47 more Major Generals approach AFT over getting lower remuneration than their juniors

Vijay Mohan

Chandigarh, February 9

As many as 47 more armed forces officers of the rank of Major General and equivalent on Wednesday moved the Armed Forces Tribunal over getting lower remuneration than their juniors.

They are claiming pay and pension parity with officers of the rank of Brigadier.

The AFT admitted two joint petitions in this regard for final adjudication and directed the Government of India and other respondents including the Principal Controller of Defence Accounts (Officers) to show cause why the petitions should not be allowed. 

One of the petitions has been jointly filed by 36 Major Generals and the second one by 11 Major Generals.

The Tribunal had earlier admitted a similar petition filed jointly by several Major Generals and equivalent. This takes the total number of petitioners to 65.

Counsel for the petitioners, Col Indra Sen Singh (retd), said that the problem had arisen due to the Military Service Pay (MSP) being introduced in the 6th and 7th Central Pay Commissions as part of basic pay of officers of the three services upto and including the rank of Brigadier and equivalent ranks, but not to the Major Generals and equivalent rank officers. 

As a result, a Major General and equivalent rank officers in the Air Force and Navy, after being promoted to the said rank, get lesser pay than Brigadiers, and consequently lesser pension than them after retirement. 

“This is against the fundamental canon of service jurisprudence that a senior official cannot be paid less salary than his junior in the same branch/service,” Col Sen said.

He added that the Army Headquarters is aware of this pay and pension anomaly and have already taken up a case with the Ministry of Defence to resolve the anomaly, but the matter is pending.

The ongoing situation, according to legal experts, is contrary to the settled law as laid down by the Supreme Court in a number of judgements, that once a judgement is passed and gains finality then the benefit of the same should be extended to all similarly situated individuals without forcing them to approach the courts.