Online
RTI Request Form Details DOEXP/R/2014/60338
Public Authority Details :-
* Public Authority Department of Expenditure
Personal Details of RTI Applicant:-
* Name S. Y. SAVUR
Gender Male
* Address 141 JAL VAYU TOWERS
NGEF LAYOUT , INDIRA NAGAR PO, BANGALORE
Pincode 560038
Country India
State Karnataka
Status Urban
Educational Status Literate
Phone Number +91-9449676278
Mobile Number +91-9688782227
Email-ID sysavur[at]gmail[dot]com
Request Details:-
Citizenship Indian
* Is the Requester Below Poverty Line ? No
(Description of Information
sought (upto 500 characters)
* Description of Information Sought
1. Please refer to No.
7/1/2014-E-III(A)/224 dated 6th June 2014.
2.
CPIO & US (D-Pay/Services) of Ministry of Defence - D(Pay Services) states
vide F No. 35(1)/2013-D(Pay/Services) dated 4th July 2014 that file No. 34(10)/2013/D(Pay/Services)
has been sent to MoF/DoE for views/concurrence on 4th June 2014.
3.
Please provide information as defined in Section 2 (f) of the RTI Act 2005
including photocopies of notings, notes on file, opinions, advices, memos, ID Notes,
minutes of meetings and discussions etc in MoF/DoE on the above mentioned file
No. 34(10)/2013/D(Pay/Services) file sent on 4th June 2014.
* Concerned CPIO Nodal Officer
Supporting document (only
pdf upto 1 MB) Supporting
document not provided
* * * * * *
Reply dated 30th July 2014 received on
04th August 2014
(letters/numerals in italics are inserted by
Aerial View for correctness of language and clarity)
F. No.
7/1/2014-E.III-A/291
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of
Expenditure
North Block, New
Delhi
Dated: 30th July, 2014
To
Sh S Y Savur
141, Jal Vayu Towers NGEF Layout,
Indira Nagar P.O.,
Bangalore – 560038
Sub: Application seeking information under RTI
Act, 2005 – regarding
Sir,
Please
refer to your online RTI application registration No. DOEXP/R/2014/60338 dated
12 .7.2014 on the above subject.
2. As
desired the relevant note portion of Rank Pay’s file and endorsement dated
9.7.2014 is enclosed.
3. You
are requested to send postal order of Rs 42/- towards photocopying charges for
21 pages of document provided to you.
4. The
Appellate Authority is Sh. Amar Nath Singh, Deputy Secretary, Room No. 74-C,
North Block, New Delhi.
Appeal, if any, may be preferred within 30 days of the receipt of this
letter.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/--------------28.07.12
(Manoj Kumar)
Under Secretary & CPIO
Copy
to: - (1) US (RTI) Deptt of Exp
(2) Copy to RTI folder.
- Pages 178-188/N
Department of
Expenditure
E-III (A) Branch
Subject: Rank Pay case
Reference: MoD’s proposal at page 75-85/N in F No.
34(10)/2013 – D (Pay/Services) and linked file No. PC
34(2)/2013-D(Pay/Services)
Ministry
of Defence proposes to issue a DGL (Draft Government Letter) amending MoD’s
letter dated 27.12.2012 to incorporate views of various agencies to implement
the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 4.9.2012 in accordance with the
opinion of the Learned Attorney General which has been duly approved by
Minister of Law and Justice.
2. This
proposal was initially examined by this Department vide our notes at page
158-165/ante and with the approval of Secretary (Expenditure) sough certain
clarifications from the Ministry of Defence vide our ID Note dated 19.03.2014
at page 166-168/ante.
3. This
issue pertains to implementation of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
dated 4.9.2012 (p.622/c) relating to non-deduction of Rank Pay from pre-4th
CPC pay structure as on 1.1.1986.
4. Rank
Pay was introduced for the first time by the 4th CPC as part of pay
structure effective from 1.1.1986. Fixation of Pay (fitment) in revised pay
structure as on 1.1.1986 was to be done based on the emoluments in the
pre-revised structure obtaining prior to 1.1.1986. However, the 4th
CPC suggested deduction of rank pay from pre-revised emoluments. Since Rank Pay
was not at all part of pre-revised emoluments, its deduction was not rational.
This was struck down in Major Dhanapalan’s case by the Hon’ble High Court of
Kerala in 1998. It is this order of the Kerala High Court which was to be
extended to all similarly placed persons as per the order of the Supreme Court
dated 4.9.2012 (p.622/c).
5. Implementation
of the Order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already been made by way of MoD’s
sanction dated 27.12.2012 (p.629/c).
6. Since
the issue of MoD’s sanction letter dated 27.12.2012 (p.629/c) the Services have
been agitating that the sanction letter does not amount to full implementation
of the order of the Supreme Court. In view of the difference of opinion between
the CGDA and this Ministry on the one hand and the Services on the other, the
former Minister for Defence decided to refer the matter to the Ld. Attorney
General. The four issues raised by the Services and the opinion of the Ld.
Attorney General dated 3.9.2013 9P.877/c) are given as under:
|
S. No
|
Issue Raised by the
Services
|
Opinion of the Ld. A.G
|
|
1
|
The order re-fixes the pay on 1.1.1986 only in
case of officers “as on 1.1.1986.”
They argued that the re-fixation is to be done “with effect from 1.1.1986.” Their main concern was that order
does not benefit those who get promoted after 1.1.1986. The minimum pay for each rank should also be
changed upwardly.
|
The Government must grant benefit to all officers
whose pay has been fixed after deducting rank pay whether on 1.1.1986 or
after 1.1.1986.
|
|
2
|
The maximum of the integrated scale applicable up
to Brigadier may be enhanced beyond Rs
5100/-.
|
There is no need to revise the same, as this does
not flow from the Dhanapalan case.
|
|
3
|
The non-deduction of Rank Pay, as of now done on
case of 4th CPC scale from 1.1.1986, should be done in case of 5th
CPC also from 1.1.1996
|
This issue also did not arise nor was considered
in Major Dhanapalan’s case.
|
|
4
|
The non-deduction of Rank Pay, as now done in
case of 4th CPC scale from 1.1.1986, should also be done in case
of 5th CPC also from 1.1.1996.
|
Since the deduction of Rank Pay was in case of 4th
CPC, the Government needs to implement the underlying principles laid down in
Major Dhanapalan’s case i.e. Rank Pay cannot be deducted at the time of
fixing pay in the revised pay scale. He
mentioned that non-deduction should be made at the time of 5th CPC
and 6th CPC.
|
7. Since the Ld. AG’s opinion was in favour
of the Services in respect of points (1) and (4) above, the Ministry of Defence
proposed to implement the same by way of an amendment of the previous sanction
dated 27.12.2012 (p.629/c). Thus they proposed the following modifications:
(iii) The first modification is that the words
“as on 1.1.1986” occurring in para 6 of the previous sanction dated 27.12.2012
(p.620/c) would be substituted by “w.e.f 1.1.1986” and
(iv) The
non-deduction of Rank Pay would also be allowed at the first time of fixation
of pay w.e.f 1.1.1996 at the time of fitment in the revised pay scales based on
the 5th Central Pay Commission.
8. The above issue was considered by this
Department vide our notes at page 158-165/ante and sought certain
clarifications from the Ministry of Defence vide our ID at page 166-168/ante.
MoD had re-submitted the proposal with the following clarifications:
|
S No.
|
Clarifications sought by
DoE
|
Clarifications of MoD
|
|
1
|
What action has been taken by M/o Defence to
verify facts, as stated by the Ld. AG as to whether deduction of Rank Pay for
fixation of pay after 1.1.1986 (except on 1.1.1986) was made or not. If so,
the outcome of such verification may be indicated.
|
As per available records, deduction of Rank pay
was earlier being done when pay of the relevant officers was revised on
transition from 3rd to 4th CPC.
Pay fixation on promotion did not involve
deduction of rank pay subsequent to 1.1.1986. As such no rank pay has been
deducted on re-fixing pay on promotion. In such promotion cases, the officers
have been paid Rank Pay of the new rank they held, in addition to the pay in
the integrated scale.
|
|
2
|
Whether such a modification will result in any
extra financial implications so far as fixation of pay w.e.f 1.1.1986 till
31.12.1995 is concerned. If so, the details thereof.
|
Since the effect of the decision is only to
reverse the deduction of rank pay during the transition from 3rd
to 4th CPC, which was reckoned on the basis of pay drawn as on
1.1.1986, there is no additional
financial liability expected to accrue as a result of the change.
|
|
3
|
Regarding the question of on-deduction of Rank
Pay, Ld AG has opined that the underlying principle laid down in Major
Dhanapalan’s case i.e. Rank Pay cannot be deducted at the time of fixing pay
in the revised scale, needs to be applied at the time of 5th and 6th
CPC also. Therefore, MoD is to explain the method of fixation of pay in the 5th
CPC pay scales.
|
A copy of SAI dated 19.12.1997 is placed in file.
In the said instructions, method of fixation of pay has been illustrated. Rank Pay was deducted during the process
of fixation of revised pay.
|
|
4.
|
Whether the provision contained in Rule 7 (B) of
CCS (RP) Rules, 1997, was adopted in the relevant Army Instructions.
|
Since the Rank Pay is granted in addition to the
basic pay and was revised by the 5th CPC at the new rate, Rule 7
(C) of CCS (RP) Rules 1997 is relevant in the present matter.
As per 7 (C), the pay in the revised scale shall
be fixed in accordance with the provisions of Rule 7 (A) and the allowance as
the new rate as recommended shall be drawn in addition to pay in the revised
scale of pay.
However, on the Armed Forces side, the
pre-revised Rank Pay was added to the pre-revised pay and benefits (i.e. DA,
IRs and 40% benefit was given thereon before revised Rank Pay was deducted.
Therefore, basic pay in the revised pay scale was fixed and revised Rank Pay
was given in addition.
Now, in then light of the Hon’ble Court order dated 4.9.2012 and
the Ld. AG’s opinion, while doing away with the deduction of Rank Pay during
the fixation process, it has been proposed
not to add Rank Pay (to pre-revised Pay) in the methodology given in SAI
dated 19.12.1997. This will be in conformity with the process adopted on
the civilian side. With the revised pay, Rank Pay at the revised rates would
also be paid to the relevant Armed Forces Officers. Illustrative example is placed on file.
|
|
5
|
It is presumed that the modification suggested in
para 2 of the MoD’s note 93 takes into account the existing provision of the
relevant Army Instructions. Thus, a revised sanction needs to be prepared by
the MoD
|
Revised DGL placed in file.
A separate para on the pay revision as per 6 CPC
has also been added in the DGL. It has been stated therein that as Rank Pay
was not deducted in the process of pay fixation in revised scales w.e.f
1.1.2006, there is no need to change the pay fixation formula laid down in
the relevant Services Instructions. Grant of additional component of MSP has
also been explained in the DGL
|
|
6
|
A concrete example of fixation of pay obtaining
at present as per the relevant Army Instruction of 1997, compared to the
fixation based on the proposed modification may be given as an illustration
to help appreciate the issue, indicating the pay fixed as at present and the
pay now to be fixed w.e.f 1.1.1996.
|
Illustrative examples of pay fixation in 1986,
1996 and 2006 as per the understanding of MoD are placed on file.
|
|
7
|
The additional financial implications on this
count may be intimated, both on account of arrears and recurring.
|
The financial implications would be provided by
CGDA after draft DGL is settled.
|
9. The
proposal was considered vide our notes at page 169-177/ante and found that pay
fixation w.e.f 1.1.1996 proposed by MoD does not flow from the advice of the Ld
Attorney General. Accordingly, DS (E.III-A) had a meeting with the officers of
MoD on 7.5.2014 and discussed in length the necessity for strict adherence to
the advice of the Ld Attorney General. The following were suggested to the MoD:
(i) The methodology proposed for fixation
w.e.f 1.1.1996 does not appear to be similar to the one adopted for pay
fixation w.e.f. 1.1.1986;
(iii)
Since
the Rank Pay has been defined as ‘Basic Pay’ in the relevant SAI dated
19.12.1997, it is apt to include it in the proposed methodology;
(iii) It would be better if the draft amendment
proposed by MoD is also shown to Ld AD to ensure that the proposed amendments
are in line with the views expressed by him in his legal opinion dated 3.9.2013
(p.877/c).
10. MoD
has now re-submitted file with the advice of Legal Adviser (Finance) and the
concurrence of MoD (Finance). The Legal Adviser has advised that there appears
to be no legal requirement of showing the draft corrigendum to the Ld. AG.
