Letter on AO - DOS Grade Pay

Pune, the 26th August, 2011

Dear Members,

You may all recall the recent meeting of the Officer Bearers held at New Delhi, with the Hon'ble Chairman in the presence of Senior Officers from the Board, seeking settlement of various outstanding demands (The Minutes of the meeting is available in the previous post). As desired by the Hon'ble Chairman, a fresh proposal has now been submitted to the Hon'ble Chairman, justifying the demand for granting Higher Grade Pay to the grades of AO and DOS. A copy of the said letter is placed below for information of the Members.

AICESTMOA

COPY OF THE LETTER

 

ALL    INDIA    CENTRAL    EXCISE    AND    SERVICE TAX MINISTERIAL    OFFICERS’    ASSOCIATION

Ref.No. AICESTMOA/2011-12/AO-DOS/

Date:- 24^th August, 2011

To,

The Hon’ble Chairman, 
Central Board of Excise and Customs,
Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance
North Block, New Delhi-1.
 
Sir,
 

Sub: Assignment of Grade Pay of Rs.4,800/- to Administrative Officer and Rs.4,600/- to Deputy Office Superintendent – Objections/submissions on the observation of Department of Expenditure communicated vide letter dated 09.09.10 - reg.

* * *

            Most respectfully, your kind attention is invited to the discussion held with your goodself in the presence of some Board officials as well as the office bearers of this Association on the 12^th July, 2011 on the subject matter apart from other related issues. In continuation to this Association’s letter dated 14.03.2011 & 05.04.2011 (copy enclosed for ready reference), on the above subject, the following few lines are being submitted herewith for your kind and favourable consideration.

 

2.         As pointed out during the discussion that the observation made by the Department of Expenditure conveyed vide Board’s letter F.No.A.26017/92/2008-Ad.IIA dated 09.09.2010, does not reflect the correct position and in fact, contradicts the recommendations of the 6^th Central Pay Commission.   It is also against the principles of natural justice and equity as guaranteed by the Constitution of India and endorsed by various judicial pronouncement.  It is in this context, we would like to once again, submit the following to facilitate taking up the matter once again with the Department of Expenditure as agreed upon in the meeting referred to above.

3.(a) Observation of the Department of Expenditure:

            The post of Administrative Officers and Private Secretaries are common category post in offices outside the secretariat and hence the Pay scales recommended by the 6^th CPC and approved by the Government for common category post are to be implemented in this case and no special dispensation can be made for common category post in one department ;

Stand of the Association:

3.b(i)   The above observation is absolutely not in conformity with one of the fundamental policy recommendation of the 6^th CPC. It recommended complete parity between officers of both Hdqrs. Organization and Field Formations in chapter 3.1.The specific recommendation in Para 3.1.3 and Para 3.1.4, being relevant to the context, is reproduced below:

Para 3.1.3:-        “Higher pay scales in the Secretariat offices may have been justified in the past when formulation of proper policies was of paramount importance. The present position is different. Today, the weakest link in respect of any government policy is at the delivery stage. This phenomenon is not endemic to India. Internationally also, there is an increasing emphasis on strengthening the delivery lines and decentralization with greater role being assigned at delivery points which actually determines the benefit that the common citizen is going to derive out of any policy initiative of the Government. The field offices are at the cutting edge of administration and may, in most cases, determine whether a particular policy turns out to be a success or a failure in terms of actual benefit to the consumer. Accordingly, the time has come to grant parity between similarly placed personnel employed in field offices and in the secretariat. This will need to be absolute till the grade of Assistants. Beyond this , it may not be possible or even justified to grant complete parity because the hierarchy and career progression will need to be different taking in view the functional considerations and relativities across the board. “

 

Para 3.1.4:- “ A parity has long been established between the posts of Lower Division Clerk (LDC) and Upper Division Clerk (UDC) in Secretariat and field offices. The position becomes different for posts above UDC level, with the Assistant in secretariat offices being placed in higher pay scale vis-à-vis those working in field offices. Earlier, the respective pay scales of Rs. 5500-9000 and Rs. 5000-8000 existed for Assistants in Secretariat and in field offices. This disparity was aggravated in 2006 when the Government further upgraded the pay scales of Assistants belonging to Central Secretariat Service to Rs. 6500-10500/-.”

