Sunday, March 31, 2013

Truth and Deceit: IV CPC Rank Pay Case: Part III


Part III
DSR 1987 Regulation has equated time scale Lt Col, even if substantive after 24 years of service, equivalent to Major. This equation was not laid in paragraph 65 of Regulation 1962. This has caused financial loss to the non-selection list of officers. It should be noted that Time scale Lt Col were given the pay scale of Lt Col on completion of 21 yrs of service by the V CPC. Such officers were promoted to the rank of Col with implementation of A V Singh committee recommendations and are drawing pay and grade pay of Col after 6 CPC.
            Regulation for Army is a administrative document and is not required to        include any instructions concerning financial implications. That being  so, Regulation of    1962 edition did not include any financial clause in this  administrative document,  whereas 1987 Regulation did include      financial clause under para 66(i) by     incorporating amendment like “non  selection officers will count against officers          in the rank of Major”.

              Perhaps the ‘Rank pay’ factor was not catered for, but the definition of rank     pay is  very clear and needs to be implemented now both at IV as well as V  CPC. This has  concurrence of the MoF as per letter of 29 Feb 2000. It will restore pay and             pension denied since 1986 to date.

DGL            The DGL as submitted by the Service HQ’s to MoD is the ‘Apt’ Document fully
fully          implementing the directive of the apex court incorporating all the judgment    clauses. It needs to be persued by the Services to ensure that the ends of justice     are fully met. It has all the tables which are exhaustive for each rank from Capt to    Brig till 6 CPC corrections. Extract of that has been given in Part II. This was  obtained through RTI.To that end the Do Letter by COSC to MoD holds good and    has been put on this blog earlier.

          Pension for Pre 1986 retirees
            The pre 1986 retiree officers have been given notional rank pay with minimum for            each rank as revealed in their PPO.eg Major given pension of 3400 plus RP 600 and      Lt Col given 3900+RP 800 etc.
            Q         How is their pension set to change?
            A         Once the minimum for each rank as given in para 6 (a)(ii) is changed which has been reflected in Part I the pension will change accordingly as the minimum will go up.This will also change at V CPC and then to minimum of pay in pay band at 6 CPC  which is given in the table that follows.
Revised Pension for Pre 2006 Retirees
The pension being given to pre 2006 retires (officers) is based on 50% of  sum of minimum of pay band plus grade pay plus Military Service Pay ie (37400+8000+6000) = 25700 in case of Lt Col. As per Committee of Secy’s Report formulated by the Prime Minister to go into the pay and pension anomalies of Ex Servicemen; the pension would be based on 50% of the minimum of the pay in the pay band as per rank held on 1/1/2006 plus grade pay plus MSP. For example for Lt Col the revised pension would be 50% of (42120+8700+6000) = 28410. Diff (28410-25700=2710) and 72 % DA thereon wef 01 July 2012. A table showing the revised pension is given from the rank of Capt to Brig.
 

Rank

Existing Pension as on 1/1/2006

Revised Pension as on 1/1/2006

Diff in

Pension

Family

Pension

 

50% of Min of pay band +GP+MSP

50% of Min of pay in pay band as per rank +GP+MSP

 

60% of Revised

pension

Captain

15600+6100+6000=13850

19350+6600+6000=15975

2125

9585

Major

15600+6600+6000=14100

26650+7600+6000=20125

6025

12075

Lt Colonel

37400+8000+6000=25700

42120+8700+6000=28410

2710

17046

Colonel

37400+8700+6000=26050

46050+8900+6000=30475

4425

18285

Brigadier

37400+8900+6000=26150

48870+10000+6000=32435

6285

19461
 
Note:  The figures quoted are the ones which will change when the HSC order of 04 Sept 2012 is implemented in toto. As of date changes have been made as recommended by Committee of Secys of the MoD letter applicable from 24 Sept 2012 the arrears of which will be paid by PDAs hopefully in Apr 2013.
 
