Lt Cdr Avtar Singh Case judgment is given below

Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
1
IN THE ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH AT NEW DELHI
O.A. No. 270/2010
With
O.A. No. 24/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others .........Applicant
Versus
Union of India & Others .......Respondents
[With Lt. Cdr. Avtar Singh & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.]
For applicant: Cmde (Retd.) Sukhjinder Singh, Advocate.
For respondents: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. MATHUR, CHAIRPERSON.
HON’BLE LT. GEN. M.L. NAIDU, MEMBER.
O R D E R
14.09.2010
1. Both the cases involve identical question of law one from the Navy and other from the Air Force, therefore, they are disposed by the common order.
2. In the case of Sqn. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain, this petition has been filed by Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain along with other applicants having equivalent ranks i.e. Major from the Army and
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
2
some of the Lt. Commanders from the Navy who have since retired. In the case of Lt. Cdr. Avtar Singh, a joint petition has been filed by all the retired Lt. Commanders of the Navy. Both these petitions are espousing the case of officers of equivalent ranks from all three Forces i.e. Army, Air Force and Navy i.e. Majors in the Indian Army, Sqn. Leaders from Air Force and Lt. Commanders from Navy. The grievance in both the petitions is with regard of pension. The Sixth Pay Commission came into force w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and in implementation of that Ministry of Defence has passed various orders from time to time. The issue before us is limited one that how the persons of these rank and other equivalent rank in the other forces should be fixed in the Sixth Pay Commission. Joint grievance of all the petitioners is that their fixation has not been done in accordance with the recommendation of the Sixth Pay Commission and the implementation order issued by the Ministry of Defence from time to time. It has been prayed that the letter issued by the Ministry of Defence dated 03rd October, 2008 and Government of India‟s letter dated 11th November, 2008 may be quashed to the extent of methodology on fixation of pension of pre 2006 retirees and has further sought a relief that respondents may be directed to amend
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
3
para 4.2 of OM dated 01.09.2008 as per its wording reproduced in OM dated 03rd October, 2008 and direct the respondents for fixation of pension in terms of the judgment given in the case of Union of India SPS Vains – 2008 (12) SCALE 360.
3. The first order in sequence of is dated 01.09.2008 by which the Ministry of Defence has implemented the Government decision on the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission and the revision of the pension of the pre 2006 pensioners and family pensioners etc. which reads as under :-
“F. No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Pension & Pensioners‟ Welfare
Lok Nayak Bhawan, New Delhi
Dated the 01st September, 2008
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Sub: Implementation of Government‟s decision on the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission – Revision of penson of pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners etc.
1. The undersigned is directed to say that in pursuance of Government‟s decision on the recommendations of Sixth Central Pay Commission, sanction of the President is hereby accorded to the regulation, with effect from 1.1.2006, of pension/family pension of all the pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners in the manner indicated in the succeeding
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
4
paragraphs. Separate orders will be issued in respect of employees who retired/died on or after 1.1.2006.
2.1 These orders apply to all pensioners/family pensioners who were drawing pension/family pension on 1.1.2006 under the Central Civil Services (Pension) rules, 1972, CCS (Extraordinary Pension) rules and the corresponding rules applicable to Railway pensioners and pensioners of All India Services, including officers of the Indian Civil Service retired from service on or after 1.1.1973.
2.2 Separate orders will be issued by the Ministry of Defence in regard to Armed Forces pensioners/family pensioners.
2.3 These orders do not also apply to retired High Court and Supreme Court Judges and other Constitutional/Statutory Authorities whose pension etc. is governed by separate rules/orders.
3.1 In these orders:
a. Existing pensioner or Existing Family pensioner means a pensioner who was drawing/entitled to pension/family pension on 31.12.2005.
b. Existing pension means the basic pension inclusive of commuted portion, if any, due on 31.12.2005. It covers all classes of pension under the CCS (Pension) rules, 1972 as also Disability Pension under the CCS (Extraordinary Pension) Rules and the corresponding rules applicable to Railway employees and Members of All India Services.
c. Existing family pension means the basic family pension drawn on 31.122.005 under the CCS (Pension) Rules and the corresponding rules applicable to Railway employees and the Members of All India Services.
4.1 The pension/family pension of existing pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners will be consolidated with effect from 1.1.2006 by adding together:-
i. The existing pension/family pension.
ii. Dearness Pension, where applicable
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
5
iii. Dearness Relief upto AICPI (IW) average index 536 (Base year 1982=100) I.E. @ 24% OF Basic Pension/Basic family pension plus dearness pension as admissible vide this Department‟s O.M. No.42/2/2006-P&PW (G) dated 5.4.2006.
iv. Fitment weightage @ 40% of the existing pension/family pension.
Where the existing pension in (i) above includes the effect of merger of 50% of dearness relief w.e.f. 1.4.2004, the existing pension for the purpose of fitment weightage will be re-calculated after excluding the merged dearness relief of 50% from the pension.
The amount so arrived at will be regarded as consolidated pension/family pension with effect from 1.1.2006.
4.2 The fixation of pension will be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than fifty percent of the minimum of the play in the pay band plus the grade pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. In the case of HAG+ and above scale, this will be fifty percent of the minimum of the revised pay scale.
4.3 Since the consolidate pension will be inclusive of commuted portion of pension, if any, the commuted portion will be deducted from the said amount while making monthly disbursements.
4.4 The upper ceiling on pension/family pension laid down in the Department of Pension and Pensioner‟s Welfare Office Memorandum No. 45/86/97-P&PW (A) (Part-I) dated 27.10.1997 has been increased from Rs.15000/- and Rs.9000 to 50% and 30% respectively of the highest pay in the Government (the highest pay in the Government is Rs.90,000 since 1.1.2006)
4.5 The quantum of pension/family pension available to the old pensioners/family pensioners shall be increased as follows:-
Age of pensioner/family pensioner
Additional quantum of pension
From 80 years to less than 85
20% of revised basic
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
6
years.
pension/family pension.
From 85 years to less than 90 years.
30% of revised basic pension/family pension.
From 90 years to less than 95 years.
40% of revised basic pension/family pension.
From 95 years to less than 100 years.
50% of revised basic pension/family pension.
100 years or more
100% of revised basic pension/family pension
The amount of additional pension will be shown distinctly in the pension payment order. For example, in case where a pensioner is more than 80 years of age and his/her consolidated pension in terms para 4.1 and 4.2 above is Rs.10,000 pm, the pension will be shown as (i) Basic pennon = Rs.10,000 and (ii) Additional pension = 2000 pm. The pension on his/her attaining the age of 85 years will be shown as (i) Basic Pension = Rs.10,000 and (ii) additional pension = Rs.3,000 pm.
4.6 Some of the existing pensioners who retired between 31.3.1985 and 31.12.1985 are in receipt of personal pension. The said personal pension will continue to be granted as a separate element and will not be merged into the pension as consolidated above.
4.7 Since the consolidated pension/family pension arrived at as per paragraph 4.1. includes dearness relief upto average index level 536 (Base year 1982=100) in accordance with the revised scheme of dearness relief for which orders are being issued separately. The four instalments of dearness relief sanctioned earlier from 1.7.2006, 1.7.2007 and 1.1.2008 in this Department‟s Office Memorandum No. 42/2/2006-P&PW (G) dated the 15.9.2006, Office Memorandum No. 42/2/2006-P&PW (G) dated 23.3.2007, Office Memorandum No. 42/2/2006-P&PW (G) dated the 18.9.2007 and Office Memorandum No. 42/2/2006-P&PW dated the 19.3.2008 respectively shall be adjusted against revised Dearness Relief becoming due on the consolidated pension/family pension.
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
7
5.1 Where the consolidated pension/family in terms of paragraph 4 above works out to an amount less than Rs.3500/- the same shall be stepped upto Rs.3500/-. This will be regarded as pension/family pension with effect from 1.1.2006. In the case of pensioners who are in receipt of more than one pension, the floor ceiling of Rs.3500/- will apply to the total of all pensions taken together.
5.2 Where the disability pension under the CCS (EOP) Rules, is drawn in addition to invalid pension under the CCS (Pension) rules, 1972, the minimum limit of Rs.3500 will apply to total of two pensions as indicated in paragraph 5.1. Where the disability pensions drawn in isolation, the minimum limit of Rs.3500/-will apply for 100% disability. For lesser degree of disability the minimum limit will be proportionately less.
6. The employed/re-employed pensioners/family pensioners are not getting dearness relief on pension at present under the extant orders. In their case the notional dearness relief which would have been admissible to them but for their employment/re-employment will be taken into account for consolidation of their pension in terms of pargraph 4.1 above as if they were drawing the dearness relief. Their pay will be re-fixed w.e.f. 1.1.2006 with reference to consolidated pension becoming admissible to them. Dearness relief beyond 1.1.2006 will, however, not be admissible to them during the period of employment/reemployment.
7. The cases of Central Government employees who have been permanently absorbed in public sector undertakings/autonomous bodies will be regulated as follows:-
(a) PENSION
Where the Government servants on permanent absorption in public sector undertakings/autonomous bodies continue to draw pension separately from the Government, the pension of such absorbees will be updated in terms of these orders. In cases where the Government servants have drawn one time lump sum terminal benefits equal to 100% of their pensions and have become entitled to the restoration of one-third commuted portion of pension as per Supreme Court
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
8
judgment dated 15.12.1995, their cases will not be covered by these orders.
(b) FAMILY PENSION
In cases where, on permanent absorption in public sector undertaking/autonomous bodies, the terms of absorption permit grant of family pension under the CCS (Pension) rules, 1972 or the corresponding rules applicable to Railway employees/members of All India Service, the family pension being drawn by family pensioners will be updated in accordance with these orders.
8. All Pension Disbursing Authorities including Public Sector Banks handling disbursement of pension to the Central Government pensioners are hereby authorised to pay pension/family pension to existing pensioners/family pensioners at the consolidated rates in terms of para 4.1 above without any further authorisation from the concerned Accounts Officers/Head of Office etc. A table indicating the existing basic pension/family pension without Dearness Pension, the basic pension/family pension with dearness pension and the revised consolidated pension/family pension is enclosed for ready reference. (Annexure I). This table may be used where the pensioners is in receipt of a single pension only. Where a pensioner is in receipt of more than one pension, consolidation may be done separately in terms of pargraph 4.1 and as indicated in pargraph 5 floor ceiling of Rs.3500/- may be applied to total pension from all sources taken together. Wherever the age of pensioner/family pensioner is available on the pension payment order, the additional pension/family pension in terms of para 4.5 above may also be paid by the pension disbursing authorities immediately without any further authorisation from the concerned Account Officer/Head of Office, etc. A suitable entry regarding the revised consolidated pension shall be recorded by the pension Disbursing Authorities in both halves of the Pension Payment Order. An intimation regarding disbursement of revised pension may be sent by the pension disbursing authorities to he office of CPAO and Accounts Officer which had issued the PPO in the form given at Annexure-II so that the latter can update the Pension
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
9
payment Order Register maintained by him. An acknowledgement shall be obtained by the Pension Disbursing Authorities from Office of CPAO and the respective Accounts Officers in this behalf.
9. The consolidated pension/family pension as worked out in accordance with provisions of para 4.1 above shall be treated as final „Basic Pension‟ with effect from 1.1.2006 and shall qualify for grant of Dearness Relief sanctioned thereafter.
10. 40% of the arrears of pension will be paid in the year 2008-09 and the remaining 60% in the year 2009-10.
11. It shall be the responsibility of the Head of the Department of the Ministry, Department, Office, etc. from which the government servant had retired or where he was working prior to his demise to revise the pension/family pension of all pensioners/family pensioners with effect from 1st January 2006 in accordance with the provisions mentioned in para 4.1 and 4.2 above and to issue revised Pension Payment Order (PPOs). Action to revise pension/family pension in terms of these provisions shall be initiated suo moto by the concerned Heads of Departments. In the case of the Defence Civilian Employees, however, the procedure prescribed in this regard by the Ministry of Defence shall be followed. It is emphasised that the Pension Sanctioning Authority, in no case, will ask the pensioner/family pensioners to surrender his/her original Pension Payment Order (PPO) for issuing revised authority. In case, however, the age of pensioner/family pensioner is not available on the PPO/office records, the same shall be obtained from the pensioner/family pensioner and indicated in the revised PPO. The authenticity of the age declared by the pensioner/family pensioner shall be verified by the pension sanctioning authority. It may also be ensured that a copy of the revised PPO should be invariably endorsed to the pensioner/family pensioner.
12. It is considered desirable that the benefit of these orders should reach the pensioners as expeditiously as possible. To achieve this objective it is desired that all Pension Disbursing Authorities should ensure that the revised
