One rank one pension move too little, too late: Ex-Army Chief

FOLLOW THIS LINK BY DOUBLE CLICK TO SEE THE OPINION OF GEN. OP . MALI K

EX- CHIEF OF ARMY






http://ibnlive.in.com/videos/295212/one-rank-one-pension-move-too-little-too-late-exarmy-chief.html

Armed forces personnel dissatisfied with One Rank, One Pension scheme

Though the UPA government has rolled out the One Rank, One Pension (OROP) scheme for ex-servicemen, and tried to bridge the gap between pre and post-January 2006 retirees, resentment is brewing among serving and retired armed forces personnel, who have termed it an ‘eyewash’ and a feeble attempt at “rectification” of a fault dating back to 2006.

Several ex-servicemen, as well as serving armed forces personnel, pointed out on Tuesday that after the Government’s Rs. 2300 crore package for pensioners, a sepoy would be entitled to a total increase of Rs. 622 per month in his pension, and the raise would be Rs. 761 for a havildar.

Among the officers, a Lieutenant Colonel, on an average, would get a raise of Rs. 565 per month.

They pointed out that several anomalies still remain, and none of the core issues, raised by the three Service Chiefs in August with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, have been accepted.

Among other things, the three Service Chiefs had asked for the resolution of serving personnel issues, like fixation of common payscales for all JCOs and Other Ranks, grant of non-functional upgradation status to commissioned officers, and one rank one pension to the retired personnel. The Chiefs had also pointed out disparities between officers in uniform and their civilian counterparts.

Citing an example, some officers pointed out disparities in nine organisations of Group A services within the armed forces, where a superintendent engineer was at par with a colonel, but after non-functional upgradation (NFU), had become equivalent to a Major General, whereas the chief engineer, higher in status in that very organisation, was equivalent to a Brigadier.

While pledging to continue their struggle for their rights, ex-servicemen said the pension hike, announced on Monday, amounted to “wrong and deceitful” treatment of their long-pending OROP demand.

“It is deceiving. The Government has wrongly interpreted the term ‘One Rank One Pension’ (OROP). They haven’t given OROP; instead they have just merely made an enhancement in pension,” Chairman of Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM) Lt. Gen. (Retd.) Raj Kadyan, said here.

IESM on Tuesday wrote to Dr. Singh, Defence Minister A.K. Antony, and the three Service chiefs, explaining how the government decision doesn’t meet their long-pending demand to provide equitable pensions.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/armed-forces-personnel-dissatisfied-with-one-rank-one-pension-scheme/article3936161.ece

UPA GOVERNMENT IS CHEATING THE NATION AS WELL AS THE SOLDIERS BY FALSE PROPAGANDA ON OROP

New Delhi: Ex-servicemen are unhappy with the pension hike announced by government saying it amounted to "wrong and deceitful" treatment of their long-pending 'One Rank One Pension' demand and vowed to continue struggle for their rights.

"It is deceiving. Government has wrongly interpreted the term 'One Rank One Pension' (OROP). They have not given OROP, instead they have just merely made an enhancement in pension," said Chairman, Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM), retired Lt Gen Raj Kadyan.

IESM on Tuesday also wrote letters to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Defence Minister AK Antony and the three Service chiefs explaining how the government decision does not meet their long pending demand to ensure equitable pensions.

"Ex-servicemen expect the government to do justice to them. This announcement has further disillusioned the ex-servicemen fraternity, who have decided to intensify their protest in a dignified manner on all India basis," IESM Vice-Chairman Maj Gen Satbir Singh wrote in the letter to the Prime Minister.

"To illustrate, a sepoy, naik and havlidar have been given an increase of only Rs 400 per month, whereas a sepoy who retired on January 2012 draws approximately Rs 4,000 more than those who retired prior to 2006," he explained in the letter, adding that disparity exists in the officer ranks too.

The government had on Monday announced a decision to address the pensionary issues of ex-servicemen.

