Wednesday, September 30, 2015

WRONG FIXATION OF PENSION OF JCOs/NCOs/ORs WEF 1.1.2006

BRIG S VIDYASAGAR VETERAN'S EXPLANATION

   Since IESM has taken my name and tried to buttress their argument that everything is honky dory on pension front of JCOs and OR  and produce a commentary from Maj Navdeep singh whom I do admire a  lot for his work in fighting cases for Ex-Servicemen and widows of ESM, I thought I will be failing in my duty if I do not respond. The learned Advocate has commented “The Brig is unnecessarily asking people to file cases”.

   Though I am not a lawyer by profession, I have few comments on the explanation given by Maj Navdeep Singh. I am reproducing his comment as under:-

Comment of Maj Navdeep Singh : In implementation of the decision of the Delhi High Court affirmed by the Supreme Court, the Government has issued the implementation instructions under question. For ranks other than Commissioned Officers, the instructions would apply from 01 Jan 2006 till 30 June 2009 since from 01 July 2009 onwards the anomaly stood removed and rendered redundant since all such personnel were as it is fixed on notional top of scales. For Commissioned Officers and Civilian pensioners, the instructions would apply from 01 Jan 2006 till 23 Sept 2012 since the anomaly was only removed on 23 Sept 2012

My (Brig S Vidyasagar Veteran's Response. My military common sense tells me the following:-

If all anomalies are removed w.e.f. Jul 2009 then why that pension of NCOs has been further improved w.e.f.  24 Sep 2012? Just see the pension of Sepoy of Y group with 15 years’ service as given in various Circulars:-

SER NO
QUALI-
FYING SERVICE
PENSION AS ON JAN 2006 AS PER CIRCULAR 430
PENSION AS ON
 01 JUL 2009 AS PER CIRCULAR 501
PENSION AS ON 24 SEP 2012 AS PER CIRCULAR 501
ARREARS FROM JAN 2006 TO
30 JUN 2009
PENSION ARREARS FROM JUL 2009 TO
23 SEP 2012
TOTAL PENSION ARREARS
1
15
3,500
4,603
5,102
73,724
28,752
1,02,476
2
15.5
3,555
4,695
5,196
75,519
28,867
1,04,386
3
16
3,625
4,787
5,291
76,669
29,040
1,05,709
4
16.5
3,694
4,879
5,385
77,820
29,155
1,06,975
5
17
3,764
4,971
5,480
78,970
29,328
1,08,298
6
17.5
3,834
5,063
5,574
80,075
29,443
1,09,518
7
18
3,904
5,155
5,669
81,225
29,616
1,10,841
8
18.5
3,973
5,247
5,763
82,376
29,731
1,12,107
9
19
4,043
5,339
5,858
83,526
29,904
1,13,430
10
19.5
4,113
5,431
5,952
84,631
30,019
1,14,650
11
20
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
12
20.5
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
13
21
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
14
21.5
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
15
22
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
16
22.5
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
17
23
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
18
23.5
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
19
24
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
20
24.5
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
21
25
4,182
5,523
6,047
85,827
30,192
1,16,019
22
25.5
4,252
5,615
6,047
82,606
24,891
1,07,497
23
26
4,322
5,707
6,047
79,385
19,590
98,975
24
26.5
4,391
5,799
6,047
76,209
14,289
90,499
25
27
4,461
5,891
6,047
72,988
8,989
81,976
26
27.5
4,531
5,983
6,141
74,092
9,104
83,196
27
28 & ABOVE
4,600
6,075
6,235
75,243
9,219
84,462

What was anomaly and how did it get removed is not explained anywhere!

Let me explain this anomaly by taking help of MoD letter dated 08 Mar 2010 which I am reproducing for your benefit. English is a peculiar language and one word here and there changes entire complexion. Therefore let us see whether Min of Def implemented their own letter:

Government of India,
Ministry of Defence,
Deptt. of Ex-servicemen Welfare,
                                                                                                                 No PC 10(1)/2009-D (Pen/Pol)
New Delhi Dated 8th March 2010
To
The Chief of the Army Staff,
The Chief of the Naval Staff,
The Chief of the Air Staff,

Subject: Implementation of the Government decision on the recommendations ofthe Cabinet Secretary’s Committee – Revision of pension in respect of Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) discharged prior to 01.01.2006.

Sir,

The undersigned is directed to state that in order to consider various issues on pension of Armed Forces pensioners, the Government had set-up a Committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary. The Committee in its Report have recommended the following for pre-2006 PBOR pensioners -

1.1 Pre-10.10.1997 PBOR pensioners may be brought on par with post-10.10.1997 PBOR pensioners; and

1.2 To reduce the gap between the pensions of pre & post-1.1.2006 PBOR pensioners, following principle may be followed -

1.2.1 Pension of all pre-1.1.2006 PBOR pensioners may be reckoned with reference to a notional maximum in the post-1.1.2006 revised pay structure corresponding to the maximum of pre-Sixth pay commission pay scales as per fitment table of each rank.

1.2.2 To continue with the enhanced weightages awarded by the Group of Ministers (GOM) of 2006.

2. The above recommendations of the Committee have been accepted by the Government and the President is pleased to decide that with effect from 1st July 2009, service pension/special pension/invalid pension/service element of disability pension and service element of war injury/liberalized disability pension (in release cases only) of all pre-1.1.2006 PBOR pensioners of Army, Navy and Air Force (including DSC and TA) shall be reckoned at 50% of the notional pay in the post-1.1.2006 revised pay structure corresponding to the maximum of pay scales applicable from 10.10.1997 of the rank and group continuously held for last 10 months preceding invalidment/discharge. The amount so determined shall be the pension for 33 years of reckonable qualifying service including rank weightage (except for TA personnel) as provided under this Ministry’s letter No. 1(6)/98/D(Pension/Services) dated 3.2.1998 and enhanced vide this Ministry’s letter No. 14(3)/2008/D (Pen/Sers)/Vol-III dated 1.2.2006. For lesser period of qualifying service, this amount shall be proportionately reduced. The amount of pension finally arrived at shall be subject to a minimum of Rs. 3,500/- per month.

Let us concentrate on the most important part of the letter i.e. para 1.2.1 and try to understand what actually it conveys:-

1.2.1 Pension of all pre-1.1.2006 PBOR pensioners may be reckoned with reference to a notional maximum in the post-1.1.2006 revised pay structure corresponding to the maximum of pre-Sixth pay commission pay scales as per fitment table of each rank

It talks of notional maximum in the post - 01 Jan 2006 revised pay structure. So let us see what is this Revised pay structure for Sepoy of Y Group (in 6th CPC scales).

What is the notional maximum for Sepoy of 23 years’ service of Group Y corresponding to maximum in 5th CPC scales of pay? It is Rs 6000. 

Then by applying 33 year rule pension for Sepoy Gp Y comes to : 6000 x (23 years’ service + 10 years rank weightage)/33 which is Rs 6000

But if you see the pension of Sepoy of Y Group with 23 years’ service in Circular 430 you will find pension fixed is Rs 5523. Is this not wrong figure?

Should it not be Rs 6000 which is top of scale? Here also Sepoys have been deprived of their hard earned pension.

Let me make table for all of you to prove to you how DAD guys make a Charlie out of faujis.
SER NO
Rank
Maximum pay for 33 years’ service including Rank Weightage as given in Fitment Table of SAI 1/S/2008
Entitled Pension @50% of Pay
Pension as per Circular 430
Loss suffered by JCOs and OR without DR per month
1
Sepoy X Gp for 23 years service
14050
7025
6441
584
2
Sepoy Y
12000
6000
5523
477
3
Nk Gp X with 25 years service
15060
7530
6900
630
4
Nk Gp Y
13150
6575
6046
529
5
Hav Gp X with 27 years service
16710
8355
8160

6
Hav Gp Y
14290
7145
7002
143
7
Nb Sub Gp X with 28 years’ service
23020
11510
11510
Nil
8
Nb Sub Gp Y
21350
10675
10675
Nil
9
Sub Gp X with 28 years service
26210
13105
13105
Nil
10
Sub Y Gp
23940
11970
11970
Nil


(Source- Via Gp E-mail from Brig S Vidyasagar Veteran)

69 comments:

  1. the 5 cpc scale of gp y sepoy is 3250-70-4300 so 4300x1.86+4000=11998 rounded of to 12000/2 = 6000.
    from where the calculated figure 5523 has come...
    can anyone work out the miracle figure of 5523....
    in terms of loss now how to correct it?????

    ReplyDelete
  2. Really the doubt has been very clearly explained in regard to pension arrears wef 1.1.2006 to PBOR. As per this explanation the pension paid as per circular 430 wef 1.7.2009 is to be paid wef 1.1.2006 as per my understanding. Clean explanation and I thank Big S Vidyasagar (Retd)
    JWO Edward Michael (Retd)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Friends, please see my comment which I posted three days back to Maj Nabdip on his blog but not published till now.....
    COMMENT
    Dear Major Nabdip Singh, what you said regarding ROTCOs(ranks other than commissnd officers) that instead of 1/7/09, the same (notional maximm pro-rata pensions) should have been come in to effect from 1/1/06, here of course we ROTCOs could have been benefited to certain extent in comparison to present circular 547.

    The ranks of commissnd officers (ROCOs) r given with 50% of minimum fitment as per Circular 500 wef 24/9/12 which shall be applicable wef 1/1/06 would bring a good amount of arrears to most of the ROCOs, other than the ROCOs whose consolidated pensions as per 11/11/08 r more than the Circular 500. But here take a case of a group X Sgt (15yrs QS + 6yrs pensionable service as weightage= 21yrs) as for example - his consolidated pension was 4277, as on 1/7/09 - 5519 & as on 24/9/12 with 02yrs more weightage - 6374 these are given as per notional maximum fitment but non of the above is still benefited as of now than the 50% of the minimum fitment which would be either 7445 or 7750 right from 1/1/06 to till now.

    Please try to understand why ROTCOs are giving adverse comments

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sir, your 7445 or 7750 is most misleading and put here with misleading intention only. Ex-SGT SN Reddy Clk/GD

      Delete
    2. Dear Reddy sir, I think you could not understand my simple analysis & example of a group X Sgt, which proved to be right & paid accordingly as per circular 568 of pcda(p) Allahabad. The minimum basic pension so calculated for 15 yrs group X Sgt with figures of either 7445 or 7750 is basing on 50% of the notional corresponding minimum scales of 6cpc as bench mark for that particular rank & group. Where is the question of my misleading here? Or Do you think that GOI has been misguided by me & issued the circular for my benefit?

      I think you should know much better than me as you are a Clk/Gd by your profession. Rgards

      Delete
  4. No anomalies removed in 2009 and 2012 only some improvement was made in both years, therefore arrear of pension should be given wef 01.01.2006 on the basis of pension improved wef 24.09.2012 to PBOR, if it was not given like circular No 548 than the agitation will be started against the Govt and retired army officers.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dear sir , you have explained very simply and correctly to understand by any one.
    Thank you very much.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Is it true table sir?
    Thanks with regard.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Many thanks Sir, you have nicely understood the Govt. circulars and presented it lively.Why the Babus are not able understand these circulars so far particularly in pension cell guys.

    ReplyDelete
  8. सर मेरी बेसिक पेंसन 1 1 06 को 2882 थी रिवाइज 1 1 06 को 4344 हुई 1 7 09 को 5361 ही और 24 9 12 को 6108 हो गई मेरा एरियर क्या होगा बताने का कष्ट करे धन्यवाद

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rank and Length of Service ????

      Delete
    2. Hi,My father retird as CPL with 15 years of service. Now his basic pension is Rs. 5961.