Q         When will pension arrears be paid by PCDA Pension Allahabad?
A.        Once the correct fixation has been done, CDAO Pune will fwd Last Pay Certificate (LPC) in respect of each officer to PCDA Pension Allahabad who in turn will work out the pension arrears from the time the officer retired till date. This will be remitted separately by PCDA pension through the banks. As on date no LPC has been recd by PCDA Pension.
 
Q.        What happens to increase in pay of officers who got promoted after 1/1/1986?
A         The minimum for each rank from Capt to Brig at IV CPC has to undergo change in terms of para 6 (a)(ii) of SAI 1987, which is very much part of the HSC judgment. Once that is done their minimum and DA admissible thereon will change through V CPC to 6 CPC eg Capt to 3000, Maj from 3400 to 4050, Lt Col from 3900 to 4700 etc. This logic equally holds good in case of officers who were in service as on 1/1/1986 and retired pre 1986.
 
 This is the only way by which this historical rank pay anomaly can be resolved in keeping with the directions of the HSC order dated 04 Sept 2012. Anything short of it would be violation of HSC order and lead to contempt proceedings.
 


53 comments:

Unknown said...

@RDOA
Sir, when our case is so strong ,why & what for are we waiting for. This time instead of taking up universal cause take it up only for members. Kindly do not delay as some of the bvetrans will not be there to see the day of victory if we delay. Regards

sl said...

Perhaps, its also an opportune time for including proposals for resolving the pre-post AVS-I anomalies relating to pensions, as commented on in the past.

Unknown said...

1. Basically the executive/officer/personality who issued draft letter dated...Sept 2012 immediately after the SC verdict on 4-Sept 2012 was correct.

2. While I got the same through E mail from one of my friend asking who can explained the the system. I Volunteer him to explained it in detail.(I have copy of a print out of it)

3." When correct draft was prepared considering /applying the entire aspects of SC Judgement at some level then how and why it lost its way for its application."

4. SC may now be informed that correct application of SC judgment was clear to MOD/MOF(Draft Letter ..Sept 2012)but same not implemented.It is a case of contempt of court

bala said...

So far -so good.
1.To guard against possible slip ups between the cup and lip; The contempt petition and affidavit before HSC should be adequately comprehensive with all these pts covered ( where there is general concurrence and acceptance )
Effort should be to put all these pts before the HSC ,keep on record and seek justice in the form of specific directions to UOI ,so that justice prevails-justice delayed is justice denied .To seek higher rate of interest for the delayed period due to inflation/falling value of rupee as evident from DA factor ,may be considered.
2..Also you may consider to keep open , the channels of certain interactions/negotiations with those associated depts for better understanding of issues involved -Of course with adequate caution.

3... Other and further issues of parity .NFU,NFSG,Appropriate equations with JTS,STS ...etc of pre and post 6 th CPC have to be pursued.
4.... Those alterations /amendments in that DSR /adm instr made from certain initiated DGLs by depts of GOI which are not consistent or at variance with basic principles ,they need to be reviewed and amended/corrected.
5..... Wider application of mind by large think tank with emerging info
would be enable us to resolve several issues.
6...... YES,that AVS committee provisions applicability without cut off dates is also an important issue.

WG.CDR.V.SUNDARESAN(RETD) said...

Dear all, seasons greetings.
At last, the nail is HIT ON THE HEAD.
HSC must be shown the entire points REPORT and i am sure the HSC will realise the whole issue in its correct, judicial and logical conclusion.
I CONGRATULATE RDOA AND ITS TEAM FOR THE EXCELLENT EXERCISE.
A REAL EYE OPENER TO ALL.
V.SUNDARESAN

Unknown said...

let us not mix up the issues as suggested by some.
let us strictly stick to the present case & after its logical conclusion we can tackle other issues.
RDOA as commendable as ever.

bala said...

Another pt that is relevant-
1. There were several writ petitions filed in various High courts by several officers.Even though all those WPs have been referred as related to RANK PAY cases ( wider and broad banding ), and stand disposed of as per that SC adjudication/final &ultimate orders ; those pleas of officers in those WPs & TPs either stand to have been adjudicated or there is scope to appeal in areas of unresolved issues/matters.

