MSP INCLUDED IN THE LATER NOTINGS & THEY TRIED TO EXCLUDE BUT COULD NOT SUCCEED

-Page 11/N-

Ministry of Defence

D (Pay/Services)

Reference Defence (Finance) Note at Page-10/N. 

          This is regarding implementation of the recommendations of the 7^th Central Pay Commission (CPC). A copy of Department of Expenditure Note no. 1-2/2016-IC dated 28.6.2016 along with copy of the minutes of meeting of Cabinet held on 29.6.2016 has been received from Ministry of Finance, D/0 Expenditure, Implementation Cell for implementation of recommendations of the 7^th Central Pay Commission (CPC) – issue of Resolution and revised rules – reg. The previous Resolution issued by the Government at the time of 6^th CPC is at Flag/’A.’  The Ministry of Finance has issued the Resolution No. 1-2/2016-IC on 25.7.2016 (Copy at Flag/’B.’)

2.       Some of the important recommendations in respect of the Defence Personnel (PBOR) are mentioned below: -

          (i)      Implementation of the revised pay structure will be w.e.f 01.01.2016;

(ii)      Pay related matter;

(a)      The existing system of Pay Band and Grade Pay has been replaced with separate Pay Matrices for both Defence and Military Nursing Services personnel.

(b)             Fitment of each employee in the new Pay Matrix would be done by multiplying his/her basic pay on the date of implementation by a factor of 2.57.

Note-1        With regard to fixation of pay in the new Pay Matrix as on 01.01.2016, the existing pay (Pay in Pay Band plus Grade Pay) in the pre-revised structure as on 31.12.2015 shall be multiplied by a factor of 2.57. The figure so arrived at is to be located in the Level corresponding to employee’s Grade Pay in the new Pay Matrix. If a Cell identical with the figure so arrived at is available in the appropriate Level, that Cell shall be the revised pay; otherwise the next higher cell in that Level shall be the revised pay of the employee.

Note -2       After fixation of pay in the appropriate Level as specified in Note-1 above, the subsequent increments shall be at the immediate next Cell in that Level.

-Page 12/N-

®       General recommendations on pay recommended by the Commission have been accepted with the following exceptions in Defence Pay Matrix in order to maintain parity in pay with Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs).

3.                  The index of Rationalisation of Level 13A (Brigadier) in Defence Pay Matrix may be revised upward from 2.57 to 2.67.

3.                  Additional 3 stages in Levels 12A (Lt Col), 3 stages in Level 13 (Colonel) and 2 stages in Level 13A (Brigadier) may be added appropriately in the Defence Pay Matrix.

iii.      Increase in Military Service Pay (MSP) of Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) from Rs 2000/- to Rs 5200/- p.m. MSP would be counted only for Dearness Allowance (DA) and Pension purposes; 

iv.      There will be two dates for grant of increment viz, 1^st January and 1^st July of every year, instead of the existing date of 1^st July. However, an employee will be able to avail annual increment only on one of these two dates depending on the date of appointment, promotion or grant of financial upgradation;    

3.                  Recommendations on Allowances (except Dearness Allowance) would be referred to a Committee comprising Finance Secretary & Secretary (Expenditure) as Chairman and Secretaries of Home Affairs, Defence, Personnel & Training etc. The Committee would submit its report within a period of 4 months. Till a final decision on Allowances is taken based on the recommendations of this Committee, all Allowances would continue to be paid at existing rates in the existing pay structure, as if the pay had not been revised w.e.f. 1.1.2016 i.e. status quo would be maintained. 

                   vi.      Arrears of Pay would be paid during the current financial year.

vii.     Recommendations not relating to pay and allowances and other administrative issues specific to department/cadres/posts would be examined separately as per the Transaction of Business Rules/Allocation of Business Rules.

3.       It is further stated that after examining the minutes of meeting of Cabinet held on 29.6.2016, a draft Resolution was prepared in anticipation and submitted for approval. The proposal has been approved by AS ® vide Note -2/N. Subsequently, the file was sent to Defence (Finance) for their concurrence and vetting of the Draft Resolution vide Note 3/N. However, Defence (Finance) vide their Note on page 4/N returned the file stating that the Resolution needs to be authenticated before concurrence is given. Vide note on page 9/N the file was again sent to Defence (Finance) after authentication of Resolution for vetting of the draft Resolution in respect of Defence Personnel (PBOR). Now, Defence (Finance) has given its concurrence vide their Note (Note Page 9/N) dated 3.8.2016.

4.       In view of the above, the file is submitted for kind approval of Defence Secretary. Thereafter, the file will be referred to the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure (Implementation Cell) for vetting the Resolution.

