Will Centre pay 18 months' DA arrears to employees, pensioners frozen during Covid? Finance Ministry gives MAJOR update
Answering a question at the Lok Sabha on August 11 regarding the roll out of three instalments of arrears that were frozen during Covid-19, Member of Parliament Anand Bhaduria cited economic disruption during that time and said that the arrears were frozen due to that reason.
The government pays DA and arrears a cost-of-living adjustment to its employees and pensioners to offset the impact of inflation. DA is usually given twice a year to employees, while DR or Dearness Relief is paid to pensioners. The arrears are credited on a pro-rated basis.
However, during Covid-19, the government had frozen these arrears for a period of 18 months, which comes down to three instalments.
Here is a breakdown of the questions asked at the Lok Sabha and the government's answers on August 11.
Answer: The decision to freeze three instalments of Dearness Allowance (DA) / Dearness Relief (DR) to Central Government employees / pensioners due from 01.01.2020, 01.07.2020 & 01.01.2021 was taken in the context of COVID-19, which caused economic disruption, so as to ease pressure on Government finances. if so, whether fiscal condition of the Government is still under pressure and is on the verge of bankruptcy.
Answer: The fiscal deficit of the Government of India has narrowed from 9.2 per cent in the Financial Year (FY) 2020-21 to 4.4 per cent in the FY 2025-26 (Budget Estimates).
Answer: The adverse financial impact of pandemic in 2020 and the financing of welfare measures taken by the Government had a fiscal spill over beyond FY 2020-21. Therefore, arrears of DA/DR were not considered feasible.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
Mandaviya namedrops Pakistan as National Sports Governance Bill puts restrictions on international participation: 'Safeguard for extraordinary circumstances'
Sports Minister Mansukh Mandaviya cited the example of Indian cricket teams not touring Pakistan since 2008, adding that the National Sports Governance Bill, which cleared both houses of the Parliament earlier this week, empowers the government to 'act decisively and lawfully in such situations'. Union Sports Minister Mansukh Mandaviya expects the National Sports Governance Bill to be implemented in the next six months. PTI The National Sports Governance Bill 2025 was passed in the Lok Sabha on Monday nearly three weeks after it was introduced in the Lower House of the Parliament, with Sports Minister Mansukh Mandaviya hailing the landmark moment as the 'single biggest reform in Indian sports since independence'. The National Anti-Doping Amendment Bill (2025) was also passed by the Lok Sabha at the same time, and the two Sports Bills cleared the Rajya Sabha, the upper house, on the following day. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The implementation of a National Sports Board and a National Sports Tribunal as well as the BCCI's exemption from the RTI Act are among the key takeaways from the Bill, which is set to replace the existing National Sports Development Code of India that was introduced in 2011. Another key provision in the Bill grants the government the ability to 'impose reasonable restrictions' under 'extraordinary circumstances' on the international participation of Indian teams and athletes. The provision appears to be aimed towards Pakistan, India's neighbour to the west that has largely shared hostile relations with New Delhi since the two nations gained independence in 1947. While the sporting relations between the two nations has had its share of ups and downs over the years, it has undergone sharp decline since the 26/11 terror attack in Mumbai in 2008. More recently, the terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam in April followed by a four-day military conflict between the two nuclear-armed nations has further hit Indo-Pak sporting ties. 'Act formalises the government's ability to act decisively and lawfully' Mandaviya, however, insists that the provision in the NSG Bill does not target 'any particular country', and that it's a 'standard safeguard' against situations that cover national security threats, diplomatic boycotts and other exceptional circumstances. 'The provision empowering the government to stop international participation is a standard safeguard seen in sports laws globally, intended for use in extraordinary circumstances. It covers situations such as national security threats, diplomatic boycotts, or global emergencies, and is not directed against any particular country,' Mandaviya told PTI in his first interview since the two bills cleared both houses of the Parliament. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'In practice, decisions regarding sporting engagements with Pakistan have been shaped by broader government policy and security assessments, particularly after major incidents affecting bilateral relations,' he added. The BCCI had refused to send the Indian cricket team to Pakistan for the ICC Champions Trophy earlier this year, forcing their games to be relocated to Dubai in the United Arab Emirates. Reuters Mandaviya cited the example of Indian cricket teams refusing to tour Pakistan since the 26/11 attacks as a case in point. '…full senior men's cricket tours to Pakistan have not taken place since the 2008 Mumbai attacks, and high-profile matches have often been moved to neutral venues. Such decisions are taken on a case-by-case basis in consultation with the Ministry of External Affairs and security agencies. 'The Act formalises the government's ability to act decisively and lawfully in such situations, while ensuring that any decision remains consistent with India's commitments under the Olympic Charter and the statutes of relevant international sporting bodies. 'This reflects the Modi government's clarity in protecting national interest while upholding global sporting obligations,' Mandaviya added. NSG Bill likely to be fully implemented in six months: Mandaviya Mandaviya, who also serves as the Minister of Labour and Employment, added that the Bill is likely to achieve full implementation in the next six months. 'This bill will be implemented as soon as possible. Within the next six months, all procedures will be completed to ensure 100 percent implementation,' Mandaviya continued. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Creation of posts and other administrative approvals will follow established procedures of the Department of Personnel and Training and the Department of Expenditure. 'The aim is to ensure that both institutions (NSB and NST) are fully functional at the earliest possible date consistent with statutory and procedural requirements,' he added, while reiterating that the bill is 'the single biggest reform in sports since independence,' he added.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