2..Thus , some of those petitioners listed in that HSC
viz ,WP (C) NO 960f 2009,34 /2009,TP (C) NO 56/2007.....etc
and other WPs in courts deemed to have been disposed off under that adjudication - HAVE (RETAIN THEIR LEGAL RIGHT ) LEGAL RIGHT TO PLEAD BEFORE HSC ON THOSE ISSUES THAT MAY BE CONSIDERED OR TREATED AS OUT OF RDOA s original plea .

3... Therefore ,it would be timely and useful ,if those petitioners/their legal counsels , also file their affidavits/contempt petitions. Certain interaction and coordination with them would be useful.

4.... Pse therefore involve them also by spreading info by e mails/phone calls.
There are 2 known (to me ) cases of WPs in A.P High court viz, W.P NO-25069 of 2007 and another NO with assigned T.P NOs 82 and 94 which were termed/grouped as rk pay case (with additional pleas ) ,which stands adjudicated/disposed off as per that HSC order.

These case papers can be made available to RDOA and their legal team.

Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran) said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brig Narinder Dhand (Veteran) said...

Hi Friends,
DON'T YOU THINK THAT WE HAVE MORAL OBLIGATION TOWARDS RDOA WHO FOUGHT FOR US WITH THE GOVT. WE SHOULD BE PART OF IT, AS OTHERWISE WE WILL ALWAYS FEEL GUILTY WITHIN OURSELVES IN DIGESTING THE RANK PAY ARREARS WHILE NOT BEING ITS MEMBERS. THE ASSOCIATION HAS WORKED VERY HARD AND HAVE SPENT YEARS UNDER GREAT TENSION AND EXPENDITURE.
PLEASE BECOME ITS MEMBER RIGHT AT THIS MOMENT- FILL UP THE APPLICATION AND SEND TO RDOA.
RDOA - WE ARE PROUD OF YOU..
BEST WISHES
BRIG NARINDER DHAND

sl said...

@Deepak sharma: "..mix up the issues.."

You have a valid point, there.
Because there was mention in the blog-post of pensions post rectification of basic pay, other issues like NFFU, RP for TS ranks, AVS-I etc get linked up in discussions, chats and comments.

But a rational procedure appears to be to, first of all, get the basic pay and pay-scales amended as per the logic given by RDOA.

The other issues are very important too and need to be addressed, perhaps separately.

WG.CDR.V.SUNDARESAN(RETD) said...

Dear all, how come the table (of the committee )shows the pension of LT.COL after 26 years of service uniformly as Rs.26265/=?
will there be an amendment?
v.sundaresan

sl said...

@WG.CDR.V.SUNDARESAN(RETD): This blog post is not about pensions, but as you have raised the point, the pension for Lt Col is shown correctly in Circular 500. Due to the weightage, the pension attains the maximum limit at 26 years of service.

But you are right. An amendment is required, for different reasons, on these lines.

sl said...

It is not only in the DSR that a new norm was adopted in relation to the rank pay for time-scale ranks.

As quoted in this Aerial View blog-post, the IV CPC itself differentiated between the rank pays applicable to select and time-scale ranks as follows:

"28.13. We also recommend that, in addition to pay in the above integrated scale, the following rank pays may be given to officers in the Army and their equivalent in the other services: -

Rank Amount of Rank pay
(Rs p.m.)

Captain and equivalent 200 Major and equivalent 400 Lt Col(Selection) and equivalent 600
Colonel and equivalent 800
Brigadier and equivalent 1200"


good samaritan said...

akOctober 5, 2012 at 6:41 AM
why do the armed forces have no anomalies committees like they have on or civ counterparts side where the staff side and govt side thrash out and continuosly keep issuing amendments and circulars clarifying the issues

Reply

Unknown said...

Hello! RDOA

1. 6th CPC REVISED PENSION mentioned by you :-

a. Col - Rs 30475
b. Brig - Rs 32435

2. Kindly check these figures with actuals - i.e. from AFV's.....

3. They're getting more......than you mentioned.......kindly check your calculations....

gentle said...