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
10
pension and the first instalment of arrears due to the pensioners in terms of para 4.1 and para 4.5 above is paid to the pensioners or credit to their account by 30th September, 2008 or before positively. Instructions regarding release of second instalment of arrears will be issued later. Concerted efforts should be made by all the authorities concerned to ensure that the revised PPO‟s are issued, wherever necessary, with the utmost expedition in terms of para 4.1, 4.2 and 4.5 above and arrears are paid in terms of para 10 above within two months from the date of issue of this O.M.
13. In their application to the persons belonging to Indian Audit and Accounts Department these orders issue in consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.
14. Ministry of Agriculture etc. are requested to bring the contents of these orders to the notice of Controller of Accounts/Pay and Accounts Officers and Attached and subordinate Offices under them on a top priority basis. All pension disbursing offices are also advised to prominently display these orders on their notice boards for the benefit of pensioners.
15. Hindi version will follow.
Sd/-
(Rajni Razdan)
Secretary to the Government of India
To
All Ministries/Department of Government of India
Copy to : as per mailing list.”
4. The highlight of this order is that a separate order will be issued by the Ministry of Defence with regard to Armed Forces pensioners and family pensioners. The guideline was given in para 4.1 that the pension and family pension of existing pre-2006
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
11
pensioners and family pensioners will be consolidated with effect from 01.01.2006 by adding together existing pension, family pension, dearness pension where applicable, dearness relief, fitment weightage @ 40% of the existing pension and family pension. Para 4.2 further says that the fixation of pension will be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than 50% of the minimum of the pay in the pay band plus the grade pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. In the case of HAG+ and above scales, this will be fifty percent of the minimum of the revised pay scale. Thereafter, on 03rd October, 2008 certain clarifications have been issued. It says that in pursuance to the Government decision on recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission, sanction of the President was accorded to the regulation with effect from 01.01.2006, of pension and family pension of all the pre-2006 pensioners and family pensioners in the manner indicated in the order dated 01.09.2008. A number of references has been received seeking clarifications, therefore, a consolidated clarification was given to all the queries which have arisen. Order of 03rd October, 2008 reads as under :-
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
12
“F. No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A). Pt. 1
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Pension & Pensioners‟ Welfare
Lok Nayak Bhawan, New Delhi
Dated the 3rd October, 2008
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Sub: Implementation of Government‟s decision on the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission – Revision of pension of pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners etc.
The undersigned is directed to say that in pursuance of Government‟s decision on the recommendations of Sixth Central Pay Commission, sanction of the President is hereby accorded to the regulation, with effect from 1.1.2006, of pension/family pension of all the pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners in the manner indicated in this Department‟s O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A) dated 1.9.2008. A number of references are being received in this Department seeking clarification in regard to various provisions of the aforesaid O.M. the matter has been considered in consultation with the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure and the following clarifications/modifications are made in regard to the aforesaid O.M. dated 1.9.2008:
Provision in the OM No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A) dated 1.9.2008
Clarification/modification
3.1 In these orders:
a. Existing pensioner or Existing Family pensioner means a pensioners who was drawing/entitled to pension/family pension on 31.12.2005.
b. Existing pension means the basic pension inclusive of commuted portion, if any, due on
The „existing pensioner or existing family pensioner‟ would include a pensioner/family pensioner who became entitled to pension/family pension w.e.f. 1.1.2006 consequent on retirement/death of Government servant on 31.12.2005.
Similarly, „existing pension or
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
13
31.12.2005. It covers all classes of pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 as also Disability Pension under the CCS (Extraordinary Pension) Rules and the corresponding rules applicable to Railway employees and Members of All India Services.
c. Existing family pension means the basic family pension drawn on 31.12.2005 under the CCS (Pension) Rules and the corresponding rules applicable to Railway employees and Members of All India Services.
existing family pension‟ would include a pension/family pension which became due w.e.f. 1.1.2006 consequent on retirement/death of Government servant on 31.12.2005.
4.2 The fixation of pension will be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than fifty percent of the sum of the minimum of the pay in the pay band and the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired.
The pension calculated at 50% of the minimum of pay in teh pay band plus grade pay would be calculated (i) at the minimum of the pay in the pay band (irrespective of the pre-revised scale of pay) plus the grade pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale. For example, if a pensioner had retired in the pre-revised scale of pay of Rs.18400-22400, the corresponding pay band being Rs.37,400-67000 and the corresponding grade pay being Rs.10,000 p.m., his minimum guaranteed pension would be 50% of Rs.37,400+ Rs.10,000 (i.e. Rs.23,700). A statement indicating the minimum pension corresponding to each of the pre-2006 scales of pay is enclosed at Annexure.
The pension will be reduced pro-rata, where the pensioner
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
14
had less than the maximum required service for full pension as per rule 49 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 as applicable on 01.01.2006 and in no case it will be less than Rs.3500/- p.m.
In case the pension consolidated as per para 4.1 of O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A) dated 1.9.2008 is higher than the pension calculated in the manner indicated above, the same (higher consolidated pension) will be treated as Basic Pension.
The fixation of family pension will be subject to the provision that the revised family pension, in no case, shall be lower than thirty per cent of the sum of the minimum of the pay in the pay band and the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale in which the pensioner/deceased Government servant had last worked. In case the family pension consolidated as per para 4.1 of OM No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A) dated 1.9.2008 is higher than the family pension calculated in the manner indicated above, the same (higher consolidated family pension) will be treated as Basic family Pension.
4.5 The quantum of family pension
of family pension
available to the
(i) The additional quantum of pension/family pension, on
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
15
old pensioners/ shall be increased
Age of pensioner/Family pensioner
From 80 years to less than 85 years
From 85 years to less than 90 years
From 90 years to less than 95 years
From 95 years to less than 100 years
100 years or more
family pensioners
as follows
Additional quantum of pension
20% of revised basic pension/ family pension
30% of revised basic pension/ family pension
40% of revised basic pension/ family pension
50% of revised basic pension/ family pension
100% of the revised basic pension/family pension
attaining the age of 80 years and above, would be admissible from the 1st day of the month in which date of birth falls. For example, if a pensioner/family pensioner completes age of 80 years on any date in the month of August, 2008, he will be entitled to additional pension/family pension w.e.f. 1.8.2008. those pensioners/family pensioners whose date of birth is 1st August, will also be entitled to additional pension/family pension w.e.f. 1.8.2008 on attaining the age of 80 years and above.
5. Thereafter on 11.011.2008, Ministry of Defence has issued the order for implementation of the Government decision on the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission - Revision of pension of Pre 2006 Armed Forces Pensioners/Family Pensioners. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under:-.
“2. Applicability
2.1 These orders shall apply to all the Armed Forces Pensioners/Family Pensioners who were drawing
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
16
pension/family Pension as on 1.1.2006 under the Pension Regulations of the three Services/State Forces and various Government orders issued from time to time.
2.2. The provisions of this letter do not apply to the following categories :
(i) Gallantry awardees drawing monetary allowance attached to the award, such as Param Vir Chakra, Ashok Chakra, etc.
(ii) UK/HKSRA Pensioners.
(iii) Persons in receipt of Compassionate Allowance, Guzara, Reservist allowance or any other allowance on which dearness relief is not admissible.
(iv) Reservists in receipt of Exgratia payment at Rs.600/- per month covered by Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence letter No. B/39042/AG/PS-4 (a&c)/1331/C/D (Pen/Sers) dated 29th Dec 2000.
(v) Families of the deceased reservists in receipt of Ex-gratia family pension at Rs.605/- per month covered by Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence letter No. B/40029/AG/PS-4 (d)/1/B/D (Pension/Services) dated 7.1.1999.
(Separate orders will be issued in respect of (iv) and (v) above)
3. Definitions
(a) „Existing Pensioner‟ or „Existing Family Pensioner‟ means a pensioner who was entitled to/drawing pension/family pension on 31.12.2005. This will also include a pensioner/family pensioner who became entitled to pension/family pension with effect from 1.1.2006 consequent upon retirement/discharge/death of Armed Force personnel on 31.12.2005. For the purpose of family pension, it also covers members of family tothose who retired/discharged prior to 1.1.2006 and in whose case
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
17
family pension had not commenced as the pensioner was alive on 31.12.2005.
(b) „Existing Pension‟ means the basic pension exclusive of Dearness Pension but inclusive of commuted portion of pension, if any due on 31.12.2005 and covers all kinds of pension viz. Retiring/service/special/reservist/invalid/disability/liberalised disability and war injury pension. This will also include pension/family pension, which became due with effect from 1.1.2006 consequent on retirement/discharge/death of a Armed force personnel on 31.12.2005.
In the case of PBOR under the three services, the „Existing Pension‟ would mean the revised pension fixed as on 1.1.2006 in terms of the provisions contained in this Ministry‟s letter No. 14 (3)/2004-D (Pen/Sers)/Vol-III dated 1.2.2006 and No. 14 (3)/2004-D (Pen/Sers) Col-V dated 2.5.2006. This also includes additional pension sanctioned to Havildar granted Honorary Rank of Naib Subedar. It will, however, not include Adhoc Ex-gratia payment, if any.
(c) „Existing Family Pension‟ means the basic family pension drawn on 31.12.2005 exclusive of Dearness pension under the Pension Regulations of the three Services/State forces and other orders issued on the subject from time to time. It also covers Liberalied and Special Family Pension and Dependent Pension sanctioned in battle and non-battle casualty cases.
(d) „Existing Dearness Relief‟ means the dearness relief due to pensioners/family pensioners upto average AICPI (IW) 536 (Base year 1982=100) as on 1.1.2006 at the rate of 24% of Basic Pension/Basic Family pension plus Dearness penson as admissible vide Government of India, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pension, Department of Pension and Pensioners‟ Welfare Office Memorandum No. 42/2/2006-P&PW (G) dated 5.4.2006.
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
18
(e) „Dearness Pension‟ means Dearness Pension as admissible vide Ministry of Finance, Deptt. Of expenditure OM No. 105/1/2004/IC dated 01.03.2004.
(f) „Pension Disbursing Agency‟ (PDA) means Treasury, Post Office, Pay and Accounts Office, Defence Pension Disbursing Office (DPDO), Indian Embassy Nepal and authorised Public/Private Sector Banks.
(g) „Pension Sanctioning Authority‟ (PSA) means PCDA (Pension) Allahabad, PCDA (Navy) Mumbai and CDA (AF) Delhi as the case may be.
4. Consolidation of Pension
4.1 The Pension/Family Pension of existing Pre-1.1.2006 pensioners/family pensioners will be consolidate with effect from 1.1.2006 by adding together:
(i) The Existing Pension (including commuted portion of pension, if any)/Existing Family Pension
(ii) Dearness Pension, if any, as applicable from 1.4.2004 to those retired/died prior to 1.4.2004.
(iii) Dearness Relief upto AI CPI (IW) 536 i.e. 24% of basic pension/family pension plus dearness pension.
(iv) Fitment weightage @ 40% of the Existing Pension/Existing Family Pension. Where the amount of fitment weightage works out in fraction of a rupee, it will be rounded off to the next higher rupee.
NOTE : Where the Existing Pension/Existing Family Pension includes the effect of merger of 50% of Dearness Pay in respect of those retired/died on or after 1.4.2004, the existing pension/family pension for the purpose of fitment weightage will be re-calculated after excluding the merged Dearness Pay of 50% from emoluments for computation of existing pension/existing family pension. This will be in line with the definition of “Existing Pension” and “Existing Family Pension” given in Para 3 of these orders.
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
19
4.2 The amount so arrived at in terms of Para 4.1 above will be regarded as consolidated pension/family pension with effect from 1.1.2006. Since the consolidated pension will be inclusive of commuted portion of pension, if any, the amount of pension commuted will be deducted from the said amount while making monthly disbursements.
5. The consolidation of pension will further be subject to the provision that the consolidated pension, in no case shall be lower than fifty per cent of the minimum of the pay in the pay band plus the grade pay corresponding to the pre revised scale from which the pensioner had retired/discharged including Military Service Pay and „X‟ Group pay where applicable. For example, if a pensioner had retired in the pre-revised scale of pay 6600 – 170 – 9320, the corresponding pay band being 9300 – 34800 and the corresponding grade pay the Military Service Pay being Rs.4,600/- and Rs. 2,000 respectively, his minimum guaranteed pension would be 50% of Rs. 9300 + Rs.4600 + 2000 i.e. Rs.7,950 for 33 years of qualifying service. The pension so calculated will be reduced pro-rata, where the pensioner had less than the maximum required service of 33 years for full pension and in no case it will be less than Rs.3,500/-. In case the pension consolidated as per Para 4.1 above in higher than the pension calculated in the manner indicated above, the same (higher consolidated pension) will be treated as Basic Pension with effect from 1.1.2006.
The consolidation of family pension will be subject to the provision that the consolidated family pension, in no case, shall be lower than thirty percent of the sum of the minimum of the pay in the pay band and the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale in which the petitioner/deceased Armed Force personnel had retired/died including Military Service Pay and „X‟ Group pay where applicable. In case the family pension consolidated as per Para 4.1 above is higher than the family pension calculated in the manner indicated above, the same (higher consolidated family pension) will be treated as Basic family pension with effect from 1.1.2006.”
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
20
6. Ministry of Defence also issued another order dated 30th August, 2008 reiterating same recommendations and implementation in consequent thereof and there is Anneuxre-I Part B, para 5.1.46 and 5.1.47 which are relevant for our purpose reads as under :-
“Past pensioners - analysis of changes made in the past and recommendations - 5.1.46 The main demands of past pensioners related to grant of one rank one pension both for civilian as well as Defence Forces retirees and better medical facilities. In case of Defence Forces, the issue of one rank one pension was conceded partially when one time increase was granted to Defence Forces pensioners in 1992 that reduced the gap between past and present pensioners in Forces. The Fifth CPC extended full parity between pre and post 1/1/1986 pensioners and a modified parity between pre and post 1/1/1996 pensioners. In modified parity, it was provided that pension could, in no case, be less than 50% of the minimum of the corresponding Firth CPC revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired.
Fitment benefit to the past pensioners - 5.1.47 The Commission notes that modified parity has already been conceded between pre and post 1/1/1996 pensioners. Further, full neutralisation of price rise on or after 1/1/1996 has also been extended to all the pensioners. Accordingly, no further changes in the extant rules are necessary. However, in order to maintain the existing modified parity between present and future retirees, it will be necessary to allow the same fitment benefit as is being recommended for the existing Government employees. The Commission, accordingly, recommends that all past pensioners should be allowed fitment benefit equal to 40% of the pension excluding the effect of merger of 50% dearness allowance/dearness relief as pension (in respect of pensioners retiring on or after 1/4/2004) and dearness
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
21
pension (for other pensioners) respectively. The increase will be allowed by subsuming the effect of conversion of 50% of dearness relief/dearness allowance as dearness pension/dearness pay. Consequently, dearness relief at the rate of 74% on pension (excluding the effect of merger) has been taken for the purposes of computing revised pension as on 1/1/2006. This is consistent with the fitment benefit being allowed in case of the existing employees. A table (Annexure 5.1.1.) showing fixation of the pension of the existing pensioners in the revised dispensation consequent to implementation of the recommendations of this Commission has been prepared and should be used for fixing the revised pension of the existing pensioners. The fixation as per this table will be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than fifty percent of the sum of the minimum of the pay in the pay band and the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. To this extent, a change would need to be allowed from the fitment shown in the fitment table.”
Para 5.1.46 says that the main demands of past pensioners related to grant of one rank one pension both for civilian as well as Defence Forces retirees and better medical facilities. In case of Defence Forces, the issue of one rank one pension was conceded partially when one time increase was granted to Defence Forces pensioners in 1992 that reduced the gap between past and present pensioners in Forces. The Firth Central Pay Commission extended full parity between pre and post 01.01.1986 pensioners and a modified parity between pre and post 01.01.1996 pensioners. In modified parity, it was provided that pension could,
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
22
in no case, be less than 50% of the minimum of the corresponding Fifth CPC revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. Para 5.1.47 says that the Commission notes that modified parity has already been conceded between pre and post 01.01.1996 pensioners. Further, full neutralisation of price rise on or after 01.01.1996 has also been extended to all the pensioners. Accordingly, no further changes in the extant rules are necessary. That shows that the norms which was accepted in the Fifth Pay Commission has also been adopted under the Sixth Pay Commission, therefore, there is no distinction between pre and post 01.01.1996 retirees. It further says that in order to maintain the existing modified parity between present and future retirees, it will be necessary to allow the same fitment benefit as is being recommended for the existing Government employees. The Commission, accordingly, recommended that all past pensioners should be allowed fitment benefit equal to 40% of the pension excluding the effect of merger of 50% dearness allowance and dearness etc. It further clarifies which is relevant and crucial in the matter that the fixation as per this table will be subject to the provision that the revised pension, in no case, shall be lower than 50% of the sum of the minimum of the pay in the pay band and
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
23
the grade pay thereon corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired. To this extent, a change would be need to be allowed from the fitment shown in the fitment table. The expression “the minimum” of pay in the pay band is crucial in this case.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant has emphasised that the minimum of the pay in the pay band for the equivalent rank should be taken into consideration for determination of the pension of the retirees. This is not contested by learned counsel for the respondents. In this connection, our attention was also invited to the Special Navy Instructions which was issued on 18th October, 2008 and the extract of these Navy Instructions reads as under :-
“SPECIAL NAVY INSTRUCTIONS
No. 2/S/08 New Delhi 18th day of October, 2008
2/S/08 REVISION OF PAY SCALES, FIXATON OF INITIAL PAY IN THE REVISED PAY BANDS, GRADE PAY AND MILITARY SERVICE PAY, REGULATIONS OF PAY ON PROMOTION – FOR OFFICERS OF ALL BRANCHES AND MIDSHIPMEN/CADETS OF THE NAVY (EXCLUDING MEDICAL AND DENTIAL BRANCHES) CONSEQUENT UPON THE IMPLEMENTATON OF THE DECISON OF THE GOVERNMENT WITH RESPECT OT
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
24
THE RECOMMEDNATISON OF THE SIXT CENTRAL PAY COMMISSION.
SECTION I – GENERAL
1. In pursuance of the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission and the Government decision thereon, the existing scales of pay admissible to naval Officers will be revised with effect from 01 January, 2006 and pay fixed in the revised pay bands, grade pay and Military Service Pay in accordance with the provisions of this Instruction. The provisions of this Navy Instruction will apply to all officers including Special Duties List and Midshipmen/Cadets who were on the effective strength of the Navy as on 01 Jan 2006 and those who join the Navy thereafter and to under trainee offices who were undergoing pre-commission training on 01 January 2006 and t trainee officers who join after that date.”
In these Navy Instructions, Rule 3 is definition clause and in Definition Clause pay in the pay band has been described as under :-
“3.(e) “Pay in the pay band” means the pay drawn in the running pay bands specified in Column 6 of Table given at para 4 (a) below.
(f) “Grade Pay” is the fixed amount corresponding to a pre-revised pay scale/rank as specified in col 7 of table at para 4 (a) below.
This definition Clause says that the pay in the pay band means pay drawn in running pay and grade pay is the fixed amount corresponding to a pre-revised pay scale/rank as specified in column 7 of table at para 4 (a) below. This table reads as under :-
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
25
Revised Pay Structure
Corresponding
S.N.
Rank
Existing
Pay Band/Scale
Pay Bands/Scales
GP
MSP
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
1.
Sub Lt.
8250-300-10050
0
PB-3
15600-39100
5400
6000
2.
Lieutenant
9600-300-11400
400
PB-3
15600-39100
6100
6000
3.
Lieutenant Commander
11600-325-14850
1200
PB-3
15600-39100
6600
6000
4.
Commander
13500-400-17100
1600
PB-3
15600-39100
7600
6000
5.
Captain (with less than three years service in the rank)
15100-450-17350
2000
PB-4
37400-67000
8700
6000
6.
Captain (with 3 yrs or more service in the rank)/Comm.
16700-450-18050
2400
PB-4
37400-67000
8900
6000
7.
Rear Admiral
18400-500-22400
-
PB-4
37400-67000
10000
NIL
8.
Vice Admiral
22400-525-24500
-
PB-4
37400-67000
12000
NIL
9.
VCNS/FOC-in-Cs of Naval Commands
26000
-
Apex Scale
80,000 (fixed)
NIL
NIL
10.
Chief of the Naval Staff
30,000
-
Chief of Naval Staff
90000 (fixed)
NIL
NIL
8. In this revised pay structure according to the applicant the basic pay of in pre revised scale for the rank of Lt. Commander and equivalent rank was Rs.11,600/- and rank pay was 1200 x 1.86 and Rs. 23,810/- has been worked out as minimum pay in the pay band for the rank of Lt. Commander in the Sixth Pay Commission. Therefore, contention of learned
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
26
counsel for the applicant is that this is the pay in the pay band of this revised pay scale for Lt. Commander and learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the expression used in the implementation order and in the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission is that incumbent shall get 50% of the minimum of the pay in the pay band. Therefore, learned counsel for the applicant submits that Rs.23810/- is the minimum pay in the pay band for Lt. Commander and it should be taken up for consideration of the pension of the pre retirees. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since distinction of pre and post has been done away in the Fifth Pay Commission which has also been accepted under the Sixth Pay Commission that means a person who retires on 01.01.2006 as a Lt. Commander and the persons who have already retired prior to 01.01.2006, there will be no distinction for them for pension. In the present case, as per the definition of the pay in the pay band by the Naval Special Order which has to be read as wherever the expression appears would mean that Rs.23810/- will be minimum pay in the pay band for the Lt. Commanders and equivalent rank.
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
27
9. As against this, learned counsel for the respondents has strenuously urged before us that the expression „minimum pay in the pay band‟ should only mean that the minimum of the scale in the pay band should be taken as determinative factor for the determination of the pension and not the minimum of the pay in the pay band. We would have readily accepted the contention of learned counsel for the respondents but for the fact that the Naval Special Order which defines the expression pay band and had already given a table below that what shall be the minimum pay for the Lt. Commander in the Sixth Pay Commission of the existing Lt. Commanders. Therefore, we cannot add or subtract anything beyond what have already been defined by the respondents. Had this distinction not been there perhaps the example which the respondents have shown from the various documents and the Circulars issued by the Comptroller General of Defence Accounts could have been readily accepted. But the fact that the Government by the Special Order dated 18th October, 2008 themselves have defined the pay in the pay band, therefore, we have to accept the definition given by them and then reading this expression „the minimum of the pay in the pay band‟ along with the recommendations of the Pay Commission and the
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
28
implementation order should be taken for determination of the pension has to be accepted. Had this expression not been defined anywhere perhaps argument of learned counsel for the respondents would have been accepted. In this connection, we may further point out that the earlier communication dated 17th December, 1998 in the Fifth Pay Commission, the Government has clearly mentioned that pension of all pensioners irrespective of the date of their retirement shall not be less than 50%, the minimum pay was revised from 01.01.2006 for the last post held by the pensioners. Had this expression been repeated, perhaps it would carry the same interpretation. In the present case, pay structure has been revised and now all the pay scales have been categorised in the various pay bands and in the case of Lt. Commander or equivalent fall in the Pay Band-III and minimum of Pay Band-III is 15,600/- at the entry level i.e. minimum of the pay band for this rank. Had this expression used in this pay scale of Sixth Pay Commission, we would not have come to interpretation as was clarified by the Fifth Pay Commission by the Government Order dated 17th December, 1998. But in the present case, the expression pay in the pay band has been defined by the Government in the communication dated 18th October, 2008 that
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
29
puts the matter beyond any controversy. The expression which has been defined in the scheme of things has to be accepted while interpreting all the provisions of the Pay Commission and the Implementation Order. Here the expression „minimum of the pay in the pay band‟ is to be taken for the purposes of deciding the pension of pre 2006 pensioners. Therefore, one has to interpret the provisions as exists and we have to take it minimum pay in the pay band for equivalent rank then that comes to Rs.23,810/- determined by the Government in Column 7 of table at para 4 (a) as such we have to accept the figure of 23810/- being the minimum of the pay in the pay band for Lt. Commanders and equivalent ranks. If that is taken then naturally 50% of this will have to be treated as a basic pension and rest of it will be added to it as grade pay and other benefits which are given to the persons of that rank. There is no controversy with regard to grade pay and Military Service pay and other benefits to which we are not concerned. We are concerned with what is minimum has to be taken for pre 2006 retirees and minimum pay scale for the purposes of determining the pension. In our opinion as per the Government order for all pre retirees of Lt. Commander and other ranks their minimum of the pay has to be accepted as determined
O.A. No. 270/2010
Sq. Ldr. Vinod Kumar Jain & Others vs. Union of India & Ors.
30
by the Government for the purpose of fixation of the officers in 2006 i.e. Rs.23810/-. Accordingly, we direct let the pension of pre retirees should be decided on the basis of minimum of the pay in the pay band i.e. Rs.23,810/- with all other benefits and shall be given to them. All exercise may be completed as far as possible within three months. Both the petitions are allowed in view of aforesaid terms. No order as to costs.
A.K. MATHUR
(Chairperson)
M.L. NAIDU
(Member)
New Delhi
September 14, 2010.

