Yet Another Recommendation to CPC - NFU matter

 

Yet Another  Referal to Central Pay Commission

On Non-Functional Upgradation for Armed Forces

 

Governments Never Learn. Only People Learn

-Abraham Lincoln

 

The Context

 An inter-ministerial Committee arrived at the following conclusion in January 2026,

 “9.1. After conducting the fresh and exhaustive review of the case for grant of Non Functional Upgradation (NFU) to Armed Forces Personnel and taking into account the above deliberations, the Committee arrived at the conclusion that the justification provided does not support the grant of Non Functional Upgradation to the Armed Forces. Further, the complexities in implementation, possible legal complications and significantly large financial implications also do not favour such decision. Accordingly, the Committee unanimously recommends that Non Functional Upgradation may not be extended to the Armed Forces” (italics supplied).

 The Committee had Financial Adviser (Defence Services), as Chairman, with Joint Secretary (Army & TA), Dept of Military Affairs, Director, Dept of P & T and Joint Secretary,  Dept of Exp, MoF as Members.

Based on the above Committee’s report, the Pay & Salary Cell of the Pay/Services Division of the Department of Military Affairs, MoD has filed and submitted an additional affidavit in the honourable Supreme Court stating, inter alia, “5. The issue of Non Functional Upgradation may also be referred to 8^th Central Pay Commission which is the expert body set up for pay related matters and can examine the matter holistically “ (italics supplied).

It may not be out of place to mention that the NFU matter has already been referred to 7^th CPC vide MoD ID No. 22(4)/2012-D (Pay/Services) dated 25th August 2014. The Empowered Committee of Secretaries (ECoS) to implement recommendations of the 7^th CPC decided and recommended that the administrative Ministry must take a decision on NFU (Para 12.1 of Notes for Empowered Committee of Secretaries (ECoS) on page 39 of 75/Page 16 of 37  F No. 1-2/2016-IC of the Minutes dated 22 June 2016 (emphasis supplied).

The latest additional affidavit based on the an Inter-Ministerial Committee’s findings on NFU mentioned yet another ‘recommendation to the next Central Pay Commission’. As the 129 page Report is not in the public domain, some aspects need to be considered.

Group of Ministers in December 2008 (No. 13787/EAM/2008 dated 19^th December 2008)

Whilst the Officers (serving and retired) of Armed Forces were in the corridors of the honourable Supreme Court, the 6^th CPC announced its recommendations. These caused so much anguish in the Armed Forces that it came to the attention of the honourable PM in 2008 who ordered a Group of Ministers (GoM), with Defence and Finance Minsters as members, to examine and resolve the issues. Then honourable External Affairs Minister (EAM), heading the GoM wrote the following in his report to the honourable PM: - 

No. 13787/EAM/2008                                                                                     19^th December 2008

Sub: 6^th Central Pay Commission (CPC) Implementation: Further benefits requested by the Armed Forces

            This has reference to the meeting taken by you on 27 November 2008 to discuss the report I had sent on 11 November 2008. While there was general agreement on the recommendations made, Finance Minister raised the issue regarding the horizontal relativities of Armed Forces vis-à-vis CPMFs and civilians.

            Vide PMO note dated 29.9.2008, I was requested to look into the issues raised by the Chairman, Chiefs of Staff Committee for further benefits subsequent to the decisions taken on the recommendations of the 6^th CPC and give my recommendations in consultation with Defence Minister and Finance Minister.

As directed by you, I discussed the matter further with Shri A K Antony on 17 December. Since Shri P Chidambaram could not attend the meeting on 17 December, I sent him a note after my discussions with RM. I received his view this morning. The substantive portions of Shri Chidambaram’s view have been incorporated in the revised report which is enclosed. Following recommendations have been made in the revised report:  

(i)         The pensionary benefits to all PBORs may be given without disadvantage to any category and an Anomaly Committee may be set (up) immediately to address any such cases (emphasis supplied).

(ii)        Lt Cols, who are in their parent service in combat or ready-to-combat jobs, may be placed in Pay Band-4. Those Lt Col level officers who are on deputation would be entitled to PB-4 only when they return to parent service.

: 2::

 (iii)       The grade pay for Lt Cols who are in their parent service in combat or ready to combat jobs, may be fixed at Rs 8000/- against the grade pay of Rs 8700/- for Cols/Directors. Those Lt Col level Officers who are on deputation be entitled to the above grade pay when they return to parent service.   

 (iv)       A High-Powered Committee may be set up to resolve the issues relating to command and control functions/status of armed forces vis-à-vis paramilitary forces and civilians.

 (v)        The pay revision of the armed forces should be delinked from the civilian pay revisions. Separate Board or Commission should be set us to recommend the pay scales of the Armed Forces in future.

 You may like to approve these recommendations for implementation. 

Sd/------------------------------

Dr Manmohan Singh

Prime Minister of India

New Delhi

 Copy to:

 1.         Shri A K Antony, Raksha Mantri, New Delhi

 2.                 Shri P Chidambaram, Home Minister, New Delhi 

 Encl:                                                                                                                                        [1B

 

Ministry of External Affairs

EAMO

 

            Sub:     6^th Central Pay Commission (CPC) Implementation: Further benefits requested

            by the Armed Forces

 Xxxx                                                                 xxxx                                                                 xxxx

 3.         The Central Pay Commissions (CPCs) are meant to suggest revision in pay for a broad category of government employees. The CPCs, by no stretch of imagination are meant to do the cadre management or improve the service prospects of individual service groups. The CPCs have somehow been turned into instruments for dealing with inter se cadre management problems by various services. The questions relating to inter se parity, seniority etc have to be dealt with by respective cadre controlling authorities (emphasis supplied). 

