DISCRIMINATION AGAINST EX-SERVICEMEN RE-EMPLOYED IN CIVIL GOVERNMENT POSTS AFTER RETIREMENT

DISCRIMINATION AGAINST EX-SERVICEMEN RE-EMPLOYED IN CIVIL GOVERNMENT POSTS AFTER RETIREMENT

According to the existing rules, all government servants retire on reaching the age of superannuation, which is 60 years. This is laid down by Para 56 of the Financial Regulations. The rules clearly state that that no extensions will be granted, except for certain exceptions that include the Cabinet Secretary, Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Home Secretary, and Director of RAW, IB and CBI, who are granted extensions to enable them to get a tenure of two years. Similar rules exist for re-employment of officers after retirement. However, these orders apparently do not apply to the IAS fraternity, who get around these rules and manage extensions or re-employment after reaching the age of 60. In addition, they are sometimes employed on contract basis.

IAS Officers

             In response to an RTI application filed on 1/2/2011, asking for the rules governing extension and re-employment of government servants in after retirement and the list of officers of the rank of joint secretary and above granted extension or re-employed with the Central Government in 2002, 2003 and 2004, the DOPT initially did not give the information. The CPIO, Shri B Bandhyopadhyay informed that extension beyond the age of 60 was not permitted vide FR 56 (d), an extract of which was forwarded. After a first appeal, the Director, Shri P Prabhakaran provided some more information. He intimated that re-employment of government servants after superannuation was prohibited by instruction given in DOPT Office memorandum No. 26012/5/2002-Estt.A dated 9/12/2002, a copy of which was forwarded.

            I then filed a 2^nd appeal before the CIC, Shri Satyendra Misra, who ordered that the relevant rules and list of re-employed officers should be given. In compliance of this decision, the DOPT sent a copy of DOP&T OM No. 3/1/85-Estt (P-11) dated 31/7/1986 and the list of re-employed IAS officers at the level of joint secretary and above for the period 2002, 2003 and 2004.

            The list for the period 2002 to 2004 contains names of 44 officers, some of whom were re-employed for as much as five years. However, the scale of pay was deliberately not provided, for which I have filed another appeal as well as a separate RTI application addressed to the US (Estt.B) (Pay) & CPIO, DOPT who deals with the subject.

            Subsequently, I filed similar RTI applications with different authorities on 15/9/2012, asking for information regarding officers from the IAS, IPS, IFS and IRS granted extensions, re-employed or employed on contract during the period 2005 to 2011. After dragging its feet and the application being passed around from one section to the other for several months, one of the four CPIOs who dealt with the case finally complied, after an appeal. Shri Navneet Misra, Under Secretary and CPIO in the DOPT, has provided a list of 16 officers who were granted extensions ranging from 3 to 6 months. Significantly, the letter does not bear a date, though the envelope indicates that it was posted on 2/1/2013. The list is as under:-

Name, cadre               Appointment  Period of Extn                       Ground for Extn

RM Prem Kumar         Chief Secy,                 1/10/2005-                   To rehabilitate people 

IAS (MH:68)             Maharashtra                28/2/2006                    who are affected by floods

Vijay Bakaya              Chief Secy,                 1/4/2006-                     Smooth running of budget

IAS (JK:70)                Jammu & Kashmir      31/5/2006                    session & bi-elections.

TK Dewan                  Chief Secy,                 1/5/2006-                     In view of certain adm-

IAS (AP:69)                Andhra Pradesh          31/7/2006                    inistrative exigencies.

Shambu Nath              Chief Secy,                 1/4/2007-                     General elections (approval

IAS (UP:70)                Uttar Pradesh              30/6/2007                    by Election Commission)

AK Chaudhary           Chief Secy,                 1/9/2007-                     No reason given

IAS (BH:72)               Bihar                           30/11/2007

Shri Rakesh                 Chief Secy,                 1/1/2009-                     Tocoordinate implementation

IAS (MT:72)               Manipur                       30/6/2009                    of 6^th Pay Commission

Johny Joseph               Chief Secy,                 1/6/2009-                     No reason given

IAS (MH:72)             Maharashtra                30/11/2009

D Rajagopalan                        Chief Secy,                 1/8/2009-                     To implement Golden

IAS (GJ:74)                Gujarat                                    31/12/2009                  Jubilee Programme

Ramakanth Reddy      Chief Secy,                 1/10/2009-                   Exigencies in administrative

IAS (AP:69)                Andhra Pradesh          31/12/2009                  work

KS Sripathy                Chief Secy,                 1/5/2010-                     To implement development

IAS (TN:75)                Tamil Nadu                 31/10/2010                  & welfare schemes

NS Napalchyal            Chief Secy,                 1/4/2010-                     Short tenure; selection of

IAS (UK:76)               Uttarakhand                30/9/2010                    successor not finalised

TT Dorji                      Chief Secy,                 1/12//2010-                  Finalise State Annual Plan;

IAS (SK:75)                Sikkim                         31/3/2011                    lead delegation to Delhi

Subodh Kumar            Chief Secy,                 1/2/2012-         Presentation of budget by       new IAS (MH:77)                   Maharashtra                30/4/2012        members of Mumbai municipality     

Van Hela Pachau        Chief Secy,                 1/3/2012-         To lead the State for Committee

IAS (AGMU:76)        Mizoram                      31/8/2012       

Samar Ghosh               Chief Secy,                 1/4/2012-                     No reason given

IAS (WB:77)              West Bengal                30/9/2012                   

Karma Gyatso             Chief Secy,                 1/9/2012-                     Exigency and earthquake

IAS (SK:77)                Sikkim                         28/2/2013                    in Sikkim

            Some interesting facts emerge from the letters of sanction of the above extensions. Almost all were Chief Secretaries in various States. Most of the extensions were approved by the Prime Minister, based on letters from the respective Chief Ministers. While an extension given during elections, with the approval of the Election Commission, may be warranted, the others appear to be on frivolous grounds viz. to rehabilitate people who are affected by floods; administrative exigencies; Golden Jubilee Programme; to implement development & welfare schemes; selection successor not finalised; lead delegation to Delhi; presentation of budget by newly elected members of Mumbai municipality and so on. There are others for which no reason is given, the approvals having been granted by the Cabinet Secretariat or the PMO without reference to DOPT.     

