A recent court judgment concerning disparity of pay and pension amongst certain ranks, and subsequent government action, has called into question the approach of the executive in resolving issues that concern the armed forces . All opinion polls show that the Indian armed forces stand at the top in terms of the common man’s belief in terms of probity – and of course, love and affection. It thus comes as a Surprise that the government, irrespective of the party in power, sometimes engages in a confrontational way with the soldier manning the trenches, sailing the High seas and flying missions to keep our skies safe. The bone of contention has often been the implementation of pay commission recommendations. Pay commissions for central government employees are set up Every 10 years. Unfortunately, almost every pay commission award has had to be contested by the services in terms of disparities that have crept in vis-à-vis other services and insufficient recognition of the special conditions in which they operate. In fact, resolutions of some representations of one pay commission have dragged on to the next commission too. The fauji, however, continues to discharge his duties. Does that mean that the soldier does not feel slighted and/or let down anytime? The 6th Pay Commission introduced military service Pay up to brigadiers (and equivalent). This resulted in brigadiers getting more pay than major generals and a similar unacceptable anomaly in the pensions as they retired. Some of the adversely affected generals (and equivalents in the other two services) went to court after inaction by the government to rectify this unacceptable anomaly. To cut a long story short, the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) ruled in their favour in March 2023. However, the government did not implement the ruling despite AFT’s execution orders; in fact, it challenged AFT’s award in the Delhi High Court, which admitted the plea but did not stay AFT’s ruling. With no rectification in sight, 82 aggrieved officers filed contempt petitions in the HC. On issuance of contempt notices by the court, orders were issued on August 31 to grant the raise plus arrears to only the 82 officers who had litigated for judicial intervention. Now, there is an ongoing drive by many generals (and equivalents) to get together and petition the judiciary for a similar ruling. Let this sink in –two- and three-star officers, who have spent their youth in service of the nation and are now septuagenarians and octogenarians, are planning to spend their time and money to ask the state for something that has already been granted (and hence accepted as correct) to their compatriots. Two facts stare us in the face. First, the government knows that the disparity in pay and pensions came about after the 6th pay commission, but has issued orders to rectify the anomalies of only the 82 officers who litigated. Second, the judiciary, in its wisdom, has acceded to the pleas of these 82 officers but has not expanded its ruling to cover all others who are similarly placed. These facts point to three deductions that need consideration. First, the government knows that there are hundreds of other officers with the same grievance. So, a responsive executive should be magnanimous, nay, duty-bound, to cover all other personnel who are so affected; data for all is computerised and available in government records. Second, the judiciary could take suo motu cognisance of the anomaly and save the nation the needless spectacle of hundreds of officers going to court for something that has been ruled in favour of only some of their brother officers. Finally, and very importantly, in this era of returning to India’s roots and statecraft wisdom, it would be wise to remember our ancient sage Kautilya, who said to the King of Magadha, “The day the soldier has to demand his dues will be a sad day for Magadha. From that day on, you will have lost all moral sanction to be king.” This timeless adage of basic statecraft should be the driver for decision making. The writer is a retired Air Vice Marshal