Defence personnel are at a great disadvantage in respect of pay, pension and medical benefits compared with civilian government servants. By MAJOR GENERAL SATBIR SINGH
OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS, EX-SERVICEMEN have been
agitating against the injustice meted out to them by the Central
government. They have lost faith in the Department of Ex-Servicemen
Welfare (DESW), created specifically to take care of their welfare.
Ex-servicemen have won 90 per cent of the cases filed in the Armed
Forces Tribunals and the Supreme Court against the government, but the government has appealed in all the cases through the DESW.
The veterans have approached the Prime Minister and the Defence Minister
to seek redress in numerous cases where they felt injustice had been
done to them but to no avail. The Supreme Court’s judgments in their
favour have either not been implemented or not been implemented in
letter and spirit in cases pertaining to disability pensions, payment of
arrears with retrospective effect from January 1, 2006, rank pay, and
hospital charges on authorised Ex-servicemen Contributory Health Scheme
(ECHS) rates for medical treatment abroad.
The government files en masse appeals against retired defence personnel
whenever any case relating to pension benefits is decided in their
favour by any court of law or the Armed Forces Tribunal. Facing the
brunt of the government’s apathy is the category of disabled and
war-disabled soldiers. Most of the special leave petitions and appeals
filed by the Ministry of Defence in the Supreme Court are against the
grant of disability or war injury benefits to disabled and war-disabled
soldiers. As a result, the veterans are forced into expensive
litigation.
Over 3,000 cases decided in favour of defence personnel by the Armed
Forces Tribunal have not been implemented; the Defence Ministry has
contested all these judgments in the Supreme Court. Imagine the plight
of a widow of a sepoy living in a far-flung rural area. How is she going
to find the resources to fight her case in the Supreme Court? The
tribunals were created for delivering speedy justice to defence
personnel at minimum cost. But the Ministry’s decision to appeal against
the tribunal’s judgments has not only delayed justice but also made it
near impossible for the defence personnel to fight their cases. The
Armed Forces Tribunals do not have contempt powers to get their
judgments implemented whereas Central Administrative Tribunals (CATs)
are vested with such powers.
This is the biggest cause of heartburning in the military community today. Military personnel with non-service-related disabilities discharged with less than 10 years
of service remaining are not entitled to any form of pension, whereas
the employment of civilian employees who “acquires a disability during
his service” is protected under Section 47 of the Persons with
Disabilities Act, 1995.
As per the Sixth Central Pay Commission recommendations, all government
servants are allowed three assured career progressions. Civilians who
retire at the age of 60 are allowed promotions at 10, 20 and 30 years of
service, and soldiers at eight, 16 and 24 years. However, since jawans
are forced to retire early,
largely between 15 and 19 years of service, to keep up the young profile
of the forces, they miss out on at least one assured career
progression, unlike their civil counterparts, who serve their full term
until superannuation. It has been proposed to the government that the
third career progression should be given to jawans automatically; they
should be promoted to the rank of naib subedar at the time of
retirement. Surprisingly, this demand has not been accepted.
Widow’s pension
Widow’s pension is one area of concern to the defence community that has
received little attention from the government. A sepoy’s widow pension
has remained a meagre Rs.3,500 a month while other sections of
government employees have received periodic increases in such pension.
The minimum family pension in respect of defence widows must be enhanced
from Rs.3,500 to Rs.10,000 a month.
It is common knowledge that soldiers retire ahead of their time. What is
not known, however, is that their life expectancy is shorter than that
of civilians. The Institute of Applied Research in Manpower Analysis
(IARM), which studied the lifespan of civilian employees at the behest
of the Fifth Pay Commission, arrived at 77 years as the average life
expectancy of a civilian government servant. The Railways conducted a
similar exercise for their personnel and assessed that they achieved an
average lifespan of 78 years. No such study was conducted for defence
personnel since it was generally believed that soldiers lived longer
than civilians. However, Major General (retired) Surjit Singh, AVSM
(Athi Vishisht Seva Medal), VSM (Vishisht Seva Medal), who headed the
Army Cell of the Fifth Pay Commission, carried out a detailed study in
2005 along with other experts. The study revealed that the average
lifespan of defence officers was 72.5 years; that of junior commissioned
officers (JCOs) 67 years; and that of other ranks was between 59.6 and
64 years.
These findings were forwarded to the Chief of the Army Staff General J.J. Singh on July 7, 2005, by Lieutenant General (retd) M.M. Lakhera, PVSM (Param Vishisht Seva Medal), AVSM, VSM, who was Lieutenant Governor
of Puducherry. The findings were reported by all national newspapers
and a question was asked in Parliament on the subject. Pranab Mukherjee,
who was the Defence Minister then, maintained that the issue would be
examined in detail. Nothing was heard about it after that.
Stress and strain of early retirement
is one of the major reasons for the lower life expectancy among the
defence personnel. Their legitimate demand for an assured second career
until the age of 60 through an Act of Parliament has not yet been
accepted.
While the pensions of all ranks were enhanced with effect from September
24, 2012, to redress the anomaly of the Sixth Pay Commission, the
request to enhance the pension of JCOs proportionately was not granted.
Majors with 13 years and more of service who retired before 2004 have been
denied the benefit of the rank of lieutenant colonel (that is, the
benefit of pay band-4 in the revised scale of the Sixth Pay Commission).
The government’s policy to grant lieutenant colonel rank on completion
of 13 years of service was made applicable with effect from 2004. It
would have been only just to grant all those who retired before 2004 in
the rank of major with 13 years of commissioned service (this number
being finite) the benefit of pension on the scale of lieutenant colonel.
The strong plea in this regard has not been accepted.
Also, the non-functional upgrade (NFU) granted to civilian employees has
been denied to defence personnel, thereby putting them at a
disadvantage.
One Rank One Pension
One of the major demands of veterans is same pension for same rank and
same length of service, that is, same rank + same length of service =
same pension, irrespective of the date of retirement. They want a
legislative guarantee to this. Although all major political parties have
agreed to this in principle and frequently incorporate it in their
election manifestos, this 40-year-old demand has not been implemented.
The bureaucratic excuses in the form of administrative, legal and
financial hurdles in implementing the demand were heard in detail in
2011 by the Rajya Sabha Petition Committee set up to look into all
aspects of the demand and rejected them in the strongest terms. Prime
Minister Indira Gandhi had agreed to this provision in principle, but
her untimely death scuttled the proposal. Successive Standing Committees
on Defence and the Rajya Sabha Petition Committee have recommended this
but to no avail.
Before 2006, the difference in the pensions of major general and lieutenant general
was only Rs.1,400. Subsequently, it became Rs.700. With the extension
of higher administrative grade (HAG) and HAG+ to the rank of lieutenant general
and above, the difference in pension is more than Rs.8,000 even after
the increase with effect from September 24, 2012. The government has
overlooked the Sixth Pay Commission recommendations, which suggested
that all government employees with a basic pay of Rs.20,000 and above be
clubbed under the same pay band. Major generals retire with a basic pay
of Rs.22,400 and above while lieutenant generals retire with a basic
pay of Rs.23,500 and above. Non-inclusion of major generals in HAG has
caused an anomaly.
On losing the case, the Defence Ministry filed a review petition in the
Supreme Court, denying enhanced arrears to army pensioners as ordered by
the Delhi High Court with retrospective effect from January 1, 2006,
instead of September 24, 2012.
Civilian employees are provided health care under the Central Government
Health Scheme (CGHS) while ex-servicemen are covered under the ECHS.
The provision of budget for the CGHS is calculated (for 2013-14) at the
rate Rs.10,700 for every beneficiary while for the ECHS, it has been
budgeted at Rs.3,150 a beneficiary. As a result, super-speciality
hospitals do not offer themselves for ECHS empanelment. Over 80 per cent
of the health care units have withdrawn from empanelment in view of
delayed payment of bills and inadequate rates for various medical
procedures. This has resulted in unsatisfactory or poor medical care for
ex-servicemen. Sophisticated procedures have not been included in the
ECHS. The veterans’ request for inclusion of the latest medical
procedures on the ECHS benefits list has not been accepted yet.
Ex-servicemen had requested that the budget be enhanced and not be less
than the CGHS rates.
Here is an example to illustrate the poor nature of health care benefits
provided by the government to ex-servicemen. Non-availability of funds
with the ECHS and, as a consequence, non-payment of hospital dues made
an empanelled hospital in Gurgaon in the National Capital Region to stop
accepting patients for cashless medical treatment. Ex-Subedar Prakash
Chandra Tomar from Meerut was brought to the hospital in a serious
condition on December 8, 2013, which as per the ECHS scheme is
permitted. The family was asked by the hospital authorities to deposit
the money for the treatment or transfer the patient to some other
hospital. Since the condition of the patient was serious, the family
raised a loan and deposited Rs.11 lakh for 20 days of hospitalisation
and treatment.
When the family was in no position to arrange further funds, Tomar’s
son, Raj Kumar Tomar, approached the Indian Ex-Servicemen’s Movement
(IESM) and the case was taken up with the Managing Director of the ECHS,
who promised to get cashless treatment. But he did not succeed. The
family deposited another Rs.2 lakh in the hospital. On January 1,
Subedar Prakash died. The hospital did not accede to the request of the
ECHS to release the body and insisted that the family clear the hospital
bills.
In November 2008, the government had announced that in future there
would be a separate pay commission for the defence forces. The defence
fraternity feels betrayed as the government has not constituted a
separate pay commission, and, as in the case of the previous
commissions, there is no representation for defence forces in the newly
constituted Seventh Pay Commission. Some 39 anomalies in defence
pensions are yet to be resolved and with no defence representation in
the new pay commission, more anomalies are likely to appear thereby
increasing the magnitude of injustice already done to defence
pensioners.
Denial of voting rights
It is surprising that serving defence personnel are denied the right to
get themselves registered as voters at the place of posting. In spite of
a clear judgment by the Supreme Court in 1971, this basic right has not
been extended to soldiers. The option of postal ballot and proxy voting
available to serving soldiers has not proved effective. There is no
restriction imposed in the Representation of the People Act, 1950, to
deny this right to defence personnel. There is an urgent need to restore
this right immediately to allow serving soldiers to vote at their place
of posting in the coming Lok Sabha elections.
The prevailing security environment calls for strong measures to upgrade
the country’s defence preparedness in terms of manpower, equipment and
weapon systems. Equally important are measures to keep the soldier’s
morale high.
Major General Satbir Singh is chairman of the Indian Ex-Servicemen
Movement and a former Senior Fellow and Security Analyst of the
Institute of Defence Studies and Analysis. He can be reached at
satbirsm@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment