ANIMATION

  • FLASH

  • WATCH THIS BLOG REGULARLY FOR LATEST NEWS ON ONE RANK ONE PENSION & OTHER SERVICE BENEFITS RELATING TO EX-SERVICE PENSIONERS,CENTRAL GOVT PENSIONERS,LIC/GIC PENSIONERS* A UNIQUE BLOG WITH MORE THAN 1 CRORE VIEWERS & 700 FOLLOWERS #

    FLASH

  • FlashFLASH* NAVAL SAILORS WHO JOINED ON OR BEFORE 03/07/1976 & DISCHARGED ON COMPLETION OF THEIR TERM OF ENGAGEMENT AFTER 10 YEARS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR SPECIAL PENSION AS PER SC JUDGEMENT IN CIVIL APPEAL 2147/2011 New **** L*OROP CASE NEXT HEARING LIKELY ON 15/12/2017
  • New











    .
  • Saturday, 6 June 2015

    LATEST NEWS ON AFVAI & IESM DELIGATION MEETING WITH DEFENCE MINISTER PARIKKAR

     OUR GENERAL SECRETARY GS SIDHU TALKING TO DELEGATION
    Respected Sir,
     I attended meeting organised by IESM TO DAY morning.Near about 150 vet were in the meeting.Few office bearer were allowed to Speak for few min. In the given time I introduced our AFVAI and myself expressed Aim of AFVAI in few words. All the activities were being aired live on TIME NOW NEWS X & NAI. In between DM called MAJ SATBIR for meeting and requested Not to go for agitation.SATBIR not agreed told DM veterans will decide and he came back discussed with veterans what to do. All officers,Jcos and Ors decided that 15 July 2015 should be last date. DM again called delegation for meeting.
    The Meeting was adjourned at 1315 hrs. The delegation left again for meeting with DM and we informed that decision will b informed through mail or phone call.I represented AFVAI with full confidence.When meeting was over I again talked to Lt gen BAHIRI and MAJ gen SATBIR and Col ANIL KAUL.I advised them to form a committee by taking at least one member from every Org ,they agreed and noted my name to represent on behalf of AFVAI.
     GS SIDHU
     GEN SECRETARY
    OUR CHIEF PATRON HFO BL  KALRA (Right) Talking to COL ANIL KAUL ( A File Photo from delegation meeting 06/05/2015)
     I also spoke to Col. Anil Kaul about the very short tenure with pittance as pension to ORs & living thereafter in a miserable condition. The Col. said this issue of ORs is close to his heart. I brought this subject to the knowledge of Col. because he was to anchor the meet and also takes up the cause of ESM forcefully, during TV debates. 
    HFO BL KALRA
    CHIEF PATRON

    29 comments :

    1. DEAR SIRS,

      Unless we have our representative from OR category, no body can explain the plight of OR comprehensively. let us have so many groups of its homogeneity but we should work under one umbrella to agitate against the non implementation of OROP and may have opportunity to vent our grievances concerning us. a very good move of AFVAI Let them not dilute the sanctity of definition of OROP

      ReplyDelete
    2. dear sir
      This maha sangram rally which is on 14 jun 2015 for the implementation of orop should go on till the announcement made. I have got the train reservation done.I will come along with my other veterans friend. I too have conveyed that if they are not able to attend the rally they will give Gyapan to the respective district headquarter.

      ReplyDelete
      Replies
      1. Dear Sir,

        I salute you for your Spirit which is an example to others

        Delete
    3. Mr Modi and his babus are deliberately delaying the OROP. Delay is a tactic of slowing down a decision-making process in order to maintain the status quo. It is employed mainly by parties involved in difficult public policy disputes (though it can be used in other contexts) who do not want changes made. If a group is part of the decision-making process but does not want change, the slower the process, the better. If they do not have a say in the design of the process, then they can deliberately delay it by stalling on their involvement. Strategic delays are often used by disputants to frustrate their opponent. For example, a city government was considering the approval of a new industrial plant. Residents of the neighbourhood near the proposed site were opposed to the idea, but they didn't have the political clout to stop it. So they decided to delay the decision-making process, by asking for a variety of site assessments, insisting on a long string of public meetings, and bringing a lawsuit which they knew they couldn't win, but it delayed the process even further. Their goal was to delay the decision long enough that the company would get frustrated and give up. At the same time, they also hoped to gain enough community support that local decision makers would decide to refuse the necessary permits for political reasons if the company pursued its quest.
      THIS IS THE TACTIC THEY ARE USEING ON US.

      ReplyDelete
    4. B.N Dutta..
      i pay a due respect to those soldier who died on the field of the war in manipur .. this is not the new stigma for the indian army ... no heatiness or cordiality from media or govt for those

      soldier who shake their life for th country ... no climatic awerness , no news for the snowfall but with out those news the heigher authority send them for millitary convey such as ration ,

      replacement of duty jawans,... those who are effected and cause to dead for those climatic disasters are from 99.9% Personal below officers rank ... From the very system of buttering from senior

      to snior ofheigher auority, those officers from PBOR didn't get acuarate respect or honour and always remain neclected ...
      so, that the 1973 the strugle of One Rank One pension had been hanged to death and toally dissolute .. and the situation remain same of personal below officers rank full of hatred, and low

      economic condition...

