Full disclosure:
3. This blog author made the presentation in his personal capacity and not as a member of any ESM organisation.
1. Lt Gen V M Patil PVSM, AVSM (retd), President Akhil Bharatiya Poorva Sainik Seva Parishad (ABPSSP) facilitated a meeting with the Hon'ble Raksha Mantri.
2. This blog author presented the subsequent analysis based on facts & documents (sources as cited below) to the Hon'ble Raksha Mantri ((in hard copy) on 8th October 2015 at 8 am and it was discussed thoroughly. Further developments are awaited.
3. This blog author made the presentation in his personal capacity and not as a member of any ESM organisation.
One Rank One Pension (OROP)
Issue
Analysis of Conflicting
Perceptions & Suggestions for Resolution
References: -
(a) Koshiyari Committee Report of December
2011,
(b) MoD OM No. 17 (4)/2008 (2)/D (Pen/Pol)
dated 12.11.2008,
(c) SAI (SNI/SAFI) No. 1/S/2008 and 2/S/2008,
(d) MoD Resolution No. 1 (E) dated 30.8.2008
(e) DP & PW OM F No. 38/37/08 – P &
PW (A). Part II dated 3.10.2008 concerning revision of provisions regulating
pension/gratuity/commutation of pension/family pension/disability pension/ex-gratia
lump sum compensations,
(f) DP
& PW OM No. 38/37/08 – P & PW (A). pt I dated 14.10.2008, - revised
pension based on revised pay bands and grade pay for posts carrying present
scales as per Sixth Central Pay Commission,
(g) Defence Pension Regulations 2008 and
Rules for Army, Navy & Air Force available on the PCDA (P) Website,
(h) Judgements of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in D. S. Nakara & Others Vs UoI (1982), UoI & Anr Vs Maj Gen S. P. S.
Vains & Another (2009), A. N. Sachdeva (deceased) & Others Vs Maharishi
Dayanand University (MDU) (August 2015).
(j) Speech of Defence Minister apropos One
Rank One Pension (OROP) on 5th September 2015,
(k) Letter from Maj Gen Satbir Singh (retd)
to Defence Minister dated 18th September 2015.
List of Appendices: -
A
- Tables for Pay & Pension w.e.f
1.1.2006 for Officers
B-
Tables for Pay & Pension w.e.f 1.1.2006 for
ORs & JCOs
C-
Tables for ORs & JCOs as given in PCDA
Circular No. 547
Full Disclosure on
shortcomings of this paper: - This analysis is handicapped from being completely objective due to
non-availability of the following: -
(a) Minutes of meetings of Joint Working
Group (JWG) constituted by the MoD on 24th April 2014 culminating
with a presentation to then Defence-cum-Finance Minister on 12th June
2014, including the methodology adopted by CGDA to arrive at the cost of
implementing OROP,
(b) Minutes of meetings that IESM, IESL and
other ESM organisations had with the Govt and the decisions taken/consensus
arrived at/differences of opinion recorded and placed in the public domain,
(c) Persistent denial of information on OROP by
CPIO and by Appellate Authority, Deptt of Ex-Servicemens’ Welfare on the
grounds that the information is sensitive/classified,
(d) Denial of information by CPIO, O/o CGDA
on the grounds that MoD has ordered that the information is MOST CONFIDENTIAL
and should not be disclosed, and
(e) MoD (D – Pay/Services and Deptt of Ex-
Servicemen Welfare), MoF (Deptt of Expenditure) denying information on the
Cabinet Secretary Committee Report of 2012 for recommending OROP (and NFU) to
be referred to the 7th Central Pay Commission.
Basis & Aim for this
paper
1. The
Defence Minister’s announcement of 5th September 2015 on
implementation of OROP vis-à-vis differences of opinion/perception/interpretation
by Maj Gen Satbir Singh (retd) and Governing Body of IESM/UFESM is the basis of
this paper/presentation. The aim is to provide a logical analysis, and
practical solutions.
