How IAS & IPS landed up with higher pay, promotion, and perks than CAPF in all the pay commissions since independence

The Pay Commission is a committee constituted by the Government of India to review and recommend changes in the salary structure of civilian and defence central government employees including IAS, IPS and Central Armed Police Forces (CAPF) officers.

The objective is to ensure that the salaries of government employees keep pace with inflation and economic growth so that they can maintain a decent standard of living. This is to motivate them to perform their duties efficiently.

Since India’s independence, there have been seven pay commissions, each after nearly 10 years.

Each of these commissions has been chaired by a prominent figure, with service members from various government departments.

In perspective – unfair treatment meted out to CAPF personnel

CAPF personnel play a crucial role in the country’s security apparatus by maintaining law and order, fighting insurgency, and protecting the borders. Still, the CAPF personnel are treated as second-rate citizens as compared to the IPS officers – who invariably give all administrative and operational orders as their Director General or immediate bosses who write their Annual Confidential Report (ACR).

This leads to a situation where CAPF personnel are considered inferior to the IPS officers and have been given a raw deal by various Pay Commissions.

Also Read: CAPF: Reasons behind the sagging morale

All seven pay commissions led to heartburn and created disparities in the pay scales and allowances in the CAPF — a group of seven armed police/security forces under the Ministry of Home Affairs. These anomalies and disparities between IPS and CAPF officers and personnel include:

• CAPF personnel are paid less than IPS officers, despite performing similar duties
• CAPF personnel receive lower allowances than IPS officers, serving in similar conditions
• CAPF personnel have limited promotion opportunities compared to IPS officers
• CAPF personnel receive lower pension benefits than IPS officers

One major issue between them is disparity in salaries and allowances. For instance, an IAS officer can draw the highest salary of Rs 2,50,000 per month, IPS officers can earn up to Rs 2,25,000 per month but CAPF officers receive much lower salaries and allowances.

Another issue between them is promotion. IAS officers can reach the level equivalent to Major General much faster in just 14 years of service while most CAPF officers have limited career opportunities and can rarely reach the equivalent rank.

The 7th Pay Commission created a big mess by raking up the rank structure between the IAS, IPS and CAPF officers. This has led to difficulties in determining the seniority, status and career prospects of the CAPF officers who invariable face many hardships during their deployment on the border or counter-insurgency areas. Still, they get limited rewards and recognition as compared to IAS and IPS officers. This calls for a more comprehensive review of the pay and promotion structures for CAPF officers to revise their pay, allowances, and promotion policies to bring them at par with the IAS and IPS officers.

Also Read: CRPF Commandos to replace NSG ‘Black Cats’ for VIP security duties

Consequences of the disparities

These disparities create cadre management problems and lead to unfair treatment for CAPF officers from CRPF, BSF, and ITBP who play a critical role in border protection and internal security duties. 

• IAS and IPS officers hold higher ranks and receive better compensation
• The IAS and IPS lobby is more influential and powerful because of direct contact with the policymakers and bureaucrats.
• CAPF officers feel demotivated and undervalued, leading to higher attrition rates.
• CAPF officers and men get slower promotions, lower salaries, and fewer benefits compared to the IAS and IPS officers
• Inefficient cadre management with IAS and IPS officers holding positions that could have been filled by CAPF officers.
• The morale of CAPF officers is low and affects their performance and effectiveness.
• Higher salaries, increments and other benefits to IAS and IPS officers

Also Read: ITBP – The Himalayan Warriors

As a result, many CAPF associations have highlighted the need to prevent these avoidable discrepancies and evaluate how CAPF personnel can get a better deal and a level playing field. In recent years many CAPF personnel have even approached the court to demand a separate cadre for paramilitary force personnel as well as fair, just and equal allowances, promotion opportunities, and other benefits like those given to the IPS officers.

Unfair advantage to IAS and IPS officers by each of the Pay Commissions

The controversy surrounding the Pay Commissions largely stems from the following concerns:

Pay disparity: While the Pay Commissions often recommend an increase in pay for all central government employees, CAPF personnel strongly feel that the pay, promotion, perks and other benefits offered to them don’t reflect their operational challenges or the risks they face in comparison to IPS officers, who occupy senior administrative and policy-making posts within each CAPF organisation.

Lack of parity in allowances: CAPF personnel perform front-line security duties on the border as well as in volatile and high-risk counter-insurgency operations. Still, they don’t get special allowances and compensation for such demanding work, while their IPS counterparts, involved in comparatively less stressful or risky policing, law enforcement and administrative duties, benefit or gain more – in the pay hikes.