      ReplyDelete
    5. I don't understand why these many meetings and dead lines? The Supreme Court has said very clearly about implementation of OROP with a time period., but the Govt. failed to implement it. every calculation, discussions are taken place and approved by the parliament approved then only. now why it is delayed? what is the real issue/problem to postpone the issue? only alternative left to initiate the contempt petition before the Hon'ble Supreme court. Jai Hind.

      ReplyDelete
      Replies
      1. This SC should take the protest by ESM on 14 June and issue a order on contempt for neglecting their earlier order on the Government.

        Delete
    6. No compromise at all , am nationalistic, RSS and BJP fan since Birth. But in this matter betrayal to ESM I don't support Mr Modi, if some body is doing that he must be bullshitted may be of any cadre

      ReplyDelete
    7. PAST GOVT NOT PLAYED SUCH A HIGH TECH DRAMA ON OROP. ITS UNFORTUNATE MY ELECTED EXCLUSIVELY LIKED BY SOLDIERS PARTY BETRAYING LIKE THIS. NO MORE GETTING FOOLED , AGREE FOR A CONCLUSION NOT FOR ASSURANCE

      ReplyDelete
    8. Strike and hit hard with military precession.

      ReplyDelete
    9. We have nourished this democracy sufficiently and the lot at helm are enjoying too much at our sacrifices and cost . Bash on regardless.

      ReplyDelete
    10. Neither sympathies nor any support to anybody in the Nation who are not implementing OROP and many other issues adjudicated by constitutional authority. Who are these individuals...?...??? To hold up or delay these .

      ReplyDelete
    11. Why not the IESM file a PIL in the Supreme Court? Till now, the PM, FM, and RM failed us. From now onwards we must approach the Supreme Commander of the Indian Armed Forces for this just full right.

      ReplyDelete
    12. Dear Friends,
      Injustice to Exservicemen:
      1. Reduction in % of pension which should have been 106% with same raito of pension increased for civilian.
      2. In 1979 Time Scale for promotion for PBOR was delayed for five year and was Put in Cold box. In fact it should have been, upgrade the pay scale as soon his promotion becomes due if he cannot be promoted due to vacancy and continue his upgrading pay scale. He should be promoted to rank for which pay scale has been achieved before transferring him to release section.
      3. As per circular 397 dated 18-11- 2008, Special group of Indian Navy was grouped in Group-X for payments wef 01-01-2006 Appendix-A Can be referred, but vide circular 430 dated 10-3-2010, while preparing Table they were grouped in Y- Group similar mistake was in Circular-501 dated 2013 Till date this Appendix- A is not Amended.

      Circular 437 dated 3-6-10 regarding Clarification
      Extract is given Below:
      (i) Naval PBOR discharged between 01-10.1997 and 31-12-2005

      Circular-512 dated 26-06-2013 regarding Clarification also give same as in Cir 437, In this case also
      Circular 437 and 512 refers for period Naval PBOR discharged between 01-10.1997 and 31-12-2005

      Group Code Shown in the PPO Actual Corresponding Group Descriptipn
      1 Group-“X” Old group “A”
      2 Group “Y” Old Special Group and group“B”
      3 Group-“Z” Old group “C”
      Appendex –A Amendment is Only in ranks between Navy & Army not regarding Pay Group. above table is for Naval PBOR discharged between 01-10.1997 and 31-12-2005

      Appendix-A of Circular-397 is not amended with regard to Pay Grouping,
      BUT Pension is being paid in Y Group although Appendix-A referred states
      " Group-X wef 01-01-2006 in Navy : Agroup or Spl Group or Artificer"



      ReplyDelete
    13. Pensioners have no differences.... parasites of the society...

      ReplyDelete
    14. Who can not survive after several years of earnings, wil not survive any more. Being soldier you shold know to the trick to survive as others do.

      ReplyDelete
    15. People are not getting a meal in a day but you need rs 80000+ as pension! What a joke!

      ReplyDelete
    16. You have two categories. Officers and PBORs. Any RTI query ever made to know how many officers and how many PBORSs laid their lives to defend the country or to meet the adverse eventuality? Can any one answer?' Bali ka bakra' koun haai?

      ReplyDelete
    17. Hype in the media, chatting in high volume, expressing deep greif, will not help the real life problems.

      ReplyDelete
    18. Pension should be uniform. After retirement noone bears any responsibility. For the past deed one should not be treated as special boy.. but help possibly to live the equally dignified lives. Pay same respect to all soldiers equally.

      ReplyDelete
    19. This society is full of biasing. No job can be done without the help of ' big shots'. Those are having sources,r only eligible for portfolios. Chaaploosi is the final yard stick to judge the performance.