      Delete
    3. 18 साल 6 महीना 17 दिन हवलदार

      Delete
  9. Both of u r offrs. Combinely if u both serve for the poor veterans how benegicial it will be

    ReplyDelete
  10. Sir,You have done fantastic job.At some site it says that pension revised from 24/9 is type OROP.Thanks sir

    ReplyDelete
  11. sir.... very correct presentation ......
    the 5 cpc scale of gp y sepoy is 3250-70-4300 so 4300x1.86+4000=11998 rounded of to 12000/2 = 6000.
    from where the calculated figure 5523 has come...
    can anyone work out the miracle figure of 5523....
    in terms of loss now how to correct it?????

    ReplyDelete
  12. It is the tricky game of former defence minister AK Antony and the so called ADMIN BABUS in the name of bridging the gaps in pension of PBORs pre 2006 and post 2006 retirees.In 2009 I had improvement in pension but not in 2012.They said improvement will not be beneficial.I belong X group in Navy having 20 year and 2 month srvice.My pension wa fixed as 8734 from 1-1-2006.
    Later ,in 2009 it was raised to 10296.In 2012 specially the X group was left out saying that it will not be beneficial.
    The problem is many veterans may not be able understand and make out anything from the circulars of PCDAPENSION because it is never explained with examples always but sometimes.In my view the arrear denied only will everyone will get from 2006-2009 mostly me like people and nothing else.
    Srinivasan
    EX MCPO-I renganathsri51@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  13. A simple circular like 548 should be published by MOD/PCDA that the arrear may be given to jcos/or wef 01.01.2006 to 23.09.2012 instead of 24.09.2012 on the basis of pension fixed as on 24.09.2012. JAI HIND to all jcos/or

    ReplyDelete
  14. These officers are totally against JCOs/OR, please do not depend upon them as they are cheating the jcos/or in the service and after retiremet do something on your own.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Respected Sir, If I am correct, as per fitment table pay/pension are to be refixed based on the starting/minimum of the pre 2006 pay scale of each rank and this has been worked out correctly and shown in the appendix a attached to CDA(P) Allahabad circular in respect of JCOs OR. As per the Govt of India letter referred in your post,maximum of pre 2006 pay scale of each rank+Grade Pay+MSP+X group pay needs to be taken into account for calculation of revised pension wef 1.1.2006 in respect of JCOs OR and thus they are eligible for arrears from 1.1.2006 to 30.6.2009 and from 1.7.2009 to 23.9.2012 for Sep to Hav and Sub Maj of X Group.Here the revised pension calculated under fitment table in respect of Lt,Capt,Hony Lt and Hony Capt appears to be incorrect when compare to the formula applied for JCOs OR. Here I will clarify the position.Pre 2006 Pay scale of Lt,Capt,Hony Lt and Hony Capt are as follows.Lt 8250_10050,Capt 10000_11800,Hony Lt 10500,Hony Capt 10850. Now we will calculate the revised pension under fitment table of each rank.Lt 8250x1.86=15345.Minimum of pay band 3 of post 2006, his pay is to be fixed at minimum ie 15600+5400+6000= 27000.pension admissible is 13500 Where as his revised pension was found step up to 15465. In the case of Capt his revised pension is to be calculated as follows.10000x1.86=18600+6100+6000=30700.He is entitled for revised pension @15350 and not 16145.As regards Hony Lt and Hony Capt their pay in the pre 2006 scale over and above the minimum of the pay scale of their rank there by they may not be eligible for fitment table as per calculation applied in the cases JCOs OR.In my view the table attched to the CDA(P) Allahabad circulars 547 and 548 needs proper scrutiny at high level and amendment if considered necessary be got issued immediately to avoid overpayment. However the revised pension under fitment table calculated appears to be correct. Pre 2006 pay scale of Maj is 12800_16050. Here is the example 12800x1.86=23810+6600+6000=36410. He is entitled for revised pension @ 18205 wef 1.1.2006 and this figure is tallying with table applicable to the CDA(P) Allahabad circular No 548.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sir, In case of Hony Lt / Hony Capt pre-revised scale was 10500 for Hony Lt and 10850 for Hony Capt. Their Min / Max of the fitment table remains same. That is 10500 x 1.86 = 19530 + 5400 + 6000 = 30930 its 50% = 15465. And Hony Capt 10850 x 1.86 = 20190 + 6100 + 6000 = 32290 its 50% = 16145. You can please refer to PCDA Circular No 502 dated 17th January 2013.

      Delete
  16. Let me clarify first regarding fixation of revised pension under fitment table of sepoy of y group wef 1.1.2006 presuming his service as 28 years and it will be reduced proportionally depending on the completed year of service.Pre 2006 Pay scale of Sepoy y group is 3250_4300.Now we will calculte the revised pension under fitment table wef 1.1.2006.3250x1.86=6045+2000+2000=10045.say 10050.pension admissible is 5025.He is getting pension @ 6235 wef 1.7.2009. How the figure is arrived is as follows.Pre 2006 pay scale of LAC is 3650_4550.Air force pay scale being the f
    highest of the three services,their maximum in the pay scale as taken commen for three services.So pension of sepoy belong to Y group was fixed at 4550.Calculation method now apply based on the maximum pay of 4550.It means 4550x1.86=8470+2000+2000= 12470.Pension admissible to Sepoy of Y group(service+ weitage) is 6235. This is the applicable for calculation pension under fitment table and highest maximum of pay scale of each rank. It is my view.

    ReplyDelete
  17. My earlier comments not published yet.

