Future of India as a Nation State

India is governed by an inefficient and corrupt to the core administration working at the behest of elite whose sole agenda is self-preservation and self-perpetuation. Rationale and ideological sustenance for this venal system is provided by a domesticated intelligentsia driven by a divisive agenda. Roots of this fatal system lie in the advent of Sultanate era which saw Indian state emphatically delinking from the society. The Sultans who occupied India from 11^th century to mid-16^th century and the Mughals who took over tenancy rights in mid-16^th century and the British who replaced them in mid-18^th century continued the practice. The top rung of these administrations was made up of foreigners, i.e., Turks, Persians and the Europeans who took great care and pride in maintaining their distinct identity and conducted their business in languages totally alien to the masses.  

Sultanate and Mughal administration had an openly exploitative relationship with the people.  One only has to look around at the ruins of those eras to see that whatever they left behind was built for their own use and they did not undertake any public works or welfare schemes. Only benchmark to assess the lower rungs of administration was timely and ruthless collection of exorbitant taxes (Mall Guzari).  The Turkic and Persian elite wanted minimum or no link with the teeming masses of Indians and hence spawned a class of intermediaries (Durbaries) known as Rajas of local stock and Nawabs of Afghan and Pathan stock.

The British did bring some change, albeit grudgingly and with a selfish motive. Since the times were changing and Europe itself was in throes of birth of democracy, its limited impact was felt in India too, where the administration did undertake some public works, like construction of canals and railways. However primary aim of these measures was increasing the state revenue.    The British while retaining old Durbaries also brought in career civil servant steeped in European culture and holding deep disdain for anything native. Between the three of them, the British Bosses, old school Durbaries and new wannabe civil servant, an overbearing and omnipotent government (Mai-Baap Sarkar) was created.

Nehru and his progenies, who lorded over India from 1947 to 1989 and 2004 to 2014 further strengthened the system of Mai-Baap Sarkar. This was a most successful change of optics ever done in the world. An inefficient and venal administration went to sleep on 14 August 1947 and woke up as a efficient and benign public service on 15 August 1947. To sustain this optic illusion a number of concurrent steps were taken which included divisive public discourse, keeping masses ignorant through opaque system of administration and control over delivery of services in the name of socialism. Ideological underpinnings were provided by an inherently biased education and information delivery system controlled by paid intelligentsia which has slowly replaced old Durbaries. This lot is called by many names like Libtards, Pseudo-seculars, Lutyens Mafia, Presstitutes  and Azadi Brigade are some of its manifestations. Simpler way of recognizing them is to trace the government-aided milk cow (Aided Institutions) these fellows are ensconced in!

The present government ought to recognize the fact that Indian society has historically recognized ability to self-govern and self-correct. What is needed is direction and time. Direction should come from truly self-motivated wise sons-of-soil who would create awareness and motivate society to correct evils which have infested us due to customs and usage. But at the same time strengthen our native culture through education, that is, make the youth aware of rich philosophical basis of our ancient culture and allow time for change to occur and grow. The government also do well to move quickly and decisively to break the stranglehold of bureaucracy over administration by decentralizing and implementing Panchayati Raj and stop funding dens of anti-national activities.            

Malicious Reversion to Slab System of Disability Pension

Malicious Reversion to Slab System of Disability Pension

Remember 3rd CPC? Post 1971 Victory the then government had reduced pension of soldiers from 70 percent to 50 percent! The present government has, post-surgical strikes, in a macabre replay of similar cussedness has with Notification dated 30 September 16, has reduced Disability Pension of Military to less than half that of equivalent Group A/IAS official.

Protection available to Disabled Civilian.  People with Disabilities constitute 2.21 percent of Indian population. Consequently they have been provided three percent reservations in government jobs. A disabled government employee is guaranteed job security under Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995. This act guarantees job as also full time attendant to even those employees who suffer from 100 percent disability. Some of the major benefits available to a civilian government employee, including Defence Civilians are:-

(a) Job guarantee till normal age of retirement, which is 57 to 60 years for civilian employees.
(b) Special Allowance for Disabled Women Employees at rate of Rs. 3000/- per month.
(c) Transport Allowance at double the normal rates subject to minimum Rs. 2250/- per month.
(d) Special Casual Leave of four days in a year.
(e) Special Casual Leave of 10 days in a year to attend seminars/training etc related to disability.
(f) Children Education Allowance and Hostel Subsidy at double the normal rates.
(g) Disability Pension at 30 percent of last pay drawn for 100 percent disability. Which for a civilian employee of equivalents grade as Sepoy will be Rs. 21000/ per month.

