Pension Grievances Cell have been receiving some grievances of the pensioners/family pensioners regarding non-payment of OROP benefits
























Pension Grievances Cell have been receiving some grievances of the pensioners/family pensioners regarding non-payment of OROP benefits


A file photo of the Pangong Tso (lake).
New Delhi, August 18
India on Friday said it will continue to engage with China to find a mutually acceptable solution to the Dokalam standoff, while confirming that “an incident” did take place between Chinese troops and Indian border guards in Ladakh on August 15.
“We will continue to engage with China to find a mutually acceptable solution,” MEA spokesperson Raveesh Kumar said replying to a volley of questions on the issue.
(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)
He said peace and tranquility in the border areas is an important pre-requisite for smooth development of bilateral relationship.
Asked about the incident between Chinese troops and Indian border guards in Ladakh on August 15, the MEA spokesperson said, “Such incidents are not in the interest of either side.”
The incident occurred when land-based patrols of both sides came face to face north of the Pangong Tso (lake) in eastern Ladakh in Jammu and Kashmir.
The MEA spokesperson said two border personnel meetings (BPMs) had taken place between Indian border guards and Chinese troops recently.
He said one BPM had taken place at Chushul on August 16 and another one at Nathu La a week before.
‘Haven’t received hydrological data from China’
Asked if China has shared hydrological data with India in the backdrop of floods in Assam, Kumar said there is an existing expert-level mechanism, established in 2006, and there are two MoUs under which China is expected to share hydrological data on the rivers Satluj and Brahmaputra with India during the flood season of May 15 to June 15.
“For this year, we have not received hydrological data from the Chinese side,” the spokesperson said.
However, he added that it was “premature” to link it with the floods in Assam.
He also noted that in view of floods in Bihar, India was closely coordinating with Nepal, both at the Centre and state levels.
Asked about the reported comments of the Japanese Ambassador on Dokalam faceoff and if India welcomes it, Kumar gave a very guarded reaction, saying the remarks speak for themselves.
The Japanese ambassador was quoted in media as saying that no country should use unilateral forces to alter the status of Dokalam.
“We recognise Dokalam is a disputed area between Bhutan and China and two countries are engaged in border talks… We also understand that the India has a treaty understanding with Bhutan that’s why Indian troops got involved in the area,” the ambassador had reportedly said.
Kumar also refused to divulge details of communication by other countries to India on the Dokalam issue. PTI

Ajay Banerjee
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, August 15
In a serious turn to the existing tensions between India and China, troops of the two sides clashed on Tuesday, with both pelting stones and hitting each other. Men on both sides were injured.This was the first such incident in several years.Sources confirmed that the incident occurred when land-based patrols of both sides came face to face north of the Pangong Tso (lake) in eastern Ladakh in Jammu and Kashmir on Tuesday. It is an area claimed by both countries and is one of the spots where the two countries fought pitched battles during the 1962 war.The Pangong Tso, a 135 km-wide glacial-melt lake, straddles both countries. It has boat patrols from either side. The land patrols are different from these.The spurs of the mountains forming the northern bank of the lake are militarily termed as ‘fingers’. On a west-to-east axis, India claims territory till ‘Finger 8’, but is in physical control till ‘Finger 4’. The aerial distance between the two ‘fingers’ is about 15 km. The land north of these mountains is disputed.Land patrols of both sides often come face to face and a drill is followed to disengage. This includes unfurling of a banner, asking each other to withdraw. This is the first step.New Delhi has asked for a report as the pelting of stones is considered a serious matter. It is not clear who started the stone pelting or how it was triggered.A flag meeting could be held between brigade commanders of either side at the Spanggur Gap, the designated meeting point south of the Pangong Tso.
Its rather a Shameful act and height of Ambition with greed of the JM Battalion Leader that he directs his second-in-command Brig JS Sandhu to reach Jallander at a schedule meeting of GOG (Guardians of Governance) the brain child of Capt Amarinder Singh to employ the trained force of Ex-Servicemen as his eyes and ears in the administration Governance.
The meeting was to be addressed by Maj Gen SPS Grewal, Vice Chairman of GOG Scheme and Chairman cum Managing Director PESCO ( Punjab Ex-Servicemen Corporation) .
The meeting was to educate the ESM of Punjab from Various Districts regarding the role and responsibility that ESM will have to shoulder to make the GOG a success. The ESM will be State employs at Village,Tehsil,Districts and State Level and they7 will paid an honorarium in return of their services. The basic aim of Capt Amarinder Singh being an ESM to restore the lost respectability and dignity of ESM in Punjab and utilize their experience in Punjab Administration.
