The Indian Economy Blog

March 9, 2008

Defence Pensions: Worrying Signs

Filed under: Fiscal policy,Human Capital,Regulatory reforms — Pragmatic @ 10:14 pm

The total strength of the defence employees has risen from nearly 362,000 in 1960 to 1.3 million today. The defence pensions bill, which is over 50 percent of the central government’s pensions bill, has also risen exponentially since the 1960s. It has grown nearly tenfold from Rs. 1670 Crore in 1990-91 to Rs. 15,244 Crore in 2007-08; and is currently over two-thirds of the military salary expenses. The subterfuge of removing defence pensions expenditure from the overall military expenditure, in vogue since 1985, has turned the spotlight away from this issue.

More than three percent of defence employees retire every year. The bulk of this group is of soldiers, who constitute 85 percent of the defence forces. There is an average in-service death rate of 1.2 percent for the defence employees, largely due to counterinsurgency operations. Early induction age and early retirement age implies a younger age cohort for 90 percent of the defence employees compared to their civilian counterparts.

Due to early retirement, the defence employees do not fulfill the government criteria of 33 years service to earn a full pension. This ought to reduce the defence pensions bill significantly. However, the high ratio of 1.68 defence pensioners per defence employee implies an extended period of pension payments, which offsets the lower rates of defence pensions. The other civil departments, incidentally, have a ratio of 0.55 pensioners per employee.

Moreover, Indian population above 60 years of age is growing at a rapid pace, at an annual growth rate of 3.8 percent per annum in the period 1991-2001, as against the annual growth rate of 1.8% for the general population. The improved health care and increased life expectancy will skew the pensioners to employees ratio even further.

The recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission are likely to push the defence pensions bill further northwards, if the example of Fifth Pay Commission is anything to go by. The implementation of Fifth Pay Commission recommendations had led to an increase in the defence pensions bill from 4947 Crore in 1997-98 to 10770 Crore in 2000-01.

It is believed that the defence pension bill has the potential to reach an unsustainable level, and perhaps even exceed the wage bill. This is borne out by the recent trends and is indicated by realistic assessment of such liabilities in the future years. The government has decided against introducing pension reforms in the defence services.

There is an immediate need to reduce the defence pension bill, which will otherwise continue to be a big drain on the national exchequer. This can be achieved by reducing the minimum military service requirements, pushing for early retirements with lateral absorption schemes and identifying a new model for defence pension reforms. These are desirable not only on the grounds of fiscal prudence and equity, but also to keep the military lean and young.

47 Comments »

  1. [...] Cross posted at the Indian Economy Blog [...]

    Pingback by Pragmatic Euphony » Blog Archive » Defence Pensions — March 9, 2008 @ 10:15 pm

  2. Why should india need such a big army of nearly 2 million. i think 500000 is suffiecient to protect borders with advent of technology.Fight for J&K is the most foolish act of both pakistan and india which has nothing to offer. Drain on taxpayers money on the whole. Lets chuck all these military personel. We should bring compulsary military service for students for 2 years for free and recruit them in emergency as israel does.
    Free 40000 crores for taxpayers each year and spend on building steel plants, cement plants and build roads, houses and build electricity palnts, give more orders for bhel.
    we can have 10 billion dollars of pseudo FDI per annum.

    Comment by satish — March 10, 2008 @ 12:00 am

  3. @Satish,

    Firstly, J&K is not our only border. We have borders with Bangladesh and China to protect.

    Secondly, how did you come up with the number 500,000?

    Thirdly and most importantly, the point of the article is the ratio of retiring defence personnel to active personnel is unsustainably high. The same situation is seen in many countries across the OECD and the US with regards to social security and pension payments. If this continues – and the pension bill outweighs the wage bill – it is a worrying sign!

    Comment by pseudoKu — March 10, 2008 @ 1:07 am

  4. US army spread all over the world has just 1 million army strength(including 200000 reserves). world now being more sophisticated in weaponary don’t need much men. Current pensioners is already a headache. If we chuck people in late 20′s and 30′s, we can considerably save for the exchequer. why do we need army personnel in bangalore, chennai etc. people who must have been economically productive are made unfit. we can save lot of money for economic development by eliminating future pensioners. From my perspective 500000 itself is too excessive for protecting j&k, sikkim, north east and i see no threat from bangladesh. Thus protecting some 50000 km2 we employ 2 million. it’s a shame

    Comment by satish — March 10, 2008 @ 6:13 am

  5. The irony is that Indian Armed Forces do require numbers. Protecting the border is just a fraction of the job specification. They have virtually taken over the job specifications of Home Ministry. It is just a matter of time that the Armed Forces will get involved with Naxalism/ veerapanism/ Dawoodism/ etc. It has already started with IAF providing recce support to Home Ministry to fight naxals.

    Rising pension bill is indeed an area of concern. If pensions are stopped then probably the rate of intake will fall further. If they continue, then probably shortly there will be a need for ‘Ministry of Armed Forces Pension’.

    The only viable solution is to keep the entry and exit doors wide open. There will be adequate people to serve till it matters most and thereafter exit without waiting for pensions. Similarly there will be adequate people wanting to continue for a long inning with job satisfaction.

    What will come as bonus is a much more larger population with exposure to Armed Forces.

    Comment by Vineet — March 10, 2008 @ 9:14 pm

  6. Well, salaries and pensions are where most of our taxes are going to. Thats how the government has no money for upkeep of existing infrastructure; forget about newer ones. I would dare to suggest that, if government employees were as productive as to justify the cost to the exchequer, we wouldn’t need PPP…

    Comment by jaleel — March 10, 2008 @ 9:49 pm

  7. As simple as it all seems when blowing off your arm-chair logic onto the comments of a blog, the real scenario is alot harder to understand. If employing X number of people to serve in the military costs money then so does replacing those many people with Machinery. India CANNOT be compared to USA in terms of military expenditure. US spends 583 billion US$. We spend 26.5 billion US$. Yet the number of soldiers in each army do not differ that greatly. The remainder of the money is spent on Defence research. The solution isn’t conscription either. Before mimicking Israel maybe you should check their economic status.
    The solution lies somewhere between a miraculous policy and banning DRDO from producing insect repellants

    Comment by Rohan — March 10, 2008 @ 10:16 pm

  8. vineet-
    Then what’s the job of police, cbi. They are provided pensions and salary. Thing is that public sector outside banks and industries are severely overstaffed and need to be reduced. if army, navy and airforce tackle naxal then eliminate police. Huge fiscal burden on central and state govt. all these spending could have utilized much more wisely

    Comment by satish — March 11, 2008 @ 1:48 am

  9. @ Satish

    Well! That’s a question the top brass of Armed Forces needs to answer. Almost two decades into CI in Kashmir Valley and NE! It is still responsibility with no authority!