NEW IESM MEMBERS (ALL EME) by Hony Lt Pandey

From: Kameshwar Pandey
Sent: 21 September 2010 18:10
To: kamboj@itintellectuals.com; rajkadyan@yahoo.com; satbirsm@yahoo.com; sharansahuja@gmail.com
Cc: CoreGpIESM@yahoogroups.com
Subject: NEW IESM MEMBERS (ALL EME)

Dear Sirs,

The following are the new IESM members. The special thing about this is that all these veterans are from the EME Corps and are working in 505 Army Base Workshop. Forms and the collected membership fee are with me and will be submitted in the Gurgaon office.

Yours truly,
Kameshwar

N/S Dinanath Prasad
Sub Damodran CK
Sub RC Singh Patwal
Sub Hira Dutt
S/M Dhir Singh
S/M Girdhari Lal
Sub Sukhbir Singh
Sub Suresh Prasad
S/M R K Mudgal
Sub Sp Yadaw
S/M Madan LAL
Sub Yudhishthir
Hav Ygendra Kumar
Hav Lal Mohan Singh
Hav RC Divedi
NK Santanu Das
Hav Om Prakash
Hav O Prakash
Hav Satyavir Singh
Hav Shri Krishna
Achhe Lal Sharma
NK Ravindra Nath Rout
Hav KD Prasad
NK Daya Nand
NK Jagbir Singh
Hav Hav Hoshiyar Singh
NK Ratti Ram Meena
NK G Anniyappan
Hav Sushil Boruah
Hav Pitamber Bhatt
Hav OP Suhag
NK Bhoj Datt
Hav Taran Singh
Hav Suresh Mohan
Hav Jagdish Chandar Man
Hav Hira Lal Tiwari
Hav Madhusoodanan
Ms Usha Rani, w/o L/Nk RS Tiwari.
Ms Kiran Bala, w/o Nk Ravidner Singh.
Ms S Bala, w/o Sep Kartar Singh

Kameshwar Pandey
Sub/Maj Hony. Lt. (Veteran)
230, Pocket-1, DDA SFS Flats, Sector-1,
Dwarka, New Delhi - 110 075

Cell : +91-9811059825
Home: +91-11-3296 6701
email: pandeykameshwar@gmail.com


...

[Message clipped] View entire message

Pragmatic Approach by Lt Col SK Parasar

From: sujitkumar parasar [mailto:skp3006@gmail.com]
Sent: 22 September 2010 07:09
To: Kamboj Chander
Subject: Pragmatic Approach

Dear Sir,
... edited ...
I am submitting an idea to strenghen it further.

A PRAGMATIC APPROACH

As a veteran, one is delighted to see the way our ESM group are persueing the issue "OROP" towards it's logical conclusion. However it demands a delicate handling and avoid any negative impact/out burst. A pragmatic approach is the Order of the Day to solve it.

Most of us had learnt few valuable lessions during our Service Life....How [ psychologically] to win the Hearts and Mind of our Hostiles ;How [intelligently] to isolate fish out of the water and how[tactically] to fight the Guerrila like a Guerrila.

Generally our Politicians, Bureocrats and Media take us in high esteem. Good will projected by them should be accepted with grace.

There should be no' Derogatory expression' against the CADRE as a whole by any of us.On the contrary they should be won over . There are few who are instrumental in their attempt to reject our right cause. They are the FISH[rotten] to be isolated out of the Water, the way it was done during the recent Media projection[NDTV].

Another important factor is our in house 'Soul Searching'. The role played by some of our Serving Brethren, who are not practicing What they preach;

'The Service Tradition'.

Our success revolves around 'POSITIVE MIND SET' and 'UNITY' with warm regards--Parasar.

Lt Col S K Parasar [veteran]

Response to AG Noorani's Article

From: Rakesh Prasad Chaturvedi [mailto:rpchaturvedi@gmail.com]
Sent: 21 September 2010 22:49
Subject: Fwd: Response to AG Noorani's Article


Am forwarding my response to AG Nooran's article in Frontline, sent as a letter to the magazine on 11 Sep. For obvious reasons I had not put it on the net , waiting for the Editor to perhaps print. I believe I have waited long enough.

I had been wondering how Mr Noorani could be so disjointed.............a lawyer too, at that. TILL I read the article at the following link. Click on it, and you will realize that our press would pick up anything sensational sounding.
http://mail.google.com/mail/?hl=en&tab=wm#inbox/12b09b71f54785cf

While at it, although I have separately responded to Wajad habibullah's selective disclosures / pronouncements on Military Leadership as defaulters during the 62 ops, I wonder what this controversial Henderson report contains? If it was about military, the politico bureaucratic combine wouldn't actually have kept it under lock and key?
And it was after all an inhouse analysis. SO, what's it doing under lock and key? WHO is learning anything from it?
Ah, and yes ! As it was done by Army team, those in service at that time, would know SOME portion of it. Individually. So many books. Would everything not be known?

With Warm Regards,
Col RP Chaturvedi,
A-35, Sector 36,
Noida 201303.
Mob: +919891279035
Skype: rakesh.prasad.chaturvedi

Views of Brig RS Chhikara

Citizens of India – Please spare a thought for the Nation

We Indians have been brought up on a diet of ignorance and indifference over the past 63 plus years; courtesy our self serving politicians and babus. We believe that we do not have a care in the world as long as our defence forces are there to protect us and the country. Never mind the monumental corruption, mis- governance and the utter lack of any sense of responsibility on the part of these worthy rulers. The average Indian goes about his business secure in the belief that ultimately the defence forces will be called in to sort out the mess created by them and all will be well. This belief has held ever since.
By and large public faith in the Defence forces is not misplaced either. After all this is the only institution not yet subsumed by prevailing systemic ills.

There are , however, pretty powerful forces at work to take this fine institution down with them too. Enemies of India will give their right hand to succeed in their nefarious mission through these emissaries. That leads me to wonder who the likes of Noorani are playing for. Certainly not for the nation. Are they just working in aid to civil authority if I may use that expression? Is it only a proxy for the Babu lobby who are wily enough to remain behind cover? This possibility is easy to see but there is a catch. The IAS lobby would certainly like to do down the military but they would certainly recognise that at the end of the dayt the defence forces are the ultimate cover for all their misdeeds in the absence of which the public may well be tempted to lynch some of them. They would not like to be devoid of that life saving cover.

My friends in the media are absolutely convinced that Indian media is fully sold out to pecuniary interests which ever quarter these may come from. Foreign powers enimical to India included. There is talk also of well orchestrated conspiracies to dismember India without having to physical attack us militarily. It is not too far fetched to imagine moles within the establishment and human rights activists being part of such conspiracies.

The bogey of Military take over is not original thought. It was raised in the early fiftees resulting in the Military being assigned roles in agriculture and house building. I recently visited Ambala where Operation Amar was launched . The result was there for all to see in 1962. Nooranis could well be aiming at a repeat experiment on a bigger scale. Doing away with AFSPA could well serve their purpose.

Our politicians have little knowledge of matters military nor are they enlightened enough to understand the importance of learning to take good advice where it is available. They can hardly be expected to check the bureaucratic and media mischief. After all they are but partners in the enterprise of corruption and misgovernance. The defence forces have already suffered serious dilution of military ethos because of the devide and rule tactics which has always been available as a master stroke in the armoury of the bureaucrat. Our system of promotions in the forces has been so corrupted from within as to ensure that people like Nathu Singh, Cariappa, Thimayya , Prem Bhagat, and Sam Bahadur are virtually precluded from reaching positions at the helm. Who then will stem the rot?

No AFSPA – No Army. This can not be a worthwhile recommendation. Army must stay and AFSPA must stay. Otherwise the field will be clear for all mischief mongers foreign or indigenous. A demoralized military will be helpless in managing internal destabilization and sabotage as well as external aggression, together. Such an attitude of hands off disengagement will be suicidal.

We must ask ourselves the question; who stands to lose most in such a situation of anarchy ?. It will undoubtedly be the ordinary citizen. The onus of correcting things while there is still some time available, must therefore devolve on the shoulders of civil society. Which means ; it is high time our civil society wakes up to the dangers inherent in present day goings on and spares a thought for their own future and for that of India. Sans the defence forces, they are the only ones who can and must take matters in hand. There is no Iron Frame and whatever its present day awatar there is, only deserves to be demolished in national interest. And if the fourth Estate continues to be as irresponsible and self serving as it has shown itself to be, they do not deserve the freedom to burn India down.

This however, is easier said than done. Such movements require enlightened, dedicated, Steadfast and patriotic leadership. Where is one to find such leadership? It will be chaotic if one relies on civil society to throw up this leadership spontaneously unless one believes in the Geeta. ‘ Yada Yadahe Dharmasye Glanir Bhavti Bharata, Agyuthanaya A dharmasya tadadmanya sarjamyam ham.’Under our present circumstances, ( Kalyug) the required leadership has to be provided, nurtured and sustained by a comparatively better organized segment of society. Perhaps military veterans along with some thinking and concerned citizens are destined to play that vital role.

Brig RS Chhikara,
Email chhikarars1940@yahoo.co.in
0124-4219549, 9560348585

Your views, comments, suggestions be sent directly to Brig RS Chhikara.
Please do not endorse copies of your emails to me. Thank you.
Chander Kamboj

Subject: [CoreGpIESM]e Delhi Goes To Srinagar- Then Tries toThe Extra Mile

From: CoreGpIESM@yahoogroups.com [mailto:CoreGpIESM@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Satish Kumar Bahri
Sent: 21 September 2010 15:08
To: Indian Express.
Subject: [CoreGpIESM]e Delhi Goes To Srinagar- Then Tries toThe Extra Mile

Dear Sir,
I refer to the above report in your paper on 21 Sep 10. You have mentioned in it that Mr Ram Vilas Paswan had told Mr Yasin Malik,"When the boys were killed, if the Army Chief had apologised to the family, this issue would not (have) taken such a shape now".

Mr Paswan is obviously talking through his hat. Its not the Army which has killed the young men in Kashmir during last three months but, the JK Police and CRPF. Please tell him that he is barking up the wrong tree and he should have got his facts right before going on such an important mission.
Regards
Lt Gen SK Bahri (Retd)

Contributions to IESM by Col Lk Anand

LALIT KUMAR ANAND [mailto:elkayanand@rediffmail.com]
Respected Gen Kadyan Sir,

I was very happy to learn that IESM is now poised to launch the next phase of our battle for OROP. We all the members of IESM expect that all our dedicated office bearers would now go all out to launch the campaign in an unabated manner, taking advantage of all the factors in our favour, till we finally achieve the goal, which we have set before ouselves ie to get the OROP for all the ESMs. I am hopeful the Rank Pay case would also come through sooner than later.

Sir, as a gesture of my good will and humble support to the cause of IESM in this venture, I have decided to contribute Rs 500 every month out of my pension, till the time we are able to fulfil this goal or till my death, if the Government continues to heap injustices upon the IESM and deprives them of their rightful demand for OROP. I am sure our fight for justice would carry on regardless till the end.

The amount of Rs 500 would be deposited every month, in the Bank Acct maintained by the IESM. May I request you Sir, to let me know the Bank and Acct No in which you would like me to deposit the amount.

With kindest regards and best wishes for an early success in our noble venture.

Yours Sincerely,

Col LK Anand Retd
25 NDA 4207-K Sqn

Rs 70 PENSION WHEN ARHAR DAL IS Rs 80?

SC: Rs 70 PENSION WHEN ARHAR DAL IS Rs 80?
R Sedhuraman
Legal Correspondent
New Delhi, September 17
Expressing shock over the payment of a monthly pension of Rs 70 to a 90-year-old widow of an Army officer, the Supreme Court today issued notice to the Centre and the Army seeking its response to a PIL filed by her.

“What is this? You are paying her just Rs 70 a month. Even a kilo of arhar dal costs around Rs 80,” a Bench of Justices Markandeya Katju and TS Thakur observed while passing the order.