Career Progression: The CAPF personnel get fewer career progression avenues as compared to the IPS officers. While IPS officers have more than adequate promotion opportunities in the state police (some of which have more than a dozen DGPs – wearing the same rank and drawing almost similar perks) or can take up leadership roles on deputation to other security agencies, CAPF personnel have very limited and less rewarding options. Even the most competent CAPF personnel cannot go beyond the level of ADG or lead the organisation they served for 30-35 years as its Director General. Most of the CAPF personnel retire at much lower posts.

Rank discrepancies: There is a big unbridgeable gap in the rank structure or hierarchy between CAPF and IPS officers. Even though CAPF officers can hold leadership roles as Commandant in an organisation they are still considered junior to IPS officers in the overall hierarchy of the police services.

Lack of uniformity: While apparently, each Pay Commission promises to bring about pay parity in various government services, the CAPF personnel do not get adequate compensation for their physical, emotional, and psychological stress during frontline duties.

What did each of the Pay Commissions offer?

First Pay Commission (1946-1947):

The 1st Pay Commission was established in 1946 under the chairmanship of Srinivasa Varadachariar the first Indian chief justice of the Federal Court of India, which came to be called the Supreme Court of India in 1939. The 1st Pay Commission had nine members. Its mandate was to standardise the salaries and allowances of around 1.5 million central government employees (at that time) including IAS, IPS and CAPF officers. The Commission introduced the concept of a “living wage” and fixed the Minimum Salary as Rs 55/month and Maximum Salary as Rs 2,000/month. However, the commission’s recommendations were tilted in favour of IPS officers. The commission recommended a higher pay scale for IPS officers, while CAPF personnel were placed in a lower pay scale.

The commission introduced allowances for CAPF personnel, including a uniform allowance and a ration allowance. But that seemed to be a mere eye wash as the commission recommended lower benefits for CAPF personnel, much below that of the armed forces.

Bias in favour of IAS-IPS officers  

The commission’s primary goal was to standardize salaries and allowances to government employees but ended up offering a higher salary structure to IAS and IPS officers who were placed on higher pay scales compared to other government employees. This practice continued over the years and became a norm which was followed by successive pay commissions.

The commission also provided a non-practising allowance (NPA) — a special allowance to IAS and IPS officers who are not practising professionals but still receive a salary. The intent behind the NPA was to attract and retain top talent in civil services. This, was why a similar allowance was not offered to other government employees.

However, the IAS and IPS officers were offered a range of other benefits, including:

• IAS and IPS officers are provided with official accommodation, especially in cities with high housing costs.
• IAS and IPS officers were entitled to a transportation allowance to offset the costs of commuting or maintaining a vehicle.
• IAS and IPS officers were offered leave travel allowance to enable them to travel with their families during leave.
• IAS and IPS officers and their families were entitled to comprehensive medical benefits in top-notch medical facilities.

Dil mange more – CAPF officers expected the following:

• Equal pay scales as they too had similar educational qualifications and roles.
• Similar NPA as they too were also not practising professionals
• Higher DA to compensate for inflation and high cost of living in areas where they were deployed.
• Higher HRA to compensate for the high cost of housing in urban areas.
• Higher travel allowance to cover their official travel expenses, considering their frequent deployments in remote areas.

Second Pay Commission (1957-1959):

The 2nd Pay Commission led by Justice Jagannath Das the second Chief Justice of Orissa High Court and Judge of the Supreme Court of India was established in 1957. The Commission submitted its report after two years. The Commission revised the pay scales by merging 50% of the Dearness Allowance with Basic Pay and recommended Rs 80 as the minimum salary (Basic Pay Rs 70 plus DA Rs 10/-) and Rs 3000/- as the maximum salary payable to nearly 2.5 million Government employees.

This commission introduced the concept of “running pay scales” to ensure regular salary increments but continued the trend of favouring IPS officers. The commission recommended a higher pay scale for IPS officers, while CAPF personnel received a marginal increase in pay. The commission also introduced a new allowance system, which benefited IPS officers more than CAPF personnel.

The commission introduced a dearness allowance (DA) to compensate for inflation but like a pickpocket who takes more by giving little, revised the pay scales providing the CAPF personnel with a marginal increase in pay.

