Wednesday, 23 March 2016

Meeting with RM on 14 Mar 2016

Kind Courtesy Lt Gen S K Bahri PVSM Veteran

From: Ravindra Pathak <>
To: Sk Bahri <>; Satish Kumar Bahri <>
Sent: Thursday, 17 March 2016 7:43 PM
Subject: Meeting with RM

Dear Bahri Sir
I have got various versions of what transpired at the meeting.
Summing up I conclude what the RM said is F O we have given what we had to now go to Committee for any problems and I will see their report is out by 15 May.
Am I right in my conclusion Sir?

Dear Ravi,
You are correct as far as the gist is concerned. However, I am clarifying as to what exactly happened at the meeting.

a)  RM started by saying that Rs 2000 crs had been distributed as arrears and pensions under OROP till date and the balance will be completed by 20 Mar 16.

b) Then he asked if there were any questions on OROP. A number of people like Col Arasu, Maj Gen NB Singh, Col Nain etc put up points. RM directed that now that the one man Judicial Committee has been setup all issues be referred to it. He pointedly said that if you send your points through DESW, to mark copies to him so that he can follow them up. He also said that if some one desires he can request for personal attendance to argue his point. Gen VK Singh further clarified it will be ensured all issues raised are dealt with sympathetically.

c)  Lastly, Maj Gen Satbir Singh raised the issue that four issues are outstanding regarding OROP, which have a total cost of approx Rs 800 crs only. The RM was quick to respond that money is not the problem but if you hold a gun to his head and demand then the govt is not going to accede to any request. He clarified that our continued fast at Jantar Mantar is putting up the back of the govt and it will not listen to anything under duress. He also clarified  regarding the claim by Satbir that Parliament has accepted the Koshiyari Committee report twice is incorrect. RM said that many committee reports are received by the govt and they are never accepted in toto, as it is the decision of the govt as to what it can and what it cannot. (I have seen it myself after being involved in the passage of Real Estate Regulation Act . The govt accepted/rejected some of the recommendations and improved on some)

d)  Towards the end I raised the issue of Wg Cdr CK Sharma that he had been arrested and bodily removed by Haryana police even though they did not produce an arrest warrant. RM said that Haryana police is a law unto itself and passed some uncomplimentary remarks about it. However, he also seemed to have noticed, as I had written to him, that policemen and CAPFs are wearing disruptive pattern clothing and consequently army flag columns had to carry placards to identify themselves. He said that he had spoken and written to the HM to stop this practice.

I have received a number of queries as to what had happened during the meeting even though IESM had omitted my presence, senior most retired officer, in their communications on this meeting, people somehow were aware that I too was invited. Mr R Chandrashekar or Gen VK had also brought out that due to the continued fast at JM we are losing sympathy of general public. I am also called by number of officers, JCOs and OR that why are we continuing at JM after achieving so much and why don't we negotiate amicably with the govt. Hope some one listens as I have tried my best.


  1. Veteran Cdr Pathak has been raising the issue that 7 CPC will be applicable to OROP beneficiaries only by the next update in 2019. How come Veteran Maj Gen Satbir not ask the RM this? Is it really rumour mongering?

  2. True, the government can argue that the next OROP correction can be in 2019, but the pay commission clearly gave the calculations for defence pensions and they have to perforce implement it. Here the number of increments too play a role besides the rank and QS. If the FM and RM become adamant, then they will loose face and the faith of the services once for all. The evident cunningness and petty mind will be exposed to the public. They dare not loose their vote bank of the servicemen/ExServiceMen and their families besides the sympathetic public at large enmass once for all.

    1. I think it may be proper to exercise some caution before jumping to any conclusions about how "clear" the 7 CPC calculations are.

      By using the increments-earned basis for calculating pensions after 01 Jan 16, older retirees may actually get pensions applicable to post 01 Jan 06 and 01 Jan 16 retirees with much less service.

  3. 7th pay commission as any one understands is independent of OROP,why show unwanted emotions on a non issue? why have doubts on such issues? are ex servicemen so ignorant even now after retirement? In service most of us were fools believing our senior officers ....