The petitioner’s husband, Major Dharam Chand, had died in 1967 after a heart attack. The petitioner, Pushpa Vanti, said her husband could not get regular medical treatment due to the 1962 and 1965 wars. She had written to the government several times demanding higher pension so that she could bring up her two children.
According to her, she is entitled to a pension of about Rs 27,000 a month. She feels ashamed and humiliated to receive Rs 70 as pension when families of sepoys get more than Rs 150 a month. Her husband was a recipient of 14 medals.

IESM: Let us be prudent in our observations by Brig CS Kamboj

Dear Friends,
Jai Hind.
Ms Barkha Dutt, daughter of a Defence Service Officer, is like our own daughter. We have seen her bloom from the days of Kargil War. Without saying so, she has undoubtedly demonstrated it many times that Defence personnel, serving and retired and their families have a very special place in her heart. Majority of Defence Services personnel, serving and retired, and their families, and majority of NDTV viewers in India and abroad adore and respect her.
Now read and re-read the email below received from Ms Barkha Dutt. Feel the deep hurt we have caused her. Are we being fair to Ms Barkha Dutt– our own daughter?
Those of you who still feel that the NDTV show on OROP, organised (telecast) with so much pains by Barkha, on 12 Sep 10, was not good – are over estimating their own capabilities. Please come down to mother earth – or accept the challenge and produce something better.
‘i’ appeal to YOU ALL, to kindly stop sending those rude emails to Ms Barkha Dutt– The Beloved Daughter of All Defence Personnel.
In service of Indian Military Veterans
Chander Kamboj.

Copy to Ms Barkha Dutt
Dear Barkha,
‘i’ suggest you should forgive and forget those who are sending those rude emails to you. ‘i’ feel they neither know their own capabilities nor depth of your love for Defence Services. May God also forgive them for their follies.
With very fond regards and wishing you further grand success in every task you undertake.
God be with you.
Chander Kamboj

From: Barkha Dutt [mailto:Barkha@ndtv.com]
Sent: 16 September 2010 01:20
Subject: ONE RANK ONE PENSION
Hi..
With all due respect, the levels of cynicism in this group.. are truly outstanding. A tv show may never meet the exact specifications of everyone who has a view on the subject... but .. the team did the best job it could to highlight a crucial national issue.
Im extremly disappointed now to ... be at the receiving end.. of mails that question our intentions.. and look for conspiracy theories... ?
regards
Barkha

GEN NATHU SINGH

From: vinay singh
Sent: 14 September 2010 09:58
Subject: GEN NATHU SINGH
Dear Brigadier Kamboj,
Thank you for posting Sarojini Naidu’s letter to Nathu Singh. Here is something else on the same lines, which is as relevant today as it was then. In January 1948, soon after taking over as GOC UP Area in Lucknow, Gen Nathu Singh wrote an Appreciation on the Defence of India, and forwarded it to Army HQ. He was greatly perturbed by a directive issued from the office of the C-in-C, which sought to reduce the size of the Regular Army to 150,000 - during World War II, it had risen to 2.5 million - with an annual budget allocation of 45 crore rupees for the next three years.

In the preamble, he wrote:
"We as soldiers must approach our leaders and submit our minimum requirements and make it clear that if funds are not provided for such a force, the responsibility will be upon them. A soldier is but a servant of the State. He must however, point out any weaknesses in the defensive structure of the country with all the emphasis at his command. In order to arrive at a correct appreciation, we must consider both military and allied factors and not be swayed by any notions of idealism or allow political considerations to affect our judgment...
A NEWLY CREATED NATION WHICH HAS ONLY JUST THROWN OFF HER BONDAGE OF FOREIGN RULE OF 200 YEARS AND MORE CANNOT RISK A REVERSE ALMOST AT HER REBIRTH.
...We must NOT decide on the size of our Defence Service on what we can financially afford but on what we need in the form of a Modern Defence based on the following considerations:
(a) What is the strength and armament of present and potential enemies of India?
(b) What is the force required by India to meet this threat
(c) What will be the cost of maintaining such a force?
(d) What is the maximum amount the country can afford to pay for its Defence Forces?
(e) To arrive at a compromise between (b), (c) and (do above, consistent with the safety of our land.
Keeping the above in view, the Land Forces which India should maintain are given in the enclosed appreciation. They are only my first thoughts."

Nathu Singh proceeded to list out the frame work of the Indian Army, for the future. By present standards, he was extremely conservative - he asked for one corps headquarters, one armoured division, two infantry divisions, one parachute brigade, one armoured brigade, and the associated complement of Artillery, Engineers and Signals. The number of infantry battalions was only 28. However, he advocated a large complement of territorial army, which would provide the second line of defence, and boost the resources of the regular army, during war.
In April 1948, Nathu Singh was promoted to the rank of Lt Gen and appointed GOC-in-C Eastern Command, at Ranchi. He continued his efforts to convince the political and military leadership of the necessity of maintaining a strong Army. When asked for a run-down of the Army, he wrote to Army HQ on 24 October 1950:
"...The situation facing the country from the military point of view is today virtually the same if not worse because, although Pakistan outwardly appears to be fraternising with our country, recent speeches of their leaders leave no room for doubt that they are preparing for a show-down with our country over the KASHMIR issue.
...Communist China's complete success over the KUOMINTANG and the establishment of the Peoples' Government, their recent activities, their declared policy towards liberation of Tibet, and the recent Mission from the latter country clearly indicate the writing on the wall. The Communist menace is gradually spreading towards the very borders of India.
...To ensure the security of our borders and our State, the Defence service ratio between INDIA and PAKISTAN should be two to one . If this is reduced, we will be laying our country open to an ever present danger of a major war."

Nathu Singh's remarks, especially with reference to Pakistan and China, display an insight of international affairs which very few Indians had, at that time. Even Nehru, who orchestrated India's foreign policy for almost two decades following Independence, failed to grasp the nuances which Nathu Singh had perceived. As a result, the Defence Forces were neglected, with disastrous results in 1962. An intimate knowledge of military affairs is important for those who decide the fate of peoples, and nations. Among his contemporaries, such as Churchill, Stalin, Chiang Kai Shek, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Tito, and Nasser, Nehru was one of the few who had never worn an uniform.

This applies even to our present day political masters. Not one of our Prime Ministers or Defence Ministers, from 1947 till now, has ever worn an uniform.
Maj Gen VK Singh

ESM CSD CANTEEN AT VIJAY NAGAR, GHAZIABAD - CLOSURE HJALTED

ESM CSD CANTEEN AT VIJAY NAGAR, GHAZIABAD - CLOSURE HALTED
Dear Friends,
Jai Hind.
The closure of the ESM CSD Canteen at Vijay Nagar Ghaziabad (UP), has been halted.
The DO letter received from present Army Commander Central Command, Gen VK Ahluwalia, is as above.
On behalf of YOU ALL, ‘i’ thank Gen Ahluwalia and Gen Sharma for stopping the closure of the said ESM CSD Canteen.
JAI HO IESM.
In service of Indian Military Veterans
Chander Kamboj.

Letter to Brakha by RDOA

From: RDOA India [mailto:rdoaindia@gmail.com]
Sent: 14 September 2010 00:07
To: barkha@ndtv.com; feedback@ndtv.com
Cc: DELETED
Subject: NDTV PGMME ON OROP

Dear Barkha,

The views of RDOA follow:

The NDTV telecast on OROP was a big ‘Façade’ missing the main objective of ‘One Rank One Pension’. The debate spiraled to a tangent to issues like honour, izzat, compensation package, disability pension, to downgrading of armed forces to the level of fire fighters and men working in mines. Are the armed forces headed that way ?

Disability pension and compensation package are by themselves major separate issues which need independent debates. Within disability pension there are number of issues/concessions which have been given to central govt civilians employees but not extended to the armed forces. The armed forces personnel are defenitely at greater risk of disability than their civilian counter parts.

As of now the compensation package does not cater for early retirement and alternative employment till the age of 60 yrs nor adequate pension to compensate for loss of earning due to early superannuation.

The concept of one rank one pension which in simple terms means “ that two persons retiring in the same rank with same length of service should get the same pension irrespective of the date of retirement”. Nobody raised questions as to why OROP is not administrativelyfeasible as said by the committee of secretaries or why OROP cannot be given?.

In a system which is rank based how can a Brig who retired after 2006 draw more pension than a Maj Gen who retired prior to 1/1/2006. It amounts to undermining the rank of Maj Gen. Will the babus accept a Jt Secy/Dir drawing more pension than a Addl Secy? The answer is a big NO then how come for the armed forces the pensions are forced down. The pensions are not being implemented inspite of the Supreme Court orders. The Ex Defence Secretary should have answered that.

Capt Dawar should have been asked as to why OROP has not been implemented inspite of it being recommended by the Standing Committeee on Defence since 1983 and forming part of the political manifesto of all political parties with assurances both outside and inside the parliament that OROP would be given. There should have been Power point slides to educate the people of the nation as to what really OROP means, what are the pension differences in ranks pre and post 2006 and not comparing a soldier to a fireman entering a building on fire. For those who have doubts, 26/11 is a stark naked reality. One can see who enters in line of ‘fire’

A valuable 30 min were wasted on irrelevant issues not pertaining to OROP. The show was totally unlike Barkha.

Thanking you
With regards
Secy RDOA
Visit Us At :
http://sites.google.com/site/rdoaindia
http://rdoaindia.blogspot.com

Letter to Brakha Dutt by AVM Jk Pathania

-----------
From: JK Pathania [mailto:jkpathania@rediffmail.com]
Sent: None
To: barkha@ndtv.com
Cc: kamboj_cs@yahoo.co.in
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

Capt Davar....by Wg Cdr Kapoor

From: MG Kapoor [mailto:mgkapoor.1962@gmail.com]
Sent: 14 September 2010 12:22
To: Kamboj Chander
Subject: Re: ESM SITREP 14 SEP 10 - "REPORT MY SIGNAL" - EMAIL 443/2010 - (H to Z-1) - 14 SEP 2010 (USA CT)

Dear General Kadyan,

The views expressed by Captain Davar were NOT his views. He was mischievous and self indulging in denigerating the armed forces. I am not very sure if ever he was an army officer? Or was he cashiered or dismissed? He was telling all lies with impunity. He is a blur on Indian Army. We all may have dissentions but we would never denigerate our great armed force which we all served once.

In fact having seen the other side I would like to once again be an army officer in my next life.

I was only sorry that you permitted Davar to carry on with his lies and bluff.

With kind regards,

MG

NDTV...Views by Cdr PP Batra from USA

From: prem parkash batra [mailto:premprempb@rediffmail.com]
Sent: 14 September 2010 14:11
To: rajkadyan@yahoo.com
Cc: DELETED
Subject:
HONOUR=
CONSTITUTION GUARANTEE EVERY INDIAN TO LIVE WITH DIGNITY

Lt Gen Raj Kadyan/IESM

Dear Sir,

1. I would like to say that your assessment of NDTV discussions on OROP is conservatively near realism. And that makes you more determined to pursue single mindedly the IESM aim.

2. However please permit to speak on one point about the paramouncy of honour in Armed Forces which has cropped up in Emails. I have no legal background what so ever but in my two hours of thumping through the pages of our Constitution, I was surprised to see that only few linesare devoted to Armed Forces and that too partly to abridge our fundamental rights. But I do not recall word honour embedded there. But what the Fundamental Rights included is for Indian to live with-Dignity. Which if roughly translated would mean "IZZAT" and which we use very frequently in our defence parlance.

But Armed Forces fight for honour of the Country but they are not expected to fight for their honour.

3. If that be so then what ESM are asking is--IZZAN-MAAN-SMAAN- which
is our fundamental right and cannot be abridged.

You may like to look into. There are many legal luminaries in ESM ranks
who can throw better light.

4. Lastly please permit me again to suggest that Office Bearers of IESM
may like to acquire an official copy of Constitution and keep within reach. And no harm in leafing through. No harm in having legal sense because IESM has to take care of that front too.

With best regards,

Cdr Prem P Batra Retired.

Wg Cdr AB Bhushan from Singapore...on NDTV

From: Avula Bharath Bhushan [mailto:avulab@hotmail.com]
Sent: 13 September 2010 23:24
To: Kamboj Chander
Subject: Re: NDTV PROGRAMME ON OROP - RESPONSE BY MEMBERS - "REPORT MY SIGNAL" - EMAIL 441/2010 - (A to G) - 13 SEP 2010 (USA CT)

Dear sir
I am away in Singapore but watched the programme .

