Latest MoD orders on OROP published on 7th Nov 2015

Latest MoD orders on One Rank One Pension published on 7.11.2015

12(1)/2014/D(Pen/Pol)-Part-II

Government of India

Ministry of Defence

Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare

New Delhi Dated 7th Nov 2015

To

The Chief of the Army Staff

The Chief of the Naval Staff

The Chief of Air Staff

Subject: One Rank One Pension (OROP) to the Defence Forces Personnel

In view of the need of the Defence Forces to maintain physical fitness, efficiency and effectiveness, as per the extant Rules, Defence Service personnel retire at an early age compared to other wings in the Government. Sepoy in Army and equivalent rank in Navy & Air Force retire after 17/19 years of engagement/service and officers retire before attaining the age of 60 years i.e. the normal age of retirement in the Government. Considering these exceptional service conditions and in the interest of ever vigilant Defence Forces, the pensionary benefits of Ex-Servicemen have accordingly, over time, been fixed.

2. It has now been decided to implement “One Rank One Pension” (OROP) for the Ex-Servicemen with effect from 1.07.2014. OROP implies that uniform pension be paid to the Defence Forces Personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service, regardless of their date of retirement, which, implies bridging the gap between the rates of pension of current and past pensioners at periodic intervals.

3. Salient features of the OROP are as follows:

i. To begin with, pension of the past pensioners would be re-fixed on the basis of pension of retirees of calendar year 2013 and the benefit will be effective with effect from 1.7.2014.

ii. Pension will be re-fixed for all pensioners on the basis of the average of minimum and maximum pension of personnel retired in 2013 in the same rank and with the same length of service.

iii. Pension for those drawing above the average shall be protected.

iv. Arrears will be paid in four equal half yearly instalments. However, all the family pensioners including those in receipt of Special/Liberalized family pension and Gallantry award winners shall be paid arrears in one instalment.

v. In future, the pension would be re-fixed every 5 years.

4. Personnel who opt to get discharged henceforth on their own request under Rule 13(3)1(i)(b),13(3)1(iv) or Rule 168 of the Army Rule 1954 or equivalent Navy or Air Force Rules will not be entitled to the benefits of OROP. It will be effective prospectively.

5. The Govt. has decided to appoint a Judicial Committee to look into anomalies, if any, arising out of implementation of OROP. The Judicial Committee will submit its report in six months.

6. Detailed instructions relating to implementation of OROP along with tables indicating revised pension for each rank and each category, shall be issued separately for updation of pension and payment of arrears directly by Pension Disbursing Agencies.

7. This issues with concurrence of Finance Division of this Ministry vide their ID No. MoD (Fin/Pension) lD No.PC to10(11)/2012/Fin/Pen dated 07 November 2015.

8. Hindi version will follow.

sd/-

(K. Damayanthi)

Joint Secretary to the Govt. of India

Click to view the order – MoD orders for One Rank One Pension on 7.11.2015

Authority : http://www.desw.gov.in/

Definition of One Rank One Pension as per Government order issued by MoD (DoESW) on 24.04.2014

Principle of OROP as per Government order issued by D/o ESW, MOD on 24.4.2014

Definition of One Rank One Pension as per Government order issued by MoD (DoESW) : The principle of OROP implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces Personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length oi 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.

No.12(01)/2014-D(Pen/Pol)

Ministry of Defence

Deptt. of Ex-Servicemen Welfare

D (Pension/Policy)

Sena Bhawan.

New Delhi the 24th April. 2014

ORDER

As decided in the meeting on OROP chaired by Hon’ble RM on 22.04.14, a Working Group is constituted as follows to finalize the modalities of implementation of OROP based on the principle specified in the previous meeting on OROP held on 26.02.14. The principle of 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.

2. The composition of the Working Group would be as follows:

(i) Controller General of Defence Accounts Chairperson
(ii) Jotnt Secretary (SSW) Member
(ill) Joint Secretary (E). Deptt of Defence Member
(iv) Addl. FA (Defiance Finance) Member
(v) Representatives of the three Services Member
(vi) Addl CGDA Member
(vii) PCDA (P). Allahabad Member

3. The Terms of Reference of Working the Group are as follows:-

(i) To examine the proposal on implementation of OROP which was presented by the Services in the meeting on 22.04.14 to enable CGDA to prepare DGL after due deliberation on all aspects.

(ii) To work out the detailed financial implications.

4. CGDA would finalise the DGL and submit it to D/o ESW, MOD along with financial implications thereof within three weeks from the date of this order.

5. Since substantial increase is anticipated in expenditure on OROP, FA (DS) would thereafter seek additional funds as per requirement.

