There are no short-term solutions for increasing defence pensions. It is a political challenge that the National Security Council must holistically examine.
Justice M. Vijayaraghavan (retd) argues that high court judges promoted from lower courts get lesser pension than judges who previously served as advocates.
The claim that VB-GRAMG provides an employment guarantee is incorrect. The only guarantee is to 'empower' the Centre to allow partial implementation in notified areas alone.
It is argued that India-Israel ties are moving from buyer–seller dynamic to one focused on joint development & manufacturing partnership, a shift 'more durable' than traditional arms sales.
Don’t blame misfortune. This is colossal incompetence and insensitivity. So bad, heads would have rolled even in the old PSU-era Indian Airlines and Air India.
Defence civilian chowkidar to naval police, gate duty chowkidar is local area suty most important security parpos defence civilian chowkidar is NPS formula and retired age for 60 combined defence chowkidar for naval police
Defence civilian chowkidar to Defence Police defence civilian chowkidar is local area is study same for state police defence chowkidar is nps formula under and is retired age for 60 is security and responsibili person and defence civilian chowkidar and defence police is combined work most for security
No body is talking about the improvement of the condition of the forces specially PBOR. Today’s scenario is like that nobody wants to continue to serve beyond the initial regular engagement (RE). WHY??? nobody asked? Bipin Rawat saheb never asked that?
When any body will forsee some carrier aspect and other prospect and better working condition , then definitely he will opt to continue to serve.
In Indian Air force , a PBOR can serve up to 57 years of age. But now days , every body mostly retires at age 38 years after completion of RE. Whatever facilities defence services provides is limited to OFFICERS only. If they continue to serve up to 57 years Then the burden of pension theoretically became half than the present.
Jai hind..
By increasing intake of SSC officers and decreasing P C officers in defence forces pension budget can be reduced as explained below.The central government should make defence service of atleast 10 years essential condition for selection in civil services of center and states at all levels. Another option can be to make provision for 50 % reservation for SSC officers in all category if first option is not admissible in our constitutional set up.This will not only reduce pension budget of defence forces but also ensure disciplined officers for civil services of country.Besides this it will encourage youth to join Short service commission as youths are now disinclined to join SSC as the are retired in age of 35 years when their family responsibility is at peak.By increasing intake of SSC officers and decreasingly P C officers and adopting reservation policy for SSC officers pension budget of defence can be curtailed.
Yes, increasing Def Pers pension is a National calamity whereas pension of other Govt emp, railways, police, bureaucrats, politicians r constantly decreasing, isn’t it ? MERA BHARAT MAHAN.
I think you need to address both Officer and PBOR. For Officers, a solution could well be to reduce the number of Permanent Commissioned (PC) Officers and increase Short Service intake. Some of the SS intake will get selected for PC, others get absorbed in the Private Sector, or preferably allowed to take UPSC exams for the so-called Group A services, some credit can be given for Services rendered. It probably is too much to make Service mandatory for UPSC exams, but that would be ideal.
For PBOR, usually highly trained and disciplined, their induction into Para-Military forces and other central and state police forces would give you a very strong, disciplined pool to choose from.
The advantage of both suggestions is to reduce the number of pensionable staff, reducing financial outlays.
Reduction in absolute size of the Army, as suggested by Mr Barsode is also essential. Unfortunately leaving a vacuum in the defensive posture is not an option – one needs to accelerate the creation of Integrated Battle Groups – these need to be highly mobile and pack a punch enough to deter likely adversaries.
The basic issue is that the size of the Indian Army is quite large by itself and it is not clear if we need such a large army. We need to dispassionately consider the required size of the army assuming worst case scenario of two front war and given that we are now in an era of modern warfare with highly sophisticated equipment. If China could reduce its army considerably and USA manages with a small army as well, we ought to make a fresh assessment. Pending that, options suggested by the author are worth examining. However, given our approach to such complicated issues, it is most likely that suggestion by CDS will be accepted, as it is the most non controversial! But that would be a wrong foot forward and just an interim measure.
Defence civilian chowkidar to naval police, gate duty chowkidar is local area suty most important security parpos defence civilian chowkidar is NPS formula and retired age for 60 combined defence chowkidar for naval police
Defence civilian chowkidar to Defence Police defence civilian chowkidar is local area is study same for state police defence chowkidar is nps formula under and is retired age for 60 is security and responsibili person and defence civilian chowkidar and defence police is combined work most for security
No body is talking about the improvement of the condition of the forces specially PBOR. Today’s scenario is like that nobody wants to continue to serve beyond the initial regular engagement (RE). WHY??? nobody asked? Bipin Rawat saheb never asked that?
When any body will forsee some carrier aspect and other prospect and better working condition , then definitely he will opt to continue to serve.
In Indian Air force , a PBOR can serve up to 57 years of age. But now days , every body mostly retires at age 38 years after completion of RE. Whatever facilities defence services provides is limited to OFFICERS only. If they continue to serve up to 57 years Then the burden of pension theoretically became half than the present.
Jai hind..
By increasing intake of SSC officers and decreasing P C officers in defence forces pension budget can be reduced as explained below.The central government should make defence service of atleast 10 years essential condition for selection in civil services of center and states at all levels. Another option can be to make provision for 50 % reservation for SSC officers in all category if first option is not admissible in our constitutional set up.This will not only reduce pension budget of defence forces but also ensure disciplined officers for civil services of country.Besides this it will encourage youth to join Short service commission as youths are now disinclined to join SSC as the are retired in age of 35 years when their family responsibility is at peak.By increasing intake of SSC officers and decreasingly P C officers and adopting reservation policy for SSC officers pension budget of defence can be curtailed.
Reduce the numbers in CAPFs, Civilians dependent of defence budget ,DRDO,DEF PSUs and increase defence budget
Lateral Entry in to govt jobs is best solution because we will get hardworking , Discipline & loyal employee in govt sector.
Yes, increasing Def Pers pension is a National calamity whereas pension of other Govt emp, railways, police, bureaucrats, politicians r constantly decreasing, isn’t it ? MERA BHARAT MAHAN.
I think you need to address both Officer and PBOR. For Officers, a solution could well be to reduce the number of Permanent Commissioned (PC) Officers and increase Short Service intake. Some of the SS intake will get selected for PC, others get absorbed in the Private Sector, or preferably allowed to take UPSC exams for the so-called Group A services, some credit can be given for Services rendered. It probably is too much to make Service mandatory for UPSC exams, but that would be ideal.
For PBOR, usually highly trained and disciplined, their induction into Para-Military forces and other central and state police forces would give you a very strong, disciplined pool to choose from.
The advantage of both suggestions is to reduce the number of pensionable staff, reducing financial outlays.
Reduction in absolute size of the Army, as suggested by Mr Barsode is also essential. Unfortunately leaving a vacuum in the defensive posture is not an option – one needs to accelerate the creation of Integrated Battle Groups – these need to be highly mobile and pack a punch enough to deter likely adversaries.
The basic issue is that the size of the Indian Army is quite large by itself and it is not clear if we need such a large army. We need to dispassionately consider the required size of the army assuming worst case scenario of two front war and given that we are now in an era of modern warfare with highly sophisticated equipment. If China could reduce its army considerably and USA manages with a small army as well, we ought to make a fresh assessment. Pending that, options suggested by the author are worth examining. However, given our approach to such complicated issues, it is most likely that suggestion by CDS will be accepted, as it is the most non controversial! But that would be a wrong foot forward and just an interim measure.