Proposal to Pay Commission relevent to Veterans
CHAPTER VII
NON –EFFECTIVE BENEFITS
GENERAL
7.1.
Ex-Servicemen are one of our most visible points of contact with the society.
Their wellbeing, living standards, health concerns, success and failures are seen and
analysed by the society. Most of the Ex-Servicemen, one encounters today, are a
bitter lot. Memories of hardships and bloody encounters with the enemy are still fresh
and so are the difficulties faced in surviving in his daily struggle with life. He fought
and triumphed death, but it is life after retirement that is actually draining his will to
survive. It is no surprise that today, soldiers who retire early die early.
7.2.
For Non Effective Benefits to be meaningful it is essential that they are
designed to address the shortcomings and provide a life of dignity to a retired
soldier. He is our pride and it is no mean achievement that wherever he has been
tasked, he has performed admirably. Indian soldier is looked upon as a saviour and
a friend in all calamities, internal crisis situations and even in missions abroad.
7.3.
This Chapter on Non-Effective Benefits is divided into the following sections:(a)
Section- 1 Evolution of Present Pension System in the armed forces.
(b)
Section - 2 Retiring Pension.
(c)
Section - 3 Family Pensions.
(d)
Section - 4
Disability Pension Awards.
(e)
Section - 5
Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity and Ex-gratia Awards.
(f)
Section - 6
Miscellaneous Issues.
SECTION – 1
EVOLUTION OF PRESENT PENSION SYSTEM IN THE ARMED FORCES
Historical Background
7.4.
Rational Scheme of Pension was introduced for officers in 1920
encompassing service element, rank, service in the Indian Army and minimum
qualifying service of 18 years. Pension was extended to the Indian Commissioned
Officers in 1935 on slab basis. This system continued till superseded by
recommendations of Armed Forces Pension Review Committee (AFPRC). The
range of pension that was applicable to defence forces was very wide with officers
drawing pension at 100% for 2/Lt, 83.7% for Colonel and Lt Gen getting 31.8% of the
last pay drawn as against civilian pension ranging from 50 % at it maximum to 22.2%
minimum.
7.5.
AFPRC formulated some guidelines in structuring an equitable pension
formula for the Armed Forces. Consequently, on acceptance of these and after a
series of discussions between the Armed Forces and the Government, new pension
structure was introduced. This reduced the pension range to 78.5 % for a 2nd
Lieutenant, 45% for colonel and 32.7% for Lieutenant Generals. Standard length of
service to earn pension in each rank was also suggested from 20 years for a 2/Lt, 26
years for a Colonel to 30 years for a Lieutenant General AFPRC also recommended
deduction of pension in the event of shortfall in standard years of service, the same
was accepted by the government and implemented along with other
recommendations from 01Jun 1953.
Existing Shortcomings
7.6.
Undeniably, every pay commission has resulted in forward march towards a
more balanced pension structure, but there are large gaps that need to be filled and
issues addressed to the satisfaction of large number of pensioners. The
inadequacies in the present system and the recommendations are considered in
each section separately. Long term objective should be to provide ready social
acceptability to ex-servicemen on their return to civil life. Principles for formulating a
comprehensive compensation package must address financial security, social equity
and eradicate disparities which are harming the interests of Defence Service
Personnel due to early retirement.
Broad Principles for Proposed Pension Structure
7.7.
Keeping the above factors in mind, the following broad principles that should
determine the formulation of an equitable pension structure are postulated: (a)
Principle of Social Equity. A person is looked upon in society based
on employment, rank and earning capacity. Hence protection of existing living
standard needs to be ensured.
(b)
Simplification of Procedures. There is a need for simplification of
procedures while working out parity in pension, family pension and disability
pension. Simple procedures will ensure minimum anomalies.
(c)
Parity in Pension – Past and Future Pensioners. There is a need
to achieve Parity in pension in case of past and present officer pensioners.
Reaching parity in pension for PBOR has been a major milestone.
(d)
Retirement Benefits Must Compensate for Truncated Career.
Retired defence service personnel should be compensated adequately.
SECTION - 2
RETIRING PENSION
“When you go home remind them of us,
who gave our today for their tomorrow”
Introduction
7.8.
