tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post3107057048083574796..comments2024-02-08T19:00:06.509+05:30Comments on Aerial View : Update 22.4.2016: Information on Rank Pay; Information of Grade Pay being made available by MoDAerial Viewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17115360943663046368noreply@blogger.comBlogger54125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-73205313932677057422016-04-30T23:12:05.491+05:302016-04-30T23:12:05.491+05:30@ Penmil
" Original Harry"
100% correc...@ Penmil<br /><br />" Original Harry"<br /><br />100% correct obsn Sir. We have been around for fairly long periods of time transending CPCs!<br /><br />"What to do if argument is rejected"<br /><br />That is the whole point Sir. Is that end of story? No escalation beyond secys? If an armed-to the-teeth org can be ridden roughshod over in such a manner then we can hardly blame anyone else for our predicament. In that case we fully deserve to be in the sorry state that we are in. We need not blame others for it.<br /><br />Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14688106567506721324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-50191786003106525512016-04-30T16:20:11.184+05:302016-04-30T16:20:11.184+05:30Dear Original Harry,
“but capabilities of our Serv...Dear Original Harry,<br />“but capabilities of our Services HQ in these matters are very well known to all of us, if we go by historical evidence.”<br />To be fair, the Service HQ did make a demand as early as in 2012. <br />Please read, Para 28 of the Report of the Cabinet Secretary’s Committee of 2012,” http://sharad10525.blogspot.in/2015/12/cabinet-secretary-committee-report-no.html?” <br />I reproduce the extracts for your easy reading here, with my emphasis on Col’s Starting pay: -<br />-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />Initial pay fixation of Lt. Colonel/Colonel and Brigadier/equivalent<br />28. The Services have represented that the initial pay fixation of Lt. Colonel, Colonel, and Brigadier should be done with reference to S-25 scale. Accordingly, the pre-revised starting scale of Lt. Colonel should be given a replacement scale of Rs 39,690, Colonel at Rs 17,100 should be given a replacement scale of Rs 42,120 and that of a Brigadier at Rs 19,100 should be fixed at Rs 46,050. Similarly, initial pay fixation of Lt. Colonel, Colonel and Brigadier/equivalent of AMC/ADC/RVC needs to be done after including DA on NPA,<br /><br />29. The Committee examined the matter and found that the S-25 pay scale of Fifth CPC is the pay scale drawn by Director level officers of the IAS which started two increments higher than the Director level officers belonging to other Group ‘A’ Services including the IPS. On the other hand, the fitment table for Lt. Colonel and Colonel are drawn up with reference to the S-24 scale which was the pay scale for Director level officers in other Group ‘A’ Services/IPS and Central Para Military Forces and of Brigadier with reference to the S-26 scale which is the scale of the DIG. The Committee noted that there is no disparity in the matter of pay scales vis-à-vis the IPS and agreeing to the proposal of the Defence Services would result in similar demands from Group ‘A’ Services, IPS and the para-military forces.<br />30. In the circumstances, the Committee is unable to recommend any change in the fitment of Lt. Colonel, Colonel, and Brigadiers.<br />---------------------------------------------------------------------<br />What to do if the argument is rejected?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-58683860696089757892016-04-30T15:42:47.827+05:302016-04-30T15:42:47.827+05:30Correction : At Line 5, for 'will varies"...Correction : At Line 5, for 'will varies" Read "will vary/varies".<br />I regret the error.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-29885926890397363942016-04-30T10:10:55.839+05:302016-04-30T10:10:55.839+05:30@Penmil
"But it is for the Service HQ to arg...@Penmil<br /><br /><i>"But it is for the Service HQ to argue that the residency period will varies across the Arms and Services and across Army, Navy and Air Force and therefore assuming a hypothetical ‘Residency Period of 2 Years is very less and unrealistic etc., etc.</i>"<br /><br />Sir, perfectly legitimate expectation <b>but</b> capabilities of our Services HQ in these matters are very well known to all of us, if we go by historical evidence. :(<br />Harryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10192867696697852328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-48276056955432207492016-04-30T07:48:02.002+05:302016-04-30T07:48:02.002+05:30Sir,
Considering all the cogent arguments put for...Sir,<br /><br />Considering all the cogent arguments put forth above, it is only fair to seek upward revision of level tops in case of defence pay matrix. Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14688106567506721324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-37226635244385485732016-04-29T15:08:45.470+05:302016-04-29T15:08:45.470+05:30@ Taaza Khabar 29 April 2016 at 13:27
Sir,
Thank y...@ Taaza Khabar 29 April 2016 at 13:27<br />Sir,<br />Thank you.<br />Yes, I agree. The figure 48900 for Col. Was arrived at by considering a ‘Residency Period’ of 2 Years for Lt.Col to get a promotion to Col.<br />(45400* 1,03) **2 +(8700-8000)=48900.<br />But it is for the Service HQ to argue that the residency period will varies across the Arms and Services and across Army, Navy and Air Force and therefore assuming a hypothetical ‘Residency Period of 2 Years is very less and unrealistic etc., etc.,<br />During the migration from V to VI CPC, Col pay was fixed at four stages above the S-24 Scale start Pay in V CPC and then migrated to VI CPC.<br />(Please recall that Lt.Col’s pay itself started two stages above the S-24 Scale and hence one increment as you noted).<br />There is no reason now, to start Col. Pay at two stages above S-24 Scale.<br />That was my opinion.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-78988222844737578252016-04-29T13:27:26.576+05:302016-04-29T13:27:26.576+05:30@penmil,
Sir, the actuals are as follows: -
Star...@penmil,<br /><br />Sir, the actuals are as follows: -<br /><br />Start as post 1.1.2006 [without any increment i.e pre-1.1.2006 Lt Col start at 38530 which includes once increment on moving from 5 to 6 CPC] commissioned or promoted (Lt 15600 + GP 5400 x 3% annual increment) without rounding off: -<br /><br />Captain (2 years) – Pay in the Pay Band 16860 + GP 6100 = 22960 x 2.67 = 61303<br /><br />Major (6 years) – Pay in the Pay Band 21630 + GP 6600 = 28230 x 2.67 = 75374<br /><br />Lt Col (13 years) – Pay in the Pay Band 37400 + GP 8000 = 45400 x 2.57 = 116678<br /><br />Col (Select) – Pay in the Pay Band Rs 40200 + GP 8700 = 48900 x 2.57 = 125673<br /><br />Brig – Pay in the Pay Band Rs 43390 + GP 8900 = Rs 52290 x 2.57 = 134385.<br /><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16599233400842278493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-6932858846089289472016-04-29T08:22:33.061+05:302016-04-29T08:22:33.061+05:30 @ Aerial View 25 Apr 2016 at 09:31
Sir,
In respon... @ Aerial View 25 Apr 2016 at 09:31<br />Sir,<br />In response to @ Harry’s comment that,” A Col rank is reached after 16 -18 years (excl trg period) service where as civ NSFG is reached in 13 years (incl probation period).” you observed,” Why are we mixing up the Army Promotion policy and time frame with that of others? What stopped Army from promoting a Col to Brig at 14 years? It is irrational to say A got this in 14 years and now I want you to give A this after 27 years because B gets it then”.<br />I think @ Harry has point in that post of his. The 7 CPC has assumed that the ‘Residency Period’ for promotion to a Col Post/Rank is 15 Years. They had therefore arrived at the conclusion that <br />‘Defence Level 13, GP 8700, Entry Pay Rs 48900, 7 CPC Start Rs 125700’<br /><br />It is for the Services to argue now, that the Col ‘s Entry Level Pay is not 48900 but it is 49590 (42120 Plus 8700) as per the fixation in 6CPC, and it should have been much more, that is (42120Plus 8700) 50820, as per the original demand of the services.!<br />But the Services could also take a cue from this and start promoting Lt.Col. to Col after 15 years of service.<br />The start of the Index level has an effect in the pay of those who get their promotion later than the assumed ‘Residency’ period, in that. They get lesser when they are actually promoted.