11. The
definitions of “Basic Pay,” “Rank Pay”
and “Existing emoluments” as prescribed in CCS (RP) Rules, 1986, and SAI dated
23.06.1987, CCS (RP) Rules 1997 and SAI dated 19.12.1997 are given as under:
|
|
CS (RP) Rules, 1986
|
SAI dated 23.06.1987
|
|
Basic Pay
|
‘Basic Pay’ means as defined in FR 9 (21) (a) (i)
FR 9 (21) (a) (i)
The pay, other than special pay or pay granted in
view of his personal qualifications, which has been sanctioned for a post
held by him substantively or in an officiating capacity, or to which he is
entitled by reasons of his position in a cadre;
|
‘BASIC PAY’ means pay in the pay scale of the
rank. It does not include Flying Pay, Qualification Pay, Technical Pay,
Personal Pay or any other type of Special Pay.
|
|
Rank Pay
|
-------
|
‘RANK PAY’ means the pay admissible to an officer
appropriate to the rank actually held, either in acting or substantive
capacity, in addition to the pay in the revised scale. Rank Pay forms part of the
Basic Pay.
|
|
Existing Emoluments
|
For the purpose of Rule 7 (A)
(a)
the basic pay in the existing scale;
(b)
dearness pay, additional DA
and adhoc DA appropriate to the basic pay admissible at the index average
608; and
(c)
The amounts of 1st and 2nd instalments of
Interim Relief admissible on the basic pay in the existing scale
|
For the purpose of Rule 6 (e)
(i)
Basic pay in the existing scale
(ii)
Dearness Pay, additional DA, adhoc DA appropriate to the basic pay
admissible at index average 608 under the relevant orders; and
(iii)
The amounts of 1st and 2nd instalments of
Interim Relief admissible on the basic pay in the existing scale.
|
|
|
CS (RP) Rules, 1997
|
SAI dated 19.12.1997
|
|
Basic Pay
|
‘Basic Pay’ means pay drawn in the prescribed
scale of pay, including stagnation increment(s) but does not include any
other type of pay like ‘special pay,’ ‘ personal pay’ etc
|
‘BASIC PAY’ means pay in the pay scale of the
rank including stagnation increment if any. Basic Pay does not include Flying
Allowance, Qualification Allowance, Technical Pay, Personal Pay or any other
type of Special Pay.
|
|
Rank Pay
|
-----
|
‘RANK PAY’ means the pay admissible to an officer
appropriate to the rank actualy held either in acting or substantive
capacity, in addition to pay in the revised scale. Rank Pay forms part of the Basic Pay.
|
|
Existing Emoluments
|
(For the purpose of Rule 7 (A)
(a)
the basic pay in the existing scale;
(b)
DA appropriate to the basic pay;
(c)
The amounts of 1st and 2nd instalments of
Interim Relief admissible on the basic pay in the existing scale
|
For the purpose of Rule 5 (A)
(i)
Basic Pay including Rank Pay and stagnation increments, if any in the
pre-revised scale
(ii)
Dearness Allowance
(iii)
The amounts of 1st and 2nd instalments of
Interim Relief
|
12. The relevant portion (of) the SAI
Instructions, 987 and 1997 relating to fixation of initial pay in the revised
scale speaks as under:
|
S No.
|
SAI 1987
|
SAI 1997
|
|
1
|
An amount representing 20% of the basic pay in
the existing scale shall be added to the existing emoluments of the officer
|
An amount representing 40% of the basic pay
including stagnation increments, if any, and rank pay wherever applicable in
the pre-revised scale, shall be added to the “emoluments” of the
Officer.
|
|
2
|
After the existing emoluments have been so
increased, an amount equivalent to the rank pay, if any, appropriate to the
rank held by the officer on 01 January 1986 at the rates prescribed in para 3
(a) (ii) above will be deducted. Thereafter, the officer’s pay will be fixed
in the revised scale at the stage next above the amount thus computed. In
case the stage of fixation falls below the minimum pay of the rank held by
the officer on 01 January 1986 as prescribed in the tables below, the pay
will be stepped up….
|
After the existing emoluments have been so
increased, an amount equivalent to the
rank pay, if any, appropriate to the rank held by the officer on 1.1.1996 at
the rates prescribed in Para 3(a) (ii) above shall be deducted. Thereafter, the officer’s pay will be fixed in
the revised (scale) at the stage next above the amount thus computed.
|
(Para 3 (a) (ii) relates to the amount of Rank Pay granted
to each Rank as on 1.1.1986)
13. Various provisions on fixation of pay as
contained in CCS (RP) Rules, 1997 are given as under:
|
Rule 7 (A)
|
Rule 7 (B)
|
Rule 7 (C)
|
|
The initial pay of a Government servant shall be
fixed in the following manner:
(i)
An amount representing 40 per cent of the basic pay in the existing
(pay) shall be added to the “existing emoluments’ of the employee;
(ii)
After the existing emoluments have been so increased, the pay shall
thereafter be fixed in the revised scale at the stage next above the amount
thus computed.
(Definition of Existing
Emoluments given at Para 11 above)
|
In the case of employees who are in receipt of special pay/allowance in addition to
pay in the existing scale has been
recommended for replaced by a scale of pay without any special
pay/allowance, pay shall be fixed in the revised scale in accordance with
the provisions of Clause (A) except that in such cases ‘existing emoluments’
shall include:
(a)
basic pay in the existing scale;
(b)
Existing amount of special pay/allowance
(c)
Admissible dearness allowance
(d) The amounts of
first and second instalments of interim relief admissible on the basic pay in
the existing scale under the relevant orders.
|
In the case of employees who are in receipt of special pay component with any other
nomenclature in addition to pay in the existing scae, such as personal pay
for promoting small family norms, special pay to Parliament Assistants,
Central (Deputation on Tenure) Allowance etc., and in whose case the same has been replaced in the revised scale
with corresponding allowance/pay at the same rate or at a different rate, the
pay in the revised scale shall be fixed in accordance with the provisions of
Clause (A). In such cases the allowance at the new rate as recommended
shall be drawn in addition to pay in the revised scale of pay;
|
14. MoD proposes the following amendments in
the sanction order dated 27.12.2012 as follows:
|
Para No.
|
Existing Provision
|
Amendment proposed
|
|
6
(This para to be re-numbered)
|
Accordingly…..(12th line)….(integrated
scale) as on 1.1.1986…
|
Para No. to be changed to Para
6A
After the word ‘integrated scale’ the words “as
on 1.1.1986” will be substituted by w.e.f.
1.1.1986
|
|
New Para 6B
|
----
|
Sanction of the Government is hereby also
communicated to modify certain provisions of SAI No. 2/S/1998 dated
19.12.1997 and the corresponding Special Instructions pertaining to Navy and
Air Force bearing No. 2/S/98 dated 19.12.1997, in so far as they relate to
deduction of Rank Pay for fixation of revised pay of the concerned officers
of Army, Navy and Air Force in the revised scale. (The modifications proposed in this para in SAI is discussed in the
next para)
|
|
New Para 6C
|
--------
|
The pay fixation formula w.e.f 1.1.2006 as laid
don in SAI 2/S/2008 and the corresponding SI applicable to Air Force and Navy
has also been examined in the light of the legal opinion tendered by Ld. AG.
