FEATURES OF OROP..various facts...must be known to some veterans who are always CONFUSED about what is happening in the corridors.REGARDING THE OROP...ALGEBRA/GEOMETRY/TRIGNOMETRY.....rgds..Sharan ************************* Modalities 1. The Reckonable Emoluments based on highest pay drawn by each rank, irrespective of pay group with reference to years of Qualifying Service will be compiled across three services as on 01 Apr 14. For implementing OROP, if the pension calculated based on this Reckonable Emoluments is more than the pension given in 17 Jan 13 letters in respect of Officers/JCOs/ORs, the pension of all pensioners irrespective of date of retirement will be increased to this level. 2. Similar revision will be carried out on 01 July of each year starting 01 Jul 2014 after taking into consideration the increment admissible on that day. Notes 1. If the current pension drawn is more than the proposal, it will be protected. 2. Where revised pension for junior rank is higher than senior rank with same qualifying service, pension of senior rank has to be stepped up to the level of the pension for junior rank. 3. Where the revised pension of a rank at any length of service is lower than the pension of that rank in lower length of service, the pension of higher length of service has to be stepped up to the level of the lower length of service of that rank. 4. The linkage of full pension with 33 years qualifying service is removed for all pensioners both past & current pensioners. 5. For Hav/eqvt and below 32 years ceiling for qualifying service is removed and table extended to 33 yrs. 6. All Honorary Nb Sub and equivalents be granted the pension of Nb Sub (MACP). 7. In case live data is not available for any particular case the corresponding pension for the next rank with same length of service to be taken reducing the difference in Grade Pay. Comments Pathak 1. The modality of fixing equivalence is not clear. How would Majors be fixed? How would Lt Col(S) be placed? 2. There is no clarity on Groups of JCO and below. Would groups vanish? Rationalization of groups across the services. 3. What about disability/war injury etc? Would these be automatically hiked since they are percentages of the Pension? Needs clarification. This has not happened after the 17 Jan 2013 letters. We are still on Circular 456. 4. What about pensions of SSC/EC officers and those with less than 20 yrs service? This is what the FM said “We also need to take care of those who served in the defence forces only for a limited number of years” 5. Illustrative tables would bring our more comments. Comments from Shashank Bendre: 1.The draft of RWP Features is too brief to be understood fully. 2.Para 2 of draft:Pension is fixed only one time till the next pay revision.How does increment come into picture for a pensioner? 3.Notes 4: Agree that linkage of 33 yrs for full pension be removed as is done for post 01-01-2006 pensioners.As long as a person puts in a minimum service (20 yrs for officers and lesser years specified for ORs), full pension be entitled. 4.Pathaks Comments Para 5: Exhaustive illustrative tables may be provided to cater to all possible cases.Since the Air Force and the Navy have different structures for ORs, the recommendations have to be linked properly. 5. Problem of officers of Major rank has to be sorted out first.In this there are two categories: (a) Majors not given TS Lt.Col. rank when the rule was not in force then and did not get the higher rank though they had more than 21 actual years service. (b)Majors granted TS Lt.Col scale or those due but not granted as per para (a) above, should get the same pension as a Lt.Col.(S) scale From Wg Cdr Ravi Mani 1. The following issues need clarity: (a) Mechanism of fixing pension of a pre 01 Jan 2006 military pensioner of a rank/total length of service combination that does not exist TODAY, for example, given that Wg Cdrs rank is attained in 11/13 years whereas pre 2004, it was attained in 18/19 years(18 for Flying Branch and 19 for Ground Duty Branches)-hence, today, you will not find a Wg Cdr with , say, 26 years of service. Thus, for pre 2006 cases, fixation of equivalence with a present RANK will flounder on the point of total service. Thus, the ways out will be to give annual increments to the pre 2006 pensioner, with the basic pension being fixed at the TOP of the scale of the current rank involved (this has already been mentioned by Wingco Bendre), and protecting the pension of a higher ranking officer who retires today. Fixing the pension at the bottom of todays scale will cause problems by way of harming the interests of older pensioners who had put in quite a few years in the rank prior to retirement. Another possibility is to BUNCH pensioners in five year groups, as has been suggested by someone. (b) When we talk of future increments after initial fixation as on, say 01 Jan 2014, it cannot be annual increments, as that will prove unmanageable, and the better course will be to give the increment on 01 Jan 2016. This will be every 6 months as I understand and mechanism could be worked out.Very much manageable. (c) If any past pensioner had less than full QS for pension at retirement pre 1.1.2006, then the position on the re-fixed scale would need to be offset to maintain the difference between one with