I wish to raise the query once again on the plight of reemployed officers during the period of 1989 till 1993 as in my own case since I was promoted to the rank of Wg Cdr (S)in Oct 86 after being commissioned in Nov 67 ( Ante date ) as Tech Sigs officer . I retired subsequently on 31Aug 1989 on superannuation & reemployed in the rank of Flt Lt since my substantive rank was released retrospectively wef Oct 86 some time in Sep 1991, when I was reemployed against the post of the Sqn Ldr. In spite of raising the query through email with AFCAO there is no response from AFCAO regarding the payment of any arrears due to me till date.
Would RDOA please advise me whether I am entitled to the arrears due to reemployment as well as revision of pension under the orders of the Hon supreme court! I shall be highly grateful for your response in this case .

Yogi said...

@gentle,
Sorry, you are not entitled to rank pay arrears as re-emp offr. However you are entitled to arrears of rank pay for the period 01 January 1986 to the date of superannuation, that is, 31 August 1989.

corona8 said...

@gentle: Your rank pay arrears would be through any day now and the true picture would be clear.

My guess is, as things stand in the context of the Govt letter, you would get rank pay arrears in respect of the rank held by you on 01 Jan 86 due to re-fixation of your basic pay as on that date.

But as RDOA are forcefully making the point that the scale needs to be revised, you'd probably become entitled to arrears for the re-employment period if such a scale revision gets implemented, as I had mentioned previously.

WG.CDR.V.SUNDARESAN(RETD) said...

I think the whole issue is getting tanda. let us not allow it. RDOA pl we have full faith in you and your team. as and when you require any help/assistance, pl do let us know. we all can share the burden of the fight.
v.sundaresan

Yogi said...

I find a lot of guys making promises of help/assistance. It will be good to show reality to the world by putting names of those who have contributed on the RDOA site.

appaji said...

just waiting to here from RDOA to contribute. If they write on sentence many are ready to send money for fight

appaji said...

just waiting to here from RDOA to contribute. If they write one sentence many are ready to send money for fight

Yogi said...

Why are people waiting for RDOA to asky? Did we wait for a call before accepting arrears of rank pay (as they are)? If not then why wait for RDOA to ask!!

MAJOR NAZAR SINGH GILL said...

Everything is now clear on R D O A Web sight. Now we are asking for to become members.It is one"s wish and pleasure to become member by paying membership fees of Rs.1,500/=. Now why we want call letter from R.D.O.A. They are at liberty to represent cases of members in H S C and why they will include names of non-members.I have seen officers on 30 Sep 2012 becoming members by one call and everyone present became member R D O A in presence of H S C Advocates representing case in SC.Thanks .

kush said...

I think, if RDOA gives its Banker’s details, it would save us time and effort of going to banks and post offices. I am sure some of us who have net banking at home will love to tfr money (Contribution) to RDOA faster and immediately. It has been requested by one blogger earlier also but they have not given the details. I do not know what inhibits RDOA to give their bankers details on the site. Is RDOA reading ? LtCol K K Choudhary

corona8 said...

Another piece of skulduggery has come to light.

Even some BP based allowances may not be re-calculated and their arrears not paid as per para 4(a) of Encl. 47A as posted on this blog-post.

MAJOR NAZAR SINGH GILL said...

In case we send subscriptions to RDOA account, how our personal details will be known to them and cash receipts given to them and correct accounts maintained in their books. Why we hesitate to send subscriptions by cheques/bank drafts to become members.Please do the needful.Thanks.

good samaritan said...

For ONLINE Transfer

1. Bank Account name: RETIRED DEFENCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION

2. Acct No: 9030-201-0079227

3.Bank Name & Branch: Syndicate Bank, DSOI Dhaula Kuan, New Delhi 110010

4. IFSC Code:SYNB0009030

good samaritan said...