6. This issues with the approval or the Competent Authority.

sd/-

(Chahan Ram)

Deputy Secretary (Pension)

Source: Aerial View

Read our exclusive article :

“Justification of One Rank One Pension – What is the real status of OROP?”

ONE RANK ONE PENSION : WHOM TO BELIEVE, OROP SLIPS DAY BY DAY, ESM TO TAKE IT TO STREETS

WHOM TO BELIEVE, OROP SLIPS DAY BY DAY, ESM TO TAKE IT TO STREETS

Dear Colleagues,
Accompanied by IESM Governing Body members Hony Captains Nagendar Singh and Balwan Singh as well as Risaldar Om Parkash I met the Raksha Mantri today. While I did highlight some other points, OROP inevitably topped the agenda. The RM has all the details worked out, including the expenditure involved in implementing OROP separately for officers, JCOs/OR, families, disabled etc. He did mention the latest spanner thrown in by a related Supreme Court decision (in the case of Maj Gen SPS Vains) where the OROP has been mentioned. However, he appeared confident of resolving the issue without much problem.

The RM is in full grip of the situation. He exudes and inspires confidence. In a relatively short time he has acquired good understanding of the complex manpower structure of the defence forces. He is also fully supportive of the uniformed personnel.

Timeline for OROP? All clearances seems to be in place. Work is progressing apace. My own estimate is OROP will come latest by 26 May 2015, when the NDA completes one year in office.

I have given the farthest limit so that we do not again fall prey to disappointment. Having said that I am hopeful it will come much sooner than 26 May. Till then let us be patient.

Other Points
Some other points that were mentioned and handed over to the RM are:
1. Reservists’ Pension. They are entitled to 2/3 of the minimum pension of a Sepoy with 15 years’ service, but not less than Rs 3,500/- per month. As of now they are getting their entitlement. With OROP the minimum pension of a Sepoy will rise, necessitating up-scaling of the Reservists’ pension.Their number is very small.

2. Pension of pre-2006 Hony Naib Subedars. As of today, Hony Naib Subedars of post 1.1.2006 era are getting the pension of a regular Naib Subedar but the pre- 2006 retirees are getting a Havildar’s pension. Number of the affected persons being small and finite, this anomaly needs to be removed.

3. Pension of Majors. It was highlighted that concept of OROP as well as Supreme Court ruling speak against creating a dividing line for grant of pension. Therefore, while considering grant of a Lt Colonel’s pension to a pre 16.12.2004 Major, there should be no further dividing line based on 1.1.1996. Officers that retired prior to 1.1.1996 in the rank of Major are only about 700 in number and should not be subjected to any discrimination. The point was registered.

4. Minimising Court Cases. It was highlighted that till the Third Pay Commission, there were practically no court cases. Any pay commission anomaly that was perceived was discussed and resolved between the Army Chief, Defence Secretary and their assisting staff. That system needs to be revived.

In this connection I also highlighted that when a military person seeks legal intervention, he is actually a representative of a larger group. There should be a provision where the relief provided to an individual should automatically extend to others similarly affected. The RM clarified that legally, since it is not a PIL, the individual fights for himself and the courts cannot give that benefit to others. However, an administrative mechanism can be put in place for extending such benefit to others. He further added that he is already having it examined for implementation. This showed how positively he is disposed toward resolving the soldiers’ problems.

 Best regards,
Lt Gen Raj Kadyan
Chairman IESM
262, Sector – 17A
Gurgaon – 122 001

Source: www.ex-airman.blogspot.in

Lack of vested right to effective judicial review from orders of the Armed Forces Tributnal (AFT): IESM

Lack of vested justify to effective judicial review from orders of the Armed Forces Tributnal (AFT): IESM letter to PM/RM/LAW MINISTER/COAS/CNS/CAS
Dated: 11 April 2015

Shri Narendra Modi
Hon’ble Prime Minister of India
Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
New Delhi – 110 001

Shri Manohar Parrikar
Hon’ble Raksha Mantri
104, South Block,
New Delhi

Shri. D.V. Sadananda Gowda
Hon’ble Minister for Law & Justice
Room No. 401, A Wing,
4th Floor, Shastri Bhavan,
New Delhi – 110001

LACK OF VESTED justify OF EFFECTIVE JUDICIAL REVIEW FROM ORDERS OF THE ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL (AFT)

