EX-SERVICEMEN IN EMERGENCY

EX-SERVICEMAN SRI. KATHI KOTAIAH SEPOY OF ARMY MEDICAL CORPS S/O. K.YALAMANDA BELONGING TO VILL& POST: RACHERLA OF PRAKASAM DISTRICT IS ADMITTED IN JYOTHI HOSPITAL OF BALASORE IN ORISSA. EX-SGT BEHARA ALONG WITH OTHER EX-SERVICEMEN BROUGHT HIM AND ADMITTED  WHEN HE WAS LYING ON ROAD ABOUT 60 KM FROM BALASORE. CONCERNED PERSONS/RELATIVES /FRIENDS ARE REQUESTED TO CONTACT EX-SGT. BEHERA ON MOBILE NO. 98531 73517 WHO IS WAITING AT JYOTHI HOSPITAL BALASORE.

ANOTHER ADDRESS ALSO FOUND THROUGH HIS BANK THAT HE BELONGS FROM GAJULA VENKATAPUR, PO. RAJUPALEM, MANDAL. KAMARAN. 

police station racherla: 0805-247433 & 9440627839 

HERE IS THE CLARITY ON TOLL TAX EXEMPTION TO EX-SERVICEMEN

LETTER RECEIVED FROM ZILLA SAINIK WELFARE COIMBATTORE

HERE IS THE ORIGINAL LETTER OF ABOVE

THIS LETTER HAS BEEN CONFIRMED AS FAKE

LATEST CONFIRMATION FROM NHAI 

Toll Tax Exemption by

HAPPY REPUBLIC DAY 2013

LONG STANDING DEMAND OF DUAL FAMILY PENSION TO DEFFENCE PERSONNEL HAS BEEN GRANTED

PLEASE CLICK HERE  FOR DUAL FAMILY PENSION CIRCULAR

FINALLY THE EX-SERGEANTS HAVE SUCCEEDED

YES. FINALLY WE HAVE BEEN GRANTED PENSION ON PAR WITH DIPLOMA SERGEANT WHICH WAS ONLY CREATED TO SEPARATE PRE-97 AND POST- 97 RETIREES. NOW THE GOVT. HAS ISSUED CIRCULAR 501 EQUATING DIPLOMA SERGEANTS AND  SERGEANTS. ACTUALLY THERE WAS NO SUCH CATEGORY OF SERGEANTS AS CALLED DIPLOMA HOLDERS BUT IT WAS CREATED ONLY TO LESS PENSION TO THE PRE-97 RETIREES. THIS BLOG WAS STARTED WITH ONLY INTENTION TO SEEK JUSTICE TO SERGEANTS AND TO SOME EXTENT WE HAVE SUCCEEDED. 

SO CALLED ONE RANK ONE PENSION IS ANNOUNCED

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR NOTIFICATION FOR JCOs AND BELOW.

Family Pension for Unmarried Daughters of Armed Forces personnel beyond 25 years of Age

No. 2(2)/2012/D(Pen/Pol)

Government of India

Ministry of Defence

Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare

New Delhi the 14th Dcc., 2012

To

The Chief of Army Staff

The Chief of Naval Staff

The Chief of Air Staff

Subject: Eligibility of Unmarried Daughters of Armed Forces personnel for grant of Family Pension beyond 25 years of Age.

Sir,

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Ministry’s ID No.878/A/D(Pen/Sers)/04 dated 21.9.2004 extending the provisions of Department of P&PW OM No. 1/19/03-P&PW (E) dated 25.08.2004 and this Ministry’s letter No.I (3)/2007-D(Pen/Policy) dated 25.10.07 which makes unmarried / widowed / divorced daughter eligible for family pension beyond 25 years of age subject to fulfillment of other prescribed conditions, Attention is also invited to this Ministry’s ID No.9(6)/2007-D(Pen/Policy) dated 21.2.2008 under which it was clarified in consultation with Department of P&PW that liberalized family pension/special family pension (dependent pension) was not covered under the provisions of this Ministry’s above said letter dated 25.10.2007. A lot of references are being received in this Ministry for making unmarried/widowed/divorced daughter eligible for grant of liberalized family pension/special family pension beyond 25 years of age, if otherwise in order.

References are also being received in this Ministry for dissolving the provisions contained in Regulation 230(c) of Pension Regulations for the Army Part — 1(1961) and similar provision in Pension Regulations for Navy and Air Force, which debars unmarried daughters for continuance of Special Family pension if they were in receipt of children allowance even after disqualification of all other eligible heir(s).

2. The above matter is considered by the Government and it has been decided in consultation with Department of P&PW that unmarried/widowed/divorced daughter also be eligible for grant of liberalised / special family pension beyond 25 years subject to fulfilment of other prescribed conditions as hitherto fore. It has also decided that all unmarried/widowed/divorced daughters, who were earlier or otherwise eligible for children allowance, shall also be sanctioned I liberalised family pension subject to other conditions being fulfilled. The allowance, if being paid, shall be discontinued from the date special/liberalised family pension is sanctioned under these orders. The provisions contained in Regulations 230(c), 239 & 240 of Pension Regulation for the Army Part - 1(1961) and similar provisions in Pension Regulations for the Navy and Air Force shall stand modified to that extent.

