Tuesday, 29 September 2015

Be Careful of Wrong Advice



Be Careful of Wrong Advice

Here is the clarification by MoD/DESW on the Circular No. 547 obtained by Petty Officer (retd) S K Singh. You may contact him for authenticity.
*         *          *         *        *

No. 1 (4)/2015 – D (Pen/Pol)
Ministry of Defence
Department of Ex-servicemen Welfare
D (Pension/Policy)
Dated: 24th September 2015

To
          Petty Officer (retd) S K Singh
          santhosh2002@gmail.com

Subject: Revision of pension: MoD letter dated 3.9.2015

Sir,

          I am directed to refer to email dated 4th September 2015 addressed to Hon’ble RRM regarding MoD letter dated 3/9/2015 issued in implementation of DoP&PW OM dated 30.7.2015 regarding benefit of fitment table in revision of pension with effect from 1.1.2006 instead of 24.9.2012 in placed opposite for kind perusal please. 

2.      It has been decided that with effect from 01.01.2006 pension/family pension for Pre-2006 JCOs/ORs Pensioners/Family Pensioners shall be determined as fifty and thirty percent respectively of the minimum of the fitment table for the Rank in the revised Pay Band as indicated under fitment tables annexed with 1/S/2008 and equivalent instructions for Navy and Air Force, plus Grade Pay corresponding to the pre-revised scale from which the pensioner had retired/discharged/invalided out/died including Military Service Pay and X group pay.

3.       However, in case, the consolidated pension/family pension calculated as per Para 4.1. of this Ministry’s letter No. 17 (4)/2008(1)/D(Pen/Pol) dated 11.11.2008 is higher than the pension/family pension calculated in the manner indicated above, the same (higher consolidated pension/family pension) will continue to be treated as basic pension/family pension. Further, where revised pension in terms of GoI, MoD letter No. PC-10(1)/2009-D (Pen/Pol) dated 08.03.2010 and No. 1 (13)/2013/D (Pen/Policy) dated 17.01.2013 is higher than the rate indicated in annexure attached with letter dated 3.9.2015 then the same will continue to be treated as basic pension/family pension from 1.07.2009 and 24.09.2012 respectively.

4.      Accordingly, revised tables indicating minimum guaranteed pension/Ordinary Family Pension has been annexed as Annexure –A (Army pensioners), Annexure-B (Air Force pensioners) and Annexure –C (Navy pensioners) to MoD letter dated 3.9.2015.

5.       In view of the above, pre-2006 JCO/ORs pensioner/family pension as indicated in the table w.e.f 1.1.2006 or as per MoD letter dated 11.11.2008 or from 1.7.2009 (only pensioner and not family pensioners) as per MoD letter dated 8.3.2010 or w.e.f 24.9.2012 as per MoD letters dated 17.1.2013 in respect of pensioners/family pensioner of JCO/ORs whichever is more beneficial (emphasis supplied).
Sd/-------------------------
(Manoj Sinha)
Under Secretary (Pen/Policy)

*        *        *        *        *
Dear Cdr Chandrashekhar and Gp Capt CRR Sastry Garu,

     I chanced upon Circular 01 of PCDA (Pensions) Allahabad. Pl read the letter of Min of Def enclosed there. The pension of pre-1996 Maj Gens has to be fixed same as post - 1996 Maj Gens.

     The principle of pension fixation of Maj Gen equally applies to all ranks. We must advice our Advocate in AFT to produce this document to AFT and simply pray that the method of pension fixation carried our for Maj Gens be carried out for Lt Cols to Brig. Min of Def letter is very crystal clear.