No Protection for Disabled Military Officer and Men. Officers and men serving in the Indian Military get none of the above mentioned facilities. Instead:-

(a) Protection of Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995 not available to military. Hence can be thrown out (invalided) of job.
(b) No special allowances of any kind.
(c) No special leave of any kind.
(d) No help for children etc.
(e) Disability Pension at Slab System, which for a Sepoy will be Rs. 12000/ per month, which is just about half of equivalent civilian employee.

Uniqueness of Military Service. While discussing probability of onset of job related disability in military we need to remember two immutable facts.

(a)   Inherently Stressful job of Army Officers and Soldiers.  This fact is acknowledged by the MoD itself, who have DRDO (DIPR) conducted a number of studies to understand and remove/ reduce causes of stress in the Army. Apparently stress of military life will over a period of time result in disability due to causes like cardiac disease, hypertension, diabetes and such like diseases.

(b)    Presumption of Fitness at the time of Enrollment. Supreme Court has opined that since only physically fit persons can join the military hence presumption is that any disability occurring during service has to be attributable to military service. The 7th CPC has also called for a liberal approach by observing that there is a presumption of service-connection in all disabilities that arise during service.

Hollow Arguments of 7th CPC.  Now let us revisit 7th CPC arguments which form the basis for MoD Notification dated 30 September 16 on Military Pension.

(a)   Malicious Argument. The 7th CPC maliciously states that 'no officer has been invalidated from service in last 10 years. Apparently it wants to buttress it argument that officers are misusing the disability regime. But it clearly hides the fact that nobody, but, nobody is invalidated from his job amongst the civilian employees. Thus it is no crime for a military officer with less than 75 percent disability to continue in service. These officers retire with disability pension which is their due and not more.

(b)     Nailing the Misuse of System Argument. To prove that officers of brigadier and higher rank have been misusing the system of disability pension the 7th CPC has produced a table covering the period 2007 - 2013 showing percent of officers from various ranks getting disability pension. This table shows that percent of Colonels and Lieutenant General retiring with disability pension has remained nearly constant. However their has been perceptible increase in percentage of Lieutenant Colonel, Brigadier and Major General.

(c)   One-sided, hence Biased Approach. The 7th CPC has based its recommendations on apparently one-sided inputs given by CGDA. It has failed to provide an opportunity to reply to the accused, which is a mandatory requirement under the law of the land. If 7th CPC or the government of India had any desire to really know the truth they should have asked for a response from Services Headquarters.

(d) Need to Discount Statistical Error.  Out of a total military strength of 1300000 the officers are 70000 or  5.4 percent. As per 7th CPC during the period 2007-2014 a total of 37537 All Rank retired with disability from three services and out of them 2151 or 5.73 percent were the officers. This marginal difference of .3 percent can even be due to statistical error.

(e) Mass Punishment is Illegal.  Coming to Brigadier and Major Generals. As per figures available in public domain around 2300 officers retire from three services every year, of which approximately 180 are Brigadier/ Major General equivalent. As per 7th CPC their disability percentage has jumped from 7.6 in 2007-08 to 17 percent in 2013-14. Even if we discount the increase in absolute numbers on account of AVSC and for argument sake accept that entire increase is malafide, total number of such manipulator comes to 10 per year or 70 for the period 2007-14. Which means that for fault of 70 the 7th CPC has recommended and government of India has punished 18.7 million military pensioners in general and 43000 officer rank pensioners in particular!

Recommendations for Defence Minister and COSC. It is apparent that 7th CPC, with malicious intent, has made biased recommendation for reversion to Slab System of Disability Pension for the military. By accepting these illogical and biased recommendations the government of India in general and MoD in particular have adopted an openly discriminatory approach towards the military in general and Military Officer Corps in particular. This is a matter which goes much beyond pension and shows adversarial attitude of politico-bureaucratic combine. Hence I recommend:-

(a)   Need to apply same yardstick to all disabled government employees. The 7th CPC is wrong in claiming that military disability pension was skewed in favour of officers by the 6th CPC. Fact is that 6th CPC merely brought disability rates for defence personnel at par with civilians who were always on 'percentage of pay' system for calculating disability pension. Thus if `equilibrium has been disturbed in case of military than same is the case of civilian employees. The Modi government having accepted the recommendations of 7th CPC has a duty to explain why slab system of the disability pension has not been extended to the civilian employees? The Defence Minister should apply similar System of Disability Pension to all employees of MoD including Defence Civilians and Military.