SATBIR CIRCULATED MESSAGE TO ESM PUNJAB AGAINST CAPTAIN AMARINDER THROUGH WHATS APP.NOW SEEKING RS SEAT
COMMENTS ON GEN SATBIR MESSAGE :TRUE FACTS
, Those who were [resent were Lt Gen Shergill,Maj Gen OROP CELEBRATED BY MAJ GEN SATBIR AT JM THEN WHY HOLDING TO JM

Majid Jahangir
Tribune News Service
Srinagar, August 3
An Army Major and a jawan were killed while two others were injured in an overnight gunfight in south Kashmir’s volatile Shopian district, the police said.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)The militants attacked an Army patrol at Zadipora Shopian, some 55 kms from Srinagar when joint teams of forces were laying a cordon in the area at around 2 am following an input about militant presence.”Four Army men, including a Major, were injured in the attack. The injured Army men were shifted to 92 Base Hospital in Srinagar, where the officer and another jawan succumbed to injuries. The condition of the other injured is also stated to be critical,” sources said.SP Shopian, A S Dinkar, confirmed two Army fatalities.Soon after the attack, forces launched an operation in the area. The anti-militancy operation is still underway in the village bordering Shopian and Kulgam. However, sources said the militants managed to escape taking advantage of the darkness.Meanwhile, two militants were killed in an overnight gunfight at Gopalpora Kulgam, over 75 km from Srinagar.Police sources said that the gunfight broke when militants were challenged by joint teams of forces when they were moving in area.”The militant opened fire triggering a gunfight which ended with the killing of two militants,” sources said, adding two AK 47 rifles were also recovered from the encounter site.A police spokesman in Srinagar said that one of the slain militant was involved in killing of five policemen and guards of bank van at Pambay Kulgam in May.

What should make us all happy is that the Prime Minister is going to BRICS Summit without having to be worried about the borders.
After all it’s always good to live to fight another day; where and how soon, only time will tell.
Authorised media in both India and China has announced that both nations have been in diplomatic engagement, as a result of which there is mutual agreement to disengage troops from the Doklam Plateau. The latter landmark, with which much of the Indian public now appears familiar, lies at the eastern edge of the Chumbi Valley and is a territory belonging to Bhutan.
In June this year, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) decided to construct a road through the plateau, which it claims as its legitimate territory, to bring its logistics reach nearer the Indian post of Doka La near the tri-junction, where the boundaries of India, Bhutan and China meet. By doing this the PLA was in effect also improving its operational and logistics capability to threaten India’s highly strategic and vulnerable sliver of territory called the Siliguri Corridor. This corridor provides India the only land access to its seven north eastern states. The PLA activated this front after an interval of time through this road construction.
However, Indian troops crossed over to Bhutanese territory and prevented further construction of the road. A 72-day standoff ensued which has had both countries and much of the international community on tenterhooks. It was a strange military standoff, where both sides maintained their balance, did not resort to any physical shootouts and apart for the initial jostling between the troops (and on India’s Independence Day a more serious exchange of stones, sticks and fisticuffs in a different area) only continued to attempt staring each other down. That was on until the announcement on 28 August 2017 that mutual disengagement had been agreed upon.
A few more issues of the background may be relevant for full public comprehension. This standoff was not anywhere on the un-demarcated Line of Actual Control (LAC) of which perceptions differ and which leads to transgressions into each other’s perceived territory. This was on a third country’s territory and India has the 2007 agreement with Bhutan for mutual assistance in the event of threats to each other’s security.
The PLA has gradually increased its activities of transgression over the last 15 years or a little more. There have been standoffs in Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh too, but none have had this kind of vitriolic backing of crude psychological warfare through the instrument of the official media in China; both Global Times and People’s Daily carried typical government drafted messages without any subtlety and Chinese television channels included commentaries by some analysts in terrible English. That the standoff has ended is a reflection of maturity on part of the two countries despite the fact that China had made it clear that there was no way its troops would leave the Doklam area.
It has happened before the BRICS Summit coming up early next month in the Chinese city of Xiamen, where Chinese President Xi Jinping will play host to the important club of middle powers. One of the reasons for the mutual disengagement appears to be the potential embarrassment to Xi Jinping in his stewardship of the summit. That obviously is the whole reason. I did appreciate that the standoff would probably continue at lower level of displayed energy right through to the 19th Congress of the Chinese Communist Party where Xi Jinping’s future power and status will be decided.