    Comment by Vineet — March 11, 2008 @ 9:33 pm

  10. What i feel is the issue needs to be resolved, but the benefit of the personnels must be considered while finding a solution…

    Comment by Tara Prasad — March 12, 2008 @ 7:49 pm

  11. Why does India need all these fancy weapons?

    Who is the enemy?

    Comment by Ros — March 15, 2008 @ 12:36 am

  12. I might add that India buys all her weapons from seasoned aggressors – US, EU, Russia & Israel. So who is left to fight?

    Comment by Ros — March 15, 2008 @ 12:40 am

  13. All exservicemen can be recruited to other governmnet departmens as policemen, teachers, etc.

    We do not have enough police and recruiting exservicemen will help improve dicipline in police force.

    More teachers will help reduce illiteracy.

    The pensions payable will then get merged with the salary payable.

    In fact the strenght of the standing army should be reduced and strenght of the reserve army increased. Exservicemen in police force would be a very good reserve army, they can be sent for refresher training periodically, they continue to be in uniform, etc.

    best regards

    Bhaskar

    Comment by M V Bhaskar — March 15, 2008 @ 7:28 am

  14. Most of the people who retire from Army these days get high paying jobs in the private sector, there for they enjoy not only the pension but income from the job as well. I am not saying that there is anything wong with it but like you pointed out that we are spending 2/3 of military salary expenses on pensions which come from the tax payers income, then it makes it wrong.

    Comment by Prashant — March 15, 2008 @ 11:03 pm

  15. @ Satish
    ‘Fight for J&K is the most foolish act of both pakistan and india which has nothing to offer.’

    I don’t think you appreciate how important J&K is strategically to both India and Pakistan.

    ‘spend on building steel plants, cement plants’

    That’s the last thing the government should be doing – opening more PSUs!!!

    Comment by photonman — March 16, 2008 @ 9:55 am

  16. Photoman
    We can always privatize industries through capital markets like maruti creating great value for the economy. By saving on military personal who are not productive at all we could have had a living standard on par thailand or malaysia. It’s a shame that people want to run away from homeland to search for a living in foreign country. India is the worst beaurocracy in the world. Where govt must be there like education, healthcare and housing govt is absent. Look at POSCO( govt initiated) steel plant, one of the largest producers of high quality steel in world. It formed the basis for largest shipping industry, automobile industry and homes for every family and employment to millions of people who moved away from farming to industries. real wealth is generated and millions of people out of poverty and hunger. Comfortable life is created. By spending of defense personel you are highlighting intentions to fight rather than peace. Humans must look forward for peace and prosperity and not fight to death. It is very unfortunate that when a civilian is killed it is a crime while if a pakistan army personnel is killed then the soldier becomes a hero. In my view if somebody is killing people he is a murderer and never a hero. Nobody is going to take anything from world. Let us be comfortable as long as we are alive. Let’s work for peace and create prosperity.
    If pakistan and india don’t fight with each other J&K is not a strategic place at all. It’s just a barren cold desert mostly except for kashmir valley.

    Comment by satish — March 16, 2008 @ 10:47 am

  17. @Satish,
    Do you think India has never done something like you have mentioned? Look at our first 15 years of (mis)rule after independence. Our big dreamer built steel plants and maintained a very miniscule, improperly funded army. The rest is history. India’s sovereignity was threatened many times in that 10 year period (1962-72) with 4 wars, including a shaming defeat with China. Indian land was forecefully taken away from her, and we have failed the people of Tibet who always respected us and hoped we would be there for them. With a weak army we could not prevent autocrat from unsurping India’s closest friend. Due to our delay in obtaining Nuclear weapons, we became forever a pariah of Nuclear club and now we are unable to expand civilian nuclear energy.

    A strong army reduces the incentive for our enemies to prey on us, and due to the strengthening defense in the last 35 years, no enemy had the gall to attack us which eliminated the wars (except for a minor conflict in 1999). Due to our defense provess, we are getting an increase attention from US, Japan and other countries that see us a maturing counter-weight to our communist neighbor.

    Let’s face it – without a strong defense there is no talk of a sovereign nation and a strong economy.

    Comment by Balaji Viswanathan — March 16, 2008 @ 11:09 am

  18. Enemy is nowhere except in our mind in the form of fear and suspicion. We dont need to get the attention of others to get improved. Good economic policies would have created bigger gdp and lesser percent of gdp on military for same level of sophistication. We can always work out peaceful solutions. We have wasted huge amount of time on fear and left millions of indians on starvation. Whole talk of sovereign nation is socialistic in an globalizing economy.
    Apart from that billion people is enough to create all kind of technology if we have an open economy without barriers to enterprenuer. We could have mastered even civilian nuclear fusion technology by now. Problem is that politician don’t want everybody to improve and wanted to keep certain elite and educated people to get prosperous and let down billions of people in the drain.

    Comment by satish — March 16, 2008 @ 11:56 am

  19. Dear Satish
    Where are you from? India or abroad? And its really funny to read your comments.
    Nice entertainment dude!

    Comment by Rangya Max — March 16, 2008 @ 10:20 pm

  20. Sirs,
    How useful is technology in counter-insurgency and low intensity conflict. Why did the US go for a surge in Iraq? Why the need for boots on the ground? Does mountain warfare need more infantry? How many commenting have actually served? This is not to deny the need for force modernisation. The primary responsibility of the State is to guarantee internal security and secure borders. Without security, no bizness, no moolah.

    Comment by kaushik — March 16, 2008 @ 11:32 pm

  21. Suppose if we refer Kashmir issue (after trifuricating the state into
    Jammu, Kashmir and Ladaak) to UN for a debate, acknowledge that Kashmir is a indeed a disputed territory and if needed a refrendem under UN may be held ? will the sky fall down on us or will India disintegate spontanously. What if we ‘abandon’ the N.Eatern unviable states to fate and unilaterally withdray from them ? all these holding on to ‘territory’ at any cost is draining our exchequer and the human cost and misery is terribly high. We look down on Africans for civil war and genocide amidst cruel poverty, while we take ‘pride’ in parading our enormously costly arms in Republic day parades, imagining that we are patriotic or nationalistic or whatever, while there is ramapant poverty and child labour, etc..

    how much can we save in defence costs then ? if we unilaterally stop
    nuclear and missle building and sign NPt, CTBT, etc will we be ‘defenceless’ or will a mada Pak dictatou Nuke N.Delhi (not a bad idea, :)) ).

