Enter Keyword and Search





Saturday, January 23, 2016

IESM LETTER TO RM ON OROP ANOMALIES

with 1 comment
IESM LETTER TO RM ON OROP ANOMALIES

21st January 2016

The Raksha Mantri
South Block, Ministry of Defence
New Delhi

Urgent Need to Rectify Anomalies in OROP
in Govt notification dated 7 Nov 15

Dear Shri Manohar Parrikar ji

Please refer to Govt executive letter dated 26 Feb 14, press release dated 5 Sep 15, Govt notification dated 7 Nov 15 and 14 Dec 15. Please also refer to the statement made by MOS Defense Sh Rao Inderjit Singh in Parliament on 2 Dec in reply to question asked by Sh Rajeev Chandrashekhar regarding implementation of OROP. (All attached)

One Rank One Pension was approved by UPA Govt in budget dated 17 Feb 14 and then by NDA Govt in their budget dated 10 Jun 14. UPA Government issued an executive order dated 26 Feb 14 for the implementation of OROP dues to veterans at the earliest. This was never implemented by the MOD nor a demand note was ever raised. The approved definition of OROP by two Governments is given below.

One Rank One Pension (OROP) implies that uniform pension be paid to the Armed Forces Personnel retiring in the same rankwith the same length of service irrespective of their date of retirement and any future enhancement in the rates of pension to beautomatically passed on to the past pensioners. This implies bridging the gap between the rate of pension of the current pensioners and the past pensioners, and also future enhancements in the rate of pension to be automatically passed on to the past pensioners.

OROP implies that a senior rank soldier should never draw pension less than his junior rank soldier. This cardinal principle is the soul of OROP and must never be violated.

Government issued a notification on 7 Nov 15 for implementing OROP. Government reiterated above-mentioned definition of OROP in the letter but introduced some conditions in the notification that completely destroy the definition approved by two parliaments. These conditions have created four anomalies which completely violates the definition and thereby, the soul of OROP. These anomalies are discussed in detail in succeeding paragraphs.

1) Fixation of Pension on calendar year of 2013 instead of FY of 2014: Fixation of pension as per calendar year 2013 would result in past retirees getting less pension of one increment than the soldier retiring today. This will result in past retirees drawing lesser pensions than present retirees. This will completely destroy definition of OROP approved by two Parliaments and will also result in loss of one increment across the board for past pensioners in perpetuity.

2) Fixation of pension as mean of Min and Max pension: Fixing pension as mean of Min and Max pension of 2013 would result in more anomalies wherein same ranks with same length of service will draw two or more different pensions thus violating the very principle of OROP. This issue was discussed with RM in various meetings and after due deliberations it was decided that accepting highest pension of each rank in the year would meet the requirement as base of pension.

3) Payment wef 1st Jul 14 instead of 1st Apr 14: OROP has been approved in budget of 2014-15 by two parliaments. As per norms of Government, all proposals approved in budget are applicable from 1st April of that FY. In the case of OROP, the Govt had issued specific orders to its applicability wef 1st April 14. Hence implementation date for OROP from 1st July will be against the Parliament approval. Changing the date would result in loss of 3 months emoluments for OROP across the board. However, if OROP implementation date is to be kept as 1st July, then the base pension should also be accepted as per the PPOs of July 2014.
4) Pension Equalisation every five year: Pension equalisation every five year will result in a senior rank soldier drawing lesser pension than a junior rank soldier for five years thus OROP definition will be violated for five years. This will also result in permanent violation of definition as fresh cases will come up every year.

These anomalies will result in lesser pensions to widows, soldiers, NCOs and JCOs than what will be due to them on approval of OROP. This will result in veterans not getting OROP as per approved definition and will create large discontentment across all ranks.

There is a need to have a relook at the pensions of Hon Nb Subedars, Majors and Lt Cols.

a) Some Havildars are granted rank of Hon Naib Subedar in view of their exemplary service. These soldiers are not granted pension of Naib Subedar thus making the Hon rank just ceremonial. It is requested that Hon Naib Subedars should get pension of a Naib Subedar rather than that of a Havildar. Similarly, this must be accepted as a principle and it should be applicable to all Hon ranks in case of NCOs and JCOs.

b) There are only a few Majors as veterans. Moreover no officer is retiring in Major rank now. In the past, officers were promoted to Major rank after completing 13 yrs of service whereas present officers are getting promotion of Lt Col in 13 yrs. It will be justified to grant all pensioners of the rank of Major, minimum pension of Lt Col as they cannot be compared to present retirees as officers are not retiring as Majors any more. Number of such affected officers is not more than 800 and will not cause heavy burden to Govt.

c) Similarly, all pre-2004 retiree Lt Cols should get the minimum pension of full Col. Presently all officers retire in the rank of Colonel hence all Lt Col equivalents should be granted min pension of Colonels.