Basis for deciding pension must take into account needs of the employees
and legitimate aspirations are built into the model arrived at. Principles of justice and
equity must remain the guiding factors. Pension must ensure that an individual lives
with dignity, independently, with self respect and without attracting further burden. It
must ensure that he meets the liabilities he was unable to settle while in service. V
CPC has acknowledged that “Pension is a statutory, inalienable, legally
enforceable right”.
Existing Provisions
7.9.
Historically pension of service personnel has been biggest casualty of
various pay commissions. Though there has been universal recognition of
peculiarities of service and uniqueness of retirement conditions, but little has been
done to offset the disadvantages. The existing system of pension for the Defence
Services is a derivative of a scheme tailored for civilian employees of the central
government.
7.10. Officers. Pension rules, as applicable to officers, are as under:(a)
The retiring pension is fixed on the average of reckonable emoluments
drawn by the individual during last 10 months of service.
(a)
The minimum qualifying period of service is 20 years.
(c)
Weightage ranging from 3 to 9 years is applicable to officers to
compensate for truncated career and early retirement.
7.11. Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR). Though the rules for calculation of
pension for PBOR are similar to that of officers, the governing conditions are
different. Salient features are as under:-
(a)
Reckonable emoluments are equal to top of the pay scale including
50% of the highest classification pay, if any, of the rank held and the group in
which paid continuously for at least 10 months at the time of discharge.
(b)
The minimum qualifying service for pension is 15 years.
(c)
Weightage ranging from 5 to 10 years is applicable to compensate for
reduced tenures.
Inadequacies of the Existing System
7.12. Undeniably, attempts have been made in recent years to address the
inadequacies; a retiree is virtually at mercy of the system. His pension is inadequate,
his responsibilities are burgeoning, the aspirations and the growing consumerism are
taking a toll on his physical and mental ability to survive in the world. The fact that a
soldier who retires healthier than his civil contemporaries dies earlier are testimony
to the fact that survival in the new environment for him is another battle. Important
issues that need to be considered are:(a)
Burgeoning Responsibilities. Defence service personnel find
themselves out of job when the responsibilities are large and mushrooming. It
is ironical that when he needs higher income, he is compulsorily retired and
given a fraction of what he otherwise earned. Most of our PBOR come from
villages and small towns, where by the age of 40 years he has a family and
aged parents. Health of his aged parents starts deteriorating. The Climacteric
Obligation Time Line Chart given below clearly highlights the growing
responsibilities from age of 40 to 54 years. This incidentally is the time when
he has lower income to look after his obligations. The soldier therefore needs
a package in keeping with the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court that
he must live with a standard equivalent to his pre-retirement level, free
from wants with decency, independence and self respect[1].
CLIMACTERIC OBLIGATION TIME LINE
(b)
Weightage Factor. Present system of weightage doesn’t guarantee
50% of pension to PBOR, since maximum of 30 years are considered for
calculation of pension. His pension falls by 5% to 45%. Whereas a civilian
who serves longer, resolves his family and social responsibilities while still in
service and earns 50% of his last pay drawn as pension.
(c)
Lateral Placement. Vth CPC had, in their general recommendations,
acknowledged that pension of a defence service personnel was meagre and
said “ his pension is not expected to be his sole means of income and
he can reasonably be expected to find a second employment”[2]. This
promise was carried further and all his dues were curtailed. The second
employment to compensate for early retirement can be effective only when it
is guaranteed by an act of law.
Proposals
7.13. Proposals related to pension are aimed at removing the anomalies in the
system and to ensure that Defence Service Personnel being compulsorily retired are
given income that enables them to live with dignity and honour.
7.14. Calculation of Pension Full pension should be authorised to Defence
Service Personnel on completion of 33 years of qualifying service (including
weightage). The scales of full pension be given as under: (a)
Officers 50% of top of the scale of the rank in which retired.
(b)
PBOR
(c)
75% of the top of the scale in which retired.