    I guess if Kashmir issue is settled once for all, then most of the
    greivance of Islamic jihad will end and we may return to the most
    pertinet issue of development and conquering poverty.

    Most of the 1.1 billion people do not care if Kashmir is with India or if it is lost. the majority of people are most concerned about rising cost of living and poverty and livelehood. So what is the point in
    spending ‘borrowed’ or pinted money on ‘national defence’ ?

    Japanase were lucky after WW 2 in one sense that they had no defece budget and USA provided its defence. !!!

    Comment by K.R.Athiyaman — March 17, 2008 @ 11:05 am

  22. Regarding Kashmir, giving away Kashmir could be a solution. But, my concern is how will India be able to hold on to Jammu and Ladakh while giving away the valley to Pakistan. The only major road to Ladakh (NH 1-A) goes via Kargil and other parts of Kashmir, and by surrendering the road and the valley, we might lose a strategic advantage. And I bet that Pakistan’s attention will divert to taking away Jammu and Ladakh from us, after it won over the valley, and it will be very hard to defend it. So, eventually we might have a painful migration of million of Hindus and Buddists and it is the least that India wants.

    Thus, instead we might have to arrive at a solution, where Kashmir is made separate nation while the rest two regions becoming proper states of india, and Kashmir should be able to shoulder the burden of internal security while we can guard its borders. Thus, Indian soldiers need not die for a state that hates India, and we dont need to spend our treasury for protecting that ste. It we will be a defacto nation like Bhutan (pleasing its local people) while India will retain most of the control on foreign policy, defence and such. Given their landlocked status and lack of sufficient resources to sustain themselves maybe they could fall back to India like Sikkim.

    Regarding N.E. states that is not an option at all. Most of the states have no way to survive alone and it will be become a dangerous region of anarchy. Given that we have a lot of India loving people at stake in Arunachal PRadesh, Assam and Manipur, it will be a suicide. The way is to break the back of militants by some strong person like Gill.

    Comment by Balaji Viswanathan — March 18, 2008 @ 2:14 am

  23. @ Satish,

    1) You seem to living in an ideal world. Not all that happens in J&K is reported in the media, and that is what makes you feel that there is no need for the armed forces in J&K. Already we have an LOC and LAC with Pakistan and China, and these guys have made their intentions clear by encroaching over Indian territories time and again. Kargil, Arunachal Pradesh can be taken as recent examples of aggressors trying to get that extra mile into the Indian territory. If you decide to remove the defence forces from J&K, it won’t be long before it’ll be made a joint base for Pakistan and China to attack India from the north.

    2) Sitting in your room, far away from the borders seems to have clouded your head. Perhaps that’s why you’ve made the statement about the enemy being there only in our minds. If you really feel that is the case, I challenge you to go and spend a couple of weeks in Kargil / Drass … and perhaps go on a rock climbing expedition on Tiger hill. You’ll get to know the facts for yourself.

    3) US army has technology like no other in the world. And their style of war is very different. USAF and US Navy first bomb the hell out of their targets, and then simply move in to clear the rubble and set up a base camp. Also, you shouldn’t forget that the US defence structure is very different from India. They have the National Guard, Marine Corps, Army Reserves, Army regulars, Army Fighter Sqns to name a few. Do some reading on defence stuff before posting about defence.

    @ Rangya Max

    Good comment lol :) Seems like Satish is in one of the underground bunkers (called basements in urban houses) in a dark corner, feeling all safe n sound :P

    Comment by Sandeep — March 18, 2008 @ 3:40 am

  24. Well… as Bhaskar said in his comment recruiting exservicemen in police force will be a good thing indeed. This will open the way for well trained, disciplined and physically fit people into our police forces, also the pension burden on the armed forces will be eased.

    Comment by Tara Prasad — March 20, 2008 @ 11:42 am

  25. DEAR FRIENDS,
    most of you who are against the defence wages, strength and pensions, let me clarify that fighting in rigrous terrain, away from the families for years, facing bullets and death every second is a much-much tougher job than posting an article on internet. It takes guts and courage to go in a war or war like situation where you are not sure whether next day you will come back walking on your own feet or on four shoulders. Gentlemen, please reconsider your thoughts, a country can never flourish or progress with weak borders and strong internal as well as external securities.
    All FIIs will start withdrawing money from our economy if they come to know that such a huge country with the rigourous terrian and with so many military and low intensity conflicts, is having only 500000 strength in the national army.
    No amount of infrastructure build-up can sustain when the protectors of territorial integrity are weak.
    So please have a heart, when you are talking about growth and economy, because i think that those who are posting such articles, dont have any understanding of business and economy.
    And if you dont mind, please consider this fact also, that when you and your families sleep at night, calm and cool………….. it is because, someone else is awake at the borders, away from his old and seriously ill parents, away from his pregnant wife, away from the pleasure of watching his kids growing and facing those bullets and death every second which may be, probably meant for you and your families……… They die, so that we may live……………
    So dear friends, salute these men in uniform, who dares and prefers to die for the motherland, rather than living a life worse than dogs and pigs like others…………..
    If we are militarily, economically and socially secured, it is because of these Great men of Honour, and not because of Mr. P Chidambaram, honourable finiance minister, who doesnt know that 9% growth of a nation doesnt mean the 9% growth in tax collection, it means the growth in the life style of a common man who used to buy a tin of edible oil for Rs.750/-, seven months back and the poor guy is buying the same for 1300/- now.
    In his effort of 9% growth per annum for country, his name will be registered in the golden letters in the history. But, what about that common man or the poor man whose conditions have gone bad to worse everyday.
    SO, i warn you, please understand the idea of growth……….. and know that who is the hinderance in growth.

    Comment by shalabh — March 24, 2008 @ 9:11 am

  26. @ Shalabh

    “…rather than living a life worse than dogs and pigs like others…”

    i like this blog and i guess everyone would like to see better words being used for criticism.

    By the way what are you vindictive of Mr Shalabh?

    Comment by greenday — March 27, 2008 @ 9:58 pm

  27. @ Shalabh

    “…doesnt know that 9% growth of a nation doesnt mean the 9% growth in tax collection, it means the growth in the life style of a common man who used to buy a tin of edible oil for Rs.750/-, seven months back and the poor guy is buying the same for 1300/- now…”

    lol
    Those are funniest line i have read till now on indianeconomy.org

    “Inflation and Growth are same” – Is this the premises for the above lines?

    Comment by greenday — March 27, 2008 @ 10:11 pm

  28. March 9th?…I think I hear crickets chirping

    Comment by Patel — March 29, 2008 @ 3:22 am

  29. each citizen pays around Rs.100 towards the pension of the armed forces. iti is vermuch negligible. the discussion on the subject is futile.

    Comment by g.raman — March 30, 2008 @ 7:46 pm

  30. @Satish
    Wow! How unappreciative can someone be of the 1.3 million who devote their lives for the country. Seriously, trying protecting yourself against the dogs in the street … You might end up crying about it. Now think about sitting in cold bunkers at 20000 feet, eating boiled rice and protecting your land for the ‘satish’ who can sleep comfortably, then get up and write bull shit on internet blogs … Man!

    btw: Pensions are paid to every single government employee by the Indian government. Additionally, technology cannot replace the human presence when playing a defensive role in hostile areas. As for people sitting in Banglore; Have you ever heard of planning, strategizing and moves, resources and decisions.

    We pay a small price … a very very small price for what we are getting … seriously Satish, try walking along on an unlit street where you cannot see much .. and then try talking about goverment spendings!

    Comment by shashank — March 31, 2008 @ 11:21 pm

  31. Please do not make people unpatriotic or so if they discussed the army.

    I think satis’s point is we should move from quantity to quality. And I think he got a point. Saddam has one of the biggest army which much like India have low per personnel capital ratio. And you can see what USA did with it. and you can just went back to Indo-China war and read how ill equipped the army was. If we need an army to protect us than we should equipped it the best way not just manning it as we got millions of people.

    To Pragmatic

    Nice analysis. we should think about alternatives. Proposal made here like adopting them in police can work to some extent and any pension after getting a new job may be stopped. i guess army may think about train them in some other skills and one time settlement as they approach retirement. If you look at the history, cost was the biggest factor why many empires could not keep a regular army. So before the situation go out of hand we need to address it.

    To shalabh
    Do you have any idea how many of them ever fought in a war? It is actually much small. But I agree we have to keep a reserve.

    To shashank
    Satis’s suggestion will make their life better than shredding tears for them.

    To g.raman
    It matters. Since about 1/5th of the population do not have enough to feed themselves.

    To K.R.Athiyaman
    We had the British to look after our defense for 200 years and that has not contributed much to development of India.

    Who are this ‘we’ to withdraw from Kashmir and North-east. Next if there is a trouble in Delhi or Andhra, would you withdraw from there too? I guess a mass migration of this ‘we’ to some green planet we be more costlier than army pensions :D

    Comment by Raaz — April 2, 2008 @ 12:05 pm

  32. I think all this jabber is just BS. u hv had 87 officers pass out from IMA instead of the 400 odd that shud hv. go ahead n we will hv to borrow officers n jawans from neighbouring countries to fight our wars. perhaps at a much larger cost. Baiting the Army seems to be a lovely intellectual game where any and every one can play.

    Comment by Jayant — April 8, 2008 @ 9:27 am

  33. some times one wonders why did we join the defence services. i have served and have taken part in the wars. i am proud of the service and of the country.But some where along, all the definitions have changed. today`s young men would rather outsource the defence of the nation(satish?)on the west to the neighbour there and in the north to the neighbour there. young men today are concentrating on the mammon only and the pride in the nation has taken a back seat. writing such things in the blogs is hurting and should be discouraged especially articles from those who have never served in the services.

    Comment by Indian — April 8, 2008 @ 1:17 pm

  34. Late Gen Sundarji, predicted this in 1986 when he made a presentation to the PM(Late Rajiv Gandhi) during one of the Army Commanders’ Conf. I was present at the Conf. He warned the PM that the pension bill will overtake the pay bill soon if we maintain a standing army of over 10 lac men. He was willing to release the inf soldiers after 5 yrs of service and they could form the reserve in case of emergency. But he insisted that his men should be absorbed in para- military duties which required similar trg and not left ‘on the streets’ after their service in the Army. Some of them can be absorbed in the other arms/services depending upon their qualifications/aptitude. Gen Sundarji provided some facts & figures to stress his point.

    Rajiv Gandhi was ‘sold’ to the idea, but he couldn’t implement the suggestion since the ‘babus’ in MHA didn’t want to lose their kingdom and successfully torpedoed Gen Sundarji’s suggestion! We now know as to how many ‘para- military’ forces are in the Home Ministry and they are ever expanding! But they still fall back on the Army when they can’t handle the situation!

    Even now it is not too late. As some one has suggested earlier in this web site,we should give military trg to all able bodied men for two years and we will not need a large standing army which is a drain on our economy as a ‘revenue’ expenditure. Hope this Govt will wake up and act!

    Comment by Lt Gen Rajgopal — May 25, 2008 @ 8:56 am

  35. I hope guys like Satish are very few in numbers in our country. He is a fit case for conscription to begin with. Let him undergo the rigour and the grind of military training and be posted to a remote field area for three years.

    Comment by R. Gopal — May 25, 2008 @ 12:20 pm

  36. Besides finding out ways to reduce burgeoning pension bill of the defence forces, the establishment needs to plug the leakages too.

    Corruption in defence is colossal. Despite the exposure by Tehelka a few years back, the situation has not improved. Hwo does one plug this menace and drainage of exchequer?
    Indian Defence is also among the top importers of defence equipment in the world although we continue to support 40 ordinance factories across the country. Its alleged that the army does not use the ammunitions supplied by these factories due to its inferior technology and/or impact.Why not close down such factories and/or outsource some of the products like unforms (one of the 40 factories only makes uniforms) from other places?
    Apart from the staioned personnel, the defence is also sitting on billions of dollars worth of real estate in major cities. A case in point is Bengaluru, where defence probably owns half the city’sland leading to congestion & traffic jams in a fast growing city. Can the defence reassess its requirement of real estate and maybe sell out prime land in the citites & settle for “strategic locations” outside the city limits?
    The defence is indeed a good training ground for teamwork, strategising, dynamic planning and much more. Why don’t they start a training institute for civilians (where the young graduates of the top institutes in the country can spend 3 months learning these inputs and pay for it too) instead of drafting them ?

