HomeSeventh Pay CommissionPension

Recommendations 7th CPC for pensioners:Anomalies in Pension for Pre 2006 Pensioners

Anomalies in Pension for Pre 2006 Pensioners: Recommendations 7th CPC for pensioners: Vidya Sagar Arora’s View

Reward for Inefficiency

I am of 1966 batch of IDSE and joined MES through UPSC Exam of 1966 and had served for 35 yrs 11 months and 9 days and out of which 15 yrs service is in JAG and above grade. I was promoted as SE(JAG Scale) on 29 Jun 1989, ACE on 27 Feb 1997. I had retired as ACE (DIG Scale ) on 31 Mar 2004.Later on through courts order, I got promotion to CE(SAG) in Jul 2014 retrospectively wef 19 Dec 2000. When I retired on 31 Mar 2004, I was drawing Rs20000/ which was top of DIG Scale. Now, following would be my pension payable as per 7 CPC recommendations.
A) Had I Retired as ACE (level 13 A); I would have got 7 increments and based on 7cpc recommendation my pension would be 50% of Rs1, 61,300/ = 80,650/ as per table 5 on page 93 of report.

Read also: 7th CPC Report Chapter 10. Pension and Related Benefits 10.1 Pension and Related Benefits of Civilian Employees [click here]

B) Now, I having got the promotion to CE and having accepted it, I would get 3 increments in CE’s( Level 14 ) scale, my pension would be 50% of Rs1,57,600/= 78800/ which is less than A above.
C) Had I retired as SE without further promotion, I would have got 14 increments in level 13 and my pension would have been 50% of Rs1, 79,300= 89,650. This is much more than A & B above.
This anomaly has come because promotions in most of the departments do not take place immediately after min. residual service due to skewed cadre structure with proportionately very low strength at higher level as compared to elite services like IAS/IPS. Individuals who have been promoted at fag end of their career are bound to get lower pension than those who were junior but were not promoted if present recommendations of 7th CPC are accepted. In Maj Gen SPS vains case it has been held by Supreme Court that pension of Maj Gen cannot be lower than that of brigadier. Thus a principle has been laid down by the highest court that a person retired in higher grade shall be given higher pension than those retired in lower grade. This principle has been reiterated by Patna High court on 15.05.15 in civil writ petition10757 of 2010 in S30 case. Earlier this was also reiterated by principal bench of CAT on 20.11.14 in OA937/2010 again in S30 case.
The Commission recommends a revised pension formulation for civil employees including CAPF personnel as well as for Defence personnel, who have retired before 01.01.2016. This formulation will bring about parity between past pensioners and current retirees for the same length of service in the pay scale at the time of retirement.
Read also: 7th CPC Report Chapter 10. Pension and Related Benefits 10.1 Pension and Related Benefits of Defence Forces Personnel [click here]
Problem due to lack of vacancies at higher level was partly solved by 6th CPC that recommended non-functional up gradation in all Group A services with two years gap at par with all India services. Thus had I not retired as CE before 2006,I would have got scale of HAG, ,which my juniors got. Under the modified parity my pension after 6th CPC should have been fixed at 33500 which would have been revised to Rs 91,100 after acceptance of recommendation of 7th CPC.
I suggest that to mitigate above anomalies, the recommendation of the commission need to be modified by government while accepting the report;-
a)Pensioners retired in pay band 4 I e 37400-67000 should be allowed number of increments earned by them after having entered this pay band while fixing their nominal pay for fixing their revised pension.
b) If any pensioner (say X) junior to one (say Y who retired before 2006) has retired post 2006 after getting NF up gradation, then Y should also be allowed benefit of up gradation while fixing his nominal pay for revising pension.
Pension in that case would be 50% of Rs 182200 (from level 15)= Rs 91100.


Stay connected with us via Facebook, Google+ or Email Subscription.

Subscribe to Central Government Employee News & Tools by Email [Click Here]
Follow us: Twitter [click here] | Facebook [click here] Google+ [click here]


  • Anonymous 8 years ago

    The above message of 25.12.2015 : 7.13 PM is from:-
    GS Oberoi,
    President, AIAROSI.
    email: [email protected]

  • Anonymous 8 years ago

    Dear Shri Vidya Sagar Arora ji,
    Please let me have your email ID.
    My email ID is [email protected]
    GS Oberoi, President, AIAROSI.

