While the politician-bureaucrat-judge nexus has reduced governance to a synonym for corruption and treason, it is only the soldier who pays with his life and limbs, not only for his own follies but also for the follies of the thugs, scoundrels and traitors in offices of authority. Thus, simply from the principle of equal pay for equal work, the cabinet secretary needs to be paid less pay and perks than the sepoy of the army. But instead what is happening is that the soldiers are being swindled, taken for a ride. The one man judicial commission of L Narasimha Reddy appointed to study the anomalies in the implementation of One Rank One Pension for the soldiers is touring the country making a mockery of the purpose and wasting the tax payers' money. This is a report prepared to submit to him during this visit to Kochi. In the event it was not submitted but considered worthy of wider dissemination. Youth aspiring to joining the army may well ask: to be bonded laborers during the best years of ones life and beggers forever after that?, when confronted with the challenge:do you have it in you?

1. BEFORE JUSTICE L NARASIMHA REDDY COMMITTEE ON OROP
(At the hearing at Kochi on 24/8/2016)
Introduction.
1. With the Supreme Court of India deciding that pension is no charity but delayed
wages/salary, OROP is a sine qua non when it comes to legal justice for pensioners and
should apply to all pensioners, as has been rightly decided by the 7th Central Pay
Commission. The definition of One Rank, One Pension should not be confusing either. It is
as simple as anybody retiring at a particular level of the hierarchy and with the same
length of service should get the same pension. It is already implemented in the case of
MPs, MLAs, bureaucrats at the top of the hierarchy and judges of the high courts and apex
court. For the MPs and MLAs the format used is a minimum pension upto (please note it is
‘upto’ and not ‘for’ because the eligibility starts immediately after taking oath) a minimum
prescribed service and beyond 5 years a fixed amount is given for every additional year of
service. This is simple and can be applied only in the case of MPs and MLAs who are not tied
up with increments based on length of service during their service. In the case of
bureaucrats, particularly the one exam wonders, file pushers who do not even know the
right direction in which to push the files, the clerks of the IAS cadre, they have manipulated
it by ensuring that at the top of the hierarchy, which every direct entry is likely to reach,
they have fixed basic pay and hence anybody retiring from that grade will get the same
basic pension irrespective of the year in which he retired! And worse, they even have a Non
Functional Financial Upgradation wherein anybody from a batch getting a promotion
entitles everybody in that batch to get the same pay as the promoted guy irrespective of
the level at which he is currently employed! And the self aggrandizers they are, they have
tried to deny it even to their counterparts in the IPS by providing for a two year delay for
them! Come to think of it, the job of an Sub Inspector of Police is any day more challenging
than that of a clerk, Cabinet Secretary included, isn’t it?
The Genesis of OROP for soldiers.
2. 16 December 1971 is any day the golden letter day in the history of post independence
India. The 13 day war with Pakistan, resulting in the liberation of Bangaldesh and capture of
93000 pakistani soldiers is without parallel in the history of warfare. Of course the country
paid a heavy price but then it happened- the greatest treachery of all times! Soldiers who
were getting 70 pc of their last drawn pay as pension, as a concession due to their early
retirement, had their pension cut to 50 pc in the name of economy measures. But, quite
abrasively, civilians who were in receipt of only 33pc of their last pay drawn as pension got
their pension increased to 50 pc! And worse, the minimum service for full pension at the
above rates was fixed at 33 years for all! In effect 99 pc of the soldiers who are forced to
retire due to the compulsions of a youthful army between 15 and 20 years of service got
to get only around 25 pc of their last pay as their pension! And that is when the offer of
OROP was first mooted and approved by the then PM, Indira Gandhey. But it never
materialized. And the treachery by the politician-babu-judiciary nexus only aggravated the
situation in the years that followed. The open revolt in the Air Force after the 5th Central Pay
Commission was expectedly quelled using the might of the Air Force Act. But how long can

