Pay Fixation of Reemployed JCOs/ORs: Justice Delayed or Justice Denied?
Thousands of retired soldiers, sailors and airmen who join Central Government, State Government, Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs), autonomous bodies and other public institutions after military retirement continue to ask one question:
“How long do we need to wait for fair pay fixation?”
While retired officers and many ex-servicemen employed in nationalised banks enjoy substantial pay protection benefits, most Junior Commissioned Officers (JCOs) and Other Ranks (ORs) reemployed in government departments continue to face a system where their military experience is largely ignored for pay fixation purposes.
Nearly four decades after the issuance of the CCS (Fixation of Pay of Re-employed Pensioners) Orders, 1986, the issue remains unresolved despite repeated representations, court cases, parliamentary discussions and policy reviews.
The latest clarification issued by the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) in 2024 regarding Combatant Clerks has once again reignited hopes among veterans that long-pending anomalies may finally be addressed.
Why Pay Fixation Matters for Reemployed Ex-Servicemen
Unlike civilian employees who often retire at 60 years of age, soldiers, sailors and airmen retire much earlier.
Many Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) retire between the ages of 35 and 50 years after rendering long years of dedicated military service.
At the time of retirement, they face several major financial responsibilities:
- Children’s higher education
- Marriage expenses
- Construction of family homes
- Care of elderly parents
- Healthcare expenses
- Financial security for their families
Reemployment in government service provides a second opportunity to serve the nation. However, many veterans find that their salary is fixed at the entry-level pay applicable to a fresh recruit who may have just completed college.
This creates a feeling that years of military service and experience have not been adequately recognized.
Historical Background: The Original Policy of 1958
The story begins in 1958 when the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure issued comprehensive instructions regarding pay fixation of reemployed pensioners.
The underlying principle was simple:
No Veteran Should Suffer Financial Hardship
If the combined amount of:
- Civil Pay
- Pension (after permitted adjustments)
was lower than the pay drawn before retirement, the case was treated as one of “Undue Hardship.”
To remove such hardship, the Government allowed:
Advance Increments
Advance increments could be granted corresponding to the years of military service rendered.
The objective was clear:
Military experience should not become a financial disadvantage after reemployment.
1983 Reform: A More Veteran-Friendly System
The policy underwent a significant improvement in 1983.
The Government decided that:
Entire Pension of JCOs/ORs Would Be Ignored
For pay fixation purposes:
- Pension was completely ignored.
- Pay was fixed independently.
- Undue hardship provisions continued.
As a result:
If the pay in the reemployed post remained lower than the last pay drawn in the Armed Forces, advance increments could still be granted.
Many veterans consider the 1983 framework to have been the most balanced and equitable system ever implemented.
1986: The Turning Point That Created the Present Controversy
The situation changed dramatically after implementation of the Fourth Central Pay Commission.
On 31 July 1986, DoPT issued the CCS (Fixation of Pay of Re-employed Pensioners) Orders, 1986.
Control over the policy shifted from the Ministry of Finance to DoPT.
The new policy divided reemployed pensioners into two distinct categories:
Category 1
- Retired Commissioned Officers
- Civilian Group ‘A’ Officers
Category 2
- Junior Commissioned Officers (JCOs)
- Other Ranks (ORs)
- Equivalent Civilian Categories
This distinction became the root cause of the present dispute.
How Reemployed Commissioned Officers Benefit
Under the existing rules, a Commissioned Officer retiring before 55 years of age and subsequently reemployed in a civil post may receive substantial pay fixation benefits.
The pay may be fixed at a stage corresponding to the last pay drawn before retirement, subject to prescribed ceilings and pension adjustments.
This ensures that their experience and previous status are reflected in their new appointment.
What Happens to Reemployed JCOs and ORs?
For most JCOs and ORs, the situation is entirely different.
The general rule requires:
Initial Pay Fixed at Entry Level
The pay is normally fixed at the minimum of the pay scale of the reemployed post.
Consequently:
- A retired Subedar with 28 years of service may receive the same starting pay as a fresh recruit.
- Military experience often receives no direct financial recognition.
- There is no general provision for advance increments based on service length.
This has remained one of the biggest grievances among reemployed veterans.
Nationalised Banks Follow a Different Model
Interestingly, many nationalised banks have historically implemented pay protection mechanisms for reemployed ex-servicemen.
In several cases:
- Previous service is recognized.
- Higher starting pay is granted.
- Financial hardship is reduced.
This has led many veterans to ask:
If Banks Can Do It, Why Can’t Government Departments?
The disparity between banks and government departments continues to be a major source of dissatisfaction among reemployed ex-servicemen.
RTI Era Revealed the Extent of the Problem
After the implementation of the Right to Information Act, 2005, many veterans began examining the rules more closely.
Several developments followed:
- RTI applications were filed.