(b)   Demand Higher Starting Threshold for Jawans. Defence Minister be asked to immediately reverse the notification regarding Disability Penison for Military and bring back Percentage Based Disability Pension with a proviso that minimum disability Pension for military will be Rs. 20000/-.

(c)    Order Inquiry. COSC may please ask three services to order in-depth time-bound inquiry into the allegation of 7th CPC that some Brigadier and higher rank officers have manipulated the system to claim disability pension. Those found guilty be stripped off their disability pension and prosecuted for fraud.

(d)   Approach the People.  In a democracy military belongs to the people and because of their willingness to give ultimate sacrifice both officers as also soldiers are held in great esteem by the society. These societies ensure that their militaries get higher pay and allowances while serving and also grant liberal pensionary and disability benefits to their disabled soldiers. But sadly unholy nexus of politico-bureaucratic combine has denied fair compensation to Indian military and the Military Officer Corps is being subjected to innuendo and deprivation too. This point needs to be driven hope to Indian Parliament through a sustained campaign by Services Hqs through official channels like Parliamentary Committees and by veterans through media.

Destroying Brand Army - MoD Bureaucracy tries its Worst

TKanta Singh C/O Smt. Shakuntala Devi,
V.PO Bhadani, Dist. Jhajjar (Haryana)

To,
Shri Manohar Parrikar,
Minister of Defence, Govt. of India, South Block, New Delhi - 110012

Respected Minister,

This will be my nth letter to you which will go unanswered for reasons that may range from busy schedule of the Defence Minister of Republic of India to normal urge to ignore non-laudatory missives. Be that as it may, my confidence in your goodwill for the armed forces is still strong. Hence this letter which focuses on attempts of civilian bureaucracy on Ministry of Defence (MoD) to both misuse as also destroy Army's Brand Equity!

 Indian Army, thanks to stellar performance of its Officers & Men, enjoys very high Brand Equity among the people of India. So much so that for citizens the term 'Defence' is synonymous with the 'Army'. Thus when Defence Minister tells the Parliament that during FY 16-17 Defence Budget of Rs.340922 Crores plus defence pensions of Rs. 82332 Crores, that is, Rs. 423254 Crore comes to 2.3 percent of prevailing Indian GDP, the Citizens feel that they have done their bit and now it is for the Army to ensure best possible defence of India. But when cohorts of the Bureaucracy of MoD including IDSA (a MoD Entity) claim that almost two-third of Defence Budget will be cornered as 'Pay & Allowances' by a bloated army, they are telling a lie which aims to simultaneously use army' brand equity to hides the fact that civilian element of MoD eat up 32 percent of defence budget and unfairly shift blame on the Army so that there is long term damage to its brand equity.

To nail this lie I have relied on data from official budget for FY 16-17 and C&AG report on MoD for FY 14-15.

Out of Rs. 340921.98 Crores defence budget for FY 16-17, the civilian element of MoD, with 5,85,000 sanctioned and 4 lacs in post, would walk away with Rs. 1,00,000 Crores (Rs. 91823 Crores plus 7000 Crores paid to civilians of MES by Services) as pay & allowances and out of Rs. 82332 Crores allotted for defence pensions, the civilian pensioners of MoD would take away Rs. 31500 Crores (including 30 percent hike on implementation of 7th CPC). Thus cumulatively the civilian element of MoD will consume 31.6 percent of defence and defence pension budget in FY 16-17. Similar situation has prevailed in preceding years!

On the other hand Army, Navy & AF taken together would get budget of Rs 249099 Crore in FY 16-27 and military pensioners would get Rs. 48800 (including OROP and projected 30 percent hike likely on implementation of 7th CPC). Thus the military as a whole will get Rs. 277899 Crores, that is, only 1.3 percent of GDP and not, repeat, Not 2.3 percent of GDP as the minister may have implied.

So far as the Army is concerned, during FY 16-17, it will get Rs. 152759 Crores as its share of defence budget and approximately Rs. 44000 Crores, (including OROP and 7th CPC), as pension of retired All Rank. Thus total money spent on the Army this financial year would be Rs. 196759 Crores, which is less than one percent of GDP!

Let me end by pointing out that during FY 14-15 at Rs. 5.27 lacs soldier was lowest paid employee in MoD while civilian employee of MES got Rs. 5.34 lacs, Ordnance Factory employee got Rs. 5.37 lacs, DRDO employee got Rs. 9.91 lacs and babu of MoD took away Rs.10.54 lacs.

I do hope you would be fair in your duties as Minister of Defence and place real figures of MoD spending in public domain so that cacophony of bloated army is concurrently accompanied by a debate on logic of having 5,85,000 sanctioned posts for Defence Civilian Employees. For example why do we have 12000 staff in MoD or what has been achieved by Rs. 15000 Crores spent on modernization of Ordnance Factories? Why is labour productivity of Ordnance Factories mare Rs. 14.1 lacs per head in FY15-16? Why do we need lac plus MES civilian employees when both capital works and revenue & maintenance are outsourced?

Thank you

Best wishes
Kanta Singh

Saving Army Officer Cadre and its Professionalism

On 03 May 16, the Defence Minister informed the Rajya Sabha that the Army is authorised 49833 officers and has 41162 on its rolls as on date. Thus it is short of 8962 officers, that is, 17 percent. It has also been widely reported that these shortages are at the level of Lieutenant, Captain and Major and there is no shortage at the rank of Lieutenant Colonel and above.  The Defence Minister in same reply has identified force accretions, stringent selection criteria and perceived risk to life as main causes of the shortage. But periodic surveys by various media agencies have shown that the army consistently comes as one of the last choice of careers for the youth. The main reasons cited against joining the Army were poor pay, tough service conditions and stunted career prospects. Apparently there is clear mismatch between the perception of Defence Minister and reality shown by the media.

Over last 32 years there have been  two reviews of its Army officer cadre. First review took place in 1984, when the rank of Commanding Officer was raised from Lieutenant Colonel to Colonel on misplaced hope that it will achieve substantial improvement in promotional chances of officers but nothing of the sort happened. The second cadre review was undertaken by AV Singh Committee. The Government of India claims to have accepted the recommendations of this committee. Stated aims of this Committee were removal of officer shortage endemic to army units, reducing age profile of commanding officer and improve promotion chances of long-termers. These goals were sought to be achieved by restructuring the officer cadre in a Regular Officer to Support Officer ratio of 1: 1.1 at the ranks of Lieutenant, Captain and Major level. However actual ratio achieved today is 4.6: 1.

Effectiveness of AV Singh Committee was predicted on success of Short Service Commission (SSC), however the Ministry of Defence has been unwillingness or unable to make SSC attractive. In fact present Terms of Service governing SSCOs are exploitative and negative in extreme. As per extant terms of service SSCO have a lock-in period of 10 years and are compulsorily put to pasture, without any financial security, any advantage for military service or alternative job after serving for 14 years. Apparently only those who have no other option would opt to take SSC. The senior army leadership tried to compensate shortage of SSC officers by increasing intake into regular cadre stream. Thus today more than 1400 officers[i] are getting Regular commission against 700 vacancies while only 700 SSC officers are commissioned against 2000 vacancies. What is even worse that IMA entries (DE, NDA & TES) are supplanting SCOs and SL officers.

Linear extrapolation career graph of an average regular officer over 31 years shows that he will be screened for promotion to the rank of Colonel after 15 years of service (because Army wants young Commanding Officers) and out of 1400 barely 25 per cent, that is around 355 will be promoted and 1150 would be superseded. In such a situation any worthwhile Human Resource Department would have allowed the superseded officers to leave the army gracefully on attaining pensionable service of 20 years. But sadly, the Government of India in its infinite wisdom has decided to deny benefits of One Rank – One Pension (OROP) to anyone seeking premature retirement thereby effectively locking up superseded officers into a cul-de-sac. Reminds one of sentenced to Kala-Paani! Consequently, over next 25 years, a massive bulge will be formed by more than 16000 superseded Lieutenant Colonel at middle level who will make up 33 per cent of authorised officer strength.

Comparatively advanced age, longer service than incumbent Commanding Officer and need for a change of environment preclude further employment of `superseded’ officers in the units of Army. Army’s ability to adjust these officers on staff in various headquarters or static establishments is also limited and we also need to remember that any fattening of staff will happen at the cost of efficiency. Thus fresh avenues of gainful employment have to be found for these officers.

Luckily NCC provides a viable employment option for these officers. In fact it is to the credit of such `superseded’ Army officers that they have turned NCC into most successful government run youth programme in India. Hence as an immediate term measure I recommend that over next two years NCC be expanded to have one Unit in each of 5191 towns of India. So as to ensure that at least 25 percent of students from 11^th and 12^th classes and degree colleges get an opportunity to join it for three year.

However as a long-term solution there is a need to create a well – balanced officer cadre for the Army which caters for both the organisational and individual needs. Such a cadre ought to be structured after a detailed study of history of the Indian Army and prevalent practices in various successful armies of the world. Implementation of the proposed officer cadre management model should result in:

·         Strength of officers in a combat unit to reach 18.

·         Fair severance package to make SSC, for seven years, a sought-after option.

·         Uniform terms of service to ensure rise of the meritorious.

·         Three year Long command tenures starting with command of Rifle Company equivalent.

I have worked for long on this issue and am quite willing to provide inputs without any expectation of reward or rHowever I would like to end with a caution. The MoD, as organised and staffed presently, has effectively stalled proper implementation of AV Singh Committee by stalling proposal of making SSC attractive and has not covered itself with glory in playing hokey with the Armed Forces in 7^th CPC would do its utmost to stall every proposal which improves or sustains professionalism in the Army.

Saving ECHS from Fiscal Pedantry

In this blogpost I want to draw reader's attention to sever damage being caused to ECHS by fiscal pedantry in clearance of bills by functionaries of MoD. It is a well known fact that direct interface between the government official and citizen has been major cause of corruption in the country. As an antidote the CVC in its paper on National Anti Corruption Strategy stresses on need to employ Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to put maximum services on line. The Government of India, especially since May 2014, has taken multiple steps to revolutionise the delivery of subsidies and MNREGA through DBT by levaraging ICT.

Use of ICT removes corruption by, depersonalising decision-making, standradising procedures, ensures service on first come - first served basis and makes whole transaction transparent. 

In the field of health care, CGHS pioneered online payment of hospital bills by establishing Bill Clearance Authority (BCA). The government of India formed an entity called UTI-ITSL to act as BCA. This entity consists of requisite medical and financial experts who scrutinise bills submitted by Empanelled Hospitals and release payment. So good has been the performance of UTI-ITSL as BCA that today Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between CGHS and Empanelled Hospital includes a guarantee of 70 Percent of bill being paid within five days. No wonder that today best of the hospitals across the country have joined the CGHS.

The ECHS came into being in the year 2002. It has been benchmarking its services to the older  CGHS. Thus it came as no surprise that in the year 2012 the ECHS followed the lead of CGHS, and appointed UTI-ITSL as Bill payment Authority ( BPA) albeit with one crucial difference that it imposed a layer of Competent Financial Authorities (CFA) between BPA and Empanelled Hospital.  This modification effectively converted the Bill Payment Authority into a Bill Payment Adviser to the CFAs (Director Regional Centre, Deputy MD, MD ECHS and MoD). In keeping with provisions of FR, the CFAs were given the right to 'cross-check' the bills cleared for payment by BPA and release payment to the empanelled hospital only when they, meaning  CFA, were satisfied. In other words direct human interface between the government official, that is, CFA and the service provider, that is, hospital got reestablished which resulted in emergence of all the old ailments like, subjectivity in decision-making due to difference in personalities of CFAs, disrupted  procedure leading to violation of principle of first come - first served and dilution of responsibility with regard to any wrong payments, for example in this system both BPA and CFA are refusing to accept responsibility for audit objections raised by C&AG. The CFA relied on the medical staff officer in his office to 'cross-checking the bills. This led to delayed payments resulting in loss of discount which government could have gained if bills were passed within stipulated 10 days. In the Para 2.6.2.3 of Performance Audit of ECHS No. 51 of 2015 the C&AG has calculated loss of discount at Rs. 34.10 for FY 13-14. Most alarmingly some corrupt CFAs and their medical staff officers, instead of raising queries with BPA, started misusing their power to 'cross-check the bills. They hold the gun of 'arbitrary cuts to bills cleared by BPA' to the head of Empanelled Hospitals. Net result of this illegal and counterproductive step is that reputed hospitals are slowly withdrawing from ECHS.

May I request to make online bill payment system of ECHS absolutely similar to CGHS. As introduction of CFAs has not resulted in any substantial gains. Rather layering of staff and reestablishment of human interface between CFA and Empaneled Hospitals is leading to 'fiscal pedantry' which has potential to destroy the scheme.

I also take this opportunity to exhort the government to fulfill the promise your election promise of establishing 'Veterans Commission' manned by veterans and the serving who are quite competent to take care of themselves far better than those presently sitting in DESW.

Saving Military Ethos

1.   I wish to engage in a serious discussion with you on two issues. First is regarding your wish to place an 'Outsider-as-Observers' in meetings of Services Selection Board (SSB) with stated aim of ensuring fair selection. Second is your wish to make military grievance redress system much more responsive by giving the petitioners freedom to directly appeal to you- just as Emporer Jahangir did by installing famous 'Bell of Justice'. Results achieved by this Bell of Justice are well known to students of history.

2.   Before we discuss efficacy of 'Outsider-as-Observer' in Army SSBs. Let us see what happens on the civil side. In case of All India Services (AIS) enough openings are available in higher grades, hence promotions are easy to come by. In so far as officers of Group A Services are concerned lack of promotion avenues is mitigated by NFFU. Resultantly Departmental Promotion Committees (DPC) are more of formalities. More important is getting a 'Paying Posting', which will allow the bureaucrat amass 'Other Income'. Being aware of such potential the politicians have centralized the power for postings as the level of Chief Ministers and Cabinet Ministers. But has this centralization removed corruption from postings? Answer is obviously No! That begets another question, that is, if 'Outsider-as-Observer' is such a great method of ensuring transparency why did you not implement it while you were CM of Goa. Similarly there have been instances of favored bureaucrats enjoying extended tenures with powerful politicians, all thanks to nod from Appointments Committee of Cabinet (ACC)! Should we not have 'Outsider-as-Observer' in ACC meetings? We also find that MoD has on number of times been found giving wrong information to even the Courts and even today thousands of Implementation Applications are pending in AFTs which are due to unwillingness of MoD to implement AFT orders granting relief to officers and soldiers. Should we then not start by implementing the concept of 'Outsider-as-Observer' in the offices of Defence Minister and Defence Secretary?

3.   My second substantial objection to this proposal of having 'Outsider-as-Observer' is that it is premised on the belief that Army SSBs are inherently biased and incompetent and need to be observed so as to keep them on straight and narrow path. Do you have any authentic data to prove this hypothesis? My husband was superseded at the rank of Colonel and we felt that he deserved to rise higher, but does that mean that the SSB which rejected him biased? No! Reasons for non-meritorious rising in any system are always more complex and need far more deliberate and fundamental solutions. 

 

4.   My appeal to you is that please ask military higerarchy to develop an Appraisal System, which is comprehensive, transparent and quantifiable to maximum extent possible. It should also be multi-point appraisal without possibility of cartelization. If you want to undertake this fundamental reform I for one am ready to give a viable alternate appraisal system. But to expect that 'Outsider-as-Observer' can solve the problem is laughable to say the least.

 

5.       Second issue is that of direct correspondence by soldiers with the Defence Minister on administrative and discipline matters. Without doubt, military grievance redress system can be improved a lot. But to think that interference by a well-meaning but ignorant Defence Minister is the solution to the problem is indeed laughable. I call you ignorant with good reason. Dear Sir, there is a whole specialization of `Military Justice System’ based on premise that military activities are so different from normal civil life activities that these military activities have to be governed by separate laws and thus Military Justice System is quite distinct from Civil Justice System. 

 

6.   Hence my simple appeal to you is please accept the fact that Military is distinct organization and has to have a separate grievance system which upholds and enforces rights of soldiers and their families efficiently while maintaining sanctity of Chain of Command. MoD as organized in India and its staff of civilian bureaucrats is by no means competent to deliver justice to soldiers. Only thing this system of Defence Minister being first point of appeal is achieving is dilution of command authority of military commanders. How does this dilution of military commanders authority helps country get a more effective military is moot point? So rather than becoming first point of appeal, please help, push and insist on military developing responsive grievance redress system embedded in chain of command.  Again, if you want to seriously pursue the Matter to logical conclusion I am ready to offer imminently workable Grievance Redress System for the Army.

Saving the Character of Officers Messes

The issue which I propose to raise for your consideration pertains to offer of membership to Army Officers Messes to Civilian Group A officers like IFA.

Officers Messes in Army, as you know, are created, maintained and run with Public Funds supplemented by private contributions by officers. Elaborate rules, codified as Paras 1259 to 1289 in Regulations for Army, 1987 govern membership and functioning of these messes. Regulations for Army strictly limit membership to these officers messes to Army Officers, as defined in Section 3 (VIII) of the Army Act and Army Rule 188. Thus no commander including GOC-in-C have legal authority to open the doors of Army Officers Mess to anyone else. Being member of such a mess is both a 'compulsion' and a 'privilege' for an army officer. This membership entails both social as well as financial obligations on the army officers and their families. The member of such mess also has, necessarily, to be under command of a military authority. Thus I am surprised that many of the Command Headquarters have made IFA member of their officers mess on the pretext of they (IFA) are part of said Headquarters and membership is limited to tenure of IFA with the headquarters.

Civilian Group A Officers like IFA belong to what is termed as an 'Organised Cadre' and Government apparatus consists of many such cadres, e.g, IAS, IDAS, IDES, IDSE and so on. As you would be well aware these Civilian Group A Officers are governed by CCS ( CCA) Rules. Thus the terms and conditions of service of Group A Officers are quite different from those of the Army Officers. However many a time some of them do affiliate with the Army in various capacities for a tenure and extending officers mess membership to anyone can result in demands for the same from others. In fact majority of 17405 Civilian Group A Officers of MoD can claim membership to Army Officers Messes on same grounds as advanced for IFAs. For example an IDES officer may be CEO or DEO in a small military station like Bukhlow or Wellington where civilian population may be negligible and these officers may want to partake army facilities. A civilian GE from IDSE may want to be member of Unit Officers Mess in Barmer. There are many LAO headed by officers of IDAS who are affiliated with Army and they may want to be part of local Army Officers Mess. IAS and AFHQ Cadre officers who are part of MoD may want to be members of Army Battle Honours Mess. 

Then there are equivalent civilians like Lecturer for 11th and 12th classes in Central Schools located in military stations primarily catering for wards of army All Rank. These lecturers draw same Grade Pay as Lieutenant and Captain. Does the Army plan to extend membership to Army Officers Messes to all of these officials. If yes how does it propose to create adequate infrastructure and staff for the same and if not then how does it justify extension of membership to IFAs.

General SLA Marshal (US Army) had described Army Officers Mess as a 'uniquely military establishment meant to nurture and strengthen 'Primary Group' in a combat unit. Let's keep our messes focused on the function they are meant for. Request senior military leadership be asked to not weaken very foundations of military ethos for the sake of temporary advantage of having an agreeable IFA. It is important for all of us to remember that youngsters join army for its distinctiveness which includes such institutions like Officers Mess, which have been nurtured by generations of predecessors who didn't think only of immediate. My humble request is that if we can't add to it let's not destroy the existing.

Lastly let me end by repeating an old truth, which is that, each cadre looks after itself. 

For example:

A. Recent bad deal given by the Armed Forces from 7th CPC has been widely and correctly attributed to biased advice the young IDAS officer gave to the CPC.

B. When Civilian Group A Officers were granted NFFU they did not ask government to extend that perk to officers of Armed Forces.

C. Previous subterfuge to deny 'Rank Pay' to Officers of Armed Forces was executed by the IDAS officersmember of Unit Officers Mess in Barmer. There are many LAO headed by officers of IDAS who are affiliated with Army and they may want to be part of local Army Officers Mess.  IAS and AFHQ Cadre officers who are part of MoD may want to be members of Army Battle Honours Mess. 

Then there are equivalent civilians like Lecturer for 11th and 12th classes in Central Schools located in military stations primarily catering for wards of army All Rank. These lecturers draw same Grade Pay as Lieutenant and Captain. Does the Army plan to extend membership to Army Officers Messes to all of these officials. If yes how does it propose to create adequate infrastructure and staff for the same and if not then how does it justify extension of membership to IFAs.

General SLA Marshal (US Army) had described Army Officers Mess as a 'uniquely military establishment meant to nurture and strengthen 'Primary Group' in a combat unit. Let's keep our messes focused on the function they are meant for. Request senior military leadership be asked to not weaken very foundations of military ethos for the sake of temporary advantage of having an agreeable IFA. It is important for all of us to remember that youngsters join army for its distinctiveness which includes such institutions like Officers Mess, which have been nurtured by generations of predecessors who didn't think only of immediate. My humble request is that if we can't add to it let's not destroy the existing. Lastly let me end by repeating an old truth, which is that, each cadre looks after itself. Remember when Civilian Group A Officers were granted NFFU they did not ask government to extend that perk to Army officers.

Streamlining CSD Procedures

This is my fourth missive to you on matters affecting soldiers, veterans and their widows and the issue I am drawing your attention to is purchase of Group VII (AFD) Items from CSD. I recommend that you visit Website of CSD to appreciate the effort mandarin of your ministry must have put in to draw up convoluted process which All Rank (serving and retired) have to follow to buy AFD item! To understand its adverse impact just put yourself in shoes of a veteran living in Barmer of Rajasthan or Bhuj of Gujarat or Siang of Arunachal Pradesh. He or his widow would have to prepare a sheaf of documents and DD, go to District Sainiks Welfare Officer/ Station HQ to get 'Sanction' and then travel hundreds of kilometers to Jaipur or Ahmedabad or Guwahati to deposit said sheaf of documents and DD to get a Release Order from CSD Depot and then go back to local dealer in Jodhpurs or Jamnagar or Jorhat to buy even an AC or Fridge or Washing Machine! That in the meantime the item may have become unavailable is different matter altogether!

I recommend that this archaic system be replaced with a simple SVC Card made on similar lines as Liquor Card presently used by All Ranks to buy liquor from CSD. This card will entitle JCO and OR to buy two Group VII items every three years and Officers three Group VII items every three years. Process would entail All Rank to select the item at local dealer showroom, get a quotation and deposit the requisite amount with defendant URC, who would issue Release Instructions to local dealer and these will entitle consumer to take delivery of item. Dealer would be paid by local URC on production of Delivery Note signed by customer. If adopted this proposed system would do away with rigmarole of multiple 'Sanctions' from various 'Authorities', reduce workload of our dear CSD Employees and also reduce possibility of corruption.

Why are Military Veterans Dying Young

Impetus for this blogpost addressed to Defence Minister of India came from a report titled 'Battle for Recognition' published in the Hindu of 29/11/15, which claimed that with per-capita cost at Rs. 2.97 Lacs the CAPF were lowest paid employees of GoI and that Defence Person at Rs. 3.24 Lacs per annum was second lowest paid. However a deeper analysis shows that in terms of life time costs Military is paid the least. In this post I propose to nail the lie about Cost of Soldier to Government and underscore the fact that Military Veterans are dying young. To prove my points I have relied solely on the data given in the Report of 7th CPC (this will makes task of cross checking the figures easy).

1. Cost of Soldier to Government. The 7th CPC computes per-capita cost of MHA employee at Rs. 2.97 Lacs at Para 3.65 on Page 35 and since CAPF form more than 96 percent of MHA strength, this can be safely presumed to be cost of a Constable of CAPF.

In Para 6.2.73 (i) (b) on Page 121 the 7th CPC states that Military Service Pay (MSP) gives edge of 27.77 percent in emoluments to a soldier in comparison to a constable of CAPF. Thus we can assume the Cost of Soldier to Government to be Rs. 2.97+27.77% = 3.79 Lakh per annum. However actual expenditure on Pay and Allowances during FY 11-12 was Rs. 39996 Crore less Rs. 2000 Crore paid to Defence Civilians in Army thus per-capita cost of Army was 3.27 Lacs. In any case both the figures are much less than per-capita cost of MoD Civilian at Rs. 4.31 Lacs or Revenue at Rs. 5.10 Lacs.

However per-capita cost while in service tells only half of story because a soldier retires after 17 years of service with least possible pension in last rank held (Naik TS) while every CAPF Constable gets to serve till 58 years of age after getting three MACPs retires with maximum possible pension in last rank held (ASI). Thus lifetime earnings of a soldier on reaching 75 years of age are 45 percent of CAPF Constable reaching 75 years of age.

2. Plight of Veterans. Refer to tables given on Page 382 and 400 of the Report of 7th CPC. First point to note is that 182000 soldiers have retired even before they attain 45 years of age due to the fact that soldiers start retiring after 17 years service when they are 39/40 year old. Second important fact is that 57 percent of military pensioners are below 60 years of age, 19 percent in 60 to 70 year age bracket and 16 percent in 70 to 80 year bracket. In case of Defence Civilian pensioners, no one retires before 60 years of age, 51 percent are in 60 to 70 year age bracket and 40 percent in 70 to 80 year age bracket. Third albeit most alarming fact that emerges from analysis of this data is that Military Veterans are dying younger in 40-60 year age bracket at annualized rate of 3.8 percent as compared to annualised rate of 2 percent for Defence Civilian Pensioners in age bracket 60-70 years. In a country where average life span is 72 years, early death of military veterans is sure sign of economic hardship and stressful life both prior to and after retirement.

I am sanguine that:
(A) You would kindly take concrete steps to either ensure that All Rank serve till 60 years of age or retire with 75 percent of last pay drawn as pension and OROP is applied as defined by the Parliament.
(B) Institute a time bound study by 'Out of Government Expert Group' to identify causes and suggest remedy for short life span of military veterans.