            Incidentally, way back in 2008, I had filed an RTI application with the DOPT asking for year wise lists of officers of the rank of Jt. Secy, Addl. Secy, Spl. Secy and Secy from 2001 to 2008. Initially, they informed me that the list of officers on each date is not maintained in the Department and advised that I should obtain it from the official website of the Department i.e. http://persmin.nic.in. However, after an appeal, the DOPT provided the list, which does not tally with the list on the web site. The case was subsequently decided by the CIC but the DOPT appealed in the High Court on whether the names of officers posted in RAW should be provided, some of which were on the website as well as their reply.

            Though the list provided by DOPT did not tally with list on the web site, it brought out some interesting features.  There were a large number of officers who should have retired still occupying important posts in the Central Government. For example, the list of Secretaries to the Government of India during as on 1/1/2008 showed the  following names of retired officers occupying government posts:-

Name                                      Appointment                                                  Date of Retirement

Malti S Sinha              Secy, M/O Health & Family Welfare                         31/10/2003

Sanjiov Misra              Secy, M/O Finance                                                     31/12/2007

A Dasgupta                 Secy, M/O Agri & Rural Industries                            31/12/2006

GS Sahni                     Secy, (PG & Coord), Cabinet Sectt                            30/11/2006

BS Minhas                  Secy, M/O Agri & Rural Industries                            31/10/2004

AN Varma                  NA, PMO                                                                   31/10/1993

Arun Bhatnagar          Secy, PMO NI Advisory Council       `                       30/06/2004

Anil Chowdhury         Not indicated                                                              31/8/2004

Somi Tandon               Secy, M/O Defence (Defence Finance)                      31/0/2005

Shyam Saran               Secy, M/O External Affairs                                        30/09/2006

Shashank                     Secy, M/O External Affairs                                        31/07/2004

RM Abhyankar           Secy, M/O External Affairs                                        31/08/2005

JC Sharma                   Secy, M/O External Affairs                                        31.07/2004

BN Som                      Secy, M/O Communications & IT                              31/01/2002

PS Go  el                     Secy, M/O Earth Sciences                                          30/04/2007

R Mashelkar                Secy, M/O Science & Technology                              31/12/2002

HK Gupta                   Secy, M/O Ocean Development                                 30/06/2002

CD Sahay                    Secy, Cabinet Sectt (R&AW)                                     30/04/2005

            As will be obvious from the above list, several officers were still occupying important government positions many years after their retirement. Some, like AN Varma, who should have retired in 1993, was still serving in 2008, at the age of 75!  The lists for the previous years from 2001 to 2007 contain similar anomalies. If one goes through names of Jt. Secys, and Addl Secys, the number of retired officers is even larger.

             

 IFS Officers

            On 15/9/2012, I had submitted an application to the PIO, Ministry of External Affairs asking for information regarding IFS of the level of Joint Secretary and above re-employed, granted extension and employed on contract in Central Government posts after retirement for the period 2005 to 2011. AS expected, the MEA refused to provide the information on the ground that it is not available in the form in which it has been sought and it would disproportionately divert the resources of the public authority to compile the same. I was asked to visit their office to inspect the available record of the year 2011, which I refused. I appealed to the First Appellate Authority, mentioning that the DOPT has provided similar information along with letters sanctioning the extension granted to each IAS officer. Surely, the number of IFS officers is much smaller that the number of IAS officers. This plea was accepted and the MEA finally provided the information as given below:-

S. No  Name                Designation     Pay Band & Grade Pay                     Tenure

1.         HK Bhasin       Ambassador     Pre-revised Basic pay       Re-emp as non-career after (IFS:1968)       (Denmark)            (Rs. 26000/- fixed)           retirement from 01/09/04 to 16/06/05

2.         Tara Singh       Ambassador     Pre-revised Basic pay       Re-emp as non-career after (IFS:1972)       (Belarus)            (22400-525-24500)          retirement from 01/07/04 to 30/06/05

3.         Ronendra Sen  Ambassador     26000 Fixed) as per          Re-emp as non-career from 06/08/04         (IFS:1966)            (USA)              pre-revised Basic pay        further extended to 31/03/09

                                                            80000 (Fixed) revised

4.         Kamalesh Sharma  High Comm             26000  (Fixed) as per        Re-emp as non-career after           (IFS:1965)                  (UK)             pre-revised Basic pay       retirement from 01/07/04 to 30/06/05

                                                              80000 (Fixed) revised

5.         Kanwal Sibal   Ambassador       26000  (Fixed) as per      Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1966)       (Russia)             pre-revised Basic pay       retirement from 17/09/04 to 16/09/07

