Avalanche turns grave for 17 Army
menin J&K.17 others hurt as tragedy strikes training
campin Gulmarg.Tribune News Service
Srinagar, February 8.At least 17 Army personnel, including an
officer, were killed and 17 others injured in an avalanche at
Khilanmarg in the upper reaches of Gulmarg, about 50 km from
here, today. Fortysix others were rescued in a joint operation
launched by the Army, police and the State Tourism Department.
A defence spokesman said the avalanche struck the training area
at Khelan Marg, where 400 Army personnel were undergoing
training. Around 80 members of High Altitude Warfare School
(HAWS) were trapped under the avalanche. Prompt action by
the Army, duly assisted by the state administration, including
civilian doctors and the police, resulted in the rescue of Army
personnel. A Brigadier from the formation was overseeing the
rescue operations, the spokesman said.
The tragedy has happened when the entire Kashmir valley and
its upper reaches have been witnessing heavy rain and snowfall
for the past four days, disrupting traffic on the Srinagar-Jammu
National Highway.
Various areas of the valley, particularly in north Kashmir, have
been cut off from the rest of the state due to heavy accumulation
of snow in the upper reaches and high mountain areas. Gulmarg
and Khilanmarg areas are under three to five feet snow
accumulated during the past four days.
The Disaster Management, Kashmir, had only yesterday issued
avalanche warning for various areas across the Kashmir valley
in view of continued bad weather conditions. It warned of high
danger avalanches in areas around Sonmarg on the Srinagar-
Ladakh axis, and the medium danger avalanche warning in
Khilanmarg, Uri, Baaz, Razdan Top, Keran, Machchil, Sadhna
Top, Gurez and Chowkibal areas of north Kashmir. Aamir Ali,
OSD with the Divisional Commissioner, Kashmir, in charge of
the disaster management, here yesterday, quoting the SASE,
also warned of low danger avalanches on the two sides of the
Jawahar Tunnel on the Srinagar-Jammu National Highway.
According to officials of the Tourism Department, which
conducts snow skiing events in the area, a team of skiing and
rescue experts headed by Tourist Officer GM Dar, equipped with
snow scooters and piston bullies, have joined the rescue operations.
Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Mob.098554-09128,Tele-fax 0175-5000896.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Directory of Ex-Servicemen : Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Directory of Ex-Servicemen
Ludhiana, February6.In order to extend best services to
ex-servicemen, the District Sainik Welfare Office has
decided to compile a directory of all ex-servicemen residing
in the district to keep a record that will help the department.
Giving details, newly-joined District Sainik Welfare Officer
Col Harvinder Pal Singh said, “We expect that around
40,000 ex-servicemen are residing in Ludhiana alone. If we
have all record pertaining to these former defence servicemen,
we will be able to help them.”Urging all former defence officials
to give their present address and contact numbers to Office,
Ludhiana, Col Harvinder saidthe District Sainik Welfare ,
“The directory will be helpful in forming a network that could
beused at the time of crisis and whenever their experiences and
services are required.”The information could be conveyed at
94178-22874, 98769-71230 and 0161-2741066.The project will
also be available in a digital format and will help the department
have better interaction with ex-servicemen and their families.
Please Note: A good effort,indeed,being made by an officer who
left an everlasting impression in every veteran's mind during his
short stay a Patiala.
Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Ludhiana, February6.In order to extend best services to
ex-servicemen, the District Sainik Welfare Office has
decided to compile a directory of all ex-servicemen residing
in the district to keep a record that will help the department.
Giving details, newly-joined District Sainik Welfare Officer
Col Harvinder Pal Singh said, “We expect that around
40,000 ex-servicemen are residing in Ludhiana alone. If we
have all record pertaining to these former defence servicemen,
we will be able to help them.”Urging all former defence officials
to give their present address and contact numbers to Office,
Ludhiana, Col Harvinder saidthe District Sainik Welfare ,
“The directory will be helpful in forming a network that could
beused at the time of crisis and whenever their experiences and
services are required.”The information could be conveyed at
94178-22874, 98769-71230 and 0161-2741066.The project will
also be available in a digital format and will help the department
have better interaction with ex-servicemen and their families.
Please Note: A good effort,indeed,being made by an officer who
left an everlasting impression in every veteran's mind during his
short stay a Patiala.
Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
After 55 years, WW-II veteran gets pension-Tribune News:Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
After 55 years, WW-II veteran gets pension.
Vijay Mohan-Tribune News Service.
