Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Sad News…. Demand for Grade pay of Rs.4600 for Inspector (Posts) rejected by MOF………Ready for further legal battle


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, as per information received  from DoP under RTI, the issue regarding grant of Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- to Inspector (Posts) was examined and forwarded to Ministry of Finanace and the claim was finally rejected under MOF, D/o Expenditure UO Note No. 6(7)/E.III(B)/2010 dated 24.08.2012.The note sheet of the relevant file has also 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 6th CPC 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 been 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

42 comments:

  1. Bhola Singh, IP AddankiSeptember 18, 2012 at 9:19 AM

    Dear Sir,

    We are ready to go upto any extent for getting Grade Pay of 4600/- for Inspector Posts


    Thanks
    Bhola Singh

    ReplyDelete
  2. 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
  3. From:- Uttam Kumar Singh, IPO, Jharkhand Circle.

    Dear Parmanand G,
    This is the time to be more aggressive. We must go to High Court to strengthen our case.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sad NEWS.....But we will fight to get Justice.
    Keep on...... Permanandji


    Khilesh Kumar Patle
    SDI (P) Ambikapur (CG)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dear Sir
    The AM had recommended implementation of Hon'ble CAT order judging various factors including functional requirements.The concerned people in MOF had acted just like super-judge in discarding the recommendation. Whether they have any statutory overridding powers in discarding the case over AM. Can they competent to act as expert body. This is a fit inter-ministerial dispute and can be taken up by AM for quick redressal at proper forum. Otherwise our pitiable condition in overall govt. functioning will be exposed and will act as de-motivator
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  6. We must fight for the justice not only in legal way but also at by various other ways. If we want we can paralyse the functioning of department of post. we must show our strength now. The inspectors in CBDT didnt got it without agitation. Let us see whats our associations veiw on this.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dear Permanand ji

    At one place in CAT jabalpur decision has been mentioned in noting to compare the Inspector of CBDT and Inspector CBI . Kindly go though this judgement . Permanand ji please act fast now. Consult with GS of IP/ASP asssiciation and file contempt as well as High Court Case in this month. We have got the outcome of case referred to MOF in one year that too through RTI. So please hurry up.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Pankaj Kumar, SDI (P)September 20, 2012 at 6:45 AM

    I am with u sir, for any assistance I am ready at any time. U never think that nobody is with u.

    ReplyDelete
  9. High time again to seek recourse to legal remedy.

    Rattan Kumar, IP, Punalur Sub Dn

    ReplyDelete
  10. Respected sir,
    Really time has come to go any extent to get justice. It's our right and we will leave no stone unturned to get that. We are always with you sir, We must move to the High Court.

    ReplyDelete
  11. dear sir,
    this is the time to be unite and continue for justice. now the matter is not only to get GP but it is more for our cadre`s respect . Mof understands that IPOs are inferior than some other inspector`s cadre (CBDT&CBEC).please move ahead, we are with you.

    ReplyDelete
  12. sir, please move contempt case

    ReplyDelete
  13. what may be outcome of High court case?

    Obviously, the judgement will be in our favour.

    will MOF accept its defeat? Definitely not, it will further move to supreme court to prove its fair attitude ( unfair ). By the time, seventh pay commission would have constituted and we will be asked to turn our faces towards the outcome of seventh pay commission report similar to the case what happened after Bangalore CAT judgement. In addition to legal resort in High court, the association should derive other plans of pressurising MOF.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Sir,
    I am with you hundred percent. We are not demanding something that is unreasonable. And what is rightfully ours we will fight for it. We should not be fighting for this but now we are forced to do it. It is time that we show to them that they cannot give step-motherly treatment and get away with it.

    Thank you for what you have done so far all IPs

    ReplyDelete
  15. Ranjeet Kumar ChaudharySeptember 21, 2012 at 6:52 AM

    Parmanand ji,
    We are contacting to IPs/ASPs of AP circle and other circles directly or through friends about the injustice made by MoF on the issue. It is opined by all the official contacted so far that we should move to High Court immediately for the sake of justice. Sir, we all are with your team with full co-operation by all means. 'The best way out of a difficulty is through it'..Truth must prevail'.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Saroj Kumar Singh, IP Chittoor South, APSeptember 21, 2012 at 11:33 PM