3.b(ii) In addition to this, 6^th CPC has recommended a particular hierarchical structure for Hdqrs. Organization in Para 3.1.9., and has similarly recommended another structure in Para 3.1.14 in respect of the Field formations. In fact at Para 7.15.14 the 6^th CPC has pointedly observed that such dispensation in chapter 3.1 would also be applicable for the Ministerial Officers in CBEC/ CBDT. Although, this particular paragraph has been quoted by Department of Expenditure in the present context, unfortunately this aspect appears to have not been taken into cognizance by the Department of Expenditure.

3.b.(iii)Therefore, the observation as regards common category staff is not at all relevant and the recommendation for the Hdqrs. Organization in chapter 3.1 would also be squarely applicable for the Ministerial Officers in CBEC as they deserve a special dispensation in accordance with Chapter 3.1, read with Para 7.15.14. Thus grade pay of Administrative Officer and Deputy Office Superintendent in CBEC is to be equated with Section Officer and Assistant in Hdqrs. Organization. It was observed by the Honourable Chairman that a specific recommendation of the Pay Commission will have an over-riding effect over any general or common recommendation made elsewhere in the report.

 

 4.(a) Observation of the Department of Expenditure:

            There is no established relativity between the post of Administrative Officers/ Private Secretary vis-à-vis the Section Officers and Private Secretaries of CSS/CSSS. They are governed by different set of Recruitment Rules. Their mode of Recruitment, nature of duties and responsibilities are also different;

Stand of the Association

4.b(i)   The above observation is completely in contradiction of the principle-stand, adopted by the 6^th CPC, as articulated in chapter 3.1 and explained in the earlier paragraph. Such arguments (not governed by the recommendation of the 6^th CPC) are concocted to deny the legitimate claims of a particular group of officers, comprehensively endorsed by an expert body like Central Pay Commission. This undermines the very essence of the recommendation of the 6^th Central Pay Commission.

 4.b(ii)  In fact, the Government of India has accepted this particular recommendation of 6^th CPC, granting parity between Hdqrs. Organization and Field Formation, for granting grade pay of Rs.4,600/- in PB-2 to Assistants, Personal Assistants of Central Secretariat Service, Armed Forces Headquarters Service, Indian Foreign Service “B” and Railway Board Secretariat Service and their counterpart Stenographer Services vide O.M. F.No.1/1/2008/IC, dated 16.11.2009. The Government’s position is made clear in Para – 4 of the said O.M. which is as under:-

“While considering the case of granting upgraded grade pay of Rs.4,600/- to Assistants and Personal Assistants in the Central Secretariat, it is noted that 6^th Central Pay Commission had recommended parity in terms of hierarchical structure of Office Staff in Field and Secretariat Offices upto the level of Assistants and this recommendation had been accepted by the Government. …”.

4.b(iii)             Therefore, it is amply clear that the Department of Expenditure is adopting double standards in as much as on the one hand it has accorded Rs.4,600/- to Assistant on the grounds of extending parity between  Hdqrs. Organization and Field Formations (in terms of the recommendation of 6^th CPC), while on the other hand it has refused to extend a similar benefit in the case of Administrative Officers and Deputy office Superintendents  in CBEC by drawing parity with Hdqrs. Organization.

4.b(iv)             It may be argued that the parity between Hdqrs. Organization and Field Formations in CBEC has not yet been overtly established as yet and they might be governed by a different set of Recruitment Rules, having a separate mode of Recruitment. However, it is pertinent to note that nowhere in the entire report has the Pay Commission envisaged a pre-condition for establishing relativity between the post of AO/PS vis-à-vis the Section Officers & Private Secretaries of CSS/CSSS. The fact that they are governed by a different set of Recruitment Rules was available to the Pay commission as well & the recommendations have been made after taking the same into consideration. But, it is the accepted recommendation of 6^th CPC that there cannot be any disparity of pay structure & hence the pay commission must have factored these facts while recommending the same. Thus, such imputed arguments are not in conformity with the views of the 6^th CPC which Govt. too has accepted for implementation.

4.b(v)  Further based upon the above premise, the Honourable Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi has vide order dated 19.02.2009, in O.A. No. 164/2009 considered the issue of parity between the Section Officer and Private Secretaries of the Central Administrative Tribunal with that of the Section Officer and Private Secretaries in CSS/CSSS. The decision of the Tribunal was favourable to these officers and the same has been accepted by the Government and the benefit has been since then extended to them. Contrary to the above, the Department of Expenditure is taking a completely different stand while considering extension of similar benefits to the post of Administrative Officer and Deputy Office Superintendent in CBEC.

4.b(vi)             Certain functions like Revenue Reconciliations, Refunds, Audit and Drawbacks etc, are performed by the Administrative Officers and Deputy Office Superintendents which are unique to this Department and hence it is requested to consider this post as Departmental Posts (A.O and D.O.S of Central Excise & Service Tax) for grant of higher Grade Pay on this ground.

5.(a) Observation of the Department of Expenditure:

15.       Keeping in view the nature of duties and responsibilities etc., there is no case for parity between the post of Administrative Officers/ P.S/Supdt./Deputy Office Superintendent, in the Directorate of Logistics with the executive post covered by the O.M dated 21.04.2004

Stand of the Association

5.b(i)   This is not a valid argument in the spirit of the recommendation of the 6^th CPC. Infact, one of the major reasons for which three pre-revised pay scale were proposed to be merged into a single Grade Pay of Rs.4,200/- in PB – 2 has been the unilateral upgradation of pay scales of Inspectors and Superintends in CBEC and CBDT on 21.04.2004. Para 2.1.19, sub para vii is reproduced below:

5.b.(ii) Para 2.1.19.Vii:- Many pre-revised scales are being merged. Barring the Group-D posts, this merger has been done by extending the existing minimum prescribed for the highest Pay scale with which the other scales are being merged. However, the grade pay for the merged scale so derived has been computed with reference to the maximum of the highest scale. This besides ensuring a uniform benefit, will also prevent bunching Following scales have been merged.

Rs.5000-8000 Rs.5500-9000 Rs.6500-6900 Rs.6500-10500

Scales of Rs. 5000-8000, Rs. 5500-9000 and Rs. 6500-10500/- have been merged to bring parity between field officers; the secretariat; the technical post; and the work shop staff. This was necessary to ensure that due importance is given to the levels concerned with actual delivery. It is also noted that a large number of anomalies were created due to the placement of Inspectors/equivalent posts in CBDT/CBEC and Assistants/ Personal Assistants of CSS/CSSS in the scale of Rs. 6500-200-10500. ……….

The recommendation made in consonance with the above, in Para 7.15.13 is also relevant, which is reproduced below:-

5.b.(iii) Para 7.15.13:- “The posts of Inspector and equivalent exist in CBDT as well as CBEC.  The Fifth CPC had recommended the scale of Rs.5500-9000 for these posts. The pay scale of these posts was, however, upgraded to Rs.6500-10500.  Demands have been received from other posts existing in the scale of Rs.5500-9000 in these two Boards seeking similar dispensation.  The Commission has recommended merger of the pay scales of Rs.5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500 which will automatically meet this demand.  Hence, no specific recommendation on demands seeking such upgradations is being made.”

5.b(iv)             It is ironical that the root cause of the present anomaly itself is cited as a reason for denying the legitimate demand of this cadre. The fact that the pay scales of the executive was unilaterally upgraded is one of the consideration under which the three payscales were merged and thereafter, the pay commission had in para 3.1.14 recommended that “in accordance with the principle established in the earlier paragraphs, parity between Field and Secretariat Offices is recommended”. Hence the observation of the Department of Expenditure is unjustified and not backed by the spirit of the recommendation of the 6^th Central Pay Commission.

