OROP : Centre Files Affidavit In Supreme Court; Says Both 'Same Rank' & 'Same Length Of Service' Necessary To Claim 'One Rank One Pension'

The Central Government has told the Supreme Court that both "same rank" and "same length of service" in defence services are necessary conditions for claiming One Rank One Pension (OROP) benefits.In an additional affidavit filed before the Supreme Court, the Ministry of Defence further said that the Finance Minister's speech dated February 17, 2014 wherein the Koshiyari Committee's recommendations for OROP was endorsed was not based on any decision or recommendation by the then Union Cabinet.The Centre further informed that revoking the benefits of Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) are factored in for OROP, it will lead to a financial outlay of nearly Rupees 42,000 crores.The affidavit has been filed in the plea filed by Ex- Serviceman Movement seeking implementation of the "One Rank One Pension"/ ("OROP") in the Defense Forces.The bench of Justices DY Chandrachud, Surya Kant and Vikram Nath on February 16, 2022 had orally asked the Union to make a disclosure by way of an affidavit on the following aspects:Number of Personnels who have been granted Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) as total proportion of various ranks.Number of personnels who have been granted 1st, 2nd ACP.Pursuant to the Finance Minister making a statement, was there any policy finalized that was the basis for the Statement.Financial outlay of the government, if directions are issued for factoring MACP for OROP. Is there any specific exclusion in the policy for MACP benefits?From Koshiyari Committee's recommendation, speech by Finance Minister dated February 17, 2014, minutes of the meeting chaired by Defense Minister dated February 26, 2014, letter dated February 26, 2014 to the Controller General of Defense Accounts, budget speech by Finance Minister dated July 10, 2014, which was Policy Statements and which were within the realm of discussion.Practical cases showing implementation of OROP and how many people have been benefitedThe Center has further submitted that Financial Outlay of Rs 42,776.38 crore would likely be incurred by the Union if directions are issued for grouping non MACP with MACP personnel for payment of OROP from 2014."In any view since this Hon'ble Court has sought for a financial data of the outflow that is likely to be incurred by the Union should non MACP be grouped with MACP personnel for payment of OROP, the total financial outlay from 2014 would be in the range of INR Rs 42,776.38 crores," the affidavit states.Finance Minister's Speech Dated February 17, 2014 Was Not Based On Any Decision Or Recommendation By Then Union CabinetThe Center in the affidavit submitted before the Top Court has said that the Finance Minister's speech dated February 17, 2014 was not based on any decision or recommendation by the then Union Cabinet. Center further stated that the Cabinet Secretariat conveyed the Prime Minister's approval on November 7, 2015 following which the Gol, MoD, Department of Ex-servicemen Welfare conveyed the policy of OROP for the defense forces personnel."A post facto approval of the Union Cabinet dated 06.04.2016 was also conveyed by the Cabinet Secretariat on 07.04.2016," affidavit also stated."Same Length Of Service" Has Remained Throughout And One Who Had Not Put In The Same Length Of Service And Therefore Not Eligible For MACP Cannot Be Benchmarked With Personnel Who Has Qualified For MACP; One Cannot Take Only The Same Rank And Ignore The Length Of Service And Similarly One Cannot Merely Take The Length Of Service And Ignore The RankObjecting to the petitioner's contention that one should go only by the same rank and not the same length of service and still grant or extend OROP benefits, Center has said that the same is unsustainable on facts and law."The contention of the Petitioners defeats one of the core values of the OROP, which is not only same rank but with the same length of service. This pair cannot be impaired. One cannot take only the same rank and ignore the length of service and similarly one cannot merely take the length of service and ignore the rank. The core parameter is same rank and same length of service. It is important to highlight that the expression "same" appears twice as "same rank" and "same length of service". By any stretch of imagination, it cannot be read as same rank different length of service or same length of service different ranks. It precisely meets with the Constitutional test under Article 14 which is "unequals should not be treated equally" and "equals should not be treated to be unequally". Neither the Constitution nor the jurisprudence evolved by this Hon'ble Court over 70 years had mandated that everyone should be treated equally every," affidavit states."It is important to highlight this condition "in the same rank in with the same length of service" had remained constant throughout. Therefore it is not left to the petitioners to contend that one should go by only the same rank and not same length of service and still grant OROP benefits....

OROP : Centre Files Affidavit In Supreme Court; Says Both 'Same Rank' & 'Same Length Of Service' Necessary To Claim 'One Rank One Pension'

Shruti Kakkar

In the affidavit, Centre has responded to the queries raised by the Court.

Tags