The Hon’ble Supreme Court on 11 March 2015 pronounced a decision in a case wherein it was held that orders passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) would not be challenged by litigants in Hon’ble High Courts but only in the Supreme Court. The judgement was passed on an appeal filed by the Ministry of Defence (and perhaps also the Army HQ) during the time of the last Government. We also have reasonable information to believe that one of the grounds raised by the MoD/Army in the appeal for denying the justify of judicial remedy like other citizens of India was that Fundamental justifys can be restricted/abrogated under Article 33 of the Constitution for defence personnel and hence a judicial remedy under writ jurisdiction of High Court would not be available. If it is true that this argument was raised by the MoD/Army, then it is the most unfortunate that the system itself is pleading for placing defence personnel on a lower pedestal than other citizens and pleading before the Hon’ble SC that the military community does not deserve the enjoyment of fundamental justifys like others. It is a well known fact that Article 33 only operates during performance of duties to maintain discipline and has no connection with justify to access of justice. It is also well known that the majority of cases in the AFT pertain to retired personnel, military widows and their families and hence Article 33 even otherwise has no applicability. This is also against the spirit of Article 39A of the Constitution which underlines equal justice for all citizens.

While in the beginning, there was an attempt to convince us that the decision will lead to ‘quicker’ justice to defence personnel, on closer and deeper examination of the issue, the following real facts and fallouts emerge:

1. There is actually no justify of appeal to the Supreme Court from AFT orders as per AFT Act since an appeal only lies in exceptional cases involving ‘point of law of general public importance’ vide Section 31 of AFT Act, hence what has been pleaded before the SC is that AFT should become the court of first instance as well as the court of last instance, leaving defence personnel, veterans and widows remediless since it is well known that 99.9% of cases can never involve ‘public importance’ questions. The decision will not lead to ‘quicker’ justice but in reality remove all chances and channels of challenge/appeal against AFT decisions. Can this bogey of ‘quicker’ justice be raised at the price of fundamental justifys of accessible justice and remedy to citizens?

2. It is well known that almost all such litigants cannot afford litigation in SC due to its prohibitive cost and the aura itself of being the highest court of the country. It is not understood how the defence ministry expects poor litigants including disabled soldiers and widows from all over the country to travel to Delhi and engage lawyers in SC to fight their cases. Most of the cases in the AFT involve issues such as disability benefits, pension, minor allowances, pay fixation, ACRs etc and litigants would now be expected to suffer in silence if they feel that they have not got justice from AFT.

3. Defence personnel, veterans, widows and families have been deprived of their basic justify of access to justice due to the plea raised by the MoD/Army wherein while all citizens of the country would have access to multiple tiers of justice, not even one tier would be available to us. Even civil govt employees aggrieved by orders of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) can approach the HC if they are dissatisfied and then further the SC, whereas similar access has been denied to us and after an order of the AFT even the SC cannot be approached as a matter of vested justify unless there is involvement of a point of general public importance.

4. We hereby express our dismay on the attempt of the official system to convey to the SC that fundamental justifys of the military community should be restricted or abrogated. We are disappointed that the system itself by raising the plea of Article 33 is attempting to prove that defence personnel, ex-servicemen and their families are lower than the ordinary person on the street. This will have disastrous consequences in the years to come. If the MoD/Army makes such averments pleading for taking away the fundamental justifys of their own members and former members and their families, then it is extremely unfortunate.

5. It is well known that the AFT functions under the control of the MoD and even Members of AFT are appointed by the MoD and selected by a selection committee which has the Defence Secretary as its member. AFT has also not been given civil contempt powers to ensure compliance of its orders. In other words, an ineffectual body has been created which functions under the MoD and then now on the plea of the MoD it has been assured that there is no effective appeal making it an all supreme body.

In light of the above, while expressing dissatisfaction at the stand and damaging stance of the MoD and the Army in the said case which has led to such a situation, we request you to kindly abrogate Sections 30 and 31 of the AFT Act so that AFT orders can be challenged on the lines of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) thereby making justice accessible and practical for defence personnel, ex-servicemen, widows and their families.

With regards,

Maj Gen Satbir Singh, SM (Retd)
Chairman IESM
Source: www.ex-servicemenwelfare.blogspot.in

FLASH NEWS ON ‘ONE RANK ONE PENSION’

FLASH NEWS ON ‘ONE RANK ONE PENSION’ – OROP FILE HAS BEEN CLEARED BY FINMIN AND IS NOW WITH PM

06 Apr 2015

Dear Veterans,

Jai Hind.

The OROP file has been cleared by Ministry of Finance and is now with PM.

There is NO DILUTION of the Definition of OROP as announced twice in the Lok Sabha.

However, the X and Y Group pensions, of JCOs and OR will be different, as always, and not same as expected by some Veterans.

Source: http://ex-servicemenwelfare.blogspot.in/