Saturday 31 October 2020

Raw Data for calculation of OROP received today from PCDA (P) - Links for access

 After 2 years of quest, was surprised to receive a CD containing the raw data which was used to compute OROP.


Now searching for a laptop with a CD/DVD drive so that I can transfer it to a pen drive and then share on Google drive.


Hold your breath & cross your fingers.


Update 01 Nov 2020


Below are the links to access the data from google drive. Please check/update your browser in case you are finding difficulty accessing. I have done my checks using Edge, Chrome and FireFox.

 

OROP Raw Data from PCDA (P)

 

(A) Regular Commissioned Officers

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ea5NZaDt1qDEHKAtEnl-PSzhL61kcgIL/view?usp=sharing

 

(B) Regular Commissioned Officers contd     

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/129uHb_2m1aTu1lY-mE3KlQ5kRteotF3e/view?usp=sharing

 

(C) EC-SSC Pensioners

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1x0EI3jX1m1IqmYKHCVD4-z6UoZkQ2Hir/view?usp=sharing

 

 

(D) EC-SSC Doctors

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ud6UOSURt6ZRH6DwC2Dy_2xPJLFMj-Ip/view?usp=sharing

 

(E) MNS Officers

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yp-DTCpVkQyh_cjeH4pqJ3VZfS3dyfoL/view?usp=sharing

 

(F) NPA

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lMPBdWTPfAK0ymmXNU6Ag9Vvug2SQZCB/view?usp=sharing

 

 

(G) PBOR Army

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1U3ZiWZCe7-NLrwevA6LnFK6PVfEODlx4/view?usp=sharing

 

(H) PBOR Navy

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HSDZHlB4WJhUhLBMn-KgWB5K31HJz3FS/view?usp=sharing

 

(J) PBOR Air Force

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1YBWrrcjQ-UkSpWqwVZ-oXQWFlVGO910q/view?usp=sharing

 



14 comments:

  1. Sir, that information is a big help in not only being able to access the basis used for fixing OROP but it also underlines the frequently expressed doubts as to who exactly were theses 2013 Major and Lt Col retirees with QS>20 and 26 yrs, respectively, whose pensions were used as a basis for OROP of all the pre 2013 retirees in the same ranks with equal service?

    The data provides a clear direction to the most basic question, why were these Maj and Lt Col retirees not in the next higher time-bound ranks of Lt Col and Col(TS) at QS of 20 and 26 yrs respectively in 2013?

    The information obtained with so much effort constitutes an important element of the full picture. The other gaps may need to be filled through RTI with more specific queries 👉🏼 http://bit.ly/2TWgXwV .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sir, the min and max pensions were required to be of those who retired in 2013.

      That was part of the official definition of OROP.

      The Maj and Lt Col retirees mentioned by you were not those who had retired in 2013.

      Delete
    2. Therefore pre-2004 Maj/Lt Col with 21/26 years would continue to progress up the pay band of Maj and Lt Col for notional pay and not the higher pay band of Lt Col and Col respectively.

      Please see earlier posts on the why and wherefore elsewhere in this blog - especially when CGDA/DESW replied to queries on notional pay/pension.

      Delete
    3. Sir, the issue in context of OROP, primarily, is how the fixation follows the official definition also cited by respondents themselves in their Affidavits in the current litigation.

      Leaving aside, for the moment, the issue mentioned by you of progression to the next higher payband as mentioned by you, there may be a need for the litigants to stay totally focused on the definition of OROP and its implementation and don the mental equivalent of something like that vision-shield aircrew used for flying practice.

      The point, in my very humble opinion is, if no Major with a regular Commission retired with 20 years of service in 2013 then how were the minimum and maximum pensions obtained for fixing OROP for the rank of Maj (regular commission)?

      There is no need for ESM to be distracted by "Notional Pay". That relates to 7 CPC. At present the issue of migration from Maj to Lt Col to Col(TS) payband can also be kept out of consideration.

      The aim is to arrive at what was the actual basis for determining the minimum and maximum pensions of Maj with QS>20 yrs and Lt Col with QS>26yrs if officers holding the same type of commission and with the same service would not have retired in 2013?

      The fixation can't be based on some non-transparent deviation from the official definition. The pension data accessed through RTI would probably be in order. But do those figures relate to pensions in 2013 of actual 2013 retirees as required by definition of OROP or are they pensions paid in 2013, or arrived at by some unknown method of calculation?

      As for progression in the retirees' own payband at retirement itself, how was the minimum and maximum pension computed for a Maj (Regular Commission) with more than 20 years of service and Lt Col (Regular Commission) with more than 26 years of service? At first glance a wide gap exists between pensions based on PB4 and OROP https://bit.ly/36Wr5yd.

      Delete
    4. Wg Cdr Sarda, you have made excellent tables. Are you ready to file court cases against the UOI regarding various issues like OROP, NFU. If you say, Yes, I and others may join you.

      Delete
    5. Sir, that is exactly what I’ve been trying to submit since, at least, 2016. The basis for fixing OROP in such cases needed to be spelt out precisely. In any case, it would still have constituted a total deviation from the respondents’ own definition of OROP, which itself, as is known, is being challenged in HSC.

      Delete
  2. Stupendous achievement in getting this actual precious data, Sir. The entire defence fraternity is indebted to you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Fight we must before we die and it's all irrelevant

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sir, Can we get live data like this for the year 2017. The OROP revision of 2018 is supposed to be based on this. Regards

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How will "live" data for 2017 be beneficial to you? First of all, can you let us know in which way data of 2013 has been of use to you personally in finding out if your own OROP was calculated correctly?

      All the data does is quote some figures for minimum and maximum pensions> The circular for OROP mentioned only the OROP based on average of min and max. So what additional info did you get from the 2013 data?

      Delete
    2. Small correction please. Sir, Can we get live data like this for the year 2018. The OROP revision of 2019 is supposed to be based on this. Regards

      Delete
    3. Those who want to raw data for 2017 or 2018 or 2019 may wish to file RTI requests and share the reply with me.

      Spoon feed me like I have spoon fed you!

      Delete
  5. sir,
    A million salutes to you for getting 2013 min and max pension data.now it is evident that there is major deviation in fixing orop for most of the ranks with equal QS..For 2018 min and max pension data needs to be made transparent before a refixation of orop for 2019
    or else again pcda will issue refixation tables arbitrarily and whole veteran fraternity will be in dark
    Regards

    ReplyDelete