    All such measures & much much more would hopefully generate enough surplus to maintain our defence forces in line with the demands of modern-day warfare. All said and done, inspite of the fact that India is one of the chaotic democracies; one of few surviving institutions that we can still be proud of ,is our defence. The establishment (read the government) should endeavour to make it better & modern and not ruin the process for the lack of a few bucks.

    Comment by Curious — May 25, 2008 @ 5:50 pm

  37. We do have a huge army and such huge army is a necccessity because of the unfortunate fact that we are surrounded by china, pakistan and bangladesh(If u doubt it refer indian history). suggesting to cut it short becuase it is costing us a lot is no way to go. Rather comeup with ideas to absorb retired personnels productively.

    Moreover replacing army men with technology is a noble idea but given India is not as rich as USA, not feasible. And having more army men and low technology suits India(though unfortunate) as unemployment rate in India is high unlike some other countries.

    On the issue of corruption and productivity, army is not the only segment where these two evils r found.

    PS- avoid statements like “India don’t need army” or “enemy is in our head”, seriously dude what were you thinking.

    Comment by DC — May 27, 2008 @ 5:19 pm

  38. A large army required or not for India? Well, intelligent question. Absorbing military men after some years of service into para military forces. Another intelligent and viable option.But the pension bill? Whether for those retired from the army or para military, they have to be sustained for giving their best years in the service of the nation. This is one cost the country has to bear for securing the sovreignity and safety of all countrymen. It will do well to remember that the armed forces are not only meant for the borders but also to secure internal calamities. Why does a man build a house. For his own security and that of his family? Look at the cost or financial burden he shoulders and for something which he is not sure whether he will live to enjoy in old age. He may might as well die at an early age! So why undertake the expenditure and go through the financial burden? I hope the intelligents(sic) are getting a point. Vested interest, corruption and the like wil exist with mankind. Can one wish away such evils? When there is no concrete answer or solution to all these then questions then why throw the burden on to the people who have at least ventured out to give a bit of their patriotism in the name of their brethren who can sleep in peace most of their nights because someone at the borders stay burn their midnight oil to ensure it.

    Comment by rajiv — May 28, 2008 @ 1:39 pm

  39. It is good to discuss subjects related to security of the nation. For too long there has been no such public discussion under the false notion of SECRECY.This has led to many uninformed view expressed above.If we question every aspect of Armed Forces, then possibly we may get many useful suggestions.Such analysis is continuously happening in theGovt(Ministry Of defence) where overall strength,Teeth To Tail Ratio,Mechanisation,use of Simulators and Robotics etc are discussed.Generating ideas for Brainstorming can be done by all and sundry but proper analysis can only be done by only knowledgable persons and decisions taken by people who have to shoulder the responsibility for the results.Since decisions taken regarding Defence would take a very long time to show results and probably only during a next war, hence decisions have to taken carefully.
    A soldier joins the service not only for the obvious pay but with an assurance that while he is serving the nation at its borders and even in the sad event of his demise, the nation would lookafter his family.So no one should crib about the pension bill. we may reduce future intake or alter pay and allce for future intake, but compensation package of existing serving and retired personnel have to compensated as promised otherwise no one would join a service which has NO easy exit.Let us offer comments on this subject very carefully.

    Comment by subash — June 2, 2008 @ 9:48 pm

  40. read off the cuff comments by many having no knowledge of ground realities about defence services.MOD is staffed by 75% civ and 25% by def servicemen[max].all maj decisions on def matters/deals/purchases are made by non uniformed [IAS]staff/politicions finally.imagine what would have happened during Kargill problem if army was half the strength of today .when on ground it is a game of numbers in every thing,besides,ofcourse, the quality of equipment/trg/leadership.

    Comment by ramesh — June 16, 2008 @ 6:15 pm

  41. It is all very well decrying the army for all the ills that plague the nation. When the army does not get a say in matters that concern it ( procurement of arms & eqpt, 6th Pay Commission etc) and the so called babus decide what is good or bad for the army, then this is what happens ( a chinese debacale- a la 1962). It is all very fine, when you are based in a city (or atleast a town), surrounded by your near & dear ones, warm, comfortable, cozy and secure in your home firm in the belief that there is the ARMY MAN out there roughing it out for your safety, comfort & your tomorrow, while his families & his today/ tomorrow itself is not safe and further becoming unsafe due to callous, unbecoming comments by uninformed, misinformed arm-chair experts on the security of the nation, economy and the MILITARY MAN. “Esteemed” countrymen, citizens of my DEAR NATION, how long have you been away from your near & dear ones? Have you had to miss out on attending important family events, birth of your child, the final rites of your father/mother, the first step/ word spoken by your child because you were deployed in some god forsaken place guarding the security of a thankless, remorseless and an ungreatful brethren.If you think the Army is corrupt, you require to take a relook (also before you point a finger of accusation you should know that five point back at you…Satish, what is your line of work– are you on of the indian bureaucracy???). The Army is the only organisation where individuals are promptly brought to book for corruption, for instance like in the TEHELKA case… The civilian counterparts (culprits) are still at large leading easy life without an action having been taken against them & some of that very ESTEEMED lot is in charge of governing the nation this very day…. What have you to say????

    Comment by Oscar — July 3, 2008 @ 9:08 am

  42. This chest beating about the size of defence pensions is clearly the work of a person who chooses to close his/her eyes to reality. If the 85% of the retirees, the figures being that of blogger and not mine, were given a second career in police/para military/central police forces,the pensions would shrink dramatically. It would also take away, at one stroke, the frustration among the men. But it would also take away the ability of distributing largesse and opportunity for nepotism for the political and the bureaucratic classes. Thus, a simple step, so obvious, has not been implemented so far.

    6th CPC, for all its shortcomings, has focused attention on this aspect. Let it be implemented forthwith.

    Comment by Older Crow — July 4, 2008 @ 4:51 pm

  43. The subject is a nonsense and not based on national needs. The writer and other have compiared US forces with that of India. US has a friendly country in its north,very small countries touching its southern bourder and large oceons flanking its eastern and western borders. US produces advanced weapons whereas we purchase the obsolete ones paying half the cost to the supplier and the other half to our political leaders in terms of their (hidden)commission.
    Gentlemen, let us not compel thousands of families whose men have struggled to provide us peaceful days and nights starve to deth. Better let us fight against corruption and corrupted leaders.