"The gap in pension of pre-and post-January 2006 retiree jawans will be bridged by determining the pension of pre-January 2006 pensioners on basis of notional maximum for ranks and groups across three Services as in case of post-January 2006 retirees," it had said in a release

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/exservicemen-reject-governments-pension-scheme/295165-3.html

EX-SERVICEMEN ARE CHEATED AGAIN BY UPA GOVERNMENT BY BY GIVING MODIFIED PARITY INSTEAD OF OROP

Press Information Bureau
Government of India
Ministry of Defence

24-September-2012 21:35 IST

Rs.2300 crore approved to meet the demands of Ex-servicemen pensioners 

The Union Cabinet has approved the recommendations of the Committee headed by Cabinet Secretary for benefits to ex-servicemen on four issues.   The financial implications of the improvements made as per the Cabinet decision on the four items are broadly estimated at Rs.2300 crore per annum.  The details are as follows: 

I.             One Rank One Pension: 

On One Rank One Pension, the demand of the Defence Forces and Ex-Servicemen Associations is that uniform pension be paid to the Defence Forces personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.  

            The difference in the pension of present and past pensioners in the same rank occurs on account of the number of increments earned by the defence personnel in that rank.  There is also a difference between the pension of pre 1.1.06 and post 1.1.06 retirees belonging to a particular rank.  The UPA Government on two previous occasions has taken decisions to narrow the gap between the present and past pensioners, particularly those belonging to the ranks of JCOs and Other Ranks. 

            On the issue of One Rank One Pension, the following have been approved by the Cabinet: 

(i)         Bridging of the gap in the pension of pre 1.1.06 and post 1.1.06 JCO/OR retirees by determining the pension of pre 1.1.06 retirees on the basis of notional maximum for ranks and groups across the three Services as in the case of post 1.1.06 retirees.  In addition, the weightage of qualifying service in the ranks of Sepoys, Naik andHavaldar would be increased by two years for both pre and post 1.1.06 retirees.

(ii)        The pension of pre 1.1.06 Commissioned Officer pensioners would be stepped up with reference to the minimum of fitment table for the ranks instead of the minimum of pay band.           

These are expected to largely meet the demands of the defence pensioners on one rank one pension.  

II.                   Enhancement of Family Pension : 

(i)                   The pension of pre - 1.1.2006 family pensioners(Commissioned Officers, Honorary Commissioned Officers, JCOs/ORs ) be stepped up based on the minimum of the fitment table instead of the minimum of the Pay Band; 

(i)            Establishing linkage of the family pension with the pension of JCOs/ORs, in those cases where the death takes place after the retirement of the JCO/OR since such a JCO/OR drew a pension based on the maximum of the pay scales, 60% of the pension applicable to JCO/OR pensioners would be granted to the family pensioner in case of normal family pension calculated a 30% of last pay drawn. Accordingly, based on the rank, group and length of service of the deceased JCO/OR pensioner, his pension would first be determined on notional basis. In cases where death of JCO/OR took place after retirement, the family pensioners in receipt of normal family pension would become entitled to 60% of the said pension determined on notional basis and those in receipt of enhanced family pension will be entitled to 100% of this pension. Similar entitlements would be determined in the case of Special Family Pension; and 

(ii)                 The family pensioner of the JCO/OR would be granted pension arrived at on the basis of the family pension worked out as per the formulation at (i) above or the pension on the basis of stepping up with reference to the minimum of the fitment table, whichever is beneficial. Further, the linkage of family pension with retiring pension beapplied in the case of post 1.1.2006 family pensioners of JCOs/ORs also. 

III.           Dual Family Pension:

Dual family pension would be allowed in the present and future cases where the pensioner drew, is drawing or may draw pension for military service as well as for civil employment. 

IV.          Family pension to mentally / physically challenged children of armed forces personnel on marriage: 

Grant of family pension to mentally/physically challenged children who drew, are drawing or may draw family pension would continue even after their marriage. 

