Saturday, December 22, 2012

MACP ANOMALY - FOR POSTS IN SAME GRADE PAY

Pl. find below the MACP clarification (received by email from CGemployees News):-
Posted: 21 Dec 2012 12:50 AM PST
Grant of financial upgradation under MACP Scheme-Clarification for Railway Employees...
An another clarification order has been issued by the Railway Board to its employees regarding the Grade Pay would be admissible under MACP to an employee holding feeder post in a cadre where promotional post is in the same Grade Pay. The nodal department of the Union Government, DOPT has informed the the financial upgradations under ACP/MACP Schemes cannot be to higher Grade Pay than what are be allowed to an employee on his normal promotion...
The Railway Board order has been reproduced and given below for your consideration...
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
Railway Board


S.No.PC-VI/307
No.PC-V/2009/ACP/2
RBE No.142/2012
New Delhi, dated 13/12/2012
The General Manager/OSDs/CAO(R)
All Indian Railways & PUs
(As per mailing list)
Sub:-Grant of financial upgradation under MACP Scheme-Clarification reg.
References have been received from Zonal  Railways seeking clarification as to what Grade Pay would be admissible under  MACP Scheme to an employee holding feeder post in a cadre where promotional post is in the same Grade Pay. The matter has been examined in consultation with Department of Personnel & Training (DoP&T), the nodal department of the Government on MACP Scheme and it is clarified that ACP/MACP Schemes have been introduced by the Government in order to mitigate the problems of genuine stagnation faced by employees due to lack of promotional avenues.   
Thus, financial upgradations under ACP/MACP Schemes CANNOT be to higher Grade Pay than what are be allowed to an employee on his normal promotion. In such cases financial upgradation under MACP Scheme would be granted to the same Grade Pay.
This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Directorate of the Ministry of Railways.
Hindi version is enclosed.
(N.P. Singh)
Dy. Director/Pay Commission-V
Railway Board
Source: AIRF & NFIR

Friday, August 31, 2012

DY OFFICE SUPDT - ONE TIME INCREMENT - IF deprived, represent to the Chairman, CBEC

Dear DOS of CE & Customs,
If you are deprived of one time increment benefit, then represent to the Chairman, CBEC for it with copy to Ministerial Federation for taking up the issue with the Board.   Here is my representation.   You may customise according to your position and represent.   Givenbelow:-


From

Deputy Office Superintendent,

To

The Chairman,
Central Board of Excise & Customs,
New Delhi. (Through proper channel)

Respected Sir,

Sub: One time increment – Deprival of benefit to Deputy Office Superintendents due to
non-acceptance of Revised Option - Request for issue of orders/instructions –
Regarding.
---

I would like to humbly bring the following for issue of necessary orders/instructions to enable Deputy Office Superintendents like me to get the benefit of one time increment for which order has been issued vide Office Memorandum No.10/02/2011-E.III/A dated 19th March, 2012 of Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi granting One time increment for those who had their increment from February 2006 to June 2006 prior to implementation of 6th Pay Commission recommendations (copy enclosed as Annexure-I).

2. I was working as DOS Level-II and my increment month was April, prior to merger of DOS Level-I & DOS Level-II. In order to get the one time increment benefit, I had given Revised Option citing letter F.No.A-26017/131/2008-Ad.IIA dated 15th December, 2009 (copy enclosed as Annexure-II) of Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi which had permitted revision of option on implementation of 6th Pay Commission recommendations.

3. Based on the revised option given by me, the Pay Fixation Statement & Arrears Bill was sent to PAO, Central Excise, Chennai. But the same has been returned that my case is not covered under One time increment order dt.19.3.2012 (copies of Bill Return Memos enclosed as Annexure-III).

4. On merger of DOS Level-I & DOS Level-II, pay fixation was done granting the benefit of merger w.e.from April, 2006 prior to implementation of 6th Pay Commission. 6th Pay Commission being an unforeseen event, the revision of option for Dy. Office Superintendents was allowed by the Board vide letter dated 15th December, 2009 on the grounds that if revision of option has resulted from Notification of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008, a Govt. Servant may be allowed to revise the option for fixation of pay within one month from the date of issue of the OM dated 29.1.2009 and all the Cadre Controlling Authorities were requested to take necessary action in terms of aforesaid OM dated 29.1.2009.  Since revision of option was permitted vide letter dated 15th Decmeber, 2009, I exercised for revision of option as getting pay fixation on 20.9.2005 itself was beneficial to me, but only till grant of one time increment.    Now, one time increment which is an unforeseen event has occured, I have again given revised option to avail the benefit.   But, the same has been returned by the PAO though Pay fixation was made and arrears bill was prepared.   It is to be stated here that I would not have revised my option at all (as per letter dt.15.12.2009), if one time increment benefit was in place on pay commission's notification itself.    Since it is a new development but one of the benefits of 6th Pay Commission, I have given revised option which is not being accepted by the PAO.    Denial of such benefit which is an unforeseen event, does not render any justice.  

5. Though one time increment is one of the benefits of 6th Pay Commission which has been announced only now and the order dated 15th December, 2009 covers it by default, it is not being accepted by PAO. Denial of revision of option is not justified in view of the unforeseen circumstances and I am deprived/denied of genuine opportunity for no fault of mine.

8. I would like to further add that mine is not an isolated case and there are many Dy. Office Superintendents similarly placed persons spread through out the Department in all Commissionerates who have been deprived of and denied the benefit due to non-acceptance of revised option.