Quite obviously, the PLA’s gambit had not worked and although it adopted the concept of war under ‘informationised’ conditions over two decades ago, its crude handling of psychological warfare proved ineffective. If anything, it hardened India’s resolve to risk what may be called ‘sticking it out’.
The standoff moved through some interesting strategic moments. While China expected India to withdraw forthwith due to a perception of the latter’s supposed weak military disposition, it did not have a ‘Plan B’ ready that would cater for the eventuality of India deciding to stick it out. Fresh from its perceived strategic success in the South China Sea, and after defying the ruling of the international tribunal, China possibly felt it could ride rough shod over India. It hoped to appropriately send India a message by embarrassing it in a military confrontation; that message was equally for nations with whom India is in potential league for strategic partnerships, Japan in particular.
As the standoff progressed into a long stalemate, the advantage appeared to shift to India creating a situation, where a mutual disengagement through diplomatic negotiation would end to India’s moral advantage. The inability of an adversary to achieve its strategic aim is long considered a victory by the other side. However, care needs to be taken not to call this disengagement a victory for India.
The term ‘victory in conflict’ (and the conflict spectrum does classify this standoff as a conflict) is one of the most debated terminologies in military parlance. The management of victory isn’t the easiest even for the most seasoned diplomatic corps or military because it has negative spinoffs which can hardly be perceived immediately. Thus the situation may well be termed as ‘advantage India’ without spelling out the domain, diplomatic or military. While many may contest this and hawks would like to project victory for various reasons, they need to be cautioned because this is not the end of Sino-Indian confrontation. The likelihood of needling and triggering similar or near similar situations through ‘walk-ins’ across the LAC in other areas such as Ladakh, Barahoti and Arunachal Pradesh, would remain live.
India’s strategic analysts must not be drawn into the victory defining game and would do much more justice if they pressurised the government to ensure that the long-pending and slowly-progressing border infrastructure is hastened as much as the acquisition of hardware and ammunition for which sizeable recent financial allocations have been made. It must not return to business as usual in these crucial fields. What is even more important is not to be led away to believe that only quiet diplomacy succeeds.
In future situations, the possibility of the intense need for a developed and well thought through communication strategy may be a virtual compulsion. How is this to be done and which body, institution or organisation has the professional expertise to undertake this is a question mark. This time China did not use its force multipliers such as cyber warfare but possibly tested some models in the live environment. The next time this will be a crucial domain and India must step up its expertise in this through a combination of military cyber and information capability, largely manned through civilian intake. That will deliver permanence and specialisation at the cutting edge, while uniformed personnel can lend it a military orientation.
One of the earliest analyses of the Doklam standoff done by me suggested a line that China would keep India engaged at the land boundaries through unresolved border disputes and frequent standoffs. The purpose of these operations would be to lend weight to India’s obsession with continental security. The urgency with which India needs to ramp up its maritime capability cannot be over emphasised. That will have China worried especially if strategic partnerships with the US, Japan, Australia, Vietnam and South Korea are established in the maritime domain, and Malabar-type exercises get progressively enhanced in scope. After all, as they say, China is still a landlocked country; its access to the Pacific does not give it the advantage it seeks. It is the Indian Ocean that it looks at. The Indian Ocean has a distinct Indian advantage and China’s worries about its energy security and trade stem from that.
At the end of the day what should make us all happy is that the Prime Minister is going to BRICS without having to be worried about the borders. After all it’s always good to live to fight another day; where and how soon, only time will tell.

Nitin Jain
Tribune News Service
Chandigarh, August 26
It could have been a repeat of the unprecedented Jat agitation violence that had rocked Haryana in February 2016, if Deputy Commissioner Gauri Parasher Joshi had not pressed the Army into action when violence and arson reigned supreme in Panchkula on Friday.(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)After being outnumbered by the thousands of rampaging dera followers, the local police had fled the spot, leaving the young officer to almost fend for herself.It was her experience of having served in the Naxal-affected district of Kalahandi in Odisha that helped the 2009-batch IAS officer from Odisha cadre, who is on deputation to Haryana, not only to save her life but also to save the situation from totally slipping out of control.The Panchkula violence and arson left at least 32 dead and more than 250 persons injured, besides damaging property worth crores of rupees.As the mob turned violent on hearing the news of the conviction of Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh, the 36-year-old District Magistrate faced stone-throwing by the rampaging dera followers, who had swarmed Panchkula for the past couple of days, for some time by herself, as the police force beat a hasty retreat (read fled the spot).During the ensuing violence and arson, this mother of an 11-month-old suffered injuries and even her clothes got torn. Left alone with a single PSO, she then decided to go to her office and issue an order to hand over the situation to the Army, which helped avoid further deterioration of the situation.In the chaotic situation, she again returned to the field. “It was the concern for the city, which was on the boil, that remained uppermost in my mind,” said the bureaucrat.On Saturday, Gauri reached home at 3 am but not before going around every nook and corner of the city and seeing for herself that the situation had been brought under control after dispersing the rioters. After spending a few hours, she left again for the field.During the violence on Friday, the injured DC continued to boost the morale of the district machinery. “When I reached home in the wee hours, the family was shocked to see my blood-soaked clothes,” shared the journalist-turned-bureaucrat, an English Literature postgraduate from Delhi’s St Stephen’s College.“She, however, still refused to go to hospital, saying that the hospital resources were too stretched and did not want to dislocate their work for her relatively less serious injury,” recalled her 2003-batch IAS officer husband Ajit Balaji Joshi, who is the Deputy Commissioner in Chandigarh.
