From: JK Pathania [mailto:email@example.com]
Subject: we the people-ndtv, 12 sept10
dear ms barkha,
let me first thank u for airing a programme on ur channel so important to all pre 2006 exservicemen against the injustice and inequity in grant of one rank one pension (OROP).i must say without any equivocation that that u have always been the champion in the past to bring out the aberrations/shortcomings in our political /social system and proper governance of the country in the various facets of life and held in high esteem for ur fearless and dispassionate approach to conduct the debate proceedings and to draw correct conclusions.
i am sending u my sincere comments on public debate on 'ONE RANK ONE PENSION'on 12 sept10.
(a) senior lady representing MOD said that there are legal hassels to implement OROP.i may mention that she has been less than honest to rebutt our claim for OROP. if that was true then how it is that MOD is losing court cases one after another.they have lost in high court/supreme court/aft chandigarh/ aft delhi. all their arguments were rejected and it is in deed sad that they are not even implemented the judgememt dated 04 march in case of maj gens which we had won 5 months back. that is the respect they show to court decisions.what else a soldier can do except return his medals and sign his represntation in blood and burn his artificial limbs.in fact it is to his credit that despite utter disregard and balatantinsensitivies shown to him he still remains loyal and law abiding unlike his civilian counterpart who burn govt properties and national assets
(b) she gave no answer to points raised by capt sidhu who was made to suffer for years and remarks made by hon'able SUPREME COURT- 'DO NOT TREAT DEF OFFICERS AS BEGGARS' DID NOT TOUCH her COMPUCTION.
(c) remark was made that that honour and pay/ pension are not linked. i was surprised to hear such a comment from pinky Anand a very distiguished person and other learned professor of social sciences.if that is fact then why the FUNTAMENTAL RULES have made by the govt wherein it is provided that in case senior will get less junior.these rules have been obviously framed to ensure administrative fairplay and just properiety.
(d)the argument given for justifying parity in pension between pre 2006 and post 2006 cabinet secy and secy level is devoid of justifiable reasons.what sort of natural justice exists in our country when priciple of parity is applied to the highest in echelon like cabinetsecy. secy their equivalents, MLAS, MPS AND JUDGES OF HIGH COURTS AND SUPREME COURTS AND DENIED TO THE LOWER MOST . let the highest in the ladder set an example of integrity ,rectitude and probity and not abuse their position to gain unfair advantage.
2. i wish to state that whole debate became unfocussed. emotions got the better of real substance of the issues .govt officials did not come with proper facts of the case.neither did their arguments to explain the case carried any legal weight.other participants merely expressed their views without actually covering/analysing the legal/admin aspects of the case. final outcome was inconclusive. i personally feel those who fought the case in the courts and won the same should have been also involved in the debate for fruitful discussion and proper appreciation of the issues involved.
3 notwithstanding the entire ESM fraternity is grateful to u for giving OROP -a national perspective and bringing to the attention of those instrumentality of the state who deal with it . with regards
Air Vice Mshl J K Pathania(retd), UYSM AVSM VSM M&D
Member Supreme Court Bar Association
Former Senior Officer Administation, Hq Wester Air Comd
Former Director Pay Pension And Regulation -Air Hq
Crusader Against Injustice And Inequity- Maj/Gen Case
( WON ON 04MAR10 AT AFT CHANDIGARJ)
J K Pathania