Jawans feel shortchanged by OROP implementation, continue fight for parity
Mohammad Asif Khan
Amid the ongoing Lok Sabha elections, veteran jawans in the Indian Army have expressed dissatisfaction with the implementation of the One Rank One Pension (OROP) system for pension for the Indian Armed forces. The OROP scheme, aimed at bridging the pension gap between servicemen and women of the same rank retiring at different times, has been a longstanding demand for veterans from the Indian Armed Forces.
This demand was fulfilled as part of a pledge made by Prime Minister Narendra Modi during the lead-up to the 2014 general election campaign, which substantially increased his popularity within the military community. The decision to implement OROP for defence forces personnel and their family pensioners was accompanied by a policy letter in November 2015, stating that pensions would be revised every five years.
According to official data from 2023, approximately INR 57,000 crore has been expended in total, averaging INR 7,123 crore annually over eight years, towards the implementation of OROP. Despite these efforts, retired jawans continue to express dissatisfaction with the scheme’s implementation.
Despite the long-fought implementation of the scheme, retired jawans (soldiers) of the Indian Armed Forces feel they haven't got a fair deal. While the scheme partially addressed the gap between pensions of personnel retiring at different times with the same rank, jawans say they were sidelined in negotiations and that many of their demands still need to be addressed.
Harbhal Singh, a former soldier who served with the Rashtriya Rifles, and is the general secretary at SSSC (Sabka Sainik Sangharsh Committee), is the breadwinner for his father, spouse and two children who are currently in school.
In 2009, while on routine patrol duty in the Kupwara district of Kashmir, he inadvertently trod on an anti-personnel mine. At the age of 35, he had to retire after 15 years of service due to a partial foot amputation. He receives a monthly basic pension of INR 20,000 along with a disability pension of RIN 7,500. He explained that because of his injury, he was unable to do any physical work.
“The OROP scheme is fundamentally discriminatory to jawans, it was under our name that the whole struggle for OROP began and now we are the ones that are left behind,” he said. Harbhal Singh’s situation vividly illustrates the challenges faced by jawans reliant on disability pensions as they strive to rebuild their lives. “The determination of disability pension should be based on the nature of disability or injury attributable to military service, rather than rank and length of service,” he emphasised.
Last year in February, retired soldiers launched a sit-in protest at New Delhi’s Jantar Mantar under the banner of the Sabka Sainik Sangharsh Committee. They were joined by 24 unions representing retired jawans, including Junior Commissioned Officers (JCOs) and Non-Commissioned Officers (NCOs), from various parts of the country but their demands were not heeded by the central government.
Key Points of Contention
Exclusion of JCOs and Honorary Ranks: The OROP benefits only extend to jawans between sepoy and havildar ranks, leaving Junior Commissioned Officers (JCOs) and those holding honorary ranks out in the cold. This discrepancy has led to a sense of discontent among these ranks. They argue that the principle of OROP should apply equally to all ranks, not just a select few. Another group that seems to have been overlooked in the OROP scheme is the war widows of jawans. Even though the OROP scheme was extended to family pensioners, including war widows and disabled pensioners, it appears that war widows of jawans have not seen a significant increase in their pensions. This has raised questions about the fairness and inclusivity of the OROP scheme.
Discriminatory Pension Revision: The veteran jawans argue that the formula used is discriminatory. For instance, while implementing the 7th Pay Commission, the central government adopted the formula of multiplying the amount of service basic pension received in December 2015 by 2.81 for officers. For jawans, it was multiplied by 2.57. This, they argue, creates a disparity between the pensions of officers and jawans. This disparity, compounded by shorter service lengths for jawans, leads to significantly lower pensions. The 7th Central Pay Commission (CPC) was instituted by the government of India to review and recommend changes to the salary structure, allowances and other benefits for central government employees, including pensioners. While the commission aimed to bring about parity and address anomalies, there have been concerns about the impact of its recommendations on different categories of pensioners.
Premature Retirement Woes: Veteran jawans allege that the concept of ‘premature retirement’ is used to deny benefits to younger retirees, defeating the purpose of OROP for those who might struggle financially after leaving service. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has entered into a partnership with the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship through a memorandum of understanding (MoU). The disparities in pensions are exacerbated by variations in length of service. Following the Ajai Vikram Singh Committee’s suggestions, officers now retire after completing maximum service, while jawans retire much earlier. This discrepancy inherently restricts the pension they receive.
Officers vs Jawans Divide: Jawans allege a lack of representation during OROP negotiations. They point out a vast difference in disability pensions for officers and jawans despite similar injuries. They feel that their interests and perspectives were not adequately considered or defended during these discussions. This has led to a sense of betrayal by their officers, who they believe should have advocated more strongly on their behalf. The prior agitation for OROP saw participation from both veteran jawans and officers, but recent protests solely involved jawans, indicating their dissatisfaction with the outcome.
Another major point of contention is the disparity in disability pensions between officers and jawans. Despite suffering similar injuries in the line of duty, jawans have pointed out that there is a vast difference in the disability pensions they receive compared to officers. This discrepancy is seen as unfair and discriminatory, further fuelling the sense of discontent among the jawans.
You must be logged in to view this content.