- Representations were submitted.
- Cases were raised through the Public Grievance Portal.
- Departmental anomalies came to light.
In some departments, pay fixation benefits were initially extended based on differing interpretations of government instructions.
Later, many departments withdrew or stopped such benefits.
As a result:
Hundreds of Legal Cases Emerged
Veterans estimate that nearly 400 cases have arisen across various courts and tribunals relating to pay fixation anomalies.
The Role of Veteran Associations
Over the years, reemployed ex-servicemen organized themselves through departmental and national associations.
These organizations approached the Ministry of Defence and the Directorate of Ex-Servicemen Welfare (DESW).
Their primary demand was straightforward:
Remove Discrimination Between Officers and PBORs
Representations highlighted that:
- Both categories retire early.
- Both categories face similar family responsibilities.
- Both categories contribute to national security.
Veteran groups argued that there was no justification for treating JCOs/ORs differently from Commissioned Officers in matters of pay fixation.
The Special Case of Combatant Clerks and Storemen
One important exception already exists within the 1986 Orders.
Under Para 16(2) of DoPT OM dated 31.07.1986:
Combatant Clerks and Storemen Receive Special Treatment
Military service rendered as:
- Combatant Clerk
- Storeman
is treated as equivalent to:
- Lower Division Clerk (LDC)
- Junior Clerk
- Storeman
in civil service.
The rule specifically states that:
- Pay may be fixed at the stage that would have been reached through equivalent civil service.
- Pay need not be restricted to pre-retirement pay.
- Fundamental Rule 27 may be invoked.
This provision has become highly significant following recent developments.
DoPT Clarification of 2024 Revives the Debate
In August 2024, DoPT examined the case of a reemployed ex-serviceman working as a Postal Assistant.
The clarification reaffirmed that Para 16(2) remains valid and operational.
DoPT reiterated that:
- Combatant Clerk service must be recognized.
- Pay fixation under FR 27 remains permissible.
- The benefit is not restricted to pre-retirement pay.
The Department of Posts subsequently advised postal circles to examine similar cases.
For many veterans, this clarification demonstrated that the Government continues to recognize military service equivalence in appropriate cases.
Proposed Reforms Under Review
Veteran organizations have long advocated amendments to the existing pay fixation framework. Among the major proposals discussed over the years are:
1. Restoration of Pre-1986 Principles
Many veterans seek a return to the broad philosophy of the 1983 policy.
2. Entire Pension to be Ignored
The demand is that pension of JCOs/ORs should be fully ignored for pay fixation purposes.
3. Recognition of Undue Hardship
If civil pay is lower than the last military pay, appropriate compensation should be granted.
4. Advance Increments Based on Service
Military service should be rewarded through advance increments similar to earlier provisions.
5. Counting MSP, X Pay and Class Pay
Since these elements are included in pension calculations, veterans argue they should also be considered while determining pre-retirement pay.
6. Equal Treatment Across Categories
Veterans seek parity between:
- Officers
- JCOs
- ORs
for pay fixation purposes.
7. Retrospective Benefits
Many stakeholders believe any revised policy should also cover existing reemployed pensioners.
Why Has the Issue Taken So Long?
Various reports indicate that proposals relating to revised pay fixation have been examined by:
- Ministry of Defence
- Directorate of Ex-Servicemen Welfare
- Department of Personnel & Training
- Department of Expenditure
Policy formulation involving financial implications often requires:
- Inter-ministerial consultations
- Financial assessment
- Legal examination
- Administrative feasibility studies
Veteran groups argue that these processes have taken far too long and have resulted in prolonged uncertainty.
The Central Question: How Long Must Veterans Wait?
For many reemployed veterans, the issue is no longer merely financial.
It has become a question of:
- Recognition of military service
- Administrative fairness
- Equal treatment
- Respect for experience
A soldier who served the nation for 20 to 30 years naturally expects that his service experience will carry value when he joins a civil organization.
The continuing delay has therefore led many veterans to raise a fundamental question:
Is Justice Being Delayed?
The answer remains dependent on future decisions of the Government regarding long-pending proposals for reform.
Conclusion
The controversy surrounding pay fixation of reemployed ex-servicemen has its roots in policy changes introduced in 1986. While commissioned officers and several categories of reemployed personnel continue to receive substantial pay fixation benefits, many JCOs and ORs believe that their military experience remains inadequately recognized.
Recent DoPT clarifications regarding Combatant Clerks have revived hopes that broader reforms may eventually emerge. Veteran organizations continue to pursue the matter through representations, legal action and dialogue with the Government.
Until a comprehensive and equitable policy is implemented, one question will continue to resonate across the veteran community:
“How long must reemployed ex-servicemen wait for fair pay fixation?”
To get updates on Exservicemen Welfare related issues stay connected with us – WhatsApp Channel