5
Yearly Review vis-à-vis Annual Review
2. IESM and
others quote the Koshiyari Committee Report. Therein it is recorded
2.1. At Para 6.4 on Page 5 of the Report, the Army’s representative
agreed to a 5 yearly enhancement, and included the family pensioners.
2.2. At Para 6.5
on Page 5, the Air Force representative agreed.
2.3. At Para 6.6 on Page 5, the Naval representative did not mention
anything relevant to this point.
3. What is the
aim for either a five yearly or an annual equalisation or
review? Is it to ensure that past pensioners with the same rank and same
number of years of service get the same pension with one retiring in 2014 or
2015 or 2016? And pension of ESM senior in rank, or with certain years of
service is not lesser than a junior’s?
4. For this the
Implementation Order has to be precisely worded. Then once in 5 years or annual
Review or Equalisation will not be needed in a majority of cases. The
few cases that would need rationalisation are, for example, of two course-mates
commissioned on the same date (say 01 Jul 1980). Course-mate A retires on 30th
June 2013 in the rank of Lt Col. He does not get the 3% increment, whereas
another course-mate B retires in the rank of Lt Col on 31st July 2013
and gets the increment though both have retired in the same calendar year 2013.
These kinds of cases will need review only if this aspect is not
covered in the implementation order. If all, like the former (who retired
one day before the increment was falling due), are given the benefit of the
increment, it will have a financial effect of 0.85% or Rs 185 crore.
5. To
emphasise the point, most importantly, since the uniform pension for the same
rank and qualifying service criteria is to be fulfilled, the review and
correction for all such ESM can be done at the initiation of the OROP scheme. It
must be emphasised that the “5 yearly review means next in 2018, and we will
miss 7th CPC recommendations” is the kind of canard spread by the
ultracrepidarists (defined as habit of giving opinions & advice on matters
outside one’s knowledge or competence) in the print and electronic media.
Analysis:
6. In a steady
state there will not be changes in the tables below until the implementation of
the 7th CPC recommendations as approved by the Govt. (Please refer
to tables at Appendix A for Officer ESM, Appendix B for Other Than Officers
ESM).
Officer
ESM
7. The tables
clearly show that
7.1. In a steady state (same rank, same years of qualifying service),
pension need not be revised (equalised) every year.
7.2. For the same rank and same years of service, Officers promoted
earlier will draw the same pay and pension as those promoted after them. So the
apprehension that a junior ranked ESM or a same rank but lesser QS ESM will
draw more in without basis, obviating the need for an annual review.
7.3. Once pension is reset on 1.7.2014 thereafter no change will take
place except on the implementation of the recommendations of the 7th
CPC.
Other than Officer ESM (without addition of Group X Pay where
applicable)
8. In a steady
state there will not be changes in the tables below until the implementation of
the 7th CPC recommendations as approved by the Govt.
8.1. Subedar Majors/MCPOs-I/Master Warrant Officers will also
have similar situation as for the Sub/MCPO-II/WO.
8.2. The current top of scale pension is higher
than the pay and pension drawn by the current retirees. Therefore, JCOs and equivalents
are already OROP compliant and may benefit minimally, if and when OROP is
implemented.
8.3. Sgt & equivalents current retirees are drawing higher
last pay drawn, consequently higher pension than the top of the scale based
pension.
8.4. However, the senior will continue to get higher pay and pension
than all juniors who are promoted to this rank at a later date.
8.5. Thus, once pay is re-set on a date, say 01 Jul 2014, then there
will not be any change in pension of this rank till the next pay commission
Suggested Solution (Please also read Average Pensions
below): -
9. Using
similar methodology as used to formulate Circulars 500 (for retired officers)
and 501 (for retired JCOs & ORs) to work out the solutions to the issue
above.
10. Include
numerical illustrations in the Implementation Order similar to the ones in SAI
(SNI, SAFI) of 2008 to make ESM understand why any review would only add to delays
in implementing OROP at the earliest.