 4.         All these problems of parity, disparity, comparison with status of the civilian services and ranks of the Police and Paramilitary forces have arisen after the Central Pay Commissions had been entrusted with the task of recommending pay scales of the Armed Forces also, which till the 3^rd CPC recommended salary structures of civilian services only. In a democratic system such comparisons between Armed Forces and civilian services are undesirable. As is being done for the academicians, medical services, public sector units etc., in future a separate board or commission should recommend the pay scales of the Armed Forces thereby removing the root cause of the point-to-point comparisons between the ranks of Defence Services and Civilian Services which is not in the interest of the country (emphasis in the original Report)……...   

 Perhaps the above recommendation from the GoM is either not in the files with the DMA or has been ignored.

 Cabinet Secretary Committee on issues related to Defence Service personnel and Ex-Servicemen - August 2012.

Vide orders dated 9^th July, 2012 and 12^th July, 2012, the Prime Minister constituted a Committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary and consisting of Principal Secretary to PM, Defence Secretary, Expenditure Secretary, Secretary (Personnel) and Secretary (Ex-Servicemen’s Welfare) with the purpose of looking into and providing suitable recommendations on the following issues of relevance to Defence Service personnel and ex-servicemen:-

(i) Issues relating to serving defence personnel and consisting of pay fixation anomalies related to Sixth Central Pay Commission:

 (a)          Common pay scale for in-service JCOs/ORs

 (b)          Initial pay fixation of Lt. Colonel/Colonel and Brigadier/equivalent

(c)          Review and enhancement of grade pay

(d)          Placing of all Lt Generals in HAG+ scale

(e)                   Grant of non-functional upgradation (NFU) to armed forces personnel (emphasis supplied)

 xxxx                                                                 xxxx                                                                 xxxx

 Grant of non-functional upgradation (NFU) to armed forces personnel

33.               It has been brought out by the Defence Services that NFU is based on the recommendation of the Sixth CPC to provide an opportunity to all Organised Group ‘A’ Services to reach higher scales of pay two years after the same is granted to IAS officers at the centre. It has been strongly recommended that Non Functional Upgradation be extended to Armed Forces Officers.

34.               The Committee noted that the service conditions of Defence Forces are quite different from those of civilian employees. Benefits in the form of Military Service Pay and various allowances are also available to the Defence Forces officers which are not admissible to civilian officers. It is, therefore, not logical to compare the earnings of the two Services. Further, Defence Forces officers are covered by a separate time bound promotion scheme upto the level of Colonel. The scheme of non-functional upgradation is applicable only for organised Group ‘A’ Services and was extended to IPS/IFS. The requirements related to command and control, the norms for recruitment, promotion and the rank structure of the Defence Forces are not identical to those of Group ‘A’ cadres. The average age of entry of Commissioned Officers is lower than that of those joining the Group A’ Services. No parity presently exists in the career progression of Group A’ Services and Commissioned Officers. In the circumstances, the Committee is unable to make a recommendation on the issue (emphasis supplied).

 

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

35.              To sum up, the following recommendations are made by the Committee:-

xxxx                                                                 xxxx                                         xxxx

 

Issues relating to serving defence personnel

39.               The Committee deliberated at length on the pay related issues raised by the Defence Forces. It was noted that the pay related issues are complex and have ramifications across the Government, including on para-military personnel. The proposals made by the Defence Forces in many cases are at variance with some of the principles followed by the Sixth Pay Commission. Some of the proposals have already been considered subsequent to the Sixth Pay Commission.

40.               In this context, the Committee also noted that the next Pay Commission’s recommendations would be likely to be implemented w.e.f. 1.1.2016. If the Thirteenth Finance Commission’s recommendation that structural shocks such as arrears arising out of Pay Commission awards should be avoided by making the pay award commence from the date it is accepted is implemented, the next Pay Commission would need to be set up in the second half of 2013 or in early 2014.

41.               In the circumstances, the Committee recommends that the pay related issues may be specifically referred to the next Pay Commission for its consideration as the Pay Commission is the expert body set up for this purpose which can examine these issues in a holistic manner (italics and emphasis supplied).

Extracts from Cabinet Secretary Committee Report 2012

         

CABINET SECRETARIAT

RASHTRAPATI BHAWAN

Subject: Decision on the recommendations of Cabinet Secretary

Committee on pay related issues of Defence Service Personnel

 

Reference is invited to M/o Defence O.M. No. 22 (4)/2012 – D (Pay/Services) dated 4th July, 2014 (addressed to PMO, Cabinet Secretariat, and D/o Expenditure) conveying the decision of the Government to accept the recommendations made by the subject mentioned Committee in respect of serving defence personnel.

 

2. In this connection, reference is also invited to this Secretariat’s Order of even number dated 13th July, 2012 constituting a Committee under the chairmanship of Cabinet Secretary and Principal Secretary to PM, Defence Secretary, and Secretaries of D/o Expenditure, D/0 Ex-Servicemen’s Welfare and Secretary, D/o Personnel & Training as members to look into pay and pension related issues of relevance to defence services personnel and Ex-servicemen.