Calculation factor
Formula for calculation is recommended
to be retained. However it is recommended that, in order to arrive at
the percentage proposed above, multiplication factor as given
below be applied: Category
(i)
Officers
(ii) PBOR
(aa) Up to 55
years
(ab) More
than 55
years
(d)
Percentage
of Pay as
Pension
50%
Basic Formula
(BF)
75%
RE x (QS + WT)
33
50%
Multiplication
Factor for BF
1/2
3/4
1/2
Where:(i)
(ii)
(iii)
RE = Reckonable emoluments in Rupees
QS = Qualifying Service in years
WT = Weightage in years
7.15. Increase in Weightage. Present years of weightage fall short of promise,
further, OR have a ceiling of 30 years of qualifying service with weightage, both
combined result in an OR getting only 45% of his reckonable emoluments as his
pension. The proposals to remove this infirmity are: (a)
Officers
No change is recommended if the retirement age of 60
years is retained. In the event of enhancing the retirement age, weightage be
enhanced by same number of years as enhancement of retiring age.
(b)
PBOR Weightage presently being given to PBOR needs to be
enhanced, to ensure that every PBOR gets full benefit of 33 years on
retirement. Proposed weightage scales are: -
Ser
No
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(v)
7.16.
Rank and
equivalent in
other services
Sepoy
Naik
Havildar
Naib Subedar
Subedar
Subedar Major
Reckonable Emoluments.
calculation
of pension are as given:-
Present
Weightage
Proposed
10
8
6
5
5
5
14
11
9
8
8
8
Proposed reckonable emoluments for
(a)
Officers
Sum of Basic Pay at the top of the scale with rank pay
merged, military service pay, NPA and stagnation pay wherever applicable of
the rank retired in.
(b)
PBOR
Basic Pay at the top of the scale, military service
pay, classification pay and stagnation pay wherever applicable of the rank
retired in.
7.17. One Rank One Pension. Over the years there has been demand and
deliberation for bridging of gap between the pension of the old and current retirees.
To ensure that disparities in pension do not appear at a later stage, it is proposed
that new set of pension rules are applied concurrently to old and fresh pensioners at
the time of implementation of VIth Central Pay Commission award. To implement
One Rank One Pension following is recommended:(a)
Officer
One rank one pension for officers be implemented and
officers be given the pension at the top of the scale of the rank he retires in.
(b)
PBOR.
Near parity has been achieved.
7.18. Pensionable Service for Ex Servicemen Employed in Defence Service
Corps (DSC) Qualifying Service for ex-servicemen employed in DSC for earning
pension should be reduced from 15 years to 10 years.
7.19. Pension for Reserve Liability Period for Retired Personnel Defence
Service personnel on reserve liability are recommended to be paid allowance at the
rate of 10% of basic pension as Reserve Liability Allowance.
7.20. Commutation of Pension. Rate of commutation of pension be enhanced to
50% and period for restoration of full pension be reduced from 15 to 12 years.
Justification of the Proposals
7.21. It is an established fact that an individual who has completed his entire
service and who superannuates at or more than 60 years of age needs at least
67%[3] of his last pay drawn to sustain similar lifestyle. This is when an individual
has taken care of his social commitments. A soldier on the contrary has his social
obligations growing as his income dwindles. Though this issue has always been
accepted by previous pay commissions, they have some how fallen short in finding a
comprehensive solution and have been found wanting in dispensing justice to the
soldier.
7.22. Serviceman retires early and the pension plan for him must ensure the
guidelines of dignity and near parity in his standard of living while he was in service.
It is therefore proposed that the pension to an ex serviceman should be given
to him based on his established needs and should not be bound by existing
limits of 50%. Any pension lower than 75% would deprive him of respect and
dignity.
7.23. Fifth Central Pay Commission too had resorted to some double speak, when
it came to providing the soldier a decent pension. While it acknowledged that 67% of
last pay drawn is essential for maintaining the desired standard, for a person who
superannuates at 60 years. It gave a mechanism that provided only 36% of last pay
drawn as pension for a service personnel retiring while still shy of 40 years and his
family responsibilities staring at him.
7.24. A comparison of incomes available to two persons of same qualifications, age
and probably similar social background, one in the Defence Services and other in a
civil government job, highlights the disparity that starts at the age of 40 years and
follows the soldier to his grave. A soldier has an income of Rs. 8910/- per month just
prior to his retirement that is equal to others. All through his retired life he faces an
ever widening gap in income in relation to his civilian friends. The income for a
soldier is his pension, a low paying second job in private capacity and some interest
generated on his securities. The gap is wide and expanding all through in his retired
life. This wide disparity needs to be reduced.
