Jawan to get pension 22 yrs after leaving Army

The Armed Forces Tribunal has quashed a 22-year-old order dismissing an Army jawan, who was reportedly undergoing psychiatric treatment, from service and granted him monetary relief.

In 1991, Ghan Shyam from the Regiment of Artillery was dismissed by a summary court martial and awarded six months of rigorous imprisonment for “having overstayed leave from September 1990 to May 1991 without sufficient cause”.

In his petition against his court martial sentence, the jawan stated that he had been posted to a field regiment in Bikaner, where due to harsh service conditions he suffered a mental breakdown and was downgraded to low medical category for psychiatric evaluation by a medical board in April 1990.

After a month, he was again sent to the Military Hospital, Delhi, for re-evaluation of medical category with a view to discharging him from service on grounds of medical disability.

He was granted 10-day casual leave in September 1990 but he fell seriously ill during the course of his leave and was treated at a government hospital. His family sent a telegram to his unit informing them of his sickness. In response, the unit instructed the petitioner to report to a military hospital, which, according to the petition, advised him to continue with his treatment at a civil hospital. After being declared fit to travel, the jawan reported to his unit but was not allowed to join. Instead he was told to report to the Artillery Centre at Nashik, where he was placed under arrest in May 1991.

In its order, the tribunal observed that the plea of guilt has necessarily got to be signed by the petitioner to give it authenticity. In this case, the signatures of the petitioner do not appear on the plea of guilt. It was, therefore, to be presumed that the petitioner did not plead guilty and the SCM proceedings should have been conducted on such premise.

The tribunal ruled that he will be entitled to pension and other such retirement benefits under the rules barring the salary.

Had a Breakdown

• In 1990, Ghan Shyam from the Regiment of Artillery suffered mental breakdown during his posting in Bikaner
• Was downgraded to low medical category for psychiatric evaluation by a medical board
• Was granted 10-day casual leave but failed to join work after falling seriously ill
• In 1991, summary court martial dismissed the jawan for overstaying leave without valid cause

via The Tribune, Chandigarh

’65 Indo-Pak war veterans in legal battle for full pension

Ishfaq Naseem.

Seventy-year-old Baldev Singh, of Dera Bassi area of Punjab, who was injured while fighting in the 1965 India-Pakistan war, is not getting pension in accordance with his rank.

Singh, who was given the rank of Honorary Naib Subedar before his retirement from the Army in 1971, is paid at least Rs 1,500 less each month as pension and is also waiting for arrears of nearly Rs 2 lakh due to him since 2006 when the other army personnel got substantial hikes in their salaries in accordance with the recommendations of the sixth pay commission.

Singh is not the only one who is not getting his due. Each day, a number of retired armed personnel holding the rank of Honorary Naib Subedars, have been approaching the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) seeking a hike in their pensions.

However, even though the Armed Forces Tribunal, in some cases, has directed the Army to release the pension to the Honorary Naib Subedars as per their due, the retired army personnel have reported back to the Tribunal that its orders are not being followed by the Defence Ministry.

On January 13, Honorary Naib Subedar Munshi Ram and three other petitioners moved the Armed Forces Tribunal seeking action that the Army comply with earlier orders of the Tribunal to release to them the pension as per their rank.

Through the contempt petition, 63-year old Munshi Ram, resident of Samoh area of Himachal Pradesh brought before the notice of the Tribunal that despite its directions that the Army make him payments as per his due within three months of the date of order issued on January 20, 2012, this was not done.

The other petitioners, Jagdish Singh Chandel of Bilaspur area of Himachal, Honorary Naib Subedar Surender Kumar Thakur of Baggi area of Himachal and another petitioner, Jagdish Singh Chandel of Chotti Badwar area of Himachal also moved against the officers in charge of records (OIC) of their respective units of the Army Medical Corps, Punjab regiment and Dogra regiment, seeking the implementation of earlier orders by the Tribunal to grant them the necessary increase in pension.

Not only this, the Armed Forces Tribunal has earlier allowed petitions by the retired Honorary Naib Subedars for granting them pension as per their due.

The Armed Forces Tribunal, in its order dated July 31, 2012, allowed the petition by Honorary Naib Subedar Dalel Singh and the bench comprising Justice N P Gupta, Judicial member, and Lt Gen (retd), N S Brar, administrative member, held that necessary calculations and actual payments be made to the petitioner within a period of three months.