10. In view of the above submissions, I request for issue of necessary clarification/order with regard to letter dated: 15th December, 2009 to enable submission and acceptance of revised option, which is solely due to unforeseen circumstances/event i.e., one time increment which is one of the benefits of 6th Pay Commission granted w.e.from 1.1.2006.

I shall be so grateful for doing the needful in this regard.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,



Copy submitted to:

The Chief Commissioner of Central Excise,
                                            . - for kind information. (Through proper channel)

Copy to: All India Central Excise and Service Tax Ministerial Officers Association
                - for information and necessary action.

Friday, July 20, 2012

One Increment on promotion in posts carrying same Grade pay - Is it the solution?

Friends,
Our leaders have demanded for something lesser and the same has been now agreed as a final solution.   Here I mean the ONE INCREMENT for posts lying in the same Grade pay but are Feeder & Promotional post to each other.

The fact which was failed to be noted is that When a person for example, remains in Rs.4200/- Grade pay (I think this situation prevails in merged scales of 5000-5500-6500), he is able to achieve the 3% Increment Plus Next Immediate Higher Grade pay On MACP itself.    Pl. note: MACP is a fall back Option (Which is the substitute option as a last resort) which itself guarantees 3% Increment & Next Immediate Grade pay.    A substitute option (Last resort) is able to guarantee these benefits.   What is guaranteed by MACP is not in place in actual promotion.    ABSOLUTELY IRRATIONAL and UNREASONABLE and NOT JUSTIFIED.

Similar situation and grant of one increment is already in place in Auditors (AT SENIOR LEVEL) case where two posts - feeder and Promotional post remain in two different pay bands like PB2 Rs,9300 with Rs.5400 Grade pay & PB3 Rs.15600 with Rs.5400 Gpay.    In this case, MACP also takes both pay bands as different for grant of MACP.    In this case, both MACP and Promotion benefit remain equal.    Here, atleast the fixation will be at minimum of Rs.15600/- if the person promoted has basic pay lesser than Rs.15600/-   But, the same cannot be the case with regard to merged scales of Rs.5000-6500 because promotion benefit falls short of MACP benefit.

When separate identity of posts are to be maintained, then grade pay should also be different for the feeder and promotional post.

Anyhow, I have cited this MACP point in my OA pending in CAT.     The next hearing will be on 23.7.2012.   No reply/counter so far from the Department side.      The argument has to be - what is achievable by MACP is not achieved even on promotion?     This itself will take care of the case and cause.

Bye for now.
Ramnath

Monday, March 19, 2012

4600 Grade Pay for DOS of Central Excise & Customs is inevitable - Why?

Dear friends of CE & Customs,

The grant of Rs.4600 Grade pay to DOS of CE & Customs cannot be denied but can only be delayed.   It is going to be the inevitable thing waiting to happen in view of the following:-

1) In CE & Customs Departments, there is single feeder cadre i.e., Senior Tax Assistant (Rs.4200 Gpay) for 2 different channels of promotion to the posts of DOS & Inspector.    Of these two, only Inspector has been granted Rs.4600 Grade pay.     And the legal battle for 4600 gpay to DOS is on.

2) As per 6th Pay Commn Report, merger of 5000-5500-6500 is not possible in CE & Customs Deptt., as there is no single line or promotion.    In departments, where there is single line of promotion, the merger of these scales has already taken place and the effective date is 1.1.2006.

3) The merger if at all thought of by the CBEC, can be only (as per 6th Pay Commn) from 1.1.2006.     But, what will happen to fate of Sr. Tax Assistants who have become Inspectors from 1.1.2006 to till date.    They are to be placed below DOS since 1.1.2006 for Inspector line of promotion (if DOS also want to go for Inspector line, after being made feeder cadre).

4) The General Rule (which cannot be changed) is that Recruitment Rule can be Revised only prospectively and not retrospectively, here I mean from the date of notification and not from 1.1.2006.    Since DOS (if merged with STA from 1.1.2006), they by default DOS becomes senior to STA, naturally they have to be considered for Inspector post also, failing which it will draw the legal intervention.    But, the position is that RR has to be revised from prospective date only, such a merger will be in contravention of the RR position. 

5) In view of the above, if merged, DOS is to be considered for Inspector.   But as per RR, they were not eligible during the post which needs revision which cannot be from retrospective date.    It is is full of  entanglement (as it can not comply with both Merger and RR & will only further complicate the position).


6) Thank the authorities that we in CE & Customs have two different lines of promotion for STA which is the saviour in our case.

In view of the position, the Govt./Department may be dilly dallying the position & can only delay the grant of 4600 gpay but cannot deny.   If the posts are merged, it is inviting further trouble, and finally due to legal intervention, the justice will be made to prevail.

Case of Chennai CAT is posted for hearing on 29.3.2012 before bench.   Govt so far has not filed its counter.

So, HAVE HOPE ABOVE 100% AND WE ARE SURE TO WIN.
Ramnath

Tuesday, January 24, 2012

Income Tax Officers/Inspectors pay parity from 1.1.96 - CAT Order

Pl. see the CAT Mumbai Bench Order granting revised upgraded scale to IT Officers/Inspectors, etc. w.e.f 1.1.96.
This would be of some use to similarly placed persons.

The Order link:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_wcN1t0C9s3ZWFiZDgyYzAtYjMwNi00YWY3LWJiZWItMDIyN2QwMTZmOWEz&hl=en_US