<br />About the maximum of the permissible pay in each ‘Level’, we may recall that while one may not serve in a given rank till one hits the maximum, but when (probably in future) reverts to Pay Scale system of Pay, then the it is the maximum of the Pay Level that is taken, for determining the equivalents.<br />The services had short pay scales in each rank, and the government argued that the ‘End of Pay Scale’ decides which Scale is senior, while comparing with the Civil Pay Scales.!<br />It is therefore necessary to retain higher maximum pay, in each ‘Level’.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-64564234631412439712016-04-27T21:07:08.307+05:302016-04-27T21:07:08.307+05:30@Harry, I do not do calculations for individuals. ...@Harry, I do not do calculations for individuals. Please send an email with details including what is your present pay in the pay band + GP so that we can arrive at the correct entry point. Then we can go on to the top of the pay matrix for Lt Cols. <br /><br />Just an aside - I was told that 'Prince' who attended the AG's address is a Veteran by 28 NDA course-mates!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 <br /><br />Wonders never cease! Aerial Viewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17115360943663046368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-81780722383798951732016-04-27T13:31:22.340+05:302016-04-27T13:31:22.340+05:30@Harry,
I regret I an unable to publish your comm...@Harry,<br /><br />I regret I an unable to publish your comment due to the language, tone and tenor of your most recent comment. Aerial Viewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17115360943663046368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-56560817192514939842016-04-27T10:21:54.098+05:302016-04-27T10:21:54.098+05:30Harry sir,
If, some time in future, when all civ ...Harry sir,<br /><br />If, some time in future, when all civ will be covered by NPS, and the Govt decides to lower the retirement ages, what happens then? <br /><br />Sir, please think. Please think once more that Cols and Brigs retire at lower ages than a civilian who retires at 60 years of age.<br /><br />There are 18 index levels for Cols i.e one has to be Col for 17 years to stagnate. There are 14 index levels for Brigs i.e. one has to be Brig for 13 years to stagnate. Why are you keeping them if they cannot be promoted to Brig and Maj Gen in 17 and 13 years after they were last promoted, respectively? <br /><br />You are promoting to Col in 18th year (age 38 or 39). Add 18 years and his age is 56 or 57. What is the Col's retirement age?<br /><br />You are promoting to Brig in 24th year (age 44 or 45). Add 14 years and his age is 58 or 59. What is a Brig's retirement age? <br /><br />The next pay commission may be in 2026, ie 9 years 8 months from now. What happens then? <br /><br />May I suggest you read the Apex Court judgment in Civil Appeal 3208 of 2015 on the Command & Exit policy? Army is obliged to reduce the ages of Arms and Combat Support Arms and that is why Army demanded the AVSC. Aerial Viewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17115360943663046368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-61164135803952297952016-04-27T09:17:29.427+05:302016-04-27T09:17:29.427+05:30Drear Sir,
"What stopped Army from promoting...Drear Sir,<br /><br /><i>"What stopped Army from promoting a Col to Brig at 14 years? It is irrational to say A got this in 14 years and now I want you to give A this after 27 years because B gets it then."</i><br /><br />Now if taking a cue from your statement, Army HQ gets into action and gets reduced service requirements approved from the Govt for Col and Brig ranks a la NFSG (GP 8700) and DIG (GP 8900) on the lines of Civ services --- to attain true current-parity, forget historical --- then are we going to let them rot at top of the scale just because it has been lowered for Def pers in comparison with civs? And if sometime in future, Govt decides to do away with re-emp and instead increase the retirement ages, what happens then?<br /><br />Harryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10192867696697852328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-45801829259107711902016-04-26T21:10:52.865+05:302016-04-26T21:10:52.865+05:30Sir,
Thank you for that background.
