DEFENCE ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT (DAD) HEADQUARTERS
Ulan Batar Road, Palam, Delhi Cantt.- 110010

File No. AT/Pay Civ/2702/Clar-V/E-3533

Dated: 25th, Jun 2022

To,

The CDA, Chennai

Subject: Admissibility of Annual increment to re-employed pensioners appointed in Armed Forces Tribunal on contract basis.

Reference: Your office’s letter No. Pay/Tech/ 6050/Gen/AI/2022 dated 21 Apr 2022.

The matter referred to this HQrs office vide your office’s above cited letter on the above subject has been examined in the light of extant orders on the subject. It is observed that the MoF OM No 3-25/2020/ E.IIIA dated 09-12-2020 is self-explanatory in the matter. MoF OM ibid clearly states that the existing instructions of DOPT, as mentioned in para 2 of it, provide for the regulation of pay in case of re-employment barring persons employed on a contract basis except where the contract provides otherwise.

2. MoF vide the ibid OM dated 09-12-2020 has laid down the rules for the regulation of remuneration for contract appointment 1] formulation of guidelines by DOPT. Since, the MoF OM dated 09-12-2020 and rules made thereunder are the latest in chronology and amply clear in respect of the regulation of remuneration of the retired Central Government employees who have been appointed on a contract basis, including consultants, these rules have the over-riding effect on the instructions issued prior to these. Therefore, the OM dated 09-12-2020 should be adhered to in letter and spirit. Any relaxation of/deviation from the rules will require to be referred to the Department of Expenditure in terms of para 10 of the OM ibid.

3. In view, for all contractual employment for retired employees, MoF (DoE) OM No F No 3-95/2020/E.IIIA Dated 9th December 2020 is applicable, which does not provide for annual increment (Para 6) as well as HRA. As such, regarding the issue of doubt on annual increment, as raised vide your office’s letter dated 21-04-2022, it is clarified that no ‘annual increment’ is to be given to any contractual worker. Further, all other allowances are to be also regulated according, to other provisions of MoF (DoE) OM Dated 09-12-2020.

4. Moreover, it is not understood as to though on one hand your office has raised doubt and referred the case to HQrs office for clarification, on the other hand the annual increment to contractual employees has been admitted by your office. As such, the authority on which the increment has been allowed to the contractual employees may be intimated to this HOrs office.

This issues with the approval of Addl. CGDA (Pay & Allow.)

Accounts Officer
(Pay & Allowances)

The post CDA – Admissibility of Annual increment to re-employed pensioners appointed in Armed Forces Tribunal on a contract basis appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

Ex-servicemen demand right to appeal to High Courts as fundamental right exercised by other citizens, against an order of SC making Armed Forces Tribunal the first and last forum for them

The Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM), which is Federation of Military Veterans’ Movement, has requested Prime Minister Narendra Modi to abrogate Sections 30 and 31 of the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) Act. Abrogation of these sections will help challenge orders of the AFT on the lines of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and make justice accessible and practical for defence personnel, ex-servicemen, widows and their families, IESM said.

The letter sent by IESM refers to a decision on 11 March 2015 by the Supreme Court, which effectively ensures that the AFT becomes the first and the last forum for litigants, including defence personnel, veterans and their families.

In a letter, IESM, said, “The judgement was passed on an appeal filed by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) and perhaps also the Army Head Quarter (HQ) during the time of the last Government. We also have reasonable information to believe that one of the grounds raised by the MoD/Army in the appeal for denying the right of judicial remedy like other citizens of India, was that Fundamental Rights can be restricted/abrogated under Article 33 of the Constitution for defence personnel and hence a judicial remedy under writ jurisdiction of High Court would not be available.”

“If it is true that this argument was raised by the MoD/Army, then it is the most unfortunate that the system itself is pleading for placing defence personnel on a lower pedestal than other citizens and pleading before the SC that the military community does not deserve the enjoyment of fundamental rights like others. It is a well known fact that Article 33 only operates during performance of duties to maintain discipline and has no connection with right to access of justice,” the letter says.

It is also well known that the majority of cases in the AFT pertain to retired personnel, military widows and their families and hence Article 33 even otherwise has no applicability. This is also against the spirit of Article 39A of the Constitution, which underlines equal justice for all citizens, IESM said.