Just an idea why not consult with Shri Harish salve and have him on the panel if there is such a program in future as the word constitution was being used so freely .

It was a good show.
Wg cdr (Retd)A B Bhushan

NDTV Views by Lt Col SS Bhatia

From: SANTOKH BHATIA [mailto:santokhsb@gmail.com]
Sent: 14 September 2010 11:27
To: Kamboj Chander; rajkadyan@yahoo.com; kamboj_cs@yahoo.co.in
Cc: CSK551@DATAONE.IN
Subject: Re: ESM SITREP 14 SEP 10 - "REPORT MY SIGNAL" - EMAIL 443/2010 - (A to G) - 14 SEP 2010 (USA CT)

Respected Sir,
I suggest that since Brig KP Singh Deo has not watched the NDTV program,he could be requested to watch it on the following link and see for himself how confidently that pseudo Capt Davar has put across the Govt points of view.If these are his personal views, he has to be corrected.
http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/we-the-people-war-veterans-still-fighting/163348

I wish a speaker from IESL was also there to confirm if JCOs and ORs were happy with removal of 13 years old disparity (Termed as OROP by the Govt). May be it was pointed out and edited.
A rejoinder from IESL on the statement of Daver would be more appropriate.
The above mentioned link must be forwarded to max MPs and civilian friends.
LONG LIVE IESM
Regards.
Lt Col S.S.Bhatia,VETERAN

NDTV ..Views by Maj Gen VK Khanna

From: Vinod K Khanna [mailto:vinodkhanna.vinod@gmail.com]
Sent: 14 September 2010 02:26
To: Kamboj Chander
Cc: C S Kamboj; Kamboj Chander
Subject: OROP Program on NDTV

Dear Chander

Watched NDTV program with interest. Overall it off well but I am sharing a few points that came to my mind to make our case more effective for future. Here I would like to point out the contrarian views expressed by Prof Shah et al.

Some of the points raised by them are as follows:

A younger person would always earn more than an older person
(We should not labour on this point any more. This is the only sensible sentence spoken by Professor Shaw during the entire show. It was a very unwise question raised by some one – without thinking of the reply he would get; lacked forethought – person deserved this reply.

Professor spoke like a robot programmed by IAS, with no heart and no brain of his own. The programmer of the Robot does not know the difference between Fire Brigade and Army. What a shame. – Chander Kamboj)


Armed forces personnel signed a contract before joining service on a voluntary basis. They are governed by that contract and now cannot claim any special privilege due to risk factor.


There is nothing extraordinary about army risk since many other services like fire fighting personnel also face risks


Government is fully honoring the 6 CPC formula for fixation of pensions. If retired secretaries get 50 % of pay as pension, that is because they are on a fixed pay


Though government is committed to a separate pay commission for the services, you have to wait another nine years for it take effect (six years before it is convened and another three for its implementation)


There is no legal obligation of government to grant OROP


OROP would be disastrous for government finances since others would also demand it


There is nothing unique about armed forces as they are just one category of government servants


The present UPA government has done more for the services that any previous administration

I feel we should put our heads together and find suitable answers to these and many other questions that may be raised as also as to why OROP should only be for the services.

I am afraid emotional arguments would have limited utility and not carry much weight with so called neutral audiences

Kind regards
Maj Gen Vinod K Khanna

NDTV ..Views by Maj Gen DN Varma

From: D N Varma [mailto:varmadn@gmail.com]
Sent: 14 September 2010 00:26
To: Kamboj Chander
Subject: Re: NDTV PROGRAMME ON OROP - RESPONSE BY MEMBERS - "REPORT MY SIGNAL" - EMAIL 441/2010 - (H to Z-2) - 13 SEP 2010 (USA CT)

Chander.
Our case on the Barkha Dutt program on NDTV was well presented.

One point though; however strongly we may feel on the 'honour' and sentimental reasons, we need to be hard headed also. For example, issue of retirement age was taken up but not forcefully enough.

It is not only OR but JCOs and specially officers also retire at early age not because they are not good enough but because pyramid is very steep due to operational reasons, structure etc.

We could work out statistics to show how it affects their pension vis a vis the civilians.

I hope we will get what we deserve viz OROP.

Regards.
DN (Maj Gen DN Varma, Gurgaon)

NDTV PROGRAMME ON OROP by R Adm Malhan

From: sushma malhan [mailto:malhansushma@hotmail.com]
Sent: 14 September 2010 05:55
To: Kamboj Chander
Subject: RE: NDTV PROGRAMME ON OROP - RESPONSE BY MEMBERS - "REPORT MY SIGNAL" - EMAIL 441/2010 - (H to Z-1) - 13 SEP 2010 (USA CT)
Dear Veterans,
like most of you I also watched the NDTV prog on OROP.
I have only the follwing arguments to support our case –

1 OROP is a commitment of the successive govts and the civil servants should find the ways and means to implement this rather than put legal and other obstacles to it.

2 when the lady gave the argument that OROP is tenable for the Secretaries to the govt of India because they get fixed pay and not to others because they have a scale of pay and it would tentamount to revising their salaries from retrospective effect ( when they were not in service ), our argument shoud have been---- aren't the ''fixed pays of the old retired secretaries also being revised retrospectively ( when they were not in service ) to enable them to get the same pension as th recently retired ones? How is that legally tenable?

Jai Hind

K L Malhan
Rear Admiral ( Retd )

OROP programme on NDTV on 12 Sep by Air Cmde Pannu

From: T Pannu [mailto:tpannu@gmail.com]
Sent: 14 September 2010 09:44
To: REPORT MY SIGNAL(CS Kamboj)
Subject: OROP programme on NDTV on 12 Sep
Dear Brig Kamboj,

Sorry for late reaction; had been pre-occupied on something urgent.

Have read with interest comments by various ESM on the NDTV programme. While there has been positive appreciation by majority, a few have expressed dissatisfaction; wonder what were the expectations of the latter.
It was nice of General Oberoi to have intimated in advance that the programme stands edited to a great extent. Inspite of the editing, what came out was excellent. The aim of creating awareness among public, specially the younger generation, regarding ill treatment being meted out to armed forces was, by and large, achieved.
There is no guarantee, however, whether it would make any dent on the mind-set of bureaucrats, few of whom seem to have sworn that they would not let OROP come thru.
Notwithstanding, we need to follow Gita to do our duty without caring for the outcome. I think, IESM deserves appreciation for relentlessly following this path; God will help.

Looking at the event dispassionately, all the speakers were at their best in their assigned roles. Gen Kadyan & Gen Oberoi stood out by showing grace in remaining calm, yet conveyed the message very effectively and meaningfully.
Kudos to Shri Rajeev Chandrashekhar MP, who in my opinion, could be termed as "Star Performer". Single handedly, he is proving a big force behind us; we owe our gratitude to him and should wish him "All the best in life".
Kicks to Capt Davar, who seems to be the biggest stooge of AICC. Looks like, he is brainwashed; wonder whether he served in Indian Army or some other one. Less said about him, the better.
Mrs Indu Liberhan and Prof Ajay Shah appeared to have been given a mandate or hired by the bureaucracy to tow their line and, let us admit, they did their job as they were expected.
Incidently, Mrs Liberhan is not from IAS; she is most likely from IDAS cadre. In mid 90s(before my retirement), we had stayed in the same block in Kaka Nagar and she appealed to us as a good human being. Probably, she was now cast in a different role by the IAS, who like to fire from others' shoulders.
Cmde Uday Bhaskar's interjection was really superb; Mr Manvender Singh, Capt Sidhu, Lt Pandey etc and the younger generation added spice to the show.
Last but not the least, it could not have been possible without Ms Burkha Dutt; she is really too good and adorable; God bless her!!!

Let us now think of what next?
Regards.
T Pannu
Air Cmde (Retd)

Views by AVM RP Mishra

From: RP Mishra [mailto:avmrpm@gmail.com]
Sent: 14 September 2010 00:30
To: Brig CS Kamboj
Subject: RTI
Dear Brigadier Kamboj,
Please refer to your remarks –

"(It is high time that IESM create a cell for ‘RTI’ and ‘Starred Questions’.
These two are very powerful tools of democracy.
Number of times this suggestion has come up, but IESM has not acted on it.
The forthcoming meeting of the IESM Core Group should discuss this issue and finalise the arrangements.
It is not necessary that all tasks must be performed by the Executive Committee of the IESM.
Kindly consider co-opting other ESM and form this Cell. - Chander Kamboj)"
I have already asked following information through my application under RTI Act with reference to Report of Committee of Secretaries on One Rank One Pension and Related issues –
1. Para 6.9 of the Report. Since financial effects must have been worked out based on number of pensioners, number of Lt Generals and equivalent in the other two services, Additional Secretaries, Chief Commissioners(Income Tax and Customs), Additional DGs of Police and equivalent civilian officers affected by grant of higher pension may be informed for each category separately.


2. Para 6.10. Financial implications on recurring expenditure for each category mentioned above may be informed.


3.. Para 9. Financial implications on account of arrears due to bringing Lt Generals and equivalent to grade 67000-79000 may be provided separately for all categories mentioned above.


I have also asked how many Major Generals and there equivalents in the other two services, Joint Secretaries and equivalent of categories mentioned above were drawing pension as on 31 Dec 1995.


I have also enquired as to the pension fixation formula for Defence officers and civil services officers in 1960? How was it related to maximum pay of the rank? Was pension of civil services officers also fixed based on maximum of pay or as a percentage of pay at the time of retirement.

My application was addressed to CPIO Cabinet Secretariat as the Committee was headed by Cabinet Secretary. He forwarded the same to CPIO Deptt of ESW and Deptt of Expenditure. Deptt of Expenditure referred it back to Deptt of ESW stating that they did not provided Secretariat to the Committee. Deptt of ESW again referred it back to Deptt of Expenditure who have again sent it back to Deptt of ESW.

Only Deptt of Pension and Pension Welfare, Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions, to whom query was referred to by Deptt of ESW, has provided information for civil service officers. As per the information, with effect from 22 April 1960, those who had completed 10 years or more of service were entitled for pension. Pension was 10/60 of average emoluments but not exceeding 2000 a year, after completion of 10 years of service, 24.5/60 of average emoluments but not exceeding 4900 a year on completion of 24.5 years of service, going up to 30/60 of average emoluments but not exceeding 5000 a year for those retiring after 25 or more years of service. Other Departments to whom Deptt of ESW had transferred the points raised by me, have either referred it back to them or given insufficient information. For example, PCDA Allahabad has said they do not have any information about number of Major Generals and equivalent.

I have already preferred first appeal to the Appellate Authorities of CGDA and Deptt of ESW.

Regards
AVM RP Mishra

Lt Cdrs Case with AFT - Another Victory

Dear Members,


We are pleased to inform that we have won the case for the enhanced Pension payable to Lt Cdrs, filed by Cdr Avtar Singh and well fought by Cmde Skhjinder Singh.The judgment was pronounced this morning by the tribunal bench headed by Justice Mathur and Lt Gen M Naidu. Copy of the judgment will be available only in a couple of days and the same will also be promulgated for your info.


The Lt Commanders will now be entitled to a pension of 50% of what the serving Lt Commander in service are drawing. It may make a difference of about Rs 4000 in their pensions.


We were awaiting the outcome of this case to file the Case for the Cmdes / Brigs etc and the needful will be done shortly. Cmde Sukhjinder will be steering this case and NFDC will also be a litigant.


This is another battle won for the Veterans with the help of the judicial process but there are good reasons to believe that as is now the norm, the MOD will file an SLP.


Vice Admiral Harinder Singh,
C 26, Sector 23,
Noida 201301

0120-2412412 9811668776

Way Ahead by Veteran Nawab Heer from Punjab

Dear All,


On behalf of all ESM organisations and IESM we all congratulate Capt Sidhu,Gen Raj Kadyan,Gen Oberoi,Commander Bhasker ,Malvendra Singh and MP Chander Shekhar.
They have done a wonderful job.


We were working behind the scene for the last few days with CNBC through Bharkha Datt.More than Veterasn who participated we are also proud of Cantonment Kids(CK,s)i.e. MP Chander Shekhar,Malvendra Singh and Barkha Datt.


Now we are nearing it.We are providing common brief on behalf of all ESM,s of Punjab to Punjab MP,s.We will request all other states to do so.We are convinced that during next session of Parliament there will be a debate on OROP.we must all now work on our MP,s.General Satbir informed me that they have already contacted 35 MP,s in Delhi we need to contact all 542.