The above recommendations made by the Committee on pension issues of Ex-Servicemen may be implemented from a prospective date and payment made accordingly.***

SH/SKS

"NO'" TO OROP Govt enhances pensions of retired soldiers, 'one-rank, one-pension' still distant

NEW DELHI: Faced with huge discontentment among military personnel over their long-standing pay and pension grievances, the government on Monday finally announced an annual Rs 2,300 crore additional pension package for ex-servicemen but stopped short of granting them full one-rank, one-pension (OROP).
The government also maintained silence on the fate of the five main demands of serving officers and jawans, who contend they were given "a raw deal" in the 6th Pay Commission as compared to their civilian counterparts.
Their demands, which were also considered by the high-powered committee led by cabinet secretary Ajit Kumar Seth, ranged from common pay scale for junior commissioned officers/other ranks (JCOs/ORs) and enhancement of grade pay to placing all lieutenant generals in the HAG + (higher administrative grade-plus) scale and grant of non-functional upgradation to armed forces personnel.
But the 23 lakh ex-servicemen, many of whom have been holding regular rallies and returning their medals as a mark of protest for the last four years, have something to cheer about. For one, the Union Cabinet approved the "bridging of the gap" between the pensions of the JCOs/ORs who retired before January 1996 and those who superannuated after that date.
It was also decided to increase the "weightage of qualifying service" for pension by two years in the ranks of sepoys, naiks and havaldars for both pre and post January 1996 retirees.
Moreover, the pension of pre-January 1996 retired officers will also be stepped up "with reference to the minimum of fitment table for the ranks instead of the minimum of pay band" as it exists now. Officials said these steps "are expected to largely meet" the demands of ex-servicemen for OROP, which incidentally has been promised by virtually all political parties over the years.
For another, the government has approved enhancement in family pension, allowed dual family pension (where the pensioner was drawing pension for military service as well as civil employment) and family pension to mentally challenged children of armed forces personnel even after they get married.
"But all this is modified parity and not the OROP we have been demanding," said a retired major general. OROP basically implies that uniform pension be paid to the personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any further enhancement in pension rates be automatically be passed on to past pensioners.
The argument is that unlike civilian government employees, who retire at 60 years of age, military personnel retire by rank at comparatively younger ages. "All jawans retire in their mid-30s, all JCOs in their mid-40s and the bulk of officers in early-50s to keep the armed forces from greying. Only a handful of officers like lieutenant generals serve up to 60 years," said an officer."Since the date of retirement also determines the quantum of pension, with each Pay Commission every 10 years, the military veterans who retire early receive lesser pension compared to those who retired later with the same rank and service," he added.
But the defence ministry in the past has contended that full OROP is not financially, legally or administratively feasible. Full OROP implementation would mean an annual outgo of another Rs 1,200-1,300 crore, apart from payment of arrears in the range of Rs 4,000 crore.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Govt-enhances-pensions-of-retired-soldiers-one-rank-one-pension-still-distant/articleshow/16533548.cms

CABINET SECRETARY REPORT ON PAY AND PENSION MATTERS OF DEFENSE PERSONNEL SUBMITTED TO PM

Pay and Pension Matters of Personnel

AUGUST 27, 2012 · 1 COMMENT/

http://www.govtempdiary.com/2012/08/pay-and-pension-matters-of-personnel/

Pay and Pension Matters of Personnel

The committee chaired by Cabinet Secretary is comprised of Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister; Defence Secretary; Secretary, Department of Expenditure; Secretary, Department of Ex- Servicemen’s Welfare and Secretary, Department of Personnel and Training. Consequent to change in charge of the then Secretary, Department of Expenditure to Department of Revenue, Secretary, Department of Revenue has also been co-opted as a Member of the Committee. Chief of Naval Staff & Chairman, Chiefs of the Staff Committee made a presentation to the Committee. The Committee further interacted with all the Service Chiefs (Chief of Naval Staff & Chairman, Chiefs of the Staff Committee; Chief of Air Staff and Chief of Army Staff). The recommendations of the Committee have been submitted to the Prime Minister.

This information was given by Minister of Defence Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri M.B.Rajesh and others in Lok Sabha today.