Sushil Manav
Tribune News Service
Sirsa, August 27
Deputy Commissioner Prabhjot Singh on Sunday ordered assets of Dera Sacha Sauda to be attached, following the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s Friday order.
(Follow The Tribune on Facebook; and Twitter @thetribunechd)
The high court had ordered the sect to pay for the losses of property caused by its followers after its head Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh was found guilty of rape on Friday.
Thirty-six people died and hundreds were injured in clashes that broke out after Singh was held guilty of sexually assaulting two female followers in 2002.
A court will announce Singh’s sentence on Monday.
CHANDIGARH: Twenty-seven years after a retired colonel was booked for corruption, a special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court awarded five years jail to him on Tuesday.
Colonel BS Goraya (retired), 75, has been held guilty under Sections 13(1) and 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The CBI court has also imposed a fine of ₹1 lakh on him, for acquiring properties disproportionate to his assets. It was among the oldest cases at the Chandigarh district courts.
“Being a senior army officer, he was having a responsibility to keep a watch over the conduct of his subordinates,” stated the judgment. “Instead of becoming a role model for society and bring pride for the nation, he grossly misused his high position and committed criminal misconduct to accumulate huge wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income by illegal means.”
Between January 1, 1987, and August 8, 1990, Goraya, a Sector-9 resident, and some of his family members — wife Parveen Goraya, daughter Manveen Goraya and one Guninder Singh — acquired properties valued at ₹82.6 lakh. Of these, they could not account for properties worth ₹72.7 lakh, the CBI had claimed. However, while pronouncing the order, the court of Gaganjeet Kaur said assets worth ₹66.94 lakh were disproportionate to his known sources of income.
A case was registered against the Colonel General Staff (engineer headquarters, Western Command) in August 1990.
During the hearing on Tuesday, Goraya pleaded for leniency in sentence, stating that he was 75. He said his wife was 72 and a heart and diabetes patient, hence dependant on him.
In February this year, the court of chief judicial magistrate (CJM) Akshdeep Mahajan had sentenced Goraya to two-year rigorous imprisonment for selling his agricultural property that had been attached in Punjab.
The CBI had also pointed that Goraya had not paid any property returns, except in 1987, after joining the army. In March this year, the HC dismissed Goraya’s plea challenging the trial court decision of not allowing examination of additional witnesses.
Senior public prosecutor Pawan Dogra and public prosecutor KP Singh represented the CBI.
The defence plans to move the high court as early as this week.
UNEXPECTED, SAY KIN
Goraya’s family members, including his daughters, son and grandson, were present in court the entire day. The former army officer,who was seen lifting his family’s spirits before the quantum was pronounced, looked equally grim after the order.
Disturbed by what they called “unexpected”, family members were seen consoling each other as Goraya requested cops to let him talk to his daughter in private.
The FIR was registered on August 6, 1990, post which Col Goraya was put under suspension on August 17,1990, and dismissed from service on March 19, 1993
The challan in the corruption case was filed by the CBI in 1993, as the inquiry was pending all this while
The cross-examination and recording of evidence by investigating officer Makhan Singh alone took seven years. It was carried out through video-conferencing from the PGIMER as Col Goraya developed a serious heart ailment The defence got seven months to present witnesses
According to defence counsel SPS Bhullar, who especially summoned the senior superintendent of police (SSP) when the case was registered, SSP Negi did not give clear answers during cross-examination. He stated he didn’t remember most of the facts during the investigation
As per judgment, the convict stated that he appeared in different courts (including high court and Supreme Court) over “500 times” and never sought a single adjournment or missed any hearing