Supreme Judgment PDF for OROP upholds decision [March 2022]
The Supreme Court upheld the Union government’s decision on One Rank One Pension (OROP) for defence forces, saying it did not come across any “constitutional infirmity” in the manner in which it was being implemented.
Check below for Judgement Details
JUDGMENT
Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J
This judgment has been divided into the following sections to facilitate analysis:
A. Factual Background
1 The petition under Article 32 of the Constitution addresses a challenge to the manner in which the “One Rank One Pension”1 policy for ex-servicemen of defence forces has been implemented by the first respondent2 through a letter dated 7 November 2015 issued to the Chiefs of three defence forces. The letter defines OROP as the payment of uniform pension to armed services personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service, irrespective of the date of retirement. OROP, in terms of the letter, aims to bridge the gap between the rate of pension of current and past pensioners at periodic intervals. The petitioners contend that in the course of implementation, the principle of OROP has been replaced by ‘one rank multiple pensions’ for persons with the same length of service. The petitioners contend that the initial definition of OROP was altered by the first respondent and, instead of an automatic revision of the rates of pension, the revision now would take place at periodic intervals. The petitioners submit that the deviation from the principle of automatic revision of rates of pension, where any future enhancement to the rates of pension are automatically passed on to the past pensioners, is arbitrary and unconstitutional under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution
2 The salient facts giving rise to the proceedings need to be stated. The demand for OROP by ex-servicemen of the defence forces was initially examined by Parliament in 2010-11. On 19 December 2011, the Rajya Sabha Committee on Petitions presented its 142nd Report on the Petition Praying for Grant of OROP to Armed Forces Personnel. The Committee recommended the implementation of OROP. The Committee defined OROP as a uniform pension to be paid to armed forces personnel retiring in the same rank with the same length of service, irrespective of their date of retirement, where any future enhancements in the rates of pension were to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners. The Committee noted that OROP was being implemented till 1973 when the Third Central Pay Commission took a decision to revoke it. The relevant observations/recommendations of the Koshyari Committee are extracted below:
“11.The Committee takes note of the fact that a sum of Rs
1300 crores is the total financial liability for the year 2011-12
in case OROP is implemented fully for all the defence
personnel in the country across the board. The Committee is
informed that out of this, 1065 crores would go to retirees
belonging Post Below Officer Ranks (PBOR) while the
Commissioned Officers would be getting the remaining i.e.
235 crores. The Committee feels that 1300 crores is not a
very big amount for a country of our size and economy for
meeting the long pending demand of the armed forces of the
country. The Committee understands that this ·1300 crores is
the expenditure for one year which might increase at the rate
of 10 percent annually. Even if it is so, the Committee does
not consider this amount to be high, keeping in view the
objective for which it would be spent. Needless for the
Committee to point out here that our defence personnel were
getting their pension and family pension on an entirely
different criteria before the Third Central Pay Commission
came into force. Till the recommendations of the Third Central
Pay Commission were implemented for the defence
personnel of the country, they were satisfied and happy with
dispensation meant for their pension/family pension
11.4 …the Committee feels that the decision of the
Government to bring our defence personnel on the pattern of
the civilians with regard to their pay, pension, etc. (from Third
Central Pay Commission onwards) is not a considered
decision which has caused hardship to the defence personnel
and has given birth to their demand for OROP. The
Committee understands that before the Third Central Pay
Commission, the defence personnel were getting their pay/
pension on the basis of a separate criteria unconnected with
the criteria devised for the civilian work force. That criteria
acknowledged and covered the concept of OROP which has
been given up after the Third Central Pay Commission.
11.5 The Committee is not convinced with the hurdles
projected by the Ministry of Defence (D/o Ex-Servicemen
Welfare) in implementing of OROP for defence personnel.