From Brig S Vidyasagar

Dear Brig Vidyasagar,

I quote an extract of an opinion from another legal expert who has always been very out spoken person to an extent that most of the times he gets on the wrong side of people. I admire him primarily for this quality of being forthright in expression of his views.
"The reason and start point for this case and this circular was that the minimum of pay of a Brig incl rank pay (19100) was more than that of a Maj Gen (18400). The entire judgement in the case of Maj Gen Vains, of HC and then upheld by SC, revolves around that aspect. I don't know how people are claiming its applicability on other ranks without reading through the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High court and then the SC."
*        *        *        *        *

MoD files affidavit that it has complied with Supreme Court Order in Maj Gen S P S Vain Case

Yesterday, 28 Sep 2015, Ms Pinky Anand, ASG is reported to have filed an affidavit that MoD, by its order dated 10 Aug 2015, has complied with the Honourable Supreme Court order in the Maj Gen S P S Vains (retd) case. Please see link below for more details

indianexpress.com/article/india-others/have-followed-supreme-court-order-on-orop-govt/

That nobody has read the order is another matter.

Next hearing is the case is scheduled for 02 Nov 2015.

Monday, 28 September 2015

From Major Navdeep Singh's Blog - "Forwarded as Received"



Saturday, September 26, 2015 From Major Navdeep Singh’s Blog


Though my last post was also on chain mails, I have realized that irresponsibility on social media and cyberspace is now assuming dangerous proportions with rumour-mongering at its peak which is not only resulting in frustration amongst the military community but also unethical and unmilitary name-calling which can have far reaching consequences on reputations of people and morale of serving personnel and veterans.

While most of us have been forwarding mails and messages in good faith, still it is our bounden responsibility not to put into orbit material which is unverified or which causes unnecessary heartburn, especially amongst serving personnel, or results in slander of personalities. The term “Forwarded as Received” does not suffice and ends up damaging and harming the entire scheme of things as we perceive.

Some very recent examples of immaturity on the net, with mass circulation, can be recalled here:

Forwarding of a message that a senior officer at the Army HQ was responsible for inserting the prohibitory “Pre-Mature Retirement” (VRS) clause in the draft letter for OROP. What could be further from truth? Why on earth would someone do that? Have we ever wondered before forwarding such silly stuff on private and social media!!!

Circulation of a patently false message that a young Major who lost his life in an unfortunate incident during battle inoculation was not evacuated on time because senior officers precluded his evacuation.

Spreading canards about a Colonel whose wife is serving in the Indian Defence Accounts Service (IDAS). The officer’s reputation has been unnecessarily sullied without even an iota of truth. Even if on hypothetical assumption, the officer’s wife, in her official dealings, may have had an opinion or perception about the concept of OROP which may not have been configured with the actuality, how could the officer be blamed for the same and how could canards be spread about his service life, career and posting profile?

Spreading disaffection about senior officers and how they accepted the ‘Apex Grade’ after the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC) resulting in “OROP” for them and how they should refuse to accept the ‘Apex Grade’. Before spreading such half-truths, people should have realized that officers from the Apex Grade are in receipt of OROP by default, not by design. The pension of past retirees is calculated on the minimum of the new pay grade and since the pay grade of such retirees is fixed, the 50% of the minimum in their case results in a fixed pension for past as well as current retirees by default. Moreover, this fixed pay concept is not new and has been in place since times immemorial. For example, during the 4thCPC, it was Rs 8000 fixed, during the 5th CPC, it became 26000 and during the 6th CPC it was upgraded to Rs 80000. This concept was not introduced by the 6th CPC. Rumour-mongers have also not realized that such officers also suffer in a way since on reaching the ‘Apex’ level, they do not get any enhancement of pay in service and their pay remains fixed without any further increment.

Spreading my old oped of the year 2012 by forging the date as 2015 and stating to the world that the Services HQ are still opposing Non Functional Upgradation (NFU) for the military officer cadre. My old oped had merely stated the restrictive view existing at one point of time in the Services HQ. After a series of deliberations, all three Services HQ were firmly of a view in favour of NFU, and still are, and have fully stood behind the concept. Please ignore emails castigating the Services HQ for not supporting NFU since there is no truth in them. My opeds may be sharp but those are meant to move the system into motion by stirring them out of inertia, and not to pinprick. My opinion, which is meant for positive movement ahead, should not be used as a tool to shame.