A similar petition filed by Honorary Naib Subedar, Kaka Singh was allowed, with the Armed Forces Tribunal observing that the entitlement of grant of pension of Naib Subedar was earlier also allowed by the Tribunal through the judgment passed on February 8, 2010 in the case of Virendar Singh versus Union of India.

Advocate Abhimanyu Sharma, who has been fighting the cases of entitlement of increased pension of Honorary Naib Subedars, said that the Defence Ministry rarely goes by the orders of the Tribunal asking it to increase the pension of the retired army personnel.

“While the increase in pension of the Honorary Naib Subedars who retired after January 1, 2006 is being granted. Those who retired prior to 2006 are not been given the benefits. This is even as they approach the Tribunal and get orders in their favour,” he said.

Government and private advocates said that each day, a large number of cases are being filed at the Armed Forces Tribunal by the Honorary Naib Subedars who seek an increase in their pension.

Government advocate, Captain Sandeep Bansal, said, “Each day I argue in 4-5 cases and we concede the cases before the Tribunal.”

Advocate Lt Col (retired), S N Sharma, said that in the last two months, he has filed at least 40 cases in which the Honorary Naib Subedars have sought an increase in their pension. He said that it is difficult for him to fend for his family with the less than Rs 10,000 as pension he gets from the Army. A widower, he has to sustain his two daughters, who were dealt with harshly by fate.

“One of my daughters is a widow while the husband of other is a paralytic. I have to sustain a large family and it gets difficult from the money which I am getting as pension,” he said.

The 70-year-old soldier of Sikh Light Infantry said that he deserved a better deal, given the condition his family is now in.

“I received a bullet in the chest which left me incapacitated to work in the Army. I retired prematurely from service after I fought the 1965 war and was hospitalised,” he said.

He adds that he has also represented the Army in different international sports. “I have taken part in the high and long jump as well as long race in countries like Egypt,” he said.

The Defence Spokesman did not respond to queries over the delay in releasing the pension of the retired Honorary Naib Subedars.

via Indian Express.

Gorkha soldier’s wife fights for benefits

About eight years after a Gorkha soldier went missing and his whereabouts remain unknown, his wife is running from pillar to post in a “foreign” land to get her due benefits sanctioned from defence authorities.

Khusi Maya Gurung’s husband, a havildar in the Fourth Gorkha Rifles, had gone to Nepal on annual-cum-sick leave of 68 days in September. While availing leave, he fell sick and was admitted to a local hospital in Nepal, but was advised by the doctors to report to a military hospital in India for further treatment since he was serving in the Indian Army.

Accordingly, the soldier left for treatment at Command Hospital, Kolkata, in September 2005, since his unit was then located in Kolkata. He boarded the Poorvanchal Express from Gorakhpur to Kolkata along with another soldier from his unit. During the journey, he got down at Chhapra Railway Station for fetching drinking water but did not return to the train. His companion, Rifleman Uttam Thapa, last saw him at the said station.

The family members and the soldier’s unit thereafter made extensive efforts to trace the soldier but without any result. Thereafter, the military authorities duly registered an FIR with the Railway Police at Chappra, but even the police could not locate the missing soldier or his body and he remains missing till date and his disappearance also remains a mystery. Later, the Army declared him a deserter rather than missing and also dismissed from service in an ex-parte manner.

After repeatedly taking up the case for release of pension and other benefits with the Gorkha Training Centre at Subathu near here did not yield any results, Khusi moved the Chandigarh bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal.

In her petition, she has contended that according to government policy, service and pensionary benefits are to be released to families of personnel whose whereabouts are not known. Earlier government departments used to wait for seven years for presumption of death and then used to release the arrears but in 1988 the government issued a policy that some benefits would be released immediately on declaration of disappearance and some other service benefits would be released after one year of declaration of disappearance after lodging a missing report with the police.

The Army authorities have maintained that she cannot be given benefits under pension regulations as her husband had been declared a deserter. She has contended in her petition that service is only forfeited for pension only in case a person has been convicted for the offence of desertion by way of a court martial, which is not so the case.

