SEVA MEDALS : ALL OF THEM ARE CORNERED BY GENERALS?

SEVA MEDALS : ALL OF THEM ARE CORNERED BY GENERALS?

In a million strong Army, the distinguished service awards seem to be almost entirely dominated by the higher ranked officers. Is it that the lower ranks have not done their bit?It’s been a momentous Republic Day for the country. For several reasons and beyond.The Indian Army too has done its role. The Parade down Rajpath is what is on public display; but behind the scenes there is a major exercise which comes to a close the evening before every Republic Day – the announcement of gallantry and distinguished service awards.The science of Phaleristics (the Greek and Roman word for award) does go to say that human beings have an innate desire to distinguish themselves from other individuals. People have a strong urge to be better than others. The quest for social distinction is taken to be a hardwired trait of human nature.

Shubhojit is a retired Army officer. An NDA alumnus, he has commanded an artillery regiment and also done a stint with the United Nations. Out on civvy street, he works in the energy sector, and goes around the world creating wind farms.

In the present context we shall not touch upon the gallantry awards for they are akin to a holy cow. Though there are many in uniform, who know much more than what the citation does go ahead and say for each of the winners we shall not delve into them simply for two reasons – they are for gallantry and that is something none of us can ever sit on judgement on; secondly, let’s give the devil his due.But the story of the distinguished service awards is seriously unnerving. Firstly, the statistics this year.

1. Param Vishisht Seva Medal: 19 – All awarded to Lt Gen only
2. Uttam Yudh Seva Medal : 03 – All awarded to Lt Gen only
3. Bar to Ati Vishisht Seva Medal: 03 – All awarded to Lt Gen only

4. AVSM – 31

a. 15 – Lt Generals                                                                                   

b. 16 – Maj Generals

5. 13 - Yudh Seva Medal

a. 04 – Maj Generals

b. 08 – Brigadiers

c. 01 – Colonel

6. 42 - Sena Medal (Devotion to Duty) 

a. 03 – Maj Generals

b. 09 – Brigadiers

c. 15 – Colonels

d. 06 – Lt Colonels

e. 07 – Majors

f. 02 – Naib Subedars

7. Vishisht Seva Medal – 76

a. 02 – Lt Generals

b. 20 – Maj Generals

c. 33 – Brigadiers

d.19 – Colonels

e. 02 – Lt Colonels

8. Bar to VSM – 04

a. 03 – Maj Generals

b. 01 – Brigadier

Total works out to be:

1.      Lt Gens – 42

2.      Maj Gens – 46

3.      Brigadiers – 51

4.      Colonels – 35

5.      Lt Colonels – 08

6.      Majors – 07

7.      JCOs – 02

The reality is startling. The Generals have it all. Shameless and undignified is not the word. The dole keeps decreasing in pecking order. The distribution is absolutely disproportionate to the strength of cadre in each rank but then who does care

Interesting queries that do arise are –

– Is performance the criteria or is the appointment you hold which makes you eligible for the award

– Is it de riguer that every General, who is the Head of Arm or Service or an Army Cdr have to be awarded PVSMs and AVSMs?

In a fighting and active Army such as ours such forms of blatant adulation towards ones peer group spells of cranny sycophancy and sheer self-promotion, which we not only do not require but can well do without too.

The number of lower ranks very low in the distinguished service awards

Is it that in a million strong Army the lower ranks have not done their bit or have faltered in their levels of dedication to service and degree of loyalty? That’s what this list reeks of. Even a cursory perusal of the citation for these awards (and a citation is the start point of each and every award) would make one laugh at the sheer play of words and the English written.

Each and every one in uniform does his / her duty, but these awards in specific go to say that some do their duty much more diligently and sincerely than the hoi polloi around them.

Is it not time that we took a stand and decided to do away with this entire mockery of an exercise of distinguished awards. Ask the Army and they will flout grand phrases such as “motivation”, “dedication to duty”, but after thirty plus years, which these Generals usually have put in, do they need such inanities to spur them on?

Studies go to say that individuals tend to exhibit a higher demand for awards if they live in a society in which one’s position in society is uncertain and has to be advertised, rather than a society in which the social rank of the various members is well established and recognized by others; in the latter case, it is less necessary to establish one’s status through awards. Are we to believe that our Generals are in desperate need of some soul searching?