Spreading mails regarding false and imaginary calculation tables which are either lesser than what is admissible thereby resulting in disappointment or which are much higher than entitlement thereby resulting in raising false expectations.

Chain mails asking people to file individual cases even in those specific matters wherein judicial intervention has already succeeded and universal orders stand issued by the Govt for all similarly placed individuals or where judicial intervention has already failed resulting in a closure of the issue. (Clarification: Here I am only referring to futility of litigation in those cases where the Govt HAS suo moto already issued universal orders after a particular decision. I am not referring to those issues where despite a favourable judicial decision, the Govt has not issued universal orders)

Also, it is painful to receive messages pertaining to my last post wherein I had attempted to clear the air about pensions of ranks other than Commissioned Officers. It seems that in the melee, affected pensioners have overlooked a very important fact that the new Circulars issued by the PCDA (547 and 548) emanate from a Supreme Court decision stating that pension should not be based on the “minimum of pay band” itself but on “minimum of pay within the pay band” for each rank w.e.f 01-01-2006. It cannot apply to ranks other than commissioned ranks for the simple reason that their pension is based on notional maximum w.e.f 01-07-2009 and hence if the judgement is applied to them w.e.f 01-01-2006, it would result in loss to all ranks since then the pensions would then fall to ‘minimum’ like in the case of Commissioned ranks and all civilians and that is the reason why pensions have been protected for them from 01-07-2009 onwards. They stand to gain only from 01-01-2006 till 30-06-2009 by the Supreme Court decision during which time their pensions were based on the minimum and these new tables would only replace the old tables that were in force from 01-01-2006 till 30-06-2009. If at all there was an anomaly, it was not linked to this Supreme Court decision or these new Circulars and it was on some other issue- it should have been emphasized and taken up that if till 5th CPC (till 31-12-2005) their pensions were based on top of the scales, the same concept should have been extended w.e.f 01-01-2006 rather than from 01-07-2009.

It is bewildering that people are neither understanding the issue nor going into depth of the same and rather sending negative messages to those who are portraying the true picture to them. Rest assured that I am always willing to stand up for our men and women of all ranks unconditionally and that is the reason why this blog has never been officer-specific and neither have been my battles for justice. But I firmly believe in standing up only for causes which are legally sound and also do not believe in circulating sugarcoated mails with trumped-up figures which later cause disillusionment.  

From Maj Navdeep Singh's Blog - Irresponsible Chain Mails on pensions of Jawans and JCOs



Sunday, September 13, 2015 From Maj Navdeep Singh’s Blog

Though the instant post was not ideally required, but I feel compelled to throw light on a subject, which, since the last few days has led to a massive disinformation campaign fuelled by irresponsible chain-mails regarding pensionary benefits of ranks other than Commissioned Officers.

As was brought out in the last post on this blog, the Government has issued the sanction order implementing the Supreme Court decision on removal of a pensionary anomaly with effect from 01 Jan 2006, that is, the date of implementation of the 6th Central Pay Commission (6th CPC) recommendations. There have been mails floating around and queries raised that the benefit as granted to Commissioned Officers and Civilians on 24 Sept 2012 has now been applied from 01 Jan 2006 but similar benefit has not been extended to ranks other than Commissioned Officers. Some mails have been nauseatingly abusive towards the Government and some have raised needless irresponsible conspiracy theories.

Let me attempt to clarify this issue for the benefit of readers.

When the 6th CPC recommendations were implemented, the pensions of pre-2006 retirees were fixed at 50% of the minimum of the applicable pay band with effect from 01 Jan 2006 rather than the pay within the pay band for each rank according to fitment tables. This was implemented for all Central Govt pensioners, irrespective of rank or service. This was objected to by pensioners and led to massive litigation since as per pensioners, the pensions were to be based on minimum of pay within the pay band for each rank/grade and not the minimum of the pay band itself.

While this controversy was simmering, the Government introduced a new system of pension calculation for ranks other than Commissioned Officers wherein they scrapped the system of minimum of the pay band but initiated a system of calculation by taking the maximum of the 5th CPC scales fitted notionally into the new 6th CPC pay bands and alongwith enhanced weightages. This new system came into force on 01 July 2009. The weightages were further enhanced with effect from 24 Sept 2012. Hence, the controversy of minimum of pay band vis-a-vis minimum of pay for each rank/grade within the pay band became redundant for ranks other than Commissioned Officers with effect from 01 July 2009 but the said anomaly continued to hold field for Commissioned Officers and Civilians. Ranks other than Commissioned Officers who were now fixed on notional top of the 5th CPC scales w.e.f 01 June 2009 were however hit by the minimum of pay band vis-a-vis minimum of pay within the pay band anomaly from 01 Jan 2006 till 30 June 2009.

On the other hand, in the case of Commissioned Officers and Civilian retirees, the pension continued to be based on minimum of pay of the pay band itself and later the Government itself rectified the anomaly with effect from 24 Sept 2012 and provided that from Sept 2012 onwards the pension would be based on minimum of pay for each rank/grade within the pay band. The letter was issued in Jan 2013 with retrospective effect from Sept 2012. Various Tribunals and more importantly the Delhi High Court however ruled that the removal of the anomaly would have to be effectuated from 01 Jan 2006 rather than the future artificial cut-off date of 24 Sept 2012, and the said decision was ultimately affirmed by the Supreme Court.

In implementation of the decision of the Delhi High Court affirmed by the Supreme Court, the Government has issued the implementation instructions under question. For ranks other than Commissioned Officers, the instructions would apply from 01 Jan 2006 till 30 June 2009 since from 01 July 2009 onwards the anomaly stood removed and rendered redundant since all such personnel were as it is fixed on notional top of scales. For Commissioned Officers and Civilian pensioners, the instructions would apply from 01 Jan 2006 till 23 Sept 2012 since the anomaly was only removed on 23 Sept 2012.

Those who are cursing the Government and Commissioned Officers and Civilian pensioners must realize the contours of the controversy before jumping the gun based on half-baked information. It is for the information of all, that pre-2006 retiree ranks other than Commissioned Officers are granted pensions based on notional maximum while Commissioned Officers and Civilians are granted pensions based on notional minimum within the pay band. The Government letter rather protects the enhanced pensions of Jawans and JCOs from 01 July 2009/24 Sept 2012 and this should have brought joy to such pensioners, even if the arrears are not that massive, rather than disaffection.

Please do not go by chain-mails being circulated based on half baked information of self styled experts since reliance on such information leads to needless frustration based on non-existent controversies.

Friday, 25 September 2015

CSD, Profits, and Armed Forces



Canteen Services for Defence Forces & What happens to the Profits

          Recently we read a piece from Dr. Dheeraj Sharma, a Professor in IIM-A, who includes a stint as consultant to the Army (actually the Army Training Command – ARTRAC) and also with MHA in his curriculum vitae. The professor’s forte appears to be marketing, which is the subject he is teaching.

          A bit late, but better than never, here is the result of my preliminary scouring of the internet (with the source) which I hope the professor will have the time to read.

 From Notes on Functions of CSD & Role of CDA (CSD) Mumbai from CDA CSD Trg Material Oct 2012

          Board of Control, Canteen Services

          Chairman:           Raksha Mantri

          Vice Chairman:  Rajya Raksha Mantri

          Members:         1. Defence Secretary
         
                                      2. Financial Adviser , MoD (Finance)

                                      3. Quarter Master General, Army HQ

                                      4. Chief of Personnel, Navy
                                     
5. Air Officer-in-Charge, Administration, Air HQ

          Secretary:            Deputy Director General, Canteen Services, QMG’s
                                      Branch, AHQ

Executive Committee of Board of Control

          Chairman                   Additional Secretary, MoD (Finance)