                                                              80000 (Fixed) revised

6.         PS Haer            High Comm        80000  (Fixed)               Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1970)       (Mauritius)                                               retirement from 10/09/06 to 31/12/06

7.         Nirupam Sen     Ambassador/     80000  (Fixed)               Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1969)       PMI (New York)                                 retirement from 01/03/07 to 31/03/09

8.         Partha Sarathi Ray  Ambassador   80000  (Fixed)             Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1971)            (Denmark)                                               retirement from 01/02/08 to 29/02/08

9.         Rinzing Wandi    Ambassador    80000  (Fixed)               Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1971)          (Mexico)                                                  retirement from 01/01/08 to 31/12/08

10        Amitava Tripathi Ambassador    80000  (Fixed)               Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1971)         (Switzerland)                                           retirement from 01/01/08 to 29/02/08

11        Asit Kumar Nag    Ambassador              37400-67000                            Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1984)          (Seychelles)     Grade Pay 10000           retirement from 01/02/11 to 31/07/11

12        Azad Singh Toor    Ambassador             37400-67000                            Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1987)          (Madagascar)               Grade Pay 10000           retirement from 01/11/11 to 30/04/12

13        Meera Shankar    Ambassador     80000  (Fixed)               Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1973)          (USA)                                         retirement from 01/11/10 to 31/12/10

14        HK Singh            Ambassador     80000  (Fixed)               Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1974)          (Japan)                                                       retirement from 01/11/10 to 31/12/10

15        Nirupama Rao    Ambassador     80000  (Fixed)               Re-emp as non-career after             (IFS:1973)          (USA)                                          retirement from 06/09/11 to 05/09/13

            In addition to the above list of re-employed officers, the MEA has intimated that two officers were employed on contact basis as under:-

Name of Officer        Retired as       Duration of Contract            Consultancy fees per month

PP Sircar                     Jt Secy             8/9/2011 to 31/1/2013             Rs. 51,000

Ms Reena Pandey       Jt Secy             1/1/2011 to 31/12/2012           Rs. 50,000

            In response to my RTI dated 15/9/2012, Shri B Bandhopadhyay, Under Secretary & CPIO in the DOPT, intimated that as per DOPT Office memorandum No. 26012/5/2002-Estt.A dated 9/12/2002 re-employment beyond the age of superannuation is not allowed. Para 9 of the OM is reproduced below:-

9.         Re-employment. No proposal for employing a government servant beyond the age of superannuation of 60 years shall be considered. It is also clarified that no person can be appointed/re-appointed to Central Government service after the age of superannuation of 60 years through contract.

            In view of these orders passed by the DOPT itself, how are IAS and IFS officers being reemployed beyond the age of 60, after superannuation? 

IRS Officers

Similar information was asked for from the Dept of Revenue, Ministry of Finance. No officer of Customs and Central Excise was granted extension, re-employed or employed on contract basis during the period 2005-2011. However, three officers of the Income Tax Dept were granted extensions, as under:-

Name                                      Designation                 Date of retirement      Duration of Extension

Ms Shobha Majumdar              Charman, CBDT          28/2/2005                    one month

R Prasad                                  Chairman, CBDT         29/2/2006                    one month

Sudhir Chandra                                    Member, CBDT           31/3/2011                    two months

IPS Officers

Information in respect of IPS officers has still not been provided       by DOPT.

Officers from the Defence Services

Service officers of the rank of Colonel and Lt Col are usually re-employed within the service, for a period of max 4 years, in appointments tenable by majors or captains. Officers of senior rank i.e. Brig and above are given re-employment outside the service, in central police forces, intelligence agencies etc. In case they retire within the service and then go out, they are re-employed in a post that is one rank lower. However, if they were already on deputation and retire from the Defence Forces, at an age less than 60, they are re-employed in the same civil appointment until they reach age of 60. For example, a Brig serving in a civil post on deputation will retire at the age of 56. Thereafter, he can be re-employed until he reaches the age of 60.

            In all cases, the entire pension of the service officer is deducted while fixing his salary in the re-employed post. The decision to ignore the salary either fully or in part rests with the Govt, which means the bureaucrats in the DOPT.

            The rules regarding fixation of pay on re-employment are given in Central Civil Services (Fixation of Pay of Reemployed Pensioners) Orders, 1986, issued vide DOPT Office Memorandum No. 3/1/85-Estt (Pay II) dated 31/7/1986  Relevant extracts of Para 4 of the Rules is reproduced below:

4.  FIXATION OF PAY OF REEMPLOYED PENSIONERS

(a)        Reemployed pensioners shall be allowed to drawn (sic) pay only in prescribed

            scales of pay for the posts in which they are reemployed. No protection of the                      scales of pay f the post held by them prior to retirement shall be given.

            (b) (i)   In all cases where the pension is fully ignored, the initial pay on        reemployment shall be fixed at minimum of the scale of pay of the reemployed          post.    

                  (ii)  In cases where the entire pension and pensionary benefits are not ignored               for pay fixation, the initial pay on reemployment shall be fixed at the same                stage as the last pay drawn before retirement.  If there is no such stage in                                    the reemployed post,   the pay shall be fixed at the stage below that pay. If                                   the maximum of the pay scale in which the pensioner is reemployed is less                               than the last pay drawn before retirement, his initial pay shall be fixed at                                     the maximum of the scale of the reemployed post. Similarly, if the                                         minimum of the scale of pay, in which the pensioner is reemployed is more                          than the last pay drawn by him before retirement         his initial pay shall be              fixed at the minimum of the scale of pay of the reemployed         post.                                         However, in all these cases, non-ignorable part of the pension and                                               pension equivalent of retirement benefits shall be reduced from the pay so                                fixed.