My feeling w...Sir,<br /><br />Thank you for that background.<br /><br />My feeling was the case for rank pay needed to be separate from the the issues at (ii) and (iii) that you have listed.<br /><br />If someone has the background data, and the will to go through the cycle of representations, followed by legal action if need be, on points (ii) and (iii) then they could do so without linking these to the rank pay order of 2012.<br /><br />That is the impression I got from the HSC order.<br /><br />Best regards. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-68586906372802025882016-04-26T18:40:25.651+05:302016-04-26T18:40:25.651+05:30Sir, even if col and brig will retire before stagn...Sir, even if col and brig will retire before stagnation as per timeframe given above, what is the harm in extending the scale for a few more years by adding 3% increment every year to cater for eventualities of earlier (?) promotion in near future. What is the catch here for restricting it to 18 and 14 years for col and brig. aaahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03806498210995687719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-28088571406917768172016-04-26T16:02:05.841+05:302016-04-26T16:02:05.841+05:30Then AG (late Goolam Vahanvati)'s opinion was ...Then AG (late Goolam Vahanvati)'s opinion was sought on the following issues: <br /><br />(i) Whether the MoD orders dated 27 Dec.12 have modified the Special Army Instructions 1/S/87 and corresponding Navy and Air Force Instructions in so far as it relates to deduction of Rank Pay and direct to re-fix the initial pay of the concerned officers of the three services in the revised scale (integrated scale) as on 1.1.1986. Whether the term ‘with effect from 1.1.1986’ should be used as given in the Single Bench’s order dated 05.10.98 passed in the High Court of Kerala, instead of using ‘as on 01.01.1986’? What consequences this change in term will entail? <br /><br />(ii) Whether the minimum pay for each rank given in Para 6 (a) (ii) of SAFI 1/S/87, needs to be re-fixed/changed?<br /><br />(iii) Whether the Basic Pay ceiling of integrated Scale in IV CPC for officers up to Brig/equivalent, which is Rs 5100/- also needs to be modified to give effect to the Court orders? <br /><br />(iv) Since the treatment to Rank Pay while pay fixation carried out in 5th CPC was similar to that of the 4th CPC, whether orders of the Apex Court dated 04.09.2012 be applied to all subsequent Pay Commissions i.e. V and VI CPC under such circumstances. <br /><br />Then AG concurred with Services HQ on points (i) and (iv)but not on (ii) and (iii). This was appealed in the Contempt Petition and the Contempt Petition dismissed.<br /><br />You may wish to write to RDOA for the affidavit but.............<br /><br />Best Wishes<br />Aerial Viewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17115360943663046368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-14132857235200823172016-04-26T15:10:13.367+05:302016-04-26T15:10:13.367+05:30Sir,
Right at this stage I am not able to access...Sir, <br /><br />Right at this stage I am not able to access the judgement of Hon'be Supreme Court as there appears to be some server error.<br /><br />But I remember the HSC had dismissed the contempt petition on rank pay with the rider that for grievances regarding "fixation", affected personnel could approach the appropriate authorities.<br /><br />To my very limited understanding, the judgement had separated the issue of rank pay from the other issues which, though related, were sort of add-ons.<br /><br />It is also not known what the issues exactly were.<br /><br />For instance, my own basic pay was fixed at Rs.3400/- wef 01 Jan 86 in the pay-scale of 3400-100-5100 with a rank pay of 600/- as applicable to a Sqn Ldr. This was revised to Rs. 3600/- from the same date in 2012 after the rank pay matter was resolved, or partially resolved. Till now it has not been clear where exactly the problem was.<br /><br />The RDOA blog does not make clear whether the pay-scale 3400-100-5100 was incorrect or should pay for Sqn Ldr rank have started at a higher level than 3600/-.<br /><br />It seems, as per the judgement, the rank pay anomaly had been resolved and for correct fixation, IAF retirees needed to approach DAV at Air HQs. Further legal action could then be contemplated based on response of Air HQ, or of Army and Naval HQs in the case of Army and Navy Officers, respectively.<br /><br />I have gone over the RDOA blog but have found that details connected with the contempt petition are very sketchy. I find the last time some of the issues related to the case were highlighted in detail by RDOA was on 6th April 2014 on their blog http://rdoaindia.blogspot.in/2014/04/iv-cpc-rank-pay-contempt-petition-gist.html<br /><br />No one seems to know whether any of those specific issues had been represented on after the judgement, as advised in the judgement, and what the response of Services HQs was.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-69335813232181400182016-04-26T12:54:12.658+05:302016-04-26T12:54:12.658+05:30Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice H.L. Dattu of...Justice Dalveer Bhandari and Justice H.L. Dattu of the Supreme Court of India, in Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India & Ors., have examined the concept of finality of judgment and how the adversarial system in India is being abused by litigants, and its adverse impact of the administration of justice. While examining various authorities on the subject, the Hon'ble Court has also examined the law prevalent in other countries such as England, Canada, Fiji and Australia. The extracts from the judgment relevant to India are reproduced below;<br /><br />FINALITY OF JUDGMENT <br /><br />114. The maxim `interest Republicae ut sit finis litium' says that it is for the public good that there be an end of litigation after a long