 

3. D/0 Expenditure is requested to take further follow up action in the matter, under intimation to this Secretariat.

Sd/-----------

(S. Ahlladini Panda)

Director

Tel: 23792357

D/o Expenditure (Shri Ratan P. Watal, Secretary)

Cabinet Secretariat’s I.D. No. 213/2/3/2012-CA.IV dated 25th July, 2014

 

Copy for information to:

 

1. Shri Munu Mahavar, Director, PMO

2. Shri R. K.Mathur, Defence Secretary w.r.t. reference cited

 

Most Immediate

Government of India

Ministry of Defence

Subject: Decision on the recommendations of Cabinet Secretary Committee on pay related issues of Defence Services Personnel

On the directions of the Hon’ble Prime Minister, a Committee under the chairmanship of the Cabinet Secretary to look into certain pay and pension issues of serving and retired Defence Services Personnel was set up by the Cabinet Secretariat in July 2012. The Committee was serviced by D/o Expenditure. The issues placed before the Committee were as under: -

4. Defence Services Personnel

5. Common pay scales for in-service JCOs/ORs

6. Initial pay fixation of Lt Col/Col and Brig/equivalent

(a)  Review and enhancement of Grade Pay

(d) Placing of all Lt Gens in HAG+ scale, and

7. Grant of Non-Functional Upgradation (NFU) to Armed Forces personnel

 (II) Ex-servicemen

 8. One Rank One Pension

 xxxxx

 2. The Committee submitted its report in August 2012. A copy of the Report is enclosed herewith. All the recommendations of the Committee related to Ex- servicemen have been implemented by issue of eight Government letters on 17.1.2013.

 3. Regarding the issues related to serving Defence Personnel, the Committee vide Para 39 of its Report noted that “the pay related issues are complex and have ramifications across the Government including on para-military personnel. The proposals made by Defence Forces in many cases are at variance with some principles followed by the Sixth Pay Commission.”

 Further, vide Para 41 of its Report, the Committee recommended that

 “In the circumstances, the Committee recommends that the pay related issues may be specifically referred to the next Pay Commission for its consideration as the Pay Commission is the expert body set up for this purpose which can examine these issues in a holistic manner.”

 4. The Government has accepted the above recommendations of the Committee on pay related issues. Accordingly, the above five issues related to serving defence personnel are referred to 7th CPC for its consideration.

Sd/-------------------

25.08.14

(Pradeep Kumar)

Director (AG-I)

2301 4036

Secretary, 7th Central Pay Commission, Post Box No. 4599, Hauz Khas PO, New Delhi – 110 016

MoD ID No. 22(4)/2012-D (Pay/Services) dated 25th August 2014

 Encl: as above

 Copy to: -

1. Ministry of Finance (Deptt of Expenditure)

2. Cabinet Secretariat

 Cabinet Secretary Committee Reports and Services Headquarters

 Whether these reports were shared with the Services HQ?

 Reply to Request for Information

Action at Services HQ – CSC 9 and CSC - 12

Received by Regd Post on 25 Jul 16

 

Tri-Service Pay Staff (TRIPAS)

Room No. 116, Kashmir House

Rajaji Marg, New Delhi – 110 011

C/7026/VIth CPC/14                                                                            11 Jul 16

 

 

1.         Please refer to your letter No. SYS/RTI/CSC-9 & 12/Services HQ dated 26 May 2016 and this office letter of even reference dated 16 Jun 16.       

 

2.         The desired information as asked vide your ibid letter is  enumerated below: -

 

(a)        Committee of Secretary (sic) Report of 2009 was not received by this office  (emphasis supplied).

 

(b)        Committee of Secretary (sic) Report of 2012 was promulgated on 17 Aug 2012. However, the report was forwarded to this office vide MoD ID No. 22 (4)/2012-D (Pay/Services) dated 04 Jul 2014 (copy of MoD covering note only is placed at enclosure 1) (emphasis supplied). 

 

3.         Meanwhile as no Anomalies Committee was formed by the Govt (except for the Committee of Secretary (sic) for resolution of pension related issues), each anomaly was taken up on case to case basis with Govt. A total of 46 anomalies (less 16 pension related anomalies) were pursued with the MoD…..

 

Xxxx                                                                             xxxx                                                     xxxx

 

4.         As most of these anomalies remained unresolved till mid 2014, MoD suggested that the issue be taken up by 7^th CPC which has already been constituted by then. However Services felt that till the time MoD and MoF do not refer the issues to 7^th CPC, no cognisance would be taken of the anomalies. Further correspondence on the issues are appended below: -

 

(a)        AFPCC letter Air HQ/99140/03/AFPCC dated 15 Jul 14 to MoD for confirming that MoD has referred the issues to 7^th CPC and requesting for MoD communication to 7^th CPC.

 

(b)        MoD replied vide No. 22(4)/2012/D (Pay/Services) dated 22 Jul 14 asking TRIPAS to take further necessary action on the matter.

 

(c)        AFPCC letter No. Air HQ/99140/03/AFPCC dated 05 Aug 14 to MoD for undertaking the matter with Department of Expenditure/MoF. 

 

(d)        MoD vide note No. 22(4)/2012-D(Pay/Services) dated 25 Aug 14 stated that the five Core Anomalies are referred to 7^th CPC.

 

(e)        Based on a query raised by Army Pay Commission Cell on the status of core anomalies, the MoD once again stated vide No. 22(4)/2012-D (Pay/Services) dated 03 Sep 14 that the five Core Anomalies have already been referred to the 7^th CPC vide their note quoted at para 4 (d) above. 