          Members          Joint Secretary (O/N), MoD

Additional Financial Adviser MoD (Finance) dealing with CSD Matters

Quarter Master General

Chairman, Board of Administration & GM, CSD

Representative of Air Force (equivalent to rank of Maj
Gen)

Representative of Navy (                ditto                     )

          Secretary:            Deputy Director General Canteen Services

How are the Profits Distributed
Ministry of Defence
Canteen Stores Department (CSD) : Turnover and Profit of Defence Canteens
PIB: Turnover of Defence Canteens.
Turnover, Profit and Profit distributed to beneficiaries after depositing 50% in Consolidated Fund of India (CFI) of Canteen Stores Department (CSD) during the last three years, year-wise, is as under:-
(Rupees in Crore)
Year
Turnover
Profit
Profit distributed to beneficiaries
2007-08
-
-
84.44
2008-09
6955.11
203.69
101.84
2009-10
8689.80
226.53
113.26
2010-11
9534.29
Annual accounts for this period are under finalization
As per laid down policy, 50% of the total profits earned by CSD is being deposited into Consolidated Fund of India (CFI).
The remaining 50% is distributed to various beneficiaries as determined by the Competent Authority.
As per policy in vogue, after deduction of regular and adhoc allocations of 4.91 % of this amount, the balance is allocated to Army, Air Force, and Navy in the ratio of 85:10:5.
This information was given by Defence Minister Shri AK Antony in written reply to Shri Ram Krjpal Yadav and Shri Shadi Lal Batra in Rajya Sabha.
Continuing the Quest for Information
A RTI request is being filed to obtain information on the share of CSD profits given by the Competent Authority to the Defence Civilians Medical Aid Fund (DCMAF) and the expenditure incurred in FY 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15.
Similarly, a RTI request is being filed to obtain information on the share of CSD profits given to the   Sanskriti School run by wives of bureaucrats and the expenditure incurred in FY 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15. 
Finally, a RTI request is being filed to obtain information on the share of CSD profits used for Chai pani within the MoD, as well as generous allowance given to bureaucrats for the purpose, that is not given to Service Officers under the Incidental and Miscellaneous head(s) and the expenditure incurred in FY 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15.
*        *        *        *        *        *

Tuesday, 22 September 2015

Seven Anomalies in OROP implementation _ Topic closed

Unable to find a single comment that provided answers or solution to the seven anomalies, this post is closed.

Thank you for your participation. 


It is understood that Maj Gen Satbir Singh has aired seven anomalies that stand in the way of a satisfactory solution to the OROP imbroglio.

The seven anomalies are: -

1. OROP not applicable for those who sought Pre-mature Release.

2. There should be annual equalisation.

3. Calendar year 2013 .

4. Payment of arrears w.e.f 01 Jul 2014.

5.   Average of pay for pension purposes.

6. OROP should be implemented in perpetuity and not adjudicated by Pay Commissions.

7. Judicial Commission should comprise 5 members and the report should be submitted within 30 days.

May I request views/opinions backed by references that one can peruse for more details?

P.S: Please confine your opinions/comments to the seven anomalies.

 

Sunday, 20 September 2015

Intellectuals Dissonance on OROP & agitation



Since many of the points of the two intellectuals are common, a point-by-point explanation to achieve Satyam Ev Jayate is not being resorted to for the sake of relative brevity.
Who Spends How Much Other than on Defence Services Pay & Pensions
The Pay Research Unit (pru-exp@nic.in) brings out a publication entitled Brochure on Pay and Allowances of Central Government Civilian Employees. The last such brochure is for 2012-13. 

The Brochure provides statistical information regarding expenditure incurred by the different Ministries/Departments of Central Government on pay and various types of allowances such as Dearness Allowance, House Rent Allowance, Compensatory (City) Allowance, Overtime Allowance etc. in respect of its regular employees. It also provides information on Ministry / Department- wise and Group-wise number of sanctioned posts, number of incumbents in position and vacant posts as on 1st March. The Brochure contains information about disparity ratio i.e. the ratio of the maximum to minimum pay of different State Government Employees.

