The current debate about OROP (One Rank One Pension) has become infused with too much passion, emotion, recriminations, frustration and downright prevarication. This, though perhaps understandable, is not healthy because it tends to blur and take the focus away from the hard issues involved, and prevents a rational analysis of the problem. The plain fact is that OROP is just not implementable, and the sooner the Government comes out with an open admission on this, and stops leading the defence forces down the garden path, the better.
The government consists of scores of departments (of which the armed forces are also a part), thousands of categories of posts and hundreds of pay scales/ranks. Their remuneration, promotion avenues, pensions have been arrived at after decades of deliberation and many Pay Commissions. There are intricate linkages between them (called “equation” in government parlance): the whole structure is like a huge spider web in which all the strands are inter-connected, and disturbing just one cobweb destabilises the entire structure. The demand for OROP threatens to do exactly this, and this is why the government is unable to take a decision on this controversial issue.
The basic premise of OROP is inherently flawed. One’s pension is inextricably linked to one’s salary at the time of retirement and not to the salary of the same post twenty years later. That is why Pay Commissions, every ten years, do not link past pensions with current salaries but provide a percentage growth to those pensions. This is true of not just the armed forces (as some may think) but of the entire government structure, including ALL civilian posts – with one exception.
This exception is the “causus belli” or the root of the problem. Many years ago the IAS contrived a sleight of hand (at which we are past masters) to ensure that the highest echelons of the elite civil services, at least, get the benefit of OROP ! This is how it was managed: the highest pay scale in government (currently) is Rs. 80000/ fixed. (only the Chiefs of the three defence forces and the Cabinet Secretary are in the fixed scale of Rs. 90000/). It was decreed that all who retire in this scale (known loftily as the Apex Scale) would get OROP – that is, their pensions would always be linked to whatever revised Apex Scale the subsequent Pay Commissions decided. Since every single IAS (or IFS) officer retires in the Apex Scale this forever ensured OROP for themselves. To reduce any opposition to the stratagem, some Apex Scale posts were also made available to other All India services.
The top brass in the armed forces were also party to this decision, for they also got a share of the pie. Take the Army. The Apex Scale has also been provided to the VCOAS, Army Commanders, Lt. General (NFSG) and one third of the total strength of Lt. Generals in the force. The same applies to their counterparts in the other two forces. This may perhaps explain why we have not heard the top echelons of the forces coming out in public support of the demand for universal OROP.
Giving OROP to just the Apex Scale was a bad and inequitable decision, and all the elite civil services and the armed forces were party to it. So, don’t just blame the “babus” please.
The chickens have now come home to roost and they’re making quite a racket over it, as chickens will do. Extending OROP to just the defence forces is neither fair, nor possible. It is not fair because, emotive claims apart, they are not the only ones serving the nation – the primary school teacher in a Naxal village in Dantewada is also doing so, the coal miner spending twelve hours every day in the pitch darkness of a flooded mine in Jharia is also doing so, the fireman rushing into a burning building in a Mumbai slum is also doing so. Nor does it help the cause to quote statistics about the number of casualties – the para military forces and some state police forces have consistently had higher casualties than the army over the years. Demanding a special dispensation on the basis of an exclusive claim to patriotism is never a good idea – it has tinges of a hubris that does not go well with the concept of selfless service.
The acceptance of the OROP demand is also not practically or legally possible, because it cannot be limited to the armed forces only, and any extension to other services and departments will bankrupt the government for all times. The stirrings have already started – the Central Para Military Forces, the Railway unions, some Associations of central government Ministries – have already given ominous hints that if OROP is allowed to the armed forces it cannot be denied to them. So we’re no longer talking of just 22 lakh ex-servicemen and 6 lakh widows – we’re talking of tens of millions of central and state government employees. We’re no longer looking at a financial implication of Rs. 8000 crores but ten or twenty times that. Its a no brainer.
And yet there are some aspects of the demand of the armed forces that are legitimate, that are peculiar to them, and which any sensitive government has to consider sympathetically. The primary one for me is their early retirement (especially for the jawans and ORs) and subsequent unemployment with relatively low pension rates. The solution to this vexed imbroglio has to come out of the box and not from any manual of the finance department. Although it is certainly presumptuous of me I would make so bold as to suggest the following steps as an alternative to OROP:
* Eradicate the root and genesis of the problem — abolish the OROP benefit provided only to the holders of the Apex Scale and cover them under the same formula of pension as applicable to others. This may occasion some resistance from about twenty thousand or so of our plastic frame and a few defence brass but it would remove the heart burning of many millions of others and restore equity.
* Provide higher pay scales to members of the armed forces to compensate them for their shorter service tenures and lack of promotion avenues. In order to do this the bureaucracy should once and for all give up the specious notion of maintaining “equations”- there are no equations between apples and oranges.
* Increase the gratuity available to ORs and jawans.
* Provide 50% reservation for jawans and other ORs in all central para-military and state police forces at appropriate levels. Not only would this single measure provide gainful employment to them for another 25 years, it would also considerably enhance the image and effectiveness of these forces because of the sterling qualities of discipline and integrity which these ORs would bring with them. I calculate that there would be about 30,000 (300000) retirees from the army every year – the annual vacancies in the para-military and police forces would be many times this number, so adjusting the former should pose no problem. Ex-servicemen Directorates already exist at the Centre and in the states and they can maintain the data of retirees and forward the names against requisitions.
OROP is a mirage which will never materialise. If the lot of our ex-servicemen is to be improved and their obvious career disadvantages compensated, suggestions like the above have to be considered. Mr. Modi should learn a thing or two from the armed forces – instead of a head-on confrontation with them he should execute a flanking manoeuvre.
| The author retired from the IAS in December 2010. A keen environmentalist and trekker he has published a book on high altitude trekking in the Himachal Himalayas: THE TRAILS LESS TRAVELLED.
His second book- SPECTRE OF CHOOR DHAR is a collection of short stories based in Himachal and was published in July 2019. His third book was released in August 2020: POLYTICKS, DEMOCKRAZY AND MUMBO JUMBO is a compilation of satirical and humorous articles on the state of our nation. His fourth book was published on 6th July 2021. Titled INDIA: THE WASTED YEARS , the book is a chronicle of missed opportunities in the last nine years. Shukla’s fifth book – THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER’S DOG AND OTHER COLLEAGUES- was released on 12th September 2023. It portrays the lighter side of life in the IAS and in Himachal. He writes for various publications and websites on the environment, governance and social issues. He divides his time between Delhi and his cottage in a small village above Shimla. He blogs at http://avayshukla.blogspot.in/ |
Very balance views with the root cause of the problem identified. OROP for all military ranks will certainly open up a can of worms and cascade in to a national issue. It may be more prudent to seek a solution with some out of the box thinking on how to make military service more rewarding and ensuring a reasonable sustainability for the retirees who retire at young age of 38- to 50 years. The government, once for all, must establish that there is and will be no comparison or parity of pay and allowances between military and other national civilian services due to the special conditions of service as applicable to military personnel.
A comment of mine on “Changing India” reproduced below gives a clue on how the armed forces may be re employed: It is unlikely that anything will change until: (1) Inequality under law and exceptions to the rule of law are expurgated from the Constitution and laws of India. (2) Bribe Taking is defined as criminal extortion or treason and made a capital offense with special rules of evidence and special courts with summary powers (akin to a Military Court Martial). (3) All court proceedings are video graphed and archived for public viewing and can be used as evidence to prosecute Judges and Magistrates at all levels under special laws and special courts with summary powers akin to a military Court Martial, for insouciance, negligence, tardiness, dereliction of duty, disregard for law and propriety, behaviour unbecoming of a Judge such as lack of etiquette and manners, (4) every job on the “Public” i.e. Government Pay Roll has specific and unique Key Responsibility Areas, Key Performance Parameters and Objectives for which they are held accountable on pain of summary dismissal for non-performance or life imprisonment for treason for sabotage under special laws and special courts with summary powers akin to a military Court Martial and (5) India creates an Ombudsman Service of reemployed and retrained military officers (Colonel and Below, JCOs and NCOs) who retire before 50 to serve as presiding officers, investigating/prosecuting and enforcement officers at the afore mentioned “Special Courts”, one for every taluk with powers to arrest, incarcerate, try and punish any and all from the President of India to a peon in accordance with the Special Laws framed therefor.