full QS and one with less QS. 2. Of course, beyond the fact that OROP is necessary to alleviate the problems faced by earlier pensioners, it in no way solves the problem of dilution of ranks within the Armed Forces , not the greying of the Armed Forces, and it also does not solve the issues created by the bloating of the civilian gazetted cadre vs parity with the Forces. The best way would have been to retain the guaranteed increments that were in vogue in the IV CPC, de-linking the pay/pension matter from rank (except that a higher rank would attract a higher grade/rank pay). This would be the NFU for the Forces. The disadvantage to faujis due to retirement at 36 years for a soldier/sailor/airman and 48/52 for officers should have been offset by mandatory grant of the pension benefits of TWO further pay commissions for men, and one for an officer. The obvious disadvantage of the rigours of Military Service should have been reverting to a higher pension for faujis. SFP/LFP and disability pension cases should have been allowed full pay till normal retirement, and enhanced pension thereafter. 3. Also, finally, the numbers problem, and the requirement that quality of intake must not be lowered for the regular cadre would dictate that short service entrants form a large percentage of the officer and the mens cadre, with assured jobs on release in the civilian streams. Dear Cdr Ravi, Brig(R) CS Vidyasagar I have gone through the version of OROP of Army HQ. My comments whatever they are worth are given below. As per my understanding, OROP can be implemented only if Reckonable emoluments of all ranks are fixed like that of Army Cdrs and Service Chiefs for maximum possible number of years of service. (The emoluments of Army Cdrs and equivalents is Rs 80,000 pm and that of Service Chiefs is Rs 90,000 pm irrespective of their date of retirement). This is not very difficult as this information could be easily obtained from PPOs of all ranks who served for various periods as on 31 Mar 2014. PCDAs of the three services would be having this data. 1. Point 1. I agree with the plan of Army HQ to arrive at maximum reckonable emoluments for all ranks as on 01 Apr 2014 from all three services. But Group X pay is more than that of Group Y. So even the groups have to be taken into account otherwise it is not OROP as personnel of Group X will suffer financially. 2. Point 2. I agree with understanding of Army HQ that Reckonable emoluments change for each rank on every 01 Jul of the year. So the last reckonable emoluments need to be reworked out on every 01 Jul of the year to arrive at retiring person. This will ensure pension of same rank with same number of years of service irrespective of date of retirement is same i.e. OROP. If this is not done, then person retiring on say 31 Jan 2016 will get less pension compared to one retiring on 31 Dec 2025. Then we are back to square 1 i.e. non – OROP or MODIFIED PARITY. 3. Point 3. I agree with suggestion of Army HQ that the restriction of 33 years for offices and 32 years for Havs for pre – 2006 has to be removed like the pay commission did for post – 2006 officers & PBOR. The pre – 2006 retiree putting in more than 26 years service (for Col) looses out. 4. Point 4. The question of Senior ranked person (Maj Gen) getting less reckonable emoluments than his junior(Brig) or the person with same rank (Col) but with less number of years of service (30 years) getting more pension than the one with more number of years of service (34 years) does not arise in post – 2006 scenario due to annual increments and higher initial pay for that rank as per fitment tables of SAI 2/S/2008. 5. Point 5. To enable OROP to be implemented, we have to work out last reckonable emoluments for all ranks with same service and same group with highest amount and treat it as fixed like for Army Cdrs and equivalents(Rs 80,000 pm). 6. Point 6. Due to stagnation increment, all pre – 2006 ranks with higher service get the same reckonable emoluments due to bunching on 01 Jan 2006 when they move into 6th CPC scales of pay. For example 1974 commissioned officers and 1976 commissioned officers would have been fixed the same pay as on 01 Jan 2006 due to bunching. This will result in both of them getting the same pension at the time of retirement. The difference between 1970 commissioned officer and 1976 commissioned officer is just one increment at the end of 5th CPC scale and difference in reckonable emoluments as on 01 Jan 2006 would be very marginal. This does not happen in post – 2006 (6thCPC scales) as pay scale covers longer years of service unlike 5th CPC scales. 7. Point 6 : Maximum Service. As on today the Ex-NDAs (who are youngest) get commission in the Army at age of 21 years due to 12th Standard being the minimum education qualification to apply for UPSC Exam. Most of Ex-NDAs are 22 years at the time of getting commission in the Army as it may not be possible for the students to get into NDA in their first attempt. So the commissioning age can be safely taken at 22 years. Since all officers retire in the rank of Colonel(TS) whose pay is same as Colonel (Selection Grade), we should calculate the maximum pay to arrive at maximum pension. The maximum pay comes only when the officer serves till his age of super-annuation due to annual increments. So the maximum service even Ex- NDA officers can put up as Col is only 54 – 22 = 32 years. 