6.(a ) Observation of the Department of Expenditure

18.       Para 7.15.14 has been quoted verbatim to justify the rejection. Para 7.15.14 as per the report of the Pay Commission is as under:-

 Para 7.15.14:            Fifth Central Pay Commission had recommended the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 for the posts of Appraiser/Superintendent (Preventive)/equivalent in CBEC and the post of Income Tax Officer/equivalent in CBDT. The Government, in 2004, upgraded the pay scales of these posts to Rs.7500-12000.  Various posts in ministerial cadres that earlier were in the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 have demanded an identical dispensation in order to maintain their relativity.  The Commission would like to clarify that posts in ministerial cadres cannot claim any relativity with those in the executive cadre as the functions are different.  Mere fact of two posts being in the same pay scale cannot be a ground for establishing relativity.  However, the ministerial posts will get a separate dispensation because the Commission has recommended parity between headquarters organizations and the field offices in chapter 3.1 of the report.  The recommendations made therein shall apply to the ministerial cadre in CBDT and CBEC as well without any relativity being established vis-à-vis the posts belonging to the executive cadre (emphasis as available in the original report of the pay Commission.

Stand of the Association

 

6.b(i)   The fact that the actually intended and highlighted portion of the recommendation has been ignored and the non-highlighted portion has been taken into account for rejecting the demand was brought to your notice. The concluding sentence in the paragraph sums up the entire recommendation in the said paragraph, i.e., the recommendations made in Chapter 3.1 of the report shall apply without any relativity being established to the executive cadre. Therefore, there shall be no relativity with executive cadre as the pay commission has come to the conclusion that parity should be granted between Hqrs., Organisation and field formation. This leads to an undisputed conclusion that the Deputy Office Superintendent should be assigned Rs.4,600/- on par with the Assistants in Hqrs., Organisation and the Administrative Officer be assigned Rs.4800/- in PB 2 on par with Section Officers who have been assigned with the same grade pay.

 

6.b(ii)              Moreover, the grade pay of Deputy Officer Superintendents merits revision on a different account as well, since the grade pay of Inspector has been revised to Rs.4600/- in PB-2 vide order dated 13.11.2009. The recommendation made in Para 7.15.15 is pertinent here.

6.b.(iii) Para 7.15.15:- “ An anomaly has been reported in case of Senior Tax Assistants who are presently eligible for promotion as Inspector as well as Deputy Office Superintendent.  It is stated that Senior Tax Assistants, if they are promoted as Deputy Office Superintendent, reach the scale of Rs.5500-9000.  However, in case of promotion as Inspector, they are placed in the scale of Rs.6500-10500 which is anomalous especially because they function under Deputy Office Superintendent before promotion as Inspector.  The Commission has recommended merger of the pre-revised scales of Rs.5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500 which will place the posts of Inspector and Deputy Office superintendent in an identical pay scale. No specific recommendation is, therefore, necessary in this case.”

 

Therefore it is once again humbly requested to take up the matter with the Department of Expenditure on the ground detailed hereinabove and in the true letter and sprit of the recommendation of the 6^th Central Pay Commission and render justice to section of deprived officers, desperately and patiently waiting for the same..

Yours faithfully,

Encl:- As stated
 

Sd/-

(Ashim Pramanick)

President

E-mail:-pramanik.ashim4@gmail.com

Copy to :-

1.       Director, AD.IIA, CBEC, North Block, New Delhi.
     

Sd/-
(Ashim Pramanick)

President

E-mail:-pramanik.ashim4@gmail.com

 

MEETING OF MEMBERS/REPRESENTATIVES REGARDING ANOMALY OF PAY IN THE GRADE OF AO/DOS

Pune, the 5th October, 2010

Dear friends in service,

As all of you are aware that the Ministry has vide its letter dated 09.09.2010 (copy placed below), communicated the decision of rejecting the request for upgradation of pay scales in respect of the AO and DOS, consequent to 6th CPC. Unfortunately, despite our concerted efforts, the Association has not been successful in its pursuit of achieving positive results in the said issues. While the Association is still keeping a close watch on the developments regarding the ensuing Cadre Restructuring, the above decision of the Ministry needs to be taken up for adjudication, in all possible ways and means, before the appropriate forums.