RETIRED DEFENCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION (RDOA) (REGD)
G-203, Green Valley Appts, Plot no 18, SECTOR 22, DWARKA,
NEW DELHI 110077

President: Lt Col BK Sharma: Mob: 9871351203
Secretary: Lt Col Satwant Singh: Mob:9818039172

Website:http://sites.google.com/site/rdoaindia; rdoaindia.blogspot.com

Email: rdoaindia@gmail.com


MEMBERSHIP FORM & CONTRIBUTION DETAILS


1. Submit the following details along with the membership fees.

(a) Service No

(b) Date of Commission

(c) Arm / Service

(d) Name(as per service records)

(e) Rank held as on 01/01/1986

(f) Date of retirement

(g) Rank held at the time of retirement

(h) PPO No

(i) CDA (O) Account No

(j) Address for comn

(k) Mobile / Tele No

(l) Email ID


2. Payment details: Rs 1500/-(Rupees Fifteen hundred only) for new members
(a) Cash/Cheque at par/Draft
(b) Cheque no ……………dt………….drawn on ………………………for Rs 1500/- favouring ‘Retired Defence Officers Association’ New Delhi
3. Existing members who have paid Rs 500/- as membership fees are required to pay an additional amount of Rs 1000/- (Rupees One thousand only) to meet the expenses in the rank pay case.



For ONLINE Transfer

1. Bank Account name: RETIRED DEFENCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION

2. Acct No: 9030-201-0079227

3.Bank Name & Branch: Syndicate Bank, DSOI Dhaula Kuan, New Delhi 110010

4. IFSC Code:SYNB0009030


Kindly ensure that your name is also transmitted for easy traceability.


Secy RDOA

Alok said...

https://pcdaopune.gov.in/Downloads/FAQ08042013A%20.pdf

Sir, this is the link to FAQ on PCDAO Web Site on RANK Pay Arrears Calculatons

Arun Shanker said...

AECAO have uploaded list of IAF officers who have not yet submitted under taking for implementation of Rank Pay case. same can be seen at http://indianairforce.nic.in/show_page.php?pg_id=280

Col MS Raju said...

@Alok

CDA shown Basic pay of a Captain on 01 Dec 1985 as 1300/-. Which Captain was getting basic pay of Rs 1300 in IIrd CPC?

Jerry Junior said...

After 4th C P C pensions were fixed as 50% of what one was drawing.I fail to under stand, why we are talking about full pension after 33 year of service.Lt col is given 7 years grace for full pension,Lt col(TS) is given 5 years grace period where as major is given 8 years.By promoting a MAJOR TO Lt COL(TS) YOU ARE DENIED BENEFITS OF MAJOR as well as a Lt Col.There fore I feel the case is required to be taken with Army H Q /C D A (P) to stop talking about full pension after 33 year of Service.

Unknown said...

Dear President RDAO
I have all along been telling that the Got has failed to comply the SC
Order and have done the contempt of court' Let us fight the case properly.

Unknown said...

Dear President RDOA,
I have all along been telling that the govt. has failed to comply the Supreme Court verdict and committed contempt of court. Let us fight the case tooth and nail on this issue

sl said...

The desire to see a legal rectification is understandable, but hasn't the deadline of 10 April 2013 been crossed, as suggested here?

appaji said...

Thanks for hosting the bank details for transferring money. We request RDOA to fight the case till the end

good samaritan said...

airforcechat

वायु सेना, जीवन की राह
airforcechat

वायु सेना, जीवन की राह


Menu

Skip to content

Home•
About•



Tag Archives: RDOA

‘DISCRIMINATORY TREATMENT TO DEFENCE FORCES – EXTENSION & RE-EMPLOYMENT’


















7 Votes



By Maj Gen V K Singh via e-mail

I had raised this earlier also but due to lack of data, there was no progress in the matter.

When I was in RAW, I had noticed that officers from the Armed Forces, when re-employed in civil posts after retirement, were appointed in a rank lower than what they held before retirement, if there was a gap between the date of retirement and the re-employment. (This happened in the case of Brig NP Jyoti of Signals, who was employed as a Deputy Director) However, if they are serving in civil posts on deputation and reemployed immediately after retirement, they continue in the same appointment. (This happened with me, and several others such as Brigadier Y. Bhardawaj, SC Anand, Ujjal Dasgupta etc, all from Signals).

