Revised Submissions on Cadre Review

Date:- 26.01.2011

Dear Members,

A copy of the revised submissions on cadre restructuring submitted to the Board is placed below for information of all Members.

AICESTMOA

ALL INDIA CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX MINISTERIAL OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION

Ref. No. AICESTMOA/11-02.

Dated :       Jan’ 2011

To,


The Chairman,
Central Board Excise & Customs,
Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance,
Government of India, North Block,
New Delhi - 1

Respected Sir,

Subject: Demands of the Ministerial Officers –

                           ongoing Cadre restructuring exercise- regarding.

* * * *

This is with reference to the discussion that took place in the meeting, held on 18.01.2011 at North Block, on the captioned subject.

2. This association expresses its gratitude to the Hon’ ble Chairman, Member(P&V), DGHRD and Team of HRD officials for enlightening us about various aspects of draft Cadre restructuring proposals vis-à-vis our demands, submitted on 24-11-2010 through Joint Action Committee. However, we were stunned and extremely shocked to learn that none of our major proposals, concerning the well-being and survival of the entire ministerial cadre, has found place in the revised draft proposals. Further, the reasons put forth for rejection/ non-consideration of the genuine demands related to this Association are not acceptable.

3. Aggrieved by the decision and as desired by the Hon’ble Chairman (CBEC), we once again place the following demands for inclusion in the ongoing cadre restructuring proposals, which were also ventilated during the meeting on 18.01.2011. It appears that the Board has assumed and is under the impression that creation of large number of posts in the executive grade, which is a by-product of the cadre restructuring, alone will satisfy the aspirations of the entire Ministerial cadre, ignoring the genuine concerns put forth by this Association for removing the stagnation in the level of DOS and AOs. It is humbly submitted that it will be very difficult to address those genuine grievances of the ministerial cadre across the country, unless the minimum following demands are met with.

4. The demands to be incorporated in the cadre restructuring proposal are;

I. Restructuring of Administrative wing in accordance with the recommendations of 6th CPC can be implemented through cadre restructuring only. We sincerely believe that the cadre restructuring exercise should not merely be a statistical one, but it should also embody a cadre policy as envisaged by an expert body like 6th CPC. Therefore, the following hierarchical structure in the Administrative wing of the CBEC may be done beyond the grades of Tax Assistant & Senior Tax Assistant.

Sl. No. Name of posts Grade Pay No. of Posts Place of posting

1 Principal Administrative Officer Rs.7600/- 66 Chief Commissioner’s Office (1 each)

2 Administrative Officer Grade-I Rs.6600/- 442 Commissionerate Hdqrs. (2 each)

3 Administrative Officer Grade-II Rs.4800/- 1564 Divisional Offices & Hdqrs. Offices

4 Administrative Officer Grade-III Rs.4600/- 1986 Sections and field formations

Justification:-

(a) The 6th Pay Commission in its report vide Chapter 3.1 has recommended parity between Hdqrs. organisations and field formations. It has recommended a model cadre structure in para 3.1.14, for field formation / non-secretariat Organizations, drawing parity of the recommended cadre structure for the Hdqrs. organization in para 3.1.9. Both the paragraphs are reproduced verbatim in Annexure – I. This particular dispensation has been categorically recommended for ministerial officers in CBEC/ CBDT by the 6th CPC vide para 7.15.14 which is enclosed as Annexure-II. This very paragraph has been referred to by the Department of Expenditure while dealing with the grade pay of Administrative Officer, DOS etc. as conveyed by CBEC vide F.No.A.26017/92/2008.Ad.II.A dated 09-09-2010. Noteworthy is the fact that the Government has hiked the Grade Pay of Assistants vide O.M. dated 16-11-2009 of Department of Expenditure, drawing parity with the similarly placed officers in the field formations. However the DOS in CBEC, despite being similarly placed with Assistant is still languishing in Rs.4200/- in PB-2. Thus the recommendations of 6th CPC as contained in 3.1.14 can be implemented only through the ongoing cadre restructuring process by way of assigning Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- in PB – 2 to A.O. Grade – III (to be created by re-designation of D.O.S.) on par with the Assistants in Hdqrs. organizations who have been allowed Rs.4600/- in PB – 2.