According to the letter, there was an attempt to convince military community that the decision will lead to ‘quicker’ justice to defence personnel. However, it says, on closer and deeper examination of the issue, the following real facts and fallouts emerge:

•     There is actually no right of appeal to the Supreme Court from AFT orders as per the AFT Act since an appeal only lies in exceptional cases involving ‘point of law of general public importance’ vide Section 31 of AFT Act. Hence what has been pleaded before the SC is that AFT should become the court of first instance as well as the court of last instance, leaving defence personnel, veterans and widows remediless since it is well known that 99.9% of cases can never involve ‘public importance’ questions. The decision will not lead to ‘quicker’ justice but in reality remove all chances and channels of challenge/appeal against AFT decisions. Can this bogey of ‘quicker’ justice be raised at the price of fundamental rights of accessible justice and remedy to citizens?
• It is well known that almost all such litigants cannot afford litigation in SC due to its prohibitive cost and the aura itself of being the highest court of the country. It is not understood how the defence ministry expects poor litigants including disabled soldiers and widows from all over the country to travel to Delhi and engage lawyers in SC to fight their cases. Most of the cases in the AFT involve issues such as disability benefits, pension, minor allowances, pay fixation, ACRs etc and litigants would now be expected to suffer in silence if they feel that they have not got justice from AFT.
• Defence personnel, veterans, widows and families have been deprived of their basic right of access to justice due to the plea raised by the MoD/Army wherein while all citizens of the country would have access to multiple tiers of justice, not even one tier would be available to us. Even civil government employees aggrieved by orders of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) can approach the HC if they are dissatisfied and then further the SC, whereas similar access has been denied to us and after an order of the AFT even the SC cannot be approached as a matter of vested right unless there is involvement of a point of general public importance.
• We hereby express our dismay on the attempt of the official system to convey to the SC that fundamental rights of the military community should be restricted or abrogated. We are disappointed that the system itself by raising the plea of Article 33 is attempting to prove that defence personnel, ex-servicemen and their families are lower than the ordinary person on the street. This will have disastrous consequences in the years to come. If the MoD/Army makes such averments pleading for taking away the fundamental rights of their own members and former members and their families, then it is extremely unfortunate.
•     It is well known that the AFT functions under the control of the MoD and even Members of AFT are appointed by the MoD and selected by a selection committee, which has the Defence Secretary as its member. AFT has also not been given civil contempt powers to ensure compliance of its orders. In other words, an ineffectual body has been created which functions under the MoD and then now on the plea of the MoD it has been assured that there is no effective appeal making it an all supreme body.

Maj Gen Satbir Singh (Retd), Chairman of IESM says, “We express dissatisfaction at the stand and damaging stance of the MoD and the Army in the said case, which has led to such a situation. We request the PM to kindly abrogate Sections 30 and 31 of the AFT Act so that AFT orders can be challenged on the lines of the CAT thereby making justice accessible and practical for defence personnel, ex-servicemen, widows and their families.

Tamil Nadu-based Welfare Service of Ex-Servicemen/Families and Others, also supported the demand made by IESM. “We fully support the ex-servicemen associations from Punjab and Chandigarh. We request you to kindly initiate steps to abrogate and repeal Sections 30 and 31 of the AFT Act in order to make justice accessible to defence personnel on the lines of CAT so that aggrieved parties are able to approach the High Courts, which are independent court unlike the Tribunals, which operate under the control of Ministry of Defence and which do not inspire the confidence of litigants, ” the letter sent by the association to PM Modi says.

Read at Moneylife

The post Remove legal unfairness, demand ex-servicemen appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

Dated: 11 April 2015

Shri Narendra Modi
Hon’ble Prime Minister of India
Prime Minister’s Office (PMO)
New Delhi – 110 001

Shri Manohar Parrikar
Hon’ble Raksha Mantri
104, South Block,
New Delhi

Shri. D.V. Sadananda Gowda
Hon’ble Minister for Law & Justice
Room No. 401, A Wing,
4th Floor, Shastri Bhavan,
New Delhi – 110001

LACK OF VESTED RIGHT OF EFFECTIVE JUDICIAL REVIEW FROM ORDERS OF THE ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL (AFT)

The Hon’ble Supreme Court on 11 March 2015 pronounced a decision in a case wherein it was held that orders passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) would not be challenged by litigants in Hon’ble High Courts but only in the Supreme Court. The judgement was passed on an appeal filed by the Ministry of Defence (and perhaps also the Army HQ) during the time of the last Government. We also have reasonable information to believe that one of the grounds raised by the MoD/Army in the appeal for denying the right of judicial remedy like other citizens of India was that Fundamental Rights can be restricted/abrogated under Article 33 of the Constitution for defence personnel and hence a judicial remedy under writ jurisdiction of High Court would not be available. If it is true that this argument was raised by the MoD/Army, then it is the most unfortunate that the system itself is pleading for placing defence personnel on a lower pedestal than other citizens and pleading before the Hon’ble SC that the military community does not deserve the enjoyment of fundamental rights like others. It is a well known fact that Article 33 only operates during performance of duties to maintain discipline and has no connection with right to access of justice. It is also well known that the majority of cases in the AFT pertain to retired personnel, military widows and their families and hence Article 33 even otherwise has no applicability. This is also against the spirit of Article 39A of the Constitution which underlines equal justice for all citizens.

While in the beginning, there was an attempt to convince us that the decision will lead to ‘quicker’ justice to defence personnel, on closer and deeper examination of the issue, the following real facts and fallouts emerge:

1. There is actually no right of appeal to the Supreme Court from AFT orders as per AFT Act since an appeal only lies in exceptional cases involving ‘point of law of general public importance’ vide Section 31 of AFT Act, hence what has been pleaded before the SC is that AFT should become the court of first instance as well as the court of last instance, leaving defence personnel, veterans and widows remediless since it is well known that 99.9% of cases can never involve ‘public importance’ questions. The decision will not lead to ‘quicker’ justice but in reality remove all chances and channels of challenge/appeal against AFT decisions. Can this bogey of ‘quicker’ justice be raised at the price of fundamental rights of accessible justice and remedy to citizens?

2. It is well known that almost all such litigants cannot afford litigation in SC due to its prohibitive cost and the aura itself of being the highest court of the country. It is not understood how the defence ministry expects poor litigants including disabled soldiers and widows from all over the country to travel to Delhi and engage lawyers in SC to fight their cases. Most of the cases in the AFT involve issues such as disability benefits, pension, minor allowances, pay fixation, ACRs etc and litigants would now be expected to suffer in silence if they feel that they have not got justice from AFT.

3. Defence personnel, veterans, widows and families have been deprived of their basic right of access to justice due to the plea raised by the MoD/Army wherein while all citizens of the country would have access to multiple tiers of justice, not even one tier would be available to us. Even civil govt employees aggrieved by orders of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) can approach the HC if they are dissatisfied and then further the SC, whereas similar access has been denied to us and after an order of the AFT even the SC cannot be approached as a matter of vested right unless there is involvement of a point of general public importance.

4. We hereby express our dismay on the attempt of the official system to convey to the SC that fundamental rights of the military community should be restricted or abrogated. We are disappointed that the system itself by raising the plea of Article 33 is attempting to prove that defence personnel, ex-servicemen and their families are lower than the ordinary person on the street. This will have disastrous consequences in the years to come. If the MoD/Army makes such averments pleading for taking away the fundamental rights of their own members and former members and their families, then it is extremely unfortunate.

5. It is well known that the AFT functions under the control of the MoD and even Members of AFT are appointed by the MoD and selected by a selection committee which has the Defence Secretary as its member. AFT has also not been given civil contempt powers to ensure compliance of its orders. In other words, an ineffectual body has been created which functions under the MoD and then now on the plea of the MoD it has been assured that there is no effective appeal making it an all supreme body.

In light of the above, while expressing dissatisfaction at the stand and damaging stance of the MoD and the Army in the said case which has led to such a situation, we request you to kindly abrogate Sections 30 and 31 of the AFT Act so that AFT orders can be challenged on the lines of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) thereby making justice accessible and practical for defence personnel, ex-servicemen, widows and their families.

With regards,

Maj Gen Satbir Singh, SM (Retd)
Chairman IESM

Source: http://ex-servicemenwelfare.blogspot.in/2015/04/iesm-letter-to-pmrmlaw.html

The post LACK OF VESTED RIGHT OF EFFECTIVE JUDICIAL REVIEW FROM ORDERS OF THE ARMED FORCES TRIBUNAL (AFT) appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

Prime Minister Approves Composition of 7th Central Pay Commission Under the Chairmanship of Justice Ashok Kumar Mathur, Retired Judge of the Supreme Court and Retired Chairman, Armed Forces Tribunal

The Finance Minister Shri P. Chidambaram has issued the following statement:

“The Prime Minister has approved the composition of the 7th Central Pay Commission as follows:

Source: PIB News

The post Composition of 7th Central Pay Commission – PM has approved the composition of 7th CPC under the Chairmanship of Justice Ashok Kumar Mathur appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

Press Information Bureau
Government of India
Cabinet

30-January-2014 16:10 IST

Uniform terms of appointment and conditions of service of chairpersons/members of tribunals/quasi-judicial bodies

The Union Cabinet today gave its approval on the recommendations of the Group of Ministers (GoM) on uniformity of tenure, retirement age, re-appointment, pension, salary and allowances including medical facilities, leave and travelling allowances for chairpersons/members of Tribunals and other quasi-judicial bodies set up for through central legislations.

The recommendations of the GoM, as accepted by the Cabinet, will have prospective effect through an overarching legislation.

Background:

In order to expedite delivery of justice and make available domain expertise in adjudication, the Government has set up various Tribunals under Central Acts, The terms of appointment and conditions of service of chairpersons and members of these Tribunals are different in many cases. The Government, constituted a GOM aimed at providing uniformity across all Central Tribunals. The Supreme Court has also observed the need for such uniformity.

Source: PIB
via: karnmk.blogspot.in

The post Cabinet approval on uniformity of tenure, retirement age, re-appointment, pension,salary and allowances etc. for chairpersons/members of Tribunals and other quasi-judicial bodies appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

The below information informed by the Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs Shri.Jitendra Singh in response to a written question in Lok Sabha.

Compensation to Security Personnel

327 personnel of Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) were killed during the last three years.

All compensation and other pensionary claims have been settled except in 03 cases of CRPF which are pending for want of succession certificate from the Court of Law.

As per Government policy, Ex-gratia lump sum compensation have been paid to the Next of Kin as per provision given as under:-
a Death due to accident while on duty :                   Rs. 10 Lakh
b Death due to act of violence by terrorist etc. : Rs. 10 Lakh
c Death in action :                                                             Rs. 15 Lakh
d Death in natural disasters :                                       Rs. 15 Lakh

In addition, Extra Ordinary Family Pension/Liberalized Pensionary Awards, Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity, Leave Encashment, Central Government Employees Group Insurance Scheme, Deposit Link Insurance Scheme and General Provident Fund have been paid as per CCS (Pension) Rules.

On receipt of succession certificates from Courts and on completion of other formalities pending claims will be settled on priority.

The post Compensation to Security Personnel of Central Armed Police Forces appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

22-August-2012 13:38 IST

Correcting Anomalies in Sixth Central Pay Commission

Recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission and several improvements made thereon by the Government have been largely well received by the armed forces personnel including ex-servicemen. Some issues regarding service conditions, pay, pension and allowances have subsequently been received. These issues are examined by the Government on case to case basis.

In the matter relating to retirement benefits, an Anomaly Committee was set up under the Chairmanship of Secretary (Defence/Finance). This Committee identified some anomalies which have since been addressed to by the Government.

Improvement of service conditions, pay, allowances and retirement benefits of armed forces personnel is a continuous process. Recently, a Committee headed by the Cabinet Secretary has been set up to look into certain issues of relevance to the defence service personnel and ex-servicemen and to provide suitable recommendations.

This information was given by Defence Minister Shri AK Antony in a written reply to Shri Mohd. Ali Khan in Rajya Sabha today.

The post Correcting Anomalies in Sixth Central Pay Commission appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.

New Delhi: The government has reportedly refused to accept the demand of the armed forces to allow military representation on the High Powered Committee, which has been formed to resolve the anomalies in the pension and benefits for the defence personnel.

Top sources at the Centre have told NDTV that the government cannot agree to the demand as the panel was formed during the sixth pay commission and now it’s a little too late to allow defence representatives on board. The Prime Minister is expected to make an announcement on the issue in his Independence Day speech on August 15.
The sources added that the panel, which was formed by the Prime Minister, will have to address the concerns of the armed forces in the way issues were handled during the sixth pay commission.
Navy Chief Admiral Nirmal Verma had reportedly written to Defence Minister AK Antony last week, objecting to the panel headed by the Cabinet Secretary.

Source: NDTV

The post Government not to allow defence representatives in pay panel, say sources appeared first on CENTRAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES NEWS.