Some of the allowances are Overtime Allowance, Special Pay & deputation (Duty) allowance, Composite Hill Compensatory Allowance, Other Compensatory Allowances, Productivity Linked Bonus, Ad hoc Bonus, Honorarium etc
Almost 84% of the total expenditure is incurred by five major Ministries/ Departments (Railways, Defence (Civil), Home Affairs, Post and Revenue) during 2012-13.

Defence Pension Budget of Rs 54000 crore for FY 2015-16 includes pensions of Defence Civilians who were employed in the MoD and in Ordnance Factories and not just Ex-Servicemen.
 Sources: http://finmin.nic.in/pru/Publications.htm and PCDA (P), indiabudget.nic.in and cpao.nic.in
The Benefits to Defence Forces that cost the Earth
Entitled ration allowance, not free ration, is Rs 89.90 per day which is to provide one Defence personnel with 4088 calorific value based on the research by DRDO, vetted by the MoD and after financial concurrence by MoF. The rations are supplied to defence personnel at places where there isn’t even a local kirana store, and also in places like New Delhi or Gandhinagar or Ahmedabad etc.
The break up that the above amount should provide daily is as follows: -
Atta + Rice   600 gms; Dal 90 gms; Oil 80 gms; Milk 250 ml; Onions 60 gms; Potatoes 110 gms; fresh vegetables 170 gms; Sugar 90 gms; Salt 10 gms; Tea or coffee 9/4 gms; Condiments 16 gms; Meat 110 gms or Eggs 3 or chicken 90 gms for non-vegetarians; Milk 220 ml and eggs 3 for vegetarians; Fruit citrus 110 gms or non-citrus 230 gms.  
Source: publications.drdo.gov.in/ojs/index.php/dsj/article/download/1701/794

        Dr Sharma, being an expert in marketing might be able to conclude that Rs 89.90 will not suffice and is lower than Rs 159 per day lowest paid in MP and Chhatisgarh for MNREGAS!

 The Kendriya Vidyalayas have a four - fold mission, viz.,

1. To cater to the educational needs of children of transferable Central Government including Defence and Para-military personnel by providing a common programme of education;

2. To pursue excellence and set the pace in the field of school education,

3. To initiate and promote experimentation and innovations in education in collaboration with other bodies like the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) etc. and

4. To develop the spirit of national integration and create a sense of "Indianness" among children.
Army Schools
The admissions are made based on the seats available in the classes, they carry a “No denial Policy” to army wards, and civilians are admitted only after ensuring that no further seat is required for any Army ward. For specific details on admission you can visit the official website of the desired APS….
Source: www.ssbcrack.com › SSBCrack
Symbiosis
1.     Institutes of Symbiosis are non communal and non sectarian.
2.     Admission is given to any eligible student, National and International, irrespective of caste, creed, religion, provided he/she is qualified, eligible and amenable to rules of discipline.
3.     No donation or capitation fee is charged for admission to any program at any institute of Symbiosis.
Promotion and Cadre Strength
 
Please read Promotion policies on the RTI manual on the respective Army, Navy Air Force websites. These have to be and are approved by the MoD.
In 1980s and till 15 Dec 2004, promotions to Lt Col (and equivalents wherever a rank is referred to) and above were by empanelment to Promotion Boards; Majors were promoted to Lt Col between 16 and 18 years of service (Arms/Services) and Lt Col to Col in 20 to 22 years of service (Arms/Services) respectively.
After 16 Dec 2004, as per Ajai Vikram Singh Committee -1 (AVSC-1), promotions of Captains to Major is in 6 years, Major to Lt Col in 12 to 14 years but the time frame and empanelment procedure for Col and above is as before as it is empanelment and consideration by a Promotion Board. Lt Cols    
        Cadre reviews are approved by the MoD and based on principle of ‘matching savings’ i.e how many junior ranks posts will a Service give up for one senior rank post.
Promotion Boards consider the panels for Lt Col & equivalent promotion to Col & equivalent and are approved by the Chief of Army or Navy or Air Force but with the cadre i.e number of vacancies that will arise due to promotions, deaths, medical invalidment etc. Proceedings of Promotion Boards for Brigadiers and Major Generals are approved by MoD and for Lt Gens by the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet.
Protest/Agitation for OROP

