15 Oct, 2012, 05.51AM IST, Rajat Pandit,TNN Two-front war remote, but China threat real



“China is the actual long-term threat. Its strategic intentions remain unclear. We have to constructively engage with Beijing but also keep our powder dry for all eventualities ,’’ said a senior military officer.

 

NEW DELHI: India's worst-case scenario is a simultaneous two-front war. This nightmarish possibility is fuelled by the ever-deepening military nexus between China and Pakistan , ranging from continuing assistance in the nuclear and missile arenas to presence of Chinese soldiers in Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan areas.

Much before defence minister A K Antony formally directed them to do so in 2009, Indian armed forces were already "actively'' factoring this twofront contingency into their plans and doctrines. More recently, he told the Parliament he might seek a hike in this year's Rs 1.93 lakh crore defence outlay due to "new ground realities'' in the backdrop of "growing proximity'' between China and Pakistan.

 

But while planning for the worst is good strategy, many military experts say the likelihood of a two-front war seems remote. China may have long used Pakistan to peg India down in South Asia but has never directly intervened on Islamabad's behalf during any Indo-Pak war, be it in 1971 or the Kargil conflict in 1999. Moreover, even as it shadow boxes with the US in Asia-Pacific and elsewhere, China remains wary of doing anything that may force India to firmly join the American corner.

 

The threat of a single-front conflict or skirmish is "much more real'' . Pakistan has always been the more in-your-face threat for India, stoking militancy, launching incursions and rattling its nuclear saber over the years. "But Pakistan can be managed ,'' says a senior military officer.

"China is the actual long-term threat. Its strategic intentions remain unclear. We have to constructively engage with Beijing but also keep our powder dry for all eventualities ,'' he adds.
Both in terms of nuclear as well as conventional military power, China by far outstrips India. Though China's primary aim is to dissuade any US intervention in the Taiwan Strait or the larger South China Sea, India cannot ignore ground realities.

China has systematically built military infrastructure all along the unresolved 4,056-km Line of Actual Control (LAC), with five full-fledged airbases, an extensive rail network and over 58,000-km of roads in the Tibet Autonomous Region (TAR). Apart from deploying medium-range ballistic missiles and fighters on the Tibetan plateau, People's Liberation Army (PLA) has now also taken to holding air and ground combat exercises near the Indian borders.

Beijing also continues to widen its arc of influence in the Indian Ocean Region by forging extensive maritime linkages with eastern Africa, Seychelles, the Maldives, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Myanmar and Pakistan, among others.

The PLA's increasingly "aggressive'' behaviour along the LAC, with over 550 "transgressions'' into Indian territory being recorded just since January, 2010, also points to a deliberate hardening of its stand in laying claim to disputed areas.

Indian armed forces, however, are no longer the pushovers they were. "I assure the nation as Army chief that 1962 will not be repeated... Nahi Hoga !'' says General Bikram Singh.

Adds another officer, "In terms of equipment and training, we are far better off now. We learnt our lessons from 1962 and built them into our plans. China's armed forces may be more than double our size but they do not have the kind of force ratios that will overwhelm us.'' IAF and Navy, too, have emerged as forces to reckon with.

Sukhoi-30 MKI fighters taking off from Tezpur and Chabua, or Leh and Thoise for that matter, can strike high-value targets deep inside China with mid-air refueling. "Chinese fighters, in contrast, will be hampered by their reduced weapon and fuel-carrying capacity while operating from high-altitude airbases in TAR,'' says a senior IAF officer.

Similarly, China may have last month commissioned its first aircraft carrier, the 65,000-tonne Liaoning , but Indian Navy is leagues ahead in blue-water experience.

IAF equipment inferior to ours in 1962: China

IAF equipment during the 1962 War "cannot be compared to that of China" and it was "not successful" in delivering supplies to beleaguered Indian troops, an official Chinese daily said on Sunday, days after IAF Chief NAK Browne said the use of Air Force would have changed the outcome of the conflict. Ahead of the 50th anniversary of the war which broke out on October 20, 1962, the Chinese edition of Global Times claimed that the combat capability of the IAF was very limited leaving it a "spectator." PTI

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/two-front-war-remote-but-china-threat-real/articleshow/16816701.cms

A useful aide mémoire, for retention by pensioners

Courtesy: Wg Cdr (Retd) VG Kumar

 

Recently some Veteran pointed out that SBI in Maharashtra is insisting on having an exclusive account for Pension. This to my mind is contrary to Guidelines issued by RBI. Please see para 3 below - answer to FAQs by RBI

 

Scheme for Payment of Pension to Government Pensioners by Authorised Banks

Reserve Bank of India (the Bank) monitors disbursement of pension by its agency banks in respect of all Central Government Departments (except the Department of Post) and certain State Governments. It has been receiving several queries/ complaints from pensioners in regard to fixation, calculation and payment of pension including revision of pension/ Dearness Relief from time to time, transfer of pension account from one bank branch to another, etc. We have analysed the queries/ complaints, rights and duties of pensioners and put the same in the form of answers to these Frequently Asked Questions. It is hoped that these will cover most of the queries/ doubts in the minds of pensioners.

1. Can the pensioner draw his/ her pension through a bank branch?

Yes. Even the Government employees earlier drawing their pension from a treasury or from a post office have the option to draw their pension from the authorized bank’s branches.

2. Who is the pension sanctioning authority?

The Ministry/ Department /Office where the Government servant last served is the pension sanctioning authority. The pension fixation is made by such authority for the first time and thereafter the refixation of pay, if any, is done by the pension paying bank based on the instructions from the concerned Central/ State Government authority.

3. Is it necessary for the pensioner to open a separate pension account for the purpose of crediting his/ her pension in authorized bank?

The pensioner is not required to open a separate pension account. The pension can be credited to his/her existing savings/ current account maintained with the branch selected by the pensioner.

4. Can a pensioner open a Joint Account with his/ her spouse?

Yes. All pensioners of the Central Government Pensioners and those State Governments which have accepted such arrangement can open Joint Account with their spouses.

5. Whether Joint Account of the pensioner with spouse can be operated either by ''Former or Survivor" or "Either or Survivor".

The Joint Account of the pensioner with spouse can be operated either as ‘‘Former or Survivor" or “Either or Survivor".

6. What is the minimum balance required to be maintained in the pension account maintained with the banks?

RBI has not stipulated any minimum balance to be maintained in pension accounts by the pensioners. Individual banks have framed their own rules in this regard. However, some banks have also permitted zero balance in the pensioners’ accounts.

7. Who sends the Pension Payment Orders (PPOs) to the authorized bank branch?
The concerned pension paying authorities in the Ministries /Departments/ State Governments forward the PPOs to the bank branches wherefrom the pensioner desires to draw his/her pension.

8. When is the pension credited to the pensioner's account by the paying branch?

The disbursement of pension by the paying branch is spread over the last four working days of the month depending on the convenience of the pension paying branch except for the month of March when the pension is credited on or after the first working day of April.

9. Can a pensioner transfer his/ her pension account from one branch to another branch of the same bank or to the branch of another bank?

(a) Pensioner can transfer his/ her pension account from one branch to another branch of the same bank within the same centre or at a different centre;

(b) He/ She can transfer his/ her account from one authorized bank to another within the same centre (such transfers to be allowed only once in a year);

(c) He/ She can also transfer his/ her account from one authorized bank to another authorized bank at a different centre.

10. What is the procedure for payment of pension in the case of the transfer of PPO to another branch or bank, as the case may be?

Pension will be paid for three months on the basis of the photocopy of the pensioner’s PPO at the transferee (new) branch from the date of the last payment made at the transferor (old) branch. Both the branches (old and new) are required to ensure that all the required documents are received by the transferee branch within these three months.

11. Is it necessary for the pensioner to be present at the branch of the bank along with documents for the purpose of identification before commencement of pension?

Yes. Before the commencement of pension, a pensioner has to be present at the paying branch for the purpose of identification. The paying branch shall obtain the specimen signatures or the thumb/toe impression from the pensioner.

12. What is the procedure to be followed by the bank branch if the pensioner is handicapped /incapacitated and is not in a position to be present at the paying branch?

If the pensioner is physically handicapped/incapacitated and unable to be present at the branch, the requirement of personal appearance is waived. In such cases, the bank official visits the pensioner’s residence/hospital for the purpose of identification and obtaining specimen signature or thumb/toe impression.

13. Has the pensioner got right to retain half portion of the PPO for record and to get it updated from paying branch whenever there is a change in the quantum of pension due to revision in basic pension, dearness relief, etc.?

Yes. The pensioner has right to retain half portion of the PPO for record and whenever there is a revision in the basic pension/Dearness Relief (DR), etc. the paying branch has to call for the pensioner's half of the PPO and record thereon the changes according to government orders/notifications and return the same to the pensioner.

14. Whether the paying branch has to maintain a detailed record of pension payments made by it in the prescribed form?

Yes. The pension paying branch is required to maintain a detailed record of pension payments made by it from time to time in the prescribed form duly authenticated by the authorized officer.

15. Can the pension paying bank recover the excess amount credited to the pensioner’s account?

Yes. The paying branch before commencement of pension obtains an undertaking from the pensioner in the prescribed form for this purpose and, therefore, can recover the excess payment made to the pensioner's account due to delay in receipt of any material information or due to any bona fide error. The bank also has the right to recover the excess amount of pension credited to the deceased pensioner’s account from his/her legal heirs/nominees.

16. Is it compulsory for a pensioner to furnish a Life Certificate/Non-Employment Certificate or Employment Certificate to the bank in the month of November?

Yes. The pensioner is required to furnish a Life Certificate/Non – Employment Certificate or Employment Certificate to the bank in the month of November. However, in case a pensioner is unable to obtain a Life Certificate from an authorized bank officer on account of serious illness / incapacitation, bank official will visit his/her residence/ hospital for the purpose of recording the life certificate.

17. Can a pensioner be allowed to operate his/ her account by the holder of Power of Attorney?

The account is not allowed to be operated by a holder of Power of Attorney. However, the cheque book facility and acceptance of standing instructions for transfer of funds from the account is permissible.

18. Who is responsible for deduction of Income Tax at source from pension payment?

The pension paying bank is responsible for deduction of Income Tax from pension amount in accordance with the rates prescribed by the Income Tax authorities from time to time. While deducting such tax from the pension amount, the paying bank will also allow deductions on account of relief to the pensioner available under the Income Tax Act. The paying branch, in April each year, will also issue to the pensioner a certificate of tax deduction as per the prescribed form. If the pensioner is not liable to pay Income Tax, he should furnish to the pension paying branch, a declaration to that effect in the prescribed form (15 H).

19. Can old, sick physically handicapped pensioner who is unable to sign, open pension account or withdraw his/ her pension from the pension account?

A pensioner, who is old, sick or lost both his/her hands and, therefore, cannot sign, can put any mark or thumb/ toe impression on the form for opening of pension account. While withdrawing the pension amount he/she can put thumb/toe impression on the cheque/withdrawal form and it should be identified by two independent witnesses known to the bank one of whom should be a bank official.

   
20. Can a pensioner withdraw pension from his/ her account when he/she is not able to sign or put thumb/toe impression or unable to be present in the bank?

In such cases, a pensioner can put any mark or impression on the cheque/ withdrawal form and may indicate to the bank as to who would withdraw pension amount from the bank on the basis of cheque/withdrawal form. Such a person should be identified by two independent witnesses. The person who is actually drawing the money from the bank should be asked to furnish his/her specimen signature to the bank.

21. When does the family pension commence?

The family pension commences after the death of the pensioner. The family pension is payable to the person indicated in the PPO on receipt of a death certificate and application from the nominee.

22. How the payment of Dearness Relief at revised rate is to be paid to the pensioners?

Whenever any additional relief on pension/family pension is sanctioned by the Government, the same is intimated to the agency banks for issuing suitable instructions to their pension paying branches for payment of relief at the revised rates to the pensioners without any delay. The orders issued by Government Departments are also hosted on their websites and banks have been advised to watch the latest instructions on the website and act accordingly without waiting for any further orders from RBI in this regard.

23. Can pensioners get pension slips?

Yes. As decided by the Central Government (Civil, Defence & Railways), pension paying banks have been advised to issue pension slips to the pensioners in prescribed form when the pension is paid for the first time and thereafter whenever there is a change in quantum of pension due to revision in basic pension or revision in Dearness Relief.

24. Which authority the pensioner should approach for redressal of his/ her grievances?

A pensioner can initially approach the concerned Branch Manager and, thereafter, the Head Office of the concerned bank for redressal of his/her complaint. They can also approach the Banking Ombudsman of the concerned State in terms of Banking Ombudsman Scheme 2006 of the Reserve Bank of India (details available at the Bank’s website www.rbi.org.in) This is applicable only in respect of complaints relating to services rendered by banks. For other issues the complainant will have to approach the respective pension paying authority.

25. Where can a pensioner get information about the changes in the pension/ Dearness Relief or any pension related issue?

The pensioner can visit the Official Website of the concerned Government Department as also Reserve Bank of India Website (www.rbi.org.in) to get the information about pension related issues.
26. Whether a pensioner is entitled for any compensation from the agency banks for delayed credit of pension/ arrears of pension?

Yes. A Pensioner is entitled for compensation for delayed credit of pension/arrears thereof at the fixed rate of 8% and the same would be credited to the pensioner's account automatically by the bank on the same day when the bank affords delayed credit of such pension / arrears etc without any claim from the pensioner.
------------------------------
These FAQs are issued by the Reserve Bank of India for information and general guidance purposes only. The Bank will not be held responsible for actions taken and/or decisions made on the basis of the same. For clarifications or interpretations, if any, the readers are requested to be guided by the relevant circulars and notifications issued from time to time by the Bank and the Government.

Proactive action by the Department of Personnel & Training : Definition of ‘Ex-Serviceman’ revised, ambiguities ironed out, categories expanded, proactive decisions taken

The Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) functioning under the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, has again proved its pro-public and proactive approach.

All ambiguities emanating from the last revision of the definition of ‘Ex-Serviceman’ (as provided in the rules of 1979 last majorly amended in 1987) have been attempted to be rectified.

The notification for redefining the term ‘Ex-Servicemen’ has been issued and can be downloaded and accessed by clicking here.

On a first glance, the following are the apparent changes:

(a)The new notification covers aspects of all level of posts, that is, Group A, B, C and D.

(b)Those released on reduction of establishment are also now covered.

(c)Territorial Army pensioners of both categories, that is, those who earn pension after continuous service or in broken spells, would be covered.

(d)All gallantry awardees covered.

(e)Boarded out recruits in receipt of disability pension covered.

(f)Adjustment and modalities of reservation vis-à-vis other reserved categories fully explained and specified.

(g)Age relaxation for all levels of posts specified unambiguously including for Competitive Examinations.

Though one major apparent slip-up that appears visible from the notification is that while personnel released with ‘attributable’ disabilities have been mentioned in the notification, those released with ‘aggravated’disabilities have not been mentioned. Although in the case of personnel of the Army Postal Service (APS), both attributable and aggravated categories have been specifically mentioned. Perhaps the Services and the Ministry of Defence need to take this up immediately with the DoPT.

Courtesy: Major Navdeep Singh

Armed Forces Tribunal will be under Law Ministry

Clash of interests is being cited as the main reason why this tribunal must be removed from under the Ministry of Defence.

The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) is all set to come under the Ministry of Law, instead of its parent body, the Ministry of Defence. The Supreme Court gave a directive to this effect in 2010 as it felt that the MoD could influence the tribunal's judgements since the latter dealt with decisions pertaining to the ministry. To ensure that fair judgements were given, the Supreme Court, in fact, directed that the administrative control of the AFT and all other tribunals should not be under their parent ministries. It recommended that the tribunals should be placed under one single nodal department, preferably the Department of Legal Affairs.

The SC directive has been under consideration ever since. But the matter got a fresh lease of life with Law Minister Salman Khurshid's recent statement in Parliament that the government was looking at the possibility of removing these tribunals from under their parent ministries and putting them under the Ministry of Law.

Clash of interests is the main reason why these tribunals need to be removed from under their parent ministries. To give an instance, the members comprising the AFT use the various facilities offered by the MoD, but are also required to pass orders against the ministry in the cases coming to them. An RTI query by a retired army officer revealed that the MoD funded AFT chairperson A.K. Mathur's foreign trips worth lakhs of rupees. The AFT also makes use of the infrastructure offered by the MoD to function: the land on which the AFTs are constructed is given by the MoD. The ministry gives the AFT members facilities such as the CSD (Canteen Stores Depot) cards. These are canteen cards that can be used to procure grocery and other household items at subsidised rates from all military canteens.

A senior retired army officer working as an administrative member at one of the AFT benches told this newspaper, "The AFTs should be under the Ministry of Law so that they can give fair judgements. Litigants are always afraid that fairness will go missing as the AFTs function from MoD land and do not have their own premises. Funds for the AFTs are also sanctioned through the MoD. The CSD cards given to the members are actually a privilege."