However, in all cases, their salaries are fixed after deducting their pensions.

Strange as it may seem, this is not the case with officers of the Central Services. I had noticed that most of them are re-employed in the same rank. Most interesting of all, they get their salaries in addition to their pensions.



Menu

Skip to content

Home•
About•



Tag Archives: RDOA

‘DISCRIMINATORY TREATMENT TO DEFENCE FORCES – EXTENSION & RE-EMPLOYMENT’


















7 Votes



By Maj Gen V K Singh via e-mail

I had raised this earlier also but due to lack of data, there was no progress in the matter.

When I was in RAW, I had noticed that officers from the Armed Forces, when re-employed in civil posts after retirement, were appointed in a rank lower than what they held before retirement, if there was a gap between the date of retirement and the re-employment. (This happened in the case of Brig NP Jyoti of Signals, who was employed as a Deputy Director) However, if they are serving in civil posts on deputation and reemployed immediately after retirement, they continue in the same appointment. (This happened with me, and several others such as Brigadier Y. Bhardawaj, SC Anand, Ujjal Dasgupta etc, all from Signals).

However, in all cases, their salaries are fixed after deducting their pensions.

Strange as it may seem, this is not the case with officers of the Central Services. I had noticed that most of them are re-employed in the same rank. Most interesting of all, they get their salaries in addition to their pensions.

A few years back, E Sreedharan who built the Delhi Metro filed a case in the Delhi Court. In his earlier appointment in the Konkan railway, he had been re-employed after retirement from the railways. His salary was fixed after deducting his pension. The Delhi High Court upheld his plea and the Government was ordered to refund the amount deducted from his salary.

I sent

corona8 said...

@good samaritan: Could'nt you have considered just providing a link to that blog-post even though it is totally unrelated to the subject of this blog post.

That cut and paste comment without proper formatting has totally messed up the comments portion of this blog-post, and is off-topic to boot.

sl said...

Perhaps it would not be a bad idea to take the discussion specific to the letter dated 29 Feb 2000, referred in this blog post, to the blog post that displays the specific para of IV CPC dealing with rank-wise rank pay over there.

Unknown said...

NO RANK PAY ARREARS DUE TO MOST OFFICERS at 6TH CPC STAGE i.e. wef 1.1.2006 : pcda(o)

Q1. RDOA : How is Pension set to change?
A1. by RDOA : Once the minimum for each rank as given in para 6 (a)(ii) is changed which has been reflected in Part I the pension will change accordingly as the minimum will go up.

A1. by CDA(O) : As OLD & NEW PAY GET EQUAL (OR RETIRES) ON OR AFTER 31.12.2005 AS HENCE NO ARREARS AFTER 31.12.2005 (as per note on DUE DRAWN STATEMENT ~ for most of the officers)

Now,

How RDOA is going to counter this?

Unknown said...

@RDOA
Sir, why cant we write a humble petition to the Hon CJI SC highlighting the Govts unfairness in implementing their decision & also how we as AF vetrans have been denied what Civ Employees have been given in refixation of Min of Scale wef 24.9.2013 instead of 1.1.2006.For every small thing MOD is forcing vetrans to go to court at this stage of life wasting our precious Money & Time.
Regards
Ravi Rao

MAJOR NAZAR SINGH GILL said...

Beautiful and sound suggestion.All high ranking veterans should go in a group after having appointment with CJI,HSC.

sl said...

@MAJOR NAZAR SINGH GILL: "..All high ranking veterans should go in a group..";

Bravo! And spoil RDOA's chances of getting some legal remedy in court?

Still, not much harm can befall us as long as this sort of "Beautiful and sound suggestion" (Beautiful??)remains confined to comments sections of blog posts.

OneTopic at a time said...

@Ravi Rao, why don't you try the RTI route before approaching the Hon'ble Supreme Court? Then you will have all the facts (and could share them with us like Aerial View is doing)? Or may be you could ask Aerial view to file a RTI, (if you send your query with brief details)

Unknown said...

@voice in the wilderness. There is adequate material available in the RTI replies recieved by Airiel View less part of para 15 & full para 16. It would be better we file a humle letter for the consideration by CJI HSC as a as an Association instead of individuals instead of filing petitions The RDOA has made it amply clear that ther is a contempt by MOD/UOI .

sl said...

@Ravi Rao : "..file a humle letter for the consideration by CJI HSC.."

We should definitely try to get a bit more knowledgeable as to how one approaches the judiciary in this country before charting out a course of action.

Maybe RDOA would consider disseminating some 'guidance' for those in need.

MAJOR NAZAR SINGH GILL said...

Misunderstood suggestion.How all high ranking veterans go without the detailed guidance and legal assistance/suggestions from RDOA Advocates/President & Secretary leading the team.In case my suggestion misunderstood, it may please be treated as withdrawn.

OneTopic at a time said...

@Ravi Rao, as a "similarly situated officer/person" you are within your legal rights to file an application/write a petition to the Hon'ble CJI and Companion Justices of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

The Learned Judge, who to whom the Hon'ble CJI gives/assigns the responsibility to decide whether your petition/application is to be listed or rejected will inform the Registrar, who in turn will communicate the decision to you.

RDOA will do what it has to do. In case one is at a pace faster than RDOA, then this is the solution.

On the other hand, one could wait for some more weeks. I state weeks because the Hon'ble Supreme Court's summer vacation will commence in May or June (I have not checked the Court's website).

Unknown said...

@Voice in the Wilderness
It would be better if it is done s a United Group instead of Individuals as all of us are
"similarly situated officer/person"

Armoredfish said...

Through Your Blog: I seek inputs to bolster my case to get rightful pensionary benefits:

My back ground

a) Retired as a regular Army Major with 20 years, 10 Months and 10 days service in the year 2000.

b) The PCDA(Pension) replied in a letter form that pension should be Rs14650/- w.e.f 01.01.2006 in June 2012 quoting their circular 397.This

figure of Rs14650/- matches with the pensionary calculations of bankers and a self-help web link Suvigya put up by the CGDA Delhi ( the highest

authority) on their website. The weblink still exists.

c) A year later PCDA(P) Allahabad write to me on 15 Mar 2013 that pension should be Rs12591/- w.e.f 01.01.2006 and Rs15999/- w.e.f 24.09.2012.

In this letter they clarify that only Major's pension shall be eleigible.

d) PDA(Bankers) are clueless about pensionary calculations ( a public sector bank) and now talk about recovery of pension on the basis of my

forwarding them a scanned copy of the letter which I have received from PCDA(Pensions) Allahabad. They are yet to receive their copy.

e) CDA(O) Pune requested some forms for Pre 1986 commisioned officers which was sent and for which a credit of Rs39000/-(appx) was effected in

the bank.No acknowledgement has been sent to me ,or a follow up letter, or a calculation by the CDA(O) Pune authorities. Email corrspondence

results in emails bouncing back.

Required

To be a part of a group which can represent legally a case for the "Lot of Forgotten Majors" of the Indian Army as a class action suit like the

USA. Links and suggestions required.

What is the update on this.

How to tackle this flip flop of PCDA(Pensions) Allahabad and how to "educate" the bankers and teach them a lesson.

Does anyone have a email IDs of RBI authorities and other pension complain email IDs barring Minister of Defence and the PM? With the aim being

to name and shame them into some action.

My email ID armoredfish(at)gmail(dot)com

There are many circulars which keep emanating from GOI and PCDA(Pensions) Allahabad with little action and timely action on ground.

Thank you and good luck with your blog. You are doing a good job.

Armored Fish

appaji said...

Please go to www.rbi.org.in. Then click contact. Write your complaint. Generally the RBI forwards your coplaint to the nearest obudsmen. Goodluck.

appaji said...

http://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/FAQView.aspx?Id=68

Please use the above link to see the faqs with regard to pension disbursement by banks