Indian Navy Veterans aggrieved for not giving Special Pension

HUNDREDS OF SUCH LETTERS ARE SENT BY NAVAL VETERANS TO NAVAL COMMANDERS FOR IGNORING THEM ILLEGALLY TO GIVE PENSION, IN SPITE OF ORDERS BY SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – ITS PITY? ??

To,

Admiral Sunil Lanba, PVSM,AVSM

Chief of the Naval Staff

Naval Headquarters,

New Delhi-110011

 

Dr.Subhash Bhamre

Minister of State for Defence

South Block, New Delhi-110011

 

Sri.Sanjay Mitra IAS

Defence Secretary

101 A, South Block

New Delhi -11011

 

Cmde CL Saini

The Logistic Officer in charge

Naval Pension Office

Mankhurd, Mumbai-400088

 

  Sub: Special Pensions to ex naval veterans-some important real facts

 

Sir

I regret to inform you that, it was quite unfair, on your part or on the part of your subordinate offices to ignore every correspondence related to my eligible special pension. If you felt that, I was claiming for the special pension, without any grounds or eligibility, your office could have given a reply to that effect.   Instead for a very simple issue, due to reasons known to you alone, no response was given to me even after 8 months of the judgment. It may be noted that the SC judgment in CA 2147/2011 and CA 8566/2014 was  only based on an existing provisions of section95(i) of the Naval pension regulations 1964. As such, can anyone think of a single reason for denying the special pension?

 

  1.      Has the special pension been denied based on any existing rules of the Indian Navy? If so kindly, inform me the relevant rules or provisions, under which, it was denied.

 

  1.     Can any convincing reasons for not informing about the issue of govt of India order dated 03.7.76, stopping  transfer of sailors to reserve service w.e.f 03.7.76 be given? This vital information affecting my service condition was not informed to me any time, while I was in service or later.

 

  1.      When the system of transferring sailors to reserve service has stopped by the govt of India, how could, anyone be kept in reserve after 03.7.76, even if a willingness to further service is given? So the linking of unwillingness for further service to payment of special was made deliberately under the influence of some vested interests, who are still working in the Navy against us.

 

  1.     Had anyone given willingness for further service on completion of initial engagement, such person would have been entitled to a better service pension.  As such when none of us has claimed for a normal pension, what is the relevance of giving willingness or unwillingness in the matter of special pension? It is pertinent to note that, the offer of further extension of service so as to earn a minimum service was made to all that time, till the minimum enrolment period in the navy was subsequently raised to 15 years.

 

  1.    The section 95 of the naval pension regulations is relevant and applicable only related to “special pension” and could be applicable, when the reservists system is stopped by way of a govt order. By the notification of goi letter dated 03.7.76, these conditions of eligibility of special pension, has already been met by all who joined service prior to 03.7.76 and left service after this date without a normal service pension.

 

  1.    Can any reason be given for not paying me my entitled special pension in a routine manner from the date of my release on 31 Dec 1985, like the payment of any other pension?  Except in the amount or rate of pension every procedure is same.    Are there any other rules or regulations  governing the sanction of special pension, other than section 95 of Pension Regulations and goi letter dated 03.7.76.  If there are any other rules or regulations governing the payment of special Pension, please inform with details.

 

  1.   is it because I had not made a claim for the same? The claim for the same was not made because, I was never informed regarding the goi letter dated 03.7.76 stopping the transfer of sailors to reserve. Like any other sailors in my category, I too was under the impression that, I was kept in reserve and would become eligible for a reservist pension on completion of 10 years after my release.

 

  1.    Is there any relevance of section 16 of Navy act 1957, in the sanction of special pension, when it is a known factor that “nothing regarding special pension” is mentioned there in. I hope an inadvertent remark in the Para 25 of the judgment made without any supporting rules might have made your office to think negatively on our eligibility.

 

  1. Was the issue something complicated and new: Not at all, as the section 95 of the Naval pension regulations 1964, was incorporated only for dealing with special pension related to reserve system?  The only requirement to be met for the payment of special pension is that, the system of transferring sailors to reserve should have been stopped as a result of Govt Policy.  The Goi letter dated 03.7.76, was a govt of India decision stopping transferring of sailors recruited prior to this date to reserve.  As such, anyone who was not transferred to reserve and discharged from Navy, on or after this 03.7.76 should have been paid this special pension from the date of release itself.

 

  1. The whole issue was made complicated by someone, by referring the matter to higher authorities, as if the court had directed to pay something new which is not in the rules.  Naturally, those offices keep referring the matter for opinions of various departments. Even none of our attempts to appraise our eligibility by virtue of existing rules were also successful. Whoever, we approached might have thought that, if we are eligible by existing rules why the payments were not done earlier. Actually the payment of special pension was not paid at the appropriate time due to ignorance or oversight of the authorities that time, if not deliberately, like in the case of not informing about the notification of an important document like Government of India letter dated 03.07.1976. There were no previous history of a payment of special pension earlier because; eligibility condition of stopping of reserve for all was first met on 03.7.76

 

In, view of the foregoing kindly look into the issue afresh and make immediate arrangement of payment of special pension, taking the opportunity got through the judgment for the early rectification of an injustice.  Out of sheer love and loyalty to our Navy which we maintain still, we had so far not done anything to tarnish the image of the Navy before the Indian Public or serving sailors. Kindly don’t make the issue more complex by misusing or abusing the legal provisions.   Any such acts would confirm our belief that, our eligible special pension is still being denied due to the vested interests of someone in the Navy. Maximum, what anyone could do is further prolong the justice, but never deny it forever.  Even if, I am not alive to receive my entitlements, the fight would go on for coming generations too, till the both ends of justice is met.