2. anybody suffer injustice silently? With the information boom facilitated by modern
technology it was just a matter of time before truthful facts poured into the public domain.
And veteran soldiers, echoing the voice of the serving soldiers also, had to take to streets to
vent their grievance and ire. But they were still far too disciplined and patriotic not to
indulge in murder and mayhem leading to the decision makers turning a deaf ear to their
just demands even while willing to talk to the Maoists who were, to use a quote used by the
current Defence Minister, ‘holding the guns at their heads’.
3. Well, OROP is not only about pension. It is more about justice. Given the fact that equal
pay for equal work is a universally accepted norm, there cannot be any doubt that the
sepoy of the Indian Army should get more pay and perks that the Cabinet Secretary. The
Right to Information Act has more than amply exposed the (in)competence and treachery
of the civil servants as a whole and clerks of the IAS cadre, in particular. Just a cursory look
at the decisions of the information commissioners who were/are mostly retired civil
servants will suffice to prove my point. Without going deeper, suffice to say that it is only
the soldiers who continue to pay with their life and limbs not only for their own failures
but also for the failures of those who are tasked and paid to train, equip and motivate
them.
The Politician-Babu-Judiciary Nexus.
4. With even MPs claiming that youth join army todie and babus managing todeny the dues
to the architect of the glorious military victory of 1971 and the nation’s first Field Marshal
Sam Manekshaw for more than 40 years is it any wonder that the morale of the troops
are in their boots? And imagine awarding Bharat Ratna to Sachin Tendulkar before
Manekshaw! While I would not care to use the analogy of chalk and cheese to compare
their persons the analogy has to hold good for their achievements.
5. I am fully conscious that to even talk of judicial perfidy is likely to raise eyebrows. And
putting it this bluntly to a former judge…may God save me! But facts are facts. Just compare
the decisions of the various courts in Major Dhanapalan’s case involving Rank Pay granted
to armed forces officers after 4th CPC in 1986 but not paid due to deliberate manipulation.
How many cases had to be filed? After how many years did the beneficiaries get their dues?
(I only hope that all of them have got it by now!) And finally did they get justice? The
answer cannot be anything other than a definite NO. With the interest due for the first 20
years denied and only 6 pc granted thereafter, can the apex court decision be considered
just? And amoung those who were responsible for this chicanery were anybody punished?
Again a big NO! Now compare it with what Subroto Roy of Sahara was required to pay and
to who all and how many cases were required to be filed and why he spent so many years in
jail. If the injustice to the soldiers is not obvious then blame it on your own sense of
justice.
And the grouses are more…

3. 6. The Armed Forces Tribunal Vs Central Administrative Tribunal. The only justification for a
contempt of court provision in the statute books in a democracy is the need to enforce
judicial orders. While the CAT has been in existence for ages and enjoys such powers the
more recently constituted AFTs have been denied those powers paving way for more
heartburns for soldiers with most of the orders of AFTs ending up in the dustbins of some
babu. In fact the order dated 29 May 2015 of the Court No 2, AFT Principal Bench at New
Delhi in OA No 138/2013 is bound the way of the Rank Pay case. (The original order is
dated 21/11/2012 in 556/2011.) But meanwhile the babus played another fraud by
originating a Special Army Instruction No 2/S/1998 para 5(a)(iv) of which reads as under:
Para 5(a)(iv):- As a one time measure those who become substantive major
before 1.1.96 will be granted the scale of Lt. Col. on completion of 21 years of
commissioned service i.e. in their 22nd year with rank pay of Major.
Since above categories of officer can not be identified by Pension
Disbursing Authorities, so it has been decided to issue corrigendum PPO by
Pension Sanctioning Authorities to implement above mentioned Govt. order
dated 24/9/2012.
The fraud has to be seen for what it is because ever since the cadre review effected in the
mid eighties all substantive Majors would get promoted on time scale to Lt Col on
completion of 21 years of service, that is in their 22nd year of service! I can vouch for it
because I was commissioned on 11 Jun 1977 and retired voluntarily on 7 Apr 1998. Army
HQs had however issued my promotion order to the rank of Lt Col (TS) wef 11 Jun 1998,
though it became in fructuous since I had hung my uniform by then!
7. Ex-servicemen Contributory Health Scheme Vs Central Government Health scheme. This is
also an example of denying the soldiers facilities that are given to their civilian counterparts.
For example, ECHS provides only allopathic treatment whereas CGHS provides all forms
including ayurveda and homeo! And more recently there have been reports that the CAG
has indicted ECHS for using its funds to meet the expenses of treatment of serving soldiers,
thus cheating the ECHS beneficiaries! And the quality and scope of the facilities are tied up
with so many ifs and buts and many empanelled facilities are also withdrawing due to
mounting arrears of dues!
8. Anomalies in implementing pay commission awards. Reports indicate that there are about
20 odd anomalies yet to be resolved after implementing the 6th CPC awards. But one of
them- the pay band-pay scale issue- affected the civilians (other than the IAS, IPS top brass)
also and the matter reached the apex court fairly fast and orders were issued to pay
pension based on pay scales rather than at the minimum of scales of the pay bands.
Obviously this was to be done from 1/1/2006 but the clerks of the IAS cadre played foul by
issuing order for implementing it from 24/9/2012! (Can we dismiss it as their
incompetence? No! Because, in the matter of implementing the 6th CPC awards there was a
dispute regarding Lt Generals who were Army Commanders and those who were not. It
was resolved fairly promptly by these clerks by creating another scale just below the top

