Latest Comments on our Blog Posts
Mahesh Yadav writes a comment on the post of “Rate of Military Service Pay for Defence forces personnel” (22 Comments) on 2017/12/27 at 3:04 pm
Sir, This is with reference to “Military Service Pay” (MSP), why only Officer’s should get all benefits of defence forces why not JCO’s / OR’s since officer’s are not directly responsible for any operational tasks, they leave every things on JCO’s , as the matter of military service pay and other benefits they are directly involved for them only and they never raise any beneficial issue related to JCO’s / OR’s to Govt. level. with the result the jawan’s are always looser.
If a person is joining as an officer, he is getting all privileges and other benefits from Central Govt. including his ration, travel, CEA, transport, pay and other allowances as per his rank but why military service pay should not be equal and why every now and than Hon’ble Court has to interfere. It is under stood that Defence services officer are doing injustice with ‘Jawan’s”
I would like to mentioned that this is totally unknown to our County Leader because they don’t know what is the role and responsibilities of JCO’s / Jawan’s in defence service. If a rule can be passed by Govt. that every person who wish to join the Politics he must spend three years of his life i.g. one year with Army , one year with Navy and one year with Air Force as a Jawan category so that he will come to know what is the life of Jawan’s in defence service, also a specific qualification is also required for becoming a Leader not 8th and 9th standard.
Apart from this, the Indian Soldier’s had raised there voice for ‘One Rank One Pension / equal MSP for all ranks are very correct which is accepted by Hon’ble Court and the final result are in favour of Jawan’s. It is pertinent to mentioned that Hon’ble PM is celebrating his Diwali with Jawan’s at Border area and promising them that I will look after your all issues but when he returned to his base port he had also forgeten his promises with Jawan’s.
I would like to request to concerned Leader they must think about ‘Jawan’s” and remember if you look after your ‘Jawan’s’ your Country will be more safer and develop fast.
Best Regards
Leena Anil writes a comment on the post of “7th CPC LTC Rules” (87 Comments) on 2017/12/27 at 2:17 pm
Sir,
I am a Central Govt. employee posted at Jabalpur. My B.Pay is Rs.56900/- in Level 7. As per Gazette Notification for 7th CPC Allowances published on 6th July 2017 CG employees from Level 6 to 8 were entitled to travel by air. On 11th July 2017 the official concerned had clarified that, the modified travel entitlement will be extended to LTC also.(Source:http:www.gservants.com.) Swamy handbook 2018 has also published the entitlement as above.
I had availed LTC for the block year 2016-17 for myself and family from Jabalpur to Cochin via Delhi purchasing Air India tickets under LTC 80 on 09/08/2017 which was much costlier than the normal tickets in the same flight and had performed my journey from 25/08/2017 to 17/09/2017. I had taken LTC advance from the office for purchasing air tickets and had submitted by adjustment bill immediately after completing return journey for claiming the balance amount.
Vide O.M. No.31011/8/2017-Estt.A-IV dated 19th Sept 2017 it is clarified that the travel entitlements by air for Level 6 to 8 is only for TA and not for LTC.
Sir, kindly inform how my claim will be settled as I had already performed the journey before 19/09/2017 purchasing costly LTC 80 tickets. Is there any order for settling such claims. Kindly guide me as to what should I do now regarding this claim. Please help me.
Thanking you,
Leena Anil
Rahul writes a comment on the post of “7th CPC MACP Scheme” (166 Comments) on 2017/12/25 at 3:53 pm
A doubt has arisen with regards to macp scheme inrespect of officer in the Junior Grade Time scale ( Group-A) post with Grade Pay 5400 (6th CPC ) after having got promotions.
As per existing MACP scheme, In Group-A organsied cadre, MACP is not to be given since career progression through other ways are available. In the above case, because of exisitng provisions in the Recruitment Rules, these officials do not qualify for any furhter carrer progressioin. The department forwaded their case for grant of 6600 GP on 3rd macp.
The PAO office returned the case with observation that macp is not applicable since the officials are holding group-a status. Please clarify.