Ex Service Men Including Commissioned officers and Defence Civilian: Calculate your pension yourselves

Log on to   http://cgda.nic.in/  , the Controller General of Defence Account site. Click on to 'suvigya'   shown on the extreme right corner of the site or follow the link http://cgda.nic.in/Suvigya/ . Click on to the type of pensioner and enter your personal details in the relevant boxes where you can get your present pension eligibility. However, this figure shows only your basic pension. Add 65% DA to the basic pension to get your total pension. 

Suvigya a new software introduced by cgda which enables all ex-servicemen including Commissioned Officers & Defence civilian to calculate their pension eligibility from any corner of the world.

Pay, pension issues report yet to be tabled Ex-servicemen feel the delay indicates government’s unwillingness.

Pay, pension issues report yet to be tabled

Ex-servicemen feel the delay indicates government’s unwillingness.

SUMAN SHARMA  New Delhi | 19th Aug

he government's promise to resolve pay and pension issues of armed forces personnel is yet to be fulfilled. A Committee of Secretaries was set-up in July this year to look into anomalies of pay and pension, and this Committee has not yet submitted its report to the Prime Minister, thereby giving rise to speculation of likely unfulfillment of the recommendations made, in favour of retired and serving personnel. The Committee, headed by Cabinet Secretary, was looking into five issues pertaining to serving personnel and four issues of retired pensioners. One rank one pension (OROP) has always been a strong demand of retired personnel for which they have been actively fighting for more than four years. Ex-servicemen feel that the delay is indicative of the government's unwillingness to fulfill their demands. This Committee has Secretaries from the Ministries of Defence, Finance, Expenditure, Department of Ex-servicemen Welfare and PM's Principal Secretary Pulok Chatterjee. For serving personnel, some of the issues this Committee is examining are common pay-scale for in-service non-officer men, initial pay fixation for Lt Col, Colonel and Brigadier equivalent and review and enhancement of grade pay. For retired pensioners the Committee is looking into one rank one pension, enhancement of family pension and dual family pensions, among others. Retired Major General Satbir Singh. Vice Chairman of Ex-servicemen Movement told this newspaper, "A Parliamentary Committee had earlier recommended OROP to the Prime Minister, but he ignored this recommendation made by 10 MPs, and instead set up a separate committee of bureaucrats, who have not yet submitted their report and also there is no representative from the armed forces in this Committee. A fraud is being played by the PM himself on the defence services." Satbir Singh, who recently wrote to Satpal Maharaj about OROP, said that this matter came up for the first time in 1982 and late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had agreed to it. A 10-MP committee submitted its recommendation of giving OROP to the PM in December 2011, on which an Action Taken Report had to be submitted by the PM in March this year in Parliament, which is not yet done. 8 August is when the Committee of Secretaries was supposed to have submitted its report, but it is delayed. Former Army Chief V.P. Malik said, "I am disappointed as this is a committee comprising only of civil service officers and no one from armed forces. There does not seem to be much hope from this Committee's report." The demands of ex-servicemen, especially OROP will benefit 24 lakh ex-servicemen and four lakh widows drawing family pensions, all across the country and would cost approximately Rs 1300 cr to the exchequer.

Prime Minister’s Independence Day speech - August 15, 2012

Our Government has set up a committee to examine issues relating to pay and pension of armed forces personnel. This committee will also look into matters concerning pension of retired men and officers and family pension being paid to their families. We will take prompt action on the recommendations of the committee, once they are received.

No 'one rank one pension' for ex-servicemen, say sources

New Delhi: In what is likely to be a big disappointment for the ex-servicemen community, the PM-appointed pay panel is unlikely to recommend One Rank One Pension.