            (c)        The reemployed pensioner shall in addition to  pay as fixed under para                                (b) above shall be permitted to draw separately any pension sanctioned to                                 him and to retain any other form of retirement benefits.

            (d)        In the case of persons retiring before attaining the age of 55 years and                                 who are reemployed, pension  including pension equivalent of gratuity                             and other forms of retirement benefits) shall be ignored for initial pay                             fixation to the following extent:

(i)                 In the case of ex-servicemen who held posts below commissioned officer rank in the Defence Forces and in case of Civilians who held post below Group ‘A’ posts at the time of their retirement, the entire pension and pension equivalent of retirement benefits shall be ignored.

(ii)               In the case of service officers belonging to the Defence Forces and Civilian Pensioners who held Group ‘A’ posts at the time of their retirement, the first Rs. 500/- of the pension and pension equivalent of the retirement benefits shall be ignored.

The loss of pension on reemployment of service officers is due to the fact that they are ALWAYS reemployed under the provisions of Para 4 (b) (ii), where the entire pension is not ignored. On the other hand, bureaucrats are reemployed under Para 4 (b) (i), where the pension is fully ignored.

Consider the example of a Maj Gen who retired in 2002, when his salary was 22400. His pension works out to Rs 11200. In case his pension was fully ignored, under Para 4 (b) (i), his emoluments would be as under:-

Salary (minimum of scale)      -                       18400

Pension                                    -                       11200

Total                                                                29,600

Actually, since his pension is not ignored, his emoluments under Para 4 (b) (ii), his emoluments would be as under:-

Salary (maximum of scale) less pension -       11200

Pension                                                -           11200

Total                                                                22,400

As can be seen, the difference works out to Rs. 7200. In fact, the loss is sometimes more. In my own case, I was drawing a salary of Rs 22900 (Basic 22400 plus stagnation pay 500) when I retired in June 2002. My pension was fixed at Rs 11325. My salary on reemployment was fixed at 22400 less pension which worked out to Rs 11075. 

Though Para 4 (d) (ii) states that in case of service officers and officers holding Group A posts the first Rs 500 of the pension will be ignored, I have never seen this happening.

Dearness relief on Disability Pension during Reemployment

During the period of reemployment, dearness relief is not paid on the pension. However, DR is given on the full salary scale in which the officer is re-employed. In case an officer gets disability pension, this is also clubbed with service pensions and no DR is paid. This is blatantly unfair, since the disability pension is not taken into account while fixing the salary. This point has been taken up me with the PCDA as well as the Government but there was no result. Unfortunately, it is mostly Armed Forces officers who get disability pension, so bureaucrats are not really affected.

Discriminations between Officers and Lower Ranks

Para 4 (d) (i) of DOPT Office Memorandum No. 3/1/85-Estt (Pay II) dated 31/7/1986 given above reads:-

             In the case of ex-servicemen who held posts below commissioned officer rank in the           Defence Forces and in case of Civilians who held post below Group ‘A’ posts at the time      of their retirement, the entire pension and pension equivalent of retirement benefits shall            be ignored.

            This means that only commissioned officers lose out when they are reemployed in civil posts after retirement. JCOs and OR get the salary of the new post as well as their pension.  Consider the case when a Captain or Major is re-employed along with a Subedar Major in the same organisation. After deducting his pension, the emoluments of the re-employed officer will be less than those of the JCO. There appears to be no logic in this anomaly, which also appears to discriminatory and can be challenged in the court.

            The above provisions are also given in the recent Instructions issued by Principal Controller of Defence Accounts to prevent Delay in payment of Defence pension by Banks, vide

Circular No. 165, Audit/Tech./070-XXI, dated: 22 .02.2013. which is reproduced below:-

(a) In case of re-employed pensioners who hold Group ‘A’ post or posts of the ranks of commissioned officers at the time of their re-employment will not be entitled to any dearness relief on pension on the fact that:-

(i) a certain portion of pension is taken into account and is not entirely ignored.

(ii) the pay in the post of re-employment is not required to be fixed at the minimum of the scale in all cases, and

(iii) dearness allowance at the rates applicable from time to time is also admissible on the pay fixed on re-employment.

(b) (i) The entire pension admissible is to be ignored in the case of civilian pensioner who held posts below Group ‘A’ and those ex-servicemen who held posts below the ranks of commissioned officers, at the time of their retirement. Their pay on re-employment is to be fixed at the minimum of the pay scale of the post in which they are re-employed. Such civilian pensioners will consequently be entitled to dearness relief on their pension at the rates applicable from time to time.

(b) (ii) The ex-servicemen (PBOR) who retired before attaining the age of 55 years and re-employed thereafter and their pay fixed at a higher stage because of advance increments and no protection of the last pay drawn is being given, the pay should be treated as fixed at a minimum only for the purpose of ignoring the entire pension and allowing dearness relief on pension.

(c) The disability element is part of disability pension, therefore position explained at a & b above will also apply for regulating dearness relief on disability element during re-employment of pensioner drawing disability pension.

(d) The family pension received by the eligible central Govt. employees/Armed Forces pensioners is, in any case, not taken into account in determining their pay on employment therefore, dearness relief at the rates applicable from time to time shall be admissible on their family pension.

            The discrimination meted out to Armed Forces officers in the matter of re-employment beyond the age of 60, fixation of salary on re-employment and non-payment of dearness relief ob disability pension should be taken up through a PIL in the Supreme Court or High Court.