(b) The Recruitment Rule for the post of DOS was notified in July 2009 much after implementation of 6th CPC where the pay scale of both the feeder grade (STA) and the Promotional grade (DOS) has been shown as being the same (Grade Pay of Rs.4200/-). As a result the STA & DOS (one being feeder & another promotional post) are in the same Grade Pay and the promotion from STA to DOS brings no financial benefit. This distortion can be addressed by favourably considering the above proposed hierarchical structure in the Cadre Restructuring proposal. The relevant recommendations of 6th CPC contained in Para 3.1.4 is enclosed in Annexure-III. Further, the grade of STA & DOS has been shown together in the draft proposal which is demeaning the higher grade. It is submitted that they should be shown separately, as one post i.e., DOS is the supervisory grade for the other.

(c) The ratio for promotions to the higher grade as per the proposed structure is not a favourable one, as is being made out in the draft proposal and the presentation made by the HRD. There will be 221 posts of CAO for 1564 posts of AO, which is in the ratio of 1:8. Some of the AOs have put in more than 12 to 15 years of service in the same grade and have completed 25-30 years of service in the Ministerial cadre itself. If these Officers are to get any relief in the proposed restructuring, then the hierarchical structure needs a definitive change as proposed by this Association. On the one hand the Board had recommended for grant of higher Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- & Rs.4800/- for the posts of DOS and AO respectively, and simultaneously arguing that such an increase of pay cannot be considered in the Cadre Restructuring proposal. Further, the ADG, HRD who represented the Official side in the Departmental Anomaly Committee is aware of the statement made by the Chairman of the Anomaly Committee that though this is a genuine grievance the issue should be considered outside the purview of the Anomaly Committee. Therefore, the only option which is left open for the Board to set right this injustice is to restructure the hierarchical structure of these Ministerial posts as proposed by this Association in consonance with the recommendations made by the 6th CPC.

(d) Based upon the recommendations of 6th CPC quoted above, the above structure of the administrative set up in CBEC is demanded. Such a set up will strengthen the administrative wing and improve the functional efficiency that is required and necessary for implementation of the Government policies on personnel matters. The contention of the Board that the organisational structure depends on the requirements of the department and that there is no justification to replicate the staffing model of CBDT is bizarre. Such a statement leads to the conclusion that the Ministerial cadre of CBEC are not supposed to compare themselves with the Executive officers in the same department, neither with the comparable organisation like CBDT nor with the Headquarters Organisation like CSS. It appears that the motive of the Board is that forever the Ministerial grade will have to remain confined to the unilateral decisions of the Board and languish in the present level or even worse.

(e) The fruits of such a step-motherly treatment are already being reaped by way of large number of posts in the grade of DOS remaining unfilled for want of willing candidates. If the same pattern continues and remain unaltered in the current proposal then the days of existence of the Ministerial cadre in this department can be numbered. It is also pertinent to mention that the large number of vacancies in the grade of DOS remain unfilled is due to the fact that there is a distorted pay structure for the Ministerial cadre vis-à-vis the executive cadre. The said distortion can only be set right by restructuring the existing hierarchical structure of the Ministerial grade as proposed hereinabove. Such restructuring alone can bring about a change and be a deterrent to large scale migration from ministerial cadre to executive cadre and resurrect the dying ministerial cadre. Otherwise the administrative functions in the filed formation will completely collapse for which CBEC may find it very difficult to explain in future.

II. It had been stated that abolition of posts is a must as it is a commitment made to the Union Cabinet made at the time of creation of 4647 posts in various grades during the Year, 2007. It is seen from the said allocation of posts that, apart from creation of certain number of posts in various cadres, 12 posts of AOs, 234 DOS, 58 STAs and 272 TAs have been created in the Ministerial cadre. Therefore it is clear that there has been corresponding increase in the Ministerial strength even in the said allocation. To curtail the number of posts by way of abolishment higher number of posts in the Ministerial cadre, thereby adversely affecting the administrative functions is uncalled for. Not only that the posts which remain unfilled for the past 10 years even without framing of Recruitment Rules are left untouched while the promotional posts like STA, DOS are proposed to be abolished is unjustified. It is requested that this decision be reconsidered in the right perspective.

(b) The existing Ministerial strength is 12,676 out of the total strength of 66,808 which is 19%. The proposed ministerial strength in the cadre restructuring is 14,396 out of a total proposed strength of 95,168 which is 15%. The reduction is amply evident. The HRD has factored the present vacancy position without paying heed to the functional necessity of the field formations and the administrative difficulties that are being experienced by them. The present vacancy position is the outcome of delayed recruitment and discriminatory pay structure of the ministerial cadre. As a result the existing ministerial officers are overburdened and saddled with additional work thereby leading to the Administrative functions taking a severe beating and unwanted delays.