Sources have told CNN-IBN that the panel led by the Cabinet Secretary is keen to push for the concept of modified parity, which means new pay grades will be fixed specifically for pension purposes.
It is likely to agree on common pay scales for Junior Commissioned Officers and ORs, enhancement of widow pension, and a green signal for Non-Functional upgradation to commissioned officers.
The three service chiefs have already held discussions with the pay panel members. The three service chiefs had written to the Cabinet Secretary about the absence of a military representative on the panel, follwing which the Committee of Secretaries held discussions with the three service chiefs earlier this week.
The panel is likely to take a few more days before sending its final recommendations

CONTAIN RISING INCIDENTS OF INDISCIPLINE IN THE ARMY

 CONTAIN RISING  INCIDENTS OF INDISCIPLINE  IN THE ARMY

                             It is with great pain to read from the media that this being the second case of grave indiscipline in the army which took place in this year. We have never heard such an incidents in the history of independent India ever before.  Incidents of Solders engaging in a fist with officers can never be tolerated with, whatever may be the reason for that. Our army is unique  in the world for its structure& discipline. The cause of indiscipline started after the implementation of 6th pay commission which has been prepared with a civil structure & disregard to military requirements .The hierarchy of discipline persisted for other ranks earlier  was the JCO  who acted as  a link between officers & other ranks, then the Havildar was the link between JCO , NAIK & SEPOY. The Naik was the link between havildar & solders. Hence a perfect system of chain of discipline was followed. The military management structure consists of officers at top management & the JCO’S at the middle management. The officers were kept much distanced from the soldiers whose approach can be made only through intermediaries; The school of military management has created it with a great thought since ordinary solders with less education are always subjected to momentary emotion & feeling. The sixth pay commission has violated above basic principle of division of responsibility of armed forces envisaged by the school military managent. In context the need for a separate pay panel for defense forces  need not be emphasized. The sixth pay panel has neglected the hierarchy in other ranks, for instance they have equated the havildar who was a link between the JCO & Naik to sepoy in their pay scales. This can be confirmed from the pay band of the other ranks. Hence the channel of responsibility& discipline was damaged by the sixth pay panel which needs to be repaired. This is the main cause that leading to gross indiscipline. There should not be a direct channel between officers & solders without the above intermediaries. Let us hope that the ministry of defense under the able leadership of our honorable minister Mr.A.K.ANTONY will take appropriate steps to maintain the reputation of our armed forces in the eyes of the world

LIC's SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IN SUPREME COURT.

LIC's SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION IN SUPREME COURT.

Posted: 02 Oct 2012 10:36 PM PDT

Supreme Court of India

You know it. Court proceedings are many-a-time a time consuming affair. 

LIC's Special Leave Petition against the order of the Rajasthan High Court  was last listed in the cause list of the Supreme Court for 7th February this year. It was again listed for 5th October.

Now we have the news that the Special Leave Petition is postponed to 26th November 2012.

The result: Pretty well an year will be over with a couple of postponements.... and who knows, when our woes will be over once for ever.

Surely, not a pleasant situation for the Pensioners!

STATUS OF THE CASES OF PRE 2006 PENSIONERSS IN VARIOUS COURTS : AS ON 01.08.2012

STATUS OF THE CASES OF PRE 2006 PENSIONERSS IN VARIOUS COURTS : AS ON  01.08.2012

COMPILED BY M. L. KANAUJIA, IRSSE / Chief Communication Engineer, N.E. Railway, (Rtd.)