7.25. Reckonable Emoluments
proposals are: -
Important changes recommended in the
(a)
Basic Pay at Top of the Scale. On proposed merger of rank pay
with basic pay being accepted, rank pay would cease to figure separately as a
component of reckonable emoluments. With a view to achieve parity in
pension for all ranks it is highly desirable that pension for officers too should
be calculated on basis similar to PBOR i.e. on top of the scale. It is therefore
essential that for reckonable emoluments, pay at the top of the scale should
be taken for officers also. Having different criterion for veterans and current
retirees for calculating pension will lead to creation of various groups and
subgroups, which is not desirable as it would lead to friction and attrition in the
otherwise closely knit service community. This issue is connected to a long
pending demand of Ex-Servicemen for achieving One Rank One Pension.
(b)
Classification Pay. Classification Pay now re-termed as Classification
Allowance for PBOR needs to form part of reckonable emoluments.
Classification Allowance in not similar to qualification or other related
allowances, but is an essential part of a PBOR’s employment policy. At any
time PBOR at various classification levels are available for duty. It is a
requirement that every soldier has to go through and is essential for his
performing his duties effectively.
(c)
Reckonable Emoluments.
Military Service pay proposed as
part of pay package for service personnel has long lasting effect on
physiological, psychological and sociological well being of a soldier. Those,
who go through the rigorous of military service and survive, continue to live
with the effects of those deprivations and hardships. The effects of military
service manifest as short life span, continued sense of insecurity, problems of
adjustment in civil life to name a few. Inclusion of military service pay as part
of reckonable emoluments is essential for dispensing justice.
7.26. Pensionable Service for Ex-servicemen in Defence Service Corps (DSC).
For ex-servicemen serving in DSC pensionable service is 15 years as against 10
years if they take up appointment in other government services. This is similar to the
facility available to civilian govt employees who take up second employment and
thereby become eligible for second pension after serving for 10 years in the new
appointment.
7.27. Reserve Liability Allowance
A soldier on retirement when placed on
reserve liability needs to maintain good health to be fit for any recall. Today he is not
being compensated for the liability, he has to look after his needs and stay fit out of
the meagre pension.
7.28. One Rank One Pension Failure to implement One Rank One Pension for
retired Defence Services Personnel by successive governments, after promises and
inclusion in election manifestos for over two decades, is the epitome of disregard for
the welfare of the retired soldier. It is no hidden fact that Defence Services function
on rank structure from which flow the authority, position, status, decision making
ability and responsibility. Service personnel grow in a culture of ranks, for him his
position and status has always been the rank that he holds. A higher rank in the
defence services ensured him higher perquisites, two officers in the same rank with
same length of service draw same pay. Thus it is legitimate that the same should
continue even after retirement and two pensioners in the same rank should be given
same pension. The demand for one rank one pension must be accepted on the
same rationale. Over the years there has been demand and deliberation for bridging
of the gap between the pension of the old and current retirees.
7.29. Commutation of Pension. The need for increasing the limit of commutation
to 50% has risen due to drop in interest rates and the income this commuted amount
is able to generate. Interest rates on secure government deposits like National
Saving Schemes and National Saving Certificates has fallen. It is clear from the
exhibit below, that where an individual could double the money in 6 years at the time
of last pay commission, today in the same time period he gets only 60% of the
amount as interest. Demand for higher commutation value and early restoration was
also raised by various organisations while submitting memorandum to Vth Central
Pay Commission. The pay commission in its report agreed with reducing the period
of restoration to 12 years,[4] and recommended to the government accordingly.
Anomalies related to Pension
7.30. Disparity in Pension Between Regimental Commissioned and Honorary
Commissioned Officers.
Pension of Regimental Commissioned Officer (RCO)
is lower than that of Honorary Commissioned Officer. The terms and conditions of
RCOs restrict their service to 12 Years of service or 52 years of age which ever is
earlier. They then become eligible for drawing the pension of the rank they have
retired and draw pension on the last pay drawn. JCOs bestowed Honorary
Commission for meritorious service get to serve for about a year in the honorary
rank, their pay is given on a fixed scale which entitles them pension on that scale.
(a)
Anomaly. RCOs start progressing in the pay scale of officers and in
certain cases retire much earlier than 10 years and at pay scales lower than
that of honorary captains, who may have joined at the same time, done same
length of service or may have been junior to the RCO for many years. This
results in RCOs getting pensions lower than honorary officers, which amounts
to an individual being given promotion in status but lower pension. There is a
need to protect the pension of RCOs against the pension of Honorary
Commissioned Officers.
(b)
Proposal
It is proposed that a RCO should get pension equal to
his pension or service pension of an Honorary Officer of the same rank
whichever is higher.
(c)
Justification
PBOR are granted commission as RCOs and
serve till 52 yrs of age. They may serve longer than Sub/ Sub Maj granted
honorary ranks, however they are given lower pension in certain cases. Two
recruits joining at the same time but retiring differently as RC and honorary
commission officers will draw different pensions. In a number of cases the
RCOs ends up getting a lower pension than their subordinates with equal
length of service who have been granted Honorary Commission.
7.31. Higher Pension to Honorary Naib Subedar. Honorary ranks are given to
few select PBOR prior to retirement, for long meritorious service. Honorary rank also
entitles the individual with pension of the rank bestowed.
(a)
Anomaly
While Naik on getting the rank of Honorary Havildar
earns pension one rupee less than that of a substantive Havildar. JCOs on
becoming Honorary Officers have their pay fixed on a fixed scale. Their
pensions are then computed at the time of retirement, as per existing formula.
A Havildar, on being bestowed an honorary rank of Naib Subedar, is given an
additional pension of Rs 100/-,(Rupees one hundred) only. Critical
examination reveals that while a Naik gains close to 8.38% on his pension
and a JCO gains up to 28.06%. An Honorary Naib Subedars gain is a meagre
4.25% of his pension. Deciding the quantum of honorary pension for various
ranks was apparently arrived at without thought and analysis. This has led to
vast discontentment amongst Honorary Naib Subedars.
(b)
Proposal
It is proposed that pension for a Havildar bestowed the
rank of Honorary Naib Subedar should be based on a system similar to that of
JCOs given honorary rank of an officer i.e. based on a fixed scale. It is also
intended to provide a benefit of Rs. 500/- (Rupees Five hundred only) at
present scales to an Hon Naib Subedar. This amount be given similar multiple
rise as PBOR pay.
(c)
Justification
Havildars granted honorary rank of Naib Subedars
need to be compensated adequately in comparison with other honorary
ranks.
SECTION – 3
FAMILY PENSION
Introduction
7.32. The family pension is admissible to the family or dependants of a Serviceman
in the event of his death whilst in service or after retirement. The award of family
pension is entirely governed by the circumstances of the death of the individual. At
present there are different types of family pensions, corresponding broadly to one of
the five attributability criterion from Category A to E.
Existing Position
7.33. Ordinary Family Pension Admissible in cases of death due to causes
neither attributable to nor aggravated by military service (NANA). This condition is
covered under Category A. It is calculated at 30% of last pay drawn at the time of
death of the individual. For first seven years it is granted at an enhanced rate of 50%
of last pay drawn. Enhanced rate of ordinary family pension cannot exceed service
pension or notional service pension of the deceased.
Drawbacks in the Existing Rule Position
7.34. There is a need to assure him that his family and loved ones will be taken
care of should a soldier die prematurely.
7.35. Low Rate of Family Pension
30% of last pay drawn as family pension is
too meagre under circumstances where an individual dies young. It becomes difficult
for the family to look after itself and survive. The responsibilities that the widow faces
only increase with time but the increase in pension does not keep pace with it.
7.36. Short Duration of Enhanced Rate of Ordinary Family Pension Ordinary
family pension is admissible at enhanced rate for a duration of 7 years after death of
the individual or 67 years of age which ever is earlier. This condition has been
imposed keeping in mind the service conditions as obtaining for civilians in office
working environment. These have then been applied to defence service personnel
who work under conditions where deaths under both attributable and not attributable
conditions take place frequently.
7.37. Stipulation for Enhanced Rate of Family Pension not to Exceed Service
Pension The origin of stipulation that enhanced rate of family pension cannot
exceed service pension may have been benign, but today it is causing tremendous
heartburn and livelihood threatening difficulties to families of deceased soldiers.