It will require much more than guts (and common sense) to overturn this annual ritual. Does the present Chief “have it in him”? Or, will he simply toe the well-worn line and continue to set new standards of ridicule as he did by presenting a cheque of Rs 115 crores by pooling in a day’s salary of all his men – without their concurrence!

(SOURCE : SANJHA MORCHA BLOG)

ARMY'S ENEMY IS ARMY

आप यह सुनकर हैरान हो जाएंगे कि आत्महत्या या साथियों की हत्या में भी उतने ही सैनिक मारे जाते हैं, जितने दुश्मनों से लड़ते वक्त.

Armed Forces Tribunal begins suo motu contempt case against Colonel

NEW DELHI: The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has initiated suo moto contempt action against joint director, army headquarters, Col SK Garg, for issuing an order on March 27, 2015, overruling the tribunal's direction to increase the disability pension of Lt Col TK Joseph who had voluntarily retired from the Army, as per the broad banding policy of disability pension. 

 Joseph, currently receiving disability pension benefits at 20%, was eligible for marked increase at 50% as part of the broad banding policy, which rounds off the percentage of pension benefit, with effect from Jan 1, 2006. This was in accordance with a Supreme Court order of 2014. The AFT had therefore ruled in his favour in February 2015, with the Chairman of the Principal Bench Prakash Tatia, stating in a formal order to the government that the petitioner shall be entitled to the same. 

 However, the Ministry of Defence did not comply with this order drawing a distinction between those who retire on superannuation and those who voluntarily retire from the Army. Garg, quoting a Ministry of Defence ruling letter, rejected Joseph's representation for disability pension as per the rounding up or broad banding policy. He reiterated the fact that granting disability pension in such a case would go againstgovernment policy because Joseph had applied for premature retirement at his own .. 

 The apex court had already ratified the policy regarding disability pension to those under Premature or voluntary retirement in 2014, and held that the benefit of roundingoff/broad-banding of disability or war injury element of pension would be granted to not only to invalided disabled personnel but also to those who were released on completion of terms, discharge, retirement, superannuation or otherwise are in receipt of a disability pension. The Principal bench of the AFT at New Delhi, headed  .. 

 

RECORD OF DISCUSSION WITH RM: 11 MAR 2015 (Col. Anil Kaul)

I had the occasion to meet the RM today for a duration of 45 mins in his South Block Office. The COAS was also present. A record of our discussion is appended below.

1. Disability Issues: The Hon’ble RM wanted a firsthand account of the effects of disability from a person who had undergone such trauma as against hearing it from other sources. Certain facts were conveyed including citing of personal examples which despite over twenty five years of consideration at various levels remain unresolved. A hard copy of all such issues was handed over to the RM. 

2. Non-Implementation of Orders of SC/ Non Issue of Instructions on Disability Related issues of Def Pers including the following: -

(a) Na-Na Cases

(b) Less than 20% disability cases

(c) Disability when on leave

(d) Broad-banding for those who superannuated

(e) Broad-banding for those who took voluntary retirement?

(f) MOD is yet to issue letter for enhanced DP for enhanced pension WEF Sep`12, though case has been taken up by Service HQ.

 

Comments of RM: He said that all disability related issues would be taken up appropriately w.e.f. 13 Mar 2015.He assured me that we would soon see the issue of operative letters.

3. Additional Points: A few additional points regarding disability were also discussed with personal examples that would have an effect on the larger disabled environment of the disabled in the Armed Forces. These are enumerated below: -

(a) There no system of post disability trauma onset in any of the three services including counselling to enable a disabled soldier to start functioning anew albeit with a few parts missing. This needs immediate implementation.

 

(b) There has to be a clear cut divide between those placed in LMC in normal course and BC’s. This must percolate down to their employment and functioning. I suggested that for starters at least in the Army suitable disabled officers be posted in the AG’s & MS branches as only a disabled understands the effects of disability. Moreover such actions do not require any elaborate Govt sanctions.

(c) I submitted that “Constant Attendance Allowance” should be applicable suo moto to anyone with 50% disability especially as after superannuation all manner of physical support available in service ceases. The RMB should be the final authority with the PCDA (P) not having any say in this.