  4. The 7th CPC recommendations say that the pay/pension drawn on 31 Dec 2015 to be multiplied by the factor 2.57 to arrive at the 7th cpc basic pay/pension. Now where is the doubt about pre-2006 and post 2006 retirees. All Lt Cols irrespective of date of retirement got basic pension of Rs 34765/- on 31 Dec 2015 under OROP Scheme. In this OROP scheme only negative point is all Lt Cols were given increments up to 25 years only and those having service beyond 25 years to 32-33-and even 38 years got same pension of 34765 at par with 25 years Lt Col. This injustice to be brought to the notice of all the authorities to rectify the anomaly.

    1. Sir, after 17 Dec 2004, all Lt Cols, if not promoted as Select Cols, are promoted to the time-scale rank of Col in the 26th year.

      Therefore, after 2004, there will be no Lt Col with more than 25 years of service. Hence the pension has been pegged at 25 years of service.

      Further, the weightage has been removed w.e.f 1.1.2006 and hence full pension does not require 33 years of service, including weightage.

    2. Sir,

      My PPO says officer service 37 yrs, 8 months & 24 days, last rank was Lt Col at the time of retirement. I was Selection grade Lt Col promoted on 01 Apr 2000 in 15th year of service but I was not given pay of Lt Col till I completed 17 years. In Dec 2004 all majors above 13 years service were promoted to the rank of Lt Col with full pay and allowances of the rank. At that time my pay should have been refixed by granting me 7 increments from 13th year of service which was not done. on 24 Dec 2004 all officers right from 14th year of service to 21 years of service were given Lt Col pay, it mean 14th year officer and 21 years officer both gate same pay, how is it possible.
      When my PPO says I had put in 38 yrs of service as an officer then what is the hitch for not granting full Col rank at 26th year and extending increments till 33 yrs. I never claimed weight-age nor I need it because my physical service was 38 years. Where is the justification that a 25 years Lt Col and 38 Years service Lt Col are getting same pension?

    3. Sir,

      Again I am touching another point here. With the HSC judgements every one who put over 20 years of service will get full pension for 33 years, then what is the fate of officer who put in physical service above 33 years say 38 to 40 years. Does it mean a person with over 20 years service and another with 38 yrs service will get pension for 33 years? How can it me justified. Does not longer service officer gets higher pension? This is just food for thought, in fact the case is already there in Tribunal.

    4. @Col MS Raju: "Now where is the doubt about pre-2006 and post 2006 retirees"

      Sir, there are plenty of doubts.

      The OROP top of the band for Lt Col corresponds to a service of 32 years and above. That will correspond to an index level corresponding to a service of about 6 years less in 7 CPC matrix, even after OROP pension is multiplied by 2.57.

      Please read the blog post I had linked to in my previous comment and the discussions on it.

      Filing of a case is presently being talked of to provide parity with pensions of Col(TS) of equal service for those older (pre December 2004) Lt Cols who retired with more than 26 years of service before rank of Col(TS) was introduced. How that turns out remains to be seen.


    5. @Col Raju,

      1. For 38 years service your pension would have been fixed at 50% of your total emoluments and the scale for Lt Col was Rs 12800-300-15200. So what was your pay? Was it more or less than 33 years Lt Col? Did you get any stagnation increments? How many?

      2. No, it does not mean that 20 years and 33 years service will get the same pension. It only means that actual service/33 years factor is gone and you will be paid pension of the rank held for the number of years served subject to the limits of the pay scale, as in the amounts quoted in para 1 above.

    6. Sir, I think Col MS Raju is applying the removal of pro-rata reduction on non-OROP pensions to OROP pensions.

      As you have pointed out, at the time of retirement before 01 Jan 2006, pension even without pro-rata reduction would have been different for retirees with different QS.

      But after 01 January 2006, it appears that pensions for pre 01 Jan 2006 as listed in Circular 500 (from 01 January 2006 to June 2014) will be the same regardless of QS as these are all based on minimum of pay in pay-band. They will be the same as Circular 500 had listed pensions at minimum pay for rank in pay-band with pro-rata reduction. Now that has been removed.

      But removal of pro-rata reduction by itself will not affect OROP pensions from July 2014.

      I have listed some salient points here

  5. @Col MS Raju.
    Lt Cols at 20, 21, 22 etc are in the range of 31,500 plus.

  6. An assurance as included in the blog-post says,"..clarified it will be ensured all issues raised are dealt with sympathetically..".

    The actual current status is only 6 "questions" were referred to the Judicial Committee by the Govt and notification by the Judicial Committee holds out no hope anything else would find its way into the report.