Saturday, 28 September 2013

Curiouser & Curiouser

Curiouser & Curiouser

-         Alice in Wonderland


The Event(s)
Hon’ble Supreme Court passes order in I.A. No. 9 of 2010 in TP [C] No. 56 of 2007

MoD obtains advice/opinion of Ld Solicitor General of India

Services HQ furnishes DGL to MoD

MoD obtains observations of the CGDA and Field Controllers on the Services DGL, wherein PCDA (N) and CDA (AF) observe that the Order applies to 5th CPC also but PCDA (O) does not.

[Curiosity: - Does this over-turn the precedent, and the bureaucracy loves precedent, that majority decisions of the Parliament and Courts need not be taken cognisance of?]  

MoD “requests” for another DGL from TRIPAS and one from CGDA

MOD issues order of implementation of Hon’ble Supreme Court order based on the CGDA DGL
Chairman, CoSC & CAS writes to Hon’ble RM pointing out four anomalies in the MoD letter of 27.12.2012

Services HQ furnishes first statement of case dated 2 Apr 13 based on the ibid letter which is circulated by MoD to Def/Fin, CGDA and MoF

CGDA provides observations and MoF concurs/agrees; MoD does not ask Services HQ to clarify (pre-meditated?) but send the documents to Ld Attorney General

Chairman CoSC & CAS writes to Hon’ble RM about inaction of MoD on his letter of 18.1.2013 as it is apparent Services HQ has been kept out of the loop

Hon’ble RM takes a meeting and directs that MoD and Services HQ furnish separate Statements of Case for opinion of Ld Attorney General

Service HQ provides fresh and elaborate SoC to Ld Attorney General; Nothing known about MoD’s SoC

RDOA files Contempt Petition (No. 328 of 2013) in Hon’ble Supreme Court

JS (E) takes a meeting and assures Service HQ SOC matter would be referred to Ld Attorney General together with MoD’s SoC, but………

MoD (or LA (Def) sends the first SoC (dated 2.4.2013) to Ld Attorney General for opinion with observations of Def/Fin, CGDA and MoF

Ld Attorney General returns Service HQ SoC of 1.7.2013 to Min of Law & Justice (for submission through LA (Defence)?)

Ld Attorney General conveys his opinion and refers only to the Chairman CoSC & CAS’s letter of 18.1.2013

What happened to the MoD’s SoC and Service HQ SoC dated 1.7.2013?

[Curious: - What is the ‘other basis’ when the CGDA & MoF harp on the inviolability of the 4th CPC’s Report & recommendations?]

Mid-day Today and Services HQ obtain  a copy of the opinion of the Ld Attorney General dated 3.9.2013

(1) Where is the Statements of Case sent by MoD for observations of Def/Fin, CGDA and MoF? Has it been submitted to Min of Law & Justice [LA (Defence)] for comments and processing with Ld Attorney General? Is it awaiting the RM’s approval??

(2) For a complete picture, will MoD send to Service HQ the observations of MoF, CGDA, Def/Fin for authentic data and/or counter incorrect inputs i.e. CGDA stating “another basis” for deduction of Rank Pay?

(3) Has MoD (Finance) vide U.O. No. 2038/Addl FA (J) dated 26.5.1987 or MoD’s Case No. PC to MF. B/04780/5/AG/PC Cell (A)/3115/D-Pay/Services) adopted the impugned formula by over-ruling the 4th CPC?

Will Ld Attorney General render another opinion to supplement his opinion of  3.9.2013 by reconsidering the issues of

(1) Minimum pay of the Rank as this was not in the 4th CPC Report or Resolution 9E of 19 Mar 87, 

(2) Raising the Ceiling of the integrated scale based on the MoF OM No. 1/2/86-Estt.(Pay-I) dated 10.4.87 and Chapter 2.3 of the 6th CPC Report quoting previous Pay Commissions recording in their Reports that Brig and DIG are equal for pay fixation purposes,

(3) Will that entail raising the ceiling for 5th CPC as well as Rank Pay deductions have to be corrected?, and

(4) Effect on the pay of Major Generals, even Lt Generals?

No comments:

Post a Comment