There are cases where a family when granted enhanced rate actually draws pension
less than the ordinary pension.
Proposals
7.38. Rate of ordinary family pension needs to be increased from present rate of
30% of last drawn pay to 40% at the top of the scale of the rank in which the
husband died.
7.39. Duration of admissibility of enhanced rate of ordinary family pension should
be extended from present 7 years to 15 years.
7.40. Stipulation specifying that enhanced rate of ordinary family pension should
not exceed service pension or notional service pension should be removed.
7.41. Families of persons drawing two pension should be authorised to draw two
family pensions on death of the pensioner.
7.42. Un-married daughters of pensioners be authorised family pension for life if
she has no income of her own.
7.43. Families of those dying during trials of indigenous developed weapon systems
and ammunition be authorised liberalised family pension.
Justification
7.44. Enhance Rate of Ordinary Family Pension from Existing 30% to 40% of
Last Pay Drawn.
Incidences of death in the defence forces are higher and
large numbers of them occur during early part of life. The family is thus left to fend
for itself and look for resources to make both ends meet. Likely hood of a young
widow devoid of income going astray while looking to augment her family income
cannot be ruled out. 30% of last pay drawn as family pension is inadequate, it would
also be grossly unfair to assume that household expenditure is 30% and the
individual spends 70% of the pay drawn on him. The income available in the hands
of a widow needs to be increased. 40% of the top of the scale proposed should
continue till 60 years of age, the accepted age of superannuation of the government
servant. Family pension may thereafter reduce to 30%.
7.45. Increased Duration of Enhanced Rate of Family Pension from 7 to 15
Years Demand for increasing the duration of enhanced rate of Family Pension from
7 to 15 years was made by civil organisations to V Central Pay Commission. The
pay commission felt otherwise and said “The period of seven years for entitlement of
family pension at enhanced rate is considered to be adequate period for a family to
get adjusted to the changed circumstances[5]”. The seven year limit may be suitable
for civil servant who has different norms ruling his life and death and dies at a much
older age. It is clear from the Obligation Climacteric Time Line given at paragraph
7.16, that the responsibilities continue to remain till 55 years of age for PBOR and 60
years for officers. The families of soldier or ex-servicemen who die short of 45 years
of age survive to face the brunt, for their family compulsions demand a higher
income for a
longer duration. The demand for enhancing the period for payment of enhanced rate
of family pension to 15 years for Service Personnel is justified.
7.46. Removal of Stipulation Limiting Enhanced Rate of Ordinary Family
Pension to Retiring Pension
Presently enhanced rate of family pension is
limited to service pension. On death of young servicemen their families end up
getting enhanced rate of family pension at a rate lesser than ordinary family pension.
This stipulation needs to be removed. Families of Sepoys with less than 9 ½ , Naiks
with less than 11 ½ years and Havildars with less than 13 ½ years of service draw
enhanced rate of family pension less than ordinary rate. The notional service
pension for all the above cases works out to be less than 30%. Their enhanced rate
of pensions are then limited to their notional service pensions. This stipulation is
against the spirit of family pension and thus needs to be dropped.
7.47. Authorisation of Ordinary Family Pension to Widows on Remarriage
Ordinary family pension of a widow ceases on her remarriage. This issue was raised
with Vth Central Pay Commission and they recommended continuation of ordinary
family pension to her on re-marriage, if she decides to look after the children. “We
are unable to agree to the suggestion for continuance of family pension to the widow
on remarriage. However if the widow undertakes to maintain the dependant children
on her remarriage, family pension should be continued”[6]. Family pension however
continues even after remarriage for widows drawing special or liberalised family
pension. Pension in most of the cases would act as one of the major reasons for
acceptance of a widow for re-marriage. Discontinuation of same after re-marriage
may actually prove detrimental to harmony in her married life. There is thus a need
to authorise ordinary family pension to widow on remarriage, If she abandons her
children, entire family pension should pass on to all the children collectively.