8. Point 7. Maximum Reckonable Emoluments of Col(TS). Since OROP is to be introduced prospectively w.e.f. 01 Apr 2014, we have to see what a Col(TS) would get as on 01 Jul 2013 (Pay being same from 01 Jul 2013 to 30 Jun 2014). If the Col (TS) were to retire with 34 years service as on 31 Jul 2013 he would get same pension as the one who retires on 31 Mar 2014(last reckonable emoluments do not change between 01 Jul 2013 and 31 Mar 2014). Since one gets rank of Col(TS) with 26 years service, he would be left with just 8 years before he super-annuates. Calculating backwards, his would have got rank of Col (TS) in Jul/Aug 2005 (Jul/Aug 2013 – 8 years). The minimum pay of Col(TS) as on 01 Jan 2006 is Rs 55,590 (Pay in pay band : Rs 40,890, GP : Rs 8,700 and MSP : Rs 6,000) as per fitment table of SAI 2/S/2008. So his pay as on 31 Jul 2013 should be Rs 68,860 and pension comes to Rs 34,430. See MS Excel sheet attached. 9. Point 8. Since Col(SG) would get his rank in much earlier service say 24 years(assuming), then we have to calculate how much pay and therefore pension he would get assuming he retired with 34 years service i.e. promoted to the rank of Col(SG) in say Jul/Aug 2003. Then last reckonable emoluments would be Rs 70, 420 and pension at Rs 35,210. In this case, even Col (TS) with 34 years service should get Rs 35,210 as pension. These figures need to counterchecked from PPOs of Officers who retired anytime after 31 Jul 2013. 10. Point 9. Erstwhile Majs with 13 years to be treated as Lt Col. Since AVS Committee recommended and Govt has approved that time scale ranks upto Lt Col, all pre – 2006 Majs retired with 13 years commissioned service should be treated as Lt Cols and pension should be worked out accordingly w.e.f 01 Apr 2014. 11. Point 10. Various Types of Casualty Pensions & Family Pensions. Enhancement of pension should be worked out as pension for those who are boarded out with lesser service would be less compared to those who have been given sheltered appointment in the Services and allowed to super-annuate. Same is the case with Special Family Pension and Liberalised Family Pension. These categories must be given the benefit as if the defence person served for minimum pensionable period i.e. 20/15 years. Cdr Pokar Ram 1. Taking the cue from the recommendation that Pre 16 Dec 2004 Major with QS 13 years or more should get pension equavalent to Lt Col (TS), then all Sepoys who retired in past with different years of service should get pension atleast equal to pension of a TS Nk as 14 years was introduced during 1984 for TS NK. Will that be acceptable to government ??? 2. Now after 01/01/2006 there are only two groups for jCOs / ORs viz X and Y for all the three services. Thus all of them need to be given pension based on pay group as it exists todate for the respective trade. Presently pre 09 Oct 1997 retirees are getting pension equal to that trade grooup applicable wef 10/10/1997. Cdr Ravindra Waman Pathak I.N. (Retd) Member Governing Body and Pension Cell Indian Ex Servicemen Movement 1 Surashri,1146 Lakaki Road Shivajinagar Pune 411016 raviwarsha@gmail 9822329340 Parkinsons Law of Delay: (Applies to all authorities in India) Delay is the deadliest form of denial. On 14 March 2014 22:25, Vinod Gandhi wrote: Thankyou AVM Misra for forwarding mail of Gen Radhakrishnan Dear Gen Radhakrishnan You have raised very apt questions. We need to know how is CDA working on the spirit of OROP. It is a fact that CDA is working in consultation with specialist from Armed Forces Hq. We need to work out the details and for this IESM is of the opinion that we need to form a committee which should form the guide lines and if possible some guide lines for tables. May I suggest that some knowledgeable veterans associate with this committee. May I request you to kindly suggest names for this committee. Some names which come to my mind are Maj Gen Radhakrishnan AVM RP Misra Adm Oleary Gp Capt SS Phatak Cdr Ravi Pathak May I request you to kindly head this team and choose your team. You can ofcourse pick up specialist outside the suggested names. I had been reading some Emails which were suggesting their own interpretation of the OROP definition. Col inderjeet Singhs Interpretation is definitely misleading and will give handle to MOD and CDA to dilute the definition of OROP. Some of the members are also sending their own calculations on OROP. You will agree that these tables may create high hopes in the mind of veterans about the expected pensions. I do not know what will finally come, hence a word of caution to veterans. Gen Satbir is in constant touch with Army Hq about implementation of OROP in letter and spirit. IESM will not accept any dilution in the accepted definition of OROP. please consider joining/leading this committee and give your views. This committee is expected to assist CDA and Armed Force Hq in implementing OROP Regards Gp Capt VK Gandhi VSM Gen Sec IESM L - 48, Sector - 25, NOIDA. 201301 Tele no 01204313951 Mobile 09810541222 Pls see IESM latest NEWS on iesm.org IF YOU SEE SOMEONE WITHOUT A SMILE GIVE HIM ONE OF YOURS.
Posted on: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 03:56:48 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015