Missing for eight years

• A havildar in the Fourth Gorkha Rifles went missing eight years ago while coming back from his home in Nepal
• The soldier left for treatment at Kolkata’s Command Hospital in September 2005 and boarded the Poorvanchal Express from Gorakhpur to Kolkata along with another soldier from his unit
• During the journey, he got down at Chhapra Railway Station to fetch water, but did not return
• The Army declared him a deserter rather than missing and also dismissed him from service in an ex-parte manner
• After repeatedly taking up the case for release of pension and other benefits with the Gorkha Training Centre at Subathu, his wife moved the Chandigarh bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal

via The Tribune, Chandigarh

2 disabled soldiers deprived of pension

Vijay Mohan. 

An “oversight” on the part of the government has resulted in a young disabled Army officer running from pillar to post for the past 10 years to get his pension and other due benefits released.

Exposing the hollowness of the claims of military authorities with regard to treatment accorded to ex-servicemen and disabled veterans, a commissioned officer and a soldier today approached the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT), stating that their pensions and benefits had not been released even 10 and six years, respectively, after leaving the service.

Lieutenant Amit Vasudev from Gurdaspur was invalided out in 2002 as a young officer with a disability that was declared to have been aggravated due to military service for life. Running from pillar to post for the past 10 years, he was not given any reason for Army’s failure to sanction his disability pension.

When questioned under the RTI Act, the Army Headquarters recently replied that his disability pension had not been released to date due to an “oversight” on the part of the authorities.

Naik Govinder Singh, a brain-damaged soldier from Hoshiarpur with disability assessed at 100 per cent, was invalided out of the Army in 2007 after having rendered 14 years of service with the entitlement of pension but the benefits have still not been released to him by the Army.

The medical board’s declaration attributing his disability to military service was overturned by the Army Headquarters, for which his appeal remains pending.

In his petition, he has contended that even by treating his disability as non-attributable he remained entitled to invalid pension that is granted to soldiers with non-service related disabilities having more than 10 years of service.

The soldier is from the Sikh Light Infantry, which happens to be the Army Chief’s regiment.

Both disabled veterans, who remain without pension, have pointed out that in the absence of release of pension, which was their rightful claim, they were not even entitled to medical facilities under the Ex-serviceman Contributory Health Scheme.

The AFT has issued a notice to the government, asking it to respond to the petitions.

-via The Tribune, Chandigarh

Soldier hurt in 1965 war fights for pension

Kumar Anand.

Having fought his war against Pakistan in 1965 as a craftsman in the Indian Army, Raj Kumar Gupta (69) has waged another battle, this time with the Indian government itself, for allegedly denying him his due pension after he was forced to retire on health grounds in 1970. During the war, when Gupta was on duty at Sialkot sector heavy bombardment caused battery acid spill over into his eyes, causing him a headache.

Now, to avail of his pension that was denied to him due to what he claims to be “sheer administrative negligence”, he has taken on the Army and the government through series of applications under the RTI Act and letters to the Prime Minister, Sonia Gandhi, the President, Defence Minister A K Anthony, ex-Army chief V K Singh, Vadodara district collector, Rajya Sainik Board Ahmedabad, and even CM Narendra Modi.

His second letter to President Pratibha Patil, highlighting his case of the “most irresponsible administration existed amongst both military and civil authorities,” was shot off a day ago. “Because of a headache, I was sent to military hospital in Dehradun and then to a hospital in Meerut. My right eye and chest were operated without proper check-up, due to which I cannot stand or walk continuously for five minutes,” Gupta said.

“I was shifted to military hospital in Shillong, where I was in a psychiatric hospital for four months. I was declared unfit,” he recalled.

When another ex-Armyman J A R Krishnan came to know about his case in 1999, he decided to fight on Gupta’s behalf. Since 2007, he has filed a series of RTI applications to Indian Army RTI Cell, Principal Controller of Defence Accounts, Allahabad, Naval Headquarters Mumbai, Headquarters Southern Command, Pune, to know why he was denied his pension “They were all sticking to the same point: the disease which he was affected was neither due to service nor aggravated because of service conditions,” Krishnan said. “His case is 42 years old. However, we have begun pursuing the case only recently. If the President does not take any action, we will take the case to the Armed Forces Tribunal,” he added.

-via Express India.

Army widows: Soldiering on with ‘measly’ pensions

Amrita Chaudhry.

Hundred-year-old Pritam Kaur, a resident of Bassian Bet village near here, cannot comprehend why the government is not ready to pay her the pension of her second husband.