 

5.         The issue of Core Anomalies were also discussed on various occasions during TRIPAS/PARC meetings. A copy of the relevant minutes of the meetings are enclosed herewith: - 

 

(a)        Minutes of the meeting 45/2014 dated 27 Oct 14, Para 2, Item I refers 

 

(b)        Minutes of the meeting 05/2015 dated 02 Mar 15, Para 2, Item III refers 

 

(c)        Minutes of the meeting 11/2015 dated 08 Jul 15, Para 2, Item II refers 

 

            (d)        Minutes of the meeting 18/2015 dated 26 Nov 15, Para 4 (a) refers 

 

6.                  This is for your information.

 

Sd/--------------

(Kamal Hira)

Wg Cdr

Joint Director TRIPAS & CPIO

 

7^th Central Pay Commission and Non Functional Financial Upgrade (NFU)

 

Shri Vivek Rae, Member and Shri Rathin Roy, Member, have favoured abolition of NFU at SAG and HAG level (para 7.2.24). 

 

Regarding NFU for the Armed Forces, then Chairman, CoSC and CAS wrote to then RM (now late Shri Manohar Parikkar) vide C/7026/VII CPC/TRIPAS dated 08 Sep 16 as follows: -

 

 8. Govt has already deferred the decision on grant of NFU to all cadres in the 7^th CPC. Thus Defence Forces have sought only the notional grant of NFU in the 6^th CPC regime for the purpose of fixation in 7^th CPC regime; no arrears are being sought.

 

9. The proposal for grant of NFU in 6^th CPC regime has now become even more critical due to the following: -

 

(a) Vide Para 2 of Annexure II to Govt of India notification for Civilians of 25 Jul 16, it is stipulated that ‘Pay Matrix comprising two dimensions have horizontal range in which each level corresponds to a functional role in the hierarchy.

 

(b) However, the pay fixation of Civilians is being done in the 7^th CPC Civilian Pay Matrix not as per functional role in hierarchy but on NFU basis, a clear violation of the Govt Gazette notification. For example, the pay of a Supdt Engineer (MES) which has a functional grade pay of Rs 8700 per month has been fixed in Level 14 (Grade Pay Rs 10000/-) based on NFU…. A copy of the pay slip issued by JS (E)/CAO, MoD is annexed as Appendix A”(Annexure 5 to 8, Pages 102 of 119 of the Minutes of the 7^th meeting of the Empowered Committee of Secretaries  held on 03 Jan 17.   

 

Empowered Committee of Secretaries post 7^th CPC

 

However, the Dept of Expenditure Note for the Empowered Committee of Secretaries vide F No. 1/2/2016-IC dated 22 Jun 16  states, inter alia,

 

12.       Department specific issues

 

12.1.    Certain issues which relate to specific department/cadre/post or cadre restructuring, fall under the purview of administrative Ministries/Departments as per Allocation of Business Rules/Transaction of Business Rules. These also include inter-service/cadre related issues such as Non Functional Upgradation (NFU) presently available to 49 Organised Group ‘A’ services, 2 years edge to AIS officers vis-à-vis Organised Group ‘A’ services…. where the Commission has not arrived at a consensus. All these issues require careful consideration by respective Ministries/Departments as per prescribed procedure. ECoS was of the view that such issues may be separately examined by the concerned Ministries/Departments in consultation with the Department of Expenditure and/or Department of Personnel and Training, as the case may be as per Transaction of Business Rules/Allocation of Business Rules” (emphasis supplied).    

 

Epilogue

 

Elsewhere it is stated that Armed Forces Officers should not be entitled to NFU because they are drawing Military Service Pay (MSP) and One Rank One Pension (OROP). The Govt of India approved MSP based on the recommendations of the 6^th Central Pay Commission (CPC) and continued it in the 7^th CPC. The lengthy reasons for MSP and its exclusive application to Armed Forces is available in the reports of the 6^th (Chapter 2.3.12 to 14) and 7^th CPC (5.2.22 and 6.1.28 to 30) especially 

 

6.1.31 The Commission, after careful consideration of the matter, notes that there are exclusive elements that distinguish the Defence forces personnel from all other government employees. The intangible aspects linked to the special conditions of service experienced by them set them apart from civilian employees. Defence forces personnel are expected to conduct full spectrum operations in operational environments which are characterised by extreme complexity and may include force projection outside India’s territorial boundaries. Defence forces personnel are trained for war like situations with highly sophisticated war machinery. They have to keep themselves posted in modern warfare. The military institutions are a key symbol of national pride. Further, the superannuation of defence personnel, particularly Other Ranks (ORs) at a younger age, is also a factor that has been considered. The Commission has therefore taken a conscious decision that the Military Service Pay, which is a compensation for the various aspects described above and for the edge historically enjoyed by the Defence Forces over the civilian scales, will be admissible to the Defence Forces personnel only.”  

 

MSP and its predecessors Special Disturbance Allowance (3^rd CPC), Rank Pay (4^th and 5^th CPC) was decided by Central Pay Commissions which the honourable Supreme Court has held, “any complex exercise of job evaluation which is the remit of an expert body like a Pay Commission”   (in Writ Petition (Civil) 648 of 2002 in Ramesh Singh Vs UoI)

 

However, there is no mention in any public debate about Special Duty Allowance of 10% of Basic Pay for Central Government employees serving in the North Eastern Region and Ladakh. Civilian employees paid from the Defence Services estimates and Railway employees too would be entitled (MoF/DoE No. 11/1/2017-E.II (B) dated 18 Jul 17). The junior most civilian officer (Level 10) drawing a Basic Pay of Rs 56000 will be paid a SDA of Rs 5600, whereas a SAG officer with Basic Pay of Rs 2, 17, 600  will draw Rs 21, 760 as SDA, whilst his equivalent Armed Forces officer is denied MSP!

 

It is evident that the Pay & Salary Cell of the Pay/Services Division of the Department of Military Affairs, Ministry of Defence is either unwilling to take a decision where in case it decides to grant the officers the NFU and resolves immense implementation complexities, legal complications, and significantly large financial implications or does not want to face the Armed Forces officers by categorically turning down them the benefit of NFU.

 

The Division of Pay/Services then under the Department of Defence, Ministry of Defence till formation of DMA in 2020 sent the issue of NFU to the 7^th CPC in 2015 and the result is as stated by the ECoS. Pay & Salary Cell, now under the same Pay/Services Division but now under DMA and Secretary, DMA does a reprise of sending it to the 8^th CPC.

 

E & O E

*          *          *          *          *          *          *          *

 

Will Satyam ev Jayate about Op Sindoor

 Will Satyam ev Jayate about Op Sindoor?

Reference is made to the following (please check details in following links) 

(a)    the Director General Air Operations stating that aircraft losses is not a matter of concern as the pilots are safe 

https://www.timesnownews.com/india/who-is-air-marshal-ak-bharti-indias-dg-air-ops-part-of-operation-sindoor-briefing-article-151611988 

(b)    Statement of EAM and the subsequent clarification by MEA that it is misrepresented 

https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/jaishankar-remarks-on-op-sindoor-misrepresented-government-on-pakistan-admission-claim-2726403-2025-05-17

(c)    Statement of the CDS at the Shangrila conclave that India had to change its tactics after the first day 

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/numbers-not-important-rectified-tactical-mistakes-cds-anil-chauhan-on-pakistans-claim-of-downing-india-jets-during-operation-sindoor/articleshow/121533331.cms 


(d)     And finally the statement of our Defence attaché in Indonesia mentioning loss of aircraft is immaterial

https://indianexpress.com/article/india/iaf-lost-aircraft-constraint-political-leadership-defence-attache-jakarta-out-of-context-10099049/ 


The latest to join the discussion in the media for the past couple of days has an article (link provided below) that China is utilising its Defence Attaches abroad to disparage the Rafale fighter aircraft and promote its own fighter aircraft. 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/07/06/france-rafale-fighter-jets-china-pakistan-india/ 

The article also quotes French Intelligence and its Air Force chief, General Jerome Bellanger, that India lost one Rafale, one Su-30 and a Mirage – 2000 in Op Sindoor. 

In terms of weather, fog usually dissipates and visibility improves when the sun come out giving way to mist and finally excellent visibility. Unfortunately, the fog of Op Sindoor appears to have given way to the mist of ambiguity but not to the excellent visibility of truth. And truth, though bitter like medicine cures all ills.

Fitness of Rafale in Combat

Having written this, it is not my case that we have a Defence attaché in many countries and they should take up cudgels on behalf of the Indian Air Force (denying or confirming losses). Dassault Aviation will put its public relation apparatus to speak about the superiority of the Rafale over Chinese AAM or fighter aircraft and France will elucidate that Rafale is a strategic asset. 

Foreign Relations

Our Government, in its wisdom, sent out delegations of Members of Parliament to various countries to explain Op Sindoor in political and diplomatic terms. Was it necessary to explain ourselves to nations far and wide that India took actions that we deemed considered appropriate to dissuading terrorism? Were our embassies and high commissions inadequate or improperly briefed to fulfill their roles?    

Air Power and its use

That leaves the third side of the triad – military.     

How were the 15 days (from 22 Apr 25 to 07 May 25) used to prepare for a strong and fitting response? What really happened in the corridors of South Block that needed pausing and recalibrating our tactics after 07 May 25, as admitted by none less than the CDS?    

Will the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth be told or will the report on Op Sindoor be consigned to the archives and remain hidden for posterity like the Henderson- Brooks report on the 1962 skirmishes? 

The Future 

But more important is whether present and future officers and commanders of the Armed Forces be apprised in classified modules in Defence Services Staff College, Higher Command Courses at the Army War College, Naval War College and College of Air Warfare as well as the course on Strategy at National Defence College so as to be able to discuss lessons learnt in Op Sindoor so that our strategy and tactics can be improved for the operations in future C4IS environment?             

Jai Hind

WhatsApp Gyan vs Facts

 Reference the WhatsApp message titled *8th CPC Buzz*

(Note: contents of WA in italics, facts in normal font)       

 The Introduction: — A Note to My Fellow Officers, Seniors, and Juniors

 Yes, 8th Pay Commission discussions have started making rounds in multiple groups—and sure, some figures being floated may seem like a “win.” But let’s not get carried away with what looks like a raise on paper.

 Here’s the hard reality—we’re still carrying the baggage of 37 unresolved anomalies from the 7th CPC. Nothing has been fixed. And history tells us: a fresh coat of paint doesn’t fix a cracked wall.

 Core Unresolved Issues That Still Haunt Us

 1. No NFU for Armed Forces; Every other Group A service enjoys Non-Functional Upgradation. We’re the only ones left out. No NFU means stagnation, plain and simple.

 Fact: - The requirement for NFU for Armed Forces Officers was taken up with MoD but remains unactioned till date because then RM wrote “Wait” on 20 Aug 2013 (Note No. 76 of F No. 22/4/2012-D (Pay/Services) as provided in reply to RTI request No.  MODEF/R/2014/61820 dated 04 Oct 14.

 Subsequently, the matter is sub-judice in the Supreme Court. Diary No. 12663 of 2017 in UoI vs Col Mukul Dev refers.

 2. Slower Career Progression; While civilians climb the ladder at 4, 9, 13, and 16 years, we hit comparable pay levels only at 6, 13, and 21 years. This alone creates a two-year setback at every step.

 Fact: 7^th Central Pay Commission did not have Cadre review as one of its Terms of Reference. Hence it did not go outside its mandate.

 Secondly, All India Services viz. Indian Administrative Service (IAS) Officers “climb” the ladder in this time frame.

 Please also read the Supreme Court judgment in Civil Appeal No. 3208 of 2015 in Union of Indian vs Lt Col P K Choudhary & Others in the Command/Exit Policy 2009 of Indian Army where extensive tables for promotions of Cols and above are given.

 3. The Level 12A Trap - Lt Cols, Wg Cdrs, Commanders are blocked from Level 12 or 13, and instead dumped into a unique 12A grade - slower growth, lower protocol.

 Fact

Level	Armed Forces Officers (INR)		Civilian Officers (INR)
	Start of pay scale	End of pay scale	Start of pay scale	End of pay scale
12	N/A	N/A	78800	175200
12A	121200	212400	N/A	N/A
13	130600	215900	118500	214100
13A	139600	217600	131100	216600
Source	Army Officers Pay (Amendment) Rules dated 06 Jul 2017		Table 5 of Chapter 5.1 of Report of 7th CPC

 4. Rank Degradation in Protocol: Captains = Group B, Majors = Junior Group A. This administrative sleight-of-hand has reversed decades of parity.

 Fact: All Commissioned Officers are Class I Gazetted Officers. There is an unresolved aspect of JCOs being Class B Gazetted officers but not given the same MSP as Military Nursing Service Officers.

 Further, each CPC has provided tables of pay parity.

 5. Brigadiers Short-Changed: Placed at Level 13A with a lower index (2.67) compared to civilians (2.72)—same rank, same time, less pay.

 Fact: This is an incorrect statement.

 The Index of Rationalisation of 2,67 is applied to Brigadiers in Level 13A vide Resolution No. 1-2/2016-IC of Govt of India dated 1^st September, 2016 — “In partial modification of the Resolution of even number dated 25.07.2016, para 3 of the said Resolution may be read as under:

 "3. The Government has accepted the Commission’s recommendations on Minimum Pay, Fitment Factor, Index of Rationalisation, Pay Matrices and general recommendations on pay without any material alteration with the following exceptions in Defence Pay Matrix, namely :-

 (i) the Index of Rationalisation of Level 13A (Brigadier) in Defence Pay Matrix may be revised upward from 2.57 to 2.67;

 (ii) additional three stages in Levels 12A (Lieutenant Colonel), three stages in Level 13 (Colonel) and two stages in Level 13A (Brigadier) may be added appropriately in the Defence Pay Matrix.”

 7^th CPC Report at Para 5.2.8 Rationalisation: An ‘index of rationalisation’ has been applied while making enhancement of levels from Pay Band 1 to 2, 2 to 3 and 3 onwards on the premise that role, responsibility and accountability increases at each step in the hierarchy. …... Recognising the significantly higher degree of responsibility and accountability at levels corresponding to Senior Administrative Grade, the entry pay is recommended for enhancement by a multiple of 2.72. The same multiple is also being applied at the HAG and HAG+ levels. At the apex level the index applied is 2.81 and for the Service Chiefs/Cabinet Secretary the index has been fixed at 2.78.

 Level 14 - Maj Gen/Senior Administrative Grade civilian officers, Level 15 - Lt Gen/Higher Administrative Grade), and Level 16 -  Lt Gen/HAG+.

 6. No Level 14 Access for Defence Mid-Career at 16+ years, civilian officers get Level 14; we’re still waiting.

 Fact: 7^th Central Pay Commission did not have Cadre review as one of its Terms of Reference. Hence it did not go outside its mandate.

 However, the Armed Forces were granted additional higher level (13A, 14, and 15) posts as part of AVSC in the time frames proposed by Army.  Please read the Supreme Court judgment in Civil Appeal No. 3208 of 2015 in Union of Indian vs Lt Col P K Choudhary & Others in the Command/Exit Polly of Indian Army where extensive tables for promotions of Cols and above are given.

 7. Allowance Inversion – Siachen vs Shillong: How did Siachen Allowance end up lower than 30% SDA paid to civilians in NE or Ladakh? This is nothing short of insult.

 Fact: Statement is wrong.

 Vide MoF, DoE, OM No. 11/1/2017-E.II(B) dated 18^th July 2017, Central Govt employees serving in North Eastern Region and Ladakh, shall be paid Special Duty Allowance (SDA) at the rate of 10% of Basic Pay. SDA will not be admissible along with Tough Location Allowance…. In respect of Armed Forces personnel and Railway employees, separate orders will be issued by the Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Railways, respectively (emphasis supplied). 

 Siachen allowance is Rs 31, 500 for Level 9 and above and Rs 21000 for level 8 and below.

 To be paid Rs 31500 as SDA, the civilian will have be granted Basic Pay of Rs 3, 15, 000 which is higher than Basic Pay of highest Level 18 (Rs 2, 50, 000).

8. JCO/OR MSP Disparity; MSP for JCOs/ORs capped at ₹5,200—less than half the justified ₹10,000 they deserve. Meanwhile, officers get ₹15,500.