Requests and suggestions are being received from many quarters for challenging the decision of the Ministry rejecting our legitimate demand before the various Tribunals. It is our experience that multiplicity of litigations/ cases filed on emotions without much thought and conviction etc., often leads to chaos and confusion which results in damaging the prospects and interest of all the members in the cadre for a long time to come.

Therefore it is felt that a meeting of all the interested Officers/Unit leaders alongwith some affected members should be convened at a central location, preferably at New Delhi to discuss the strong points and finalise a common strategy before embarking upon filing individual O.A’s. A common ground could be crystallized in the said meeting and circulated among all the Officers/regional units for filing OAs before the Tribunal.

It is therefore appealed to all the members/Office bearers concerned about the welfare and well being of the Members of the Association, to hold back their emotions and bring forth their strong points to the table for discussion in the proposed meeting and not to file OA’s without consulting the Association. The date and venue for the meeting will be communicated to one and all in due course.

Awaiting your favourable and enthusiastic response, I remain.

Yours comradely,

(THOMAS MONY)

Secretary General

REPRESENTATION TO THE DEPARTMENTAL ANOMALY COMMITTEE

ALL INDIA CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX MINISTERIAL OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION

Pune, the 04th October, 2010

The Departmental Anomaly Committee constituted by the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, has not provided an opportunity to the Association to represent its Grievances directly. Instead, it has been informed to submit the Grievances and Agenda points to the Leader of the Staff Side who has been nominated to take up the matter before the Committee on our behalf. Accordingly a Memorandum has been submitted to the Chairman of the Departmental Anomaly Committee and also the Leader of the Staff Side Shri. K.K.N. Kutty, Secretary General of the Confederation of the Central Government Employees, New Delhi regarding the Anomaly in respect of our cadre. A copy of the said Memorandum is placed hereunder for information of the Members.

* * * *

SUBMISSION OF AGENDA POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE DEPARTMENTAL ANOMALY COMMITTEE

        Most respectfully, the following submissions are being made to bring to light the anomaly that has arisen in the Grade Pay of Administrative Officers and the Deputy Office Superintendents in CBEC.  In this regard, the factual position and cause of the anomaly, alongwith detailed justification for upgradation of Grade Pay in respect of these two Grades is narrated hereunder:-

Factual Position:-

2. The Administrative Hierarchy of the Ministerial cadre in the field formations under CBEC begins with Tax Assistant (Gr. ‘C’ with GP-2400) at the entry level, whose first promotional opportunity is to the grade of Senior Tax Assistants – (Gr. ‘C’ with GP – 4200). Thereafter there are two promotional avenues available to the Senior Tax Assistants; i.e., (a) Deputy Office Superintendent (Gr. ‘B’ Non Gazetted – with GP – 4200) (DOS) and further as Administrative Officer (Gr. ‘B’ Gazetted with GP – 4600) (AO) in the Ministerial cadre; and (b) Inspectors (Gr. ‘B’ Non-Gazetted with GP – 4600) and further as Superintendents (Gr. ‘B’ Gazetted with GP – 4800) in the Executive cadre.

3. The Administrative Officer (Group 'B' Gazetted) post under CBEC was created in 1959. Ever since the creation of the post, parity existed between the grade of Administrative Officer/ Examiner of Accounts/ Assistant Chief Accounts Officer and Superintendents/ Appraisers, as both the posts were placed in the same scale of pay upto 21.04.04. The Examiners of Accounts were performing the same function as like that of a superintendent in an Audit party and DOS were performing the duties of an Inspector in these audit parties. This fact is well documented in the Audit Manual of 1990, issued by the CBEC. The pay scale of Administrative Officer (Group 'B' Gazetted) under CBEC was equal to the pay scale of Appraiser/ Superintendent of Central Excise/Customs (Group 'B' Gazetted), under CBEC while the Pay scale of DOS was equal to that of an Inspector.