3. The family pension to unmarried/widowed/divorced daughters above the age of 25 years shall be payable if all other eligible children below the age of 25 years have ceased to receive family pension and there is no disabled child to receive the family pension. Family pension shall be payable to unmarried/widowed/divorced

daughter in order of their date of birth and younger of them shall not be eligible unless the next above has become ineligible for grant of family pension.

4. This order will take effect from 6.9.2007 i.e., the date from which Ordinary Family Pension was allowed to unmarried daughters by DoP&PW.

5. This issues with the concurrence of Finance Division of this Ministry vide their UO No. 10(8)/2012/Fin/Pen dated 21.11.12.

Hindi version will follow.

Yours faithfully,

sd/-

Under Secretary to Government of India

Source: www.cgda.nic.in

To ensure independence, bring AFT under justice ministry: HC

The Punjab and Haryana high court ruled on Tuesday that the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) be brought under the union ministry of law and justice, taking it out of the purview of the ministry of defence (MoD), to ensure independence in its functioning. The court directions came on a petition

by Major Navdeep Singh, founder president of the AFT Bar Association at Chandigarh, who had said that since the defence ministry had been made the parent administrative ministry of the AFT, it was "wielding all pervasive control" over the tribunal and was also the "rule-making and appointment authority not only for the staff, but also of the judicial and administrative members of the tribunal". The petition pointed out the irony that orders of the AFT had to be passed against the defence ministry.

In its ruling, thus, the HC said the administration of justice is a subject matter of the department of justice under the ministry of law and justice as per the Constitution's allocation of business. As the petition also questioned the logic of having two serving bureaucrats on the selection committee examining the suitability of serving or retired HC judges to be appointed to the AFT, the court directed that after bringing the tribunal under the law and justice ministry, suitable amendments in the selection committee could also be carried out.

The bench of chief justice AK Sikri and justice Rakesh Kumar Jain said that in India, "unfortunately tribunals have not achieved full independence". "The secretary of the concerned 'sponsoring department' sits in the selection committee for appointment. When the tribunals are formed, they are mostly dependant on their sponsoring department for funding, infrastructure and even space for functioning. The statutes constituting tribunals routinely provide for members of civil services from the sponsoring departments becoming members of the tribunal and continuing their lien with their parent cadre," the bench added. "Unless wide-ranging reforms as were implemented in United Kingdom and as were suggested by Chandra Kumar (a Supreme Court judgment) are brought about, tribunals in India will not be considered as independent."

The court also directed that all vacancies of judicial members' posts in the Chandigarh bench of AFT be filled up in the near future.

(Source-Hindustan Times)

Law Ministry to control AFT: High Court

Chandigarh, January 8
The Punjab and Haryana High Court today ordered that the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) be shifted from the administrative control of the Ministry of Defence to the Ministry of Law. Taking stock of the legal position and earlier directions by the Supreme Court, a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice AK Sikri and Justice RK Jain ruled: “Insofar as the Armed Forces Tribunal is concerned, there is hardly any issue that it be brought under the control of Department of Justice in the Ministry of Law and Justice. Mechanism for control over the Armed Forces Tribunal can be worked out by the Department of Justice. Accordingly, we issue a direction to this effect.”

Stating that the AFT Act does not specify as to which ministry should wield control over it, the Bench observed that tribunals in India have not achieved full independence. “The apex court has observed that unless a wholly independent agency of all such tribunals is set up, it is desirable that all such tribunals, as far as possible, be under a single nodal ministry, which will be in a position to oversee the working of these tribunals. For a number of reasons that ministry should appropriately be the Ministry of Law,” the Bench said.

 The judgment, according to legal experts, would go a long way in establishing the independence of judicial functioning through separation of the Judiciary from the Executive. At present, the AFT functions under the MoD, which is a respondent in all cases filed before the tribunal. A public interest litigation filed by Navdeep Singh, a local lawyer, had pointed out that the Supreme Court had already held that tribunals could not be made dependent on the sponsoring or parent ministries and to ensure their independence they could only be supervised by the Law Ministry. The petition had contended that all orders by the AFT were to be passed against the MoD and the same ministry had been made the parent controlling ministry of the tribunal, wielding all pervasive control over the AFT, including appointments, funding, rule-making and infrastructure, thereby making it seem more of an extension of the state rather than an independent judicial body. The petition also pointed out that non-appointment of judicial members after their retirement had resulted in absolute absence of judicial remedy to serving and retired personnel at some places. The Chandigarh Bench, having the largest jurisdiction of five states was also partially functional with only one judicial member appointed out of three. The petition had sought provisioning of proper infrastructure, accommodation and courtesy to the institution of AFT and its members.

Big change

• Currently, the AFT functions under the MoD, which is a respondent in all cases filed before the tribunal.
• The judgment, according to legal experts, would go a long way in establishing the independence of judicial functioning through separation of the Judiciary from the Executive.
• A PIL filed by Navdeep Singh, a lawyer, had pointed out that the SC had already held that tribunals could not be made dependent on the sponsoring or parent ministries and to ensure their independence they could only be supervised by the Law Ministry
• (Source-The Tribune)