I being coordinator of ESM,s of Punjab having been given powers to "Declare HUKA PANI BAND" of any ESM working against cause of ESM,today having been convinced that Capt Parveen Davar EX Deccan Horse need to be declared as 'Jai Chand Of ESM".So any ESM dealing with him will be annoying all ESM community.I will request all to boycott Capt Davar from all social get together in Delhi and elsewhere for his stance totally against ESM. He is socially boycotted till he renders apology to all ESM of India.

One lesson which emerges out of the debate that rather than depending on only emotions and sentiments we need to find real answers for two questions.One,legality part of OROP.Two,an analogy given by professor that over a period of time differences in pension likely to appear between son and father retiring in same rank.Please do not start shooting me;I am suggesting we must have real time answers.Somehow I felt that our Generals although gave very good points ,but were not that prepared for the few points raised by the enemy camp.In future we have to be prepared.For the debate in parliament we need some well read and informed Generals like Gen R and few others irrespective of ranks.

CK,s are our HR for future ventures.With all respect to Barkha,it seemed that she was also biased against us,unless it is my tainted mind.MP Chnader Shekhar and Capt Sidhu carried the day.

Request to all ESM. reinforce success by holding all types of protests including Candle Laight Vigil throught India.Nothing goes un-noticed.Please unite irrespective IESM/IESL or any other ESM org.Rise above party lines,my request to friend davar also


Regards,


Veteran Nawab
__._,_.___

NDTV..Views by MAj Gen K Khorana

From: Krishen Khorana [mailto:kkrishen@hotmail.com]
Sent: 13 September 2010 02:45
To: Barkha Dutt
Cc: DELETED

Subject: We The People - 12 September 2010. Comments and Suggestion

Dear Ms Barkha Dutt,
Hope you find the time to go through the following write up.
Maj Gen (Retd) K Khorana
2, Sector 2
Panchkula.


“We The People” – 12 September 2010. Comments and Suggestion.

Who says money and honour are not linked?

Only combination of the two gives status. How can one forget that in India, money alone can accord power and status? And yet, linkage of money with honour is neither dishonourable nor something new in society and history. However, using it as a clever argument and reddest of red herring the IAS and others of their ilk scored a brownie point over services representatives’ assertion.

It is time that our governments and the civil society stops treating the army as “good man the laaltain”. The “laaltain” must be prevented from extinguishing.
Tell me, would you accord the same respect, honour and what have you to say Ambanis, Birlas and Tatas sans their money? Or how many times would you invite Pratibha Patil, Sharad Pawar, Lallu Yadav, Sushma Swaraj, Paswan and their likes to your channel studios had it not been for their status in civil society? Status, honour, money and power are all interlinked.

All segments of society serve humanity. We all understand that. But in each profession (doctors, teachers, lawyers etc) has individual clients, from whom they obtain remuneration/fee as per their personal skill and volition. Armed forces have the whole nation as its client (dealing with the nation through its elected representatives, irrespective of their political affiliations). But ultimately it has to and must remain responsible to the whole nation. Equally, it becomes the responsibility of the nation through its elected representatives to ensure that needs of the military are fulfilled; they are not in a postion like in other professions, to demand directly for themselves from the vast nation. Some panellists were ignorant on such matters.

Today, our Supreme Court, as one of the pillars of our democracy (feudalistic in nature), felt it necessary to frequently indict the country’s executive - “don’t treat soldiers like beggars”, “don’t make soldiers run from pillar to post with their grievances”, “don’t create classes with a class” etc etc. Despite indictments, our Government goes back, again and again, to the Supreme Court to reverse its judgements in favour of soldiers. With what intent? That attitude of the government alone has proved the proverbial straw for soldiers, particularly the retired. In their ‘peaceful’ agitation mode, they have begun to submit their memoranda signed with their own blood. Mind you that in itself is a violent act. One wonders what it would be next to make the government(s) and civil society to listen and solve retired soldiers’ grievances.

The argument by one panellist (a bureaucrat) that cabinet secretary, chiefs and others drawing ‘fixed scales’ are only getting 50 percent of pay last drawn was utter hogwash. Cleverly done, it made all pre 2006 retirees the beneficiary. The dispensation gave benefit to almost 70 percent of the entire IAS cadre recruited directly, commencing 1947! The benefit would not go to beyond double digits for those who served the armed forces. And in any case, what stopped the government from ‘fixed scales’ for every rank of the Indian Army, from 2nd Lieutenant to Lt General (40000 to 80000)!

The biggest fiddle of 6th CPC was sadly missed out. Historically, whether during British Raj or post independence, every rank was paid pension according to one’s rank; higher the rank, higher the pension. In one stroke, in 6th CPC, ranks were done away with and minimum of “pay band”, irrespective of the rank, introduced! From lt colonel to lt general, all get the same basic pension, with minor differences introduced for argument’s sake and to technically defeat Apex Court judgements. One begins to wonder as to what kind of human beings are there in our bureaucracy and the government!

OROP was a simple in its inception, when it came up in the eighties. Many governments agreed for its implementation. In a contemporaneous environment, with every delay (over decades now) and the governments’ baulking at Supreme Court judgments in favour of retired soldiers, the issue is now seen as one of great injustice, hence highly emotive too. It would be a folly to let the matter linger any further.

Suggested Solution.
1. Government should immediately obey and implement judgements, orders and instructions passed by Indian Supreme Court, as it pertains to pay and pension of retired armed forces personnel, in LETTER AND SPIRIT, and not just technically to hoodwink the Apex Court and affected people.
2. As an interim measure, the government should immediately place and implement “Fixed Formula” for basic pensions of retired soldiers, at a scale of say between 85-90 percent of basic pension drawn by each rank retiring after 2006. The said ‘fixed formula’ should then be further refined by the next pay commission, central or for armed forces, on the lines of OROP.
3. Armed Forces Pay Commission for serving and retired soldiers to be convened by January 2011, delinking it from any periodicity and to be held on the basis of inflation and cost index. Report to be submitted by June 2011 and implemented by December 2011, after approval of Parliament in its winter session.
4. Military Pensions Formulae be converted into a law and built into The Constitution of India. (Away from any political or bureaucratic consideration).
5. Above formulations to ensure that armed forces remain apolitical, efficient and clean.

Suffice it to say that the present logjam must be broken, for the good of the country and the armed forces.

K Khorana
Maj Gen (Retd)

NDTV..Views by Brig Arun Mishra

From: arun mishra [mailto:arunkumar.mishra@hotmail.com]
Sent: 13 September 2010 03:02
To: Kamboj Chander
Subject: RE: OROP PROGRAMME ON NDTV 24X7, FEED BACK - "REPORT MY SIGNAL" - EMAIL 438/2010 - (H to Z-3) - 12 SEP 2010 (USA CT)

Dear Brig Kamboj,
I watched the show.

Army Cdrs who are entitled to OROP should be approached to lend their weight to the struggle. It is a well thought out move of IAS cadre to pluck them out of the batte by putting them in OROP cat.Unwillin


We should leave out the Honour part in this battle as it is a very intangible factor.


Using RTI we get the pension burden and connected population of both the retired IAS and retired Defence forces officers, then work out pro rata share of both. It will make public the paltry amount we get. Data and DATA alone will make you get the better of IAS cadre.


Form a RTI cell to get all sorts of relevant data from the govt.
(It is high time that IESM create a cell for ‘RTI’ and ‘Starred Questions’.
These two are very powerful tools of democracy.
Number of times this suggestion has come up, but IESM has not acted on it.
The forthcoming meeting of the IESM Core Group should discuss this issue and finalise the arrangements.
It is not necessary that all tasks must be performed by the Executive Committee of the IESM.
Kindly consider coopting other ESM and form this Cell. - Chander Kamboj)



Arun Mishra Brig (Retd)
C 9/9122, Vasant kunj, New Delhi 110070
+91 11 26896459, +91 9811803333
-----------

NDTV..Views by Veteran Ram Gulrajani

From: Ram Gulrajani ramgulrajani@gmail.com
Sent: 13 September 2010 02:27
To: IESM Kamboj CS, Brig
Subject: WE THE PEOPLE

Dear Brig

Barkha Dutt's programme WE THE PEOPLE on the issue of OROP telecast on 12 Sep has kindled the conscience of the people of India. I watched this programme sitting among civilian at a gathering, where most of them were youngsters (age group 20-30) and no one knew that I was a retired armyman among them.

The reactions were strong and cent percent in favour of veterans. The case of Capt Sidhu stirred up strong emotions and I could see some wet eyes among young people. The no-nonsense stand of Mr. Rajeev Chandrashekhar, MP, was very much appreciated. One cheeky girl even had the temerity to say Chandrashekhar is as handsome as he is bold and forthright.

Many who were not aware of this simmering problem of OROP were now educated. Undoubtedly there was respect for soldiers, concern for their problems and the injustice meted out them for the difficult jobs they do.

I personally missed Gen Satbir Singh, who would have confronted the anti-OROP lobby with more facts and figures. This is to wish him quick recovery with prayers for his long and healthy life. His role in this movement is matchless.

Over-all, this programme from the stables of NDTV will have an impact on the government, babus and politicians. Its the beginning. Barkha's reaction to Gen Kadyan's remark that we are holding peaceful protests, was a muted testimony of the fear every babu must be hiding that what if this kind of trained force comes down to violent agitations.

I think the message has gone to all concerned loud and clear that defence forces are not happy and something need to be done fast.

Veteran Ram Gulrajani.

NDTV...Views by Col BK Rai

From: Bhanu Kumar Rai [mailto:bkrai2005@yahoo.com]
Sent: 13 September 2010 07:16
To: Kamboj Chander
Subject: Re: OROP PROGRAMME ON NDTV 24X7, FEED BACK - "REPORT MY SIGNAL" - EMAIL 438/2010 - (H to Z-2) - 12 SEP 2010 (USA CT)

I feel that the programme anchored by Barkha was very good and this initiative is on the right track.

We should contact Arnav Goswami of Times Today and Rahul Kanwal of Headlines Today after a few weeks and try to have a couple of rounds.

I spent my formative years in the Army and then became a technocrat and also a pseudo bureaucrat, then an advisor to leading business houses for several years, I tend to think a bit differently from thoroughbred Soldiers.

I feel that making comparison with IAS/IPS is demeaning. It opens the Babu's rule book and confirms what is not openly stated, and clearly accepted by the Congress Party that the bureaucrats form the basic frame of the Government and all others are essential but inferior.

We should strive at emphasising the unique work culture and the values of the Armed Forces and strive for a separate Pay Commission now.

The attitude of the spokesman of the congress: Mr Davar was very disappointing.
He thinks that it is axiomatic to wait for a few more years for the next pay commission.
Why?
It appears that he came with a brief from the AICC.

Also, as submitted by me earlier we must remain apolitical and not align with any party while welcoming support from enlightened politians like Mr Rajjev Chandrasekhar MP as individual leaders.

The alignment with BJP only hardens the attitude of other parties opposed to them.

-BK Rai
(Col BK Rai, Former Secretary to Government of India, 3rd Graduates Course of the IMA, Premature Retirement in 1970)

WHAT WE NEED TO DO NOW by Amit Bhadhuri

From: abhadhuri924@googlemail.com
To: kamboj_cs@yahoo.co.in
CC: RSingh305@aol.com; ajbjaini@hotmail.com; tashraj@rediffmail.com
Subject: WHAT WE NEED TO DO NOW
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:59:19 +0100

Dear Brig. Kamboj Sir,

I had the opportunities to watch the long awaited "We the People" programme 4-1/2 hours before the viewers in India.

It was a good programme and the good feelings I have on this occasion, that, NDTV certainly broke its traditions.

What made me extremely happy, that, we still have a few good MPs like Mr. Chandrasekhar. He has a dynamic and formidable personality, has a very strong conviction and an excellent communicator. He truly stands out from those many
parliamentarians, who we see regularly in the parliament behaving no better than street thugs (sadly they are mostly from certain states), bring shame to the nation and always a helpless Speaker to deal with them. Such behavior from parliamentarians is simply unthinkable even for a minute in the Western democracy or where I live. And until we fill up that gap between the east and west, we will simply stay behind.

We need to develop a good rapport with Mr. Chandrasekhar. We need to engage preferably a contact point with excellent communication skills from us to have regular contacts with him. We need to identify more such MPs and work with them. We are not in KHAKI anymore, therefore, we should be proud to expressing our political views honestly in the best interests of our country because "Nothing is above the country". We need to work and support the
Pro-nationalistic political parties, who support our causes. Then only politicians will recognize the value of Armed and Para-Military forces instead of just using them 24+7, a skilled practice of the politicians in power since 1947.

It was heartening to watch Gen. Oberoi willingness for his grandson joining the Army.

Finally, I only hope, May All Mighty offer some common sense to Prof. Shah, Mr. Davar and Mrs. Liberhan if not for IESM but for the sake of the country.

With warm regards,
Amit
Amit Bhadhuri
Former CISF Officer (settled in UK)

NDTV....Views by Sgt.S.Kanthiah

From: Kandiah S [mailto:kandiahs81@yahoo.com]
Sent: 13 September 2010 09:42
To: Kamboj Chander
Subject: Re: OROP PROGRAMME ON NDTV 24X7, FEED BACK - "REPORT MY SIGNAL" - EMAIL 438/2010 - (H to Z-3) - 12 SEP 2010 (USA CT)

Dear Sir,
I was fully merged with the NDTV show on Sunday. It was marvelously arranged and conducted by our Mdm.Burka Dutt, Hats off to her. She was full of enthusiasm and action, throwing valuable questions to the participants.The show has awakened many of our ESM brothers.

The way Capt.Siddu, with one artificial hand, was narrating his stories and fight for about 40 years to get his pension, that too a meager amount of Rs.240/, made me shed tears.

Then the Havildar expressing his inability to educate, bring up his children with his meager pay/pension also a pity. All these happenings are brought to light by this wonderful TV program.

Our beloved Generals Oberoi and Kadyan were very soft spoken to the actual facts to the public. We can not refrain from appreciating our MP. from Karnataka , Mr.Rajeev Chanraseker for his strong support for the veterans.

I thank one and all of the participants for their very useful and lively interactions in the Show. We hope to view such lively shows in future also to open the Eyes of MOD and the Govt, particularly the Bureaucrats..

With Greetings,
Ex.Sgt.S.Kanthiah, Liaison Officer.
Exwel Trust, Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu

NDTV...Views by Cmde Lk Batra

From: lokesh batra [mailto:batra_lokesh@yahoo.com]
Sent: 13 September 2010 20:06
To: undisclosed recipients:
Subject: Please spread Link of Video of NDTV OROP Programme

14 September 2010

Dear Veterans,

In democracy it is healthy to express opinion and deabate the issue and that is exactly what happened.

But I confess Hony. Lt. (Veteran) Lt Pandey takes the cake.

In my view OROP programme was a Grand Success.

Any debate which is one sided is no good. It does not give food for thought to viewers. It gives the impression of being rigged.

In my interaction with media, when ever I release an RTI expose, I always insist on reporters to include the views/comments of other side/government functionaries.

Media is suppose to play neutral role.

However in OROP programme, NDTV clearly appeared to have favoured OROP cause.

First they organised the programme and had done a lot of research.

In invite list who favoured OROP outnumbered those against it.

In audience list (in studio) 100 percent invitees were for OROP and that too youth brigade in majority. I bet most of them were ‘Fauji Bachaa’s' and their friends. Good for us. Youth is the right choice to carry our message to the civil society.

Time and again the anchor (Barkha) cross examined those who made points against OROP. Davar was badly ticked when used the word ‘sympathise’.

Probably those who have participated in such media programmes in the past and have experience, would know that it is not fish market. However in this case, those present in the studio during recording know passions were running high when ever any one spoke against OROP.

To restrict the telecast to allotted time of 50 minutes, the editing was inevitable.

I reiterate the programme facilitated a 'Leap Forward' to our cause.

I must say, we have to be tolerant to criticism if we have to create Public Opinion for OROP cause.

I humbly propose circulating the link of NDTV Programme on OROP to the civil society.

http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/news/we-the-people-war-veterans-still-fighting/163348


Please do that by sending the link to your contacts in the civil world with your write up. Request them to pass it on…. And make a long chain...

I have posted it to all my contacts in India and abroad and also various RTI Groups. Soon this link will be posted on Face book and other social networking sites.

These are my views and I am open to criticism and suggestions.

All my communications are in Public Domain.

Best
Lokesh
{Commodore Lokesh. K. Batra (retd.)}
Social & RTI Activist
BringChange

www.bringchamge.org

NDTV OROP SHOW -THE BACKSTAGE STORY AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE by Hony Lt Pandey

From: Kameshwar Pandey pandeykameshwar@gmail.com
Sent: 13 September 2010 10:20
To: rajkadyan@yahoo.com; satbirsm@gmail.com; Sharan Ahuja; kamboj_cs@yahoo.co.in; Kirit Joshipura; Aditya Jaini
Cc: CoreGpIESM@yahoogroups.com
Subject:

NDTV OROP SHOW -
THE BACKSTAGE STORY AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE

My Dear Respected Sirs and Colleagues,

In my opinion , the recent NDTV show on OROP was a success in many ways. Thanks to the internet, mostly everyone on RMS has been able to see the recording of the show which was finally aired after significant edit. The show has been already discussed, criticized, appreciated and everything in between. We should, however, realize that the show was conducted by NDTV (a standard sponsor funded and government pleasing TV News Channel) and not by IESM. So the participants had little control on the way it was being conducted, IESM included.

What I wanted to draw everybody's attention to is the real scenario at the studio while the said program was being recorded. I would also mention why the knowledge of the studio environment is important for everyone to know.

There is a very specific term in the media fraternity known as 'Sensitization'. What it means is that a certain group of people is 'sensitized' or made aware of the issues, problems and challenges faced by another community/group/part of the public. NGOs, corporations and even governments spend significant sums of money to mould the opinion of the target masses in their favor by doing such campaigns.

Now at the NDTV studio, something similar to that, on a smaller scale, was carried out by Col Joshipura Sir and self before the program started. We made small huddles of other participants of the discussion and told them what OROP really is and why its such a gross injustice towards our veterans. Especially the younger lot in the audiences seemed to understand this concept very easily. Probably because they have an open mind and do not have any vested interests in actions against the defence forces.

What we were able to accomplish by this, even before the program started, was that almost everyone in the studio (minus the vested interests) was already on our side. You had to see it to believe it. One word, and I mean one word, against OROP or the veterans was not tolerated by the crowd. This was primarily the reason why Capt. Davar was unable to complete even one single sentence properly. And why the others (the lady IAS and others) were scared to say anything against us. They were making attempts but they were scared. You can see it on their faces.

The environment in the studio was mostly split in two emotions -- Anger and Disappointment. Disappointment that the government which is supposed to take care of the military that takes care of the nation is so brutally ignoring the very men and women that gave the nation the best years of their lives. Anger - because if something is not done soon, something is got to give...

Gen Kadyan and Sh. Uday Bhaskar as well as Sh. Rajeev Chandrashekhar were calm, composed and organized like they always are and put forward the points in an effective way despite provocation by the bureaucrats and co. Self, with help from the audience, provided some artillery fire!

What you all must also know and understand is the fact that since certain of the panel's individuals were direct representatives of the government (Capt Davar included) and so they were being given a LOT LOT LOT of footage. It was easily visible. On the contrary when our people were speaking, they were getting the mic literally for seconds! It was frustrating but hey, you have to make the best of what you have, right!

Now you can ask me why is this important at all? When it was not captured by the cameras and not aired on television why is this even worth talking about.

To answer that, I will have to direct your attention to another specific term used in advertising. Its called 'viral marketing'. This is a well known fact that viral marketing is on of the most effective and fastest spreading modes of publicity. What it means is that news/opinion is spread virally from one person to another then to another then to another. Also known as word of mouth publicity.

Now NDTV can edit out the conversations which were taking place in the background and thorugh mice. They can choose to not air the parts many of us spoke. But what they cannot take away from us is the stir we created in those 50 or so people present in that room. They cannot take away the fresh and new perspective and knowledge that they now have about the armed forces, the government, how we are being treated and the white lies the government sells. especially the younger people and other ESM not yet associated with IESM.

And guess what, this is going to spread virally. From one person to another from one mouth to another. From a youth to another youth. And while this might seem or sound insignificant at this time, this will go a long way in strengthening our movement from the inside. To strengthen the roots of this mission. To connect with the youth and the general public.

Speaking to people at the studio was specially effective because they were all well educated and well connected people and probably keep interacting with many people. So that will help.

Once again the program, in my opinion was very successful. Of course, as with everything, it could have been better as some have pointed out. But I think it was good and I think the message was sent across. I do hope that such programs keep happening and that we reach our goal at the earliest.

I thank you for taking the time to go through this email. Much appreciated.

Yours truly,

Kameshwar

--
Kameshwar Pandey
Sub/Maj Hony. Lt. (Veteran)

230, Pocket-1,
DDA SFS Flats, Sector-1,
Dwarka, New Delhi - 110 075

Cell : +91-9811059825
Home: +91-11-3296 6701
email: pandeykameshwar@gmail.com

NDTV..Views by Maj Gen Raj Mehta

From: raj mehta raj_s_mehta12@yahoo.com
Sent: 12 September 2010 22:04
To: REPORT MY SIGNAL (CS Kamboj)
Subject: OROP ON WE,THE PEOPLE SEP 12, 2010


Dear Sir,
The Barkha Dutt show last night can be seen at different levels of objective scrutiny.

Let me start with the most important first. We,The People is a well followed program in terms of TRP rating, bureaucratic and political eyeballs that watch the program, and the iconic standards attained by it over the years (though some would argue that the format, with its closet full of the same old "experts" and social gadflies that are part of the Delhi glitterati/chatterati, is becoming stale and needs a serious makeover). Barkha is remarkably gifted, feisty and loves the camera but it is only once in a while that she allows content to override her by now well patented, sometimes hectoring, even intimidating presentation style.

Yesterday, though, she was the Barkha of old who delivered magic during the Kargil War. She sensitively allowed content to override her basic "take charge" personality and with great visual, emotional and mental impact.


I do think, sir, that, with one fell swoop, she has given OROP more visibility and intensity than our years of struggle since 1982 to make Governance aware of its legitimacy.

Thats the good Barkha of old; the spritely, effervescent motor mouth and intense storm trooper who covered Kargil to world class standards (I suspect she really set standards during that coverage); that at a time when (as she mentioned in a post-war interview) she was menstruating, closeted in a bunker with bravehearts some of whom later died.

The next in line for scrutiny were Capt Sidhu, the amputee Paratrooper brave heart. The program rightly gave him a standing ovation, and, in so doing, panned the sheepish faces of the bureaucrats present to put up the Governments poorly choreographed, obtuse, single point defence. They appeared taken aback by the spontaneous response of the studio audience in empathising with this brave soldier and his 30 year old fight for justice.

Gen Vijay Oberoi was his usual assured self and was a treat to watch, though the program constraints made him speak more on behalf of the war wounded than on OROP. His contribution on OROP came more by way of interjections than original content.
(Gen Vijay Oberoi is President War Wounded Foundation. He has been fighting for the dues of war wounded with the Government and in the Courts. One must appreciate that first deserving cases are the war widows followed by war wounded. The rest of the ESM can only come after these categories – Chander Kamboj).

On a par really, were the steller contributions of the Independant MP, Mr Rajeev Chandrasekhar and Mr Manvendra Singh, a TA officer and journalist (he is the son of Mr Jaswant Singh of the BJP). It was a delight to see them tear the Governments specious (and the Congress representative, Capt Davar's) arguments to shreds and with logic rather than emotion.


The IESM stand on OROP was put across with dignity and quiet assurance by Gen Kadian, though one would have wished for some forceful clarifications from him on the issues being raised by the out-of-sync "expert" Mr Shah, Ms Indu, the senior financial bureaucrat and Capt Davar.

I do feel sir, that the gains are that the case now has the nation's attention, rather than just some people. We have to thank the IESM for that, as well as NDTV for providing the platform for giving the issue truly national coverage. Barkha Dutt, a big thank you.

The areas of improvement are clear: Capt Davar's deliberate reference to the fact (unchallenged by the panel) that IESL was "happy" with the awards by Government implies that we need greater unity between our ESM lobbies.
The clearly visible hard stands displayed those representing the UPA viewpoint (including the unfeeling economic "expert") means that a long battle is ahead and needs great circumspection as well as a well thought out plan to win the OROP campaign instead of yesterdays battle.

I do also feel that our key points in favour of OROP need to be prioritized and put down in precise language that every one; the Government, Supreme Court, common man, ESM can all understand. Once finalised, these points should be our common user language for getting OROP through.

We also need to have irrefutable figures on who all have OROP benifits. It appeared to me that we need rather more research on this issue.


With warm regards,
Gen Raj Mehta (Mohali, Punjab)