Sd/-----------

3/8/16

Section Officer (P/S)

US (P/S)  on leave

DS (AG-II) Def (Finance) have vetted draft resolution. The file is submitted for kind approval of Secretary (Defence) please.                  Sd/------------------ 4/8/16

JS (E)           Sd/---------- 4/8/16

                   (V Anandarajan) JS (Estt)/CAO 

AS (K)         Sd/------------- (Suresh Kumar) AS (K) & CVO 4.8.16

Defence Secretary           Appd           Sd/-------- 8/8/16

JS (E)           Sd/------------ 8/8/16

DS (AG-II) Sd/------------- 8/8/

US (P/S)     Sd/----------9/8/16

SO (P/S)     Sd/---------- 9/8

Ministry of Finance, Deptt of Expenditure (IC Cell)         Sd/-----------9/8/2016

THE FILE NOTINGS REVEWALS HOW MSP WAS DENIED EARLIER BUT RESTORED LATER

File Notings Resolution 2 (E)

File No. 1(7)/2016/D (Pay/Services)

-1-

Ministry of Defence

D (Pay/Services)

Subject: Resolution containing decisions of Government on recommendations of VII CPC relating to PBORs of Armed Forces

          A copy of Department of Expenditure No. No. 1-2/2016-IC dated 28.6.2016 along with a copy of the minutes of meeting of Cabinet held on 29.6.2016 has been received from Ministry of Finance, D/o Expenditure, Implementation Cell for implementation of recommendations of the 7^th Central Pay Commission (CPC) – issue of Resolution and revised rules-reg. The previous Resolution issued by the Government at the time of 6^th CPC is at Flag ‘A.’

2.       Some of the important recommendations in respect of the Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) are mentioned below: -         

(i)      Implementation of the revised pay structure will be w.e.f 01.01.2016;

(ii)      Pay related matter;

          (a)      Minimum pay would be Rs 18, 000/- p.m.;

          (b)     The existing system of Pay Ban and Grade Pay has been replaced with three separate Pay Matrices for Civil, Defence and Military Nursing Services personnel.

(c)      Fitment of each employee in the new Pay Matrix would be done by     multiplying his/her basic pay on the date of implementation by a factor of 2.57.

(d)     The minimum Pay at each Level corresponding to successive Grade Pay, from PB-2 onwards has been enhanced by a variable Index of Rationalisation (IOR) )ranging from 2.57.to 2.81 depending upon the increasing role, responsibility, and accountability. 

(e)      General recommendations on pay recommended by the Commission have been accepted without any material alteration.

iii.      Increase in Military Service Pay (MSP) of Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) from Rs 2000/- to Rs 5200/- p.m would be counted only for Dearness Allowance

iv.      Rate of increment would be 3%. There will be two dates for grant of increment viz. 1^st January and 1^st July of every year, instead of existing date of 1^st July. However, an employee will be able to avail annual increment only on one of these two dates depending on the date of appointment, promotion, or grant of financial upgradation.

v.       Recommendations on Allowances (except Dearness Allowance) would be referred to a committee comprising of Finance Secretary & Secretary (Expenditure) as Chairman and Secretaries of Home Affairs, Defence, Personnel and Training etc. Till a final decision on Allowances is  taken based on the recommendations of this Committee, all Allowances would continue to be paid at existing rates in existing pay structure, as if the pay had not been revised w.e.f 1.1.2016 i.e., status quo would be maintained.

vi.      Arrears of Pay and Pensionary benefits would be paid during the current financial year.

vii.     Recommendations not relating to pay, pension and allowances and other administrative issues specific to department/cadres/posts would be examined by the concerned Ministries/Departments as per the Transaction Rules/Allocation of Business Rules.   

3.       We have not yet received the requisite resolution from Ministry of Finance regarding civilian personnel. The resolution to be issued by the MoD in respect of the Defence Personnel (Personnel Below Officer Rank) has been prepared in anticipation and placed opposite for consideration.

Sd/------------------

                                                                                      (Laxmi Balasubramanian)

SO D (Pay/Services)

15/7/16

US (P/S)                                  Sd/----------- 15.7.17

DS (AG-II)                              Sd/----------- 18/7

JS (E)                                       Sd/----------- (Ashok Dongre) 18.7.16

AS (R)                                      As proposed. 