7.48. Authorisation of Ordinary Family Pension to Unmarried Daughters for
Life Presently widowed daughters are authorised ordinary family pension for life,
where as unmarried daughters are allowed ordinary family pension till the age of 25
years only. This is a case of wrong interpretation. A widowed daughter is allowed
family pension because she is equated to an unmarried daughter who has no means
to sustain herself. An unmarried daughter when wholly dependant on her father too
needs to be treated alike. Both widowed and unmarried daughters have same
conditions and difficulties and deserve same treatment.
7.49. Trial of Indigenous Ammunition Families of those dying during trials of
indigenously developed weapon systems and ammunition need to be authorised
liberalised family pension. This condition needs to be included in Cat E along with
those of death and disability during live demonstration and exercises. It needs to be
appreciated that when a person conducts the trial, he fires a weapon that has not
been tested. Its efficacy and safety is not known, it is only an idea converted into a
working model. The risk to life is far more than any of the other conditions listed in
category D.
SECTION - 4
DISABILITY PENSION AND AWARDS
Introduction
7.50. As in the case of the Family Pension, the disability awards to the servicemen
are also governed by the attributability or non-attributability clauses.
Proposals
7.51. Slab System to be Replaced by Percentage System. Presently slab
system is applicable for the defence personnel whereas civilian employees are paid
disability at 30% of last pay drawn. It is proposed that disability component of
disability pension be paid on percentage basis at 30% of basic pay subject to a
minimum of Rs.1,550/- per month at present rates. The lower limit i.e. Rs.1,550/- per
month be given the same multiple as the pay rise to retain parity.
7.52. Disability Due to Injury in War and Similar Situations.
Rates double
of those applicable for disability under normal conditions, i.e. 60% of last pay drawn
subject to a minimum of Rs. 3100/- per month at present rates should be made
applicable for disabilities.
7.53. Qualifying Service for Invalid Pension Should be Removed for Neither
Attributable Nor Aggravated by Service Conditions (NANA). Invalid pension has
a service qualifying limit of 10 years for persons who have disabilities that are NANA
by military service conditions, i.e. persons who are invalided before completing 10
years of service are not eligible for invalid pension. This stipulation needs to be
removed. Invalid pension should be authorised from very first day of service.
7.54. Constant Attendant Allowance. The rates of Constant Attendant
Allowance are extremely low (i.e Rs. 600/- per month) and it is not possible to
engage a constant attendant at the existing rates. Therefore, the constant
attendant allowance needs to be raised to the minimum wage applicable to one
Group D employee of Central Government.
7.55. Bar of Voluntary Retirement for Grant of Disability Pension.
Bar on
payment of disability pension to those, initially retained in service but seek to
proceed on voluntary retirement should be removed.
7.56. Removal of Lower Limit of 20% for Disabilities.
Presently lower limit of
20% is applied for admissibility for disability component of family pension. All
disabilities below 20% whether attributable or not are not authorised disability
pension. Compensation on Disability for less that 20% should be allowed. It is
proposed that Disability component be paid to disabilities below 20% for all
attributable cases on pro-rata basis. All disabilities between 1 to 10% be paid for
10% disability.
Justification
7.57. Removal of Limits for Disability Pension. A person who sustains a
disability for whatever reason and has his career prematurely terminated on that
account, suffers not only from physical effects of his disability but also from the
emotional trauma of having been discarded from service and having to start all over
again in life. It is contradictory that Government grants Ordinary Family
Pension to an individual’s family if he dies in an accident even after one day’s
service, but they deny the same benefit to him and his family, if instead of
dying, he becomes a lifelong cripple and at times worse than a dead person,
he is denied the privilege. The condition is unjust and against spirit of natural
justice.
7.58. Bar of Voluntary Retirement for Grant of Disability Pension.
According to Regulation 50, PRA Part I(1961), if an officer seeks retirement
voluntarily, he is not eligible for disability pensionary benefits. This is an archaic rule
out of tune with the realities. It will benefit both the individual and the organisation if
personnel with disabilities are allowed to proceed on premature retirement with a
disability factor.
7.59. Percentage System for Disability Component.
Present method of
drawing disability on slab system was beneficial to young PBOR. Simple resorting to
percentage system would be detrimental to our PBOR, for they would not be
adequately compensated for their sacrifices. Ends of justice can only be ensured if
disability component is made applicable to Defence Service Personnel at 30% of
pay, as applicable to civil employees while protecting Rs.1550/- PM being paid to the
soldiers at present rates. Any increase in pay should be offset by corresponding
increase in lower limit of Rs.1550/-.