A slight correction in the article. The figure of retirees given in the second last para should read 30000 ( and not 300000) as printed. Even this is an approximate figure.
Shukla-ji …. this system of bureaucracy is legacy from British Raj who designed it to keep the native Indian under their domination.
Just see/ think …. if like make developed country the bureaucrats are chosen from professional with each change of Govt and they have to find jobs every 05 /10 years, then only the real one will remain in the system and rest rotten vanish into common people like us.
If you call yourself top level ,quality brain, privileged service deserving the HAG salaries, then the risk also should be proportional l. This quota system should vanish.
A dispassionate and well written analysis of the current cauldron in which the present government finds it self. Rahul on the advice of his evil mentors as usual is trying to fish in the troubled waters.
The solutions offered by the author are well intentioned and should be attempted with some slight modifications, if I may be permitted to say so.
1. Remove the anomaly enjoyed by the Apex scale beneficiaries including in the armed forces. DROP OROP which is not financially sustainable.
2. Do of course offer good salaries etc to the armed forces BUT DO NOT MAKE A SIMILAR MISTAKE OF offering higher gratuities because IT WOULD INDUCE OTHERS TO START ASKING FOR A SIMILAR HIKE IN GRATUITY. IT WOULD OPEN ANOTHER PANDORA’S BOX.
3. Yielding to temptation, as every one knows, is quick and far simpler than to remain pure.
I am referring to the state police services which as every one knows has steeped itself into the lowest level of corruption and moral degradation – which being a different subject will not be discussed now – is not at all a place for the retired people from the defence.
But, jobs in Central Security Forces(CSF)etc like the defence forces are transferable and therefore the personnel are for all practical purposes insulated from the state politics and political influences and compulsions. These are best suited for the middle aged recruitment at different levels thereby we can not only retain whatever purity the present CSF etc.enjoys but also not put the retirees of armed forces in the midst of the police force. To do this offer the jobs to the retirees at the appropriate level and the balance vacancy only to the fresh candidates which implies no reservation percentage.
4.There is yet another group of retirees who can continue to serve the Defence force in the departments of planning,administration,logistics, training,teaching and futuristic thinking etc. which do not require excellent physical fitness. These people can be appointed on contract basis and they will retire at the age of 60 like every one else. The rider is they will be offered and taken in on contract basis at the appropriate level but as civilians so that the aspirations of the younger group to get promotions will not be cast aside and secondly their retirement benefits would be fixed at the time of retirement and they can draw this only after they retire @60. So they are looked after from the time they prematurely retire due to the peculiarities of requirements of defence and also draw pension from 60 as civilians.
By the way this is also applicable to the jobs they get from CSF etc.facilitated by the Defence.
Avay Shukla’s “sleight of hand” in inventing logical argument is undoubtedly top class. In fact, I agree with him on most points. The accolades desrved by the primary school teacher or CRPF constable in Dantewada, a miner in Jharia or fireman in Mumbai are their due and must be so paid. The crucial difference, however, lies in ditinguishing their role from that of the infantry soldier at Siachen Glacier, commandos striking deep inside Myanmar or soldiers pressed in catastrophic where everyone else has given up. Anyone else’s failure can be endured by the nation – at least until the Military comes in. But imagine if the soldier was to give up in 1971 or at Kargil. Can the nation bear the loss of military defeat? Avay Shukla is right – we cannot and should not compare apples with oranges!