    ReplyDelete
  18. My earlier comments not found published so far.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Dear Jayarajan ak; this is not a matter of Lt,Capt and H/Lt, H/capt. This ia the matter of PBOR. According to Brig S Vidyasagar it is very clear reaction on MOD letter dated 03 Sep 2015. However your calculation regarding Lt,Capt and H/Lt,H/Capt is wrong because pay of these category is 10500 and 10850 respectively as per 5th pay commission.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Dear Jayarajan Ak, this is not a matter of Lt,Capt and H/lt,Capt. This is the matter of pension of PBOR. According to Brig Vidyasagar it is very clear that how GOI,MOD confuse the PBOR for revision of pension pre-2006 as per letter dated 03 Sep 2015. However your calculation in respect of Lt,Capt and H/lt,H/capt is wrong, because pay of Lt,Capt and H/Lt,H/capt is 10500 and 10850 respectively as per 5th pay commission for service 28 years and above.

    ReplyDelete
  21. You may also kindly referSpecial Army Instruction 2/2/08.

    ReplyDelete
  22. First of all whole heartedly I thank and congratulate respected Sir Brig. S Vidyasagar for his minute observation and correct calculation of pension regarding PBOR.All ex-servicemen especially seargent and below of AIr force and its equivalent in army and navy are denied their rightful pension by wrong calculation at MoD/PCDA level and nobody other than Brig. S Vidyasagar has raised this issue.Now this is great opportunity for all of PBOR to be united and file a case in the court under the guidance of Brig. S Vidyasagar.Unless our pension is correctly fixed as per the observation raised by Brig. Sir.I would like to emphasize that pension can be corrected now because circular 547 and 548 are effective from 01.01.2006.Hence all PBORs revised pension may be fixed properly w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and arrears should be paid accordingly.Necessary corrigendum to circular 548 in a very simple and clear language which leave no scope fro Babus for misinterpretation and wrong implementation should be issued on priority.We PBOR are having very high hope from Major Gen. Stbir Singh and his team and Brig. S Vidyasagar to ensure that PBOR get their right due.
    Thanks with regards.

    ReplyDelete
  23. First of all whole heartedly I thank and congratulate respected Sir Brig. S Vidyasagar for his minute observation and correct calculation of pension regarding PBOR.All ex-servicemen especially seargent and below of AIr force and its equivalent in army and navy are denied their rightful pension by wrong calculation at MoD/PCDA level and nobody other than Brig. S Vidyasagar has raised this issue.Now this is great opportunity for all of PBOR to be united and file a case in the court under the guidance of Brig. S Vidyasagar.Unless our pension is correctly fixed as per the observation raised by Brig. Sir.I would like to emphasize that pension can be corrected now because circular 547 and 548 are effective from 01.01.2006.Hence all PBORs revised pension may be fixed properly w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and arrears should be paid accordingly.Necessary corrigendum to circular 548 in a very simple and clear language which leave no scope fro Babus for misinterpretation and wrong implementation should be issued on priority.We PBOR are having very high hope from Major Gen. Stbir Singh and his team and Brig. S Vidyasagar to ensure that PBOR get their right due.
    Thanks with regards.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Dear sir, why there are so so many different kind of letters and circulations on the pension of Defence VETERANS such as for commissioned officer, for honorary commissioned officer, for defence pensioner, for Jcos and ORs? Is in future there should not be a single letter or circular regarding all the issue on pension of all VETERANS (commissioned officer/ PBOR) to avoid such these type of unnecessarily confusion and parity between the Indian Ex-Servicemen. There will not be a need to MOD issuing such type of letter for clarification ON REVISION OF PENSION FOR JCOs ,NCOs and ORs which are yet not clear. Sir It is not a advise but it is an appeal to avoid such these type of clarification. Thank You.

    ReplyDelete
  25. We must study in length what is actually fitment table formula and as how pay and pension of pre 2006 pensioners are to be refixed wef1.1.2006 based on the Court Verdict. Unless and until we know the correct method of caculation for fixing the revised pension under fitment table our views may not be accurate. In my view pay and pension of pre 2006 are to be caculated in the minimum of the pay scale of each rank.We may take an example the case of a Sub Maj of Y Group.Pre 2006 pay scale of Sub Maj Y group is 6750_9550.If Iam correct, pay and pension of Sub Maj Y Group is to be refixed wef 1.1.2006 as follows. Minimum/starting pay take it as 6750. Now work out the pay under fitment table. 6750x1.86= 12560+ Grade pay 4800+ MSP 2000= 19360. Pension admissible wef 1.1.2006 is 9680. This is what I could under stand.For correctness you may kindly verify the table attched to the CDA (P) Allahabad circular No 547. If any body can give more clarification,it will be useful for me for offering further comments on the subject.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Sir My besic pension was 3179 at the time of retirement, after 6 CPC 4984, revised on 1/7/09 -5992 and there after on 24/9/2012 it is 6453. can yuo tell me the arrears.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I WANT TO ADD THE FOLLOWING :-
    a) Pre-01.01.2006 PBOR enjoyed pension equivalent to 50% of pay at highest of their scale with a proportion of 33 years (including 5 years weightage) service.
    b) Things changed for post 01-01-2006 who got pension equivalent to 50% of LPC and later 50% of so called NOTIONAL MAXIMUM. Post 1.1.2006 pensioners suffered monetarily for all these TEN YEARS. We expect OROP post 1.1.2016 brings 50% of the highest on pay scale. PBOR are retiring between 40 to 50 years of age. There being no arrangement for LATERAL TRANSFER TO PARA-MILITARY FORCES, it is UNJUST to fix pension at 50% of NOTIONAL MAXIMUM.
    c) Could someone explain the authorities, how post 01.01.2006 pensioners are going to be compensated for the BIG-BIG ANOMALY OVERLOOKED all these TEN YEARS. OROP SHOULD START FROM 01-01-2006 with 50% of MAXIMUM OF PAY SCALE. Otherwise THERE IS NO JUSTICE.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I dont think it will ever be approved.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Dear sir as per PCDA circular 549 dated 06 Oct 2015, There is again confusion about Annexure A,B and C of MOD letter dated 03 Sep 2015.Please clarify. Thank You.