  • Anonymous 8 years ago

    The 2009 Orders of Gov't. issued by DoP&T were made specifically applicable to Pensioners so that pre-2009 Retirees from Organised Services who had suffered all along in their services get relief at least as pensioners. Since these orders would provide the due relief to post 2006 officers during their service itself, there would not be any more need to provide relief to post 2006 Retirees.The orders are, therefore, really meant to give relief to the pre-2006 retirees.

  • Anonymous 8 years ago

    I would like to send email to Shri Vidya Sagar Arora on these issues so that a satisfactory solution is suggested to the Gov't. to remove the anomalies. GS Oberoi.

    • Anonymous 8 years ago

      I would like to record my views that it is NOT inappropriate or anomalous(in fact, it is but Necessary) for the maximum of a lower Level Matrix Table to be greater than the minimum of a higher Level, as the pay/pension ALSO depends on the length of service put in at that Level Matrix.
      As far as the applicable Matrix Table is concerned, it should go with the STATUS of the POST and not the then prevailing scale of the post, as already clearly decided by the Gov't. through DoP&PW OM of 17/12/98.
      To further explain, for example, the Matrix scale applicable for the post of SE, CPWD( and equivalent post in Central Engineering Services)IRRESPECTIVE of the date of retirement would be Level 13, for which the pay scale in terms of V CPC is Rs. 14,300 t0 18,300.
      A pensioner, say with long years of service as SE, CPWD(Level 13) may as well draw more pay/pension than a Chief Engineer, CPWD(Level 14)promoted after only a few years of service as SE, CPWD.
      Gurbaksh Singh Oberoi, President, All India Retired Officers of Survey of India.

  • pradip kumar chatterjee 8 years ago

    Shri Arora's observation is appropiate. But, I am of the view that his suggestion as at a) above should be extended not only to pay band 4 but also to all the affected pay bands.

  • Anonymous 8 years ago

    Regarding Shri Vidya Sagar Arora's article on Anomalies in 7th CPC Report, my comment is that he is entitled to pension in the scale of Add. Secretary w.e.f. 31.3. 2006 vide 2009 Orders of NF Upgradation of DoP&T, which were specifically made applicable to all Pensioners.
    I have now taken up with the Hon'ble Minister, Dr. Jitendra Singh ji.
    GS Oberoi, President, All India Association of Retired Officers of Survey of India.
    email: [email protected]

    • Anonymous 8 years ago

      Here, I may further add that the pensioner should have the option to determine his pension as is more beneficial to him. For example, if his pension as Superintending Engineer(JAG),Level 13 in 7th CPC with the matrix increments equal to the total number of years served as SE and above before retirement works to be higher than his pension in the higher post as Chief Engineer with the increments earned in this higher scale, he cannot justifiably be stopped from the option of drawing pension in the lower scale.
      I would like to further state that pre-96 retirees from the post of Superintending Engineer(and equivalent posts in Central Engineering Services, like Dy. Director, Survey of India)are entitled to get their pension fixed in Matrix Level 13, i.e. Scale Rs.14,300 to 18,300(CPC V Terms),irrespective of the fact whether they served in the scale Rs. 3,700 to 5,000 or Rs. 4,500 to 5,700/-(IV CPC Terms), as the two scales(of SE and SE(NF Sel. Grade) were merged w.e.f. 1.1.96.
      It should be noted that the V CPC recommended that for 'modified parity', the Status of the POST held is CRUCIAL for determining the pay/pension, and this was made absolutely clear beyond any doubt, through the issue of DoP&PW OM of 17.12.1998. And, this has also been ratified time and again by the Apex Court that the Minimum pension cannot be less than 50% of the minimum of the revised pay of the POST held at the time of retirement.
      We are thankful to the 7th CPC that they have fulfilled the earnest wish expressed by the V CPC that 'complete parity would be achieved over a period of time'.
      GS Oberoi, Director(Retired), Survey of India, President, AIAROSI.

    • Dear Sir,
      What reason not to clarified CSD facilities for family pensioners(widows wife) to MOD & now how much time to wait clarification regarding admissibility of CSD facilities to family pensioners(widows wife) to MOD . Because many of family(widows wife) pensioner waiting for this facility…

    • Good morning VISHWANATH, dear as per me all family pensioners getting CSD facilities, may please contact me on mail [email protected] ASHOK DHINGRA Asitt. Sect. Gen UFESM Regd