The Armed Forces Tribunal enjoys the status of a High Court, and came into being in 2009. Each court consists of a judicial member and an administrative member. The administrative member of an AFT is always a retired senior officer, usually a three-star officer. A source told this newspaper, "These retired officers usually know the applicants approaching the Tribunal. This increases the chances of the Tribunal's decisions being influenced. So their decisions are unlikely to be fair. This debate to delink the AFT from the administrative powers of the MoD has been going on for a long time."

Source: Sunday Guardian

How India brought down the US’ supersonic man

Chuck Yeager is an American icon and will go down in history as the first man to break the sound barrier. But during the 1971 India-Pakistan War, when an Indian pilot shot his personal aircraft, the air ace lost his cool, and demanded retaliation against India. Mercifully, his antics were ignored by then US President Richard Nixon.

 

The 1971 India-Pakistan war didn’t turn out very well from the US' point of view. For one particular American it went particularly bad. Chuck Yeager, the legendary test pilot and the first man to break the sound barrier, was dispatched by the US government to train Pakistani air force pilots but ended up as target practice for the Indian Air Force, and in the process kicked up a diplomatic storm in a war situation.

Yeager’s presence in Pakistan was one of the surprises of the Cold War. In an article titled, "The Right Stuff in the Wrong Place,” by Edward C. Ingraham, a former US diplomat in Pakistan, recalls how Yeager was called to Islamabad in 1971 to head the Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) – a rather fanciful name for a bunch of thugs teaching other thugs how to fight.
It wasn’t a terribly exciting job: “All that the chief of the advisory group had to do was to teach Pakistanis how to use American military equipment without killing themselves in the process,” writes Ingraham.

Among the perks Yeager enjoyed was a twin-engine Beechcraft, an airplane supplied by the Pentagon. It was his pride and joy and he often used the aircraft for transporting the US ambassador on fishing expeditions in Pakistan’s northwest mountains.

Yeager: Loyal Pakistani!

Yeager may have been a celebrated American icon, but here’s what Ingraham says about his nonchalant attitude. “We at the embassy were increasingly preoccupied with the deepening crisis (the Pakistan Army murdered more than 3,000,000 civilians in then East Pakistan, now Bangladesh). Meetings became more frequent and more tense. We were troubled by the complex questions that the conflict raised. No such doubts seemed to cross the mind of Chuck Yeager. I remember one occasion on which the ambassador asked Yeager for his assessment of how long the Pakistani forces in the East could withstand an all-out attack by India. "We could hold them off for maybe a month," he replied, "but beyond that we wouldn't have a chance without help from outside." It took the rest of us a moment to fathom what he was saying, not realising at first that "we" was West Pakistan, not the United States."

Clearly, Yeager appeared blithely indifferent to the Pakistani killing machine which was mowing down around 10,000 Bengalis daily from 1970 to 1971.

After the meeting, Ingraham requested Yeager to be be a little more even-handed in his comments. Yeager gave him a withering glance. "Goddamn it, we're assigned to Pakistan,” he said. "What's wrong with being loyal?!”

"The dictator of Pakistan at the time, the one who had ordered the crackdown in the East, was a dim-witted general named Yahya Khan. Way over his head in events he couldn't begin to understand, Yahya took increasingly to brooding and drinking,” writes Ingraham.

“In December of 1971, with Indian supplied guerrillas applying more pressure on his beleaguered forces, Yahya decided on a last, hopeless gesture of defiance. He ordered what was left of his armed forces to attack India directly from the West. His air force roared across the border on the afternoon of December 3 to bomb Indian air bases, while his army crashed into India’s defences on the Western frontier.”

Getting Personal

Yeager’s hatred for Indians was unconcealed. According to Ingraham, he spent the first hours of the war stalking the Indian embassy in Islamabad, spouting curses at Indians and assuring anyone who would listen that the Pakistani army would be in New Delhi within a week. It was the morning after the first Pakistani airstrike that Yeager began to take the war with India personally.

On the eve of their attack, the Pakistanis, realising the inevitability of a massive Indian retaliation, evacuated their planes from airfields close to the Indian border and moved them to airfields near the Iranian border.

Strangely, no one thought to warn General Yeager.   

Taking aim at Yeager

The thread of this story now passes on to Admiral Arun Prakash. An aircraft carrier pilot in 1971, he was an Indian Navy lieutenant on deputation with the Indian Air Force when the war broke out.
In an article he wrote for Vayu Aerospace Review in 2007, Prakash presents a vivid account of his unexpected encounter with Yeager. As briefings for the first wave of retaliatory strikes on Pakistan were being conducted, Prakash had drawn a two-aircraft mission against the PAF base of Chaklala, located south east of Islamabad.

Flying in low under the radar, they climbed to 2000 feet as they neared the target. As Chaklala airfield came into view they scanned the runways for Pakistani fighters but were disappointed to see only two small planes. Dodging anti-aircraft fire, Prakash blasted both to smithereens with 30mm cannon fire. One was Yeager's Beechcraft and the other was a Twin Otter used by Canadian UN forces.

Fishing in troubled waters

When Yeager discovered his plane was smashed, he rushed to the US embassy in Islamabad and started yelling like a deranged maniac. His voice resounding through the embassy, he said the Indian pilot not only knew exactly what he was doing but had been specifically instructed by the Indian prime minister to blast Yeager's plane. In his autobiography, he later said that it was the “Indian way of giving Uncle Sam the finger”.

Yeager pressured the US embassy in Pakistan into sending a top priority cable to Washington that described the incident as a “deliberate affront to the American nation and recommended immediate countermeasures”. Basically, a desperate and distracted Yeager was calling for the American bombing of India, something that President Richard Nixon and his Secretary of State Henry Kissinger were already mulling.

But, says Ingraham: “I don't think we ever got an answer.” With the Russians on India’s side in the conflict, the American defence establishment had its hands full. Nobody had time for Yeager's antics.
However, Ingraham says there are clues Yeager played an active role in the war. A Pakistani businessman, son of a senior general, told him “excitedly that Yeager had moved into the air force base at Peshawar and was personally directing the grateful Pakistanis in deploying their fighter squadrons against the Indians. Another swore he had seen Yeager emerge from a just-landed jet fighter at the Peshawar base.

Later, in his autobiography, Yeager, the subject of Tom Wolfe’s much-acclaimed book “The Right Stuff” and a Hollywood movie, wrote a lot of nasty things about Indians, including downright lies about the IAF’s performance. Among the things he wrote was the air war lasted two weeks and the Pakistanis “kicked the Indians’ ass”, scoring a three-to-one kill ratio, knocking out 102 Russian-made Indian jets and losing 34 airplanes of their own.

Beyond the fog of war

The reality is that it took the IAF just over a week to achieve complete domination of the subcontinent’s skies. A measure of the IAF’s air supremacy was the million-man open air rallies held by the Indian prime minister in northern Indian cities, a week into the war. This couldn’t have been possible if Pakistani planes were still airborne.

Sure, the IAF did lose a slightly larger number of aircraft but this was mainly because the Indians were flying a broad range of missions. Take the six Sukhoi-7 squadrons that were inducted into the IAF just a few months before the war. From the morning of December 4 until the ceasefire on December 17, these hardy fighters were responsible for the bulk of attacks by day, flying nearly 1500 offensive sorties.

Pakistani propaganda, backed up by Yeager, had claimed 34 Sukhoi-7s destroyed, but in fact just 14 were lost. Perhaps the best rebuttal to Yeager’s lies is military historian Pushpindar Singh Chopra’s “A Whale of a Fighter". He says the plane’s losses were commensurate with the scale of effort, if not below it. “The Sukhoi-7 was said to have spawned a special breed of pilot, combat-hardened and confident of both his and his aircraft's prowess,” says Chopra.

Sorties were being launched at an unprecedented rate of six per pilot per day. Yeager himself admits “India flew numerous raids against Pakistani airfields with brand new Sukhoi-7 bombers being escorted in with MiG-21s”.

While Pakistani pilots were obsessed with aerial combat, IAF tactics were highly sophisticated in nature, involving bomber escorts, tactical recce, ground attack and dummy runs to divert Pakistani interceptors from the main targets. Plus, the IAF had to reckon with the dozens of brand new aircraft being supplied to Pakistan by Muslim countries like Jordan, Turkey and the UAE.

Most missions flown by Indian pilots were conducted by day and at low level, with the pilots making repeated attacks on well defended targets. Indian aircraft flew into Pakistani skies thick with flak, virtually non-stop during the 14-day war. Many Bengali guerrillas later told the victorious Indian Army that it was the epic sight of battles fought over their skies by Indian air aces and the sight of Indian aircraft diving in on Pakistani positions that inspired them to fight.

Indeed, Indian historians like Chopra have painstakingly chronicled the details of virtually every sortie undertaken by the IAF and PAF and have tabulated the losses and kills on both sides to nail the outrageous lies that were peddled by the PAF and later gleefully published by Western writers.