In the methodology of pay fixation of revised pay w.e.f 1.1.2006 Rank Pay has
not been deducted and has been taken into account alongwith Basic Pay in the
pre-revised scale to arrive at the new, revised pay in the relevant pay band
w.e.f. 1.1.2006 whereupon Grade Pay has also been given and an additional
component MSP at Rs 6000 p.m is also admissible to the Armed Forces officers
up to the rank of Brigadier/eq. As such, the pay fixation formula w.e.f 1.1.2006
for the relevant officers of the Armed Forces as laid down in the relevant
instructions does not require any change.
|
|
7
|
Except to the extent of modification of the
provision contained in para 6 (a) (ii) of the aforesaid Army Instructions and
corresponding Navy and Air Force Instructions both bearing No. 1/S/87 dated
11.6.1987 and 26.5.1987 respectively
relating to deduction of Rank Pay in terms of these orders, which is in
complete compliance of the aforesaid judicial pronouncement, in all other respects
there shall be no change in the provisions of the aforesaid Special Army,
Navy and Air Force Instructions 1987 pertaining to the implementation of the
recommendation of the 4th CPC.
|
Except to the extent of modifications as stated
in MoD letter No. 34(6)/2012-D (Pay/Services) dated 27.12.2012 and as amended
vide this letter, the aforesaid Army Instructions 1/S/87 dated 11.6.1987 and
corresponding Navy and Air Force Instructions both bearing No. 1/S/87 dated
11.6.1987 and 26.5.1987 respectively as amended from time to time and Special
Army Instructions No. 2/S/98 of 19.12.1997 and the corresponding Special
Instructions in case of Navy and Air Force both bearing No. 2/S/98 nd dated
19.12.1997b as amended from time to time, there shall be no change in the
provisions of the aforesaid Special Army, Navy and Air Force Instructions of
1987 and 1997 pertaining to the implementation of the recommendations of the
4th and 5th CPC respectively.
|
|
8
|
As the aforesaid order of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court passed on 4.9.2012 read with their earlier order dtd 8.3.2010 has
upheld the order of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court passed on 5.10.1998 in case
of Major A K Dhanapalan and as the said order of the Hon’ble Kerala High
Court is for re-fixation of pay as on 1.1.1986 and as this sanction is in
compliance with these judicial pronouncements, it is clarified there shall be
no change in respect of Special Instructions of Army, Navy and Air Forces
issued on 19.12.1997 and 11.10.2008 (Army) and 18.10.2008 (Navy and Air Force)
for implementation of the recommendations of the 5th and 6th
CPC respectively, except to the extent of the need for re-fixation of pay as
on 1.1.1996 and 1.1.2006, necessitated due to re-fixation of pay as on
1.1.1986 in terms of these orders.
|
As the aforesaid order of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court passed on 4.9.2012 read with their earlier order dtd 8.3.2010 has
upheld the order of the Hon’ble Kerala High Court passed on 5.10.1998 in case
of Major A K Dhanapalan and as the said order of the Hon’ble Kerala High
Court is for re-fixation of pay without
deduction of Rank Pay w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and as this sanction is in
compliance with these judicial pronouncements and the legal opinion of the Ld. Attorney General, it is
clarified that there shall be no
change in respect of Special Instructions of Army, Navy and Air Forces issued
on 19.12.1997 and 11.10.2008 (Army) and 18.10.2008 (Navy and Air Force) for
implementation of the recommendations except to the extent of the need for
re-fixation of pay w.e.f. 1.1.2006,
necessitated due to re-fixation of pay as on 1.1.1986 in terms of these
orders.
|
15. The amendments proposed in SAI (2/S) 1997
are as under:
|
Rule/Para
|
Existing Provision in SAI 1997
|
Amendment proposed in SAI 1997
|
|
5
(a) (ii)
|
After the existing emoluments have been so
increased, an amount equivalent to the rank pay, if any, appropriate to the
rank held by the officer on 1.1.1996 at the rates prescribed in Para 3 (a)
(ii) above shall be deducted. Thereafter the officer’s pay will be fixed in
the revised (scale) at the stage next above the amount thus computed.
|
After the existing emoluments have been so
increased, there shall be no deduction
of Rank Pay. Thereafter the officer’s pay will be fixed in the revised
(scale) at the stage next above the amount thus computed.
|
16. The
present proposal of MoD is not to take Rank Pay into account while determining
the ‘existing emoluments’ as on 1.1.1996. An illustration given by MoD on the
pay fixation of the Defence personnel as on 1.1.1996 and the proposed fixation
after amendment of SAI 1997 would be as under:
Pre-revised
Scale; Rs 2300-100-3900-150-4200-EB-5100
Revised
Scale of Pay; Rs 9600-300-11400
|
|
|
Fixation
actually done i.e. prior to the implementation of SC Order
|
Fixation
of pay after implementation of SC Order
|
Fixation as per AG’s opinion (By adopting Rule 7 ©
of CCS (RP) Rules 1997
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
1
|
Existing
Basic
|
3100
|
3300*
|
3300*
|
|
2
|
Existing
Rank Pay
|
200
|
200
|
200
|
|
3
|
DA/IR
|
5314
|
5630
|
5630
|
|
4
|
Existing
Emoluments
|
8614
|
9130
|
9130
|
|
5
|
Add
40% of (1) + (2)
|
1320
|
1400
|
1400
|
|
6
|
Total
|
9934
|
10530
|
10530
|
|
7
|
Less
Rank Pay
|
400
|
400
|
Nil
|
|
8
|
Total
|
9534
|
10130
|
10530
|
|
9
|
Basic Pay to be fixed/fixed + Rank Pay
|
9900+400= 10300
|
10200+400=
10600
|
10800+400=
11200
|
|
10
|
DIFFERENCE IN PAY (Col 5-3)
|
-
|
-
|
Rs 900
|
*
The basic pay increased by Rs 200/- is because of non-deduction of Rank Pay
during fixation of pay as on 1.1.1986 as per Supreme Court order.
17. From
the table given above, it is obvious that even during the 5th CPC,
Rank Pay was deducted from the total emoluments. The deduction was also done
even after implementation of the Supreme Court Order (Col. 4 of the table
refers).
18. The
present proposal is not to deduct Rank Pay while calculating the ‘Existing
Emoluments’ and thereafter add the revised Rank Pay w.e.f. 1.1.1996. Even
though this proposal flows from the advice tendered by the Ld. Attorney
General, this will have a double benefit to the Defence Personnel i.e. they
have the benefit of the old Rank Pay and the Revised Rank Pay. Since the advice
is not to deduct Rank Pay while fixing the pay, the proposal of MoD seems to be
in order. However, logically, the following would be the right course of
action.