Effective Date 01 Jul 2014
vis-à-vis 01 Apr 2014
11. ESM would have to be placed at the levels
of pension that any retiree with the same (uniform) service and same rank would
draw on 01 Jul 2013, which was the date of last increment. For example (amounts
used are for illustrative purposes only: -
|
Particulars
|
w.e.f 01 Apr 2014
|
w.e.f to 01 Jul 2014
|
|
Rank
Lt Col
|
20
years service
|
20
years service
|
|
Pay
in the Pay Band (Rs)
|
45000
(includes
3% increment on 01 Jul 2013)
|
43410
|
|
Grade
Pay (Rs)
|
8000
|
8000
|
|
M S
P (Rs)
|
6000
|
6000
|
|
Increment
|
Nil
- As already drawn on 01 Jul 2013
|
on
01 Jul 2014 1590
|
|
Total
emoluments
|
59000
|
59000
|
|
Pension
|
29500
|
29500
|
12. Analysis:
- Provide illustration/numerical
examples in the implementation order.
Calendar
Year 2013 vis-à-vis Financial Year 2013-4
13. The Govt has indicated that the base year
for the purpose of OROP would be the calendar year 2013. This does not seem to
be an unacceptable proposition. The reason is that after 01 Jul 13 the pension
would include the increment of the year 2013.
14. The Services/ Ex-servicemen have demanded
01 Apr 2014 as the base date but pay, and pension does not change after taking
into account the increment of 01 Jul 2013. To that extent base year commencing 01
Apr 14 should not make any material difference. The only aberration is, again, that
of course mates retiring on two different days, one on 30 Jun 13 the other on
31 Jul 13 having a difference in pay and pension. But these odd cases, which
may not be numerous to deserve too much attention for determining macro policy.
15. In the heat and dust, it is forgotten that
all Central Pay Commission recommendations are made effective 1st
January (1986, 1996, 2006) i.e beginning of the calendar year.
16. Analysis:
- ESM will not be deprived of OROP because the increment due on 1st
July 2013 will be effective and paid whether it is calendar year or financial
year.
Average Pension
vis-à-vis Top of the Scale (Average Pension vis-à-vis Actual Pay/Pension Drawn)
17. Average of
pension will involve checking records of 30 lakh ESM & widows or NoK.
Reasons are given below.
17.1. Till the 1.1.2006, the following weightages were provided
for calculating pension benefits (MoD letter dated 3rd February
1998) for all retiring from the Defence Forces: -
|
Rank
|
Weightage Services
(years)
|
Weightage MNS
(years)
|
|
Lieutenant
|
9
|
Nil
|
|
Captain
|
9
|
7
|
|
Major
|
8
|
7
|
|
Lt Colonel (TS)
|
5
|
-
|
|
Lt Colonel (Select)
|
7
|
6
|
|
Brigadier
|
5
|
3
|
|
General Officers
|
3
|
3
|
|
Below Commissioned Rank
|
||
|
Sepoy
|
10 (+2 from 17.1.2013)
|
-
|
|
Naik
|
8 (+2 from 17.1.2013)
|
-
|
|
Havildar
|
6 (+2 from 17.1.2013 )
|
-
|
|
JCO
|
5
|
-
|
17.2. After the implementation of the 6th CPC, wherein the
qualifying service for full pensions for officers was reduced to 20 years, the
weightage was removed [Resolution No. 38/37/08-P & PW (A) dated 29th
August 2008] for Officers, except for commissioned officers who retired or were
invalided out of service between 1.1.2006 and 1.9.2008. On the other hand,
weightage stands withdrawn for PBOR w.e.f 1.1.2006 (Para 5.1.3 of MoD No.
71(4)/2008(2)/Pen/Pol) dated 12th November 2008.
Note: Weightages for JCOs/ORs has been
withdrawn for retirees from 1.1.2006 if they are drawing pension at last pay
drawn. In case it is beneficial that pension at the notional top is higher, the
same can be drawn and in such cases the weightage will apply.