 

 

Thanking you in anticipation.

 

Yours faithfully

RAMINDER SINGH SAHOTA

ADVOCATE

EX – LEADING TELEGRAPHIST

“O” No. 93588

Joined Indian Navy: 16.09.1967

Released from Navy: 31.05.1979

Resident of:

B-404 Lovely Home CGHS Ltd

Plot-5, Sector-5, Dwarka,

New Delhi – 110 075

Mobile: 9810065447

Web-site: http://rsahota.com

E-Mail: raminder.sahota@gmail.com

 

 

 

About the author

Advocateji.Com publishes problems of public & provides free advice in 24 hours on its web-site at New Delhi

5 Comments

  • Mohan rao indian says:

    Dear Mr. Raminder Appreciate well written follow up to CNS. I am also similar engagement of 10 long years served and released from Indian Navy.

    HUNTING IS THE TRUMP CARD USED BY AFT CHENNAI. THAT IS WHAT SPECIALIST LAWYERS AND JUDGES DO TO ACTION THE ITEM.

    THE MOVEMENT UNDERLYING CAUSE IS IDENTIFIED INDIAN NAVY AT FAULT AND START GIVING REASONS OF EXCUSES ON RIGHTFUL PENSION TO ABOVE SAID RELEASED SAILORS.

    THE NOMINATED INDIAN NAVAL CAPTAIN / COMMODORE FROM CABS WERE DOUBLY HUNTED IN CHENNAI AFT COURT HALL. FEAR BUILT UP AS IF HIJACKED AND THE JUDGES WILL NOT ALLOW THEM TO RETURN BACK TO CABS THE GUY SURRENDERED TO GIVE PENSION TO THE 3 RESPECTIVE APPLICANT . THAT IS WHAT IF HIJACKED ANY ONE TO DO GIVE WHAT IS ASKED AND SAVE LIFE. SMART GUY BEING NOT A DECISION MAKER FOR INDIAN NAVY WITHIN HIS LIMIT ACCEPTED FOR 3 APPLICANT WHO HAD FIGHT ON THIS ISSUE.

    THE guy traveled all the way from cabs and allowance of conditional accepted by AFT and Indian Navy went for SLP.

    WE KNOW THE PAIN TAKING WIN ON COURT ALL AND SMOOTH DEAL. APPLICABLE TO ALL CASES . THE GUYS MISTAKEN JUDGES GIVE SPECIAL CONSIDERATION TO WHITE UNIFORM AND THE RANKING SIMILAR TO MAGISTRATE. WHAT HAPPEN THE AFT COURT AND THE JUDGES ARE FROM MILITARY SERVICES. FOOLISH GUYS COME FOR BRIBE.

    View Comment
  • Narinder Singh says:

    This is pitiful that every time we talked about our defense services but all is to make fool to our defense personal nothing else. Sorry to say that. Un able to do any thing our own Higher Authorities

    View Comment
  • Sanjay says:

    Thank you for detailed study of the case.
    I do not know legally what happens to someone who neglects the Supreme Court verdict and throws it in dustbin. It looks like Navy top brass is the main culprit.This is the only organisation in the whole world who is interested in stopping its own veterans from getting any benefits from Government. Navy has been doing it for last 40 years. Honestly sailors / ex-sailors should not expect anything good from these crooks.
    Now only Defence Ministry or Prime Minster can help in this case.
    One more excellent point hilighted by you is that pension should be legally given from the date you left the service and not from last three years.
    I honestly feel we will have to create nation-wide awareness by staging Dharna in front of President Palace or in front of Prime Minister’s office.
    Naval Authority is show piece and can not do anything except postponing issue.Navy does not have any authority in this matter and all important issues are handled by civilian Government.
    I have very strong doubt , if supreme court can not help us who else can ?
    The President of India is the one who is the protector of Constitution and we must approach him as verdict given (constituionally ) by Supreme Court is not respected by concerned authorities.
    I feel very confused the way system works.
    May God save my country.
    Bharat Mata ki Jai

    View Comment
  • Hundreds of unanswered letters are lying in doldrums for last seven months at NAVPEN and the above will add on to yet another. Unless, we resort to SATYAGRAH or fast unto death at Defence minister residence, nothing can be expected from these indecisive Babus or top naval brass to resolve the longstanding issue. It is time, let us once again join together to fight a second war against this injustice.
    Jai Hind, Jai Jawan!

    View Comment
  • Dear naval veteran friends it’s true sahota sir has very elaborately presented the facts to all concerned decision makers. But we still may not get our rightful without getting supreme court intervening into this matter again. Because where govt is so indecisive we cannot hope for justice. Sup.court knew this fact quite well &that is why they’ve kept a rider of 9% interest for the delay caused for payment. Nevertheless our patience is thinning with each days delay. And they are compelling US to do something unpleasant. Pls have little more patience very soon we would be hearing some positive news. Till that time do regular yoga to remain fit & healty. We need to enjoy our achievement with good healty & peaceful mind. Thanks

    View Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.