Pre-revised
Scale; Rs 2300-100-3900-150-4200-EB-5100
Revised
Scale of Pay; Rs 9600-300-11400
|
|
|
Fixation
actually done i.e. prior to the implementation of SC Order
|
Fixation
of pay after implementation of SC Order
|
Fixation as per AG’s opinion (By adopting Rule 7 ©
of CCS (RP) Rules 1997
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
1
|
Existing
Basic
|
3100
|
3300*
|
3300*
|
|
2
|
Existing
Rank Pay
|
200
|
200
|
200
|
|
3
|
DA/IR
|
5314
|
5630
|
5630
|
|
4
|
Existing
Emoluments
|
8614
|
9130
|
9130
|
|
5
|
Add
40% of (1) + (2)
|
1320
|
1400
|
1400
|
|
6
|
Total
|
9934
|
10530
|
10530
|
|
7
|
Less
Rank Pay
|
400
|
400
|
200
|
|
8
|
Total
|
9534
|
10130
|
10330
|
|
9
|
Basic Pay to be fixed/fixed + Rank Pay
|
9900+400= 10300
|
10200+400=
10600
|
10500+400=
10900
|
|
10
|
DIFFERENCE IN PAY (Col 5-3)
|
-
|
-
|
Rs 600
|
* The basic pay increased by Rs 200/- is because of
non-deduction of Rank Pay during fixation of pay as on 1.1.1986 as per Supreme
Court order.
19. Notwithstanding
the previous para, it seems that the proposed pay fixation by MoD seems to be
in order. Hence, we may, perhaps agree to the amendments proposed by MoD.
20.
Submitted.
Sd/---------------------------
(Balachandran B. S.)
SO (E.III-A)/18.08.2012
DS (E-III-A)
- Pages 189 to 195-
The
issue under consideration is to modify the Government sanction issued by the
Ministry of Defence on 27.12.2012 (p.629/c) to implement to order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
dated 4.9.2012 (p.622/c) regarding
non-deduction of Rank Pay from the pre-4th CPC (Pre-1st
January 1986) emoluments for the purpose of fixation of pay in the revised 4th
CPC pay scales w.e.f. 1.1.1986 in respect of commissioned Service officers from
the rank of Captain and equivalent onwards up to Brigadier and equivalent.
2. The
modification essentially proposed by the Ministry of Defence is to follow the
same principle of non-deduction of Rank Pay also at the time of fixation of pay
in the revised pay scales based on 5th Central Pay Commission w.e.f.
1.1.1996. This is based on the advice of the Ld Attorney General dated 3.9.2013
(p.897/c) that then principle of non-deduction of Rank Pay
as ordered by the Supreme Court in respect of fixation of pay at the time of 4th
CPC in 1986 would equally apply at the time of the 5th and 6th
CPC.
3. While
the re-fixation of pay without deducting Rank Pay in the 4th CPC pay
scales from 1.1.1986 was estimated to cost approximately Rs 800 crore, the present proposal (Flag FF) for re-fixation of pay in the 5th CPC
pay scales from 1.1.1986 is estimated to cost not less than Rs 230 crore only
in respect of Army and Navy. However, according to CGDA, which has made this
calculation, this figure is too tentative and is likely to undergo substantial
change. Their note dated 29.5.2014 refers.
Brief Background
4. Rank
Pay was introduced for the first time by the 4th Central Pay
Commission in respect of Service officers ranging from Captain to Brigadier.
The quantum of Rank Pay ranged from Rs 200 to Rs 1200 p.m. The Commission,
while specifically recommending that Rank Pay would be taken into account by
fixing pay in the revised pay scale, suggested as part of illustration on
fixation of pay, for deduction of Rank Pay from the pre-revised emoluments
(pre-1.1.1986) for fixation of pay in the revised pay scales and thereafter
again adding the same amount of Rank Pay. There is an apparent contradiction in
this recommendation because, firstly, Rank Pay was not in existence prior to
1.1.1986 and, hence, its deduction from pre-1.1.1986 emoluments was unjustified
and, secondly, if it was to be treated as pay for being taken into account for
fixation of pay, its deduction was again unjustified.
5. However,
this recommendation was implemented and notified as part of the Special Army
Instruction (SAI) of 26.5.1987 (p.570/c). Para
6 (a) thereof provided for deduction of Rank Pay from the then existing
emoluments for fixation of pay in the revised pay scales of 4th CPC.
6. This
deduction of Rank Pay was challenged by Maj Dhanapalan in the Kerala High Court.
The High Court in its order dated 5.10.1998 (p.605/c) directed to re-fix the
pay w.e.f. 1.1.1986 without deducting the Rank Pay. Subsequent to dismissal of
an appeal by the Division Bench of the same High Court on 4.7.2003, this was
implemented in respect of the petitioner. A number of petitions were later on
filed by similarly placed persons. In its order of 8.3.2010 (p.621/c) the Supreme Court upheld the reasoning of the
judgment dated 5.10.1998 and ordered interest of 6% on arrears admissible from
1.1.1986. In a subsequent petition filed by the Government, the Supreme Court passed an Order on 4.9.2012,
observing that its order of 8.3.2010 did not require any modification, except
in regard to the interest part. The Court has ordered interest @ 6% from 1.1.2006
and not from 1.1.1986, as earlier ordered.
7. Accordingly,
the Government issued order on 27.12.2102 in implementation of the aforesaid
order of the Supreme Court dated 4.9.2012. This
order basically withdraws that provision of the SAI dated 26.5.1987 which
provided for deduction of Rank Pay, and then provides for fixation of pay as on
1.1.1986. Thus, as per this order, the pay stands re-fixed in the pay
scales as on 1.1.1986 without deducting Rank Pay from pre-1.1.1986 emoluments.
This is what the case of Maj Dhanapalan
was and hence similarly placed persons needed similar treatment for the purpose
of fixation of pay as on 1.1.1986. This re-fixation is effective from 1.1.1986.
Arrears on this account have been/are being paid.
Demand of Service Officers
8. Service
officers, however, were not satisfied with the order issued by the Government
on 27.12.2012 arguing that this order did not comply with the order of the
Supreme Court dated 4.9.2012 in respect to the following four matters: -
i. As per the order dated 27.12.2012, the
benefit has been given only to those who were subjected to deduction ‘as on
1.1.1986,’ whereas the order of the Supreme Court is to give the benefit
“w.e.f. 1.1.1986.” The main concern of the service officers was that they did
not benefit officers promoted after 1.1.1986.
ii. The minimum pay for each rank should
also be raised.
iii. The maximum of the pay scale may be
enhanced beyond Rs 5100.
iv. The Rank Pay should not be deducted in
case of revision of pay scales based on 5th CPC from 1.1.1996.
9. Since
the issue raised before the Courts by Maj Dhanapalan was in regard to
non-deduction of Rank Pay while switching over the pay from the pre-4th
CPC to post-4th CPC structure as on 1.1.1986, it was felt that the
above issues do not directly flow from the order of the Supreme Court in case
of similarly placed persons and as such the above issues raised by the Services
were not justified. However, in view of the strong feelings expressed by the
Services, the former Defence Minister decided that the opinion of the Ld.
Attorney General may be obtained.