    Comment by R S SAHNI — September 5, 2008 @ 4:07 pm

  44. Dear friends,
    One or some of us do not want large/strong army, excellent idea, but before exercising this sacred option please visit Afganistan for a couple of months. Some great people from old Kingdoms of this country might have thought in this fashion with the end result, our forefathers were attacked and forced to slavery. For God’s sake, please let us know the future you have in your mind for the free citizens of this country. Thank God, you didn’n put these intellectuals in decision making body of this country.

    Comment by Daniel Cyril Lobo — September 20, 2008 @ 9:13 pm

  45. Dear All,
    May god continue to bless you. I am a retired defence person who had served for 20 Years. During my service period, I have fought numerous unofficial war against the enemy of our Nation and restored the sanctity of our country at the cost of the lives of my coleagues.All the news are not published in the newspaper/media, so you may not be knowing the hardship/difficulties of our lives we faced everyday. Therefore, it is not your fault to think that”we don’t need this large number of defence personnel”. India is facing considerable threats from all potential sources. To pacify these threats, India needs an efficient Defence force, which we do have. Therefore,I requestto all of you, please visit any defence museum or establishment, your all questions will find an answer. After all, how many people offers his life for the sake of money/service? Everybody gets sallaries against the service offered by them, but a defence person gets his salary by protecting your and your faily’s life.
    Jai Hind!

    Comment by Sudip — November 24, 2008 @ 12:46 pm

  46. Let me cut it short. All these economists who are pained at the defence expenditure and the pension bill : I tell all these people – have some guts and disband the defence forces once and for all and give the task of defending this nation the the CPOs or better still outsource the defence. What I actually want to tell these insincere fraud is : do not yap about soldiering unless you know about it. If you have some beans and shame in you then join the Infantry and try doing the job that these soldiers are doing. Also prepare your sons to join army and be prepared to recieve coffins at your doorsteps. OTHERWISE JUST KEEP YOUR MOUTH BLOODY SHUT. This is as polite as I can be with bums like these. Amen!!!!