            The ESM has agreed to take it up. I have them given them a detailed brief along with copies of the replies received from DOPT etc. I hope this is done soon. Others who are similarly affected may give their inputs if they wish.

Maj Gen VK Singh

Veteran

3/4/2013

                                                 

                                                 

VEEKAYS NEWSLETTER – 2012

VEEKAYS NEWSLETTER – 2012

Christmas and the New Year are round the corner and it is time for the annual ritual of getting ‘through’ with near and dear ones, some close and some far away. There are many friends, acquaintances, comrades and colleagues who one has not met or spoken to for years. In fact, at the ’dam busters’ get together held a year ago in Kharakvasla, some of us met after exactly 47 years! The fact that a few had already departed on their last journey made the occasion doubly poignant, reminding us that we are getting older, if not old.

2012 has been eventful, if not exactly hectic.  The case filed against me by the CBI at the behest of RAW is still on. They filed a charge sheet in April 2009, after which  I applied to the court for copies of documents listed in the charge sheet as evidence to be given to me (I already have copies of some of them, which pertain to appointment, salary, extension and re-employment etc). The court granted the request, but the CBI went in appeal against that order in the High Court. At that time, the Supreme Court had stayed a similar order of the Delhi High Court on an appeal by the Government in the case of Brig Ujjal Dasgupta, and the CBI counsel was banking on that. (Ujjal was granted bail after spending more than four years in jail on a trumped up charge). However, shortly afterwards the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, and ordered that the documents will be given. With this, it was thought that the CBI will now have no option but to do the same in my case. But I had not taken into account the ingenuity of the CBI counsel.  For the last two years or so, he has delayed the case seeking adjournments on one pretext or the other. Fed up with this, I met the Director CBI Mr AP Singh in April and told him that his lawyer was taking him for a ride – the CBI was paying him for each hearing and he was deliberately making sure that the case drags on for another five or ten years. The Director promised to look into it.

I had also filed a case in the High Court in 2008 for quashing the FIR and charge sheet. This is still to be decided. The CBI counsel is the same, in this case as well as in the lower courts.(Just for the record, he played a role in the famous case of Captain BK Subbarao, IN, who was arrested at the Bombay airport in 1988  for attempting to take ‘secret’ documents, abroad – only it was his own PhD thesis. He spent 20 months in jail and was exonerated by the Supreme Court only in 1993. The CBI counsel in my case was one of the two counsels who filed a false affidavit in the Supreme Court on behalf of the Government in the Subbarao case). Arguments have been held and the case is listed for final disposal since April 2011. For various reasons it has still not been decided.

Then there are five cases which I have filed in the court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under CrPC 156 (3), asking that the CBI be directed to register FIRs and investigate the complaints I have made to them. One relates to the instances of corruption that I have reported to the CVC and the CBI. The other four concern disclosures in books and articles about RAW, some of which I have used as reference material. Hearings are still being held, without a decision so far. After almost three years, the CMM transferred the case involving corruption to the District Judge, who in turn sent it to the CBI Spl Judge. After about a dozen hearings, the CBI Spl Judge discovered that only the High Court or the Supreme Court has the authority to direct the CBI to register an FIR and investigate a case. I am wondering how this happened – for three years, neither the CMM, nor the District Judge nor the CBI Spl Judge was aware of the Supreme Court ruling that lays down this condition. Now I plan to file a petition on similar lines in the High Court. Perhaps in 2-3 years, they might take a decision.

As regards the other four cases against the authors of books and article, some of which I have quoted in my own book, summons were issued in two cases. They promptly went to the High Court, Quoting Section 13(3) of the Official Secrets Act, which stipulates that5 no court will take cognisance of an offence under this Act unless the complaint comes from a government department. Now we know why in all espionage case, such as the war room leak case, the bureaucrat will never be punished. The person to whom secret documents or information was passes can be prosecuted, but not the official was passed it on, after accepting a bribe. I did some research in the National Archives in the genesis of the OSA, in UK as well as in India. I found some interesting facts.

 In the Indian Official Act of 1889 as well 1904, there was a provision for sanction being required from the Governor General or the Local Government. This provision was also inserted in the Indian Official Secrets Act, 1923.  In 1937 and 1967, ‘Governor General’ and ‘Local Government’ were amended to read ‘Appropriate Government’. The intention of nominating the Governor General as the sanctioning authority was to ensure that prosecution under the OSA was undertaken only in very serious cases, after clearance at the highest level. However, as it stands today, this provision is being misused by unscrupulous elements within the government and outside. Classified information is being leaked to the media by intelligence agencies, to protect themselves from blame for intelligence failures after terror attacks. Classified information is also made available by corrupt officials to private vendors, to enable them to bag lucrative government contracts, especially in the defence and aerospace sectors. Because of the stipulation given in Section 13 (3) of the OSA, no action can be taken by the courts even when such cases are brought to their notice by whistle blowers. The organisations to which these officers belong rarely agree to make formal complaints, since many of them are involved in such activities themselves. Brilliant is it not?