    ReplyDelete
  30. In the fitment table regarding Hav of 24 years 3600x1.86=6696+Grade pay 2800+MSP 2000+class pay 300 =11796 fifty % 5898 as per circular 547 it is given 5291 who will pay diff Rs 607- wef 01.01.2006 please clarify.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Keep the Annexure A,B, and C on side please read as arrears should be given wef 01.01.2006 to 23.09.2012 on the basis of circular 501 or arrears is due wef 01.01.2006 instead of 24.09.2012 as per pension fixed vide circular 501.

    ReplyDelete
  32. It is not clear to me as to how the methodolegies for calculation of pension under fitment table have applied differentely for JCOs OR and Commissioned officers. My doubt is how a Lt and H/Lt pension have been refixed wef 1.1.2006 under fitment table. JCOs OR pension have been refixed wef 1.1.2006 by applying the formula ie minimum/Starting pay of pre 2006 pay scale ofeach rank multitled b y 1.86+grade pay+MSP+X group pay total of which will
    be divded by 2.For example case of SubMaj of Y group is explained here.Pre 2006 pay scale of Sub Maj Y group is 6750-9550. Minimum or starting pay is 6750. Please see the calculation method. 6750x1.86= 12560+Grade pay 4800+MSP 2000= 19360/2=9680 This is the figure shown in the appendix attched to the CDA P Circular 547. Now take the case of Lt and H/Lt.Pre 2006 Pay scale of Lt is 8250-10050. Minimum pay of Lt and Hony Lt in the pay scale of Lt is 8250.If we calculate the pension under fitment table as applied in the case of JCOs OR it will be as follows. 8250x1.86=15345. Since the pay band 3 starts at 15600 their minimum pay should taken as 15600 for calculation purpose.
    15600+grade pay 5400+MSP 6000=27000.Pension under fitment table of Lt is required to be refixed wef 1.1.2006 is 13500. As per CDA PAllahabad circular 547 and 548 Lt pension has been found refixed @ 15465 wef 1.1.2006 as same amount as applicable wef 24.9.2012. Hony Lt pay is fixed at 10500 under 6th CPC. Pay Scale of Lt is 8250-10050.Hony Lt pay was fixed at over and above the miximum pay of Lt. ie 10500. Can it be taken as minimum pay of the Lt in the pay scale of 8250-10050.What is actually the fitment table to be applied for each. Is it different for officers and JCOs OR. If any body can clarify the correct position it wiil be more useful for me to clear my doubts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For Hony Lt Minimum and maximum of the fitment table is same. That is 10500 x 1.86 = 19530 + 5400 gde pay + 6000 MSP = 30930 its 50% = 15465. But PCDA circular is showing this figure for 28 years and above service and reduced proportionately for less service. This is not correct. The 15465 basic pension should be for all Hony Lts irreapective of length of service. The correct table you can find in PCDA circular No 502 in which Enhanced rate of family pension and ordinary rate of family pension have been shown.

      Delete
  33. Hav pre 2006 pay scale of Y group 3600-5100 Fitment table calculation 3600x1.86 =6696+Grade pay 2800+MSP 2000 +Half of classification pay 150=11646/2= 5823 Say 5820 .It is for 28 years. 5291 is for 24 years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. sar im EX HAV GP-Y Retred 31.10.2005 Leanth of service 18 yers sar mera arrears kitna bne ga

      Delete
    2. sar im EX HAV GP-Y Retred 31.10.2005 Leanth of service 18 yers sar mera arrears kitna bne ga

      Delete
    3. The reply give by Jayarajan AK is not correct. Please refer PCDA circular No 502 dated 17th January 2013. The min pension of Hav is 5820 and Max 7650.

      Delete
    4. Hav Y gp 18 years of service should get basic pension 5992 as per PCDA circular No 502 dated 17th January 2013.

      Delete
  34. For Sukhwinder Singh. As per my knowledge pension entitlement of Hav Y group with 18 years serivice retired between 10.10.1997 to 31.12.2005 are as follows.Present pension for 18 years service of Y group. 4254 wef 1.1.2006 (maximum for 28 years 5673). 5251 wef 1.7.2009(max 7220). 5902 wef 24.9.2012 (max 7605). Revised wef 1.1.2006 as per Circular 547 4350(maxmum 5820) Formula for calculation of pension less than 28 years. maximum pension devided by 33 x total service with weightage. Waightage as on 1.1.2006. Sep10 years, Nk 8 years Hav 6 Years. Additional 2 years wef 24.9.2012. you are entitled for arrears @ 46 PM with DA from 1.1.2006 to 30.6.2009.It is my view.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Arrears admissible is 4350-4254 Say 96 + DA and not 46+ DA as mentioned above.Further formula applied for calculation pension for less than 28 years wef 1.1.2006 and revised as per circular 547 shows somw difference for which my knowledge is in adequate. Extreamly sorry for the error occured.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Sir i wasSOS on 0109 1993 after 16.5 . 27 days .i am get in 5647 BP in group Y .and i m also getting DP 50 %.sir bit will me my present BP and arrears

    ReplyDelete
  37. I am thankful to Brig Vidya sagar for good efforts to do for PBOR/ JCOs&Jawans.

    ReplyDelete
  38. 1.​I am pre 2006 PBOR. I was discharged from Air Force on 31.05.1992 after completing 15 years of service in Group IV Trade. My basic pension on the date of discharge was Rs.479/- as per PPO No. 08/14/B/06606/1992. My pension was revised and improved on many occasions which are as follows:

    1. Pension on discharge 01.06.1992​​​Rs. 479.00
    2. Pension on 01.01.1996 V CPC​​​Rs.1480.00
    3. Pension on 01.01.2004 (DP Merger)​​​Rs.2220.00
    4. Improvement pension (with DP) 01.01.2006​​Rs.2411.00
    (Group of Ministers)
    5. Revised pension as on 01.01.2006 VI CPC​​Rs.3633.00
    6. Improvement pension 01.07.2009 (CSC)​​Rs.4515.00
    7. Improvement pension 24.09.2012​​​Rs.4949.00

    2.​On 10th October 1997 the pay structure was revised based on educational qualification and in which Group IV was merged with Group III and subsequently existing Group II and II were placed in "Y" group. The pay structure of Group III and Group IV were the same prior to 10.10.1997 or as on 09.10.1997 (i.e. 3775 - 85 - 5050)

    3.​As such pension for Group IV and Group III sergeants having 15 years of service and the same as on 01.01.2006 i.e. Rs.3633/-. Whereas on 01.07.2009 CSC has bridged the group of Pre 2006 and Post 2006 PBOR pensioners. In which pre 10.10.1997 PBOR pensioners were brought at par with post 10.10.1997 PBOR pensioners. Also refer SAF 01/05/2008 as PCDC Circular 471.