Ite m	HEARD BY		PETITION NO. & YEAR	LEAD PETITIONER	NEXT DATE FIXED FOR HEARING	REMARKS IN BRIEF
I	CAT-PB Delhi		OA 3079/2009	LR Khatana s29	DOJ 01.11.11	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed to refix pension in 3 months as per OM dt 29.08.08.
2	CAT-PB Delhi		OA 306/2010	D L Vohra s29	DOJ 01.11.11	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed to refix pension in 3 months as per OM dt 29.08.08.
3	CAT-PB Delhi		OA 507/2010	PPS Gambhir s29	DOJ 01.11.11	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed to refix pension in 3 months as per OM dt 29.08.08.
4	CAT-PB Delhi		OA 655/2010	s29 pen.Association	DOJ 01.11.11	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed to refix pension in 3 months as per OM dt 29.08.08.
5	CAT Hydrabad		OA 2413/2009	AJ Gurushanker	DOJ 09.09.11	Full parity case. Appeal disallowed.
6	AFT-PB Delhi		OA 24/2010	Lt.Com.AvtarSingh	DOJ 14.09.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
7	AFT-PB Delhi		OA 270/2010	Sq.Ldr. V K  Jain	DOJ 14.09.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
8	AFT-PB Delhi		OA 139/2009	Lt.Col.PK Kapur	DOJ 30.06.10	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
9	AFT Chandigarh		OA 277/2010	Romesh Chand	DOJ 01.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
10	AFT Chandigarh		OA 312/2010	OP Singh	DOJ 01.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
11	AFT Chandigarh		OA 313/2010	MS Minhas	DOJ 01.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
12		AFT Chandigarh	OA 314/2010	YS Nijjar	DOJ 01.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
13		AFT Chandigarh	OA 325/2010	Dildar Singh Sahi	DOJ 01.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
14		AFT Chandigarh	OA 326/2010	Gurlochan Singh	DOJ 01.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
15		AFT Chandigarh	OA 327/2010	Gurmeet Singh	DOJ 01.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
16		AFT Chandigarh	OA 445/2010	Balwant Singh	DOJ 01.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
17		AFT Chandigarh	OA 476/2010	Karam Chand	DOJ 01.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
18		AFT Chandigarh	OA 257/2010	Jagdish Chandar	DOJ 25.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
19		AFT Chandigarh	OA 409/2010	N N Sud	DOJ 25.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
20		AFT Chandigarh	OA 410/2010	HS Tonque	DOJ 25.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
21		AFT Chandigarh	OA 521/2010	GS Kang	DOJ 25.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
22		AFT Chandigarh	OA 522/2010	SS Matharu	DOJ 25.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
23		AFT Chandigarh	OA 346/2010		DOJ 25.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
24		AFT Chandigarh	OA 728/2010		DOJ 25.11.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
25		AFT Chandigarh	OA 100/2010	SPS Vains M.Gen.	DOJ 04.03.2010	Modified Parity case. Appeal allowed.
26		CAT Patna	OA 284/2009	MMP Sinha	DOJ 28.05.2010	Full Parity case. Appeal Disallowed.