Bias in favour of IAS-IPS officers

• IAS and IPS officers were placed on higher pay scales compared to other government employees
• IAS and IPS officers were offered DA, a cost of living adjustment allowance to compensate for inflation. The rate of DA for IAS and IPS officers was higher than all government employees
• IAS and IPS officers were granted House Rent Allowance (HRA), which varied according to the city in which they were posted. The HRA for IAS and IPS officers was higher than other government employees.
• IAS and IPS officers were granted travel allowances to cover their official travel expenses, both within the country and abroad. The travel allowance for IAS and IPS officers was more generous than other government employees. While the objective behind it was to attract and retain promising talent in the civil services, the disparities between IAS, IPS, and other government employees led to debate and criticism

The CAPF officers wanted the following benefits, which never materialised. These included:

• Higher pay scales at par with those of IAS and IPS officers.
• NPA, similar to IAS and IPS officers
• Higher DA to cover the inflation and the high cost of living in areas where they were deployed.
• Higher HRA to compensate for the high cost of housing in urban areas.
• Higher travel allowance to cover their official travel expenses, considering their frequent deployments in remote areas.

Third Pay Commission (1970-1973):

The 3rd Pay Commission chaired by Raghubir Dayal raised the minimum wage from Rs 185 per month to Rs 196 per month in 1970. This commission emphasized the need for a more equitable salary structure.

The 3rd Pay Commission significantly increased the pay scales of CAPF personnel and also introduced a city compensatory allowance (CCA) to compensate for the high cost of living in cities. The Pay Commission made several positive recommendations for CAPF personnel. It recommended a higher pay scale for CAPF personnel and introduced a new allowance system that benefited them.

However, the commission’s recommendations were not fully implemented, and IPS officers continued to receive higher pay and allowances.

Bias in favour of IAS-IPS officers

The 3rd Pay Commission introduced several benefits for IAS and IPS officers. The IAS and IPS officers were:

• Placed in higher pay scales compared to other government employees.
• Received – Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA), a special allowance
• Received – Dearness Allowance (DA) to cover the cost of living and compensate for inflation.
• Received – House Rent Allowance (HRA) depending on the city they are posted in.
• Received travel allowances to cover their official travel expenses.

However, the CAPF officers didn’t get these benefits. Some such benefits that CAPF officers expected but never received include:

• Upgradation of their pay scales to match those of IAS and IPS officers.
• NPA, similar to IAS and IPS officers
• Higher Dearness Allowance (DA) to compensate for inflation and the high cost of living in areas where they were deployed.
• Higher House Rent Allowance (HRA) to compensate for the high cost of housing in urban areas.
• Higher travel allowance to cover the official travel expenses, considering frequent deployments in remote areas
• Risk allowance to compensate for the high-risk nature of jobs.

Fourth Pay Commission (1983-1986):

The 4th Pay Commission led by P. N. Singhal introduced the concept of “pay scales” with distinct grades in 1983. The Commission submitted its report in three phases in 4 years and recommended the constitution of a permanent machinery for periodic review of pay and allowances of Central Government employees which was not implemented.

This Pay Commission was a major setback for CAPF personnel. It recommended a new pay scale that reduced the salary of CAPF personnel. The commission also introduced a new allowance system that benefited IPS officers more than CAPF personnel.

The commission revised the pay scales of CAPF personnel, providing a marginal increase in pay but at the same time coined a term called rank pay, which reduced the salary of CAPF personnel.

Unfair bias in favour of IAS-IPS officers

Some of these benefits to IAS and IPS officers include:

• Higher pay scales compared to other government employees.  
• Special allowance called Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA)
• Dearness Allowance (DA) a cost of living adjustment allowance to compensate for inflation.
• House Rent Allowance (HRA)– depending on the city they are posted in
• Travel Allowance to cover the official travel expenses.

Expectations of CAPF officers, which never materialised

Some benefits that CAPF officers expected but never received include:

• Pay scale upgradation at par with IAS and IPS officers.
• Non-practicing allowance (NPA) similar to IAS and IPS officers
• Higher Dearness Allowance (DA) to compensate for inflation and high cost of living  
• Higher House Rent Allowance (HRA) to compensate for the high cost of housing in urban areas.
• Higher travel allowance to cover official travel expenses due to frequent deployment in remote areas.
• Risk allowance to compensate for the high-risk nature of the job.
• Para-Military Service Pay (PMSP) to compensate for the unique service conditions

Fifth Pay Commission (1994-1997)

The 5th Pay Commission was chaired by Justice S. Ratnavel Pandian, a former justice of the Supreme Court of India in 1997. It had Suresh Tendulkar, a professor at the Delhi School of Economics, and M.K. Kaw, an officer of the Indian Administrative Service among its members. The Commission’s voluminous report had 172 chapters. One of its recommendations was to slash the government workforce by about 30%. It also recommended a reduction in the number of the pay scales from 51 to 34 and no recruitment of personnel for around 350,000 vacant posts in the Central Government. None of these recommendations were implemented.