    4.​Since pre 10.10.1997 PBOR pensioners, were brought at par with post 10.10.1997 PBOR pensioners, my pension as on 01.07.2009 is to be fixed at Rs.4840/- (For Group III sergeant having 15 years of service as per Table 114 of PCDS Circular 430). But my pension was fixed at Rs.4515/- (Table 115 of PCDA Circular 430 which is for Group V, converted to Group IV and Group "Z")


    5.​In Case of PBOR who were invalidated out during 01.01.1986 to 31.12.1995 the pay drawn at the time of invalidment must shall be adopted for national fixation of the pay as on 01.01.1996 and it is further fixation as on 10.10.1997 at the rate given to similar PBOR of the same rank and group after the revision of pay scale wef 01.01.1996and 10.10.1997. I would like to state with heavy heart that government and the concerned issue circulars for the benefit of pensioners but these who implement the instruction and circulars were reluctant or ill conceived the same and the benefits were not reached to pensioners.

    6.​Further my pension was revised on 24.09.2012 as Rs.4949/- as PCDA Circular 501 Table No.17. As on 01.07.2009 my pension was fixed wrongly and the same is resulted in wrong fixation as on 24.09.2012. My pension as on 24.09.2012 is to be fixed as Rs.5301/- as per Table 17 of PCDA Circular 501. Para 5.2 of the PCDA Circular 501 state that pension payable from 01.07.2009 may be paid correctly first as per instruction contained in PCDA Circular 430 and thereafter pension to be revised as on 24.09.2012 as per PCDA Circular 501.

    7.​In view of above, I request you sir kindly verify the pension fixation as on 01.07.2009 and 24.12.2012 for 15 years qualifying service of a Sergeant of Group IV which merged to Group III on 10.10.1997. The CPPC Chennai fixed me wrongly using the wrong Table which can be verified and corrected only at CDA (AF) New Delhi.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear sir, all the group IV trades of IAF of pre86,pre96,pre10/10/97 & group Z of post 10/10/97 till 31/12/2005 are placed in group Z & the pensions from the beginning for you has been fixed correctly.Table 115 of Circular 430 itself clrears the whole of the doubts. But the most pathetic thing is that all the group IV trades including MTD of Army till 31/12/2005 are placed in group Y, while the same of IAF are placed in group Z. It shows the policy makers either knowingly have done the great injustice towards the said group of IAF or might be with their inadequate knowledge towards the same.

      Delete
  39. I never understood why every pay commission has degraded the status and pay of the Technical Sgts in the Indian Air Force:-
    Technical Airmen in the Indian Air Force are either a civil diploma holder or 10+2 in Science and
    thereafter undergo technical training in their respective training institutes. Although the qualification they
    achieve after completion of their training is equivalent to a civil diploma engineer, but the reason is unknown why the technical Airmen (equivalent to civil diploma engineers) are placed in the lowest pay band (5200-20200) with a ‘X’ group pay of 1400 rupees only, after completion of their training. Whereas the civil diploma holders are directly placed in Pay band – 2 with a Grade pay of 4200/- rupees. This is totally injustice with the technical airmen.
    Further, a civil diploma engineer becomes equivalent to a Degree in Engineering and gets promoted, at least, to the position of an Assistant Engineer, or an Engineer in 10 to 12 years. The salary also increases considerably. But for a technical airman, even to get a diploma engineer’s scale, he has to complete a minimum of 13& ½ years of service, clears all the requisite service promotion exams and become a SGT (Senior non commissioned officer). Yes, this the rank, from when, a technical airman
    becomes eligible to get a diploma engineer’s scale. You may laugh, but, wait. There are more things need to be said. Does he get the actual diploma engineer’s scale then also? Let me compare and the picture will be cleared to all of you.
    Pay of civil diploma holder in 5th Pay Commission: 5000-150- 8000 / Pay of technical SGT in 5th Pay
    Commission: 4670-85- 5945. Later upgraded to 5000-100- 6500 (The reason? to give less pension?)
    Pay of civil diploma holder in 6th Pay Commission: 9300-34800 with a grade pay 4200/ Pay of technical SGT in 6th Pay Commission (fact but true) :- 5200- 20200 with a Grade pay of Rs. 2800.
    Why this sort of discrimination and injustice? There can’t be any argument that higher ranks
    deserve higher pays. But does that mean the subordinate staffs need to be paid less? Moreover, what does the ‘Military Service Pay’ means? The JCOs & the other ranks placed below the Commissioned officers are less military than the military nursing staffs? Are they combatant? Why a non combatant staff will get more MSP than a combatant personnel? Will the commissioned officers allow this type of injustice with themselves? The JCOs(Class II Gazetted Offr) and the other ranks are also central government employees. They can’t form an union. Even some of their fundamental rights are restricted. Please think for them also. They also need to be looked after. Is there anyone who is listening? The world is watching at us!

    ReplyDelete
  40. Immaturity of my age and the attractive advertisement drew my attention to join in the Air Force as a Group X technical airmen. After two years initial training, I became a diploma qualified technical person but remain restricted to the lowest pay band, starting from joining to leaving the service after completing my initial bond. Isn't it a mockery that a diploma qualified person is called a Fitter in the service? Another funny thing is, in service I was an OR and after the retirement also I feel the same discrimination, whenever I visit either a CSD canteen or an ECHS polyclinic and throughout my life, I will be addressed as OR only whenever I will visit those places. It was my fault to join in Air Force and now other than cursing me I can't do anything to calm me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just wait. The good politicians are now aware of the facts. The PBORs may get a good deal in the near future.