17.3. Further, MoD letter No. 1(13)/2012/D (Pen/Pol) dated 17.1. 2013 (PCDA
Circular 501) also states as follows: -
2……The Committee of
Secretaries recommended
2.1. The pension of pre-1.1.2006 JCO/OR pensioners may be determined
on the basis of notional maximum for the ranks and groups across the three
Services, and
2.2. Current weightage in qualifying service of Sepoy, Naik and
Havildar may be increased by 2 years.
18. Another
factor that will come into consideration is at Para 2 and 3 of MoD letter No.
1(04)/2015 (II) – D (Pen/Pol) dated 3.9.2015 (PCDA Circular 547) which states:
……..2. Now, after the issue of
GoI, Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensioners, Department of Pensioners and
Pensioners’ Welfare OM No. 38/37/08-P & PW (A) dated 30.7.2015, it is
decided that with effect from 1.1.2006 pension/family pension of 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…..
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. However, where revised pension in terms
of GoI, MoD letter No. PC -10 (1)/2009 – D (Pen/Pol) dated 8.3.2010 and No. 1
(13)/2012/D (Pen/Pol) dated 17.1.2013 is higher than the rate indicated in
annexure attached with this letter then the same will continue to be treated as
basic pension/family pension from 1.7.2007 and 24.9.2012.
19. Table below
indicates the differences for some ranks and Qualifying Service: -
|
QS (X Gp)
|
Sepoy
|
Naik
|
Havildar
|
Naib Subedar
|
||||
|
Circular No.
|
501
|
547
|
501
|
547
|
501
|
547
|
501
|
547
|
|
15
|
5961
|
4637
|
5961
|
4637
|
6374
|
4637
|
6976
|
5558
|
|
20
|
6441
|
5564
|
7065
|
5564
|
7760
|
5564
|
8720
|
6947
|
|
25
|
6441
|
5564
|
7606
|
5841
|
8868
|
6328
|
10464
|
8337
|
20. Under the
circumstances, the proposed average pension for OROP is likely to
be an administrative night mare. No clarity on whether it will be a simple
mean, a simple average, or a weighted mean (apropos till 1.1.2006 weightage was
provided to Defence Personnel for pension purposes). There is no clarity on who
will determine minimum and maximum pension for the calendar year 2013, with
weightage and without. If determined, then who verifies.
21. The
easier way is to tabulate the pay drawn for each rank in each year of
qualifying service. The figure so determined divided by 2 will provide the
amount of pension. This table is easy to comprehend and is in sync with the
current table in vogue since 24 Sep 12 for pension. In any case if average
method is applied the financial impact
cannot be Rs 8296 Cr as those above the average do not benefit, hence
there will be no change for JCO’s, but only Havildars and equivalent would get
an increase in pension amount.
OROP Not Applicable for
Pre-Mature Released Defence Forces Personnel vis-à-vis OROP applicable for all
22. Government of India has
promulgated the definition of Ex-Servicemen issued on 4th October
2012 by DOP & T which states, inter alia
“(c) An ‘ex-serviceman’ means a
person –
(i) Who has served in any rank whether as a combatant or
non-combatant in the Regular Army, Navy and Air Force of the Indian Union,
and
(a) Who either has been retired or relieved or discharged from such service
whether at his own request or being relieved by the employer after
earning his or her pension; or
(b) Who has been relieved
from such service on medical grounds attributable to military service or
circumstances beyond his control and awarded medical or other disability
pension; or
(c) Who has been released from
such service as a result of reduction in establishment;”……..(emphasis supplied)
23. Army,
Navy, Air Force Pensions Regulations 2008 are statutory. These Regulations
(separately for Army, Air Force, and Navy, in that order) are available on the
PCDA (P) website. They are too voluminous to reproduce here. Suggested reading
are
23.1. Part I- Containing Regulations regulating the pensionary awards of personnel of
the Regular Army, the Defence Security Corps, Emergency/Short Service
Commissioned Officer and the Territorial Army, especially
Section 1 –
Para 4 – Definitions;
Para 5 – Types of
Pensions;
Para 8 – Pension
subject to future good conduct;
Section 2 –
Para 17 and notes there under;
Para 19
23.2. Part II- Regulations relating to pension procedure affecting the personnel whose
pensions are regulated by the Regulations in Part I.