The 5th Pay Commission merged 50% of the dearness allowance (DA) with the basic pay and increased the minimum pay from Rs 750 to Rs 2550. The Pay Commission focused on modernising government offices and also recommended changes in the salary structure and introduced a new pay scale. This had an impact on around 4 million Government employees.

The 5^th Pay Commission revised the pay scales of CAPF personnel, providing a significant pay increase and also introduced special duty allowance (SDA) for CAPF personnel serving in difficult areas.

However, the Pay Commission continued the trend of favouring IPS officers and recommended a higher pay scale for IPS officers, while CAPF personnel were made to keep quiet with a marginal increase in pay. The commission also introduced a new allowance system that benefited IPS officers more than CAPF personnel.

Unfair bias in favour of IAS-IPS officers

The Pay Commission suggested higher Pay Scales for IAS and IPS officers compared to other government employees and emphasised employee welfare schemes, which disproportionately benefited IAS and IPS officers.

The 5th Pay Commission’s recommendations introduced pay bands and grade pay and focused on performance-related incentives for nearly 6 million other government employees. 

Expected benefits not received by CAPF Officers

Some of the benefits that the CAPF officers expected to get but never received from the 5th Pay Commission included:

• Higher pay-scale equivalent to those of IAS and IPS officers.
• Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA), similar to IAS and IPS officers
• Enhanced Dearness Allowance (DA) to compensate for inflation and the high cost of living  
• Enhanced House Rent Allowance (HRA) to compensate for the high cost of housing in urban areas.
• Higher Travel Allowance to cover official travel expenses for frequent deployments in remote areas.
• Risk Allowance to compensate for the high-risk nature of jobs.
• Special Para-Military Service Pay (PMSP) in keeping with the unique service conditions in which CAPF officials operate.

Sixth Pay Commission (2006-2008):

The 6th Pay Commission led by B. N. Srikrishna introduced pay bands and grade pay to simplify the salary structure and focused on performance-related incentives for nearly 6 million other government employees in 2008.  The Pay Commission raised the minimum salary to Rs 15,600 per month, and the maximum salary to Rs 90,000 per month.

The Pay Commission made some positive recommendations for CAPF personnel and recommended a higher pay scale for CAPF personnel. It also introduced a new allowance system for the CAPF personnel. The commission revised the pay scales of CAPF personnel and introduced MACP, which provided assured career progression to CAPF personnel.

However, the commission’s recommendations were not fully implemented, and IPS officers continued to receive higher pay and allowances.

Unfair bias in favour of IAS-IPS officers

• IAS and IPS officers were placed in higher pay scales compared to other government employees. 
• IAS and IPS officers became entitled to receive grade pay, depending on their position in the hierarchy. For example, a junior-scale IAS officer received a grade pay of Rs 5,400, while a senior-scale IAS officer received a grade pay of Rs 12,000.
• IAS and IPS officers continued to receive a special allowance called Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA)  
• IAS and IPS officers continued to receive Dearness Allowance (DA) a cost of living adjustment allowance to compensate for inflation
• IAS and IPS officers continued to receive House Rent Allowance (HRA), depending on the city they were posted  
• IAS and IPS officers were entitled to receive travel allowances to cover their official expenses.

Benefits that CAPF officers expected, but never received:

• Pay scale upgradation to match the pay and perks given to IAS and IPS officers
• Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA), similar to IAS and IPS officers
• Enhanced Dearness Allowance (DA) to compensate for inflation and the high cost of living
• Enhanced House Rent Allowance (HRA) to compensate for the high cost of housing in urban areas.
• Higher Travel Allowance to cover official travel expenses and frequent deployments in remote areas.
• Risk Allowance to compensate CAPF officers for the high-risk nature of their jobs.
• Para-Military Service Pay (PMSP) to CAPF officers to compensate them for their unique service conditions.

Seventh Pay Commission (2013-2015):

The 7th Pay Commission chaired by Justice Ashok Kumar Mathur a former Chief Justice of Calcutta High Court as well as Madhya Pradesh High Court, and Judge of the Supreme Court of India, recommended significant changes to the salary structure, including a 14.29% increase in basic pay. The other members of the commission were Vivek Rae, a retired IAS officer of the 1978 batch, and Rathin Roy (economist, Director NIPFP). Meena Agarwal (administrative expert) was the Secretary of the Commission.