27			CAT-PB Delhi	OA 1732 / 2010	Ram Murti Raina	DOJ 25.05.2010	Prayer for reconsideration allowed but UOI has done nothing in the matter.
28			CAT Mumbai	OA 780/2009 + 8	Dr. KR Munim	DOJ 22.02.2011	Full Parity case. Appeals Disallowed.
29			CAT Ernakulam	OA 843/2010	S29 and s26 S.Parmasivan Pillai  & Ors.	24.11.2011	This prayer was for modified parity and for counting of special pay for pension allowed under DRDO letter dt. 10.10.2008. Appeal allowed to refix pension in 3 months (1) As per OM dt 29.08.08 exactly as pronounced by CAT-PB in case of OA 655 of 2010 (2) Also to count special pay allowed under DRDO letter dt. 10.10.2008, to three of the ten petitioners, namely,S. Paramasivan Pillai. A.K.Prakash and Kalaga Sriharikumari.
30			AFT-PB/Delhi	OAs 106/2009,76/ 2011 and 24/2011	Wg.Comm. V S Tomar & Ors. Vs. UOl	DOJ 07.12.2011	Petition is allowed in part and para 5 of Order dt.11.11.2008 (pension be in no case less than 50% of Minimum of the pay band plus grade pay corresponding to pay scale from which pensioner had retired I discharged, including MSP and X group pay where applicable) struck down being discriminatory and violative of Article 14.
31			CAT-PB/Delhi	Contempt No.158 of 2012	S29 Pensioners Association Vs. UOI & Ors	30.05.2012	This Contempt Petition is against Govt. which has failed to comply the orders of the CAT-PB given in Judgment in case of  OA 0655/2010.(see item 4 above). It  came up for hearing on 2.03.2012,13.03.12 and 28.03.12. On request from Pensioners Advocate, further proceedings have been postponed till 09.05.12. Further extended to 30.5.12. In view of  case in DHC (see item 61) case dropped by the CAT/PB.
32			CAT Hydrabad	OA 568/2010	s29 pensioners Dr. Kotra & Ors.	DOJ 30.12.2011	Appeal allowed to refix pension in 3 months as per OM dt 29.08.08 exactly as pronounced by CAT-PB in case of OA 655 of 2010.
33			CAT Hydrabad	0A931/2010 Clubbed With OA 568/2010	s26 Pensioners.	DOJ 30.12.2011	Appeal allowed to refix pension in 3 months as per OM dt 29.08.08 exactly as pronounced by CAT-PB in case of OA 655 of 2010.
34			AFT-PB Delhi	OA 312 of 2010	Sub.Lt. Ram Singh Vs UOl & Ors. (Pl.see item 6,7 and 56)	DOJ 02.01 .2012	Govt. has filed Civil Appeal No. 8875 & 8876 in Hon.ble Supreme Court against the Judgment of AFT-PB in OA No. 270 and 24 (see item 6,7 and 56). This case being of  similar nature, AFT-PB has therefore, adjourned the case sine-die, till the Judgment of hon.ble Supreme Court, becomes available
35			CAT-PB Delhi	OA 937/2010	s30 pensioners s30	DOJ 06.03.2012	Judgment has come on 6.3.12. s30 full parity case has been dismissed. S29 modified parity case has been held valid based on Judgment dated 1.11.11  in OA 655.
36			CAT-PB Delhi	OA 2101/2010	CG Pensioners s30	DOJ 06.03.2012	Judgment has come on 6.3.12. s30 full parity case has been dismissed. S29 modified parity case has been held valid based on Judgment dated 1.11.11  in OA 655.
37			AFT-PB Delhi	OA 408 of 2010	Wg.Comm. AK Agarwal Vs UOl	DOJ 20.03.2012	The Court ordered on 20.3.12 that “let the decision of   HSC in case of  SLP against AFT judgment in OA 106 of 2009 be awaited. Till then case is closed.
38			CAT-PB Delhi	OA 201/2010	M L Gulati s29 Vs UOI	DOJ 29.02.2012	Full Bench Court ordered on 29.02.12  to grant relief within 3 months as given in case of  OA 655 Judgment dt. 1.11.11.
39			CAT-PB Delhi	OA 2087/2009	Ran Vir Singh s30	DOJ 29.2.2012	Full Bench Court ordered on 29.02.12  to grant relief within 3 months as given in case of  OA 655 Judgment dt. 1.11.11. For equality with post 2006, FB Court  ordered to refer the case to Division Bench.
40			AFT-PB Delhi	OA 126 of 2011	Wg.Comm.KG Rao Vs UOl	16.08.2012	At the request of learned proxy counsel for the petitioner, case is adjourned. At the joint request of parties, listed  on 16th August 2012.
41			AFT-PB Delhi	OA 289 of 2011	Lt.Col.BGV Kumar Vs UOl	16.08.2012	At the request of learned proxy counsel for the petitioner, case is adjourned. At the joint request of parties, listed on 16th August 2012.
42			CAT-PB Delhi	OA 1165 / 2011	Pratap Narain & Ors Vs. MOP/flOP	24.08.2012	Parity for 20 years service. Govt. submitted its Counter on 11.07.12.