24. The Constitution Bench of the Honourable
Supreme Court in the D S Nakara case in 1982 averred, inter alia,
“In the instant case, the
petitioners do not challenge, but seek the benefit of the liberalised pension
scheme. Their grievance is of the denial to them of the same by
arbitrary introduction of words of limitation. ………………... If the event is
certain but its occurrence at a point of time is considered wholly irrelevant
and arbitrarily selected having an undesirable effect of dividing a homogeneous
class and of introducing discrimination, the same can be easily severed and set
aside. It is therefore just and proper that the words introducing the arbitrary
fortuitous circumstance which are vulnerable as denying equality be severed and
struck down.”
25. The Honourable Court ruled in the Maj Gen S
P Vains case, inter alia,
“…..The case of the respondents however, was that
in view of the Constitution Bench decision of this Court in D.S. Nakara and
others vs. Union of India (1983) 1 SCC 305, the fixation of a cut-off date
as a result of which equals were treated as unequals, was wholly arbitrary and
had been rightly interfered with by the High Court. One of the questions posed
in the aforesaid decision was whether a class of pensioners could be divided
for the purpose of entitlement and payment of pension…… The question was
answered by the Constitution Bench holding that such division being both
arbitrary and unprincipled the classification did not stand the test of Article
14.
xxxx xxxx xxxx
26. The question regarding creation of different
classes within the same cadre on the basis of the doctrine of intelligible
differentia having nexus with the object to be achieved, has fallen for
consideration at various intervals for the High Courts as well as this Court,
over the years…… In the context of that case, which is similar to that
of the instant case, it was held that Article 14 of the Constitution had been
wholly violated, inasmuch as, the Pension Rules being statutory in character,
the amended Rules, specifying a cut off date resulted in differential and
discriminatory treatment of equals. ………… The division which classified
pensioners into two classes was held to be artificial and arbitrary and not
based on any rational principle and whatever principle, if there was any, had
not only no nexus to the objects sought to be achieved by amending the Pension
Rules, but was counter productive and ran counter to the very object of the
pension scheme. It was ultimately held that the classification did not satisfy
the test of Article 14 of the Constitution (emphasis supplied).
Suggestion Solution:
26. It would be advisable for the Government
to delete the VRS/PMR clause unless the Government wishes to
26.1. Further mar
its image as being anti – Armed Forces Veterans, and/or
26.2. Waste time of
the Courts, Law Officers and itself in fighting and losing cases.
Govt’s Constitution of Single
member Judicial Commission
Vis-à-vis IESM’s 5 member Committee
27. If proposal is to appoint a Commission of
one member or a Committee of 3 to 5 members, one of the members should be from
Finance and one an ESM unaffected by the OROP scheme. This will make the report
of the Commission/Committee more likely to be acceptable and would invite far
less strictures/observation then if the committee does not have
any finance representative.
Jai
Hind
* * * * *
Appendix A
(Refers to Para 6)
Officers
[*
Amounts are taken from Annexure A of PCDA Circular No. 500 dated 17.1.2013.]
