§ Sir C. YATE
asked the Secretary of State for India whether his attention has been called to the fact that in the new rates of pay sanctioned for officers of the Indian Army lieutenant-colonels commanding infantry regiments have been given the cost of upkeep of the charger they have to maintain without any deduction from their pay, while lieutenant-colonels commanding cavalry regiments have had the cost of the upkeep of the two chargers they have to maintain deducted from their pay, with the result that the infantry commanding officer gets maintenance for his charger on the same pay as before while the cavalry commanding officer gets maintenance for two chargers but loses Rs. 100 per mensem despite the recommendation in paragraph 14 (5), Part V, Section 1, of the Esher Committee's Report, that no reduction should be made in the pay of officers of the Indian Army in consideration of Government relieving them of the cost of providing and maintaining chargers; that in addition to this loss of pay the Government have failed to provide 842W mounted officers free of charge with the authorised number of chargers as recommended in paragraph 14 (1), Part V, Section 1, of the same Report; and what steps it is proposed to take in the matter?
§ Mr. MONTAGU
I am aware that a Cavalry Commandant now draws the same rate of pay as an Infantry Commandant, whereas previously he drew Rs. 100 per mensem more. This is in accordance with the recommendations of the Esher Committee in paragraph 24, Part V, which should be read in connection with paragraph 14 (5). The previous difference between the two branches existed mainly on account of the heavier liability incurred by the Cavalry Commandant in respect of maintaining chargers. The obligatory number of chargers is now maintained by Government in each case, and the pay has therefore been fixed at the same rate. The Esher Committee's recommendation as to the free provision of chargers was not accepted, as it was considered sufficient to allow officers to purchase chargers at concessional rates.
§ Sir C. YATE
asked the Secretary of State for India if he can now state the recommendations of the Government of India regarding the adjustment of the pay and pensions of those officers of the Indian Army who were retained in the Army on account of the War beyond the date on which they became due to be placed on the retired list; and what decision has been arrived at?