(c) The total net increase in the ministerial grade is 1720 out of which the increase in the number of post of LDC is to the extent of 1009. This increase is not going to benefit the ministerial cadre and meet the functional requirements as the recruitment to the grade of LDC is by 100% promotion from Group ‘D’ cadre. It is being experienced that after implementation of the 6th CPC the Group ‘D’ Officers are not accepting the promotions to the grade of LDC due to the fact that they are already receiving higher Pay than that of LDC by way of financial upgradations. Thus it may not be realistic to expect that these posts can be filled up by 100% promotion from Group ‘D’.

(d) It is also worthwhile to mention that the Board has already proposed separate promotional channel for the erstwhile Group-D officers upto a grade pay of Rs.2400 in PB – 1, as disclosed in the meeting held on 18-01-2011. Therefore instead of creation of post in the LDC grade (which may be completely abolished in the event of creation of separate channel for erstwhile Group-D), the strength in TA & STA be substantially enhanced in Executive, Audit and Cadre controlling Commissionerates equivalent to the number of LDC posts that are likely to be abolished. The staffing norms for each commissionerate needs be improved upon particularly with reference to the grades of STA & TA, since the present structure is worse than the normative structure, suggested by study Group-I & II. The creation of Audit Commissionerates, as factored by HRD, to arrive at a reduced staffing pattern is not applicable for ministerial grades as there is not many ministerial posts (particularly in DOS & STA), proposed for the Audit Commissionerates.

III. The strength of Ministerial Officers for the Customs Preventive Commissionerate envisaged in the draft proposals are as under.

1. Administrative Officer – 2

2. Deputy Office Superintendent – 3

3. Senior Tax Assistant - 12

4. Tax Assistant - 24

It is extremely difficult to imagine that such a meager sanctioned strength can meet the requirements of the administrative work-load of the Customs preventive formation, manned by the Central Excise Personnel.

The number in each grade should be increased in the following manner in each Customs Division and Customs Circle. The total strength of entire Commissionerate, would therefore be required to be calculated by multiplying the number of the Customs Division & Customs Circle with the number of strength (proposed as under) for each Division & Circle, apart from providing equal strength of staff for the Commissionerate Hqrs., similar to an Executive Commissionerate.

1. Administrative Officer – 1

2. Deputy Office Superintendent – 1

3. Senior Tax Assistant - 4

4. Tax Assistant - 4

IV. HRD has already assured that all the newly created posts would be filled up by promotion only. It is requested to fill up all posts including Direct Recruitment & carried forward vacancies on the day of implementation of restructuring proposal, by promotion only, as done in the last cadre restructuring. Relaxation in the eligibility service may also be granted to promote officers and this may come as part of cadre restructuring proposal. Moreover, the demand for increase in the promotional quota also remains unaddressed.

V. Last but not the least, during the course of discussion , it was brought to this Association’s notice that there is a possibility of upgrading the post of Inspector who have put in more than 10 years of service to the post of Superintendent on in-situ basis, which proposal too would be detrimental to the interests of our cadre.

The examination of the above demands is a must to mitigate rankling grievance of the frustrated ministerial cadre. We request and hope that these demands will be favourably considered in the right spirit thereby boosting the morale of those officers who have been sincerely and dedicatedly working for the Department for more than 3 decades.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-

(Aasim Pramanick)

President

LETTER TO CHAIRMAN ON OS TO AO ISSUE

Dear Members,

A copy of the letter submitted to the Chairman, requesting to extend the benefit of pay fixation for the Officers who were promoted to the Grade of Administrative Officers from the erstwhile cadre of Office Superintendents is placed below for information.

AICESTMOA

ALL INDIA CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX MINISTERIAL OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION

Ref. No. AICESTMOA/11-01.To,

New Delhi, the 20th Jan’ 2011

Hon’ble Shri. S. Dutt Majumder, IRS,

Chairman, Central Board of Excise & Customs,

Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue,

North Block, New Delhi.

Respected Sir,

Sub:- Non-Adherence to directives of the Hon’ble Finance Minister in reducing litigations by Deptt. Of Expenditure - Request for extending benefit of Pay fixation under FR 22 (I)(a) (1) to all Administrative Officers promoted from the cadre of Office Superintendent during the period 01.01.1996 till restructuring of the cadres as per settled legal position – reg.