Majors/Lieutenant
Commanders/Squadron Leaders
|
Qualifying
Service
(QS)
|
Pay in Pay Band
|
GP
|
MSP
|
Increment in Jul
|
Total
B+C+D
(add E for additional year of
QS)
|
Pension
|
Pension drawn*
|
|
A
|
B
|
C
|
D
|
E
|
F
|
G
|
H
|
|
7
|
21630
|
6600
|
6000
|
850
|
34230
|
17115
|
|
|
8
|
22480
|
880
|
35080
|
17540
|
|
||
|
9
|
23360
|
900
|
35960
|
17980
|
|
||
|
10
|
24260
|
930
|
36860
|
18430
|
9930
|
||
|
11
|
25190
|
960
|
37790
|
18895
|
10482
|
||
|
12
|
26150
|
990
|
38750
|
19375
|
11034
|
||
|
13
|
27140
|
1020
|
39740
|
19870
|
11585
|
||
|
14
|
28160
|
1050
|
40760
|
20380
|
12317
|
||
|
15
|
29210
|
1080
|
41810
|
20905
|
12689
|
||
|
16
|
30290
|
1110
|
42890
|
21445
|
13240
|
Lt Colonels (Sel)/Commanders/Wing
Commanders
|
Qualifying
Service
(QS)
|
Pay in Pay Band
|
GP
|
MSP
|
Increment in Jul
|
Total
B+C+D
(add E for additional year of
QS)
|
Pension
|
Pension drawn*
|
|
A
|
B
|
C
|
D
|
E
|
F
|
G
|
H
|
|
14
|
37400
|
8000
|
6000
|
1370
|
51400
|
25700
|
16716
|
|
15
|
38770
|
1410
|
52770
|
26385
|
17510
|
||
|
16
|
40180
|
1450
|
54180
|
27090
|
18306
|
||
|
17
|
41630
|
1490
|
55630
|
27815
|
19102
|
||
|
18
|
43120
|
1540
|
57120
|
28560
|
19898
|
||
|
19
|
44660
|
1580
|
58660
|
29330
|
20894
|
||
|
20
|
46240
|
1630
|
60240
|
30120
|
21490
|
||
|
21
|
47870
|
1680
|
61870
|
30395
|
22286
|
||
|
22
|
49550
|
1730
|
63550
|
31775
|
23082
|
||
|
23
|
51280
|
1780
|
65280
|
32640
|
23878
|
Colonels/Captains/Group Captains
|
Qualifying Service
|
Pay in Pay Band
|
GP
|
MSP
|
Increment in Jul
|
Total
B+C+D
(add E for additional year of QS
)
|
Pension
|
Pension drawn*
|
|
A
|
B
|
C
|
D
|
E
|
F
|
G
|
H
|
|
18
|
43120
|
8700
|
6000
|
1560
|
57820
|
28910
|
21057
|
|
19
|
44680
|
1610
|
59380
|
29690
|
21900
|
||
|
20
|
46290
|
1650
|
60990
|
30495
|
22742
|
||
|
21
|
47940
|
1700
|
62640
|
31320
|
23584
|
||
|
22
|
49640
|
1750
|
64340
|
32170
|
24426
|
||
|
23
|
51390
|
1810
|
66090
|
33045
|
25269
|
||
|
24
|
53200
|
1860
|
67900
|
33950
|
26111
|
||
|
25
|
55060
|
1920
|
69760
|
34880
|
26953
|
||
|
26
|
56980
|
1970
|
71680
|
35840
|
27795
|
||
|
27
|
58950
|
2030
|
73650
|
36825
|
27795
|
Brigadiers/Commodores/Air
Commodores
|
Qualifying Service
(Years)
|
Pay in Pay Band
|
GP
|
MSP
|
Increment in Jul
|
Total
B+C+D
(add E for additional year of QS
)
|
Pension
|
Pension drawn*
|
|
A
|
B
|
C
|
D
|
E
|
F
|
G
|
H
|
|
26
|
53220
|
8900
|
6000
|
1870
|
68120
|