hierarchy of appeals. At some stage, it is necessary to put a quietus. It is rare that in an adversarial system, despite the judges of the highest court doing their best, one or more parties may remain unsatisfied with the most correct decision. Opening door for a further appeal could be opening a flood gate which will cause more wrongs in the society at large at the cost of rights. <br /><br />115. It should be presumed that every proceeding has gone thorough filtration several times before the decision of the Apex Court. The controversy between the parties must come to an end at some stage and the judgment of this court must be permitted to acquire finality. It would hardly be proper to permit the parties to file application after application endlessly. In a country governed by the rule of law, finality of the judgment is absolutely imperative and great sanctity is attached to the finality of the judgment. Permitting the parties to reopen the concluded judgments of this court by filing repeated interlocutory applications is clearly an abuse of the process of law and would have far reaching adverse impact on the administration of justice. <br /><br />Aerial Viewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17115360943663046368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-44040417662284993252016-04-26T08:38:59.720+05:302016-04-26T08:38:59.720+05:30Now at this juncture what can be doneNow at this juncture what can be doneDineshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01101872022007084086noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-8588007081109294852016-04-26T07:24:30.141+05:302016-04-26T07:24:30.141+05:30In civil proceeding, an application for Review is ...In civil proceeding, an application for Review is entertained only on a ground mentioned in Order XLVII, Rule 1 of the CPC. The said Rule contemplates the following grounds for Review of an order –<br />(i) The discovery of a new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within the petitioners’ knowledge or could not be produced by him at the time when the order was made.<br />(ii) Some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record.<br /><br /> In this context, “error ” means “error of law”<br />Aerial Viewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17115360943663046368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-79960302933922602732016-04-26T07:18:46.503+05:302016-04-26T07:18:46.503+05:30@Harry, the final dollop(?)of the top of pay matri...@Harry, the final dollop(?)of the top of pay matrix; Pay matrix of Col and Brig is shorter - Index 18 for Col (18 years as Colonel!) as against 21 years for civilian with GP 8700 and Index 14 for Brig (14 years as Brig!) as against Index 18 for Civilian with GP 8900. <br /><br />Equivalents for Maj Gen, HAG, HAG+, Apex I and Apex II have the same index.<br /><br />Before you write, "I told you so," imagine a Col remaining in that rank for 18 years! And a Brig for 14 years!<br /><br />Suppose A is commissioned at 20 years, promoted to Select Col at 18 years of service (age 38), he would be 56 years of age before he stares at stagnation! <br /><br />Similarly, a Brig serving in that rank for 14 years? A is commissioned at 20 years of age, promoted Col (Select) at 18 years service (age 38 years), Brig at 24 years service (age 44 years) and serving till age of 58 before he stares at stagnation! <br /><br /> Aerial Viewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17115360943663046368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-90825079868953879222016-04-25T19:16:45.039+05:302016-04-25T19:16:45.039+05:30Negative Sir. I am not aware whether they did it o...Negative Sir. I am not aware whether they did it or not. But yes they <b>ought to have done that</b> to buttress their case for enhancement of depressed grade pays.Harryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10192867696697852328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-65496728674491845002016-04-25T18:12:16.200+05:302016-04-25T18:12:16.200+05:30I did not ask MoD because the stand, to my underst...I did not ask MoD because the stand, to my understanding was the same, in other words, that pay was not depressed to the extent of the amount of Rank Pay. <br /><br />Are you aware if the Services HQ placed the Apex Court ruling before the 7 CPC in any additional memorandum?<br /><br /> Aerial Viewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17115360943663046368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-76717249943317633662016-04-25T17:07:08.156+05:302016-04-25T17:07:08.156+05:30Sir,
If the MoD note pre-dates the verdict, then ...Sir,<br /><br />If the MoD note pre-dates the verdict, then was any rejoinder sent --- after the SC verdict in rank pay case was delivered on 18 Aug 2015 --- to make due corrections in the submission as required in light of the ruling of the Apex Court?Harryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10192867696697852328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-89104315007352151682016-04-25T16:11:20.499+05:302016-04-25T16:11:20.499+05:30Sir,
The reply was given to 7 CPC on 08 May 2015 ...Sir,<br /><br />The reply was given to 7 CPC on 08 May 2015 and the verdict of the Apex Court was on 18 August 2015.<br /><br />You may wish to correct your impression.Aerial Viewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17115360943663046368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5780881198603853530.post-76772841670064131952016-04-25T15:35:58.686+05:302016-04-25T15:35:58.686+05:30From your latest update, it is observed that there...From your latest update, it is observed that there is no mention of the verdict of the SC on Rank Pay in the note given by the MoD.Purposely hiding the information to manipulate the decision. Veteranshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15616232581971123568noreply@blogger.com