Recently, a PIL was filed in the Supreme Court on behalf of the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, questioning the legal status of the three Indian intelligence agencies – IB, RAW and NTRO. It seeks that the Government be advised to enact laws to define their role along with provisions for parliamentary oversight and audit, as has been done in all democracies, including USA, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc. As it stands, for all practical proposes these agencies are a law unto themselves, since their very existence is not formally recognised. One only has to read the books by MK Dhar, B. Raman, Sankaran Nair etc to realise that they are used by the party in power for everything under the sun, including illegal tapping of telephones (even the President of India, GIani Zail Singh was not spared), breaking into people’s houses (Maneka Gandhi), bribing politicians from other parties to change their loyalty and so on. B Raman and Sankaran Nair even give details of a bribe of 6 million dollars paid by the Government of India in to an Iranian called Rashidiyan, who was a friend of Ashraf Pehlavi, the sister of the Shah of Iran. The reason – to get a soft loan of 250 million dollars from Iran after the US imposed sanctions on India in the wake of the 1974 Pokharan blast. Of course, the level of corruption in the intelligence agencies is mind boggling. Some instances have been mentioned in the PIL. Let us see what happens.

There are many other interesting cases but if I do not stop, this newsletter will begin to look like a law journal. Obviously, a lot of my time and energy is spent in drafting petitions and attending hearings. For the record, in 2012 I have attended 2 hearings in the Supreme Court, 11in the High Court, 24 in the CMM’s court, 12 in court of the CBI Spl judge and 8 in the Chief Information Commission. These add up to 55, which is a little more than the numbers in previous years – 50 each in 2011 and 2010, and 42 in 2009. Now, I have to keep a diary like most lawyers do apart from marking the dates on calendar on by desk.

Another major activity that I was engaged in from 2006 onwards was the History of the Corps of Signals, Volume III, covering the period 1947-72. The book was formally released during the centenary celebrations of the Corps in February 2011 at Jabalpur. But it has still not been printed because of problems associated with clearance by the military intelligence directorate. Since September 2010, when I finished the manuscript, it has been going up and down, between three directorates – Signals, MI and MO. Initially, MI cleared the book only as a RESTRICTED publication, on the ground that the 1962, 1965 and 1971 operations had still not been declassified. We told them that the History Division of the Ministry of Defence had already written the official histories of the histories of the 1962, 1965 and 1971 wars. Though these had not been printed, they were available on the website of Bharat Rakshak. But they were still not convinced and asked us to remove all references to war diaries and official records. We did this, but they were still not happy, and sent it to MO, for their opinion. As was to be expected, MO refused to clear it. They asked us to remove the entire chapter on the 1962 war with China and all references to Mukti Bahini in 1971. This too was done and the book resubmitted, Inexplicably, MO sent it Eastern Command and 33 Corps, for comments on the Nathu la operations in 1967. These were written based on personal inputs from signal officers who were present, especially 2^nd Lt (later Col) NC Gupta and Maj (later Lt Gen) SRR Aiyengar, the ‘sparrows’ of the 112 and 63 brigades. Incidentally I was also serving in the unit at that time, in Gangtok. Not many pop-le know that NC Gupta was recommended for an MVC for the op, but was finally given a Sena Medal, because his citation had details of infantry units vacating their posts. The manuscript has recently been returned, with the remarks that the version given does not tally with official records. So now we are back to square one. 

An interesting event that I was part of is the Jaipur Literature festival. Fed up by the attitude of the MOD and the Service HQ, I requested the USI to sponsor a discussion on the issue de-classification of military records. With the approval of the Director USI, I contacted Namita Gokhale, who is a co-director of the event and arranged a meeting between a delegation from the USI and the organisers of the event – Namita Gokhale and Sheuli Sethi. They agreed to give us a slot. For the first time ever, the subject was discussed during the Jaipur Literature Festival (JLF) in January 2012. In the session titled 'Indian Military History: The Missing Links', the discussants were Shri Chandrashekhar Dasgupta, IFS, Squadron Leader RTS Chhina, Shri Anit Mukherjee and yours truly. The session was moderated by Manoj Joshi, the current comment editor of Mail Today. Many people, including the organisers, were skeptical about the interest and response that a mundane subject like military history would elicit from the audience. One can imagine their surprise when it was found that the Durbar Hall had been filled up even before the session started. The audience comprised not only retired defence officers, but many young people, from school or college.

Another area of concern is the problems connected with my health. Last year, I had to undergo nine months of ATT after it was discovered that one my ribs had been partially eaten away by tuberculosis. The course finished in February this year. Apart from the nausea caused by the medicines, I had to suffer total abstinence and remained a teetotaller. Soon after return from our holiday in Europe in September last year, I had some loss of vision in my right eye. Tests revealed that I had suffered a haemorrhage in my retina. I was given a Lucentis injection, followed by a second one after 4 weeks followed by laser scatter after another 4 weeks. After this, I was given a Macugen injection, followed by three doses of Avastin at intervals of 6-8 weeks. The last Avastin injection, given in April 2012 resulted in loss of eye sight in that eye. Surprisingly, this happened to eight persons, mostly veterans, who were given the injections that day. There was uproar, and I had to undergo an operation called PPV (Pars Plana Vitrectomy) after two days. I had to go to hospital almost every week for a check up. Things improved only after I was given steroids. Now, the swelling has almost gone and the vision is back, but not completely. Vertical lines appear bent or broken and objects in the middle appear to be smaller than the ones on the periphery of the eye.