In view of above you are requested to rectify these anomalies and issue addendum to notification issued on 7 Nov 15 for implementation of OROP. We strongly believe that there will be no requirement of judicial committee for attending to anomalies creeping up in implementation of OROP. Grant of increase in pension in case of honorary ranks and Majors and Lt Col must also be approved as a good will gesture.

This letter is being signed by three major organizations with the approval of more than 200 organizations. List of such organizations is attached.

sd/-
Lt Gen Balbir Singh
Chairman IESL Advisor UFESM

sd/-
Col Inderjit Singh
Chairman AIEWA Chairman IESM

sd/-
Maj Gen Satbir Singh
Chairman UFESM Advisor UFESM

Copy to:
  • Mr Arun Jaitley, Finance Minister, North Block, Finance Ministry, Government of India
  • Mr Jayant Sinha, MoS, Finance, North Block, Finance Ministry, Government of India
  • General Dalbir Singh, PVSM, UYSM, AVSM, VSM, ADC, Chief of Army Staff
  • Air Chief Marshal Arup Raha, PVSM, AVSM, VM, ADC, Chief of the Air Staff & Chairman Chiefs of Staffs Committee (CoSC)
  • Admiral RK Dhowan, PVSM, AVSM, YSM, ADC, Chief of Naval Staff


Source: http://ex-servicemenwelfare.blogspot.in/

Lakhs of Railway Employees participated today in 3 days Protest Programme

with 0 Comment
Lakhs of Railway Employees participated today in 3 days Protest Programme

Lakhs of Railway Employees participated today in 3 days Protest Programme starting from 19.01.2016 to 21.01.2016

On the clarion call of the National Joint Council of Action(NJCA), three day (19th to 21st Jan, 2016) sit-in programme in all the state capital and industrial centers started today, wherein affiliates of All India Railwaymen’s Federation, National Federation of Indian Railwaymen, All India Defence Employees Federation, National Defence Workers Federation, National Federation of Postal Employees, Federation of National Postal Organisation, Confedration of Central Government Employees & Workers participated en mass.

FOR PUBLICATION

New Delhi: 19th January, 2016 – On the clarion call of the National Joint Council of Action(NJCA), three day (19th to 21st Jan, 2016) sit-in programme in all the state capital and industrial centers started today, wherein affiliates of All India Railwaymen’s Federation, National Federation of Indian Railwaymen, All India Defence Employees Federation, National Defence Workers Federation, National Federation of Postal Employees, Federation of National Postal Organisation, Confedration of Central Government Employees & Workers participated en mass.

At Jantar-Mantar, New Delhi, thousands of Central Government Employees, including the Railwaymen started peaceful sustained struggle, demanding redressal of long pending genuine demands of the Central Government employees, removal of retrograde recommendation of the 7th CPC, scrap Natioal Pension System(NPS) and restore Guaranteed Old Pension Scheme, payment of arrear of Productivity Linked Bonus, filling-up of vacancies, stop indiscriminate outsourcing, stop amendment in Labour Laws in favour of corporate, non-creation of new posts for new assets,

On this occasion, a mammoth peaceful rally of thousands of Central Government Employees, including the Railwaymen, was organized at Jantar-Mantar, New Delhi, which was addressed by Shri Shiva Gopal Mishra, Convener, NJCA and General Secretary, AIRF-NRMU, Shri S.K. Tyagi, President/NRMU, Shri B.C. Sharma, General Secretary URMU, Shri R.N. Parashar, General Secretary NFPE, Shri A.K. Kanojia, ITEF, Shri V. Bhattacharjee, Civil Accounts, Shri Giriraj Singh, President NFPE, Shri Devendra Kumar, FNPO, Shri R.K. Singh, General Secretary, Diploma Engineers’ Federation.

Giving stern warning to Government of India, all the speakers said, if their aforementioned demands are not resolved by the end of February 2016, all the Central Government Employees will be compelled to go on “Indefinite Strike” in the month of March 2016.

For General Secretary

Source: AIRF


NATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE DEMANDS OF GRANT OF APPROPRIATE PAY SCALES TO EMPLOYEES AND OFFICERS OF ACCOUNTS AND AUDIT

with 1 comment
NATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE DEMANDS OF GRANT OF APPROPRIATE PAY SCALES TO EMPLOYEES AND OFFICERS OF ACCOUNTS AND AUDIT

JOINT ACTION COMMITTEE OF ACCOUNTS & AUDIT EMPLOYEES & OFFICERS ORGANISATIONS
17/2 – C, P & T Quarters, Kali Bari Marg, New Delhi: – 110001
Email: v.aicaea@mail.com

NATIONAL CONVENTION ON THE DEMANDS OF GRANT OF APPROPRIATE PAY SCALES TO EMPLOYEES AND OFFICERS OF ACCOUNTS AND AUDIT
Dated 10th January 2016
DECLARATION

The representatives of All India Audit & Accounts Association, All India Civil Accounts Employees Association, All India Postal Accounts Employees Association, All India Audit and Accounts Officers Association, All India Association of Pay & Accounts Officers (Civil), All India Civil Accounts Employees Association, Category-II, All India Federation of Divisional Accounts Officers and Divisional Accountants Associations and All India P&T Accounts & Finance Officers Association met in the National Convention on 10th January 2016, Conference Hall, 4th Floor, Nirman Bhawan, CPWD, Koti, Hyderabad.