43			CAT-PB Delhi	OA 2165 / 2011	KR Srinivasan & Ors Vs. MOP/flOP	24.08.2012	Parity for 20 years service. Govt. submitted its Counter on 11.07.12.
44			CAT-PB Delhi	OA 247 of 2012	17 Petitioners	24.08.2012	Parity for 20 years service. Govt. submitted its Counter on 11.07.12.
45			Lucknow HC	Ser.Ben.203/2010	s29 UP Officers	Not listed after 1.5.12	Modified parity case. UOI filed Additional Counter Affidavit on 10.4.2012. Heard on on 1.5.12 and ordered “Shri Satya Narain Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner is on sanctioned leave.The case is adjourned. List again.”
46			Delhi HC	WP(C)3359/ 2010	s29,s26 Ex.ParaMil.	Not listed after 16.2.12.	Modified parity case.  Last heard on 16.02.2012.
47		Pun. & Har. HC		CWP19641/2009	RK Agarwal (s29) Rtd.CEEs and XENs	31.08.2012	Petitioners Rejoinder not yet  submitted.
48		Pun. & Har. HC		CWP19642/ 2009	Satish Bhalla (s29)	Pending	Modified parity case. Last listed on  17.1..12..
49		Pun. & Har. HC		CWP3452/ 2010	0 P Kapur (s29)	Pending,	Modified parity case. Last listed on 2.3.12.
50		Pun. & Har. HC		CWP12638/2010	M L Kansal (s29)	Pending,	Modified parity case. Last listed on 24.2.12.
51		Pun. & Har. HC		CWP20725/2010	RK Sehgal (s29)	Pending.	Modified parity case. Last listed on 24.2.12.
52		Pun. & Har. HC		CWP20726/2010	R K Bali (s29)	Pending	Modified parity case. Last listed on 24.2.12.
53		Pun. & Har. HC		CWP20727/2010	B K Jam (s29)	Pending	Modified parity case. Last listed on 24.2.12.
54		Pun. & Har. HC		CWP20753/2010	CK Gupta (s29)	Pending	Modified parity case. Last listed on 24.2.12.
55		HC Patna		CWJC1O757/2010	MMP Sinha, s30	25.06.2012	Full parity disallowed by CAT Patna. Shri Sinha has appealed in HC/Patna. Last heard on 03.04.2012 but adjourned to 25.06.12.
56		Supreme Court		Contempt Petition (Civil) 64/2009	SPS Vains, Major General & Ors.	21.09.12	Modified Parity case. This case is connected to Civil Appeal 2966/2011.
57		Supreme Court		Civil Appeal 2966 / 2011	U0I Vs SPS Vains Mj. General & Ors	21.09.12	Modified Parity case. This case is connected to Contempt Petition (Civil) 64/2009.
58		Supreme Court		T.P.(C) No.56/2007 (Review Petition)	U0I & Ors. Vs NK Nair & Ors.	04.09.2012	Hon.ble Supreme Court allowed appeal for grant of Rank Pay to be added to fix pension w.e.f. 1.1.1986 with 6 % interest. U0I submitted Review Petition citing financial constraints to implement HSC Judgment which is being heard now.
59		Supreme Court		Civil Appeal 8875 -8876 of 2011.	U0I & Ors.Vs. Vinod Kumar Jain & Ors (Avtar Singh)	3.8.2012	This relates to item 6 & 7 above. U0I  has gone in appeal with prayer for stay  and condonation of delay. Respondents Rejoinder is now submitted. Couldnot be heard on 6.7.12.
60		Supreme Court		Civil  Appeal  5367 -5368    OF   2005	Principal Sec.(F & P), Govt. of Andhra Pradesh  Vs.   A.P. Pensioners Samaj.	31.07.2012
61	Delhi HC			WPC 1535 of 2012	UOI Vs CG SAG s29 Pensioners Association	29.11.2012	This petition has been filed by UOI  in appeal and grant of stay against CAT-PB Judgment dated 1.11.11  in case of OA 655 of 2010 and three other OAs. The hearing took place on 4.5.12. 7.5.12 and 17.7.12.So far,  following orders have been passed as available on the DHC Website : (1) This writ petition has been filed against the order dated   01.11.2011 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal  Bench, New Delhi in OA No. 655/2010 and in other OAs. We feel that it  would be appropriate that the petitioner files separate writ petitions in   respect  of  each of the OAs which were filed before the Tribunal. The  present writ petition shall be considered as the writ petition in respect  of OA No. 655/2010. The respondent-caveators are represented in the  Court. We are issuing formal notice in this matter. They accept notice.  The caveat stands discharged. The learned counsel for the respondents state that there would be no necessity to file a counter-affidavit and  they would be relying on the pleadings before the Tribunal. List for disposal on 04.05.2012. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents state  that they shall not be pressing their contempt application before the  Tribunal till the next date of hearing. (2) An adjournment slip has been filed on behalf of the respondent. Renotify on 29.11.2012.