34060
|
27795
|
|
27
|
55090
|
1920
|
69990
|
34994
|
28262
|
||
|
28
|
57010
|
1980
|
71910
|
35955
|
29145
|
||
|
29
|
58990
|
2040
|
73890
|
36945
|
29145
|
||
|
30
|
61030
|
2100
|
75930
|
37965
|
29145
|
||
|
31
|
63130
|
2160
|
78030
|
39015
|
29145
|
||
|
32
|
65290
|
2230
|
80190
|
40095
|
29145
|
||
|
33
|
67000
|
2280
|
81900
|
40950
|
29145
|
||
|
34
|
67000
|
2280
|
81900
|
40950
|
29145
|
||
|
35
|
67000
|
2280
|
81900
|
40950
|
29145
|
Major Generals/Rear Admirals/Air
Vice Marshals
|
Qualifying Service
(Years)
|
Pay in Pay Band
|
GP
|
MSP
|
Increment in Jul
|
Total
B+C+D
(add E for additional year of QS
)
|
Pension
|
Pension drawn*
|
|
A
|
B
|
C
|
D
|
E
|
F
|
G
|
H
|
|
30
|
61090
|
10000
|
Nil
|
2140
|
71090
|
35545
|
31250
|
|
31
|
63230
|
2200
|
73230
|
36615
|
31250
|
||
|
32
|
65430
|
2270
|
75430
|
37715
|
31250
|
||
|
33
|
67000
|
Nil
|
77000
|
38500
|
31250
|
||
|
34
|
67000
|
Nil
|
77000
|
38500
|
31250
|
||
|
35
|
67000
|
Nil
|
77000
|
38500
|
31250
|
||
|
36
|
67000
|
Nil
|
77000
|
38500
|
31250
|
||
|
37
|
67000
|
Nil
|
77000
|
38500
|
31250
|
[Note: - There are current cases shown above
wherein Brigadiers & equivalents are earning PB 4+ GP + MSP = Rs 81900 and
their pension is Rs 40950! Army Cdrs/VCOAS & equivalents are paid Rs 80000
(fixed) pm and their pension is Rs 40000 pm. Apex Scale??]
Appendix B
(Refers to Para 6)
Other Ranks
Notes: 1. ‘X’ Group Pay of Rs 1400 p.m is not
added in arriving at Column F.
2.
Column
X indicates the pension for X Group.
3.
Amounts
indicated in Column H are from PCDA Circular No. 501 dated 17.1.2013.
Naik/Leading Seaman/Corporal
|
QS
|
Pay
in PB
|
GP
|
MSP
|
Increment
|
Total
|
Pension
|
Pension
drawn*
|
|
A
|
B
|
C
|
D
|
E
|
F
|
G
|
H (X Gp)
|
|
6
|
7650
|
2400
|
2000
|
290
|
11650
|
5825
|
-
|
|
7
|
7940
|
300
|
11940
|
5970
|
-
|
||
|
8
|
8240
|
310
|
12240
|
6120
|
-
|
||
|
9
|
8550
|
320
|
12550
|
6275
|
-
|
||
|
10
|
8870
|
330
|
12870
|
6435
|
-
|
||
|
11
|
9200
|
340
|
13200
|
6600
|
-
|
||
|
12
|
9540
|
350
|
13540
|
6770
|
-
|
||
|
13
|
9890
|
360
|
13890
|
6945
|
-
|
||
|
14
|
10250
|
370
|
14250
|
7125
|
-
|
||
|
15
|
10620
|
380
|
14620
|
7310
|
5961
|
||
|
16
|
11000
|
390
|
15000
|
7500
|
6182
|
||
|
17
|
11390
|
410
|
15390
|
7695
|
6402
|
||
|
18
|
11800
|
420
|
15800
|
7900
|
6623
|
||
|
19
|
12220
|
430
|
16220
|
8110
|
6844
|
||
|
20
|
12650
|
440
|
16650
|
8325
|
7065
|
||
|
21
|
13090
|