Nearly 48 lakh central government employees and 55 lakh pensioners befitted from the pay commission which recommended 23.55 per cent increase in pay and allowances and fixed the Minimum pay at Rs 18,000 per month; and maximum pay at Rs 2.25 lakh per month.

The Pay Commission also recommended Performance benchmarks for Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) which was made more stringent from “Good” to “Very Good”. The Commission has also proposed that annual increments not be granted in the case of those employees who are not able to meet the benchmark either for MACP or for a regular promotion in the first 20 years of their service.

The commission revised the pay scales of CAPF personnel, providing a marginal increase in pay and also introduced OROP, providing equal pension to CAPF personnel of the same rank and length of service.

But in the overall context, the Seventh Pay Commission was a major disappointment for CAPF personnel. The commission recommended a marginal increase in pay for CAPF personnel, while IPS officers received a higher pay scale. The commission also introduced a new allowance system that benefited IPS officers more than CAPF personnel.

Unfair bias in favour of IAS-IPS officers

The 7th Pay Commission introduced several benefits for IAS and IPS officers, some of which were unfair to other government employees.  

• IAS officers were placed on higher pay scales compared to other government employees, with a basic pay of Rs 56,100 per month.
• IAS officers were entitled to receive additional increments – 3% each over their basic pay at Senior Time Scale (STS), Junior Administrative Grade (JAG), and Non-Functional Selection Grade (NFSG).
• Although not explicitly mentioned in the 7th Pay Commission, IAS and IPS officers were entitled to receive Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA)
• IAS and IPS officers were eligible for 31% Dearness Allowance (DA) a cost of living adjustment allowance to compensate for inflation.
• IAS and IPS officers continued to receive House Rent Allowance (HRA) depending on the city they are posted in, ranging from 8% to 24% of basic salary.
• IAS and IPS officers were eligible for travel allowances to cover their official travel expenses.
• IAS officers were provided security guards at their official residence and vehicles with drivers for official use.

Benefits that CAPF officers expected but were never provided:

• Pay scale upgradation to match that of IAS and IPS officers.
• Non-Practicing Allowance (NPA) similar to IAS and IPS officers
• Para-Military Service Pay (PMSP) to CAPF officers  
• Risk Allowance to compensate for the high-risk nature of their jobs.
• Border Area Allowance to compensate CAPF officers for the hardships while serving in border areas.
• Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) benefits similar to other central government employees.

Long term impact of the widening gap between IAS-IPS and CAPF officers

This has widened the gap between IAS-IPS and CAPF officers. leads to the following:

• Increased the pay disparity and resentment among the CAPF officers who get much lower pay and allowances.
• IAS-IPS officers continue to get perks and privileges like official accommodation, transport, and security, which are denied to CAPF officers
• Lower pay scales and allowances that affect the career prospects of CAPF officers who are not even considered for higher-ranking posts.
• This affects the morale and motivation of CAPF officers, leading to higher attrition rates and decreased job satisfaction.
• The CAPF officers continue to demand equal pay and benefits.

Conclusion

Let’s face facts, the seven pay commissions in India since independence have largely been unfair towards CAPF personnel significantly impacting the pay, promotion, pension, and other benefits of CAPF personnel who seem to be moving two steps forward, and four backward.

To address these issues, the government should take a more holistic approach and ensure that the 9,48,204 odd CAPF personnel receive fair and equitable compensation. The CAPF personnel are facing numerous disparities in terms of pay, promotion, and other benefits. These inequities not only affect their financial stability but also their career progression and morale. To rectify this situation, the government of India must adopt a more inclusive approach and ensure that the CAPF personnel receive the fair treatment and compensation they rightfully deserve. Addressing these concerns is not just a matter of equity, but a crucial step towards the motivation and effectiveness of our forces entrusted with safeguarding the nation’s security.

The anomalies and disparities created by the seven pay commissions have led to low morale, limited career progression, and financial hardship for the CAPF personnel belonging to the seven armed police organizations namely  Assam Rifles, Border Security Force, Central Industrial Security Force, Central Reserve Police Force, Indo-Tibetan Border Police, Sashastra Seema Bal and the Special Task Force (National Security Guard) categorized under the “other armed forces” in the Union List of the Constitution of India