The definition of One Rank One Pension (OROP) as given out by Minister of State of Defence in a written reply in Rajya Sabha as per Press Information Bureau dated 02 Dec 2014 is as under:-
IST
Press Information Bureau
Government of India
Ministry of Defence
Implementation of One Rank One Pension 02 Dec 2014
The principle of One Rank One Pension for the Armed Forces has been accepted by the Government. The modalities for implementation were discussed with various stakeholders and are presently under consideration of the Government. It will be implemented once the modalities are approved by the Government. One Rank One Pension (OROP) implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners. This implies bridging the gap between the rate of pension of
the current pensioners and the past pensioners, and also future enhancement in the rate of pension to be automatically passed
on to the past pensioners.
This information was given by Minister of State for Defence Rao Inderjit Singh in a written reply to Shri Rajeev Chandrasekhar in Rajya Sabha today.
This is the same definition as approved by Bhagat Singh Koshiyari Committee of Petetions committee of Rajya Sabha in Dec 2011.
As a layman, I understand that, if a Hav Raunaq Singh with 24 years’ service in Y group retires in say Nov 1996, he should be given the same pension of Hav Bhim Singh with 24 years’ service in Y Group who retires on 31 Mar 2014. To ensure these two get the same pension as Hav Hari Ram who retires on 31 Mar 2015, one increment is to be given to past pensioners so that at any time any Hav with 24 years’ service of Y Gp get the same pension. Then only we will have OROP in true sense.
Whatever I learnt by dealing with MoD bureaucrats is “ Never make any letter crystal clear. Make it ambiguous so that it can be interpreted any way you like”. This is the reason many of the letters of Govt of India are ambiguous and lead to many disputes going right upto hon’ble Supreme Court to adjudicate. Classic case is the pension fixation as on Jan 2006 by substituting correct term Min pay in Pay band (different for different ranks) with Min of Pay band ( same for persons in the same band i.e.Lt cols to Maj Gens to whose Min pay in Pay band is i.e. Rs 37,400)
Let us see how this simple definition of OROP is being interpreted or misinterpreted by bureaucrats in Min of Finance.
Then why is that hon’ble PM says there are many definitions to the OROP?
Then why is Mr Arun Jaitley says increments cannot be given to past pensioner every year?
This is an emotional subject hence I request veterans to kindly understand other points of view.
First Misinterpretation by Babus of Min of Finance. UNIFORM PENSION.
Yes uniform pension as per definition of OROP need to given to soldier for all their services to the Nation. So a Hav with 5 years’ service as Hav gets different pension on 01 Apr 2014 than a Hav with 7 years’ service even if both of them put in same service i.e. 24 years. So we will give UNIFORM PENSION of Hav A with 5 years’ service as Hav out of total 24 years to get same pension retired in Nov 1996 to get pension as his counterpart (i.e. 5 years as Hav out of 24 years’ service) who retires on 31 Mar 2014. We are following definition by letter and spirit.
Havs may of be same rank but the one who puts in more service gets higher last drawn pay so his pension has to be more compared to another Hav who serves as Hav for lesser number of years of service. If we treat both as same, we will be violating Art 14 of Constitution of India which talks of Equality. So Havs of 5 year service as Hav are different than Hav of 10 years’ service even if they both put in for total service of 24 years.
WHICH POLITICIAN WILL DISAGREE WITH THIS ARGUMENT OF BUREAUCRATS OF MIN OF FINANCE?
But what we as veterans must understand is no PCDA or Record Offices have got the data of service in last rank. No PPO mentions service in last rank. So if leaders of ESM organisation even out of frustration accept this argument of Bureaucrats of Min of Fin, OROP can never be implemented because you can never get this data of service in last rank.
It is similar to allotting Rs 2.89 lakh crores in the Defence budget to make everyone happy but surrendering thousands of crores at the time of March of the year.
Has not Rs 1,000 crores kept for OROP been surrendered in the financial year 2014-15 by NDA – II Govt as it is not yet implemented?
Has not Rs 100 crores allotted for National War Memorial in Jul 2014 budget been un-used as not a brick has been laid for it till today?
The fate of OROP will also be like this if this interpretation of Bureaucrats of Min of Finance is accepted by ESM leaders fighting for OROP.
Second Misinterpreation by Bureaucrats of Min of Fin on OROP – Bridging Gap in Pensions.
The definition talks about bridging gap between pension of past pensioners and present pensioners. We agree to it totally. The gap between a pensioner who retires in Jan 2006 and the one who retires in Jan 2014 is quite huge. We do understand both of them have same needs and we have to fulfil them. But the definition does not say “ MAKE PENSIONS EQUAL”. It only says “ BRIDGE THE GAP”. It there is minor difference of few hundreds for JCOs /OR or few thousands between officers it is bridging the gap. Since the definition of OROP does not say SAME PENSION we will ensure pensions are different but we shall keep the gap as small as possible.
This is the kind of language these Bureaucrats trained to use to confuse every one and for some innocent veterans, this interpretation appears to be reasonable.
If gaps in pensions is to be bridged then it is not OROP but only Modified parity. So our leaders of ESM Associations must understand the nuances of such interpretation.
Third Mininterpretation by Bureaucrats of Min of Finance- Future Enhancements in Pensions.
Yes we agree that future enhancement of pensions should also be given to past pensioners. This is to reduce the gap or bridge the gap in pensions which definition talks about.
But, Sir, when does enhancement of pension takes place? Who enhances pension?
The Central Pay Commission fixes new pay scales and pensions are derived out of it once every 10 years.
Pay scales are not revised every year anywhere in the world. So how can a past pensioner demand hike in pensions?
Serving personnel get annual increment because they serve the Nation but Past pensioners do nothing for the Nation and yet demand a benefit given to a serving soldier. Serving soldier and pensioner soldier are of different class. Hence a benefit given to a serving soldier cannot be given to past pensioner. If we give then such an action is struck down by hon’ble Supreme Court as violating Art 14 of Constitution. The Serving soldier stands on different pedestal and past pensioner stands on different pedestal. So how can they both be equated?
This argument of wily bureaucrats will force the politicians to toe their line.
If this argument of Bureaucrats is accepted then there will be different pensions for soldiers with same number of years of service even if you accept service in last rank. This will result in soldiers retiring in 2025 get higher pension than those retire prior to Jan 2016 in the same rank in the same service in last rank and with same total service.
To my mind these are the reasons why there is so much controversy on OROP in Min of Finance.
Regards,
Brig CS Vidyasagar (Retd)
Source TriServiceVeteransIndia
No comments:
Post a Comment