460
|
17090
|
8545
|
7271
|
||
|
22
|
13550
|
470
|
17550
|
8775
|
7506
|
Havildar/Petty
Officer/Sergeant
|
QS
|
Pay
in PB
|
GP
|
MSP
|
Increment
|
Total
|
Pension
|
Pension
drawn
|
|
A
|
B
|
C
|
D
|
E
|
F
|
G
|
H
|
|
14
|
9040
|
2800
|
2000
|
360
|
13480
|
6920
|
-
|
|
15
|
9400
|
370
|
14200
|
7100
|
6374
|
||
|
16
|
9770
|
380
|
14570
|
7285
|
6651
|
||
|
17
|
10150
|
390
|
14950
|
7475
|
6929
|
||
|
18
|
10540
|
400
|
15340
|
7670
|
7206
|
||
|
19
|
10940
|
420
|
15740
|
7870
|
7483
|
||
|
20
|
11360
|
430
|
16160
|
8080
|
7760
|
||
|
21
|
11790
|
440
|
16590
|
8295
|
8037
|
||
|
22
|
12230
|
450
|
17030
|
8515
|
8314
|
||
|
23
|
12680
|
470
|
17480
|
8740
|
8591
|
||
|
24
|
13150
|
480
|
17950
|
8975
|
8868
|
||
|
25
|
13630
|
500
|
18430
|
9215
|
8868
|
||
|
26
|
14130
|
510
|
18930
|
9465
|
8868
|
||
|
27
|
14640
|
530
|
19440
|
9720
|
8868
|
||
|
28
|
15170
|
540
|
19970
|
9985
|
9145
|
Naib Subedar (Nb Sub)/Chief
Petty Officer (CPO)/Junior Warrant Officer (JWO)
|
QS
|
Pay in PB
|
GP
|
MSP
|
Increment
|
Total
|
Pension
|
Pension drawn*
|
|
A
|
B
|
C
|
D
|
E
|
F
|
G
|
H
|
|
19
|
10520
|
4200
|
2000
|
450
|
16720
|
8360
|
8371
|
|
20
|
10970
|
4200
|
2000
|
460
|
17170
|
8585
|
8720
|
|
21
|
11430
|
4200
|
2000
|
470
|
17630
|
8815
|
9089
|
|
22
|
11900
|
4200
|
2000
|
490
|
18100
|
9050
|
9418
|
|
23
|
12390
|
4200
|
2000
|
500
|
18590
|
9295
|
9787
|
|
24
|
12890
|
4200
|
2000
|
520
|
19090
|
9545
|
10115
|
|
25
|
13410
|
4200
|
2000
|
530
|
19610
|
9805
|
10464
|
|
26
|
13940
|
4200
|
2000
|
550
|
20140
|
10070
|
10813
|
|
27
|
14490
|
4200
|
2000
|
560
|
20690
|
10345
|
11336
|
|
28
|
15050
|
4200
|
2000
|
580
|
21250
|
10625
|
11510
|
Subedar/Master CPO
II/Warrant Officer
|
QS
|
Pay
in PB
|
GP
|
MSP
|
Increment
|
Total
|
Pension
|
Pension
drawn*
|
|
A
|
B
|
C
|
D
|
E
|
F
|
G
|
H
|
|
24
|
12280
|
4600
|
2000
|
510
|
18880
|
9440
|
11517
|
|
25
|
12790
|
4600
|
2000
|
530
|
19390
|
9695
|
11914
|
|
26
|
13320
|
4600
|
2000
|
540
|
19920
|
9960
|
12510
|
|
27
|
13860
|
4600
|
2000
|
560
|
20460
|
10230
|
12708
|
|
28
|
14420
|
4600
|
2000
|
570
|
21020
|
10510
|
13105
|
|
29
|
14990
|
4600
|
2000
|
590
|
21590
|
10795
|
13105
|
|
30
|
15580
|
4600
|
2000
|
610
|
22180
|
11090
|
13105
|
|
31
|
16190
|
4600
|
2000
|
630
|
22790
|
11395
|
13105
|
|
32
|
16820
|
4600
|
2000
|
650
|
23420
|
11710
|
13105
|
|
33
|
17470
|
4600
|
2000
|
670
|
24070
|
12035
|
13105
|