7.60. Disability for War Injury.
For injury during war and similar situations
disability is paid at double the rates applicable to disability under normal conditions.
In the present instant too, percentage rates double of those proposed for normal
pension are justified and will maintain the Status Quo.
7.61. Limit for Disability.
Psychological and physical effects of disability last a
lifetime. The trauma of being disabled in an era where fitness be it physical, mental
or emotional are keys to success is immense. Persons with minor disabilities find it
difficult to be accepted. The justification of imposing a lower limit of disability does
not exist. If the disability is attributable then it calls for compensation. In the present
times where minor crimes and failures are not pardoned how do we justify
withholding compensation for a disability we call minor? There is a need to remove
the lower limit and disability of percentages lower than 20% should be compensated
in proportion to the extent of disability.
7.62. Constant Attendant Allowance.
Grant of Rs. 600/- to hire an attendant to
look after a disabled person is devoid of any sound reasoning. On one hand there
are regulations to ensure that minimum wages are paid to a person and in the same
breath a disabled person is expected to hire an attendant at ridiculously low
remuneration. A disabled soldier will pay out of his meagre pension or else he would
live his entire life at the mercy of others. There is an urgent need to make this
allowance respectable and place at the hands of our disabled soldiers enough
means to hire an attendant with respect and live with dignity.
€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€
€€€€€€€€€€€
PROPOSED PAY STRUCTURE
In keeping with the proposal of applying a multiple of 4.5 and increased
disparity ratio of 1: 12 the proposed replacement scales on the modified existing
scales are as under:RANK
LT / EQUIVALENT
CAPT/
EXISTING SCALES
RANK
PAY
8250 – 300 - 10050
EQUIVALENT 9600 – 300 - 11400
400
MODIFIED SCALES
WITH RANK PAY
MERGED
PROPOSED SCALES WITH
FACTOR OF 4.5
8250 - 300 - 10050
37200 – 1350 – 45300
10000 - 325 - 11950
45000 – 1400 – 53400
MAJ/ EQUIVALENT
11600 – 325 - 14850
1200
12800 - 375 – 16550
57600 – 1500 – 72600
LT COL/ EQUIVALENT
13500 – 400 - 17100
1600
15100 - 400 – 19100
68000 – 1800 – 86000
COL/ EQUIVALENT
15100 – 450 - 17350
2000
17100 - 450 – 22050
77000 – 2100 – 100100
BRIG/ EQUIVALENT
16700 – 450 - 18050
2400
19100 - 450 – 23150
85950 – 2250 – 106200
MAJ GEN/ EQUIVALENT
18400 – 500 - 22400
20300 - 525 – 24500
91350 – 2500 – 111350
LT GEN/ EQUIVALENT
22400 – 525 - 24500
24050 - 650 – 26000
108000 – 3000 - 117000
DGAFMS
24050 – 650 - 26000
24700 - 650 – 26000
111000 – 3000 - 117000
26000
26000
117000
ARMY CDR/ EQUIVALENT
[1] DS Nakra and other Vs Union of India (AIR 1983, SC 130). Quoted at Para 127.3, Page 1755, Compiliation
of V Central Pay Commission Report, Nabhi Publications, Reprint May 1999.
[2] V CPC report para 161.12 page 2031 , Part VIII, Vol III, Compilation of V Central pay Commission Report,
Nabhi Publications, Reprint May 1999.
[3] Study conducted by TECS for V CPC and given at para 127.9 of page 1756 vol III of Compilation of Fifth
Central Pay Commission Report, Nabhi Publication,.
[4] V CPC report para136.10 page 1843 , Part VI Vol III, Compilation of V Central pay Commission Report,
Nabhi Publications “It would be reasonable to restore the commuted pension after 12 years instead of 15 years
as at present. We recommend accordingly”.
[5] Para 134.16, page 1822, Part IV, Compilation of V CPC Report, Nabhi Publication
[6] Para 134.23 page 1824, Part IV Compilation of V CPC report, Vol III, Nabhi Publication.