* * * *

This Association has been time and again taking up the cause of those officers in the cadre of Administrative Officer who have been promoted from the cadre of Office Superintendent prior to Cadre Restructuring and granted the pay fixation benefit as per FR 22 (I) (a) (1) and who stood deprived of the pay fixation benefit granted to them owing to issuance of Board’s s F.No.A-26014/7/2001-Ad.II.A dated 24.07.2006.

2. Apart from the previous references made on the subject issue, various documents and correspondences related to the issue involved has now become available through RTI, whereby it appears that either the facts of the particular issue have not been appreciated properly, or have been overlooked, consequent to which the issue is not being considered favorably, despite strong grounds and reasons thereto. Therefore, at the cost of repetition, the brief facts are narrated hereunder with a request to emphasize upon the Department of Expenditure to re-consider the issue and concede settlement of the same in consonance with the settled legal position.

Brief Facts:-

a. Prior to the Cadre restructuring in CBEC, the promotions to the grade of Administrative Officer, a Gazetted Group ‘B’ post were being made from the grade of Office Superintendent, Non-Gazetted Group ‘C’ post. Consequent to implementation of the recommendations of Fifth CPC vide resolution dated 30.09.1997, the pay scales of both, the feeder grade i.e. Office Superintendent and the promotional grade i.e. Administrative Officer came to lie in the same pay scale i.e., 6500-200-10500. Therefore, a question arose as to whether the benefit of pay fixation can be extended in cases where an Officer is promoted from the grade of Office Superintendent to Administrative Officer after 01.01.96, as both the grades are having identical scales of pay. As the promotional grade is carrying higher duties and responsibilities the benefit of pay fixation was extended in many field formations. Subsequently after a lapse of 9 Years, the Board had vide letter F.No.A-26014/7/2001-Ad.II.A dated 24.07.2006, clarified that “since the pay scale of Office Superintendent and Accounts Officer (Administrative Officer/Assistant Chief Accounts Officer) were merged into one pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 by the Fifth Central Pay Commission, w.e.f. 01.01.96, the benefit of pay fixation under FR 22 (I) (a) (1) cannot be granted.”

The said clarification is silent on the situation prevailing before the merger of both grades and has only considered the situation post merger of both these cadres. (kindly refer to Department of Expenditure’s advice on N/s. 43 of Board’s F.No.A.26014/7/2001-Ad.II A wherein it is mentioned that “the issue has been reconsidered by this Department. It is observed that the posts were merged and as such benefit under FR 22(1)(a)(i) is not possible as per extant instructions” Copy enclosed for ready reference), which advice specifically answers situation post merger and not for the period from 01.01.1996 till the date officers holding both these posts & performing different functions stood merged.

b. Consequent to issuance of Board’s clarification dated 24.07.2006, some of the Cadre Controlling Authorities in the field formations, issued orders modifying the earlier promotion orders (even those issued prior to 05.06.2002) and sought to deny the benefit of pay fixation to those Officers who were promoted to the grade of Administrative Officers from the pre-restructured post of Office Superintendent. Being aggrieved with the said decision, some officers approached the Hon’ble Tribunal, Bangalore Bench. The Hon’ble CAT, Bangalore in O.A. No. 117/07 dated 13.02.2008 and a series of other cases had held that the clarification dated 24.07.06, is bad in law stating that “the applicants were promoted to the post of AO long before the date of merger, i.e., 05.06.2002.” Further it also ordered that “the impugned order dated 24.07.06 is quashed and set aside” apart from setting aside the orders issued pursuance to the said Board’s order dated 24.07.06.

c. The Writ Petition No.10261/2008 filed by the department against the said order of the Hon’ble Tribunal was dismissed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, vide a detailed order dated 26.11.08. Thereafter a Special Leave Petition was preferred by the Department against the said order, which came to be dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court after condoning the delay, vide its order and judgement dated 21.08.2009. In conclusion, the order passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal, Bangalore quashing the circular/clarification dated 24.07.06, attained finality and thus became a settled law of the land. Consequently, the Board had vide its letter F.No.A-26017/31/2007-Ad.II-A dated 01.02.2010, directed the Commissioner, Central Excise, Bangalore –I, Bangalore to implement the orders and judgement of the Hon’ble CAT, Bangalore Bench, restrictively in respect of only those Officers who have filed Application before the Hon’ble Tribunal.

