Association Writes to Department on Postmaster Cadre

No. CHQ/IPASP/PMC/2010 Dated: 23.12.2010


To
Ms. Radhika Doraiswamy
Director General
Department of Posts
Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg
New Delhi-110001

Sub: Introduction of Postmaster Cadre in Postal Wing.

Ref: Postal Directorate No. 4-17/2008-SPB-II dated 22nd November, 2010

Respected Madam,

The Department has issued the above notification introducing Postmaster cadre in Postal Wing. At the outset, we wish to place on record that we are not against to the introduction of Postmaster’s cadre but seek certain clarifications in the interest of our cadre and Department. The following are the few points which require immediate kind attention of the Department

It is perceived from the said notification that posts for different categories in the hierarchy are to be carved out only from the General Line posts and as such IP Line cadre should not have any cascading effect.

1. In view of para 5(VI) & 5(VII) of said notification, it is understood that all 116 posts of Sr. Postmaster grade presently held by IP Line officials are to be filled partly from HSG-I (General Line) and partly from IP Line officials. The officials in PS Gr.”B” & Sr. Postmaster grade would be eligible for induction in IPoS, Group “A” on the basis of a consolidated eligibility list. Both these paras of the notification are in gross violation of equality provided under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution as different parameters have been adopted for promotion to Sr. Postmaster from HSG-I which is on the basis of promotion on the one side and IP Line which is through LDCE on the other side.

2. Furthermore, the demand of other trade unions to fill up 100% posts of Sr. Postmasters and Chief Postmasters only from officials of Postmaster cadre (HSG I General Line) is baseless and hence categorically refuted.

3. This Association would like to recall that hitherto also there were two separate cadres i.e., Postmaster Group B and Postal Superintendent Group B which were merged to form composite cadre called PSS Group “B”. Due to unification of two cadres, the General Line officials were allowed to share 6% of the total posts worked out after merger. In this regard, Gazette notification was issued codifying the recruitment rules and subsequently LDCE was introduced for 25% of the vacancies out of which General Line officials still enjoying the share of 6%.

4. Apparently the new proposal is only attempt to revive old pattern viz. Postmaster Group B and Postal Superintendent Group ‘B’ as two independent cadres. This whole process of notifying the introduction of separate cadre of Postmaster has been done by the Department without consulting our Association. Resultantly, there is resentment and confusion in the Inspector, Posts cadre which is otherwise also directly or indirectly affecting the efficiency of the Department.

5. Now, since Directorate has issued notification so it would be only fit and proper if no further share from 649 posts presently held for promotion by non selection against 75% quota is allowed. However, Department may fill up 75% Sr. Postmaster posts from 165 (19% of total 866 PSS Group "B") posts presently allotted for promotion by LDCE for IPs and 25% of 52 (6% of 866) posts presently kept reserved for promotion for General Line officials. In this event, even Department will not have to call for options from IP Line officials working in PS Group "B" cadre and they can be easily adjusted and posted as Sr. Postmaster on 116 posts for which Department is also very much inclined.

6. 25% of vacancies in Senor Postmaster grade have been earmarked for HSG I (General Line) officials through promotion. Hence, recruitment rules of PS Group B cadre may be modified and provision may be made in the recruitment rules of PS Group B that 6% of total posts to be filled on the basis of same Departmental examination from General Line officials with 5 years regular service in LSG and above shall be reduced to the extent of number of posts occupied by the General Line officials in Senior Postmaster grade in Postmaster cadre.

7. In some Circles, Chief PMsG have identified posts of HSG I of IP Line for Postmaster Grade III which is in violation of the instructions contained in notification ibid. For the present 141 posts of HSG I Postmasters are earmarked for the IP Line officials which are part of promotional avenue for the Inspector, Posts. Order issued by the Department on formulation of Postmaster cadre is silent on the issue as to how these 141 posts will be retained for IP Line. The Association urges the Department to consider this issue and issue orders immediately that these 141 posts of IP Line remain in subordinate capacity in HSG I for IP Line officials.

8. It will be in the betterment of things if a meeting is arranged to discuss the issues concerning Inspector, Posts cadre. Until and unless this is done, the effects will lead to confusion resulting in resentment, frustration in the already depressed and ignored Inspector, Posts cadre.

Yours Sincerely,

(Roop Chand)
General Secretary