      Delete
  41. My benefits of joining in the Indian Air Force:-
    (a) Although a diploma qualified person but was called a Fitter in the service and after the retirement also the same endorsement by the district soldier's board.
    (b) I was an OR in the service and still an OR after my retirement also. This discrimination I feel whenever I visit any CSD canteen or an ECHS polyclinic.
    (c) Being a diploma qualified person worked in the lowest pay band throughout my career i.e starting from joining to leaving the service (initial bond).
    (d) Whether OROP or pay commission, my pension increase will be very less.

    ReplyDelete
  42. The table attached with pcda circular No 547 is wrong. Correct table is attached with PCDA circular No 502 dated 17th January 2013 in which enhanced rate of family pension / ordinary rate of family pension have been worked out min 50% and 30% of minimum of fitment table for least service and maximum service 50% / 30% of maximum of the fitment table. But deduction per every half year of service is not correct. Deduction for every half year of service should be half of increment. For example increment in 5th CPC was 200 for Sub Majs. Then 200 x 1.86 = 372 its 50% 186 should have been reduced every year. For half year 50% of 186 = 92 should have been reduced for every half year. But every half year Rs 205 has been reduced. Like that in each rank same type of anomaly is there. What is the base for for deduction is not known to me. We all should write and approach to DESW MOD and PCDA for correcting the table as per their circular No 502 dated 17th January 2013 wef 01.01.2006. Please wake up every body and take action. I have already written to PCDA and DESW MOD in writing as well as online greivance registration with DOPPW GOI.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Look at the discrimination meted out in terms of Pay and status to the Group X Technical Airmen of the Indian Air Force:-

    For all the three armed forces, i.e., Army, Navy and the Indian Air Force, for the group X technical trades, the entry level qualification is 10+2 in science or diploma in engineering. After their training they become equivalent to Diploma in Engineering. In Army and Navy those diploma qualified personnel are placed directly as JCO and Petty officer respectively, but in the Indian Air Force, those diploma qualified personnel are placed as Aircraftsman (equivalent to Sepoy) and thus placed in the lowest pay band, i.e. pay band 1. How funny it is. Isn’t it?

    Further, a diploma qualified person is supposed to get the salary of a BE in 10 to 12 years as per the government policy but, forget about pay band 3, the Group X technical airmen even after becoming a Sergeant also, can not reach to Pay band 2 (which they are supposed to get after their training). They bear the financial losses silently and remain restricted to the lowest pay band. They can reach to pay band 2 if they give an extension of service after completing their initial bonds and become a Junior Warrant Officer (May be after 24 to 26 years of service). That is the one and only pay band given to them in their entire career on promotion. They may be promoted to the highest rank of an airman but have to satisfy them to be in pay band 2 for ever. Please tell me, which technical airman will like to extend his service, after completing his initial bond?

    ReplyDelete
  44. During pre-independence British era, we had the whites and the Indians and now we have the officers and the men in the Armed Forces. We got the freedom but the powers only transferred from the white hands to the brown hands and the laws remain the same. British used to take care of their officer’s welfare selfishly and resorted to various disciplinary policies of the subordinate ranks only. I hope, we are not abiding by the same mentality even after 67th years of independence also. We are a completely independent country now. We must feel proud to be an Indian. Why to follow age old Act and rules? Can’t we move forward with our own sets of rules? Aristocratic rules have no place in the armed forces atmosphere. Suppression and oppression also have no place in a democratic country. Equality, opportunity and respect for each and every citizens of this country can only make us a strong global power. What is the purpose of purchasing those costly flying machines or weapons if the soldiers who will operate or maintain those have low morale, sense of prejudice or a sense of neglect? The good politicians and the bureaucrats must step in at the earliest, for the sake of the country’s prosperity, safety and the security.

    ReplyDelete
  45. I am going to get any benefit from this OROP implementation. The chart shows less pension basic than what I am drawing. How is that possible? If they take average pension, then also I am supposed to get an increased amount of basic because of the increment in every year. The chart is either wrongly calculated or a malafide intention. Jai ho!
    But don't worry. I will carry on writing on this, so that everyone of this world come to know the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Atleast my future generations will not join in the defence forces as pbors.

    ReplyDelete
  47. 1. I have understood that nothing is going to be changed unless there is an intervention by the developed nations.

    2. The country is still following the colonial mindset and some country might have vested interests that we continue to do so. Unless they think for us we are not going to be benefited by any means. That is what I think so.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Respected Sir, I am No 14223942H Ex Naik (TS) Narendra Bahadur Misra retired from Army Corps of Signals from the Matric Entry Trade with Science Group (OCC Class -I) after completing 15 years of service. As per your norms in the Army Matric Entry Trades are considered in X group. As on date I was received OROP but the pension was consider in Y Group. I request you sir kindly consider my pension in X group. Thanking you sir

    ReplyDelete
  49. As per table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016 basic pension of Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar of X group for service 24 years or 26 years has fixed in same rate i.e. Rs 11138 but basic pension of Honorary Naib Subedar & Naib Subedar of Y group is different. This difference is Rs 1004/- .
    As per table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016 for 24 years service Y group Honorary Naib Subedar basic pension has fixed at Rs 8425/- and Naib Subedar basic pension has fixed on Rs 9429/- which is not understood in OROP and it is injustice with the Honorary Naib Subedar of Y group.
    Hony Rank of Naib Subedar granted to Havildar will be notionally considered as a promotion to the higher grade pay and will be allowed notionally for the purposes of fixation of pension only with effect from 01-1-2006. The said decision has been communicated vide Ministry of Defence letter NO. 1(8)/2008-D (Pen/ Policy) dated 12-6-2009.
    As per table No 7 of circular No 555 dated 04 February 2016 24 years service of X group Naib Subedar & Honorary Naib Subedar pension are equal, so 24 years service of Y group Naib Subedar & Honorary Naib Subedar pension also should be equal, please consider it.
    Keeping view of the above, You are requested to do the needful.
    Thanking you with warm regards,
    Yours obediently soldier,
    2879637W Honorary Naib Subedar Vijai Kumar, PPO No-S/29763/2006(ARMY)