The protests are by retired Services personnel. It is not by serving personnel and Dr Sharma, this is necessary for sake of truth and he should read the proceedings in the High Court of Delhi where CPO personnel, retired and serving have filed cases for Non-Functional Upgradation. 
Reproduced below from Source: http://www.livelaw.in/treat-all-paramilitary-forces-as-organized-services-group-a-officers-to-get-non-functional-financial-upgradation-delhi-high-court/
A Delhi High Court Bench comprising Justice Kailash Gambhir and Justice Najmi Waziri has directed the central Government to consider all paramilitary forces, the CRPF, BSF, ITBP, CISF and SSB, as “organized services”.
The order, that would benefit about 10, 000 Group A Officers, said that Group-A Officers of paramilitary forces should be given all benefits, including non-functional financial upgradation (NFU) from 2006 in terms of the Sixth Pay Commission, on the lines of those given to administrative services officers.
The Sixth Pay Commission Report had included a provision to provide Group-A officers with non-functional upgradation in pay scales, since upgrade of designation and promotions were not possible due to shortage of vacancies. Ministry of Home Affairs had however denied such benefits to the forces, claiming that BSF and other forces were “a General Central Service’ and not an “organized service.”
The Court was hearing a plea filed by more than 200 serving and retired officers of the paramilitary forces, demanding grant of NFU to them alleging the deprivation of the financial benefit is “affecting the morale and efficiency of the officers.” They said “undertaking these policy measures will ensure pay parity and social recognition as they would get timely promotions.” They had challenged an Office Memorandum issued by the ministry in October 2013 that had denied the benefits of pay scale revision under the NFU policy to the CAPF personnel (emphasis supplied).
The Officers had reportedly claimed that officers from the paramilitary forces are facing stagnation because of lack of adequate promotional posts. The situation was aggravated by the fact that a majority of the higher posts in the hierarchy had been filled up by deputations by officers from the Indian Police Service and the government has failed to take adequate steps for career progression of the cadre officers.

Representing the officers, Senior Advocate Jyoti Singh pleaded that though they are the members of armed forces of union and employed on very sensitive duties like guarding of borders, maintaining internal security, fighting terrorism and left wing extremism and involved in disaster management etc., yet they are not being given their due with respect to the status as well as financial benefits.

The Court observed that the Centre had admitted in several notifications and documents since 1986 that the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) came under “organized services.” It noted that “as recently as on February 11, petitioners in central forces have been categorized as ‘organized services’, therefore benefits ought to be granted to them”.
Now, all except the Armed Forces are recognised as Class A Organised services and hence eligible for NFU i.e one IAS officer is promoted and every body else gets Non-Functional  Upgradation (sic) i.e. higher Grade pay and Pay in the Pay Band for someone else being promoted. So BSF attains OROP without having to struggle or agitate.
Dr Sharma and Chetan Bhagat may wish to read the recent High Court of Delhi judgement about BF etc being Class A organised Services. Writ Petition (Civil0 153/2013 & CM Nos 3088/2013. 4134/2013, 9418/2015 etc refer.
        Both intellectuals may like to note that MoD has not complied with a Supreme Court order in a case filed by a retired AFMS doctor, to pay Armed Forces Medical Services doctors the Dynamic Assured Career Progression, though it is paid to Govt’s civilian doctors and a battle of words is on between MoD and the Chiefs of Staff Committee who requested the MoD to pay an allowance akin to NFU to the Armed Forces Officers to prevent command & control embarrassment. Payment of NFU will increase Grade Pay since emoluments drawn determines seniority and status in Govt.
TASKS OF THE BSF:

The tasks of the BSF are divided as follows:

1.                   Peace time:
o          Promote a sense of security among the people living in the border areas.
o          Prevent trans border crimes, unauthorized entry into or exit from the territory of India.
o          Prevent smuggling and any other illegal activity.
In the last few years the BSF has, in addition to their duties, been deployed for counter insurgency and internal security duties (emphasis supplied)

2.                    War Time:
o          Holding ground in less threatened sectors so long as the main attack does not develop in a particular sector and it is felt that the local situation is within the capability of BSF to deal with. The BSF units can continue to remain deployed in particular sector even in a war situation to release the Army for offensive tasks. In the event of a major attack developing, which is not within the capacity of the BSF to deal with, the Army can be expected either to reinforce the BSF with Artillery or other support, or relieve the BSF from its role in the particular sector (emphasis supplied).
o          Protection of vital installations particular air-fields against enemy commandoes/para troopers or raids. The role can be entrusted to the BSF Units which are placed under the Army's operational Control.
o          Providing extension to the flanks of main defence line by the holding of strong points in conjunction with other units.
o          Limited Aggressive action against para military or irregular forces of the enemy within the overall plan of the Armed Forces .
o          Performing special tasks connected with intelligence including raids. These are tasks which might be entrusted to BSF Units by the Army in a war situation according to local necessity. It would, however, be expected that the state of training and equipment of the particular BSF Units would be kept in view in assessing their adequacy for the tasks.
o          Acting as guides in an area of responsibility where routes are known. This is a task which the BSF should be able to perform.
o          Maintenance of law and order in enemy territory administrated under the control of Army. Normally, ordinary civil police force would be utilised for this task but the BSF could be used to supplement the civil police or to act in lieu thereof in a situation where civil police is not readily available. 
o          Provision of escorts.
o          Guarding of prisoners of war cages
o          Assistance in control of refugees. It is the intention to utilise civil police force and armed Home Guards etc. for these tasks but again depending upon local exigencies, the BSF might be entrusted with these tasks.
o          Anti - infiltration duties in specified area. This is an important responsibility which will have to be performed by security forces. The exact responsibility of the BSF in this matter is still under consideration and separate instructions are expected to be issued.
Others who are Patriotic
 
What about doctors? Do you realise that a typical junior resident (first-year post-graduate student of medicine) probably works for unimaginable hours and sometimes for several days at stretch?

Facts: On numerous occasions doctors have gone on strike, paralysing hospitals and putting patients in need to critical care in jeopardy. They have been rewarded with pay rises.

What about the constabulary of the state police forces? The cutting-edge level of state police forces work long and perilous hours each day.
Facts: In an law & order situation, in riot hit areas, the Army is called out to restore law & order and carry out flag marches to ensure that riots subside to the level that the local police can then take over.

What about our teachers? What about miners?
Facts would speak for themselves if one reads Government websites about the abysmal level of education from primary to higher secondary. Isn’t that why the teaching shops or coaching shops are proliferating?

As for miners, the Government places IAS officers as heads of the companies and utilises services of consultants who would be in a better position to render facts for consideration.
Are we trying to say that the CAPF, paramilitary forces, doctors, teachers, miners, serve the nation less than the armed forces? More importantly, are they less patriotic?

Fact, every one serves the nation – the corporates, the Public Sector Banks, the Foreign Portfolio Investors and they all get tax exemptions of Rs 63000 crore, re-capitalisation of Rs 70000 crore over the next 5 years, and exemption from Minimum Alternate Tax of Rs 40000 crore. They too serve the country trying to increase its GDP and the growth rate to 8.5% etc. They are patriotic too! But at the cost of Rs 1, 23, 000 crore!!  

In conclusion

Before 14th August 2015, the agitation was gasping for attention. It got the attention of the media thanks to Delhi Police and the MHA. On 5th September 2015, the RM provided a wet blanket, which was made wetter by the PM’s speech in Chandigarh but the focus remained on OROP and its agitation.


This is another effort at Satyam Ev Jayate.