4. While the nature and duties of all the respective grades i.e., AO, DOS, Superintendent and Inspectors continued to remain the same, during the Year 2004 (21.04.2004), Ministry awarded up gradation of pay scale to the grade of Appraiser/ Superintendent of Customs (Preventive) and Inspectors/ Preventive Officers on par with Officers of CBI, leaving aside the pay scale of Administrative Officer and DOS, thereby creating an artificial imbalance in pay scales of Officers under CBEC. The Ministerial Officers had raised their concern and sought parity with similarly placed cadres before the Ministry. This particular issue was also raised in the Rajya Sabha vide an Unstarred question No.518, Shri. Vidya Sagar Nishad, Honourable Member of Parliament. In response, the Honourable Minister of State for Revenue Shri. S.S. Palanimanickam in his reply dated 07.12.04, while admitting the fact that the pay scales of Group ‘B’ & ‘C’ Executive grades have been revised, had stated that “As regards the revision of the pay scales of various ministerial grades including the grades of Deputy Office Superintendent Level-I and Level-II, the matter is under examination by the Government.” Considering the validity of the demand of the staff side, the matter was referred to the 6th CPC, vide letter F.No.A-26017/168/2007-Ad.IIA dated 30.11.2007. On consideration of the issue, the Commission has in para 7.15.13 and 7.15.14 of its report observed as under:-

7.15.13:- The posts of Inspector and equivalent exist in CBDT as well as CBEC. The Fifth CPC had recommended the scale of Rs.5500- 9000 for these posts. The pay scale of these posts was, however, upgraded to Rs.6500-10500. Demands have been received from other posts existing in the scale of Rs.5500-9000 in these two Boards seeking similar dispensation. The Commission has recommended merger of the pay scales of Rs.5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500- 10500 which will automatically meet this demand. Hence, no specific recommendation on demands seeking such upgradations is being made.

7.15.14:- Fifth Central Pay Commission had recommended the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 for the posts of Appraiser/Superintendent (Preventive)/equivalent in CBEC and the post of Income Tax Officer/equivalent in CBDT. The Government, in 2004, upgraded the pay scales of these posts to Rs.7500-12000. Various posts in ministerial cadres that earlier were in the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 have demanded an identical dispensation in order to maintain their relativity. The Commission would like to clarify that posts in ministerial cadres cannot claim any relativity with those in the executive cadre as the functions are different. Mere fact of two posts being in the same pay scale cannot be a ground for establishing relativity. However, the ministerial posts will get a separate dispensation because the Commission has recommended parity between headquarters organizations and the field offices in chapter 3.1 of the report. The recommendations made therein shall apply to the ministerial cadre in CBDT and CBEC as well without any relativity being established vis-à-vis the posts belonging to the executive cadre.

In this regard, it is also relevant to refer para 3.1.3 (Disparity between Secretariat and field offices) of the report wherein it is observed as under:-

“The field offices are at the cutting edge of administration and may, in most cases, determine whether a particular policy turns out to be a success or a failure in terms of actual benefit to the consumer. Accordingly, the time has come to grant parity between similarly placed personnel employed in field offices and in the Secretariat. This parity will need to be absolute till the grade of Assistant.”

5. Further, the qualifying service required for promotion to the grade of Inspector is two Years, whereas the qualifying service required for promotion to that of DOS is three years. However, the grade pay of DOS is Rs.4200, similar to that of the STA, whereas in the case of Inspectors it is Rs.4600, promotion to which requires a lesser qualifying Service than that of DOS. It is a paradox that a STA, whose ACR is being initiated by the said DOS as a supervisory Officer, will be drawing a higher Grade pay than this superior Officer, on his/her next promotion to the grade of Inspector. Therefore it is clearly evident that there is an anomaly in these cadres. This has been acknowledged by the Pay Commission at Para 7.15.15, where it has been categorically recorded as under:-

“An anomaly has been reported in case of Senior Tax Assistants who are presently eligible for promotion as Inspector as well as Deputy Office Superintendent. It is stated that Senior Tax Assistants, if they are promoted as Deputy Office Superintendent, reach the scale of Rs.5500-9000. However, in case of promotion as Inspector, they are placed in the scale of Rs.6500-10500 which is anomalous especially because they function under Deputy Office Superintendent before promotion as Inspector. The Commission has recommended merger of the pre-revised scales of Rs.5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500 which will place the posts of Inspector and Deputy Office Superintendent in an identical pay scale. No specific recommendation is, therefore, necessary in this case.”