Fact: As per MoF F No. F No. 7/6/2019-E.III(A) dated the 14 June 2019  in reply to RTI Request it is stated at Page 39  that, “The concept of MSP was introduced by 6th CPC (up to Brigadier rank) as an edge for the Army over civilian counterparts and it was treated as Pay for calculating DA, Pension, HRA, Composite Transfer Grant and Annual increment. MSP by the 7th CPC has been calculated by multiplying existing rate with 2.57 and subsequent rounding off. As the amount of MSP was Rs 2000/- for JCO/OR in 6th CPC period which has been increased to Rs 5200/- by 7th CPC, the demand for change in rates of MSP has not been accepted. Similarly, MSP for Serving Officers has been increased from Rs 6000/- to Rs 15500/(emphasis supplied).

9. Slab-Based Disability Pension: Unlike civilians who get a fair, percentage-based disability pension, ours is a capped lump sum—regardless of severity.

Fact: Disability Pension - Granted in invalided out cases due to disability Attributable to or Aggravated by Military Service. It consists of Disability Element and Service Element. Service Element is equal to the retiring pension i.e. 50% of the reckonable emoluments last drawn. Disability Element would be 30% of reckonable emoluments last drawn for 100% disability. For lesser percentage of disability, the amount of disability element is reduced proportionally. No disability element shall be payable for disability assessed as less than 20%. In other than invalided out cases, disability element is granted for disability Attributable to or Aggravated by Military Service, in addition to Service Pension, if otherwise admissible. Source: https://desw.gov.in/en/pensions

This Isn’t Just a Few Issues – It’s Systemic

See response above for the following

These 9 examples are just the surface. I’ve identified 37 major anomalies, officially submitted and still left unaddressed since 2016.

Here’s the complete list of issues that continue to plague Defence Forces under the 7th CPC:

1. Separate pay matrices for Defence Forces and civilian services, breaking long‑standing parity in pay and status.

2. Uniform fitment factor of 2.57, which failed to neutralize post‑2016 inflation for military pay scales.

Fact: CPC has recommended Dearness Allowance to neutralise post-2016 inflation of all pay scales.

3. Delayed top‑time scale fitment (only at 21 years) versus earlier, more frequent civilian increments.

4. Slower time‑scale promotions – AF officers reach Level 11 (Major‑equivalent) at 6 years, civilians at 4.

5. Absence of Level 12 for AF: replaced by Level 12A at 13 years, whereas civilians go to Level 12 at 9 years.

6. Level 13 anomaly – civilians hit Level 13 at 13 years; AF officers remain stuck at 12A.

7. Selection‑grade disparity for Brigadiers: slotting in Level 13A at index 2.67 versus civilians at 2.72.

8. No Level 14 for mid‑career AF officers (16 years) while civilians move on to Level 14.

9. Rank‑equivalence demotions – Captains equated to Group B Section Officers; Majors to junior Group A.

10. Civilian Joint Directors outrank Lt Cols in protocol despite equivalent seniority – Fact: Letter withdrawn.

11. Siachen Allowance capped at ₹31,500–42,500, yet civilians in NE/Ladakh draw 30 % SDA often higher.

12. Special Duty Allowance (SDA) – AF ineligible, while civilians in equally tough postings get 30 % of pay.

21. Exclusion from NFU – unlike all other Group A services, AF was denied non‑functional upgradation.

22. “Watered‑down” NFU ignored – Commission recommended it for AF; Govt. refused to implement.

23. JCO/OR MSP frozen at ₹5,200 instead of the ₹10,000 sought to sustain junior leadership.

24. Officer MSP ₹15,500 seen as disproportionate versus inadequate junior MSP.

25. Slab‑based disability pensions capping benefits, unlike civilians’ percentage‑based awards.

32. Stagnation due to late promotions, feeding into morale and cohesion issues.

For brevity, details not provided for the following: -

13. Transport Allowance rates set lower for uniformed ranks than for civilian counterparts.

14. Field‑area DA anomalies – mismatches in hardship classifications between AF and civilian services.

15. Composite Personal Maintenance Allowance (CPMA) – only partially extended to Defence ranks.

16. Flying Allowance – discriminatory ceilings for Air Force pilots versus civilian aviators.

17. Sea‑going Allowance – Coast Guard vs Navy parity inconsistencies.

18. Hard‑lying Money – unequal rates between Navy and Coast Guard personnel.

19. Outfit & Kit Maintenance Allowances – gaps in entitlement for equivalent civilian posts.

20. Good Conduct Badge & Boiler Watch Allowances – Coast Guard left out despite similar duties.

26. Family pension anomalies – civilian widows/children get proportional benefits; AF gets slabs.

27. Gratuity & lump‑sum anomalies – lower ceilings for AF personnel on retirement.

28. LTC block‑year mismatches – AF officers face more restrictive travel concession cycles.

29. Conference TA/DA rates – capped for AF, while civilians at equivalent levels get higher rates.

30. Cashless medical treatment – AF excluded from streamlined civilian schemes.

31. Children Education Assistance – AF children denied full civilian entitlements at remote postings.

33. “Core anomalies” from 6th CPC (6 items) rolled over unaddressed.

34. Civil‑Military relations – false equating of AF risk mandates with CAPF duties.

35. Protocol & status parity – AF officers relegated below civilian peers in official hierarchies.

36. Pay fixation anomalies on promotion, disadvantaging seniors versus juniors.

37. Discipline & cohesion impacts – unaddressed anomalies erode trust in the Pay Commission process.

So What’s the Ask?

Before we start clapping for what the 8th CPC “might” offer, let’s ask: Who’s cleaning up the mess from the 7th? If history is any guide, they’ll toss a few pennies our way and expect us to forget the structural damage that’s been left unaddressed for nearly a decade.

