DT
PT
Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
search-icon-img
Advertisement

AFT quashes policy denying OROP benefits to pre-mature retirees

Terming denial unconstitutional, the tribunal ordered grant of OROP benefits to petitioners without any discrimination
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
Advertisement

The Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) has struck down a government order that denied the benefits of One Rank, One Pension (OROP) to armed forces personnel who opted for pre-mature retirement after November 7, 2015, terming the denial to be unconstitutional and discriminatory.

The pre-mature retirees are placed in three categories -- the first category comprises armed forces personnel who retired before July 1, 2014, with OROP benefits; the second category is of retirees between July 1, 2014. and November 7, 2015; and the third category covers those who retired after November 7, 2015, and were affected by the government’s decision.

A group of 114 personnel from all three services moved the AFT against their exclusion from OROP benefits. “The actions of the government in inserting an exclusionary clause in the order for implementation of OROP for post July 2014 retirees was not only illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, but also against the existing policy issued by the government as well as the basic spirit of the Constitution,” Major SS Pandey (retd), the counsel for some of the petitioners said.

Advertisement

The AFT Bench, comprising Justice Rajendra Menon and Rear Admiral Dhiren Vig, in its order dated January 31, observed that persons who opt for pre-mature retirement form a homogeneous class. Once it is found that every person in the Army, Navy and the Air Force who seeks premature retirement forms a homogenous category, no policy can be formulated which creates differentiation within this class on the basis of date and time of their retirement.

The Bench asserted that differentiating in the same category without any just cause or reason amounted to violation of the rights available to pre-mature retirement personnel under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. It held that the government action was also contrary to the principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of fixing the cut-off date and creating differentiation in a homogeneous class.

Advertisement

Ruling that the said order was unsustainable in law and cannot be implemented, the Bench said, “We strike it down and direct that in the matter of grant of OROP benefit to pre-mature retirees, they be treated uniformly and the benefit of the scheme of OROP be granted to them without any discrimination.”

Till 1973, armed forces personnel having the same length of service had parity in pension irrespective of the date of retirement. However, this was discontinued in 1973 after implementation of the Third Pay Commission. This led to ex-servicemen projecting their grievances and the agitation for OROP, which intensified and led to ex-servicemen returning their medals.

After much debate in public and on the floor of Parliament and setting up of a 10-member parliamentary committee to examine the matter, the government decided to implement OROP prospectively from 2014-2015, which was notified in February 2014. A policy letter issued in May 2014 however, excluded a section of pre-mature retirees from its ambit.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Opinion tlbr_img3 Classifieds tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper