Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Demand of Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- for Inspector Posts rejected by MOF again.

Copy of letter of Shri Permanand posted in "Postal Inspectors Blog for Pay hike" is reproduced below for information.

Dear Friends,

It is really sad to intimate that Department of Expenditure, MOF has rejected the demand for grade pay of Rs.4600 to Inspector (Posts) even after the full justification given by Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench in its order dated 18.10.2011 in OA No. 381/2010 and the good viable proposal submitted by DoP. The official rejection letter is yet to be received. However, note sheet of the relevant file has been received under RTI from DoP.

2. As available in the note sheets (17/N), the DoP had sent the following proposal with concurrence of IFW and approval of Secretary (Posts) to Department of Expenditure, MOF:

“The hierarchical difference i.e non-availability of intermediary cadre like Assistant Superintendent Posts in CBDT/CBEC and CSS can be resolved by allowing Grade Pay of Rs.4600 to Inspector Posts in Department of Posts (a GCS Group B Non-Gazetted Post) and retaining its promotional cadre of Assistant Superintendent Posts (a GCS Group B Gazetted Post) also in the identical Grade Pay of Rs.4600. In the Accounts cadre, the cadre of Accounts Officer is in Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-2. Its promotional post of Senior Accounts Officer is in Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-3 & its further promotional post of ACAO also in Grade Pay of Rs.5400 in PB-3. This would not thereby involve upgradation in Grade Pays of Assistant Superintendent Posts and PS Group B.”

3. MOF has rejected the demand for Grade pay of Rs.4600 for Inspector (Posts) without examining the above proposal, and stated the following (written in red colour):

(I) There was no specific recommendation in para 7.6.14 to the effect that Inspector Post are granted Pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500.


(It seems that MOF has not gone through the para 26 of Hon’ble CAT order dated 19.10.2011 in OA No. 381/2010, wherein the import of the observation of the Pay Commission has been clearly mentioned. Moreover, as mentioned in para 7.6.14 of 6thCPC report “…………With this upgradation, Inspector (Posts) shall come to lie in an identical pay as that of their promotional post of Assistant Superintendent (Posts) [ASPOs]. ASPOs shall, accordingly, be placed in the next higher pay scale of Rs.7450-11500………….”)

(II) Inspectors in CBEC/CBDT were placed in the scale of Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f 21.04.2004 i.e prior to 6th CPC by an executive order of the Govt. keeping in view of their parity with Inspectors of CBI/IB and court directions of CAT Jabalpur Bench. Further, Asstts. Of CSS have also been granted the pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f 15.09.2006 on the basis of their traditional parity with Inspectors CBEC/CBDT. Further, it was the conscious decision of the Govt. to keep Asstts. In CSS/Inspector and analogous post in CBEC/CBDT in the higher pre-revised scale i.e Rs.7450-11500/- considering their pre-revising relativities, hierarchical structure, mode of recruitment etc. The mode of recruitment was not the only criteria as contended by the applicants in the OA. In various cases, Apex Court also opined that wholesale identity between two groups would involve matters relating to nature of work, educational qualification, mode of recruitment, experience etc.

(The details of the basis for increase from Rs.5500-9000 to Rs.6500- 10500 for Inspectors CBEC/CBDT w.e.f 21.04.2004 and for Assistants in CSS w.e.f 15.09.2006 along with the note sheet of the relevant file have been asked from MOF under RTI. Also, Documents available for establishing the “Traditional Parity” / wholesale identity between Inspectors CBEC/CBDT and Assistants in CSS have asked. MOF Response is awaited. Further, wholesale identity should be decided by the Expert body i.e Pay Commission. 5th & 6th CPC had rightly did so for Inspector (Posts) and granted equal pay scale/ grade pay to that of Inspectors CBDT/CBEC and Assistants in CSS. Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal v. West Bengal Minimum Wages Inspectors Association, (2010) 5 SCC 225 wherein it has been stated as under:-

"23. It is now well settled that parity cannot be claimed merely on the basis that earlier the subject post and the reference category posts were carrying the same scale of pay. In fact, one of the functions of the Pay Commission is to identify the posts which deserve a higher scale of pay than what was earlier being enjoyed with reference to their duties and responsibilities, and extend such higher scale to those categories of posts.")

(III) It is pertinent to mention here that the OM dated 13.11.2009 and 16.11.2009 came into existence as a result of demand from various quarters of Govt. seeking upgradation for pre-revised scale of Rs.6500-10500 due to functional requirement. However, hierarchical structure of Inspector Posts does not demand such functional requirement, as post of ASP in the scale of Pay of Rs.9300-34800 GP of Rs.4600/- PB-2 corresponding to the pre-revised scale of Rs.7450-11500 still exists, even after implementation of 6th CPC.

(Regarding the hierarchical differences, a viable proposal was submitted by DoP wherein it was clearly mentioned that the hierarchical difference i.e. non-availability of intermediary cadre like Assistant Superintendent Posts in CBDT/CBEC and CSS can be resolved by allowing Grade Pay of Rs.4600 to Inspector Posts in Department of Posts (a GCS Group B Non-Gazetted Post) and retaining its promotional cadre of Assistant Superintendent Posts (a GCS Group B Gazetted Post) also in the identical Grade Pay of Rs.4600. The example of AO, Sr. AO & ACAO was also given in the proposal. But, MOF overlooked the same.)

(IV) Since Inspector Post have come in the Pay Scale of Rs.9300-3400 GP of Rs.4200/- PB-2 corresponding to pre-revised scale of Rs.6500-10500, the hierarchical posts in their cadre i.e ASP and SP had to be placed in the GP OF Rs.4600/- and Rs.4800/- respectively to maintain the relativity in the cadre. Moreover, the scale of other similarly placed posts i.e Asstt. Manager and Manager in mail Motor Service were also placed in the GP of Rs.4600/- and Rs.4800/- respectively. In case the demand of Inspector Posts for GP of Rs.4600/- is accepted, it will have cascading effect involving huge financial implications. Also, the demand for upgradation from similarly placed posts in Mail Motor Service etc. will arise immediately.

(In the proposal, it was clearly mentioned that this would not involve upgradation in Grade Pays of Assistant Superintendent Posts and PS Group B. Asst. Manager & Manager, Mail Motor Service are placed in the Grade pay of Rs.4600 & Rs.4800 respectively. Hence the imagination of MOF that In case the demand of Inspector Posts for GP of Rs.4600/- is accepted, the demand for upgradation from similarly placed posts in Mail Motor Service etc. will arise immediately, is hypothetical. Further, while submitting the proposal, DoP had given the figures for financial implications and for Inspector (posts), it is Rs. 1.01 crores only. Hence the ground that in case the demand of Inspector Posts for GP of Rs.4600/- is accepted, it will have cascading effect involving huge financial implications, does not hold any ground.)

(V) The duties and responsibilities assigned to Assistant of CSS and Inspector, CBDT/CBEC are quite different from Inspector (Posts). There is no comparison between Assistants CSS & Inspector CBDT/CBEC and Inspector (Posts). They are performing different duties in their respective cadres.

(As a matter of fact, the duties and responsibilities assigned to different cadres in different Department / Ministries will be different and after comparison only, specific pay scale/grade pay is given to particular cadres by the expert bodies i.e Pay Commission. The details regarding comparison of “Duties & Responsibilities” of Inspectors CBDT/CBEC and Inspector (Posts) have been asked from MOF under RTI.
Further, Para 30 of CAT Ernakulam Bench Order dated 19.10.2011 in OA No. 381/10 reproduced below:
“This Tribunal need not have to labour more to arrive at the finding that the functional responsibilities of the Inspector (Posts) are certainly onerous and evidently, it is on the basis of adequate justification that the successive Pay Commissions have appreciated the need to revise the pay scale of Inspector (Posts).”

4. It is very much clear from the grounds given by MOF that they were pre-determined not to allow Grade Pay of Rs.4600 to Inspector Posts in any case and they simply overlooked the full justification given by the Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench and also the good viable proposal given by DoP. It can also be seen that the matter was disposed first time at the level of Jt. Secretary even after the clear instruction from Hon’ble CAT to re-look in the matter at the level of Secretary. It is also evident form the notings of the DoP at 28/N, which is reproduced below:
“Views taken by Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure contains neither any details of examination of the proposal made by this Department on 17/N nor reasoning based on which the proposal was admitted/rejected.”

5. Accordingly the file was re-referred to the Department of Expenditure, MOF. However, Department of Expenditure, MOF returned the file stating that:


“The matter has been examined in this Deptt. and AM is advised to issue a reasoned speaking order rejecting the claim of the applicants on the grounds indicated in U.O note dated 28.05.2012.
This issues with the approval of Finance (Secretary).”

6. Our case for upgradation of Grade pay of Inspector (Posts) to Rs.4600 under OA No. 381/2010, had already been considered by Hon’ble CAT Ernakulam Bench within the parameters prescribed by the Apex Court in respect of the powers of the Tribunal in dealing with the fixation of Pay scale and had viewd that :

(a) The decision of the Ministry of Finance does not appear to have taken into account the clear recommendation of the Sixth Pay Commission nor for that matter the full justifications given by the Department of Posts.

(b) The Tribunal is of the considered view that there is no justification in denying the Inspector (Posts) the higher Grade Pay of Rs 4600 when the same is admissible to Inspectors of other Departments with whom parity has been established by the very Sixth Pay Commission vide its report at para 7.6.14 extracted above. The Ministry of Finance has to have a re-look in the matter dispassionately at the level of Secretary keeping in view the aforesaid discussion.

7. From the documents received under RTI, the rejection of our demand of Grade pay of Rs.4600 for Inspector (Posts) has been disclosed. However, we may wait for the official rejection letter. Further, we wish to move to High Court at the earliest, to get Justice.

Views and comments are requested, so that we may move further.

Thanks.
Permanand

23 comments:

  1. The duties and responsibilities of Inspector Post now a days also has to do multitasking job in different field and overburden if anybody wants to do his job seriously and sincerity and denial of Grade Pay for Rs4600/- at par with others is cause injustice to the cadre.So association should take necessary step to bring justice to our cadre.It is not only a monetary beneficial but also for the pride of the cadre

    ReplyDelete
  2. We are with Permanand, But will association fight with Permanand to get the justice for Inspector Posts at least this time

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dear Parmanand Ji,
    Efforts made by your team is highly appreciable. We are not going to accept any defeat without actual defeat. We contacted our batchmates, seniors and new comers they all are in the same opinion that we are with you with 'Tan Man and Dhan'.Sir, keep going... JAI GANPATI BAPPA

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sir, as you said, MOF is not ready to grant any extra pay to Inspector Posts. People in Departments like AG they are enjoying just like anything without any work. In India, this is not new thing. Anyway, let us fight.

    ReplyDelete
  5. we stand with you in this unfair deal, which we all are facing. Go ahead with sport mans spirit.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear Permanand,
    Now this matter is contempt of court.so,all of u may be move 4 that and i also request our GS for financial help.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Analysis of MOF grounds by Mr. Permanand clearly shows that MOF is adamant on the issue. For their own Department, MOF's treatment is different, whereas with other Department their treatment is "SAUTELA". We also should try to get more & more connected documents from MOF to expose them and to strengthen our case before Hon'ble High Court.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dear Sir,

    1. The CAT Earnakulam has also justified the work by giving brief details of nature of work done by Inspector Posts and also compared with the other posts like translator, etc.

    2. All the upgradations have been done in 2004 & 2006. At the time of initial advertisement published by SSC in 2003 for Inspector Post/Inspector CBDT/Assistant in CSS, All the posts are in the same pay scal i.e. 5500-9000.

    3. As per my knowledge, the CAT has also been approached in 2006 at time of upgradation of pay Scale of Assistants, but the matter was referred to 6th CPC and 6th CPC established parity.

    4. considering the facts, it is right decision to approach High Court as early as possible. Hope association will support by all way.

    Manish, IP Bihar Circle

    ReplyDelete
  9. WE SHOULD APPROACH HON'BLE HIGH COURT AT THE EARLIEST

    ReplyDelete
  10. lets fight for the genuine demand again.....
    Hope all members are united this time....

    Khilesh Kumar Patle
    SDI(P) Ambikapur(CG)





    ReplyDelete
  11. From:- Uttam Kumar Singh, IPOs, Jharkhand Circle.

    Dear Parmanand G,
    This is the time to be more aggressive. We must go to High Court to strengthen our case. This case should now be pursued at the level of our association. Now our association will be tested and I hope our association will accept this task blissfully.

    ReplyDelete
  12. First step is always appreciable ,and you did that. Now its the time of team mates to support you till the victory. It is injustice to the cadre stating that we are not at par with others . The responsibility and commitment towards this cadre demands so much attention and much much time which always cause less family attention. One of our masters in PTC told that Inspectors should have thousands of eyes and hands to complete the sub-divisional task perfectly. We are with you and support in all the ways to get justice from High Court. Please...be directed.