10. Accordingly,
a detailed reference was made by the Ministry of Defence to the Ld. Attorney
General after consulting the CGDA and this Ministry. This Ministry sent an
exhaustive note, dealing with all the above four issues, to the Ministry of
defence, in view of the substantial financial implications involved. The said
detailed note was sent to Ministry of Defence on 5.7.2013. The stand of this
Ministry in regard to the above four issues were as under: -
(i) In regard to the first issue, pertaining
to the point as to “ as on 1.1.1986” vis-Ã -vis “w.e.f. 1.1.1986,” it was
pointed out by us that the SAI dated 26.5.1987 does not at all provide for
deduction of Rank Pay at the stage of promotion subsequent to 1.1.1986. This
was clearly confirmed by CGDA in their note dt 23.5.2013 (p.635/c). Since the issue involved was non-deduction of
Rank Pay at the time of migration from 3rd CPC to 4th CPC
pay scales, which took place on 1.1.1986, the re-fixation was to be done only
“as on 1.1.1986” and since the pay so re-fixed is effective from 1.1.1986 only,
the phrase “w.e.f. 1.1.1986” is well taken care of. In fact, the arrears on
account of re-fixed pay were calculated accordingly, establishing that the
benefit is “w.e.f. 1.1.1986.”
(ii) As regards the second issue relating to
the revision of minimum pay, this ministry agreed with the views of CGDA
contained in their note dated 23.5.2013 that this issue does not flow from the
order of the Supreme Court.
(iii) As regards the third issue, relating to
revision of the maximum of the pay scale beyond Rs 5100, while agreeing with
the views of CGDA contained in the note dated 23.5.2013 that this issue also
does not flow from the order of the CAT (?) it was also pointed out by this
Ministry that there was no case for changing the maximum of the pay scale
because no person can draw pay beyond the prescribed pay scale, except by way
of stagnation increment which are already admissible in this case. Moreover,
Rank Pay, being admissible in addition to pay in the pay scale, is not
restricted within the maximum of the pay scale.
(iv) As regards the fourth issue pertaining to
non-deduction of Rank Pay at the time of 5th CPC, this Ministry
agree with the views of CGDA contained in their note dated 23.5.2013. The view of CGDA was that the issue related
to deduction of Rank Pay as on 1.1.1986 and not w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and, moreover,
there is no Court order directing change in pay fixation formula of 5th
CPC.
Opinion of the Ld. Attorney
General
11. The
opinion of the Ld. AG dated 03.09.2013 (Flag
AG, p.877/c) is
briefly as under:
(i) As regards the first issue relating to
the aspect of “as on 1.1.1986” and “w.e.f. 1.1.1986,” his opinion is that
Government must grant benefits to all those officers whose pay has been fixed
after deducting rank pay whether as on 1.1.1986 or after 1.1.1986. He has
qualified this by mentioning that this must be done after properly verifying
the facts.
(ii) As regards the second issue, relating to
upward revision of minimum Rank Pay, (wrongly
states – the issue is minimum of pay for each rank) the Ld. AG has clearly
opined that there is no need to revise the same, as it does not flow from the
Dhanapalan judgment.
(iii) As regards the third issue, relating to
upward revision of the maximum of the pay scale of the Brigadier, the Ld AG has
clearly opined that this issue also did not arise nor was considered in Major
Dhanapalan case.
(iv) As regards the fourth issue, relating to
non-deduction of Rank Pay at the time of fixation of pay in the revised pay
scales based on the 5th CPC, the Ld AG has opined that since the
deduction of Rank Pay was as in case of 4th CPC, the Government
needs to implement the underlying principles laid down in Major Dhanapalan
case, i.e. Rank Pay cannot be deducted at the time of fixing pay in the revised
pay scale. He has mentioned that no deduction should be made at the time of 5th
CPC and 6th CPC.
12, Thus,
while the Ld AG has not upheld the 2nd & 3rd point
raised by the Services, he has recommended that the 1st & 4th
point, as demanded by the Services be allowed. It is in pursuance of this that
the present proposal has been made by the Ministry of Defence and they propose
to issue a Government sanction modifying the previous order dated 27.12.2012,
to include the 1st point relating to the phrase “w.e.f. 1.1.1986”
and the 2nd (4th ?) point, relating to non-deduction of Rank Pay
at the time of the 5th CPC. The draft sanction prepared by Ministry
of Defence is placed below in their file.
The point as to “w.e.f. 1.1.1986”
as against “as on 1.1.1986
13. As
already mentioned above, this change is merely a change of syntax. The effect
or re-fixation has already been given w.e.f 1.1.1986 as re-fixation as on
1.1.1986 has the same effect. Thus this does not add any further benefit nor
does (it) involve financial
implications. This has been confirmed by the Ministry of Defence (para 5 of Note 75 of MoD file.)
14. Thus,
we may have no objection to this.
The point as to non-deduction of
Rank Pay w.e.f. 1.1.1996 (5th CPC
15. The 5th
Central Pay Commission recommended for adoption of the same method for fixation
in case of Service personnel as recommended by the 4th Pay
Commission in regard (to) deduction
of Rank Pay. However, the reason why this deduction at the time of the 5th
CPC was not earlier addressed at the time of the issue of the order dated
27.12.2012 is mainly because there was a vital distinction in the treatment of
Rank Pay between the 4th and 5th CPCs. The distinction is
that there was no Rank Pay at all priot to 4th CPC, while at the
time of the 5th CPC there was a Rank Pay which was revised by the 5th
CPC and the old Rank Pay was taken into account for fixation of pay. A comparative
account of fixation of pay suggested by the 4th & 5th
CPCs is: -
|
Rank
|
Method recommended by
the 4th Pay Commission
|
Method recommended by
the 5th Pay Commission
|
|
Major
|
Existing Basic Pay = Rs 1600
No Rank Pay
DA/ADA/IR = Rs 1740
20% of Basic Pay = Rs
320
Total = Rs 3660
Pay in the revised pay in the scale = Rs 3400* +
Rank Pay of Rs 400
*Deducting the Tank Pay from the pre-revised
emoluments (pre-1.1.1986 emoluments)
|
Pay+ Rank
Pay (3400+600)= Rs 4000
DA + IR = Rs 5680
20% of (Pay+ Rank Pay) = Rs
800
Total = Rs 10480
Pay after deducting revised Rank Pay of Rs 1200 = Rs 9280
Pay in the revised scale = Rs 11600 + Rs 1200
Rank Pay
|
16. It
may be seen that though old Rank Pay was treated as basic pay and taken into
account for fixation of pay, the revised Rank Pay was also deducted from the
total pre-revised emoluments. Like the 4th CPC, the 5th
CPC did not give any reason for this deduction. This deduction principle was
incorporated in the relevant SAI dated 19.12.1997 (Para
5 (a) (ii).