JS (E)                                       Sd/---------- (Ashok Dongre) 20.7.16

DS (AG-II)                              Sd/-----------

US (P/S)                                  SD/------------

SO D(P/S)

SOURCE-ARIEL VIEW

ONE MORE CLARIFICATION OF LAST RANK HELD & RANK PENSIONED

CLARIFICATION OF 568 BY PCDA

Govt clips wings of Armed Forces Tribunal in new rules

• Written by Man Aman Singh Chhina | Chandigarh |
• Published on: July 12, 2017 10:46 am

The Union government has changed the rules governing appointment in the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), giving more powers to the Defence Secretary who would now have a role in ordering inquiries against members of the tribunal and their removal. Contravening a Constitutional Bench judgement of the Supreme Court which directed the placement of tribunals under the Law Ministry, the new rules reiterate that the AFT will function under the Ministry of Defence which, incidentally, is the ministry against which all orders of the AFT are to be passed.

The rules also reiterate the role of the Defence Secretary in selecting the Members of the tribunal and even consultation with the Chief Justice of India (CJI) has been abrogated. The Defence Secretary and other bureaucrats would now have a role in ordering inquiries against members of the tribunal and their removal, which could only be undertaken by a Supreme Court judge till now.

The facilities and benefits of retired High Court Judges appointed as Judicial Members have been downgraded to regular Group A (Class I) officers of the Central Government. While the SC had directed a longer tenure for tribunal members without a provision for re-appointment to ensure independence, the new rules have decreased even the existing tenure to 3 years and have provided for re-appointment by a selection committee, of which the Defence Secretary is a member. This, despite the fact that the Defence Secretary is the first respondent party in all litigation in AFT.

 While the existing provisions barred the post-retirement employment of members with the government, the new rules specifically allow such employment. Under the new rules, any advocate with 10 years of practice can be appointed as the AFT Chairperson while the lower appointment of Judicial Member can only be held by a High Court Judge.

Chairman of All Indian Ex-servicemen Welfare Association and a practising advocate at AFT’s Chandigarh bench, Bhimsen Sehgal, said that the amendment to rules was wrong and it will degrade the status of the appointees. “Nobody will come forward to become a member of the AFT in view of such rules. Further, the AFT should come under the ambit of the Minstry of Law and not Ministry of Defence. It cannot function independently as all infrastructure is provided by MoD,” he said.

 Sources say that the government had notified the rules even when the Punjab and Haryana High Court had directed the central government in 2012 to place the AFT under the Law Ministry and also to recast the selection committee. When the UPA Government had approached the SC with a Special Leave Petition, the apex court had refused to stay the judgement and had only agreed to stay the contempt proceedings in the HC.
http://indianexpress.com 

 Rs 4 crore compensation to officer court-martialled 26 years ago

LUCKNOW: In a landmark judgment, Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has ordered the defence ministry to pay Rs 4 crore compensation to an officer who was court-martialled 26 years ago.
While reinstating the service of second lieutenant SS Chauhan, the AFT also asked the army to deposit Rs 1 crore with the Army Central Welfare Fund within a period of four months.
Chauhan, of the Sixth Rajput Battalion, was posted in Srinagar when he was courtmartialled after being declared a deserter and mentally unstable.
Quashing the court-martial of Chauhan, Justice DP Singh and Air Marshal Anil Chopra asked the defence ministry to reinstate the of ficer and provide him promotional avenues up to the stage of lieutenant colonel for the purpose of arrears of salary, pension benefits and rank.
"Keeping in view... mental pain, agony and humiliation suffered by the petitioner, it is a fit case where the petitioner should be awar ded exemplary compensatory cost," the bench observed.
Chauhan, who hails from UP's Mainpuri district, was court-martialled on November 4, 1991, and the order was approved by the then General Officer Commanding-inChief, Srinagar. The officer reportedly landed in trouble when he recovered 147 gold biscuits weighing around 27.5kg during a search operation in Srinagar on April 11, 1990.
In his petition, Chauhan pointed out that the gold biscuits were recovered from a house in the presence of other soldiers and were handed over to his seniors.

During the trial, the tribunal observed that Chauhan's senior officers implicated him in false cases to ensure that the recovery of gold could be concealed from the government.
Justice Singh and Air Marshal Chopra directed the chief of the army staff to look into the matter. 
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com 

OROP CASE HEARING LIKELY ON 05/07/2017

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Case Status Status : PENDING

Status of : Writ Petition (Civil)    419    OF   2016

INDIAN EX SERVICEMEN MOVEMENT AND ORS   .Vs.   UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Pet. Adv. : MR. BALAJI SRINIVASAN   Res. Adv. : MUKESH KUMAR MARORIA

Subject Category : MATTERS PERTAINING TO ARMED FORCES & PARA MILITARY FORCES

Listed 0 times earlier            Last Listed on : 05/07/2017

Last updated on 06-07-2017