    Sir,
    Please go ahead we are with you.. Jai HO

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

    Dear Parmanand G,
    If you need any financial help to move ahead then kindly write about it on this blog and also mention means by which it can be sent to you, so that we can contribute financially. We must go to High court and I think that we should also file a contempt case against MOF. We should not delay any more.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Dear Permanadjee its really appreciable that we have won the CAT case due to your sincere effort and the news about declanation by MOF is really Sad.But we should continue our fight and go ahed immediately with High court. By your blog post it seems that MOF has simply declined our case and MOF is adamant on not to give GP 4600. So with the consultaion of our Assosition we should go ahed instead of left half way. We all r with u.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Gourish Jena, SDIP, Chintapalli Sub Division.September 22, 2012 at 7:56 AM

    Sir,
    We have been denied justice. We deserve it. Its is our right. I think this has happened due to differences among us only. I think, all this happened due to cheap thinking and narrow mindedness of some people among us only. They cannot withstand IP's getting 4600 GP. This weakness among us has given space to others to do injustice to us on silly grounds. Some of us don't want to give up the ego they bear. It is time to rethink, reunite, restructure ourselves if needed and restart with renewed strength. We are definitely going to win.
    I have regards for you and your team who have been fighting for all.I extend my sincere support to you and your team. We are ready to share whatever difficulty comes, financial or any thing else. But we must so that we are not inferior to any body and not destined to remain inferior whole life.
    I also request all my friend to come forward to help ourselves. Because after all, at the end of struggle, benefit will be ours only.
    Together we can and we will make a difference.

    ReplyDelete
  20. We've been denied the justice, so I am with u Permanand Sir in this fight for justice. Plz move ahead and make us aware of further movement n for our support/help.

    ReplyDelete
  21. We've been denied the justice, so I am with u Permanand Sir in this fight for justice. Plz move ahead and make us aware of further movement n for our support/help.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Sir,
    The reasons and justifications mentioned in the Red lines by Mr Parmanand are perfect. Some RTI information has been sought by him. Surely, he is much nearer to the subject and his Counsel has command over the subject. It would be better if Contempt at Ernakulam Bench be initiated by him or Writ before High Court of its jurisdiction. Filing of Writ before Hon'ble High Court would linger on the case, therefore, it is better to initiate Contempt Proceedings against Secretary Finance and Secretary DOP.

    September 20, 2012 8:40 AM
    Source : Kaushah Kumar Singh, Punjab Circle

    ReplyDelete
  23. Sir,
    The reasons and justifications mentioned in the Red lines by Mr Parmanand are perfect. Some RTI information has been sought by him. Surely, he is much nearer to the subject and his Counsel has command over the subject. It would be better if Contempt at Ernakulam Bench be initiated by him or Writ before High Court of its jurisdiction. Filing of Writ before Hon'ble High Court would linger on the case, therefore, it is better to initiate Contempt Proceedings against Secretary Finance and Secretary DOP.

    September 20, 2012 8:40 AM
    Source: Balbir Singh Kaushal, Punjab Circle

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sir ,

    It will be better to file a contempt petition as soon as possible . MOF is trying to gain time by giving such silly & unthoughtful reasons so that they get more time to develop some concrete reasons , which they can not do But still justice delayed is justice denied . Consult the lawyer immediately & please inform through blog in what way we people may help you.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Sir
    Please take up the case with GS. Immediate CWC meeting be conducted. 15 days time may be given to govt. One delegation must visit Communication Minister and convicingly place our genuine small demand. Otherwise, all IP and ASP must go on casual leave from 16th day onwards.
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  26. Dear sir,
    i am agree with Bhola singh, we are ready to go upto any extent for getting Grade pay of 46000/- for inspector posts, if needed we will leave the association and we will make ours seperate association for the benefits of Inspector..
    thanks
    Amit Kumar
    Araku IP

    ReplyDelete
  27. It is right time to act aggressively. The Association is reluctant towards IPs well fare. FM has got a point for rejection (non merger of IP ASP).

    Association did not revealed its stand on the issue so far. All like minded may think for seperate Association.

    Primerily we should support Sri Permananda in all respect.

    Permanandaji please go ahead to approach HC. Provide your account details or open a new account so that all can remit amount as financial assistance. Please think on these lines.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Dear Parmanand Jee,

    It is the time to take our fight to next step. As the matter is under consultation with our advocate. Please inform us about what advise he has given so that we can inform our members for full support from all sides.
    I am with you as I was at the time of filing of writ at Ernakulam Bench.