They have categorized the hurdles into administrative, legal
and financial. The financial aspect has already been dealt
with by the Committee. So far as the administrative angle is
concerned, the Committee is given to understand that all the
existing pensioners/ family pensioners are still drawing their
pension/family pension based upon the lawfully determined
pension/family pension. In that case, revision of their
pension/family pension, prospectively, as a one time measure
should not pose any administrative hurdle. So far as the legal
aspect is concerned, the Committee is not convinced by the
argument put forth against the implementation of OROP
because the pension/family pension is based upon the
service rendered by personnel while in service and
comparison of services rendered during two sets of periods
does not seem to be of much relevance. If seen from a strict
angle, in each set of periods, the army officer performed the
duties attached to his post and it may not be proper to infer
that the officers who served at a later period performed more
compared to the officers of earlier period. On the contrary,
facts tilt towards treating past pensioners/family pensioners at
par with the more recent ones.”
3. On 17 February 2014, the Finance Minister announced in his Budget Speech that the Union Government had in principle accepted OROP and it would be implemented prospectively from financial year 2014-15. The Finance Minister stated that an amount of Rs 500 crores has been transferred to the Defence Pension Account to meet the budgetary expense. On 26 February 2014, the Defence Minister chaired a meeting to discuss the implementation of OROP. The Defence Secretary, the Secretary to the Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare, the Controller General of Defence Accounts , the three Vice Chiefs of Staff, and senior officers of the Service Headquarters along with the concerned Joint Secretaries attended the meeting. The minutes of the meeting refer to OROP as a uniform pension to be paid to armed forces personnel that are retiring in the same rank with the same length of service, irrespective of the date of retirement, where any future enhancements in the rates of pension are to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners. The fourth respondent, CGDA, was directed to take necessary steps to give effect to the decision of implementing OROP in consultation with the three defence forces, and the first and second respondents.
4 By its letter dated 26 February 2014 the first respondent directed CGDA to work out the modalities of executing OROP. However, OROP was not implemented at the time. On 10 July 2014 in his Budget Speech for the year 2014-2015, the Finance Minister reaffirmed the Union Government’s commitment to implement OROP and a further sum of Rs 1000 crores was set apart to meet the requirement. In a written reply to a Member of Parliament on 2 cember 2014, the Minister of State for Defence stated that OROP implies that a uniform pension is paid to retired servicemen having the same rank with the same length of service, irrespective of the date of retirement, with any future enhancement in the rates being passed on to the past pensioners automatically
5 The above sequence of events has been emphasised by the petitioners to highlight that OROP always entailed an automatic revision of the rates of pension to bridge the gap in the pension being received by past and current pensioners. However, according to the petitioners, a letter dated 7 November 2015 of the Joint Secretary of the first respondent to the Chiefs of three defence forces introduced a revised definition of OROP, where the revision between the past and current rates of pension was to take place at periodic intervals. Besides stating that OROP would take effect from 1 July 2014, the letter also highlighted the salient features of OROP:
“3. Salient features of the OROP are as follows:
i. To begin with, pension of the past pensioners would be
refixed on the basis of pension of retirees of calendar year 2013
and the benefit will be effective with effect from 1.7.2014.
ii. Pension will be re-fixed for all pensioners on the basis of
the average of minimum and maximum pension of personnel
retired in 2013 in the same rank and with the same length of
service.
iii. Pension for these drawing above the average shall be
protected.
iv. Arrears will be paid in four equal half yearly instalments.
However, all the family pensioners including those in receipts
of Special/Liberalized family pension and Gallantry award
winner shall be paid arrears in one instalment.
v. In future, the pension would be re-fixed every 5 years.”
6 The above definition of OROP was also adopted by the first respondent while implementing OROP by its notification dated 14 November 2015. The rates of pension were now to be revised every five years. The notification also constituted a Committee headed by Justice L. Narasimha Reddy to examine and make recommendations on the terms of reference received by the Union Government on measures to remove anomalies that may arise in the implementation of the letter dated 7 November 2015.
Click here to continue to Read the OROP Judgment
Follow us on Telegram Channel, Twitter and Facebook for all the latest updates
Judgement is wrong