6. After careful consideration of all the facts, the Pay Commission had recommended merger of the three scales in order to retain the parity between Inspectors and DOS, which existed prior to 21.04.2004. However this parity has again been altered, after the revision of Grade pay in respect of Inspectors and Assistants to Rs.4600/- vide OM dated 13.11.09, leaving aside the Grade pay of Deputy Office Superintendent. Under these circumstances, this Association has sought upgradation of Pay of DOS & AO to restore parity on the following grounds.

JUSTIFICATIONS FOR UPGRADATION OF PAY:-

(i) DEPUTY OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT:-

7. As per the Recruitment Rules of Assistant in CSS, an UDC (in the pay scale of Rs.4000-100-6000 – pre-revised = Rs.5200-20200 in PB-1 & GP of Rs.2400 -revised) with 5 years of the qualifying service is eligible for promotion to the grade of Assistants. However, in the offices under CBEC a Tax Assistant (equivalent to the UDC in CSS) is eligible for promotion as STA after completion of 3 years of qualifying service. This STA is eligible for further promotion as DOS after completing 3 years of qualifying service in that grade. Thus a TA (UDC) in the field Offices is eligible for promotion to the level of DOS (equivalent to Assistant) after 6 years of qualifying service, one Year more than the requirement for promotion as Assistant in CSS. Even after ignoring the requirement of higher qualifying service for promotion, a DOS is comparable to the grade of Assistants in the Headquarters organization, which has now been granted grade pay of Rs.4600 corresponding to the pre-revised scale of Rs.7450-11000. Further, both DOS and Assisants are Non-Gazetted Group ‘B’ Posts, whose next promotional post is a Gazetted Group ‘B’ post i.e., Administrative Officer and Section Officer respectively. The nature of duties and responsibilities are similar between these two cadres and it is apparent that the post of DOS is on par with that of Assistants. Since parity has been established between the Ministerial cadres of Headquarters Organisation and Field Offices, it is justifiable to grant higher Grade Pay to DOS, equivalent to the pay of Assistants, as recommended by the Pay Commission in terms of para 3.1.3.

(ii) ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER:-

8. The Administrative Officers in this department when posted in the Headquarters Offices of the Commissionerates, function as Heads of one of these three sections viz., Administration, Establishment or Accounts section. They are required to perform a combination of all these three roles in the Divisional Offices, When ever they are posted to Accounts Sections to assist a CAO in Commissionerate Headquarters, they have to look after the work related to Reconciliation of Revenue Receipts. While doing so, there have been many instances, where discrepancies noticed have led to detection of Tax Evasion on further investigation, which have led to recovery of Revenue to the Department. This Reconciliation work is unique to this department alone, which requires experience in the field level. While there has been a constant increase in workload on a whole, unlike on the executive side, there has not been any corresponding increase in the staff position nor is there any increase in the pay scales of these experienced Officers. Not only that, most of the Administrative Officers of this department have reached this level after putting in a minimum of 15 to 20 Years of service depending upon the vacancies available in the respective Zones, which need to be recognized and adequately compensated.

9. Further, even if the role of DDOs are common to all the departments, it is humbly submitted that some of the duties performed by them can be compared to that of an Income Tax Officer of CBDT, in as much as they have to mandatorily calculate and recover the Income Tax at appropriate rates, in respect of those Officers, whose salary are being drawn and paid by them. In addition to the above, they recover TDS in respect of all payments to contractors/service providers, and through this they are contributing to the exchequer. Apart from this, they have the additional responsibility of filing a quarterly and annual return to the Income Tax Department, in respect of the Taxes that have been deducted at Source. Therefore they play a significant role in nation building as well while performing these functions.

10. In the Headquarters Organisations (CSS), the Section Officers who perform the role of DDOs and perform similar nature of work, have been granted the grade pay of Rs.4800 in PB-2 corresponding to the pre-revised scale of Rs.7500-12000, who are entitled to Grade pay of Rs.5400 on completion of 4 years of service in the grade. As stated above, the AOs are comparable to the Section Officers, and they are no way inferior to them on any count. Their nature of duties and responsibilities are similar to that of Section Officers in handling of Administrative and Establishment matters as well. As per the recommendations of the Commission, the Ministerial cadre shall be granted parity of pay with that of the Headquarters Organisation. Considering a similar plea in the case of the Administrative Officers in the Department of Telecommunication in the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology the Ministry was pleased to allow them a grade pay of Rs. 4800 (copy of the order dated 23.03.09 is enclosed). Hence, the grade of AOs of CBEC are eligible for grade pay of Rs.4800 in PB-2 on par with that of Section Officers, and they should also be granted the non-functional upgradation to the grade pay of Rs.5400, on completion of four years of Service.

Promotional avenues:-

11. As explained hereinabove, the entry level in this Department by way of Direct Recruitment is to the grade of Tax Assistants, who are appointed through the Graduate Level Examinations conducted by SSC, which can be considered just one level lower than the examination held for appointment to the post of Inspectors. In absence of adequate monetary compensation and promotional avenues, when compared to executive grades, these computer literate and highly qualified Officers more often than not, opt for promotion as Inspectors in the Executive side, because of higher Grade Pay. This anomaly if not rectified will lead to a situation, where only those officers who do not qualify for promotion as Inspectors alone, will choose the line of DOS and AO in absence of other option/alternative. Such a turn of events will lead to utter chaos and confusion, and one day the Administration in the field formations of CBEC will come to a standstill, because most of these posts (DOS/AO) will remain unfilled after the promotion/retirement of the existing officers. A trend has already emerged whereby large numbers of post are lying vacant in the grade of DOS for the past two years in many zones. Therefore, on this count also the demand of higher Grade Pay for DOS and AO merits consideration, in order to attract proper talent for the Ministerial cadre which alone can meet the Administrative requirements of the Department.

Name of the Post Grade Pay Promotional Post Grade Pay of Promoted post Min. Qual. Service

Tax Assistant 2400 (PB-1) Sr.Tax Assistant 4200 (PB-2) 3 Years

Sr. Tax Assistant 4200 (PB-2) DOS 4200 (PB-2) 3 Years

DOS 4200 (PB-2) Admin. Officer 4600 (PB-2) 2 years

Admin. Officer 4600 (PB-2) Chief Accts Officer 5400 (PB-2) 7 Years

(No monetary benefit is available on promotion from STA to DOS and that promotion is to be ignored)

12. From the above table, it may be seen that a Ministerial Officer will be able to get only two promotions in his entire service i.e., upto the level of Administrative Officer. Very few Officers reach the level of CAO, as these posts are very far and few, and are not filled up regularly on occurrence of vacancies. Though the Government has allowed three Financial upgradations for all Government Servants, the spirit of the recommendations imply that there shall be equal promotional avenues also, in order to satisfy the career aspirations and monetary benefits. Further, it can be seen that there is no post available with Grade Pay of Rs.4800, and at present an AO is being promoted to the Group ‘A’ post of CAO directly from the Grade Pay of Rs.4600, which is inconsistent. The line of promotion would become more appropriate and consistent only if upgradation of the pay is granted to the grade of DOS at Rs.4600 and AO at Rs.4800.

13. In view of the above, it is submitted that the post of DOS should be granted Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- and that of the Administrative Officer be granted Grade Pay of Rs.4800/-. Such an upgradation alone can restore the imbalance that has crept in pay scales of the Officers in CBEC, and further bring the much needed relief to those who have suffered the embarrassment and humiliation in this Department for the past so many Years.

  

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-

(THOMAS MONY)

SECRETARY GENERAL