      ReplyDelete
    20. A commader is a handicap without the support of his troops who equally responsible to win the battle. Unless they are able to execute the plan as planned, the batle will be lost. Thoughts alone can not do anything unless there is a coordination among the parts of the body..

      ReplyDelete
    21. The responsible persons in the govt make hue and cry for patriotism, then why do they make division among the soldiers?

      ReplyDelete
    22. Difference between X & Y Group is 1985 for Hav with service 23.5 to 25.5 years service,
      If we take same years service render the difference is between all ranks of Y group is given below :

      15 year 28 yr
      Sep 1563 835
      NK 2014 365
      Hav 2249 390
      Nb Sub 2270 67
      Sub 3368 298
      Sub Maj 3859 290

      One should only not decided on what is difference , but consider what was Basic pension on 31 March 2014 for all rank,

      Pension as As Per OROP A s Per PPO Difference between

      Cir-501 OROP PPO Difference Between OROP
      31-3-2014 & PPO 31-3-2014
      1. Sep
      15 yrs 5196 6665 7605 Less 940
      2. NK
      22 Yrs 6599 7170 8295 Less 1125
      3. Hav
      24 yrs 7375 7808 9320 Less 1512
      4. Nb Sub
      26 yrs 10025 10405 10852 Less 447
      5. Sub
      28 yrs 11970 12268 11370 More 898
      6.Sub Maj
      30 yrs 12285 13045 12285 More 760
      As per above table Sub & Sub Maj has got More than PPO of 31- March 201
      4 where as Sep to NB Sub gets Less than PPO 31 March 2014.

      Thus most affected are HAV, NK, Sep And Nb Sub respectively

      Regards
      Balwinder Singh Chhina , Mobile 08447524787

      ReplyDelete
    23. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH
      OA 1165/2011 with OA 2165/2011 And OA 246/2012 New Delhi this the 21st day of April, 2015

      Table Under Para 4 as 3. is reproduced below:
      The recommendation regarding payment of full pension on
      completion of 20 years of qualifying service will take effect only prospectively for all Government employees other than PBORs in Defence Forces from the date it is accepted by the Government (6.5.3.)

      Judgments CAT Decision Dated 22-116 is reproduced below:
      13. In view of the judgments of the Honble Supreme Court in D.S. Nakara (supra), V. Kasturi (supra), T.S. Thiruvengadam (supra) and order of the Full Bench of the Tribunal in OA 937/2010 with OA 2101/2010 dated 20.11.2014, we are of the opinion that the prayer in the OAs is fully justified. We, therefore, quash and set aside the impugned orders dated 3.10.2008 and 19.03.2010 being violative of law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court and direct the respondents that the qualifying service for earning full pension will be treated as twenty years also for those who retired from the Central Government service on or before 31.12.2005 and were alive on that day. The respondents are also directed to modify/amend all relevant government orders/ letters/ notifications in accordance with the above decision. It is made clear that this parity of pension between pre and post-1.01.2006 pensioners (on the question of eligibility of minimum pensionable service of twenty years) would apply both as regards pension and family pension.
      “For parity of reasons, the qualifying service for earning pension in case of superannuation and retirement on absorption in government body/ government undertaking will be treated as 10 years also for those who retire from the Central Government service on or before 31.12.2005 and were alive on that date.” The respondents are granted three months time from the date of receipt of this order for implementation of directions contained in this order.

      RA 165/2015 in OA 2165/2011 With RA 172/2015 in OA 1165/2011
      Order reserved on: 13.01.2016- Order pronounced on:22.01.2016

      Members my take decision for further line of action required.
      BS Chhina, Mobile: 08447524787

      ReplyDelete
    24. My PM is unable to do justice for a lady! How can he do justice for others, other women? Media hype and propaganda on progress will not help at all. The people of India know well who is the bluff master!

      ReplyDelete
    25. Minimum service required for pension was 20 years for Defence Officers and Civilian pension was reduced for less service than33 yrs. Pension was decided by fowling formula:

      0.5 Lsast Salary x QS/33.
      Same formula was applicable for PBOR, but minimum service required is 15 years for pension.

      Vide CAT Judgement Ref RA 165/2015 in OA 2165/2011 With RA 172/2015 in OA 1165/2011
      Order reserved on: 13.01.2016- Order pronounced on:22.01.2016
      Officers and Civilian will be entitled to obtain Full Pension on having 20 yrs service.

      As PBOR we should plan to get full pension on completion of 15 yrs as officer have got full pension on completion of 20 yrs.

      Think Please

      Regars,
      BS Chhina, Mobile:08447524787

      ReplyDelete
    26. Written on the paper, and jumping in the print media, how much care taking for villagers. It looks that all villages are developed in a new heights that were never seen before!

      ReplyDelete
    27. PBORs must app AFT for 20 yrs full pension!

      ReplyDelete