    Comment by ashok — December 20, 2008 @ 2:39 pm

  47. DISCRIMINATION IN FIXATION OF PENSION OF PRE-2006/Sep 2008 PENSIONERS.
    1 Article 14 strikes at arbitrariness in State action and ensures fairness and equality of treatment to all. It is attracted where equals are treated differently without any reasonable basis. The principle underlying the guarantee is that all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike both in privileges conferred and liabilities imposed. Equal laws would have to be applied to all in the same situation and there should be no discrimination between one person and another if as regards the subject-matter of the legislation their position is substantially the same.
    2 It only means that all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike both in privileges and liabilities imposed. Equal laws would have to be applied to all in the same situation, and there should be no discrimination between one person and another if as regards to the same subject matter.
    3 Article 14 forbids class division. The classification is founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons or things that are grouped together from those that are left out of the group and that differentia must have a rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved by the statute in question. The DP&T P&PW have divided the homogeneous class of present, past and future pensioners while issuing their memorandums for the purpose of fixation/revision of their pension consequent upon the 6th CPC report.
    4 The main and common grievance applicable to the existing pensioners is of the denial to the pre-2006 pensioners and some of the later period of the arbitrary introduction of words of limitation. There is nothing immutable and incontrovertible about the choosing of an event as an eligibility criterion subsequent to a specified date. If the event is certain but its occurrence at a point of time is considered wholly irrelevant and arbitrarily selected having an undesirable effect of dividing a homogeneous class and of introducing discrimination, the same can be easily severed and set aside by any court of the country. It is therefore just and proper that the words introducing the arbitrary fortuitous circumstances which are vulnerable as denying equality be severed and struck down.
    5 The point to note is ‘the benefit of revised scales of pay in the pay bands and grade pay is not limited to those who enter service subsequent to the date fixed for introducing revised scales but is extended to all those in service prior to that date’. Even in the case of the new retirees; the benefit of gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, past service was taken into consideration. It is therefore emphasized that the scheme of liberalisation is not for new retirees benefit. Pension has correlation to average emoluments and the length of qualifying service and the liberalisation is not meant merely for the future retirees after a specific date.
    6 It is well known that the pension is a right and not a bounty or gratuitous benefit. The payment of pension does not depend upon the discretion of the Government alone but it is governed as per the constitution of the nation and by the rules framed by the parliament thus a government servant coming within the preview of those rules is entitled to claim the pension.
    7 The demand of “One Rank One Pension (OROP)” has been raised time and again by the defense personnel, though it may have to imply to all the central Govt. pensioners, may they have retired from defence forces or from any other central Govt. departments and/may they have already retired or future retirees. Unfortunately and regrettably, all the preceding CENTAL PAY COMMISSIONS (CPC) and the Governments have been shying away this legitimate demand. It is mentioned with anguish, agony, pain, grief and distress that it has been happening despite the fact that certain main political parties of the country like Congress Party and Bhartia Janta Party, included this demand in their election manifestoes. This subject was also included in the President’s address in the Parliament in 2004 thereby making OROP the declared policy of Government (not of any particular political party).
    8 Principally, the concept of OROP implies that, who have retired or will be retiring from the same rank/post with the same length of service, should always get same amount of pension, irrespective to their dates of retirements and total length of service provided to the nation. 6th pay commission has discussed this issue vide Para 5.1.46 & 5.1.47 (Pages 338 & 339) of its report. 6CPC and has held that “The Fifth CPC extended full parity between pre & post 1/1/1986 pensioners and a modified the parity between pre & post 1/1/1996 pensioners to bring them at par. In modified parity, it was provided that pension could, in no case, be less than 50% of the minimum of the corresponding Fifth CPC revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired.” This principle was fully and strictly followed in letter and spirit by the Govt. and THE MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PG AND PENSIONS (DEPTT OF PENSION AND PENSIONER’S WELFARE) RESOLUTION NO. 38/37/08-P&PW (A).
    9 Nonetheless, consequent on 6th CPC report and the subject matter OROP is being taken up separately by the defense personnel. Here in, the subject matter is the case of application of pro rata of 33 years service, which was earlier applicable to all the central govt. employees, serving as well as retired ones; including defence forces personnel. Now, the 6th CPC have taken off this clause, but, the DP&T, P-PW have still incorporated for the pre 2006 pensioners and few others from a selected specific date in their OMs on their own without assigning any authority or reason.
    10 It is emphatically and vigorously point out that in accordance with the Article 14 and the principle of modified parity, the 6th CPC has recommended as under:-
    11 The 6th CPC report with beneficial amendments will be applicable w.e.f. 01 Jan 2006.
    12 “The full pension will be granted 50% of last pay drawn of the pay band of the post plus grade pay after rendering 20 years of service. The earlier clause for grant of full pension of 33 years is categorically and unconditionally removed.
    13 Further, in the case of existing pensioners, it is clearly mentioned in the 6th CPC Report that the revised pension will be calculated after multiplying the previous pension by a factor 2.26, but it will 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”.
    14 In the Ministry of Personnel, PG and Pensions (Deptt of Pension and Pensioner’s welfare) Resolution No. 38/37/08-P&PW (A) dated 29 08 08, it is clearly stated under item No. 12 that the Govt. had accepted the contents of para 5.1.47 of 6th CPC Report with the modifications; in that fixation of pension shall be based on a multification factor of 1. 86 i.e. basic pension + Dearness Pension (wherever applicable) + dearness relief of 24 % as on 01 01 06 instead of 1. 74 some other similar points which are beneficial to the employees.
    15 The 6th CPC in para 5 1 .47 of its Report has said 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 6th CPC concludes Para 5. 1. 47 by recommending that “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 prerevised 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. The Govt. accepted this without any objection.
    16 Ministry of Finance, Deptt of Exp. (Implementation Cell), vide their O M No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 30 08 08 issued detailed instruction for implementation of 6th CPC Govt. accepted report, enclosing with it the Fitment Tables S – 1 to S – 34; (later in some cases favourable amended) allotting Revised Pay Band + Grade Pay for each Pre-revised Pay Scale. In column 1 of each table the minimum pre-revised basic pay is indicated and in second column Minimum Pay in the Pay Band, in third column Grade Pay and in last column Revised Basic Pay is indicated.
    17 Ministry of Personnel, PG & P, Deptt of Pension and Pensioner’s welfare, vide para 4.2 of Memorandum F No.38/37/08-P&PW (A) dated 2nd September 2008, issued instructions for the implementation of the Govt. ‘s decision for fixation of revised pension of pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners. They have again repeated in the para “the Revised Pension in no case shall be lower than 50 % of the minimum of the pay in pay band plus the grade pay corresponding to the pre-revised pay scale from which the pensioner had retired.” In view of the point explained above, the Finance Ministry’s has made it amply clearly, visibly and undoubtedly emphasized that the full pension will be 50% of the last pay drawn plus grade pay. Thus, in all the case of present, future including all the existing pensioners of pre 2006 period; it will be fixed 50% of the minimum pay of the pay band of the post plus grade pay of the post. As such there is no deference in either case. Here, the pension fixation authority has to ascertain the old pay scale of a pensioner to fix/revise his pension in the corresponding revised pay band and grade pay. Based on it, his pension is to be re-fixed accordingly.
    18 However, it was further added in the above office memorandum No: 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 2.9.2008 Government Servants who retired during 1.1.2006 to 1.9.08 after completion of 33 years of qualifying service will be eligible for full pension and the pension of those Government Servants who retired before 2.9.08 with qualifying service of less than 33 years will continue to be proportionate to the full pension based on their actual qualifying service.
    19 It may be noted that hereafter the application of Pro rata of 33 years has nothing to do in any case for fixation of pension of the existing pensioners, hence not required to be applied in any one’s case. In all the cases, henceforth, the pension is to be fixed based on 2o years of service rendered. However, if pension is granted in the cases where service rendered is less than 20 years, in such cases, the pro rata of 20 years is to be applied since the condition of grant of full pension is 20 years; especially, as the clause of 33 years is especially and principally removed by the 6th CPC.
    20 We all know and elaborated above in detail that as per 6CPC recommendations for pension benefits which were implemented by the Government, CG employees who have completed the qualifying service of 20 years will be eligible for full pension (viz., 50 % of last pay drawn). However, the Government gave effect to this order only from 2.9.2008 and those who retired before 2.9.2008, completion of 33 years of service is mandatory for getting full pension.