d. Ironically, it is submitted that the clarification issued by the Board was restricted to the litigants only, instead of issuing fresh instructions superseding the earlier orders issued on 24.07.2006 which stood quashed and was set aside by the legal body. It is owing to this restricted implementation of the Court judgment which has an All India ramification, that another set of affected Officers from Central Excise, Cochin approached the Central Administrative Tribunal seeking similar relief. It is apprehended that some aggrieved Officers from other Zones are also contemplating similar course of action. In this context, the CBEC, has in consultation with the Department of Expenditure decided to defend the OA now filed before the CAT, Ernakulam, much against the principles laid down by a judicial verdict of a High Court and approved by the Hon’ble Apex Court, which as explained above has been accepted and implemented for similarly placed Officers. By doing so the Board is indirectly forcing all the similarly placed Officers to approach the legal forums, much against the principles laid down in Article 14 of the Constitution. More so, in a situation when the Hon’ble Finance Minister has ordered constitution of a Committee to prepare a roadmap for reducing existing litigation and also to avoid litigation in future, such a stand being taken by the Board is surely against the spirit and directions of the Hon’ble Finance Minister.

Settled Legal Position :-

1. It is an undisputed fact that the Hon’ble Tribunal has categorically held that the Ministry’s order dated 24.07.06 is bad in law, and quashed the same and also the subsequent order of the Cadre Controlling Authority in totality. The Ministry has sought to implement the order of the Tribunal, affirmed by the Hon’ble High Court and the Apex Court, restrictively to the applicants only, which action is discriminatory and against all the basic tenants of law as the order passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal is an order in rem and not an order in persona. It is pertinent to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has in Amrit Lal Berry V/s. CCE, (1975) 4 SCC 714 held that “when a citizen aggrieved by the action of the Government Department has approached the Court and obtained a declaration of law in his favour, others, in like circumstances, should be able to rely on the sense of responsibility of the Department concerned and to expect that they will be given the benefit of this declaration without the need to take their grievances to Court”. Even the Expert Body like the Fifth Pay Commission has in its recommendation with regard to extension of benefit of Court judgment to similarly situated held in Para 126.5 that “Extending judicial decisions in matters of general nature to all similarly placed employees – We have observed that frequently, in cases of service litigation involving many similarly placed employees, the benefit of judgment is only extended to those employees who had agitated the matter before the Tribunal/Court. This generates a lot of needless litigation. It also runs contrary to the judgment given by the Full Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore in the case of C.S.Elias Ahmed and others V/s. Union of India and others (O.A.NOs 451 and 541 of 1991), wherein it was held that the entire class of employees who are similarly situated are required to be given the benefit of the decision whether or not they were parties to the original Writ. Incidentally, this principle has been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in this case as well as in numerous other judgments like G.C.Ghosh V/s. Union of India, (1992) 19 ATC 94 SC dated 20.07.1998, K.I.Shepherd V/s. Union of India (JT 1987 (3) SC 600), Abid Hussain V/s. Union of India (JT 1987 (1) SC 147 etc. Accordingly, we recommend that decisions taken in one specific case either by the Judiciary or the Government should be applied to all other identical cases without forcing the other employees to approach the Court of Law for an identical remedy or relief. We clarify that this decision will apply only in cases where a principle or common issue of general nature applicable to a group or category of Government employees is concerned and not to matters relating to a specific grievance or anomaly of an individual employee. It is in this background that this Association had requested the Ministry/ Board to extend this benefit to all similarly placed Officers.”

2. It is understood that the matter was once again referred by the CBEC to the Department of Expenditure so that the Officers who stood promoted from the grade of Office Superintendent to the grade of Administrative Officers from the period 01.01.1996 till the date of merger of posts, are eligible for benefit of pay fixation as the post of Administrative Officer carries both higher duties and responsibilities compared to that of an Office Superintendent. The Board also felt that the advice given by the Department of Expenditure needs re-consideration. Since it was reiterated again and again, in the course of consultation with the Department of Expenditure, this particular issue stood referred to the Ministry of Law and Justice for its advice/ opinion regarding implementation of the order and defending the present OA. The Ministry of Law and Justice has vide Dy.No.3136/2010-B dated, 04.08.2010, categorically stated as under:-

“In this connection it is pertinent to note that Article 14 of the constitution guarantees equality and equal protection of laws within the territory of India. Equal protection means right to equal treatment in similar circumstances both in the privilege conferred and in the liabilities imposed. In the light of the principle enshrined under Article 14 of the constitution granting benefit to some employees and denying the same to other similarly situated persons may go against the spirit of the constitution and may not with stand to the judicial scrutiny. Since the matter being sub-judice and it is not practice in this department to tender any advice in sub judice matters it is for the administrative department to take a policy decision as per their policy and precedent and defend the pending cases accordingly in consultation with the Govt. Standing Counsel.”

3. Instead of accepting the said advice and allowing the benefit by issue of uniform instructions, the Department of Expenditure had once again mechanically reiterated its earlier stand taken, which is religiously being followed by the CBEC without taking into consideration the correctness of the matter and the prevailing legal position. It is an admitted fact that when the issue was first referred to the Department of Expenditure for opinion/ advice regarding the situation prevailing before cadre restructuring i.e., for the promotions effected during the limited period between 01.01.96 and 05.06.2002 whereas the advice given by the Department of Expenditure was that the same need not be granted, as both the posts have since been merged (relevant copies of notesheet of F.No.A-26014/7/2001-Ad.II A are enclosed). The Department of Expenditure has overlooked the vital fact that Officers who stood promoted from the period 01.01.1996 till the date of restructuring were already availing of the Pay Fixation benefits as per rules in force. Needless to mention, though the Law Ministry has opined that the stand taken by the Department of Expenditure is untenable and will not withstand judicial scrutiny, no positive decision has been arrived to in the issue concerned, thereby leading to fresh litigations in the matter. It is ironical that so much of time, energy and money is being spent by the Government to defend these cases, whereas the litigants have to incur unnecessary expenditure to get their legitimate benefits for no fault of theirs.

4. Further it is submitted that the number of affected Officers are far and few and spread out in various Commissionerates throughout the country, who have been availing of the said legitimate benefit till 24.07.2006. It is also pertinent to bring to your notice that some of them who are in the last lap of their service are either facing the threat of recovery from their pensionary benefits or are forced to approach the court for relief at this stage of their career, especially in a situation wherein the entire case has already been decided & settled by the judiciary.

5. In view of the compelling facts and legal position explained above, it is humbly requested that :-

(i) a policy decision may kindly be taken to extend the benefit of pay fixation to similarly placed officers as per the Hon’ble Tribunal’s order which is an order in rem & not restricted to the applicants only, &

(ii) suitable directions may kindly be issued to all the Cadre Controlling Authorities under CBEC, for uniform application of the Court’s order to all similarly placed Officers under CBEC at the earliest, with copies to the respective Pay and Accounts Offices thereby granting relief to those officers who are under the threat of recovery from their service benefits, thus putting an end to the unwarranted injustice and related litigations thereto.

Awaiting a judicious re-consideration of the above matter and an early issuance of revised directives to the concerned authorities, I remain,

Yours faithfully,

(THOMAS MONY)

Sd/-

SECRETARY GENERAL

Encl : As above.

Copy submitted for kind information to :-

1. The Joint Secretary (Personnel), Department of Expenditure, North Block, New Delhi.

2. Smt. Renu Jain, Deputy Secretary, Department of Expenditure, w.r.t the meeting held on 28.10.2010, on the subject matter with a request for re-consideration of the matter.

3. The Deputy Secretary, Ad.II A, CBEC, North Block, New Delhi with a kind request to re-examine the entire matter in the light of the judgment delivered and for an early issuance of revised instructions to the field formations in the matter.

UPDATE ON THE MEETING WITH THE CHAIRMAN

Pune, the 23.11.2010

Dear Members,

As stated in the Previous post, the detailed information emerging out of the Meeting with the Chairman on the 18th January, 2011, is placed below.

The Hon’ble Chairman, Central Board of Excise & Customs welcomed all the representatives of the officers and staff associations/federations who have been actively participating in the Cadre Restructuring process, especially the constituent Associations/ Federations of the Joint Action Committee.

Thereafter, the Hon’ble Chairman directed the ADG, HRD to commence the proceedings of the meeting to which the ADG, HRD put forth a Power Point Presentation detailing the manner in which the Cadre Restructuring proposal has been prepared and how the aspirations of all cadres has been taken care of. It is noteworthy to mention that the ADG, HRD had made maximum utilization of the information inputs which is in the custody of HRD to present the case, at times by putting forth the reasoning for acceptance and/or non-consideration of submissions put forth by the respective Associations/ Federations.

Instead of briefing all our members with details, I attach herewith a Power Point presentation, which if gone through, even a lay man can understand that once again a Cadre Restructuring is being embarked upon, without taking into consideration the legitimate aspirations of the officers working in the Ministerial cadre. [Click the link provided below to download the file.]

