Maharaj about OROP, said that this matter came up for the first time in 1982 and late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had agreed to it.

A 10-MP committee submitted its recommendation of giving OROP to the PM in December 2011, on which an Action Taken Report had to be submitted by the PM in March this year in Parliament, which is not yet done.

8 August is when the Committee of Secretaries was supposed to have submitted its report, but it is delayed.

Former Army Chief V.P. Malik said, “I am disappointed as this is a committee comprising only of civil service officers and no one from armed forces. There does not seem to be much hope from this Committee’s report.”

The demands of ex-servicemen, especially OROP will benefit 24 lakh ex-servicemen and four lakh widows drawing family pensions, all across the country and would cost approximately Rs 1300 cr to the exchequer.