Chandigarh- February 4.After struggling for 28 years, a veteran
of World War-II has been finally awarded pension for the
service he rendered over 55 years ago. Had it not been for
miscalculation by the Army authorities, he might have got his
pension years ago.Allowing a petition filed by Harbans Singh,
a resident of Kharar, the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed
Forces Tribunalalso directed that he should be paid three-year
arrears, commencing from the date of filing of petition till now.
Harbans Singh had served with the Rashtriya Indian ASCfrom
September 1940 to March 1946. He again enrolled onto the Army
in August 1951 and was discharged in March1955.In 1982, the
Central Government introduced a new policy under which break
in service was to be condoned and the period was to be counted
towards the qualifying period for fixing pension.Soon after, he
received a letter from ASC Records stating that he was eligible
for pension and should apply for thesame. He took up the
matter with the authoritiesconcerned, but in 1993, received a
communiqué fromthe Directorate General Supplies and
Transport that hisservice amounted to 14 years and two months.
The minimum qualifying period for pension is 15 years, but a
shortfall of six months can be condoned under law.As per the
letter, his service was short of over four months even after
condoning the grace period.Later perusal of records showed
that the date of his service period was wrongly mentioned. His
actual service periodwas over 14 years and six months, which
made him eligiblefor pension.As the matter lingered, he filed a
writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court in 1998.
The matter wasadmitted and was later transferred to the
tribunal for further consideration.
Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Mob.098554-09128,Tele-Fax 0175-5000896.
Vijay Mohan-Tribune News Service.
Chandigarh- February 4.After struggling for 28 years, a veteran
of World War-II has been finally awarded pension for the
service he rendered over 55 years ago. Had it not been for
miscalculation by the Army authorities, he might have got his
pension years ago.Allowing a petition filed by Harbans Singh,
a resident of Kharar, the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed
Forces Tribunalalso directed that he should be paid three-year
arrears, commencing from the date of filing of petition till now.
Harbans Singh had served with the Rashtriya Indian ASCfrom
September 1940 to March 1946. He again enrolled onto the Army
in August 1951 and was discharged in March1955.In 1982, the
Central Government introduced a new policy under which break
in service was to be condoned and the period was to be counted
towards the qualifying period for fixing pension.Soon after, he
received a letter from ASC Records stating that he was eligible
for pension and should apply for thesame. He took up the
matter with the authoritiesconcerned, but in 1993, received a
communiqué fromthe Directorate General Supplies and
Transport that hisservice amounted to 14 years and two months.
The minimum qualifying period for pension is 15 years, but a
shortfall of six months can be condoned under law.As per the
letter, his service was short of over four months even after
condoning the grace period.Later perusal of records showed
that the date of his service period was wrongly mentioned. His
actual service periodwas over 14 years and six months, which
made him eligiblefor pension.As the matter lingered, he filed a
writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court in 1998.
The matter wasadmitted and was later transferred to the
tribunal for further consideration.
Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Mob.098554-09128,Tele-Fax 0175-5000896.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Hindustantimes
War-injured to get maximum pension?
HT Correspondent.
NEW DELHI: The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has come to the help of war-injured soldiers and directed the government to consider a maximum of the pay scale for an officer while fixing his war injury pension.
The tribunal headed by Justice A.K. Mathur also advised the government not to differentiate between a short service commissioned officer and a permanent officer while granting death-cum-retirement gratuity (DCRG).
The tribunal accepted the plea of the petitioner Disabled War Veterans and held: "We strongly feel that it is a matter which requires a serious consideration of the Government that a person whose career has been sacrificed for safeguarding the Indian border and he is to be treated in such a poor way that he is being paid war pension on the basis of minimum of the scale of that rank. Therefore, looking yeoman service rendered by incumbent, he should be given a fair treatment."
Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Aiswarya Bhatti criticised the present government practice and said a war injury cut short an officer's service, forcing him to retire permanently. Therefore, she said, it would be harsh and unfair to the soldier if his maximum pay scale were not considered for determining the amount of war injury pension.
Observing that the discrimination on the basis of an officer's service violated Article 14 of the Constitution, the tribunal added: "Once the Short Service Commission officers and the Permanent Service Commission officers fight on the border shoulder to shoulder, they form same class and no further distinction can be made... and if unfortunately both of them receive an injury and they are disabled then no distinction can be made in payment of DCRG."
---------------
HT Correspondent.
NEW DELHI: The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has come to the help of war-injured soldiers and directed the government to consider a maximum of the pay scale for an officer while fixing his war injury pension.