In this backdrop, the Pakistani claim (backed by Yeager) that they won the air war is as hollow as a Chaklala swamp reed. In the Battle of Britain during World War II, the Germans lost 2000 fewer aircraft than the allies and yet the Luftwaffe lost that air war. Similarly, the IAF lost more aircraft than the PAF, but the IAF came out on top. Not even Yeager’s biased testimony can take that away from Indians.

Tags: war history

Final order of the Supreme Court on the Rank Pay issue dated 04 September 2012

The order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 04 September 2012 wherein the Application filed by the Union of India praying for recall of the order of the Court dated 08 March 2010 on the rank pay issue was disposed, can be downloaded by clicking here.

As informed earlier, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has refused to modify or vary the earlier order except that the interest part has been modulated to be granted from 01 Jan 2006 rather than 01 Jan 1986. Hence, while the arrears of pay would be released from 01 Jan 1986, the interest on the arrears shall now be payable with effect from 01 Jan 2006.

The statement of the Solicitor General has also been recorded that the amount shall be paid within 12 weeks from 04 September 2012.

The original order of the Supreme Court dated 08 March 2010 can be accessed by clicking here.

Courtesy: Major Navdeep Singh

Rank Pay forms a part of basic pay, release arrears to affected officers : Supreme Court, today, 04 September 2012

Source: http://www.indianmilitary.info/

Courtesy: Major Navdeep Singh

 

Perhaps historically the most important litigation involving the military has culminated today.

 

A three judge Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court today decided not to interfere with its earlier decision granting the cumulative benefits and arrears of Rank Pay with effect from 01-01-1986 to all affected officers. However, the interest component has been modified and interest @ 6% per annum would now be admissible on the arrears from 01-01-2006 rather than 01-01-1986.

 

All payments have been directed to be made within a period of 12 weeks from today and the benefits shall be released to all officers irrespective of whether they had approached a judicial forum or not.

As many would be aware, after the 4th Central Pay Commission (CPC), an integrated pay scale of Rs 2300-5100 was implemented for officers from the rank of 2/Lt to Brig. In addition, rank pay was authorised to officers from the rank of Capt to Brig ranging from Rs 200 to 1200 which was to be added into the basic pay for all intents and purposes.

However, while fixing the pay in the new scales, an amount equal to the rank pay was deducted from the emoluments resulting in financial loss to all affected officers. Hence all officers holding the rank of Capt to Brig as on 01-01-1986 suffered cumulative losses.

The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in a case filed by Maj AK Dhanapalan had termed illegal this deduction of rank pay. The SLP filed by the Union of India was also dismissed, albeit not on merits but on technical grounds of limitation.

 

Soon thereafter, many similar petitions were filed in various Hon’ble High Courts all over the country which were clubbed together and transferred to the Hon’ble Supreme Court to be heard alongwith an SLP of similar nature which had arisen out of a case that was allowed on the basis of the judgement in Dhanapalan’s case.

 

The Hon’ble Supreme Court on 08 March 2010 upheld the said verdict and granted relief to all similarly placed officers alongwith an interest of 6%. Things were however not to end there since the Govt constituted a committee to look into the amount involved and went back to the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing an application for recall of the order dated 08 March 2010 on the grounds of burdening of the exchequer and also stating therein that many more issues on the subject were not taken into consideration by the Court and hence the order needed to be recalled.

 

The case thereafter remained pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and was finally argued today when the Hon’ble Court, after hearing marathon arguments of the Solicitor General appearing for the govt, decided that there was no infirmity in the order passed on 08 March 2010. As informed above, only the modification in the grant of the interest component was effectuated.

 

The case was not without surprising developments which can now be shared since the issue no longer remains sub judice.

 

First was the total incorrect and skewed presentation of the status and pay of military officers vis-à-vis officers of the civil services projected in the affidavit appended with the recall application filed by the Union of India. The speciousness thereof has already been discussed by me on the blog in November 2011 and all those falsities were exposed in the affidavit filed on behalf of the affected officers before the Hon’ble Court.

 

Secondly, which can be disclosed now, is that when it was being projected by the Govt that the Services HQ were also in favour of getting the verdict recalled / reversed, the three services on the basis of a decision taken at the apex level, clearly, officially and categorically informed the Solicitor General in writing that the Armed Forces were not in favour of the matter being contested against the affected officers and in fact were in favour of getting the verdict of the SC dated 08 March 2010 implemented. Thereafter, the Ministry of Defence wrote to the Services HQ asking them to withdraw the communication to the Solicitor General, however to the credit of the Services, the said communication was ultimately not withdrawn. Besides showing utter disregard for the opinion of the services in this matter, this incident also shows as to how the MoD tries to browbeat the services into accepting its views. Needless to state, in litigation, one party to a particular litigation can never direct another to take a particular stand. However this has been continuing unabated in the MoD wherein they force the Services to reflect the stand of the MoD before Courts and not project their (services’)independent views as is permissible under law. And unfortunately, it’s also seen that elements of the JAG Branch usually toe the line of the MoD rather than the Services.

 

The biggest ‘Thank You’ for this win goes to Retired Defence Officers’ Association (RDOA) who had been unflinchingly following up the matter with great zeal in a very objective and balanced manner.

 

Jai Hind.

Incorrect letter regarding pay fixation of veterans in Banks and other financial institutions withdrawn by Ministry of Finance

Source: http://www.indianmilitary.info/ 

Courtesy: Major Navdeep Singh

 

Based on the newly introduced concepts of 6^th CPC, fresh instructions were issued by the Govt of India, Department of Personnel and Training vide Letter No 3/19/2009-Estt (Pay II) dated 05 April 2010 in which all modalities of pay fixation of re-employed ex-servicemen pensioners were explained. The said letter however was vague and ambiguous as far as the treatment of Military Service Pay (MSP) was concerned. As a result, civil organisations including banks, started deducting MSP from the pay fixed in the re-employed organisations, meaning thereby, that MSP was not being included in the protected pay in such organisations.

 

Accordingly on the issue being raised by ex-servicemen, a clarification was sought from the Ministry of Finance and a fresh letter was thereafter issued by the DoPT of even number dated 08 November 2010 in which the following was explicitly clarified by the Govt of India :-

 

“Hence in respect of all those defence officers/personnel, whose pension contains an element of MSP, that need not be deducted from the pay fixed on re-employment”

 

The above clarification, wherein it was provided that MSP would not be deducted from the pay fixed on re-employment, was endorsed by the Govt of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services, to all Banks etc for compliance vide Letter No 4/1/2010-SCT(B) dated 22 Nov 2010.

 

However later, on receiving letters for clarification of the subject from The Indian Banks’ Association, the Department of Financial Services issued another letter No F No 4/1/2010-SCT(B) dated 23 March 2012 based on the earlier DoPT letter dated 08 Nov 2010 but in which it was surprisingly incorrectly stated in the last lines that MSP shall not be included in pay fixation, meaning thereby that MSP shall be deducted from the pay fixed on re-employment. This however was actually in contravention of the actual DoPT letter dated 08 Nov 2010 which in fact clearly states that MSP need not be deducted from pay fixed on re-employment. The following lines of the letter dated 23 March 2012 created chaos:-

 

“Therefore Ex-servicemen re-employed in the banks who retired on/or after 01.01.2006 are eligible to pay fixation in banks based on the pay drawn by them at the time of discharge from the Defence Services which would include band pay Plus grade pay but does not include MSP”

 

The said clarification dated 23 March 2012 signed by Mr LK Meena, Director of Financial Services, rather than clarifying the issue unnecessarily created confusion and banks thereafter started deducting MSP from the pay fixed on re-employment while the DoPT had stated just the opposite.

 

When I pointed out the anomaly to the Department of Financial Services, no action was taken by them and even RTI Applications were stonewalled.

 

However, it goes to the credit of Mr LK Meena, Director, Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, Govt of India, that on my pointing out the fact that his staff had not briefed him correctly before getting the letter issued, he has promptly withdrawn the incorrect direction dated 23 March 2012 and has now directed all Banks and Insurance Companies to follow DoPT directions dated 08 Nov 2010 in letter and spirit. The letter withdrawing the earlier letter and containing the aforesaid directions has been issued on 28 Aug 2012. Mr Meena has also stated that his Public Information Officer had not replied to the RTI Application in a proper manner.

 

With this, the problem of not taking into account the Grade Pay and MSP of defence personnel on re-employment in Banking and Insurance institutions stands resolved.

Two back to back write-ups on suicides and related issues in the defence services

Daily News and Analysis (DNA) had published a thought provoking OPed by former Vice Chief Lt Gen Vijay Oberoi titled ‘Take turbulence in the ranks seriously’.

Col Karan Kharab (Retd) responds and follows it up through his guest post ‘Suicides in the Army, diagnosis and remedy’.
The views expressed are not of this blogger.

Take turbulence in the ranks seriously

Lt Gen Vijay Oberoi (Retd)

Three incidents of collective indiscipline by jawans in the last few months, reflecting a breakdown in the traditionally close officer-man relationship, are a cause for concern, especially as all three of them are related to combat units, where a stable and healthy officer-man relationship is an article of faith.

The Indian Army, with a justifiably proud record of service to the nation, has always placed officers-men bonding at the highest level.

In the past, the army has handled such incidents with compassion and firmness. Such incidents will no doubt happen again. However, there is need for comprehensive remedial actions. We must not succumb to a tendency of being simplistic, like attributing such incidents to recent cases of corruption amongst a few senior officers. Such attributions are obviously absurd, as these are two vastly different issues. The need is actually to focus on command and control, discipline and officer-man relationships.

In combat units, a thorough knowledge of jawans by their officers is a must. Included in this are the jawans’ capabilities and limitations; what enthuses or dampens their spirits; their backgrounds as well as of their families; and whether they are team persons or loners. Earlier, senior unit officers acted as guides and mentors in this respect. Unfortunately, on account of the huge shortage of officers in combat units today, as well as the large number of tasks assigned to the few available officers, it is virtually impossible for them to spare time to do so now.

The main reason for this state of affairs is the prolonged employment in fighting insurgents and terrorists over decades now, which have taken stress and fatigue to extremely high levels. These operations are extremely difficult and full of tension, especially on account of scrupulously adhering to human rights norms.

A major caveat of the army’s secondary role of assisting the civil administration is that it must be released as soon as the task is over, but in counter-insurgency operations there appears to be no end state! There has been no insurgency in the north eastern states for many years now, but neither the states concerned nor the central government want to release the army. In J&K, the situation has improved vastly, but the police forces are not in a position to assume control. The army’s reasoning that the situation will deteriorate rapidly if the army is de-inducted is sound, but why are the police forces not being made capable?

While the government must squarely take the blame for this state of affairs, the army hierarchy also needs to be blamed for not pursuing it relentlessly.

There are also three other issues that need to be tackled by the government. The first is deliberately downgrading the esteem and importance of the military by successive governments. This has resulted in our soldiers becoming greatly disillusioned not only with the government officials but, what is worse, also with their own officers, who are being viewed as devoid of any power, as civil and police officials studiously ignore requests from commanding officers relating to various problems of soldiers projected by them. This is in stark contrast to earlier times when the civil officials responded with alacrity when a commanding officer wrote to them about the personal or collective problems of his jawans. This aspect needs immediate improvement by good governance and by educating the officials.

Soldiers’ lay their lives on the line, not because of the pay or allowances that they get (which in any case are less than what the equivalent civil officials receive) but because of their self-esteem and military élan. These need to be nurtured by the civil administration.

The second and related issue is the military intake. Although recruitment rallies draw large numbers, the reason is no longer pride in joining the military but massive unemployment, resulting in inferior manpower joining the military. In the case of officers, young men from traditional military families are no longer enthused with the forces. The main reason is the decline of respect for the military.

The last point is the treatment of the veterans. The government needs to understand that the policy of ignoring those who have served the nation sacrificing their all will be a disaster in the long run. Future generations will not heed the call of the bugle when they see neither respect nor adequate financial benefits being given to the veterans. The present indifference and callousness must end.

Will Delhi wake up?

The writer is a former Vice Chief of Army Staff.

Suicides in the Army – Diagnosis and Remedy

Col Karan Kharb (Retd)

Something very sinister is around. Operational stress and official neglect are taking their toll in soldiers committing suicides and protesting in a mutinous manner. Whereas step-motherly treatment meted out by the Sixth Pay Commission to the Armed Forces is one of the reasons for the falling morale, persistent indifference shown by the Government has also added to the discontent. Even more saddening is the fact that the Military authorities too have been brushing aside the malaise within. Recently, Lt Gen Vijay Oberoi, former Vice Chief of Army Staff presented his diagnosis of the problem in an article. Here are some additional inputs.

Downgrading Esteem and Importance of Military

Halos are extinct and larger-than-life images have shrunk to real-life size everywhere in modern times. The so-called all-powerful bureaucrats are being shunted around from one post to another like shuttlecocks at the whims and fancies of political bosses. Their careers alternate between witch-hunt and reward depending upon what kind of political boss they get to serve under. Sunk in depravity, our politicians have suffered their loss of image and credibility too. Nobody now buys pictures of these leaders to display in homes or offices until official rules compel to do so. Within themselves too, the same chair brightens or dims differently under different occupants. World’s most qualified Prime Minister Manmohan Singh compares atrociously with under-matriculate Indira Gandhi. Time was when magnitudes of humanity poured to have glimpse of Nehru but not any longer.

What has survived, however, is people’s abiding love and respect for the sincere, able, honest and courageous leaders. They become icons of popular hope and respect. Oddly, some of them come from the same rotten environment that media and people – we included – hate and abuse for all our problems today – the bureaucracy. Agreed, those who choose to defy the Establishment and follow the dictates of their conscience are not many. Yet, we can see that those who did stood up and changed the course of things drew public applause like TN Sheshan, E Sreedharan, Vinod Rai, Kiran Bedi to name a few. In an even more degenerative field of politics too, we do have a crop, however miniscule, of off-beat progressive leaders like Narendra Modi and Nitish Kumar.

Military in India has been somehow shy of public exposure – a mistake that held it back from joining, leave alone leading, the mainstream freedom struggle despite Netaji’s call for the INA. Such a stance of aloofness emboldened Nehru and Krishna Menon to treat the Military nothing more than a workforce that could be employed for constructing roads and canals even as they doubted its loyalty and feared coups. Field Marshal Manekshaw is perhaps the only Indian General who did make a difference in exalting the military reputation. Lately, Gen VK Singh did stand up boldly enough but the issue he took up first (date of birth) was unfortunately too small and personal for the position he held. Later of course, he did write boldly to the Prime Minister and did not hesitate to apprise the people about essentials of national security.

Unfortunately, the inter-Services and intra-service feuds are doing the Military more damage than any politico-bureaucratic dispensation. The day the three Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces stand up jointly as custodians of national security to express their concern and advice, no Government will dare to brush it aside. Also, taxpayers are entitled to know the state of their Armed Forces and, therefore, the Chiefs of the Armed Forces (sorry, I don’t call them ‘Services’) should be required to formally address the Parliament and inform the people on matters of national security and the state of defence preparedness. There can be debates and disagreements on the opinions they express but who, if not they, would be better qualified to speak about matters of national defence and security? Sadly though, it may be recalled how an Army Chief was ticked off by a former defence minister for his remark about the un-demarcated border in Arunachal Pradesh. Likewise, a Vice Chief of the Army Staff was snubbed by Shushma Swaraj so angrily that just the next day an apologetic general withdrew his fully justified and well informed opinion about the handicap of women joining the Army. Had they both reasserted their stand as professionals without giving in to the bully in the lobby, military’s image would have been fairly vindicated and credibility enhanced. Alas, that did not happen.

To sum up, I would reiterate the comment I made on an earlier occasion: The truth is that abstract decorations like esteem, image, honour and izzet abhor pleading, and are not available on request anywhere in the world. Being embellishments of power, these gems of credit can be only earned by merit or seized by force. Repeated pleadings will surely get us more sympathy, pity and merciful reportage though.

‘Inferior Manpower Joining the Military’

Undoubtedly, the quality of officer intake has gone down. The quality of jawans, on the other hand should have only improved with more graduates and technically qualified youth joining the ranks. Perhaps the crux of the problem lies at the centre of this matrix where a subordinate views himself academically equal or better qualified than his boss. Don’t we see a shade of this attitude in the outbursts of our Olympian celebrity Sub Vijay Kumar? With an increasing number of officers now hailing from the same socio-economic milieu as their NCOs/OR, the tradition of officers being ‘friendly but not familiar’ with men stands diluted while the British legacy of ‘Koi haiy’ sahibs and servile, obsequious followers has continued despite noticeable resistance. It is good that the Army has decided to hire civilian sahayaks and other menials in place of combatants.

I think time has come when officer-man relationship needs to be redefined so as to weave them into an integrated whole. Simplistic solutions based on traditional thinking will not do. A paradigm shift is warranted to enable higher commanders to view the whole spectrum from a different angle and discover invisible challenges and opportunities.

The Irony of ‘Shortage of Officers’

In the present scenario of military operations, maximum load comes on the unit where out of an average of 22 officers authorised, only 8-10 are posted. Considering those away on leave and courses out of these, it is 4-5 officers who share the load of 22. Obviously, these officers, already stressed, have neither time nor energy to inter-act with their men in sports, training, welfare and leisure time where they could detect and diffuse discontent, if any.

Oddly enough, above the unit level there is no deficiency of officers at any headquarters even though all field formations largely remain static and un-engaged in operations that are almost always limited to unit/sub-unit level actions. Higher the headquarters, more the unauthorised attachments! Why? Because the higher boss needs luxury and the attached finds his haven to the arduous unit tenure, and also earns a better ACR through influence.

Despite deficiency of officers, which is alarming by any count, all the pressure of VIP visits (a euphemism for pleasure trips) comes to rest on the concerned units where officers and men frantically work round the clock only to earn a ‘shabash’ from the bara sahib. And imagine the height of hypocrisy displayed by a‘punctilious’ GOC who, on his insistence, was presented a mess bill of Rs 45/-for three days of royal revelry organised by a unit for him and his entourage of personal guests. Clearing it for prompt payment, he said, “I have never left a guest room without paying the mess bill”. Higher commanders need to introspect earnestly and seek answers to some straight but pricky questions: Am I using more man-power and resources than authorised, like Flag Guard, sahayaks, drivers, vehicles etc? Then follow your conscience, not necessarily the rulebook.

Also, the higher commanders need to restrain themselves from meddling in unit affairs. Too much of curiosity and eagerness to address Durbars, meet individual officers and JCOs and listen to their problems is an intrusion into the CO’s domain which must be strengthened and never weakened at any cost. Remove and sack a CO, if required, but let the next one function with freedom and authority. Likewise, within the unit, COs too have diluted the trust and bondage sub-unit commanders traditionally had with their JCOs and men. Build the sub-unit commanders into effective leaders.

Lastly, a question: The Prime Minister warned the nation from the ramparts of the Red Fort on 15^thAugust this year that the economic slowdown posed threats to national security. Should the custodians of National Security remain silent an inactive when such crisis is impending? There is risk involved in seeking answer to such grave questions. But should such risks deter them?

May they find right answers to mighty questions concerning National Security and move boldly and diligently in unison. I wish the Indian Armed Forces and the country glorious times ahead.

Col Karan Kharab was commissioned in the Bihar Regiment and commanded 21 BIHAR. He was also an instructor in the IMA and had a stint with the NSG. He can be reached at karankharab@gmail.com

Courtesy: Major Navdeep Singh

Lack of details in PM’s speech on military pay and pension anomalies

For all those who are wondering why the Prime Minister only briefly touched the matter regarding implementation of the recommendations of the Committee of Secretaries examining pay and pension anomalies of the services and did not fully discuss the details in his Independence Day Speech, it would be worthwhile to inform that firstly the Committee could not submit the report by 08 August 2012 as envisaged by the order of the PMO and there still were some loose ends and some dissenting voices from the side of the Defence Ministry. And secondly, it has come to note that the implementation could not be officially announced because of the lack of a cabinet nod and hence the absence of the formal acceptance of the report by the govt. Mr Deshmukh’s untimely demise added to the delay.

On implementation, which should be in the very near future, the military community can expect bridging of the gap between pre and post 2006 retirees by further enhancement of weightages for pension, enhancement of pension of commissioned officer retirees on the principles of modified parity, dual family pension for widows, removal of bar of continuance of family pension on marriage of handicapped kin, introduction of common pay-scales for ranks below commissioned officers and non-functional upgradation (NFU) for commissioned officers. Civilian pensioners can also be expected to be benefited as a result of modification of pensionary modalities.

Enhancement of Grade Pay for commissioned ranks and enhanced initial pay fixation for Lt Cols, Cols and Brigs may not be recommended by the committee and would in all probability be kept pending for further deliberations.

Still, there’s many-a-slip in the domain of officialdom, as we all know, hence reactions on the fresh provisions should be reserved till the time the recommendations are officially notified as accepted with full details.

Courtesy: Major Navdeep Singh

What can be legitimately expected? : PM appointed Committee of Secretaries looking into Pay and Pension anomalies

It seems that the PM appointed Committee of Secretaries looking into the anomalies affecting serving and retired defence personnel is ready with its report.

What I’m placing on the blog in the following lines is broadly what is expected out of the committee’s recommendations.

However, please do be warned that the thought-process of the committee is only recommendatory in nature and is yet to be accepted by the PM, and also, that the final turn out could be different than what may be recommended.

The low-down below on the majority of issues is just what can be reasonably expected, however kindly be reserved about bouquets or brickbats as yet till the time the matter is officially announced.

One Rank One Pension for ranks other than commissioned officers: The concept of OROP as classically understood, may not be accepted. However the gap between pre and post 2006 pensioners would further be bridged. The last time this was done in March 2010 when theCommittee of Secretaries had recommended the enhancement of pensions on 01 July 2009. The Govt would most probably implement further enhancement of pensionary weightages applicable to lower ranks to compensate them for their truncated careers thereby further reducing the gap. Not exactly OROP but would provide succour to lower ranks for sure. The weightages currently applicable are 10, 8, 6 and 5 years for Sepoys, Naiks, Havildars and JCOs respectively.

Widows’Pensions: Family pensions would be enhanced in all probability. As reported on the blog earlier, pension of widows would now be calculated with reference to the notional top of the 5^thCPC scale within the new 6^th CPC scales rather than the bottom of the scales. It may be recalled that till the 5^th CPC, the pension of widows was calculated with respect to the top of the scale which was brought down to the bottom of the pay-band as a result of introduction of pay-bands by the 6^th CPC.

Enhanced Pension for Commissioned Officers:While the system of calculation of other ranks has always been different and more beneficial, the pension of Commissioned Officers has traditionally been linked with the system of calculation as followed for civilian employees. The Govt is however likely to increase the pensions of commissioned officers by calculating pension based not on the minimum of the pay band but by taking the basis of minimum of pay within the pay-band. This is totally in line with what had been decided by the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal in Sqn Ldr SS Matharu’s case, and by the Delhi Bench in Lt Cdr Avtar Singh and Sqn Ldr Vinod Jain’s case. This is also in line with the orders of the Full Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal rendered for civilian pensioners as a result of the long drawn struggle led by Mr V Natarajan, President, Pensioners’ Forum, Chennai. The said stipulation shall bring much needed succour especially to officers who retired from the rank of Major and Major General. If ultimately recommended and implemented, in all probability, the stipulation may also be extended to civilian pensioners thereby particularly resulting in relief to officers who retired from the Junior Administrative Grade (Deputy Secretary to Govt of India) and Senior Administrative Grade (Joint Secretary to Govt of India). While the maximum relief would be for these ranks and grades, this would result in enhancement to other grades also.

Dual Family Pension and Pension for married handicapped kin: Currently, widows of pensioners who were in receipt of two service pensions for two separate spells of service are authorised one family pension only after the death of the employee/pensioner. This bar on the second family pension would be removed in all probability. Handicapped kin of govt employees are authorised to family pension for life but according to the interpretation of authorities, such pension was being refused to married handicapped children. This was held bad in law by the Chandigarh Bench of the AFT in the case of Vinod Kumar Vs UOI and also by the Chennai Bench and hence was not actually required to be placed before the committee having been already judicially adjudicated upon. This regressive bar is also bound to be removed. Both these stipulations are also expected to be extended to civilian pensioners.

Non Functional Upgradation: NFU for serving commissioned officers of the defence services is likely to be accepted. Though the signals are highly affirmative, nothing can be said till the time the same is done.

Enhancement of Grade Pay and other pay+status related anomalies: Enhancement of Grade Pay and the status of officers of the defence services degraded by successive pay commissions may not be resolved at the instant stage though full efforts are being made by all parties. The major stumbling block is the report by a GoM headed by Mr Pranab Mukherjee that had placed a Lt Col of the Army in between the Junior Administrative Grade (PB-3/GP 7600) and the Selection Grade (PB-4/GP 8700) based on incorrect inputs by the Finance Ministry. In the said report, officers of the Finance Ministry had also reportedly informed the GoM that officers in the Army were being promoted to the rank of Brig in 23 years of service and Maj Gen in 25 years. Both figures are grossly wrong and since there was no chance or occasion provided for military representatives to rebut these incorrect facts, the injustice got solidified. It may be recalled that even earlier, wrong pay scales of military officers had been mentioned on Page 73 of the 6th CPC report as published in 2008 on this blog, which anomaly was only to an extent rectified when Lt Cols were upgraded to Pay Band-4. Fixation of initial pay for Lt Cols, Cols and Brigs is also linked to this issue. HAG+ to all Lt Gens may not be accepted.

I would request readers again not to strongly react to the above and wait for all recommendations, and then the implementation, to be officially announced after which a detailed analysis can be carried out further.

Courtesy: Major Navdeep Singh

Kargil Vijay Diwas - Walkathon Starts at 0830

Dear Veterans,

The nation will commemorate 13th anniversary of Kargil Divas marking India's victory over the Pakistani intruders who attempted to infiltrate India in 1999. Indian armed forces drove out Pakistani intruders who were occupying Kargil and Drass. But the victory came at a heavy price as 527 soldiers lost their lives and over 1300 were injured.

To commemorate the historic day and to honour the 527 brave martyrs of India, Flags of Honour Foundation will pay homage to the men and women who laid their lives for the nation. Flags of Honour Foundation has organized a Walkathon – a walk by citizens to pay homage to the martyrs will be flagged off by Former Lokayukta Justice Santosh Hegde at the Victoria statue and will walk through Cubbon, Ambedkar Veedhi, Raj Bhavan Road before reaching National Military Memorial Park on the Chowdaiah Road ( opposite to Nehru Planetarium.)

More than 600 citizens including school and college students will participate in this walk that will conclude at the National Military Memorial.

We request you to please join the Walkathon and pay your respects to the brave who have laid down their lives for us. Please find attached a poster detailing out the events.

Venue: Victoria Statue, Cubbon Park

Date: 26th July, 2012

Time: 8:30 am

A Detailed TV Panel discussion on pay, status and pension related issues

Detailed TV Panel discussion on pay, status and pension related issues affecting defence personnel and veterans.

Panellists were Generals Surjit Singh and SPS Vains, and Maj Navdeep Singh was recorded and telecast yesterday i.e, 21^st July 2012, by Day and Night News. To watch the programme please click the following links.

Part-1: Click here

Part-2: Click here

Result of Meeting held on 18th July for One Rank One Pension

On 18th July 2012, the three service chiefs, led by Admiral Nirmal Verma, Chairman Chiefs of Staff Committee (CoSC) met with a high-powered Committee of Secretaries constituted by the Prime Minister to resolve anomalies in the implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission award for the Armed Forces.

Although a total of 39 anomalies have been identified by the three services since 2008, they have decided to concentrate on some core issues that directly affect both serving and retired armed forces personnel.

The issues are:

Fixing common pay scales for all JCOs and ORs

Source: NDTV

• Grant of NFU (non-functional upgradation) status to commissioned officers
• Correcting difference in rank pay of commissioned officers
• Extending the HAG+ (Higher administrative Grade Plus) scale to all three star officers
• Granting One-Rank-One-Pension to retired personnel

There have been strong demands from ex-servicemen and from acting servicemen for One-Rank-One-Pay. And to push for their demands further, the three Service chiefs, led by Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, Naval chief Admiral Nirmal Verma, along with his colleagues, Chief of Air Staff ACM, NAK Browne and Army Chief General Bikram Singh gave a detailed presentation to the Committee of Secretaries on Wednesday.

The six-member committee, comprising the Cabinet Secretary with the Defence Secretary, Secretary Ex-Servicemen Welfare, Secretary DoPT, Expenditure Secretary and Principal Secretary to PM, as members was set up by the Prime Minister after a Rajya Sabha panel last year recommended granting One Rank One Pension to the retired defence personnel. The government has asked the committee to submit its report by August 8.

There is a buzz in the corridors of power that the Prime Minister wants to make a grand announcement from the ramparts of the Red Fort on August 15 and therefore the deadline of August 8!

For the uninitiated, the One-Rank-One-Pay scheme implies that uniform pension be paid to the armed 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 past pensioners.

But the issue that has upset and angered serving defence personnel is NFU.

For those not in uniform it needs a bit of an explanation.

Buckling under pressure from Group A organised Services under the Central Government like Border Roads Organisation, Military Engineering Services, Postal Services, the Sixth Pay Commission gave them a special concession.

It allowed the officers in these services to be placed in a grade pay scale equivalent to an IAS officer two years behind that particular IAS batch. For example if the 1992 batch of the IAS officer got placed in the Joint Secretary grade in 2012, all Group A organised officers of the 1990 batch would automatically get the pay and allowance equivalent to the 1992 IAS batch, irrespective of the post and place they are serving in. That is the upgradation will be done on a ‘non-functional’ basis.

This has brought in huge functional problems in day-to-day affairs when military officers have to work in close coordination with MES Civil Officers, BRO Civil Officers, IPS Officers in BSF, CRPF, ITBP, Defence Accts (IDAS), Test Audit (IA&AS), Ordnance Factory Board etc, with whom Defence forces officers interact regularly, will now get the salary and grade pay of Joint Secretary/Major General (Grade Pay Rs. 10000/-) after 22 years of service, and will draw the pay of Additional Secretary to Government of India which is equal to a Lieutenant General (Grade Pay Rs. 12000/-) in 32 years of service whereas military officers senior to them in rank and service will get less grade pay at the same level of service thereby creating a functional disparity giving rise to insubordination and subtle non-compliance.

Military officials have pointed out that this has adversely affected organisational command and control in multi-cadre environment. It also led to lowering the status of Armed Forces Officials vis-a-vis organized Group A officers and IPS Officers. Organized Group A and IPS Officers reach HAG (Higher Administrative Grade) Scale at 32 years while only 0.2 per cent of Armed Forces Officers can ever reach that level.

With over 97 per cent Armed Forces Officers retiring in the Grade Pay of 8700, their exclusion from the NFU is seen as grossly unfair. This differential not only disturbs financial parity, it pushes down the Defence services in status as even direct recruit officers of Group B services attain a better pay and promotional avenue and manage to reach the level of Joint Secretary/Major General before retiring.

Both the OROP and granting the NFU status to Armed Forces officials is not going to be expensive either.

According to calculations done by the military, the annual outgo for granting One -Rank-One-Pension to the approximately 21 lakh ex-servicemen would not be more than Rs. 1300 crore. Similarly the NFU status, if granted, will cost the exchequer a mere Rs. 70 crore annually but will go a long way in restoring the pride and status of the armed forces’ officers.

The other core issues are minor in comparison but important nevertheless.

Committee on defence pay and pension anomalies, some additional issues

On the last blogpost concerning the committee constituted on the directions of the Prime Minister, some have shown utter discontentment and lack of any hope from the said working group. Some organisations have rejected the group even before the initiation of its functioning. While the distrust vis-à-vis some certain of bureaucracy is understandable to an extent, painting the entire set-up and also the serving military community as being ‘selfish’ and concerned about its own needs and requirements would not be in order.

And is this approach correct? Needless to say, the formation of the committee is a much welcome step and the credit for it goes to the Pay cells of the three services, mainly the Army Pay Cell, to have adequately highlighted at the right places the requirement of resolution of many pertinent anomalies. It may be pointed out here that earlier the formation of an ‘anomalies committee’ had been summarily rejected by the MoD but the Pay Cells and the current senior incumbents of the AG’s branch still managed to convince the Raksha Mantri of the requirement of redressal of these anomalies.

There is some deficit under the present circumstances and some loose ends that need the attention of the PMO, the Cabinet Secretary and the Services, some of these are :

(a) No stake holder is a part of the committee. Since the committee has been granted the authority to co-opt additional members, the thrust should be on the request to have minimum of four members from the military committee – one serving, each from Army, Navy and Air force and one veteran. It may be recalled that similar committees for civilian employees function democratically with a 'staff side' and 'official side'.

(b) When a Parliamentary Committee has already looked into the demand of One Rank One Pension (OROP) and recommended the same, would it be ethical for a committee of bureaucrats to examine the same demand? Wouldn’t this send a wrong message? Who is more important to the PM, the voice of elected representatives of a democracy or a body of career bureaucrats?

(c) There are many other important anomalies that remain unaddressed. How will those be addressed and by whom? Who decided that these were the only 9 issues that required redressal? Who picked up these 9 from the long list of ‘core issues’? One such very important issue is the issue of broad-banding of disability percentages which affects 80% of all disabled veterans in India and which has led to a spate of unwanted litigation, this issue is the most important stand-alone subject today which requires serious attention rather than rounds of litigation.

(d) Though despite internal inertia by lower echelons of the MoD, the committee has been established, but would it function on its own merits with proper application of mind by the members with independent inputs invited from all concerned or would it again fully depend upon the Pension and Pay/Services Wings of the MoD which have been at the forefront of stonewalling and putting up misleading notes to confuse the top leadership.

Some questions remain unanswered and the constitution of the committee is not perfect as far as its members are concerned, but I would request the defence community to be optimistic on the subject and not jump the gun till the time the recommendations are submitted. Also the Services HQ are at this time tirelessly working towards the objective and need our encouragement in this regard, not negative vibes.

Let us keep our fingers crossed, be optimistic and hope for the best. Still otherwise, this committee is not the last word even if does not entirely meet the expectations of the military community.

Courtesy: Maj Navdeep Singh

Hawk eye on Malacca strait

Dear Member, an interesting article is enclosed below, kind courtesy Cdr Carl Gomes, a veteran from Bangalore.

Hawk eye on Malacca strait

New Delhi, July 9: India is set to commission its latest military post named Baaz (hawk) on its south-eastern fringe in the Bay of Bengal to oversee a sea lane through which a quarter of the world’s trade passes, an Indian Navy source told The Telegraph on Monday. In April this year, the navy had upgraded its detachment in the Lakshadweep Islands in the Arabian Sea to the level of a full-fledged base. Named the INS Dweeprakshak, the base is in the island of Kavaratti. Together, the INS Dweeprakshak and the naval air station, Baaz, are set to be India’s western and eastern-most sentinels. But it is the Baaz that is of greater significance to the world because its location gives it a hawk eye over the Straits of Malacca after US defence secretary Leon Panetta said in Delhi last month that its military was “re-balancing” to the Asia-Pacific. Campbell Bay, where Baaz has come up, is closer to Indonesia than to the Indian mainland. To be opened this month-end by the outgoing navy chief, Admiral Nirmal Verma, whose mission it has been, naval air station (NAS) Baaz will be based in Campbell Bay at the southern tip of Great Nicobar island. Spread over nearly 70 hectares, Baaz will eventually be capable of turning around all kind of fighter and transport-troop carrier aircraft. NAS Baaz sits astride the Six-Degree Channel between Nicobar and the coast of Aceh that is known to sailors around the world as the mouth of the Straits of Malacca. The strait connects the Indian and Pacific Oceans and the economies of China, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore are largely dependent on it. Last month, a Hercules C-130 aircraft, newly acquired by the Indian Air Force, flew non-stop for 10 hours from the base at Hindon, east of Delhi, to Campbell Bay. That was a trial sortie that indicated that operations were about to begin at NAS Baaz. Battered by the tsunami of 2004, Campbell Bay, with its fragile ecosystem, is now set to become one of India’s most strategic forward operating air bases. It now has a 3,000ft runway that is likely to be extended and will eventually be able to handle airlifters like the IL-76 and the larger Globemaster III that the IAF has contracted. Fighter aircraft can operate from the base even now but, with its commissioning as a full-fledged station, it extends their reach. Indian air surveillance in and around the Bay of Bengal, apart from the coastline, has depended on sorties from Port Blair — about 550 nautical miles north of Campbell Bay, roughly the distance from Delhi to Bhopal — that made it difficult to sustain the watch over longer periods of time. With the commissioning of Baaz, Indian military aircraft would now be able to spend more time in surveillance of not only the Straits of Malacca but also the Straits of Sunda and Lombok. China’s Peoples Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) rates its strategic interest in the Straits of Malacca on a par with the importance it gives to Taiwan. The commissioning of NAS Baaz on the southern tip of Great Nicobar island will be followed by an upgrade of NAS Shibpur at Diglipur on the northern tip of the Andamans.

Very Positive development: Finally, a time-bound committee to look into, and implement the resolution of anomalies affecting defence personnel and veterans

The defence community would be pleased to know that the Prime Minister’s office has directed the constitution of an anomalies committee to look into many vital anomalies affecting serving and retired personnel and also their families.

The best part of the directions signed this week is that the committee is to submit its recommendations within a month and the implementation of the accepted recommendations may also be announced on 15 August 2012, thereby marking a radical signal of positivity.

Though a chunk of the bureaucracy in the Ministry of Defence was not inclined to let any such committee come through, this has been possible due to multiple channels of Track-II diplomacy and the stellar efforts of the Chairman COSC and the Pay Cells of the three services which evoked direct response from the Raksha Mantri who then took it upon himself to get this committee approved from the Prime Minister personally and directly without being blinded by comments of lower bureaucracy of the MoD.

The only negative offshoot is that the committee does not have any serving or retired military member and that a proper consultative process was not initiated before identifying the anomalies which required immediate examination. Ideally, the stake-holders should have been a part of the process. However, the saving grace is that the committee has been granted the authority to co-opt any additional member if required. The Committee shall function under the Cabinet Secretary with the Defence Secretary, Secretary Ex-Servicemen Welfare, Secretary DoPT, Expenditure Secretary and Principal Secretary to PM, as members.

Howsoever we may view the development, many important issues such as Non-Functional Upgradation, enhancement of pensions of widows, One Rank One Pension, dual family pension, fixation of pay of Lt Cols/Cos/Brigs, enhancement of Grade Pays, universalisation of scales, grant of HAG+ to all Lt Gens, removal of pay anomalies of other ranks etc have been listed in the charter of the committee. Five anomalies concerning serving personnel and four concerning veterans and pensioners shall be taken up. One surprise (and actually infructuous) entry in the list of anomalies is that the committee would be looking into the issue whether a handicapped family pensioner could be granted family pension on marriage since as per the current interpretation, family pension to handicapped family pensioners is discontinued on marriage. However this issue already stands addressed by the Hon'ble AFT in the case of Vinod Kumar Vs UOI and the judgement also already stands implemented and hence the inclusion of this point in the committee seems totally redundant once it has been judicially adjudicated.

It is however surprising that while the PM had directed that the constitution of the committee may be publically announced, the same has not been done by the staff at MoD till date despite the fact that the directions were conveyed by special courier (by hand) to the MoD for immediate action by the PMO.

RIP - Sub Major (Hony Capt) Mohinder Singh, MVC

The War Decorated India
PRESS RELEASE
BRAVEST OF THE BRAVE PASSES AWAY

RIP - Sub Major (Hony Capt) Mohinder Singh, MVC

Sub Major (Hony Capt) Mohinder Singh, MVC passed away yesterday peacefully. His mortal remains were consigned to flames today. He was living in the Urban Estate at Patiala.

He was born on 03 January 1939 at village Sham Nagar in Amritsar district of Punjab.

Sub Major (Hony Capt) Mohinder Singh, MVC was enrolled on 03 January 1950 in 18th Battalion of the Punjab Regiment of Infantry.

Sub Major (Hony Capt) Mohinder Singh, MVC is survived by his wife Sardarni Gurmit Kaur and two sons: Mittarpal Singh & Charanjit Singh. His son, Mittar Pal Singh, can be contacted on mobile: 981583076

Subedar Mohinder Singh was commanding a platoon of a battalion of Punjab Regiment in an attack on a well-fortified enemy post supported by medium machine guns in the Kargil Sector. The attack was held up by enemy medium machine guns which were effectively bringing down a heavy volume of fire. He exhorted and inspired his men by personal example to maintain momentum of the attack. With utter disregard for his personal safety, he charged forward, destroyed one of the medium machine gun bunkers and inflicted casualties on the enemy in close combat. His personal example and gallantry so inspired his men as to ensure success of the attack.

Throughout, Subedar Mohinder Singh displayed conspicuous gallantry and leadership of a very high order and performed his duties beyond the call of duty.

For this act of valour he was awarded the Mahavir Chakra on 07 December 1971.

After retirement from the army Sub Major (Hony Capt) Mohinder Singh, MVC settled down at Patiala where he worked with the Punjabi University for some time as Security Officer.

Punjab, the state which has got the highest number of gallantry awards for a show of valour in the face of enemy, has lost another one of its Gallant Sainiks. Now the state is left with 12 living MVC awardees.

Punjabis have won 4 Param Vir Chakras, 48 Mahavir Chakras (plus two Bars) & 250 Vir Chakras (plus two bars). The total number of awards of the Vir Chakra series conferred in India since 1947 is as follows: PVC: 21, MVC 218 & VrC 1318 total: 1557.

This implies that Punjabis have won 19 % of PVCs, 22.9 % of MVCs, 18.96 % of VrCs awarded by the nation so far.

Condolence messages from the President, The War Decorated India, Brig Narinder Singh Sandhu, MVC, Brig Amarjit Singh Brar, VrC (Director Punjab), Brig Kuldip Singh Chandpuri, MVC, VSM (Director Punjab) & Capt Reet MP Singh, VrC were conveyed to the family.

The cremation ceremony was well attended. 18th Battalion the Punjab Regiment had sent a contingent under its Subedar Major in full military regalia. However, the presence of a Bugler to sound the Last Post was missed.

There also were men from a local unit carrying wreaths from the local Divisional Headquarters - in normal uniform.

Secretary General
The War Decorated India
303, Urban Estate“ I (B)
Patiala. Punjab 147002-04