    Sanjeev Kumar
    ASP

    ReplyDelete
  29. Bhola Singh, IP AddankiSeptember 26, 2012 at 8:14 AM

    Dear Parmanand Sir,

    Please intimate about the advice given by our advocate and any further progress on the case. we are eagerly waiting for your reply.

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  30. Bhola Singh, IP AddankiSeptember 26, 2012 at 8:14 AM

    Dear Parmanand Sir,

    Please intimate about the advice given by our advocate and any further progress on the case. we are eagerly waiting for your reply.

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  31. Bhola Singh, IP AddankiSeptember 26, 2012 at 8:14 AM

    Dear Parmanand Sir,

    Please intimate about the advice given by our advocate and any further progress on the case. we are eagerly waiting for your reply.

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  32. I'm with u sir, just move on to the next step. I'm eagerly waiting for your further movement. If u need any kind of assistance we are always ready.
    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  33. Sir, we will win this battle surely please go ahead we r with u....

    ReplyDelete
  34. Dear Friend,

    What Anonymous said is right our association is not concern about the welfare of IP. Our relactance towards merger has resulted in this rejection and dont know why our associations official stand has not been cleared yet

    ReplyDelete
  35. Dear Permanand,
    All IP & most of ASPOs in Maharashtra Circle mwith u. We will win battile. File both contemp case as well as case in Hihgh court against narrow minded peoples /officers who apply their own ill mind. Even Talibans decision making /knowledge of law is better than those who are involved in rejecting GP of 4600/- for IPOs.We are being forced to follow the path of destruction. The path of destruction is folled by those who are at one or another time denied justice. Where is justice in our case?We got justice through CAT but denied by ill peoples having some mental imnbalance or lack of knowledge. Now question is whether Finance secretary is above CAT? If so what is use of filling injustice cases in CAT? The existence of CAT is in danger zone by denial of CAT instruction by Finace secretary.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Sir
    We are eager to know the development. What is the stand of our department over rejection by MOF. MOF created functional justification stand for counterparts. Whether DOP didn't consider the same before recommending. Whether Hon'ble CAT omitted to look into this counter by MOF before passing judgement. Whether DOP helplessly accepts the command or refers the case to nodal ministry,cabinet body, it is important. Whether govt. accepts the supremacy of MOF in isolation in interpreting law on its behalf. Whether Govt. is committed in legal battle and finding solution of the case only in High Court ot Supreme Court,or there is any other easy solution.When Association people are going to meet central ministers to convince the case. Can we not lodge immediate protest and go slow in various RFD targets and other targets in collective manner.Can govt. achieve in its mission of transforming DOP and making it a vibrant public-centered organ by dissatisfying one important group having level-playing role. Does the biggest democratic govt. of India publicly promote discrimination by putting forth artificial stand.
    All the cadre members may be asked to common protest letter by email to PMO and Finance Minister, Communication Minister, draft protest letter may be placed in association blog. All these actions including any other may be examined immediately. WE URGENTLY NEED JUSTICE
    Thanking all

    ReplyDelete
  37. My dear friends,

    till the useless GAZETTED STATUS is their for the use less ASPOs in our department, we cannot get the 4600 grade pay. The direct recuritees are bothered about the 4600 grade pay but the promotives will never bother and the use less IP unions all over india will never bother. It is impossible to get till the promovtives exist in this department

    ReplyDelete
  38. Dear Anonymous

    1. I agree with comments of anonymous posted 0n 29 Sep 2012 at 10.13 AM . As you said all member should sent emails to Fin Min . Communication Min , Finance Secretary MOF , Expenditure Secretary MOF and Secretary DOP

    sk
    Ponjab circle

    ReplyDelete
  39. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Dear Permanand ji

    1. I request you to update the present postion and latest viewpoint .


    SK
    ASP
    Punjab Circle

    ReplyDelete
  41. pankaj kumar, SDI SonpurOctober 9, 2012 at 8:12 AM

    please update current position of the case. If any assistance you can say any time. without any fail we will be there. so please sir move ahead.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Sir
    Is there any strategy set forth in next CWC by leaders or it is just another pleasant get-together at our cost.
    Members expect some focussed action for betterment like GP hike, cadre review/upgradation suiting present day market requirement

    ReplyDelete