    ReplyDelete
  13. MINISTRY OF FINANCE IS NOT RESPONDING WITHOUT EXAMINING THE FACT GIVEN IN THE PROPOSAL BY DOP. AND GIVING ONE SIDED DECISION. IT IS NOT JUSTICE IN SPITE OF THE CLEAR INDICATION FROM THE SIXTH PAY COMMISSION AND RESPECTED EARNACULM BENCH. IT IS ALSO CONTEMPT OF COURT . OUR ASSOCIATION SHOULD DEFINITELY IN HIGH COURT WITH MORE ENTHUSIASM AND GIVE IT PART TO CONVINCE THE HIGH COURT WITH FACT AND GET JUSTICE. NOW IT IS A QUESTION OF OUR PRIDE . MOF CAN NOT BE THE DECISIVE AUTHORITY FOR US. MOF HAS CLEAR ITS INSPECTORS GRADE PAY WITHOUT ANY RESISTANCE AND NOW WHEN WE ARE GIVEN JUSTICE FORM ERANACULAM BENCH AND SIXTH PAY COMMISSION WHY IT IS BEING A HURDLE

    ReplyDelete
  14. My support is with you Permanandji. We all have to fight together to get justice.

    ReplyDelete
  15. sir,
    Please move to High court without any further delay on the issue as nothing is going to come automatically after seeing the attitude the MoF.
    Thanks sir

    ReplyDelete
  16. Dear Permanand sir,
    Now the strength of our fight for our right,is to be examined.My support is with you. please move ahead, we are with you. we may come forward with financial assistance to continue our fight ,if required.

    ReplyDelete
  17. DEAR PERMANAND SIR,
    PLEASE MOVE AHEAD, IT IS TIME TO FIGHT NOT JUST FOR INCREASING GP BUT ALSO FOR OUR RESPECT. WE HAVE TO PROVE THAT WE NOT INFERIOR THAN SOME OTHER INSPECTORS (CBDT/CBEC). I AM WITH YOU.

    THANKS SIR !

    ReplyDelete
  18. What may be the outcome in high court?
    Obviously, the decision will be in our favour.
    Will the adament and blind eyed
    MOF will accept its defeat. Definitely not, it will further move to Supreme court to prove its fair action ( unfair) By the time next pay commission woud have consituted and we have to turn our faces towards seventh pay commission similar to the position what happened in Bangalore CAT judgement. So in addition to moving to High court, the association has to derive other means of pressurising MOF.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Sir,

    MOF has totally ignored CAT Ernakulam's decision , we need to perhaps check whether the same was mentioned or was the order copy enclosed by DOP in its proposal file or not. What MOF is doing is a contempt of court order . When court has already passed order discussing & keeping in view all the facets , then how can the justice be denied? It was no more a proposal but an order this time.

    Along with moving to higher court the above point must also be got cleared as to the file has simply been rejected by some bigheads without having an actual look on CAT's order, otherwise again court proceedings will take time & if MOF will reject citing some vague reasons like this , what will be the use of hardwork?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Bhola Singh, IP Addanki Sub DivisionSeptember 21, 2012 at 8:41 PM

    main akela hi chala tha janib-e manzil magaar,
    log sath aate gaye aur karwan banta gaya..........


    Permanand Jee,
    We all should fight together for one cause for the sake of pride and financial parity of our cadre.


    HUM SAB AAPKE SAATH HAIN.


    BHOLA SINGH
    IP ADDANKI

    ReplyDelete
  21. The nature of work done by Inspector Posts is very ''AJEEB''. In the grade pay of 4200 the field work look like ''ASAMBHAV''. I am with you with my all efforts in this fight of justice

    ReplyDelete
  22. Dear GS,

    One week has gone but upto now association has not cleared/uploaded its stand. as CWC Meeting at Shirdi is going to held on 12th and 13th of october i.e. a long period from now. it is requested to please upload the stand to be taken by Association in this case.

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  23. we are going to make new association for direct IP because we all understand that nobody and not a single association is with us. All the circle heads belongs with promote IP and they are not willing to fight for justice. They think that if the case will be final all the direct IP will get all the benefits.Thats why they are not taking so much interest.

    ReplyDelete