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_wcN1t0C9s3OTBiNDA5YzAtYzU0NC00ZTdhLTgyODktM2VhNTBkYjE3ZjU1&hl=en&authkey=CN7e0NUG

While the experience, expertise and the manner in which cosmetic changes/developments have been put forth by the ADG, HRD is worth appreciating, this Association is unhappy over the manner in which its submissions are being dealt with. On casting a second look, any person would be in a position to make out that the attempt of the HRD possibly was to cater to the requirements put forth by the Executive cadres, Stenographers & the IRS Association. By doing so it has been projected that some remedial action is being taken at the Board level to mitigate the problems being faced by the members of those Associations. To what extent actual relief would be extended is yet to be seen in this regard. A small table showing the relevant demands made by the Association and the decision of the Board on the same is placed below.

However, the manner in which the aspiration of officers in the Ministerial Cadre was handled is not worth mentioning. Re-iterating the earlier stand, it was put forth by way of a presentation stating that the posts in CAO/AO grades were being increased to a very great extent, thereby reducing the stagnation in the Ministerial Heirarchy, whereas on the other end it was stated that the quantum of Inspectors vacancies that would arise would be sufficient enough to ensure that maximum Ministerial Officers would get promoted to the Executive cadre. That being so, there was not the slightest of attempt on his part to embark upon a self-study, whereby the HRD which boasts about Long Term Human Resource Plan did not even prefer to create posts in the Grade Pay of 4600 and 4800 for those neglected officers in the Ministerial Cadre serving the Department in the Cadres of Administrative Officers and Deputy Office Superintendents, and especially in a situation when the HRD itself is fully aware of the factual position that the pay scale issue with regard to these two posts has been rejected by the Department of Expenditure, thrice, thus leaving little scope to benefit on this arena, leave aside the hope that the cadre has by following up the said issues through the Departmental Anomaly Committee.

By diverting the attention of this Association stating that pay matters does not have a scope in the Cadre Restructuring process, the HRD is trying to double cross the members of this Association. As can be seen from the Cadre Restructuring proposal, there are many new posts being proposed to be created, obviously with an enhanced pay related to the post, and in the background of such a situation, this Association is left with little confusion as to what stops the HRD from creating posts that would mitigate long pending grievances and make the proposal perfect from that angle. The HRD has vide its O.M. issued under F.NO.8/B/65/HRD(HRM)/201/3439 dated 05.10.2010 forwarded the decision of the Government on the matter relating to upgradation of pay scales of Administrative Officer/Deputy Office Superintendent etc., thus putting a seal of confirmation of having knowledge of the factual position.

Considering the above situation, the HRD ought to have proposed creation of an Administrative Officer Grade III/Examiner or similar post in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- in PB-2 for the DOS and thereafter proposing a placement of the Administrative Officer in the Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- in PB-2. Unfortunately, the HRD has lost sight of the very basic facts and has proceeded with a Cadre Restructuring Proposal which obviously is beneficial for some specific cadres only. The Association is afraid that owing to the overburdened workload on the Hon’ble Chairman, and considering the simplicity and innocence of the Hon’ble Member (P&V), it is felt that the HRD is deciding the modalities and intricacies of the issues involved in Cadre Restructuring with the least of supervision/monitoring over it by the higher authorities, as this wing of the Department does not even have the slightest idea about the Administrative problems being faced by the Board during the past 10 years ever since the previous Cadre Restructuring, nor is aware of the historical problems of this cadre.

The ADG, HRD had during the course of presentation stated that nearly 30-35 % of the posts in the Ministerial cadres of DOS/STA have been lying unfilled consistently for more than three years and as per Department of Expenditure’s instructions any post lying vacant for more than 1 year need to be treated as abolished. Accordingly, based on the working strength of the Ministerial Cadres, the HRD has proposed the present set up in the Cadre Restructuring Proposal without even giving a slightest thought about the fact that DPCs for the post of Chief Accounts Officer does not take place once in five years, the Cadre Controlling authorities do not hold timely DPCs as per the Model Calendar, the fluctuation in the vacancy position at the time of reporting and immediately thereof does not match and other extraneous circumstances whereby the study as well as the proposed strength of Ministerial Officers envisaged in the Cadre Restructuring proposal is unacceptable to this Association. It is also pertinent to mention here that the Senior Tax Assistants are drawing the Grade Pay of Rs.4200/- in PB-2 whereas the promotional post i.e. Deputy Office Superintendent is also placed in the same scale of Rs.4200/- in PB-2. Even a person without vision could analyze the motive behind the existing form of hierarchy proposed for the Ministerial Cadre. The HRD has nullified the justifications for having a Model Commissionerate a/w Ministerial Staffing sanctioned in the previous Cadre Restructuring and so also has given a total go-bye to the recommendations made by Study Group-II in this regard. Though it is time and again repeated that the CR proposal is finalized based on the reports/ recommendations of the three Study Groups and the High Power Committee, such recommendations do not find any place in the proposal and therefore it is certain that the DG, HRD is the Author and Editor of the entire cadre review proposal independent of these reports/recommendations.