    21 Save for, in spite of such a clear position, the DP&T, overlooking and ignoring the contents of 6th CPC and resolution of the Govt, it sad to point out that the DP&T have still incorporated the clause of pro rata of 33 years for fixation of pension in the cases of the existing pre-2006 pensioners which is utterly, and absolutely discriminatory, biased, prejudiced, bigoted and inequitable. They seem to have done it without obtaining clarification from the 6th CPC or Cabinet or Central Govt. Even if they have obtained approval of the Govt., they could have done it by misleading, in disingenuous manners, deceptively and deceivingly. In view of this fact it seems the DP&T P&PW have done it with an ulterior, inexplicable, puzzling, baffling and mysterious motive, they will not come within the preview of this order.
    22 It is pertinent to highlight the fact that the Constitution Bench of Honorable Supreme Court of India gave decision in case of D S Nakra and others Verses Union of India (1983) 1 SCC 305 . One of the questions posed in the case was whether a class of Pensioners could be divided for the purpose of entitlement and payment of pension into those who retired by certain date and those who retired thereafter. The Constitution Bench held that such division being both arbitrary and unprincipled; the classification did not stand the test of Article 14. The argument that the cut off date had to be fixed in view of the limited financial resources available to cover up additional expenses to be incurred on account of revision of pay scale was not accepted by the Constitution Bench of the honorable Supreme Court. This exactly applies to the case of pre-2006 and post 2006 Pensioners. In case it is still done by the DP&T, P&PW, it will be a case of violation of Article 14 of Constitution of India as well as against the ruling of Constitution Bench of honorable Supreme Court of India cited above.
    23 Another similar case: The Honorable Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 5566 of 2006 vide Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 12357 of 2006, Union of India and others Appellants Vs. SPS Vains (Retd.) and other Respondents; gave its another historical Judgment on 09 09 08, involving the similar matter of equality wherein the honorable Supreme Court fully agreed with the decision given by Constitution Bench of Honorable Supreme Court of India in D S Nakra case.
    24 It is therefore once again emphasized that the division of Pensioners in two groups namely pre – 2006/Sep 2009 pensioners and post – 01 Sep 2009 pensioners, with a cut off date of 01 09 06, is violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India and against the above cited ruling of the honorable Supreme Court of India.
    25 But in spite of all what has been brought out above, the MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PG AND PENSIONS (DEPTT OF PENSION AND PENSIONER’S WELFARE) RESOLUTION NO. 38/37/08-P&PW (A), Pension have issued orders contrary to Art. 14 and Apex court judgement. This has defeated the very concept of 6th CPC and Govt resolution, according to which, the minimum pension is now to be reduced applying pro-rata of 33 years in the cases where the pensioner had put in less than 33 years service. It is thus utterly, absolutely, out-rightly, and wholly overlooking and neglecting the contents of CPC report, and Govt., resolution, according to which pension is to be fixed after 20 years 50% of last pay drawn for the future retirees after Jan 2006 and 50% of minimum of the pay band plus grade pay. This seems to have been done by them considering as if there themselves are the Govt. of India and there is no one above them. Also, they seem to have done it intentionally, considering that they will never be affected of such a clause, 20 years clause of the 6th CPC will remain operative/applicable for them. If 33 years clause was to be made applicable by them, it should have been made applicable for future retirees as well even after the ensuing/subsequent pay commission reports. It is considered sadistic decision of the DP&T, P-PW by the entire nation/public, whosoever reads this clause.
    26 It is once again re-iterated that the condition of 33 years service is neither mentioned anywhere in the 6CPC neither report nor it is in Government Resolution. No policy on common matters can be framed without any reason/logic. It is rather not clear and known as to on what basis and with whose consent this condition has been incorporated while changing the original orders. Obviously, the concept of 6th CPC and Govt. resolution has been completely ignored by the implementing authorities.
    27 In this regard it is worth to discuss the rulings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which enjoy the status of LAW OF THE LAND. 6th Pay Commission has referred to the famous judgment in the case of D.S. Nakra Vs Union of India (AIR 1983, SC 130) vide Para 5.1.3 of its report. This Judgment pronounced by a Constitution Bench of Supreme Court is available at http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/qrydisp.aspx for the benefit of all who want to read it. The case dates back to 70s when the Government had introduced Liberalized Pension Scheme. Earlier pension was calculated based on the average salary of last 36 months. Under Liberalized Pension Scheme, the provisions were changed to calculate the pension based on the average salary of last 10 months. The case was filed by one retired civil officer (subject to Central Civil Pension Rules 1972) and one retired defense officer (subject to Army Pension Regulations) and the third petitioner was a Registered Society. Only the following extracts of this judgment will clarify the LAW OF THE LAND:
    28 “Proceeding further, this Court observed that where all relevant considerations are the same, persons holding identical posts may not be treated differently in the matter of their pay merely because they belong to different departments. If that can’t be done when they are in service, can that be done during their retirement? Expanding this principle, one can confidently say that if pensioners form a class, their computation cannot be by different formula affording unequal treatment solely on the ground that some retired earlier and some retired later.”
    29 “All pensioners whenever they retired would be covered by the liberalised pension scheme, because the scheme is a scheme for payment of pension to a pensioner governed by 1972 Rules. The date of retirement is irrelevant. But the revised scheme would be operative from the date mentioned in the scheme and would bring under its umbrella all existing pensioners and those who retired subsequent to that date. In case of pensioners who retired prior to the specified date, their pension would be computed afresh” Another recent Judgment pronounced by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 9th September 2008 is available at http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/qrydisp.aspx for the information authorities and others. This case was originally filed by some Retired Major Generals of the Army with regard to fixation of their pension after implementation of 5th Pay Commission. Government of India filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the judgment of Punjab High Court, (Civil Appeal No. 5566 of 2008, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 12357 of 2006 Union of India vs. SPS Vains (Retd.) and others). In this case Hon’ble Supreme Court has directed as under:
    30 “We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal and modify the order of the High Court by directing that the pay of all pensioners in the rank of Major General and its equivalent rank in the two other wings of the Defence Services be notionally fixed at the rate given to similar officers of the same rank after the revision of pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996, and, thereafter, to compute their pensionary benefits on such basis”.
    31 It is abundantly clear from the above extracts that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already accepted the principle of equality and this enjoys the status of the LAW OF THE LAND. It may be noted from the foregoing that the implementing officials of 6th CPC have not followed the contents of 6th CPC and Govt. resolution while issuing various clarifications.
    32 Deprival of due and that too justified due of Revised Pension has created gloom and obscurity as well as a great resentment, antipathy and umbrage amongst all the pre-2006 retirees, since they are helpless due to their old age and financial constraints. I may not hesitate to accept that it may not be possible for the effected pensioners, especially due to financial constraints, all of them spread in far flung areas in the country and in their advanced age to approach Courts of Law to seek justice. Please do have mercy on them. They feel most cheated, disgusted and frustrated, as though the 6th CPC had done justice with the pre-2006 retirees, which was accepted by the Govt. with the approved of the Union Cabinet with favorable amendments, but, subsequent modifications and amendments issued under Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pension, and Deptt. Of Pension and Pensioner’s welfare vide various OMs., pertaining to fixation of all the pre-2006 Pensioners has shattered their hope and aspirations beyond imagination.
    33 There being a great injustice, prejudice and discrimination to the pensioners; an earnest request is made to all the politicians, MPs, Ministers, Govt. servants, entire public of the nation, luminaries, news papers, media/electronic media and readers, the pension associations of all the departments of the country as well as all the pre-2006 pensioners and their well-wishers to make public this issue so that our Political Leaders are made aware of it, who can take some urgent remedial action in the matter.
    34 In view of the situation explained above, all the concerned authorities are requested to please do look into this matter without any prejudice, chauvinism, narrow-mindedness, discrimination and insularity to initiate suitable action and amendment to remove the unwarranted, gratuitous, uncalled-for, unjustifiable and unsubstantiated pro rata clause of 33 years which has been incorporated intentionally or un-intestinally. Most urgent or as early as possible of the concerned authorities is solicited please.
    35 I whole heartedly and sincerely convey my personal and special thanks to all the politicians, MPs, Ministers, Govt. servants, entire public of the nation, luminaries, news papers, media/electronic media and readers, the pension associations of all the departments of the country as well as all the pre-2006 pensioners and their families to co-operate and assist with the old pensioners and convince/ask the concerned authorities to do the needful in the matter most urgently please.
    Yours Sincerely,
    Col. (retd). K L Jaspal.
    Email address: krishanlaljaspal@yahoo.co.in

    Comment by K L Jaspal — May 20, 2009 @ 5:45 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Powered by WP Hashcash

Powered by WordPress