Sir, What about the huge disparities existing now between the past and present retirees?
Why only the armed forces denied nfu?
A very well-written article with a lot of good English and vague suggestions and but not much else. With all due respect Sir, kindly allow me to submit a few thoughts on the subject.
Comparing the Army to other Government Departments is a classic case of apples and oranges. The primary school teacher, the coal miner, the fireman – they can, and have, gone on strike (without any disastrous consequences to the nation) and even when they have not, their respective efficiency at work can be seen in a Government Education system which is in a shambles, Coal production which is never at par with the demand, and not the best of fire services comparable to other countries. Now please imagine the chaos if the Army decided to go on strike. And please try to recall the last time the Army failed in any task given to it. From natural calamities to floods to saving national face at the commonwealth games by making bridges at the last minute, the Army has always delivered, while our brethren in the civil administration have shamelessly held up their hands.
Coming to your contention of state and paramilitary forces being at par with the Army – the only reason I don’t laugh outright is because the parameter chosen by you is casualties. And death is never a laughing matter for a soldier. However, if these forces were so efficient, why has Militancy dropped full-time into the lap of the Army? Simple answer – because they can’t and we can.
And if you say that the Railways will want to be included, we are fine with it. But before that please allow our jawans to earn as much as a TTE does till he retires. And since you have retired from the IAS, I would not consider it gentlemanly to comment on this particular cadre. But you will agree that it will make for a very lengthy discussion.
So I would like to say that it is always the Army that is called in to hold up the pants of the Civil Administration – and never the other way round. So if you don’t agree with the OROP for the Armed Forces, fine. But please don’t demean us and the memory of our fallen comrades by comparing us to any other Government Service and making vague observations of flanking manoeuvres. These are only done while dealing with an enemy – or maybe I missed the central import of your article?
Few Questions may be the honorable Shukla Ji answers we shall be obelized.
1. Why the pay scales are lot lower than their civilian equivalents (because Armed forces never ever asked MORE than that they got in any pay commission)?
2. Equating to a Teacher or a Coal mine worker. There are safeties for teacher and miner, and they dies when those fail. And army man is the safety for country, who dies for that. Risk is 1st is he is teaching and may die, if not protected by someone. 2nd is going for dying for protecting someone.
3. Why Military guys retire earlier? Does this writer exactly understand the work style of an armed forces guy? A simple truth, a guy can’t take the hardship long so a civilian can serve till 60, even a military officer serves till 60, but a lower rank guy retires early.
4. Why in 70’s the pension calculation reduced from 70%pay to 50% for military? Is it not in the contest and promise of OROP?
5. If Govt. thinks, after 60 a Guy retires and lives on pension, why the difference between a babu retiring at 60 and an army man retires at 35 in pension when both reach same age of 60?
6. Is writer expects a military retiree has to join Paramilitary/Police, and continue to take Risk and stay away from family forever?
My knowledge is definitely not any match to the writer for sure. But he should consider to convenience guys like me, so we do understand better of his views, and may support those.
Expected musings by an IAS Chap sprinkled with untruth to obfuscate. The fact that a Govt committee (Koshiyari) found it feasible and successive parliaments have spelt it out, the babu is indulging in what he is best at – stalling. After so much of deliberations and the feasibilty accepted such random musings are mischievious but expected from a babu
This babu thinks he knows better than the learned people who approved OROP in various committees and also spelt out its definition. The machiavellian attempt to obfuscate amplifies arrogant ignorance.
To overcome this problem of OROP enhance defence forces pension to 70 percent as was in the year 1973 due to special nature of service condition.Early retirement be adjusted in para military and police forces where retirement age is 60 years .
Indeed a very balance view on the whole issue, but the problem is that far too much water has flown from under the bridge and it is now threatening the bridge. The problem has been allowed to manifest to a stage where every serviceman feels cheated of his legitimate claim. The issue has no easy solution, the sooner it is resolved the better for the government.
Mr Shukla may please enlighten us on the quantum of money gifted to the Central Services
by way of:-
(a) Non Functional Upgradation. How much per year and how much overall till retirement?
Is this not an unwanted, unnecessary and devious bonanza? Does it not lead to OROP for all these guys?
(b) Former FM; PC, upgraded hundreds of posts in the IRS (Taxation Dept, ED etc) just before the last election. How much has it cost the nation?
I am making an attempt here to respond to some of the suggestions/comments made:
* S. Nagarajan
I feel a higher gratuity for armed forces personnel is legally possible and should be considered. Gratuity is linked to years of service rendered, and since defense personnel are at a disadvantage here because they retire early this can provide the legal distinction for providing them a higher gratuity. Civil services will find it difficult to counter this reasoning.
– Granted that state police forces are ( rightfully) perceived as highly politicised, corrupt and indisciplined. But there would still be distinct advantages in inducting retired armed forces personnel into them: one, such reemployed retirees would be posted closer to their homes and two, the very profile and image of the police would change for the better if 50% of the force were to consist of highly trained, disciplined and honest troopers. Induction of defense personnel into the police-state and central- would be a win-win for the country as well as the individual soldier.
* Karan Kharb, Major Gurpreet singh
– In any debate it is never a good idea to heap contempt on all others while holding oneself as the only model of probity and excellence. The school teacher, the miner and the fireman are, in their own humble way, performing as vital a job as the soldier- without them the country would not be worth defending. Granted that the civil component of govt. employees are perceived to be corrupt and inefficient, unlike defense personnel, but that is not because of any difference in their respective DNAs. The difference is attributable to the environment they work in. The soldier, by the very nature of his duties, is ( thankfully) insulated from the negative and deleterious influences of politics, pressures and corruption that have become a way of life in the civil govt. For the same reason the soldier is able to get better leadership and imbibe a standard of discipline and single minded dedication to his job. Both are products of their environment- one is not intrinsically superior to the other, so making a claim on this basis alone is not a winning tactic.
SKM
– I am surprised, and somewhat touched, that you still have faith in Parliamentary Committees. If OROP was so simple it would have happened by now. The fact is that there are major financial and legal implications in implementing it, and refusing to acknowledge this will only make its resolution that much more difficult.
AK SINHA
– I totally agree with the suggestion that pension rates for defense forces should be restored to the 1973 level of 70%. This would only be just and equitable and would by itself go a long way in meeting the essence of the OROP demand.
For this issue to be resolved the bitterness and recriminations must end. The Govt. must be more honest with the soldier and should talk to him, not hide behind a stone wall of silence and arrogance. The difficulties must be explained, false assurances should be avoided, and a via media found. Impediments like the Delhi Police Commissioner who demonstrated so vividly his contempt for our war veterans must be removed. And, given that the issue is reaching a flash point, the talking must be at the level of the Prime Minister himself and no other. If he can talk to Pakistan why can he not talk to his own Generals?
Very smartly things were again juggled up in a manner to camouflage to trivialise a soldiers issue. Yes casualties of para millitary forces are,coal miner works indeep dug hole, a school teacher do serve in a remote naxalite area and we forgot about 24*7 duties performed by doctors (supposedly), and many others. But dear author may be have chosen to forget that if all these conditions are if can be applued to one service that is armed forces. They serve in remote places, inhospitable terrain, they suffer more no of casualties atleast a fraction more than the IAS(pun intended) they are involved anti naxalite anti terrorism directly, and they work 24*7 for a mere 6k a month inthe name of MSP whereas many of their civil counterparts draw overtime allowance for doing things slowly and inefficiently on the contrary. Defence forces dont go on strike and their grade pays are much lower than the buerocrats resulting in the garrison engg of an MES drawing more salary than the AOC/GOC of a base in some cases. Lastly to cut short dear author they dont get to play golf at gymkhana club during office hours.
And OROP toh aab ayega hi. Boldijiye apni lobby se agar isbar rok paye toh.
Dear sir , You are doing nothing but exposing your greediness. This time we will not let you success in selfish motto of your lot who is prompt to mention his MSP but forget to mention about jawan whose msp is one third than officers whose difficulty level is in multiples.Also majority of offrs retire after 50 yrs of age after earning handsome pension.So OROP should be applicable for jawans retiring at young age.
Dear shukla ji have u visited any time J&K area without escort or leh area at night Petrol or jaiselmer in may_ june When temp is 48 or at north east reason where travel time take 2to 4 day’s think every thing just feel it,go there stay there let the comity stay there & than Ask….OROP
Very well written Avay.. Your articles are airways very enlightening.. The Officers need to be limited after but so do the jawans.. And the millions of others who do their respective duties towards the welfare of the nation.. Every honest citizen contributes some way or the other.. May I ask.. After putting in 36 years of service in self employment and paying direct and indirect taxes all my life do I get any benefits??? None at all.. So why the comparisons???
A bizarre display of sick mentality . dear retired IAS officer, your jharia miner goes back every night to reunite with family. Your naxal primary teacher does not have frozen fingers due to frost bite. For god sake do not spread poision in sugar coated English. Have fear of god.
Surely a very enlightening article, to know both sides of the story. OROP is indeed a complex issue than it was envisaged and perceived. The issue has many intricacies for implementation, in letter and spirit— The definition of OROP has to be more explicit and clearer.
But definitely a way has to be found of the current impasse? What is the solution? I tend to think that raising the pension level to 70 percent for all ex-servicemen; including the officers and other ranks(OR”s) is the best way out. In that case , other central government employees cannot make similar demands.
Government has to find a way to give enhanced pensions to all ex-servicemen;,given that the issue finds merit over civilian employees ,who can serve till the age of 60 years.
Government can now raise the pension level of all ex-servicemen at par with the serving personnel who retire now; as a one time measure, and thereafter have separate Pay Commissions for Armed Forces every five years as a review and enhancements, where it is justified.
The issue has to be speedily resolved, before it gets out of hand, and assumes gigantic proportions of a raging fire.
Ajay Gupta
Dear avay shukla
As u have said that there is no comparison between apple and oranges and yet u have precisely done that. I do not deny for a second that every profession contributes towards the betterment and development of the nation but to triviliaze armed forces by stating that it is not a good idea to demand special dispensation by an exclusive claim to patriotism is unjust and even immoral if I may say so….armed forces have never claimed that they are more patriotic than the other citizens but yes I do perceive them as protectors of our sovereignty, territorial integrity ànd democracy…the core issue here is not the financial aspects of a profession but the status of a soldier in our country…when MPs have the audacity to proclaim that a soldier serves the nation for free liquor and ration that reflects the deeprooted malice that this country holds against its soldiers…when various vested interests proclaim that army officers are not part of class A services and deny NFU to the armed force officer cadre on this pretext, they again pose a question about the status of our soldier in the society…when service headquarters continue to be attached offices to ministry of defence, it reflects the status of our armed forces, it is outrightly laughable to see the irony here…lastly, ur claims about OROP being not practical or sustainable reeks of ignorance on the subject…OROP exclusively for armed forces is already in prevalence in many countries including USA, UK, France…the pay compensation to armed forces is 15-20% higher even to the bureaucracy of these nations…the armedforces of
Great Article Mr Avay Shukla. Had no idea about the OROP issue, prior to reading this article. Also great is the ensuing debate in the comments section.
A good analysis, and enlightening comments. However I still miss something vital here – the same thing that is missing from all heated debates on emotive issues: facts. The discussion would be a lot more meaningful if one could see how the present pension system falls short of OROP. I would like to see a table – it shouldn’t be too hard to prepare for anyone working in the offices dealing with pensions – showing how the pension for different ranks of armed forces varies as a function of time since retirement. How much, for example, does a lance-naik who has retires today gets as pension; and what is the pension given to the ones who retired 5, 10, 15, 20 years back and so on. Same for other ranks. A similar exercise can be done for other services also.
The real problem of the armed forces, which distinguishes them from all other government services, is early retirement. Avay Shukla has given some suggestions to deal with it. Let me add one more – let the armed forces pensions be calculated on OROP basis up to the age of 60, and let the normal formula apply thereafter. This would not raise any demand from services other then the armed forces, as they all retire at 60.
The article should have come out four decades back, so that the Armed Forces did not suffer what has been done to them. The only logical option now is to grant OROP to Armed Forces, while pointing out to others what pay, perks and privileges they have been enjoying past decades, not given to Armed Forces – early promotions,serving till 60 drawing- like full pay even if not promoted etc. After this, government can look into the other recommendations of the author like financial compensation if promoted late etc.
Generally, a very sharp analysis by the author. However, the emphasis on cogent issues has not been proportionate. I am in agreement with the author that granting OROP to the armed forces is a difficult task, but I disagree that it is not in the realm of possibility, given the resources available in the country. The author must understand the injustice in continuum done to the armed forces ever since our Independence. It was first the political leaders who were inimical to the armed forces owing to their unfounded fear of military coup, as evinced in perpetuity in our neighbourhood for the same period. From there on, the bureaucracy took over to placate their political bosses, and resultantly, severely undermined the armed forces, which they continue to do with impunity even to date. Therefore, the task of implementing OROP, as approved by various parliamentary committees (in whom the author has little faith) and even the Honourable Supreme Court has still not seen light of the day. It is reasonable to assume that the Honourable Supreme Court would not have given their approval without comprehensive consultations with the stake holders and a deep analysis of the issues involved. It is possible that the author lacks trust even in the highest court of the land, and may like to contest their decision. That would be his call. In addition to what the author has dexterously written, I would like to add the aspect of promotional avenues in the armed forces vis a vis some of the others. The armed forces, as is well known to the intelligentsia, have a very steep pyramidal structure of promotions, where there are very few possibilities of promotion even to the deserving. This is not so because some personnel, including officers, do not deserve promotions or are any less qualified than the others, who make it to the next rank, it is because of the strict command and control requirement of the armed forces that have to be kept in mind to maintain this structure. Here also, the personnel suffer and have to be content with lower pensionary benefits despite being qualified for promotion. This is not so in any other organisation, including central armed police forces, who are devoid of a strict rank based functional structure. It is amply clear that, here also, the armed forces are at a loss, both in terms of years of service, and lower pensions. The author, is therefore, right in not comparing apples and oranges, while still comparing them. There are certainly some good thoughts thrown up by the author, but appear somewhat impractical, as the bureaucracy will never accept the truth of what has been written by the author, and therefore, the suggestions, howsoever beneficial will never be accepted by his own ilk. By and large most commentators have given very rational views, but to my mind, they are all too late, as some of our colleagues are on hunger strike unto death, and I daresay, their medical parameters do not look good. It may indeed be better for the Honourable Prime Minister himself to move out of his comfort zone and speak to the service veterans to resolve the impasse without loss of even one day, because precious lives are at stake.
I ask only 2 questions.
1 Is lateral absorption, for ALL Defence retirees, in sister organisations possible with assurance of protecting last pay and growth till 60 years of age?
2. Why a Govt committee (Koshiyari) found it more feasible and successive parliaments have accepted the current definition of OROP?
Dear sirs, I am a BSF officer…have gone through alk what has been said…and agree for most of the suggestions for betterment of armed force personnel…but probably most of you are unaware that BSF itself is an Armed Force of the Union as stipulated in its costitution approved by the Parliament…we have fought wars…are in inhospitable terrain on all borders and LOC…24*7 without any benefits of either the IAS or Army…We are being unjustly populated at higher echelons by arrogant, selfish and corrupt IPS who were unfit in their own cadres..a BSF Officer and jawan is working 16 hours everyday in harshest conditions of border of the country and being treated as no ones progeny…we definitely don’t want any deputation or re-employment from either the army or IPS…
With all due respect :-
BSF must be part of a wing in Indian Army which can solve many complexities ?
OROP;- Entry to IAF / Army / Navy personnel basically HSC or +2 & subsequently the Three wings of the Armed Forces periodically train the man power in which complexities are existing. But why our people demanding special groups in OROP. Before joining you are not technical. In OROP you protect the pay parity in groups & retiries at different times just to protect the purchasing power of the pension which you get at different years.
Need not to do anything more just restore 70% Pension and higher rate of MSP for jawans if not atleast equal to Officers.
Dear author sir, the complete article arranged and written nicely can impress anybody and confirms the actions of ‘Babugiri’ as reflected. It may also be obviously claimed that it is non else but the babus repeated again the babus with cunning attitude are in a practice of diluting the thoughts quoting comparisons of apples and oranges. Though your writing style is impressive but answers to a few more questions would be definitely appreciable. a) As you have described an equality of risk within various govt. departments with the military, I have seen many times the military called for action whenever other departments like the Police, Fire, CRPF, Disaster management etc. fail to yield results. But can you sir show some example where other departments are called for to do it for the Military ? b) As far as the Apex scale benefits concerned your suggestion for dropping it back is too good. Please say it truthfully why the nation’s exchequer was swapped then and could you ever think such if there would have no demand for OROP by the military veterans now ?? c) OROP issue is alive since over 30 years where few hundred thousands soldiers are desperate with the financial loss but living with hopes through recommendations and assurances from various govts, Pay commissions, the Koshiyari committee and finally the Supreme Court. How could the concept of OROP exist so long leaving such babugiri unheard ? Kahan chale gaye the sab babu jis ? d) Sir, do you also claim the verdicts of the Supreme Court as wrong verdict in favor of implementation of OROP to soldiers ? I would like to conclude that your article on OROP for soldiers is meant to obfuscate the issue and also confirms babus’ actions to dilute the issues of apples and oranges continuing since beginning through the illiterate politicians depending upon you babus. But the time now is running in favor of the soldiers and it may be hard to stop this. I shall eagerly wait for the answers. Thanks to you sir for educating me so much.
I agree with the analysis of Mr Avay Shukla.
*The genesis of the problem lies in the surreptitious grant of OROP to the babus and the topmost rungs of the Armed Forces whilst denying it to the others. As Avay Shukla suggests this should be abolished, attracting the unhappiness of just about 20000 bureaucrats. They make enough money under the table anyway!
*Provide higher scales to the Armed Forces to compensate them for the shorter employment tenure is a very practicable idea. Along with that reversion of pensions at 60-72% of last drawn salary should balance the keel. He rightly says the the notion of the babus of maintaining equations is pre bullshit because one cannot compare apples to oranges.
*Reservation of 50% of vacancies in the Central and State police forces, including BSF and ITBP, is an excellent idea that has been on paper in some form or the other but never been implemented in right earnest. If implemented properly it will not only help eradicate the number of unemployed in the country but will also help the receiving forces gain much better trained personnel who will only need orientation training and nothing more. The para-military forces will become a more disciplined and formidable arm of governance. It will also help foster better relations and cooperation, if need be, between the military and para-military forces (unless the babus and Shekhar Gupta and his ilk scare the politicians that this will increase the chances of a coup!)
*The Government should also consider extending the same facility that it extends to ECOs and SSCOs to enter the Civil Services to the PRCOs too, after a specified number of years. This facility was available till even many years after independence and thus there were a large number of bureaucrats with Armed Forces background; and they all did very well. With larger number of bureaucrats who have served some length of time in the Armed Forces we will partially satisfy the demand of many that all bureaucrats should serve in the Army for at least two years.
Yes, I agree that OROP syndrome will eventually open up a pandora box but we have to come out with the solution now. If something wrong had been done in the past, it should be rectified forthwith and an uniform, justified and better deal to the armed forces should be accrued in a very amicable atmosphere. It is not good for the country that matter is delayed for long now anymore…