(d) Payment of double conveyance allowance, where authorised to disabled personnel should be as matter of course and not based on claims. We are all aware of who is authorised Government tpt is and who is not.

(e) All service group Insurances are private entities and should offer disability benefits to BC’s retained in service and who superannuate in the normal course.

The funds available are adequate and if necessary and additional levy on premium can cater for this aspect. To deny this to one segment is a violation of the principle of equality. Notwithstanding what the Govt provides in such cases as that is a part of a service obligation whereas group insurances are private funds meant for this. The RM was appreciative of this logic and even suggested a methodology for the COAS to consider. 

The RM even mentioned that shortfalls if any could be made up by the MoD. 

(f) As per AO 17/89 Battle Casualties have the option of taking disability pension as a capitalized value in service. However there is no provision of restoration of such commuted value as in the case of normal pension. Disability is for life and there needs to be a reconsideration of restoring the capitalized value after 15 years, for those who took this option, as in the case of normal pension. A detailed case study is as given below: 

1. Reference AO 17/89.

 

2. On Superannuation every service personnel is entitled to service pension. This consists of the service element and the disability element. As a battle casualty I come under the purview of the AO ibid.

3. Personal Illustrative Case: I am 80% disabled due to battle injuries for life. As per AO 17/ 89 I was, entitled to, as were other BC’s, “War Injury Pay”. As per awards of the 4CPC, this was specified as “percentage of disability equivalent of percentage of pay drawn at the time of injury”. My pay at that point was approximately Rs 4200/- therefore I should have been entitled to 80% of which came to Rs 3360/- pm. This was later amended to “Not more than Rs 1500/- per month allowed for 100% disability due to normal service conditions”. This was to be proportionately reduced for lower percentages. Accordingly I was entitled to Rs 1200/- pm. A loss of 3360- 1200 = 2160/- As a result BC’s lost out on higher emoluments due to some change that was not noticed by those dealing with such cases.

 

4. A second provision of the AO was that one could take the capitalized value of this amount in service or await superannuation to get a disability pension. This was to be calculated for a time period of service to an age and service in the same rank that is in my case a Major. As can be seen I lost out on the following counts: -

(a) Reduction in overall authorized amount.

(b) No consideration for promotion beyond the rank of Major.

(c) No consideration for age applicable beyond the rank of Major.

5. I was paid such compensation after ten years of my injury. A request for interest on delayed payments was initially rejected till the Delhi High Court gave a ruling in my favour on which CDA (O) paid me the interest in the year 2000, i.e. after thirteen years of my injury and a court case lasting over two years. 

6. The acerbic language of Army HQ, as a measure of no respect to battle casualties, stated, “ That the case stands closed and no further discussions would be appreciated” So much for winning a gallantry award and losing your limbs.

7. Appeal: Notwithstanding the above as in the case of commuted value of service element of pension that is restored after a finite period of 13/15 years, similarly the capitalized value of disability pension needs restoration after a suitable period of time. In my case, the capitalized value has been taken for the rank of “Major” superannuation was 50 years that I crossed in Jul 2001 a full four years before superannuating in 2005 in the rank of “Colonel”. Considering that the capitalized value was applicable from 12 Oct 1987 but paid to me in 1996, a total of 25 years have passed and therefore the disability element of pension paid as capitalized value in service now needs restoration, keeping in mind that the disability is for life and as one ages the effects become more debilitating.

(g) A staff check would show that there would be a handful of such personnel in such a predicament.

4. OROP 

The RM gave out the status of OROP as on date. The salient features of which are as follows: -

(a) The final document duly cleared by the FA (Def) and signed by him is being fwd to the FM today. I.e. 11 Mar 2015.

(b) The amount worked out remains at Rs 8298 Cr. 

(c) He is scheduled to meet the PM & FM on 16 Mar 2015 on the issue.

 

(d) He is adhering to the time schedule as indicated on 2 Mar 2015 to the IESM delegation. I.e implementation instructions by 31/3 15. At worst case 30/4/15.

(e) 86% of beneficiaries are JCO’s & NCO’s, The balance 14% divided between Officers and family pensioners i.e. Vir Naris.

There being no other points the meeting was closed.

Anil Kaul

Col Anil Kaul, VrC

11 Mar 2015

(Source- Face book post)

SC rules in favour of broad banding disability percentage

• HT Correspondent, Hindustan Times, Chandigarh
  |  
• Updated: Dec 12, 2014 11:57 IST
 

In an order that will benefit lakhs of disabled soldiers, the Supreme Court has dismissed more than 800 multiple appeals that the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had filed against broad banding of their disability percentage.

The fifth pay commission had introduced the concept of broad-banding to minimise medical subjectivity and rationalise the mistakes of medical boards by providing that those with below 50% disability would be granted a disability element by treating it as 50%; those with 50 to 75% disability would be granted the benefit of 75%; and above-76% cases would be considered as that of 100% disability.

By rounding off, the disability percentage enhances, which means higher pension. However while implementing the concept, the MoD granted it only to the personnel who were invalided out on medical grounds post 1996. The rounding-off benefit was not given to pre-1996 cases or those released with disability pension on superannuation or completion of terms, though all categories were afflicted equally with the problem of medical subjectivity.

Military pension rules, however, provided that defence personnel released in a low medical category were deemed invalided out of service for purposes of disability pension.

In a series of litigation later, various benches of Armed Forces Tribunal, high courts and the Supreme Court held that pre-1996 disability cases and those released on completion of terms or superannuation could not be deprived of broad banding. One of the lead cases was of Panchkula resident and former army vice-chief lieutenant general Vijay Oberoi, who had lost a leg in the 1965 war with Pakistan.

in 2011, in spite of a decision of the-then chief of the army staff, general VK Singh, to refuse to file appeals against judgments in favour of disabled soldiers, the MoD insisted on filing appeals in all matters, stating that the decisions were “against the government policy” and instructing the government lawyers to file appeals in thousands of these cases in the Supreme Court. On Wednesday, a three-judge bench of the apex court head more than 800 clubbed cases and dismissed all appeals, bringing relief to the disabled and war-disabled soldiers.

All-India Ex-servicemen Welfare Association (AIEWA) chairman Bhim Sen Sehgal, welcomed the decision, saying that disabled soldiers had suffered for long. “Rather than resolving pension anomalies, the MoD forces disabled and war-disabled soldiers to litigate unnecessarily till the Supreme Court, causing unnecessary heartburn and burden on taxpayers’ money,” said high court lawyer major Navdeep Singh. He added that the lower bureaucracy was working against the spirit of the directions of the current government.

Public figures, including actor Kabir Bedi, parliamentarian Rajeev Chandrasekhar, former defence services chiefs, and 1971-war hero brigadier Kuldip Singh Chandpuri (retd), had written to the Prime Minister on Armed Forces Flag Day that most of MoD appeals in the Supreme Court against disabled soldiers were “alarming enough to make the entire citizenry hang its head in shame”.

(Source- HT)

One Rank, One Pension stuck between Services and Defence Ministry

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley arrives in Parliament to present the annual budget 2015-16 in New Delhi on Saturday. (Source: PTI)

By: Press Trust of India | New Delhi | February 28, 2015 5:01 pm

Reinstating government’s commitment on implementing the ‘One Rank, One Pension’ policy, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley on Saturday said the issue is pending as the method of calculating pension is stuck between the Armed Services and the Defence Ministry.

“I have already in the last Budget said that we are going to implement ‘One Rank, One Pension’. This need not be stated on every occasion. We are completely committed to it,” Jaitley told reporters here when asked about the delay in launching the scheme.
Explaining the reasons behind the delay, the Minister said: “The methodology of calculating the One Rank, One Pension is an issue pending between the Services and the Defence Ministry.” As and when that idea is formulated, not only it should be implemented, it will be implemented, he added.
“You may only notice that I have today, despite the squeeze, increased the allocation for Defence by almost Rs 25,000 crore,” Jaitley said.

Last month, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar had said that ‘One rank, One pension’ scheme will be rolled out soon.
The scheme, which seeks to ensure that a uniform pension is paid to defence personnel who retire at the same rank with the same length of service, irrespective of their date of retirement, has been a long-standing demand of the over two million ex-servicemen in the country.
http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/OROP