The tribunal headed by Justice A.K. Mathur also advised the government not to differentiate between a short service commissioned officer and a permanent officer while granting death-cum-retirement gratuity (DCRG).
The tribunal accepted the plea of the petitioner Disabled War Veterans and held: "We strongly feel that it is a matter which requires a serious consideration of the Government that a person whose career has been sacrificed for safeguarding the Indian border and he is to be treated in such a poor way that he is being paid war pension on the basis of minimum of the scale of that rank. Therefore, looking yeoman service rendered by incumbent, he should be given a fair treatment."
Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Aiswarya Bhatti criticised the present government practice and said a war injury cut short an officer's service, forcing him to retire permanently. Therefore, she said, it would be harsh and unfair to the soldier if his maximum pay scale were not considered for determining the amount of war injury pension.
Observing that the discrimination on the basis of an officer's service violated Article 14 of the Constitution, the tribunal added: "Once the Short Service Commission officers and the Permanent Service Commission officers fight on the border shoulder to shoulder, they form same class and no further distinction can be made... and if unfortunately both of them receive an injury and they are disabled then no distinction can be made in payment of DCRG."
---------------
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Tribunal puts army in dock- says different benefits for similar injuries is disremation:Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Tribunal puts army in dock- says different benefits for
similar injuries is discrimination
NEW DELHI: When a bullet coming from the other side of
the border does not distinguish between a commissioned
and non-commissioned officer in the Army, how can the
government do so when it comes to grant of death-cum-
retirement gratuity (DCRG), wondered the newly-constituted
Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) headed by a retired Supreme
Court judge. In a major order that would assuage the long-
standing grievance of the officers, both commissioned and
non-commissioned, AFT principal Bench comprising
chairperson Justice A K Mathur and member Lt Gen M L
Naidu said this discrimination in payment of DCRG was
violative of Article 14 (right to equality) guaranteed under
the Constitution. A petitionfiled by the Disabled War Veterans
(India) through counsel Aishwarya Bhati had made two major
grievances — one relating to the difference in payment of DCRG
and the other regarding computation of pension for a disabled
soldier. Bhati had alleged that the government takes into
account the minimum payscale in the rank of the disabled
soldier to compute the war injury pension to him and had
requested AFT to direct the Centre to consider taking into
account the highest pay in the rank for the purpose. AFT agreed
on both counts with the counsel. On DCRG, it said once the
short service commission officers and the permanent service
commission officers fight on the border shoulder-to-shoulder
, they formed the same class and no further distinction can be
made. "Once they form the same class and they are fighting
shoulder-to-shoulder against the enemy and if unfortunately
both of them receive an injury and they are disabled then no
distinction can be made in the payment of DCRG," the AFT
said asking the government to take serious note of the anomaly
and review the policy forthwith. "We cannot give them benefit,
but we can only request the government that this payment of
DCRG on the basis of distinction between short service
commissionand regular service commission is highly
discriminatory. We hope and trust that the government will
remove thisdiscrimination which is apparent on the face of it,
" it said. Coming to computation of war injury pension, the
AFT said the cause of injury which disabled a soldier and cut
shorthis career was beyond the control of the personnel and
such persons should be treated fairly by being given war injury
pension on the basis of the highest pay in the rank. "We feel
strongly that it is a matter which requires serious consideration
of the government that a person whose career has been sacrificed
for safeguarding the Indian border and he is to be treated in such
a poor way that he is being paid war disabled pension on the
basisof minimum of the scale of that rank," the AFT Bench
said. "The maximum scale of that rank should be considered
for determining the amount of war injury pension," the AFT
said disposing of the petition by the Disabled War Veterans.
Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Mob.09554-09128,Tele-Fax 0175-5000896.
similar injuries is discrimination
NEW DELHI: When a bullet coming from the other side of
the border does not distinguish between a commissioned
and non-commissioned officer in the Army, how can the
government do so when it comes to grant of death-cum-
retirement gratuity (DCRG), wondered the newly-constituted
Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) headed by a retired Supreme
Court judge. In a major order that would assuage the long-
standing grievance of the officers, both commissioned and
non-commissioned, AFT principal Bench comprising
chairperson Justice A K Mathur and member Lt Gen M L
Naidu said this discrimination in payment of DCRG was
violative of Article 14 (right to equality) guaranteed under
the Constitution. A petitionfiled by the Disabled War Veterans
(India) through counsel Aishwarya Bhati had made two major
grievances — one relating to the difference in payment of DCRG
and the other regarding computation of pension for a disabled
soldier. Bhati had alleged that the government takes into
account the minimum payscale in the rank of the disabled
soldier to compute the war injury pension to him and had
requested AFT to direct the Centre to consider taking into
account the highest pay in the rank for the purpose. AFT agreed
on both counts with the counsel. On DCRG, it said once the
short service commission officers and the permanent service
commission officers fight on the border shoulder-to-shoulder
, they formed the same class and no further distinction can be
made. "Once they form the same class and they are fighting
shoulder-to-shoulder against the enemy and if unfortunately
both of them receive an injury and they are disabled then no
distinction can be made in the payment of DCRG," the AFT
said asking the government to take serious note of the anomaly
and review the policy forthwith. "We cannot give them benefit,
but we can only request the government that this payment of
DCRG on the basis of distinction between short service
commissionand regular service commission is highly
discriminatory. We hope and trust that the government will
remove thisdiscrimination which is apparent on the face of it,
" it said. Coming to computation of war injury pension, the
AFT said the cause of injury which disabled a soldier and cut
shorthis career was beyond the control of the personnel and
such persons should be treated fairly by being given war injury
pension on the basis of the highest pay in the rank. "We feel
strongly that it is a matter which requires serious consideration
of the government that a person whose career has been sacrificed
for safeguarding the Indian border and he is to be treated in such
a poor way that he is being paid war disabled pension on the
basisof minimum of the scale of that rank," the AFT Bench
said. "The maximum scale of that rank should be considered
for determining the amount of war injury pension," the AFT
said disposing of the petition by the Disabled War Veterans.
Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Mob.09554-09128,Tele-Fax 0175-5000896.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Disability benefits for pre-2006 pensioners-Vijay Mohan Tribune News Service : Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Vijay Mohan:Tribune News Service.
Chandigarh, January 31.Following the recommendations of the Committee of Secretaries, the government has partially
modified regulations for disability pension and extended
benefit of broad-banding of disability percentage to those
invalided out of serviceprior to January 1996.The cap on
war injury pension, restricting the same to themaximum
of last drawn emoluments for personnel invalided out in
Category ‘E’, also stands removed. The orders to this effect
were issued by the Ministry of Defence on January 19 after
financial sanction for the same was accorded earlier this
month.The benefits of broad-banding of disability
percentage and removing the cap on war injury pension
were recommended by the Sixth Pay Commission. These
were, however, extended only to those invalided out of
service in1996 or after, thereby putting similarly placed
persons left service earlier at a disadvantage.While the
partial modification has been welcomed by veterans as
a positive development,some officers and legal experts
point out that the benefits have been extended only to
those individuals, who were invalided out of service and
not to those who retired on completion of their terms of
engagement.
In the case, Paramjit Singh Vs Union of India, the Punjab
and Haryana High Court, has alreadyheld this disparity
to be arbitrary.
Regulations now themselves provide that for the purposes
of disability pension, persons placed in low medical
category at the time of retirement are deemed to be invalided
out of service.The different treatment between invalided and
superannuating personnel, according to lawyers dealing in
the pensionary matters, seems strangein view of the fact that
broad-banding or rounding-off disability percentage was
introduced to curb medical subjectivity because it was felt
that different medical boards were providing different
percentages of disability for similar ailments.
Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Mob.098554-09128,Tele-fax 0175-5000896.
The govt.sleeps while the sadists take the system for a ride -Navdeep :Veteran Prabhjot Singh Chhatwal PLS Retd.
Dear Veterans,
Regards.Maj.Navdeep has posted the following onhis
blog.Our organisation fully endosres his views and I
request all otherwelfare organisations of veterans to
take same stand. The legal pundits are bent upon
crushing the pensioners, particulary, the veterans
and their dependents. We will have to take a boldstand
against this injustice being done to us all. We should
stand united and pay heed to the clarion call given by
Maj. Navdeep.Sunday, January 31, 2010
The gameplan of legal pundits :
The govt sleeps while sadists take the system for
a ride
You may have read this on the blog before.
All is fair in love and war they say, and the same seems
to be the battle-cry of the Central Government against
its retired employees.So what is it that the people in
officialdom have against disabled veterans and
pensioners ?The last months have seen the Union of
India filing appeals and SLPs in almostevery decision
of the Hon’ble Courts allowing disability pension to
disabled veterans. The same is the story with other
pensionary matters. I feel ashamed in saying this but
while the lawyers make hay, former soldiers and their
families suffer in silence.It is turning out to be sickening
now. And this is to say the least.Law has now been
well settled by the Courts includingthe Hon’ble
Supreme Court on certain issues, but the legal advisors
of the government are in no mood to relent. Even when
High Courts (and now benches of the AFT) are deciding
matters with well-rounded decisions based on settled
law and principlesof equity, the central govt continues
to mindlessly file appeals before the Supreme Court.
The govt also continues to refuse benefits to veterans
in settled issues till the time individual casesare filed
separately by pensioners. One such glaring example
discussed before is disability pension to voluntary
retirees. Despite the fact that the Supreme Court has
upheld the right ofvoluntary retirees to receive
disability pension, the Union of India continues to
fileappeals against decisions of High Courts granting
such benefits to affected disabled personnel. Another
very recent and shocking example is SLP No 688 of
2010 filed by the Central Govt before the Supreme
Court which was listed for hearing on 25th of January,
2010. The case involved the improvedpensionary
benefits granted to PBOR wef 10-10-1997 after
removing the anomalies of the 5th CPC. The Hon’ble
Punjab & Haryana High Court had earlier in the year
2008 held that such benefits had to be granted to
affected personnel with effect from01-01-1996 (and not
10-10-1997) since the anomaly had to be rectified
from the date of its inception and not from some other
prospective artificial date. The High Court had hence
held personnel who retired between 01-01-1996 to
10-10-1997 also entitled to the enhanced benefits. The
Union of India, as expected, challenged the verdict
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court through an SLP but
the same was dismissed on merits on 21-11-2008.
So far, so good, but what is shameful is that fully
knowing that the law was now settled by the Apex
Court and that the Central Govt.had itself rectified
this anomaly through the anomalies committee,
another SLP (the above mentioned 688 of 2010)
was filed by them this new year against another such
decision by the same High Court and the same has
again been dismissed by the Apex Court on
25-01-2010. I bet the Hon’ble Supreme Court would
not have been informed in the fresh SLP of the
earlier dismissal of an exactly similar case in the
year 2008.It is high time that the Defence Minister,
the military top brass and the Defence Secretary take
a call on this mindless one sided ego basedlitigation
which, besides leading to burdening judicial fora,is
also leading to burden on the State and demoralisation
of rank and file. Nobody stands to gain except probably
the battery of lawyers appearing for the Union of India.
It also seems that power has been concentrated in the
hands of a few officers dealing with pensionary and
legal matters who have spent quite a few years in the
corridors of the Services Headquarters & the Ministry
and decisions of filing appeals are thrust upon the top
brass without due judiciousness or sensitivity
concerning the issues at hand. This must change. A
letter recently marked to the Defence Minster by a an
ex-services welfare organisation aptly describes the rot:
“Lower staff at the Pension wing of the Defence Ministry
is also known to prepare misleading and deceptive
noting sheetswhich are put up to senior officers and
even the Raksha Mantri, who in good faith affix their
initials leaving the gallery open to such officers who
then flaunt the said approvals by stating that the same
have the sanction of the Defence Minister. It is also
learnt that the officers in the Defence Ministry have
asked Govt.lawyers in writing to change their legal
opinion when such lawyers had advised against filing
of appeals.”What is the game behind this, one may ask.
Well, the govt is well aware that disabled veterans and
poor pensioners do not have adequate financial
back-up to defend their cases in the Supreme Court,so
for the govt it is well worth taking a chance. I can only
say that in the interest of equity and fair-play, we all
must wakeup before some officers take the entire
defence services and the legal system for a royal ride.
It is also time for senior staff of theMinistry and our
uniformed officers to apply proper mindbefore they
permit their subordinates to resort to unethical
litigation against poor people who have served the
nation to the best of their abilities. The hint of my
call is particularlydirected towards the upper
echelons of Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare in
the MoD and the Personnel ServicesDirectorate in the
Army Headquarters. The tendency to view poor
litigants as ‘Enemies of the State’ must also change.
Regards.Maj.Navdeep has posted the following onhis
blog.Our organisation fully endosres his views and I
request all otherwelfare organisations of veterans to
take same stand. The legal pundits are bent upon
crushing the pensioners, particulary, the veterans
and their dependents. We will have to take a boldstand
against this injustice being done to us all. We should
stand united and pay heed to the clarion call given by
Maj. Navdeep.Sunday, January 31, 2010
The gameplan of legal pundits :
The govt sleeps while sadists take the system for
a ride
You may have read this on the blog before.
All is fair in love and war they say, and the same seems
to be the battle-cry of the Central Government against
its retired employees.So what is it that the people in
officialdom have against disabled veterans and
pensioners ?The last months have seen the Union of
India filing appeals and SLPs in almostevery decision
of the Hon’ble Courts allowing disability pension to
disabled veterans. The same is the story with other
pensionary matters. I feel ashamed in saying this but
while the lawyers make hay, former soldiers and their
families suffer in silence.It is turning out to be sickening
now. And this is to say the least.Law has now been
well settled by the Courts includingthe Hon’ble
Supreme Court on certain issues, but the legal advisors
of the government are in no mood to relent. Even when
High Courts (and now benches of the AFT) are deciding
matters with well-rounded decisions based on settled
law and principlesof equity, the central govt continues
to mindlessly file appeals before the Supreme Court.
The govt also continues to refuse benefits to veterans
in settled issues till the time individual casesare filed
separately by pensioners. One such glaring example
discussed before is disability pension to voluntary
retirees. Despite the fact that the Supreme Court has
upheld the right ofvoluntary retirees to receive
disability pension, the Union of India continues to
fileappeals against decisions of High Courts granting
such benefits to affected disabled personnel. Another
very recent and shocking example is SLP No 688 of
2010 filed by the Central Govt before the Supreme
Court which was listed for hearing on 25th of January,
2010. The case involved the improvedpensionary
benefits granted to PBOR wef 10-10-1997 after
removing the anomalies of the 5th CPC. The Hon’ble
Punjab & Haryana High Court had earlier in the year
2008 held that such benefits had to be granted to
affected personnel with effect from01-01-1996 (and not
10-10-1997) since the anomaly had to be rectified
from the date of its inception and not from some other
prospective artificial date. The High Court had hence
held personnel who retired between 01-01-1996 to
10-10-1997 also entitled to the enhanced benefits. The
Union of India, as expected, challenged the verdict
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court through an SLP but
the same was dismissed on merits on 21-11-2008.
So far, so good, but what is shameful is that fully
knowing that the law was now settled by the Apex
Court and that the Central Govt.had itself rectified
this anomaly through the anomalies committee,
another SLP (the above mentioned 688 of 2010)
was filed by them this new year against another such
decision by the same High Court and the same has
again been dismissed by the Apex Court on
25-01-2010. I bet the Hon’ble Supreme Court would
not have been informed in the fresh SLP of the
earlier dismissal of an exactly similar case in the
year 2008.It is high time that the Defence Minister,
the military top brass and the Defence Secretary take
a call on this mindless one sided ego basedlitigation
which, besides leading to burdening judicial fora,is
also leading to burden on the State and demoralisation
of rank and file. Nobody stands to gain except probably
the battery of lawyers appearing for the Union of India.
It also seems that power has been concentrated in the
hands of a few officers dealing with pensionary and
legal matters who have spent quite a few years in the
corridors of the Services Headquarters & the Ministry
and decisions of filing appeals are thrust upon the top
brass without due judiciousness or sensitivity
concerning the issues at hand. This must change. A
letter recently marked to the Defence Minster by a an
ex-services welfare organisation aptly describes the rot:
“Lower staff at the Pension wing of the Defence Ministry
is also known to prepare misleading and deceptive
noting sheetswhich are put up to senior officers and
even the Raksha Mantri, who in good faith affix their
initials leaving the gallery open to such officers who
then flaunt the said approvals by stating that the same
have the sanction of the Defence Minister. It is also
learnt that the officers in the Defence Ministry have
asked Govt.lawyers in writing to change their legal
opinion when such lawyers had advised against filing
of appeals.”What is the game behind this, one may ask.
Well, the govt is well aware that disabled veterans and
poor pensioners do not have adequate financial
back-up to defend their cases in the Supreme Court,so
for the govt it is well worth taking a chance. I can only
say that in the interest of equity and fair-play, we all
must wakeup before some officers take the entire
defence services and the legal system for a royal ride.
It is also time for senior staff of theMinistry and our
uniformed officers to apply proper mindbefore they
permit their subordinates to resort to unethical
litigation against poor people who have served the
nation to the best of their abilities. The hint of my
call is particularlydirected towards the upper
echelons of Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare in
the MoD and the Personnel ServicesDirectorate in the
Army Headquarters. The tendency to view poor
litigants as ‘Enemies of the State’ must also change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
