8th Pay Commission: FEARS of Exclusion - Are Existing Pensioners Being Left Out? ToR Row

Concerns have intensified over the Terms of Reference (ToR) of the 8th Central Pay Commission, with pensioners’ organisations warning that existing pensioners and family pensioners may be excluded from its scope. The issue has sparked anxiety among central government employees and retirees, even as the government insists that pensions remain within the commission’s mandate.Pensioners’ body flags exclusion fearsThe Central Government Pensioners’ Welfare Association (CGPWA), Jammu, has written to the Prime Minister, the Union Finance Minister, the Minister of State for Pensions, and the Chairperson of the 8th Pay Commission, raising strong objections to the notified ToR.According to the association, the wording of the ToR appears to restrict the commission’s scope to serving

central government employees, effectively leaving out existing pensioners and family pensioners.Assurances vs notified ToRThe CGPWA pointed out that after the ToR was issued on November 3, 2025, senior ministers, including the Finance Minister, publicly stated that pensioners’ interests would also be considered. However, the association argues that these assurances are not clearly reflected in the official ToR.The group also cited a clarification given in the Rajya Sabha on December 2, 2025, where the Ministry of Finance said pensions had not been excluded. Pensioners’ bodies say this contradiction has added to the confusion.Objection to “unfunded cost” terminologyA major point of contention is the ToR’s reference to the “unfunded cost of non-contributory pension schemes.” The CGPWA says the phrase is unprecedented and portrays pensions as a financial burden rather than a constitutional right and deferred wage.The association noted that pensions for MPs, judges and defence personnel are also non-contributory and paid from the Consolidated Fund of India, yet similar language is not used for them.Legal and policy concernsIn its letter, CGPWA president and former DGP S.P. Khoda referred to amendments in the Finance Bill 2025, alleging that retrospective changes to pension rules legitimise discrimination among pensioners based on retirement date. The association argued that such changes weaken earlier Supreme Court judgments which held that pensioners form a single class.The letter also raised issues related to:

• Additional pension for senior citizens, demanding a lower age threshold and a tiered structure
• Restoration of commuted pension, arguing that the government recovers the commuted amount within 12 years but restores it only after 15 years

Government’s positionThe government has reiterated that pensions have not been excluded from the 8th Pay Commission’s purview. The Finance Ministry has told Parliament that the commission will examine pension and gratuity matters for both NPS and non-NPS employees.Officials maintain that the ToR language reflects concerns around fiscal sustainability and long-term economic conditions, not an attempt to dilute pension rights.Wider employee concernsBeyond pensioners, employee unions have also objected to the ToR, citing:

• No explicit mention of pension revision
• Ambiguity over Dearness Allowance (DA) merger
• No reference to the traditional January 1, 2026 effective date
• Lack of clarity on contractual staff and trade union rights

Several MPs have raised these issues in Parliament, and employee organisations have warned of nationwide protests if the Terms of Reference are not amended.