I had written to many of you regarding the incident in April, when I was drugged and robbed in the train, while travelling from Delhi to Sultanpur in UP. Along with me, another senior citizen travelling with me on the opposite lower berth was also targeted. I later came to know that such incidents are quite common, especially in AC 2 compartments. The railways have earmarked four lower births in each coach which are allotted only to senior citizens. There are gangs comprising two people, who keep a track of the persons to whom these births are allotted. On the last day, they book two Tatkal tickets and get the upper births above them allotted, in collusion with the railway staff. This enables them to spend some time with the senior citizens, and run small errands, such as getting water, tea etc form the platform. Once they gain their confidence, they usually drug their water, tea or food. The drug is carried below the fingernails, and all that one has to do is to dip the finger in the cup or glass, when the person is looking away or has gone to the toilet. Of course, I lodged an FIR and the Police did carry out an investigation. As expected, the IDs submitted by the two boys when making the reservations turned out to be fake. I had also given the IMEI numbers of the phones t the police. These were not used, at least for several months after the event, so the guys were obviously professionals. Details of the incident have been posted separately on my blog http://veekaysnewsletter.blogspot.com.

This year we had two sojourns in the hills, both in Himachal. In June we went to Dharamshala and Dalhousie for a week. Because of my imperfect eye, I decided not to drive and hired a driver. Shortly after we started climbing the hills ahead of Chandigarh, We found that he was dozing off. After a few narrow escapes, I had to take the wheel myself and drive up to Dharamshala. For the next two days I drove myself until my nephew, who is posted in 10 Guards arranged another driver from Pathankot. This guy turned out to be excellent, and took us to Dalhousie and later drove us back to Delhi.

In October, we made a 10-day trip to Manali. There were 14 of us in three cars – an Innova, a Captiva and a Skoda. We stayed in the Mountaineering Institute, which has excellent rooms and lots of parking space. We wanted to do some adventure activities and the Director of the Institute, Captain Salhuria (he is the brother of Captain Salaria, who was awarded the PVC) detailed a young lady to advise us. She was Dicky Dolma, who met us next morning. After she left, my granddaughter told me that her photo was in their school text books – she had climbed Everest. Naturally, the kids all wanted a photo and autograph, and Dicky obliged. She told me she was selected for the Everest expedition by Colonel Amit Roy, our veteran mountaineers from Signals. The Manali trip was wonderful. The younger ones did a lot of trekking, para gliding, and river rafting. We went up to Rohtang where there was some snow. I had driven over this route during the Himalayan Rally in the early eighties, and the kids were very keen to see the entire stretch beyond Rohtang up to Keylong. But we had to turn back after about 20 Km as the road was bad. For some strange reason, taxis from other states are not allowed to go to Rohtang and private cars need a permit from the SDM. We went on a Sunday but the CO of the Border Roads task Force, whose office is right next to the Mountaineering Institute, used his clout and got us the permits.

We are still staying in Gurgaon, in Palam Vihar. My son Abhimanyu, his wife Jasmine and their two children, Bhuvanyu (10) and Khushi (8) live on the first floor. They go to Sun City School. My daughter Mauravi has moved from Ikon Tower opposite the DLF Golf Course to Hextex Commune a short distance away. Her two daughters, Mriggya (10) and Eshaana (8) go to the American Excelsior School which is located nearby. Her hubby, Vaibhav, whom is in the merchant navy, is presently sailing. Mauravi and her children usually come over to Palam Vihar on Friday evening and go back on Sunday. My wife’s nephew, Ajay lives just behind us in G-60 with his wife and two children. So the weekends are far from quiet. During winter, all of us normally go out for a picnic on Sundays to one of the gardens or monuments in Delhi.  The Outlook Traveller guide to Delhi and NCR is often consulted before selecting a destination for the weekend.

This year too, I have added some names to the list of addressees. Those who wish to read my previous newsletters can do so by logging on to on my blog http://veekaysnewsletter.blogspot.com.

Wishing all of you a Merry Christmas and a Very Happy and Prosperous New Year.

Vinay and Kumud Singh 

G-31, Palam Vihar, Gurgaon – 122017

Tele: 0124- 4074077, 9873494521, 9899110913

25^th December 2010

 At Khajjar, near Dalhousie- 30^th June 2012

A HARROWING EXPERIENCE - DRUGGED AND ROBBED IN THE TRAIN

            It seems my run of bad luck is never going to end. This is an update of the recent traumatic event that has left me devastated.

On 9/4/2012 I boarded the Farakka express at Old Delhi railway station at about 10 pm. I was going to Sultanpur (UP) to look up my mother. I was on berth No 9 in the AC 2 Tier coach. Opposite me, on berth No 7 was another citizen, Mr. Punia, who lives in Panchkula. The upper berths were occupied by two young men in their twenties, whose names were Arif and Aslam. Except me, all were booked for Patna.

When we arrived at Lucknow next morning at about 8 am, I went outside and had a cup of tea. I then had my breakfast which I had carried from home. When I came back from the wash room after washing my hands, I found that the two young men had brought four cups of tea, out of which they offered two to Mr Punia and me. Immediately after having a few sips, I lost consciousness, and so apparently did Mr Punia. (Later, I came to know that the he had earlier asked the boys to buy a bottle of water for him from the platform. He recalls that when they gave him the bottle the cap was unscrewed).

After three hours, my brother and his son, who had come to receive me at Sultanpur, found me unconscious. Initially they thought that I was asleep, but were alarmed when they found me groggy and incoherent. They immediately got a wheel chair and off loaded me from the train. When they found that the passenger on the opposite berth was also unconscious, they offloaded him also, on a stretcher. Meanwhile, they had also informed the Police and Railway authorities, since they were not sure if Mr Punia was dead or alive. The train was held up for an hour or so and some local news reporters also arrived. Of course, the upper berths were vacant, the boys having left. They took away my two cell phones and my wallet which had three debit cards, two credit cards and my driving licence, apart from some cash. They left my DSOI, ECHS, canteen and golf club cards. As for Mr Punia, we later found that they had taken his bag which had a large amount of cash. They left all our clothes and a folder belonging to Mr Punia which had some legal papers with his address.