Apart from these reasons, there are many Direct Recruit Officers who are not accepting their appointment orders in the cadres of Tax Assistant as well as Inspector for the sole reason that Inter-Commissionerate Transfers has been banned from 19.02.2004 for no rhyme or reason, thus leading to non-filling up of vacancies. The ADG, HRD has undertaken a detailed study on the eligibility status of Ministerial Officers, based upon which it has been mentioned that all eligible Ministerial Officers will get promoted to the higher grades in Executive as well as Ministerial streams and that promotion quota vacancies will still remain due to unavailability of eligible officers in the feeder grades. Undoubtedly, eligibility is a by-product of timely promotions, and if promotions are denied the question of eligibility would not arise in itself, thus making the statement made by ADG, HRD sound like the gospel truth.

The Association is in the process of finalizing a representation to be submitted to the Board before 27th January, 2011, as stated by the Chairman in the meeting. The Members may be well prepared to take upon the challenge before them and see to it that the aspirations of our cadre receives due attention. Towards this goal, all the Members should remain united and rise to the occasion as and when there is a necessity.

Comradely yours,

THOMAS MONY

Secretary General

MEETING WITH CHAIRMAN

Date:- 18.01.2011

Dear Members,

You are all aware that a meeting of all the associations had been convened by the Board under the chairmanship of the Honourable Chairman of CBEC, at 16.00 hrs on the 18th January, 2011 in order to discuss the demands of all the Associations on cadre restructuring.  The meeting took place as scheduled and our Association was represented by our President and the Secretary General, who are still at New Delhi.

The Association is in receipt of calls from various quarters seeking an update on the meeting. Considering the requests, an initial update is being provided here. Detailed information will appear on the blog in due course.

UPDATE

The Chairman welcomed the leaders of all the Association and assured full co-operation in considering their demands. He then requested the ADG, HRD to make a power point presentation regarding the Cadre Review proposals and how the demands have been addressed. Accordingly a power point presentation was made by the ADG, HRD to the members present in the meeting.

The Chairman then asked the respective Associations to give their opinion/comments on the proposals. All the Associations had replied that major concerns have not been addressed as yet. Finally the Chairman asked the Associations to give detailed proposals with full justification by 27th of January, 2011 which will be considered before 3rd of February, 2011, and thereafter the  Cadre Review proposal will be finalised. The Association will do the needful in this regard.

Further developments on the matter will be intimated in due course.

AICESTMOA

Invitation for Meeting on Cadre Restructuring

Pune, the 12th January, 2011.

Dear Members,

The Association is in receipt of the Office Memorandum, regarding the meeting convened by the Board to meet the representatives of Officers and Staff associations/federations and discuss their demands on cadre restructuring. As stated earlier, the meeting is scheduled on 18th January, 2011. The Leadership has made necessary arrangements to participate in the meeting and raise the demands already submitted to the Board. It is further informed that only the National leaders will be participating in the said meeting. A copy of the OM is placed below for information.

Comradely Yours

THOMAS MONY.

CADRE RESTRUCTURING - UPDATE

Pune, 09.01.2011

Dear Members,

Greetings to you all once again on the occassion of the New Year! May this New Year bring with it many more good things and fulfill the wishes and all our goals during the Year.

This is to inform that the Constituent Associations of the Joint Action Committee had submitted a letter to the Chairman, CBEC, seeking an appointment with him to discuss the Cadre Restructuring Proposals. On consideration of the same, it has now been informed that a meeting has been convened by the Board with all the Service Associations to be chaired by the Hon'ble Chairman on the 18th of January, 2011. The Association is making necessary arrangements to participate in the meeting.

A legible (typed) copy of the said letter is available on the following link.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B_wcN1t0C9s3ODBhODNkNDctM2Q2NC00NTk0LWI0OGUtM2EwYzgxYWFmYTdh&hl=en&authkey=CPb9ts8D

Comradely Yours,
Thomas Mony,
Secretary General.