A widow of Naik Arjun Singh who died in Burma while taking part in the World War 2 in 1942, Pritam Kaur was remarried to Sohan Singh, the younger brother of Arjun Singh. “We had been married for just three years and did not have any children. I was remarried to Sohan Singh who was subedar in the Engineers Core. Sohan Singh died in 1985 after completing his service. While I get Arjun Singh’s pension, the government does not allow me the pension of my second husband, and I do not know why.”

Army jawan’s widow wins battle that he couldn’t

Vijay Mohan.

About 49 years after her husband was discharged from the Army and nine years after he passed away, the widow of an Army jawan has been sanctioned family pension even though her husband never got his post-retirement benefits.

It was only after the death of Sep Gurdayal, an Army Ordnance Corps reservist from Gurdaspur, in 2003, that his widow Piaro, took up the case afresh with the Army authorities and the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Pensions) for the grant of reservist and family pension. Gurdayal had taken up the case for his pension earlier, but to no avail.

The sanction of pension came without the family members having to seek judicial intervention. It was largely through the efforts of a serving colonel posted in the Western Sector, who assisted the family with paperwork and procedural matters, that the widow got her benefits.

Besides getting a pension of Rs 6,000 per month in accordance with current Pay Commission rates, she has also got arrears of pension since 1963, when her husband was discharged. The reservist pension at that time was just Rs 10 per month.

According to a letter written by the Army Ordnance Corps (AOC) Record to the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts, Gurdayal was enrolled in the AOC in June 1947, when he was only 15 years old.

His service with the Regular AOC was extended till July 1958, following which he was transferred to the reservist establishment.

In 1963, he was invalided out of service on medical grounds.

His total service, including boy service when he did not complete 16 years of age, worked out to be 15 years and 213 days. According to Defence Ministry regulations issued in 2002, boy service is to be counted towards fixing pensionary benefits.

THE FIGHT AFTER SERVICE

* Sep Gurdayal, Army Ordnance Corps (AOC) reservist from Gurdaspur, was enrolled in the AOC Record in June 1947 at the age of 15 years.
* His service with the Regular AOC was extended till July 1958.
* He was later transferred to the reservist establishment
* In 1963, he was rendered invalid on medical grounds
* He applied for pension, but to no avail
* After his death in 2003, his widow took up the case afresh
* She has been sanctioned a pension of Rs 6,000 pm, besides arrears since 1963

-via Tribune India

Estranged Army wives seek half pension share

Kalavati works in a small shoe shop in Lothkunta. Married to an army man, she never imagined he would abandon her after his retirement and leave her to fend for herself.

“We were managing fine with his pension and other facilities extended to us because of his service in the army. But since past two years, he has abandoned us, giving no financial aid and is living in Srikakulam. He is an alcoholic and had a spate of extra-marital affairs,” said Kalavati who had to withdraw two of her daughters from college after she was abandoned.

Captain (Retd) P. Satya Prasad, zilla sainik welfare officer in Visakhapat-nam, says Kalavati’s is not an isolated case. Instances of ex-servicemen abandoning their families for extra-marital affairs and alcoholism are piling up.

Brigadier (Retd) C.S. Vidyasagar, director, Sainik Welfare Board, AP, told Deccan Chronicle that as per defence ministry rules, ex-servicemen who do not support their families after retirement are liable to part with half their pension.

“However, the instructions for doing so have to come from court. So, we send all the victims to the family court. But the procedure is long and in most cases, the victims don’t have enough money for the legal aid. In such cases, we request our ex-servicemen lawyers to fight their cause for a nominal fee, sponsored by the Sainik Welfare Board,” Brig. Vidyasagar said.

He said the Board will soon request the governing committee to increase the financial aid of Rs 5,000 that it provides because it hardly meets the needs of families in distress.

“Many times we write directly to the banks where the ex-serviceman in question gets the pension, but only 10 percent of bank managers respond,” Capt. Prasad said.

-via Deccan Chronicle.

Pension for navyman after 36 years wait

Vijay Mohan.

After running from pillar to post, a disabled Navy sailor who had suffered head injuries on a ship almost 40 years ago has been sanctioned disability pension with effect from 1975.

Holding that the sailor was entitled benefits for 20% disability for life, the Armed Forces Tribunal also ordered the pension authorities to pay the sailor interest on arrears since 1975 at the rate of 12% per annum.

Jai Bhagwan Sharma enrolled in the Navy in 1965 and served till 1973. He had also taken part in the 1971 Indo-Pak War. During service, he hurt his head when a high-pressure steam pipe burst in the engine room of his ship in 1972.

After a long hospital stay, Sharma was boarded out of service on medical grounds. He began experiencing frequent bouts of severe headaches, which led to neurological complications, and was diagnosed as a case of neurosis. His disability was assessed at 20% and attributed to military service.

Sharma was granted disability pension of Rs 59 per month from June 1973 to March 1975 and Rs 50 per month for life thereafter. He was hospitalised twice in 1974 and 1975 for cerebral seizures and was referred to the Dr Rajendra Prasad Centre for Ophthalmic Sciences and the All India Institute of Medical Sciences for clinical investigations and treatment.

In 1990, Sharma was examined at AIIMS and found handicapped to the extent of 75%. He was under treatment for life and his vision has also become very weak.

In June 2001, when Sharma visited the Pension Distribution Officer for yearly identification, he discovered that the disability pension has two elements — disability and service — and that payment of disability element of his pension had been discontinued since 1975 without any reason or intimation.

Sharma wrote to the authorities for holding a resurvey medical board and also sought payment of his pension’s disability element from 1975. When there was no response, he moved the Delhi High Court, which directed the authorities to consider his representation within three months. Even this order was not adhered to.

What followed next was a series of legal and bureaucratic wrangling and in 2005 he received a communiqué that he was granted disability element of his pension — Rs 310 per month – with effect from 2004 for life. He made several representations for increase in disability pension but without any result and finally approached the Tribunal.

Pension authorities have submitted before the Tribunal that Sharma’s revised pension payment order was issued on November 23, 2011. The Tribunal, while expressing its ire over the attitude of the authorities and the manner in which the case was handled, observed that the departments concerned had been making Sharma run from pillar to post and ordered that he be adequately compensated for this reckless delay.

Testing times

1972: Jai Bhagwan Sharma suffers a head injury after a high-pressure steam pipe bursts in the engine room of his ship

1973: Sharma boarded out of service on medical grounds, granted disability pension

June 2001: Sharma discovers that payment of disability element of his pension discontinued in 1975

November 23, 2011: After a protracted legal battle, Armed Forces Tribunal orders Sharma be paid pension from 1975 with 12% interest

-via The Tribune

13 years after soldier’s death, widow gets pension

Vijay Mohan.

In a landmark decision emphasising that callousness towards human life would not be tolerated, the Chandigarh Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal yesterday ordered exemplary compensation of Rs 10 lakh along with special family pension to Navindra Devi, widow of a soldier who had died in 1998.

The Bench comprising Justice Ghanshyam Prashad and Lt Gen HS Panag also directed that arrears of pension be paid to the widow with effect from 1998, along with interest.

The petitioner’s husband, while posted near Bikaner, developed psychiatric problems for which he was given electric shocks in a civil hospital. Thereafter, he was sent on leave to recuperate.

A few days after returning from leave, the unwell soldier walked out of the unit and went missing. He was found wandering near the Delhi railway station by the Government Railway Police (GRP) who requested the Army authorities to take him back to his unit.

However, rather than sending a team to bring back the soldier, his unit in Bikaner and the military authorities in Delhi kept writing letters to each another in this regard.

While the correspondence continued, the GRP let him go when no one from the Army came to escort him. His body was found the next day from a well.

The Army unit then showed him on leave retrospectively from the date he had wandered out of his unit. No Court of Inquiry (CoI) was conducted as Bikaner and Delhi authorities kept on shifting the blame.

After three rounds of litigation in the Delhi High Court, the court finally ordered the authorities to convene a CoI that was held 11 years after the soldier’s death.

The CoI, however, declared the death as not related to service factors and opined that the unit had readied a team to bring back the soldier from the GRP, but the team could not be ultimately dispatched.

Holding the unit responsible for callousness leading to death, the tribunal observed that there was extreme negligence in handling the issue since no care was taken to keep the soldier under medical supervision and then to bring him back from the GRP. The tribunal also observed that a CoI was not held which was mandatory under rules and the inquiry was held 11 years after the death on judicial intervention.

The tribunal also held that it was wrong for the authorities to have shown the soldier on leave retrospectively to evade responsibility. It was held that in terms of the dictum of the Supreme Court in Charanjit Kaur vs. Union of India, the widow deserved to be granted special family pension and appropriate compensation.

-via The Tribune