    ReplyDelete
  50. R/ Sir ,
    anyone can provide me Rank list for pre 01.01.2006 retired personal.On behalf LPC cum DATA sheet filled up and PCDA fixed pension. If anyone of you can provide it please contact me bass.sunil07@gmail.com
    Thank you

    ReplyDelete

  51. Dear sir, Delinking of 33 years to full pension. PLease refer PCDA circular No 502 dated 17 Jan 2013. This circular was issued for Enhanced/ ordinary rate of family pension. Table in this circular for Enhanced rate of family pension in Table 1 & ordinary rate of family pension in Table No 2. Enhanced rate of family pension is equal to service pension. In PCDA circular 501 dated 17 Jan 2013 table DESW/ PCDA have shown pension based on 50% of Notional max pay as per fitment table among three services with prorate reduction for less service. But Min pension i.e, 50% of min pay in pay band as per fitment table is not maintained. In circular 502 dated 17 Jan 2013 which was issued for Enhanced/ ordinary rate of family pension, same pensions i.e 50% of notional max pay as per fitment table as shown as in circular No 501 dated 17 Jan 2013 and 50%/30% of min pay as per fitment table is also maintained. There is no confusion in Min pension. Unnecessary DESW is prolonging/ delaying the issue. Simply they have to reissue Tables of DESW/ PCDA circular No 502 dated 17 Jan 2013 Table 1 Enhanced rate of family pension for Service pension and Table 2 Ordinary rate of family pension for family pension. If I am wrong, Please advice me. Twice I have represented these thins to DESW and PCDA. But reply is not satisfactory. Regards ....Prakash Pattar. Ex Sub Maj.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Respected Brig Saheb, as per your statement above Nb Sub are not at loss and they are getting 50% as per circular 430. Due to 33 years service rule as a Nb sub 21'5 years service,I was getting 8573/- Now on delinking of 33 years rule, am I eligible for Rs 10765/- as basic.? Kindly clarify please

    ReplyDelete
  53. Dear Sir,

    It is to inform you that I am an ex-serviceman and retired from Army (Sikh Light Infantry) wef 31 Dec 1997 prematurely after rendering 23 years and 05 days service and my pension was fixed as Rs. 3954/- vide PPO No. S/045395/97 (ARMY) dated 7 Oct 1997. My pension has been increased to Rs. 8937/- wef 01.01.2006 under 6th CPC vide GOI, MOD vide letter No. 17(4)/2008/D (Pen/Policy) dated 11.11.2008 and PCDA, Allahabad Circular No 397. This pension was further improved to Rs. 10157/- wef 01 Jul 2009 vide GOI, MOD letter No. PC-10(1)/2009-D (Pen/Pol) dated 08.03.2010 and PCDA Circular No. 430. Pension of pre-2006 pensioners (PBOR) was further revised vide GOI, MOD letter No. 1 (13)/2012/D (Pen/Policy) dated 17.01.2013 wef 24.09.2012 and PCDA Circular No. 501, but my pension was not revised.

    Based on judicial pronouncements, Govt. of India, Ministry of Personnel, PG & Pensions, Department of pension & Pensioners’ Welfare vide OM No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 30th Jul 2015 decided that the pension/family pension of all pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners may be revised in accordance with their OM No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 28.01.2013 with effect from 01.01.2006 instead of 24.09.2012. Accordingly, all pre-2006 Commissioned Officers of Armed forces were given their pension wef 01.01.2006 instead of 24.09.2012, whereas for PBOR, GOI, MOD vide letter No. 1(04)/2015(II)-D(Pen/Pol) dated 03.09.2015, has prepared separate Annexure ‘A’ for Army, Annexure ‘B’ for Air Force & Annexure ‘C’ for Navy, authorising disbursing authority to step up pension/family pension wef 01.01.2006 instead of allowing of pension tables as given in GOI, MOD letter dated 17 Jan 2013. My pension as given in this annexure is Rs. 8010/- whereas my initial pension as on 01.01.2006 was fixed as 8937/-. Hence, no arrear has been paid to me and I have been allowed to continue to draw my pension as Rs. 10157/- wef 01 Jul 2009. As per judicial pronouncements, my pension which I was drawing wef 01 Jul 2009 should be paid to me wef 01.01.2006. This seems to be totally injustice to me.

    In case of officers, order issued vide GOI, MOD letter No. 1(04)/2015(I)-D (Pen/Pol) dated 3rd Sep 2015, (para 4) states that revised tables indicating minimum guaranteed pension/ordinary family pension for Indian Commissioned Officers which is annexed with GOI, MOD letter No. 1 (11)/2012-D(Pen/Policy dated 17.01.2013 shall be effective with effect 01.01.2006 instead of 24.09.2012. Why this same formula is not applied to PBOR.

    On delinking of 33 years qualifying service, I am entitled for Rs. 11970/- pm wef 01 Jan 2006 to 30 Jun 2014 and Rs. 12268/- per month, but this all is under cloud, no hope for better future. When MOD will issue suitable order for PBOR on delinking of 33 years qualifying service for full pension benefits.

    To deliver natural justice to me, May I request you to kindly look into this and take up this issue with GOI, MOD to remove this anomaly.

    I shall be remained grateful to you.

    ReplyDelete
  54. hello sir,
    I am sankaran.I was served as army man for 15.5 years.I was ranked as havildar (clerk GD).How much rupees ,i get pension Wef 01.01.2016.

    ReplyDelete