Both of us were admitted to the nearest hospital and put on drips. When I regained consciousness after about 24 hours, I gave statements to the Police who registered an FIR.  My brother had informed Mr. Punia’s son in Panchkula, who reached Sultanpur next day, and took his father home. Surprisingly, neither the conductor nor the attendant discovered that two of us on the lower berths were unconscious. Neither did they notice that the two boys had left the compartment. I presume they had not checked their IDs when they had boarded the train – at least they did not check mine.

I wonder what would have happened to us if my brother had not off loaded us at Sultanpur, after about three hours. If Mr Punia had not been off loaded, he would have remained in the same state at least till Patna, a good 12 hours later. There are various possibilities that come to mind. Perhaps the two boys had purposely booked their berths above the berths which are earmarked for senior citizens, knowing that they are easy targets. Maybe they had come to know that Mr Punia was carrying a large amount of cash, and had been tailing him from Panchkula. If they got their berths at the last moment, this could only be with the connivance of the railway staff.

It is the third possibility that has me most worried. Could it have been done by the dirty tricks department of my old organisation (RAW)? One may ask, why now, almost five years after they got after me for exposing corruption in the set up. Well, after failing to get any favourable response from the CVC and the CBI, to whom I reported these incidents, I had filed a complaint with the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) in 2009, under Cr.P.C.156 (3), asking him to issue directions to the CBI to register an FIR and investigate the complaints. After three years, the complaint was recently transferred to the District Judge who had transferred it to the Spl Judge CBI. It was heard on 16/3/2012 and the CBI could give no satisfactory answer for their inaction except that they had written to RAW in 2008 and were waiting for a response! The Judge was naturally not amused and adjourned the case for 16/4/2012, asking them to file a status report. (Incidentally, they could not give any satisfactory answer on 16/4/2012 also, and the case has now been adjourned to 2/5/2012). With the heat now being tuned on them, it is understandable that some people in RAW would be feeling hot under the collar. Was the drugging and theft a veiled warning, or could it be something more sinister? With the increasing number of whistle blowers paying the price with their lives, nothing is beyond imagination. Shortly after this, during a hearing, the CBI Spl Judge asked me if I had come alone. When I answered in the affirmative, he said that he had a hunch that some people were keeping me under watch. He advised me not to come alone in future. The CBI counsel and the IO wee present, along with someone from RAW, incognito. Later during the month, when I met the Director CBI in his office, with a request to expedite the case filed against me, I brought this to his notice.

 Apart form lodging an FIR, I had written a DO letter to the ADG railway Police in Lucknow. After about two months, a sub inspector came to Delhi to investigate the case. He interacted with the Police and the railway authorities. The addresses and IDs given by the two boys when booking their tickets were found to be fictitious. The booking clerk who had done the booking said that he was not able to distinguish between a forged ID and a genuine one. I had given the IMEI numbers of my two mobile phones to the Police. They kept track of it for some time. After a few months when i checked, I was told that the phones have not been used.

I later came to know that such incidents are quite common, especially in AC 2 compartments. The railways have earmarked four lower births in each coach which are allotted only to senior citizens. There are gangs comprising two people, who keep a track of the persons to whom these births are allotted. On the last day, they book two Tatkal tickets and get the upper births above them allotted, in collusion with the railway staff. This enables them to spend some time with the senior citizens, and run small errands, such as getting water, tea etc form the platform. Once they gain their confidence, they usually drug their water, tea or food. The drug is carried below the fingernails, and all that one has to do is to dip the finger in the cup or glass, when the person is looking away or has gone to the toilet. When travelling alone, the safest option is to travel by air or by road. If one has to travel by train, it is best to take a day train, like the Shatabdi.

Maj Gen VK Singh 

EIGHTH BIENNIAL REUNION - 33 ADSR

The DOT ARENERS held their 8th Biennial Reunion at Hisar on 23/24 November 2012. Out of 12 ex-COs, no less than 9 were present. The only ones who were missing were RM Shukla, RK Sharma and Cariappa. Of course, there were a large number of other officers, who had served in the unit during the last 30 years. Some were accompanied by their better halves. 

Most of us reached around mid day on 23rd. After a quick lunch, some of us played a bit of golf. In the evening, there was a dinner in the Signals Officers Mess. Apart from the customary Scotch which the ex-COs had contributed, we had some champagne -  after all, it was the 30th anniversary of our raising  There was also a Reunion cake; in fact there were two. The second one was cut after midnight, since it happened to be the birthday of the unit's First Lady, Mrs Kang. 

Next morning, we had the customary group photo in front of the RHQ. We were saddened to find the comn ICV released to the unit as a war trophy missing - it had been taken away to form part of the Division's museum and archives. After going round the unit and the comn vehicles that had been laid out, we met the JCOs and OR over a cup of tea. Some people stayed for lunch while a few rushed off earlier - some had to catch a flight or a train at Delhi, or other commitments. 

I have been going to Hisar every two years for the last two decades or more. It warms the cockles of  one's heart to see how the unit whose birth one witnessed and nursed during its infancy has grown into a such a fine outfit. All credit to the COs  and officers, JCOs and OR who have carried forward the legacy of the founding fathers. The change in the environment is even more striking. From a dusty camp under tents it is now totally green with wide roads, gardens well designed buildings. 

Some photos are being separately.