|
 Our
armed forces have come in for strong criticism from politicians and even
the media for the orderlies (a.k.a batman or sahayaks) most commonly
used by army officers...
Generations of Army officers (and not so much as those in the Navy or
the Air Force) have seen them as their inherent right, their use being
authorized by the DSR (Regulations for the Army, 1962) to maintain items
of leather and brass. However, in reality the orderly is now (and has
been for the past several decades) used for almost everything doable by
serving officers and their families.
This ranges from relatively soldierly activities like gardening and
other related external household errands to clearly un-soldierly acts
like cooking and household work. All this has now become an accepted
norm. But the debate isn’t just about making soldiers do domestic
duties. It is how they are used and even misused and if there is a way
out.
An orderly is essentially required in operational areas to free an
officer from personal tasks and to serve as not just a handy man but
also a radio operator. In pre-independence India, he was used less in
peace locations, with the sahibs also having a fleet of servants.
However, once the British moved back to England, they did away with the
batman, as they did with many of the trappings of the Raj. Their
officers now involved in operations in Iraq and Afghanistan are managing
without a batty, since their camps have advanced logistics - even tents
have tap water. At our end, living conditions are manpower intensive,
and so officers in operational regions – I wouldn’t say that for JCO’s –
in our class centric society, can do without bathing with their men at a
water point or carrying buckets of water.
 Ironically though the batman’s role has been justified on operational
grounds, he is most misused not along India’s inhospitable borders, but
in peace time locations where the demanding memsahib sees the batman
more as her right than that of the officer! For instance, I have known
houses of serving General’s even in a city like Delhi to have over 30
men (soldiers and temporarily hired labour) working in their houses,
when clearly these people were shown on the books to be employed
elsewhere. And when they retire, amongst the things their wives miss
most, is having so many people at their beck and call. But generals
apart, I have known commanding officers to have at least 10 men
dedicated to their homes, with a tent pitched outside their ground floor
flat to accommodate this section – of batmen, cooks, drivers and
cleaners – all being readily available not so much for themselves, but
their memsahib! This is where the problem lies.
In reality, there are some soldiers in every unit who gladly opt for
such work, because they find the rigor of life in uniform and the daily
routine of training or operational tasks difficult to cope with. Being a
‘batty’ is thus a softer option. In many cases they become a part of an
officer’s family. Many old timers even retain their ‘batty’ on
retirement, and look after them and their families.
Ideally though, the army must find a balance between their operational
and peace time needs. Perhaps a way forward would be to retain the
orderly in field areas and that too following strict guidelines of use,
and to hire civilian contracted staff (as is done in training
institutions in Mhow and elsewhere) who can pander to the whims of the
memsahib and their baba-log.
Maroof Raza is the Managing Director of Salute He
has authored ‘Generals and Governments in India and
Pakistan’ (Har Anand Publications, New Delhi)
|