India's merchandise trade deficit touches $27.35 billion in July
New Delhi: India's merchandise trade deficit touched $27.35 billion in July as exporters braced for Trump's trade offensive with additional duties set to kick in on 27 August. Merchandise exports were $37.24 billion in July, while imports reached $64.59 billion, provisional data from the commerce ministry showed on Thursday. Indian exporters could be among the hardest hit if US President Donald Trump's proposed additional 25% tariff hike on Indian goods take effect this month, unless a breakthrough is reached during the ongoing 21-day negotiation window. About half of India's exports to the US could be affected, especially from labour-intensive sectors like garments, leather, and gems and jewellery, according to Madan Sabnavis, chief economist at Bank of Baroda. Exports to the US account for about 2% of India's GDP. Trump announced a 25% reciprocal tariff on imported goods from India on 31 July. On 6 August, the US President signed an executive order imposing an additional 25% tariff for India's 'direct or indirect' purchase of crude oil from Russia. 'It is estimated that around 55% of the total value of India's merchandise exports to the US is subject to this reciprocal tariff,' Union minister of state for finance Pankaj Chaudhary said in the Lok Sabha.
NDTV
2 hours ago
- NDTV
Pakistan Reintroduces Anti-Terrorism Act: Report
Islamabad: The National Assembly of Pakistan passed the Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Bill, 2024, restoring the provision of preventive detention for individuals suspected of terrorism, The Express Tribune reported on Tuesday. The amendment, which was passed on Wednesday, empowers both military and civil armed forces to detain individuals suspected of terrorism for up to three months. According to The Express Tribune, the bill, presented by Pakistani Minister of State for Interior and Narcotics Control Talal Chaudhry, was approved after a clause-by-clause reading, with the House rejecting proposed changes by Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (F)'s Aliya Kamran and accepting an amendment from Pakistan Peoples Party's Syed Naveed Qamar. As per the amendment, Section 11EEEE of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), initially enacted in 2014 in the aftermath of the Peshawar Army Public School attack, had expired in 2016 due to a sunset clause, The Express Tribune reported. The latest amendment reintroduces this provision, allowing authorities to detain individuals based on credible intelligence or reasonable suspicion to preempt terrorist activities. The law also allows for the establishment of Joint Interrogation Teams (JITs), composed of members from law enforcement and intelligence agencies, to carry out in-depth investigations and gather operational intelligence. According to the bill's statement of objectives, Pakistan's current security landscape demands stronger legal tools to empower the government, military, and law enforcement agencies in dealing with individuals posing a serious threat to national security, as reported by The Express Tribune. The bill was taken up for voting, with 125 members supporting the motion and 59 opposing it. As per the bill, as stated by The Express Tribune, sub-section (1) of Section 11EEEE allows detention beyond three months, subject to constitutional safeguards under Article 10, which protects against unlawful arrest and detention. A key revision to sub-section (1) of Clause 2 states: "The Government or, where the provisions of section 4 have been invoked, the armed forces or civil armed forces, as the case may be subject to the specific or general order of the Government in this regard, for a period not exceeding three months and after recording reasons thereof, issue order for the preventive detention of any person who has been concerned in any offence under this act relating to the security or defence of Pakistan or any part thereof, or public order relating to target killing, kidnapping for ransom, and extortion, bhatta, or the maintenance of supplies or services, or against whom a reasonable complaint has been made or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists of his having been so concerned, for purpose of inquiry," as quoted by The Express Tribune. Further amendments in sub-section (2) specify that any detention ordered by the armed or civil armed forces must be investigated by a Joint Investigation Team. This team would include a police officer not below the rank of SP, and members from intelligence, military, and other enforcement agencies. Additionally, a new provision (2A) declares that these powers under sub-sections (1) and (2) will remain in effect for three years from the enactment of the Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Act, 2025. Pakistani Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar clarified that this law is meant to be used selectively and includes checks. "A clause is being added to the bill stating that there are solid reasons for arrest. The arrested person will have to be presented before a magistrate within 24 hours, and a clause has also been included to be enforceable for a specific period," he stated, as quoted by The Express Tribune. Reacting to the passage of the amendment, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan criticised the move, calling it a repeat of earlier legislation that infringes on "fundamental human rights".