4. two to accommodate the Non-Army Commander Lt Gens and making it applicable to
Additional Secretaries of the Government of India. And this was implemented wef
1/1/2006 saying that it was resolution of a 6th CPC anomaly!) Back to courts and orders for
applying the revision from 1/1/2006 followed. But here, to my horror, I had the experience
of even the banks, as Pension Disbursing Authorities, and the Banking Ombudsman play
foul! Personally, in my case, I noted that the basic pension given to me from 1/1/2006 to
23/4/2012 was only 2/3 of the basic pension paid earlier from 24/9/2012. On seeking
clarification from the bank there was no response. Complaint to the Banking Ombudsman
produced a treacherous order. Finally a letter to the Governor, Reserve Bank of India, while
eliciting no reply, did bring in the dues within one month!
9 Lack of information. The last ten years were so full of action and changes that most of the
soldiers, including officers, can safely be assumed to be ignorant of what has been
happening around them that directly affected their lives. One case is the non issue of
corrigendum PPOs reflecting the changes in pension as they happened whenever they
happened. In fact I have still not received the corrigendum PPO reflecting the changes in
the pension when the 6th CPC awards were 1st implemented in 2008. I got the Annx IV to
the MoD, Departmentof Ex-ServicemenWelfare letterNoNo17(4)/2008(1)/D(Pen/Policy) dated
11.11.2008 using the RTI Act from my PDA, SBI. But to my horror the bank could not even
provide me the number of pensioners to whom they had issued these forms! Finally, after
two years, on the orders of the information commissioner, when they were compelled to
provide the figures I was informed that these forms were prepared only for about 1/3rd of
the pensioners drawing their pension from SBI! And it is this lack of information that is
preventing me from directly answering the questions in the notification, dated 2/8/2016,
issued by the Judicial Committee on OROP. However this is being attempted with the
limited knowledge I have about these subjects.
9.1. Whether the benefit of OROP is to be extended to Reservists. Yes.
9.2. Whether the decision to grant benefit of MACP under OROP only to pensioners
who have actually earned requires any modification? Yes. It should be given to all
pensioners fulfilling only the criteria of period of service, because the need for
earning/fulfilling other criteria is only notional and not materially relevant.
9.3. Whether pension tables for more than 33 years of qualifying service are to be
prepared? Yes. In fact the ceiling of 33 years, now applicable for maximum pension
should also be removed. In addition the minimum service of 15/20 years prescribed for
earning pension should also be done away with. With the introduction of pension for
MPs and MLAs who have just taken oath, the minimum service prescribed for others is
in violation of the principle of equality guaranteed by the Constitution. Thus all
soldiers who have retired/resigned, except those who have been dismissed on
disciplinary grounds, without completing the minimum prescribed service should be
given pro-rata pension subject to minimum, as is being given to MPS and MLAs.
9.4. Whether the methodology followed for fixation of pension under OROP in the
absence of actual retirees in the same rank and same qualifying service for the below
mentioned categories requires any modification: Yes. The methodology should cater for
all ranks, from Sepoy to Field Marshal, based on ranks and additional tables providing

5. weightages for professional qualifications and type of entry, taking direct entry as the
standard. In this context the even more pertinent suggestion is that the datum should
not be the min, max or average of pay scales. It has to be the same format used for
fixing pay of serving personnel’ considering the length of service of the pensioner as
being fixed at the time of his retirement.
9.5. Whether the methodology followed for fixation of pension under OROP for
invalidated out war injury pensioners and liberalised family pensioners require any
modification in pension fixation formula. Yes. War injury pensioners should be given
their complete last pay drawn as pension with appropriate increase whenever revised.
Liberalised family pensioners should be given the same pension as the pensioner. But I
must also mention here that even the broadbanding of disability pension has to be
implemented better by having just two categories- upto and including 50pc and 51 to
100pc.
9.6. Whether in the case of JCOs/ORs, the pension is to be paid on the basis of the
last rank held instead of last rank pensioned under OROP. Before I answer this I must
admit that it is news that these are different. The only exception that I know of is of
honorary commissioned JCOs who may be awarded the honorary rank after retirement.
Obviously in their case the pension has to be of the higher rank awarded because
without monetary benefits the award would be simply tokenism and would fail to
motivate JCOs to perform even in the last days of their service. This would apply to
honorary ranks awarded to sepoys and NCOs also.
Conclusion.
10. Judicial commissions are well known as a useful tool for decision makers to delay
decision, obfuscate issues and deny justice. Equally importantly the credibility and efficacy
of these commissions also remain questionable. We have seen how the Railway Minister
(Lalu Prasad Yadav) appointed judicial commission to inquire into Godhra train burning
produced a report in line with the Railway Minister’s views and another judicial commission
appointed by the Chief Minister of Gujarat (Narendra Modi) to inquire into the same
incident produced a report in consonance with the Chief Minister’s views. So where does
that leave this committee? My involvement with the government, including the judiciary,
has helped me postulate that all public servants are idiots or traitors unless proved
otherwise.
11. With hope reigning supreme in the human heart and being prepared for the worst even
while hoping for the best, I dedicate these suggestions to all my brave brothers and sisters
in uniform.
Veteran Major P M Ravindran
‘Aathira’, Near Kailash Nagar
Kalpathy, Palakkad-678003
Tele: 0491-2576042, Email: majorravi@gmail.com