| |
mayank Said:
The edifice of democracy is not the bastion of civilians only..this democracy is sustained and nurtured by the sweat and blood of the men in uniform..while the country men only talk and clap on talks we do and die in action. What status and parity are we talking of ..to disallow denegration of forces is the duty we have towards this country..what do people not having donned this great uniform and served this land know of what the forces mean..go see tv n be happy..dont forget popcorn
Posted On 9/29/2008 2:32:18 AM
|
SURESH Said:
Yes, service personals have no right to oppose the government decision at any time. perks and benefits given to them is extremely good as compared to civilian counter part. How a Lt Col with just 13 years of army service expecting pay band IV,whereas civilian counter part will get the same after 15-16 years of government service as Group A officers? Even a weak defence minister encouraging all their unreasonable demand on this aspect.
Posted On 9/29/2008 9:25:51 AM
Re: Pradip Said:
It is evident that Suresh is ignorant of the facts why army wants its Lt Cols in pay band 4. In the last five CPC Lt Cols and their equivalents in the IAF and the IN were getting same pay scales as their counterparts in the Para Military Forces and civilian employees in Defence Forces. Therefore why lower pay scale for Lt Cols and equivalents in the sixth CPC? Although in defence forces an officer becomes a Lt Col/equivalent in 13 years, a large majority of them retire in the same rank after more than 30 years of service.( A time scale Col in 26 years does not get additional pay for his time scale rank).Is it fair to place such officers having more than 30 years of service in a lower pay band than their counterparts in PMF and civil employees in defence? In the armed forces seniority of officers is based on rank (and lenght of service in the same rank)With civilian in defence forces and others it is the pay scale which decides seniority. Hence is it fair on part of the govt to downgrade an officer of the defence forces from his earlier status and become junior to his earstwhile equivalents in the PMF/ civilians paid from defence estimates?
Posted On 10/1/2008 7:46:53 PM
|
SURESH Said:
Yes, service personals have no right to oppose the government decision at any time. perks and benefits given to them is extremely good as compared to civilian counter part. How a Lt Col with just 13 years of army service expecting pay band IV,whereas civilian counter part will get the same after 15-16 years of government service as Group A officers? Even a weak defence minister encouraging all their unreasonable demand on this aspect.
Posted On 9/29/2008 9:25:51 AM
Re: murty Said:
Civilian authority does not mean civilian babus of Defence Ministry.It is the eleccted representatives of the indian people through democratic means.The present civilian babus acting like enemy No.1 to armed forces is not called for. Who wants parity with corrupt, lazy,kaamchor civilins of the Govrenment.The present status of armed forces as is held at present is diluted by scpc.Over and above the cos (Committe of secretaries) further trying to dilute by their ever envious attitude towards Armed Forces for reasons known to them. Perhaps it may be due to some one is interested in breaking the moral of armed forces through the MOD civilian officials.Other wise this much of vengence of the babus against Armed Forces is never ever seen in India.How can it be possible that,civilians of all departments prior to scpc who are junior to armed forces suddenly become seiniors.If the comparison is not to be expected in present situation of Pay bands dictating it,Why not armed forces have seperate pay commission.All this show that either the Government or the MOD babus are deliberately killing the moral of armed forces.The hornet's nest is disturbed.Be careful when it is going to bite.
Posted On 11/7/2008 9:52:11 AM
|
SURESH Said:
Yes, service personals have no right to oppose the government decision at any time. perks and benefits given to them is extremely good as compared to civilian counter part. How a Lt Col with just 13 years of army service expecting pay band IV,whereas civilian counter part will get the same after 15-16 years of government service as Group A officers? Even a weak defence minister encouraging all their unreasonable demand on this aspect.
Posted On 9/29/2008 9:25:51 AM
Re: praveen Said:
you gave the right comparison, but the data, you got it all wrong. read the ips pay rules (ammended in 2008 after the pay commission). compare the no of years and the grade achieved
5400-ips 0 yrs(training counted for pay)-army 1.5 yrs(ie, training not counted for pay)
6600-ips 4 yrs incl training- army 6 yrs+1.5 yrs training
7600-ips 9 yrs incl training- army 13 yrs+1.5 yrs training
8700-ips 13 yrs incl training- army 22 yrs+training (only 20%or less gets this rank.but ips all can become DIGs)
please dont shoot if you are not aware of the fact. the problem is captains grade pay has been artificially kept one stage lower (there is no equivalent in civil service now). it is plainly visible that army ranks has been downgraded by one rank by such false comparison. the truth in the pre-revision scales,brigadier was above DIG,but below IG. if that original parity is restored,then all anomalies will be restored automatically. by the way, govt letters and court orders say that rank pay has always been part of pay for all purposes, including status.DA was counted on this. there is a clarification govt. letter also to this effect.
yes, i agree the promotion prospects of bsf and cpo s are not as good. they deserve to be treated at par with ips, why not.the problem is ias and ips lobby doesnt like even the CPMF s getting a better deal(IPS heads these organisations, why should they bother about the CPMF cadre officers!!) when it comes to ips,ias the latter tries to throw its weight and bags additional increments.
one more notion to be dispelled. not all army/navy/af officers are from army engg colleges. for one, i am a BE graduate from a reputed REC. there are so many like me. there are doctors who are highly qualified. then there are infantry/artillery/flying branch/ex branch officers from direct entry (CDS exam).(though i surely doubt if good graduated will be interested in joining fauj, if the situation keeps deteriorating like this.you can verify the facts mentioned frm web
Posted On 11/29/2008 2:36:37 AM
|
James Said:
Democracy or no democracy, the armed forces have the right to demand superiority to civil service. They work under extremely hazardous conditions. Probability of death or dismemberment on job are extreme. Contrast this with the civil servants plush office with 5 star luxury. These civil servants have not covered themselves with glory anyway. Rampant corruption and chamchagiri have made them despicable creatures in the modern India
Posted On 9/29/2008 10:06:28 AM
|
Sekhar Said:
A democracy does not need Armed Forces. Disband the Armed Forces!
Very funny indeed. The author must be an Anti National Element!
Posted On 9/29/2008 10:50:18 AM
|
manoj Said:
It is a shameful and sad state of affairs created by our babus where, like never before, the defence forces had to openly ask for parity.
Armed forces do a real tough job and for that their morale has to be high.The head has to be held high and the mind has to be without fear to take a risk of lives of the troops under him and hisown life.
Indian armed forces are a highly disciplined lot unlike in case of pakistan and the beaurecracy need not be scred of them.
Rest assured they will never create any nuisance under any circumstances.
We are not asking for money but status and what ever we earn to earn it with honor and pride. Money is made by prostitutes and corrupt people but that is without any respect or honor.
On the army we are taught "Death before Dishonour".
what a pity we fight for the honor,pride and respect of the nation and in turn the nation can't give us the same, instead tries to keep us on their toes.
When there is a war you say"mere desh ka jawan, desh ki shaan", but when it is over we are tild we are having a ball. All the duration when there is no war, we in the armed forces are always training and preparong for war and wars are not too frequent because our enemy knows our ferociousness.
In case life is very cool in army, please send your sons to enjoy it.but u will not do so because you know the reality.
when police fails in there duties defence forces are called ,when babus fail in thir administration again army is called to restore the situation.Dont let the forces get into a low morale, because if it happens and theor is a war, no IAS, no PCS can come and take over the command and save the day.
Have a heart and have a thought before writing any thing like this.
Posted On 9/29/2008 11:52:06 AM
|
devindra Said:
The armed forces in India are 'commissioned'officers the civil servants are appointed.The term servant exemplifies their status.Their is no parity between the two hence the chip on the shoulder off the civil servants.Deep down they know exactly where they stand.The armed forces in India report directly to the 'elected'representatives of the people of India.NO LESS NO MORE.THERE IS THERFORE ONCE AGAIN NO COMPARISION POSSIBLE between the two arms of the executive.The armed forces come directly under Acts of Parliament and serve at the pleasure of the President.No civil servant has this status and is therefore subordinate to the armed forces since 1947.Political neglect and obusfaction of the facts by the civil servants has lead to the elected representatives of the people being disinformed of the clear constitutional facts on the ground.This has led to the author of this article writing poppycock without stating the correct legal position on the ground.Furthermore he has not got the courage to write his name as the author of this piece.In 169 districts of this country the civil servants have run away from their posts and there is no rule of law.In these times they remember the army/navy/airforce.WHY?Kindly explain first why you all have deserted the people of this country.Status comes with responsibility and service to the nation,which must be first each and every time even beyond personal comfort.When you have honour and are not deserters then you will be granted status by the people of India.In Bihar &Assam recently during the floods all DM's deserted their posts &finally when the army/navy/airforce were asked to step in as per aid to civil power rules the young officers were informed by the suffering masses how they had been left helpless by the 'civil servants'who had packed their belongings and run away with their families.SHAME ON YOU &ALL OF THEM MUST BE SUMMARILY DISMISSED FROM SERVICE.In China not one man left his post during the earthquakes!Think,ponder why.
Posted On 9/29/2008 11:56:09 AM
|
Raj Said:
Dear friend....
What is definition of civilian control over military??? This in no way means control over military by some other govt. servant. This way an IAS officer will be able to exercise control over all three services. Suddenly, he would get too much power that he is not used to handling and hence he will become the biggest threat to our democracy. Thus spirit of the statement “Civilian control over military” will be lost.
True civilian control over the military can only be exercised by an elected representative in a democratic setup. This is so because an elected representative has responsibility towards the people who have elected him and that justifies his power.
So please don't try to mislead people by talking about civil control and equating it to control by civil servants
Posted On 9/29/2008 12:00:45 PM
|
Sanjay Said:
Hope when a Chinese soldier is standing with his boot on your head in your front lawn and you are begging him to spare ur life....you remember these words. As told by Gen McArthur to President Roosevelt when he tried to degrade the American military before World War II. Till then u are welcome to ur opinion and enjoy the democracy and the freedom that the armed forces ensure that u can enjoy.
Posted On 9/29/2008 12:53:34 PM
|
balaji Said:
I think the person who has written this article does not understand what the core issue is. The issue is maintaining the parity as it was before the implementation of the pay commission. It amounts to saluting a person who saluted you before the implementation of pay commission. After all your pay is the indicator of the status in a hierarchy. Would the writer be ready to salute the person who saluted him yesterday?
Posted On 9/29/2008 1:35:37 PM
|
shaila Said:
The views in the article are that of an ignorant person and have no merit. He has no idea about services and their interaction with government
Posted On 9/29/2008 1:44:43 PM
|
Gurmeet Said:
The Govt of India held back the Gazette Notification and defence minister (MoD) forwarded the demands of Forces itself speak that that the Govt has accepted the disparity. The President, prime minister, finance minister was spoken to by the Chiefs before raising their concern. In Forces, the commander speaks on behalf of troops unlike civilian where everybody goes on strike. Not raising the bill was result of holding back of Gazettee Notification. When you drive somebody next to wall he has no choice but to bounce back. Army did the same.Learn lesson than to blame the Forces.
Posted On 9/29/2008 3:02:00 PM
|
Ajay Said:
In any democracy, armed forces officers have no business demanding parity with civil servants-- BUT WHAT ABOUT PARITY WITH PARA MIL FORCES-- Dear friends have a wider view and DONT MISUSE THE WORD DEMOCRACY --else we all will lose this democracy which is purely because of OUR STRONG AND LOYAL DEF SERVICES.
(In case of any emergency--National/International, try calling a civil servant for rescue-- BINGO--U GOT MY POINT)
Posted On 9/29/2008 3:47:09 PM
|
ps Said:
It appears that the precedence list which lays down the status is a farce and not for any one to guage his or her status.I can agree with the writter if the parity or order of precidence was never in place for defence personnel.There was a time where any Lt Col or above posted in Delhi area had to call on the First Person but this has deminished away. There are so many like things which have happened in past need no mention.Please understand that a materialistic man also needs protection.This need is best exhibited when faced with adverse situation and this momentary realisation passes away once the needs are met
Posted On 9/29/2008 5:26:46 PM
|
ANKIT Said:
SO SHALLOW IS YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE ISSUE I DO NOT WISH TO REPLY TO IT BUT WHEN YOU TALK OF BUSINESS OF ARMED FORCES I JUST REMIND YOU OF ONE THING THAT YOU MUST NOT CARRY IN YOUR MOROSE BRAIN IE IF THE ARMED FORCES STOP DOING THE BUSINESS OF WHAT THEY DO THE CIVILIANS DO NOT HAVE A CLUE AS TO HOW TO TAKE A CHILD OUT OF BOREWELL THAT IS THE CRUX OF YOUR MENTAL CAPABILITIES.THE AIR THAT YOU BREATHE AND THE FOOD THAT YOU EAT AS ALSO THE SMILING FACE ON THE CHILD THAT YOU BORE -YOU OWE IT ALL TO THE ARMED FORCES -NEVER AGAIN DARE TO WRITE WHAT YOU HAVE BECAUSE YOU WILL GO TO YOUR GRAVE WITH THE SHRIEKS OF THE THOUSANDS OF OFFRS & MEN WHO LAID THEIR LIVES JUST TO ALLOW YOU TO ENJOY SIMPLE HAPPINESS -TELL IT TO YOUR BUREAUCRAT CRONIES AND ALL THOSE WHO INSTIGATED YOU TO WRITE THIS PIECE.
Posted On 9/29/2008 6:46:52 PM
|
s Said:
Dear blogger,
the armed forces in a democracy come under the the highest elected person, who is the President and commissions the Officers,and not under the civil servants who are actually appointed by the Government
Posted On 9/29/2008 6:59:38 PM
|
nav Said:
Though I do not want to dignify this article with a reply, I m forced to. The author's tone is condescending enough to cause fury in a soldiers mind. He has no idea what he is talking about
Posted On 9/29/2008 8:05:58 PM
|
Debashish Said:
The author seems to have either forgotten the history or is blissfully ignorant of the fact that the status of armed forces officers/men has been downgraded, rather degraded, day by day. He talks of parity in status with respect to their civil service counterparts.I can only wish that he goes through the order of precedence of the three service chiefs at the time of independence and compares the same to what it is today. Same is the story with all other ranks.It must be realised that both have different roles to play and comparing their jobs or working conditions is not fair. However, the author may go in for a national level poll on whether armed forces or civil bureaucracy have performed better in their respective areas and contributed more to the country and society as a whole since independence and he will get an answer.I would also like him to ponder on the reasons so as to why there is an ever increasing trend of civil bureaucracy depending more and more on defence forces at the time of calamities like earthquake, flood, fire or to control riots and on internal security matters.It is purely because even the babus-in their heart of hearts-know it fully well that the soldier will deliver when it matters.These are not the traditional roles of a soldier.The rot in civil bureaucracy has happened slowly but steadily. The bureaucrats splurge on taxpayers hard earned money, have practically little or no accountability as such, spend most of their time and energy fending to the needs of politicians, cannot ensure even the fundamental rights of citizens are protected but at the same time are extremely conscious of the fact that civil bureaucracy must prevail over armed forces.There is a famous saying that mother is remembered in pain and soldier in war.The fact that India has not fought a war in recent past has only helped his (babu's)cause.The author should know that for a soldier the 'Izzat'is the fuel that keeps him going.Jai Hind!
Posted On 9/29/2008 8:32:31 PM
|
C Said:
When I first started subscribing to the mint along with the HT, I never thought I would feel ashamed of having done so.Probably the journalist who wrote the quick edit has a deep rooted grudge against the armed forces which would explain his prejudiced and biased editorial.Just because the army guy dons the uniform does not mean that he has to keep his mouth shut and keep on slogging like a donkey without getting any izzat or is the izzat meant only in times of national crisis and danger to the country's borders. You are right, Military service cannot be compared with civilian service. If civil servants did not fail, we would not be calling in the army at the drop of a hat, in floods, earthquakes and even when a boy falls in a borewell left open by the civil authorities. It is very easy to breeze into office at 1200 noon and in the airconditioned environment write a quick edit dismissing the just demands of the armed forces. We give our lives to the country, at least don't demean us in this fashion. As of 4th Oct, I will no longer be subscribing to the Mint and I hope that my service brethren will do the same.
Posted On 10/1/2008 7:24:30 AM
|
anil Said:
The article is worded to attract more visitors to the site.HAS NO SUBSTANCE WORTH A COMMENT.Request service officers to refrain from dignifying such posts by offering any comment what soever.
Posted On 10/1/2008 10:24:59 PM
|