17. Therefore,
in keeping with the advice of the Ld AG, this issue of deduction of Rank Pay
also needs to be addressed. Considering that Rank Pay obtaining before the 5th
CPC was revised/replaced by the 5th CPC with a higher amount, it was
earlier thought to treat Ran Pay on the same basis as special pay at the time
of 5th CPC for fixation of pay in the revised pay scales. So far as
special pay is concerned, the method of fixation of pay adopted at the time of
5th CPC as per CCS (RP) Rules, 1997 provided for a special method in
cases where special pay was replaced/revised by a higher amount. The
method provided that the pre-revised
special pay may not (be) included in the pre-revised emoluments like basic pay
for being taken into account for fixation of revised pay and hereafter the
revised special pay may be added. This principle is contained in Rule 7 (1) (B)
of the CCS (RP) Rules, 1997.
18. It
was, therefore, thought that since Rank Pay was also revised/replaced by the 5th
CPC by a higher amount, just like special pay, the pre-revised Rank Pay may not
be included in the emoluments like basic pay; the revised Rank Pay may not be
deducted from the total pre-revised emoluments and then revised Rank Pay may be
added to the revised pay. The Ministry of Defence earlier proposed a draft
sanction (Encl 77A of MoD file) on
the same basis. The actual fixation would have been as indicated in the
statement at that time prepared and placed in the file of MoD.
19. However,
a perusal of the draft prepared by MoD revealed that this would have created
further legal complications and may in fact go against the order of the Supreme
Court, inviting possible contempt. This is for the following reasons: -
(i) Non-inclusion of pre-revised Rank Pay in
the pre-revised emoluments like the basic pay would mean taking away Rank Pay
from the ambit of basic pay. This is what the Ministry of Defence had proposed
in the draft sanction, deleting the Rank Pay from the ambit of “existing
emoluments” which includes at present both basic pay and Rank Pay. Since SAI
sated 19.12.1997 provided for Rank Pay as part of the existing emoluments just
like basic pay (para 5 (d) (ii), the Ministry of Defence proposed to delete
Rank Pay therefrom in order to exclude old Rank Pay for being taken into
account as part of existing emoluments like basic pay for fixation of pay. This
is not proper because Rank Pay has been treated as part of basic pay all along.
In the SAI of 26.5.1987, which covers the pay scales from 1.1.1986 up to
31.12.1995, clearly mentioned that Rank Pay forms part of basic pay (para 2 (d)
thereof). This being so, if Rank Pay is at this stage excluded from then
purview of basic pay for fixation of pay as on 1.1.1996, it will create a whole
range of legal problems and the Government may be seen as reinventing the
nature of Rank Pay at this late stage to water down the impact of re-fixation
from 1.1.1996.
(ii) Most importantly, the principle of
treatment of special pay where it was replaced by a revised amount post-5th
CPC, is on the premise that special pay was not part of the basic pay, as
defined in Rule 3(1) of the CCS (RP) Rules, 1997. On the other hand, Rank Pay
was part of basic pay and hence it may not be treated similar to special pay.
Thus, Rule 7 (1) (B) of the CCS (RP) Rules, 1997 does not apply in case of Rank
Pay.
20. The
matter was therefore, considered with the officers of the Ministry of Defence
and they were advised to reconsider the matter, lest there should be further
legal problems. They were also advised to take legal opinion as to the cottect
course of action as per the advice of the Ld AG.
21. Accordingly,
the Ministry of Defence have now prepared a revised draft sanction, proposing
non-deduction of revised Rank Pay from the total emoluments and at the same
time not excluding the pre-revised Rank Pay from the scope of basic pay. An
illustration of actual fixation on this basis is given in the statement
prepared by Ministry of Defence. The revised sanction has also been prepared by
Ministry of Defence. It provides that the relevant para 5 (a) (ii) of the SAI
dated 19.12.1997 would be amended to provide that no deduction of Rank Pay
would take place. They have also obtained legal opinion which has vetted this
course of action (p 95/N of MoD file).
22. It is
submitted that while the earlier draft of Ministry of Defence proposing
exclusion of Rank Pay from the ambit of “basic pay’ and existing emoluments and
then non-deduction thereof, was estimated to cost around Rs 5.75 crore in case
of Army along with recoveries of Rs 43.35 lakh, the present draft sanction is
likely to cost more than Rs 230 crore. However, the present draft sanction is
the correct course of action. A comparative account of fixation or pay as per
the old draft and the revised one is as below: -
|
Elements prior to 1.1.1996
|
Existing fixation of pay
|
Fixation of pay as per earlier
draft
|
Fixation of pay as per present
draft
|
|
Basic
|
3300
|
3300
|
3300
|
|
Rank Pay
|
200
|
Nil*
|
200
|
|
DA/IR
|
5630
|
5314
|
5630
|
|
Emoluments
|
9130
|
8614
|
9130
|
|
40% of basic pay + Rank Pay
|
1400
|
1320
|
1400
|
|
Total
|
10530
|
9934
|
105301
|
|
Less Revised Rank Pay
|
400
|
Nil **
|
Nil**
|
|
Total
|
10130
|
9934
|
10530
|
|
Revised Pay + revised Rank Pay
|
10200+400
|
10200+400
|
10800+400
|
|
*
Rank Pay deleted from the ambit of old basic pay. This is fundamentally
incorrect and hence this was not pursued further.
**
Revised Rank Pay not deducted from the total pre-revised emoluments
|
|||
23. Considering
the advice of Ld. AG that the underlying principle that Rank Pay cannot be
deducted at the time of fixing pay in the revised pay scale, as laid down in
Maj. Dhanapalan case, is to be implemented and also considering that deduction
of revised Rank Pay from the pre-revised emoluments is something which is not
justified, as also the fact that since Rank Pay was part of basic pay and,
hence, it could not have been excluded from the pre-revised basic pay; the
proposal of Ministry of Defence as per the revised sanction, is justified. We
may agree with the same.
Why 6th CPC fixation is
not affected
24. At
the time of 6th CPC, Rank Pay has been replaced by Military Service
Pay (MSP) and while fixing pay in the revised pay scales based on 6th
CPC, both old basic pay and old rank pay were included for the purpose of
fixation in revised pay and no deduction of Rank Pay took place, with the MSP
added to the revised pay. That is, the practice now adopted for 5th
CPC fixation has already been adopted for 6th CPC fixation and,
hence, at the stage of the 6th CPC there was no problem of deduction
of Rank Pay. Thus no change is called for at the time of 6th CPC.
This has been confirmed by the Ministry of Defence also, and, therefore, 6th
CPC fixation method remains unaltered as per the revised draft sanction.
Conclusion
25. We
may agree with then proposal of the Ministry of Defence and also concur in the
draft sanction prepared by them, as per para 14 & 23 above. This would
entail financial implications in excess of Rs 230 crore on account of arrears
etc (para 3 above also refers). However, the same may not be helped at this
stage because of the legal imperative.
26.
Kind
approval of the Hon’ble Finance Minister is solicited.
Sd/---------------------
(Amar Nath Singh)
DS (E-IIIA)
26.6.2014
JS (Pers.)
Contd
at N/196
Sd/-----
-196/N & 197-
Notes from pre-page refer
The
discussion is on implementation of an order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated
4.9.12. directing that “Rank Pay” should not be deducted from emoluments for
the purpose of fixation of pay in the revised pay structure post 4th
CPC. This judgment has been given in respect of Commissioned Service Officers
in the Ministry of Defence from the rank of Captain and equivalent up to Brigadier
and equivalent. The manner of
implementation of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has also been
discussed on several occasions with MoD and has been analysed in detail in this
Department. We have already agreed to implement the order of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in so far as non-deduction of Rank Pay at the time of the 4th
CPC is concerned. Necessary instructions have been issued by MoD in compliance
of the Court orders. The estimated financial impact of this implementation is
Rs 800 crore. The stand of this Department has been that the order of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court is w.r.t. the revision of pay under the 4th
CPC and may not necessarily be extended thereafter in the case of 5th
CPC, as it does not flow directly from the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
This view of the Department is based on the views of the CGDA in the matter.
However, the three Services have been demanding that the order of Hon’ble
Supreme Court be extended to 5th and 6th CPC.
In
view of the difference of opinion between the Service Headquarters and MoD/MoF,
former Raksha Mantri decided that the entire matter would be placed before the
Learned AG for his valuable opinion. The Learned AG has opined that, “the Government needs to implement the
underlying principle laid down in the Maj. Dhanapalan case, i.e. Rank Pay
cannot be deducted at the time of fixing pay in the revised pay scale.”
Thus, the view of the AG is that the benefit given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in the case of 4th CPC needs to be extended to 5th and 6th
CPC also.
It
may be seen from the details at para 24 of 195/N that during the 6th
CPC, Rank Pay was replaced by Military Service Pay and, therefore, no deduction
of Rank Pay similar to the practice followed in the 4th CPC and 5th
CPC is applicable in the case of 6th CPC. We, therefore, only have
to take into account the pay fixation done in the 5th CPC. Table at
para 15 depicts the methodology of pay fixation in the 4th CPC and
in the 5th CPC. It may be
seen that in the 5th CPC also, Rank Pay was deducted from
pre-revised emoluments before fixations. This, therefore, has to be corrected
on the basis of the advice of the Learned AG.
The
proposal now received from MoD addresses the issue of reversing the deduction
of Rank Pay from 5th CPC fixation. The draft sanction order received
from MoD is placed at F/DFA. The sanction order has been examined at paras
18-22 of pre-page. It is now proposed to concur with the draft sanction order
of MoD. The financial implication of this approval is expected to be upwards of
Rs 230 crore in view of the quantum of arrears from 01.01.1996 onwards that
would have to be paid,
Submitted
for kind approval of Hon’ble FM.
Sd/------------
(Sudha Krishnan)
Joint Secretary (Pers)
02.07.14
Secretary (E) Sd/-------------
(Ratan
P Watal)
2/7
Finance Minister
Sd/-----------------
5/7
Secretary (E) Sd/----------
7/7
JS (Pers) Sd/-----
7/7/14
DS (E-III-A) Sd/----------
7/7
S.O. E-IIIA
DFA
Please Sd/-------- 7/7
DS (E-III-A) The
FD note to be sent to MoD is for kind approval of JS (Pers)
Sd/--------------
8/7/14
JS (Pers) Sd/------------
8.7.14
DS (E III A)
For
signature please Sd/---------
SO
E. III. A
US (E-III-B) Sd/----------------
09.07.14
S.O (E-III-B)
Ministry of Finance
Department of Expenditure
Reference: Note 96 of Ministry of Defence recorded on
their file No.
34 (10)/2013 – D (Pay/Services) LF
No. 34 (2)/2013- D (Pay/Services)
Ministry
of Defence may please refer to the aforesaid note, proposing issue of a revised
DGL amending the previous Order issued by Ministry of Defence on 27.12.2012,
relating to implementation of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated
4.9.2012 in regard to the Rank Pay case.
2. The
draft DGL of the Ministry of Defence proposes to amend the sanction letter
dated 27.12.2012 in the following two respects based on the advice of the Ld.
Attorney General as contained in his opinion dated 3/9/2013:
(i) To substitute the words “as on 1.1.1986”
as per para 1(i) of the draft revised DGL, by the words “with effect from
1.1.1986,” and
(ii) To provide re-fixation of pay with effect
from 1.1.1996 in the context of revised pay scales based on the 5th
Central Pay Commission, without deduction of Rank Pay as earlier provided in
the Special Army Instruction dated 19.12.1997 and the corresponding
Instructions in case of Navy and Air Force.
3. The
matter has been considered in the light of the points brought out by the
Ministry of Defence as well as the advice of LA (Defence) dated 2.6.2014
contained in Note 95 of the aforesaid file of Ministry of Defence.
4. So
far as the first issue, as mentioned in para 2 (i) above is concerned, Ministry
of Defence has clarified that such a modification will have no additional
financial liability so far as fixation of pay with effect from 1.1.1986 till
31.12.1995 is concerned. In other words, there would be no extra financial
implications on this account other than the implications already incurred on
issue of the order dated 27.12.2012 for re-fixation of pay with effect from
1.1.1986 on account of switch over from 3rd CPC to 4th
CPC pay scales.
5. As
regards the second issue contained in para 2 (ii) above, it is seen that the
same is in accordance with advice of Ld. AG. The advice of LA (Defence) dated
2.6.2014 is also that there is no legal objection in this regard.
6. Accordingly, this Ministry concurs in the
proposal of the Ministry of Defence and also in the revised DGL prepared by the
Ministry of Defence.
7.
This
issues with the approval of Hon’ble Finance Minister.
Sd/--------------------------
09.07.14
(Manoj Kumar)
Under Secretary
Ministry
of Defence (Joint Secretary (E) South Block, New Delhi
MoF,
Doe, UO No. 94466/E.III(A)/2014 dated 09-07-2014
* * * * *
\\\\\Typed True Copy/////
Dear Sir,
ReplyDeletePl refer your blog post dated 05 Aug 2014. It is very clear from the understanding of the MoF DoE that the Capt and Equi pay scale wef from 01 Jan 96 should be more than Rs.10,000/- and not Rs.10,000/- as indicated in the DGL submitted by the Services HQ. Correct me ZI am wrong or my understanding is poor on the interpretation of file notings obtained from MoD thro RTI. http://sharad10525.blogspot.in/2014/08/mod-letter-of-24-july-2014-most-of-what.html.
Jai Hind