This isn’t about perks. It’s about: Parity, Dignity, Correcting deep-rooted systemic disparities

What You Can Do: 1. Spread Awareness - Ensure all ranks know these discrepancies—don’t let vague numbers or token hikes fool anyone.

2. Demand Action - Raise these points with Anomaly Committees, Commanders, Veterans  Associations. Start with NFU, pay matrix parity, and MSP correction.

3. Hold Leadership Accountable It’s time the Chiefs and Service HQs put pressure where it matters—MoD and DoPT.

Don’t fall for the bait. Stay sharp. Stand united. We’ve earned better. Let’s demand it.

 _*— A Committed Officer* (emphasis supplied).

 

 Fact: Most of the Points 1 to 37 in the latter half are repetitions of several points in the first half. They either ignore or appear to be unaware that Chairman, CoSC and CAS had taken up the following issues with then RM on 09 Sep 2016 and followed up with his successor:

 

(A) PAY RELATED ISSUES. Out of six Core concerns, two have been resolved and following four concerns are remaining:

 i. Military Service Pay (MSP) at higher rates for JCOs – MSP of (Rs) 10000 for JCO

 ii. MSP as a separate element of pay for Maj General and above.

 iii. Non Functional Upgradation (NFU)

 iv. Correction in entry pays for 6 Ranks/Levels.

 (B) PENSION RELATED ISSUES

 i. Weightages to be restored to cater for truncated carrier (sic)

 ii. One Rank One Pension

 iii. Sharing of report of One Man Judicial Committee (OMJC).

 (C) ALLOWANCES RELATED ISSUES

 Out of 19 concerns, 11 issues relating to entitlement of Ration to Officers in Peace Areas, Dress Allowances, Reciprocity of Allowances, Technical Allowances, Sea Going Allowances, Flying/SF/MARCOS/Chariot Allowance, Correction in RH Matrix, Restoration of CILQ, Qualification Pay (Q-Pay), GCB/GS Pay (and) Classification Allowances and Travel Entitlement of Navy have been mentioned.

 Similar issues were listed in the TRIPAS letter dated 20.01.2016 addressed to Hon’ble Raksha Mantri and Appendix A and B of that letter.

 Min of Finance stated as follows: -

 5. Demands of the Defence Forces already accepted: The under mentioned demands of Defence Forces in respect of pay and pension has been accepted by Government.

(I) Vide Cabinet approval dated 29.06.2016, the following exceptions in (the) Defence Pay Matrix were approved.

i. The IOR of Level 13A (Brigadier) in Defence Pay Matrix revised upwards from 2.57 to 2.67.

ii. Additional 3 stages in Levels 12A (Lt Col), 3 stages in Level 13 (Colonel) and 2 stages in Level 13A (Brigadier) added appropriately in the Defence Pay Matrix.

(II) The Defence Pay Matrix (except Military Nursing Service (MNS) which had 24 stages extended to 40 stages similar to Civilian Pay Matrix (Cabinet Approval May 2016).

(III) The Index of Rationalisation (IOR) of Levels 12A and 13 of Defence Pay Matrix enhanced from 2.57 to 2.67. The Defence Pay Matrix and Matrix of MNS have been accordingly revised. (Cabinet approval - May 2016).

(IV) Percentage based system for disability pension has been restored after the matter was referred/considered by National Anomaly Committee (Cabinet approval – May 2016).

(V) Demands for allowing broad-banding of disability pension for disability assessed at 20% and above and benefit of additional pension on attaining the age of 80 years and above applicable on disability element accepted (FM approval).

6. With respect to the manner in which the concerns/recommendations of the Defence Forces were addressed it is submitted that Defence Forces made a presentation before the Empowered Committee chaired by Cabinet Secretary on 11.03.2016 on their demands. Subsequently a series of meetings were held with nodal authorities involved in the implementation of the 7th CPC Report and all the issues raised by the Defence Forces have (been) extensively discussed in these meetings. Joint Secretary (IC) and Director (IC) from the then Implementation Cell participated in these meetings. Based on the outcome of these consultations, proposals have been processed for obtaining approval of Cabinet.

7. The concerns of the Defence Forces were also received vide their letter dated 18.07. 2016 addressed to Hon’ble PM and letter dated 08.09.2016 addressed to Hon’ble RM. The matter was discussed in the meeting taken by the then RM (on) 13.04.2017 and MoD vide their OM dated 19.04.2017 recommended three core concerns i.e. 40 stages in Defence Pay Matrix, revision pf IoR for Level 12A (Lt Col), and 13 (Col) and grant of Personal Pay in 7th CPC pay structure to address pay/pension anomalies between Col/Brig and Maj Gen and above rank(s). The first two issues related to Defence Pay Matrix have already been addressed and (the) third issue pertaining to grant of Personal Pay for Maj Gen and above, MoD advised to approach DoPT, the nodal Ministry concerned with pay fixation issues.

Finally, the Armed Forces requested delaying implementation of 7^th CPC pay scales till certain issues were resolved.

As approved by Hon’ble RM vide note on page-6, the letter of payment of arrears on adhoc basis of pay to Defence Forces Personnel pending issuance of Notification accepting 7^th CPC award was issued vide No. 1(11)/2016-D(P/S) dated 10 Oct 2016.

Conclusion

In conclusion, let us be aware that some issues had been resolved. Let us get out of the box of grievances and self-pity and look ahead on how to improve our pay, allowances and pensions.

                                                    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *