OROP Latest News: A high level meeting was taken up by Defence Minister on July 16, 2014
The demand for one rank one pension (OROP) was accepted by the previous government and a provision of Rs. 500 crore was made in the interim budget. The new government, stating its intention to implement the demand many times, has also provided for it in the regular budget. However, veterans are nowhere near getting the enhanced pensions envisaged. What is the current status on OROP?
A high-level meeting was taken by the defence minister on July 16 to thrash out issues with Service Chiefs, staff of Services headquarters and the top brass of the defence ministry, including defence accounts and the department of ex-servicemen’s welfare attending.
Also present were the representatives of four major ex-servicemen’s organisations to give inputs and plead their case. Regrettably, the meeting was inconclusive. A deadlock was created over the most basic issue, the very definition of OROP between bureaucrats of the MOD on one side and the uniformed fraternity plus the veterans on the other. The defence minister stated that the Koshiyari Committee’s definition of OROP might not be acceptable to the government now. His remark to veterans to lower their expectations reveals the stand of the government on the issue, causing consternation among them.
The political executive as well as the people of this country must realise that OROP is not a concession but is meant to offset restricted terms of service to soldiers wherein they are retired at a very young age. Here, the definition set by the Koshiyari Committee must prevail in that OROP implies that uniform pension be paid to Armed Forces personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service, irrespective of their date of retirement, and any future enhancement in the rates of pension to be automatically passed on to past pensioners. It is significant that this explanation had already been accepted by the government. My take is that the government needs to show political will and make good on its promises.
Source: Hindustan Times
The demand for one rank one pension (OROP) was accepted by the previous government and a provision of Rs. 500 crore was made in the interim budget. The new government, stating its intention to implement the demand many times, has also provided for it in the regular budget. However, veterans are nowhere near getting the enhanced pensions envisaged. What is the current status on OROP?
A high-level meeting was taken by the defence minister on July 16 to thrash out issues with Service Chiefs, staff of Services headquarters and the top brass of the defence ministry, including defence accounts and the department of ex-servicemen’s welfare attending.
Also present were the representatives of four major ex-servicemen’s organisations to give inputs and plead their case. Regrettably, the meeting was inconclusive. A deadlock was created over the most basic issue, the very definition of OROP between bureaucrats of the MOD on one side and the uniformed fraternity plus the veterans on the other. The defence minister stated that the Koshiyari Committee’s definition of OROP might not be acceptable to the government now. His remark to veterans to lower their expectations reveals the stand of the government on the issue, causing consternation among them.
The political executive as well as the people of this country must realise that OROP is not a concession but is meant to offset restricted terms of service to soldiers wherein they are retired at a very young age. Here, the definition set by the Koshiyari Committee must prevail in that OROP implies that uniform pension be paid to Armed Forces personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service, irrespective of their date of retirement, and any future enhancement in the rates of pension to be automatically passed on to past pensioners. It is significant that this explanation had already been accepted by the government. My take is that the government needs to show political will and make good on its promises.
Source: Hindustan Times
0 comments:
Post a Comment