The Convention, in conformity with the observations given by the National Joint Council of Action of the Central Government Employees, totally rejects the anti-employee recommendations of the 7th CPC. The mutilation of Dr. Aykroyd formula in computation of minimum wages based on the 12-monthly average (ending on 1.7.2015) prices of essential commodities supplied by Labour Bureau at Shimla was a total jugglery on the part of 7thCPC.

The convention considers that, reduction in the wages of women employee who avail CCL, forcing the employees to go on voluntary retirement on completion of 20 years of service in the name of ‘inefficiency’, earmarking ‘very good’ for MACP, withdrawal of all types of short term advances like festival/cycle/ LTC etc, refusal to recommend for scrapping of new Pension scheme, refusal to propose for dispensing with the outsourcing/casualisation/ contractorisation by regularizing the employees engaged through such methods for regular government functions are the most retrograde and the anti-employee recommendations of the 7CPC.

The Convention noted that on the issue of formation of Apex Level Grievance redressal mechanism to the Group B Gazetted Officers and Promotee Group A Officers, even after 67 years of independence, settlement has not taken place mainly because of intransigent and adamant stand of the Ministry of Finance, Government of India. The meeting noted that on all other demands also there is a dilly dallying attitude on the part of authorities resulting in non-settlement.

The Convention congratulates the Central Government employees for observing 27th November 2015 as BLACK DAY by wearing black badges and holding (lunch hour) demonstration at the work place and organizing lunch hour demonstration on 30th December 2015 responding to the call of NJCA, which was duly endorsed by the Confederation.
The Convention endorses the 26 Point Charter of Demands on issues related to the recommendations of the 7th CPC submitted to the Cabinet Secretary on 10th December 2015 by the Staff Side, National Council, JCM and on behalf of the NJCA and also by the CCGGOO to the Government to discuss and settle the demands immediately.

The Convention also endorses the decisions taken by NJCA on organizational actions including the decision of massive Dharna on 19th, 20th and 21st January 2016 and Indefinite Strike in the 1st Week of March 2016 with an appeal to the entirety of the Accounts and Audit Employees and Officers of the country to prepare and participate in all preparatory programmes and the Strike action under the guidance of the local Co-ordination Committees and JCAs.

The Convention takes the opportunity to congratulate all those employees and officers of Indian Audit and Accounts Department and other organised Accounts Cadre who responded the call of Apex JAC i.e. observance of demands day on 15th December 2015 and submission of the demands of the Accounts and Audit Employees and Officers in the form of Resolution to local Head of Offices for onward transmission to higher authorities.

The Convention totally agrees with the following proposals for pay structure for Audit & Accounts Cadres submitted by the apex level JAC to secretary, Department of Expenditure ON 11TH December 2015 seeking mitigation of the injustice done to the accounts and audit cadres by the 7th CPC.

1. Accounts/Audit Assistant: Re-designation of LDC as Accounts/Audit Assistants and grant of replacement scale of PB-1 Grade Pay Rs.2400 — i.e. level 4 pay scale of Table 5.Pay Matrix.

2. Accountant/ Auditor: Correction of error done in implementing 6CPC recommendations by the Government and Grant of replacement pay scale of PB 2 GP 4200 — i.e. level 6 pay scale of Table 5 in Pay Matrix.

3. Senior Accountant /Auditor (SA)/DA: Streamlining the contradictory views and recommendations of 7th CPC and grant of replacement pay scale of PB 2 GP 4600 — i.e. level 7 pay scale of Table 5.Pay Matrix to the Senior Accountant/ Auditor/Accounts Assistants (in Railways).

4. Assistant Accounts Officer/ Assistant Audit Officer/DAO II: Acceptance of Para No. 11.12.140 of the recommendations of 7th CPC and grant of replacement pay of GP 5400(PB-2) to AAOs on completion of four years’ service — i.e. Pay level 9, in the pay matrix.

5. Accounts/Audit/Senior Accounts/Audit Officer/DAO I/Sr. DAO: Grant of following pay scales to the Cadres indicated:
Audit/Accounts Officer/DAO Gr. I GP 6600 PB-3 — i.e.level-11 pay scale of Table 5.Pay Matrix
Sr. Audit/Accounts Officer/Sr. DAO (15%) GP 7600 PB 3 — i.e. level-12 pay scale of Table 5.Pay Matrix.

6. Qualification Pay Granting qualification Pay to all Organized Accounts and IA&AD uniformly in terms of the recommendations of 7 CPC in Para’s 8.9.43, 44 and 45 respectively.

7. Secretarial Staff : Pay scale of secretarial staff working in Account and Audit Organizations may be granted at par with Secretarial staff working in the Ministry.

8. Cadre review : Since no cadre review of Accounts and Audit departments had been done after 1987, the cadre review should immediately be initiated as per the recommendations of 7thCPC.

The Convention further resolves to:
· Reorganize and reactivate the local committees of the Joint Action Committee at every station within 10th February 2016.
· Organize following sustained agitational programmes.
1. Daylong Dharna at all stations by the local JACs on 11th February 2016 
2. Signature campaign – all units/circles/ branches shall deposit the Signatures to their respective Central Headquarters with in 28th February 2016

3. Massive Dharna at Delhi

Source: http://confederationhq.blogspot.in/

Anomalies in Pension of Pre-2006 HAG / S-30 Grade Pensioners of Organised Group ‘A’ Services

with 1 comment
Anomalies in Pension of Pre-2006 HAG / S-30 Grade Pensioners of Organised Group ‘A’ Services

Anomalies in Pension of Pre-2006 HAG / S-30 Grade Pensioners of Organised Group ‘A’ Services – Recommendations of 7th CPC for Pensioners : D.K. Jain’s view

One of our regular and genuine viewer, Shri. D. K. Jain, ADG (Retd.) Military Engineer Services send an exclusive report of anomalies in Pension of Pre-2006 HAG Grade pensioners of Organised Group ‘A’ Services to us and given below for your reference…

Anomalies in Pension of Pre-2006 HAG / S-30 Grade Pensioners of Organised Group ‘A’ Services: 7th CPC Recommendations by D. K. Jain, ADG (Retd.) Military Engineer Services

1. 7th CPC has recommended pension formulation of past civilian employees retired prior to 01.01.2016, based on notional pay of the retiree which will be the minimum of the Level in the Pay Matrix corresponding to the Pay Band and Grade Pay at which he/she retired, duly raised by adding number of increments earned in that Level while in service, at the rate of three percent. The revised pension computed based on these parameters, i.e. minimum of the Level in Pay Matrix and number of increments earned in that Level will not be reasonable and will not impart due justice to pre-2006 HAG / S-30 grade pensioners of Organised Group ‘A’ Services. The pre-2006 pensioners of HAG / S-30 grade retired from Organised Group ‘A’ Services have been put to a great disadvantage compared to the pensioners of junior Levels and compared to post-2006 pensioners of the same Level who retired after getting non functional financial upgradation (NFFU) to the scale of HAG / S-30 grade in 2006 onwards, on implementation of 6th CPC recommendations. The issue needs to be examined in view of following submissions and remedial action taken so that the method of formulation of pension is not unreasonable and discriminatory to the above mentioned class of pensioners.

2. The revised pay scales for all Levels including Level 15 of 7th CPC Pay Matrix are based on implemented pay scale of 6th CPC. Anomaly in any of the implemented pay scales of 6th CPC therefore gets carried forward to the revised scale of that Level in 7th CPC Pay Matrix. Level 15 of the 7th CPC Pay Matrix corresponds to the scale of HAG and S-30 grades of 6th CPC and 5th CPC respectively. In connection with the anomalies in the implemented scale of HAG grade of 6th CPC, the following is relevant.

a. The pay scales of HAG / S-30 and HAG+ / S-31 have always been almost identical. The minimum of both the scales has always been same throughout right upto 5th CPC. The maximum of HAG+ / S-31 has, however, been slightly more than the maximum of HAG / S-30 scale. These scales from 3rd CPC to 5th CPC were as under:
HAG / S-30 HAG+ / S-31
3rd CPC 3000 Fixed 3000 – 3500
4th CPC 7300 – 7600 7300 – 8000
5th CPC 22400 – 24500 22400 – 26000

b. 6th CPC had recommended both these scales in the Pay Band PB 4 with Pay 39200 – 67000 and Grade Pay of 11000 for S-30 and 13000 for S-31. The difference in the recommended scales was 2000 only.

c. Both S-30 and S-31 scales were almost same in 6th CPC recommendations with slight difference of 2000, due to the following reasons:

i. S-30 and S-31 both grades were direct promotional grades from S-29, with the same experience of 3 years in S-29 grade.

ii. Promotion from both S-30 and S-31 to the next grade, i.e. S-32 was admissible directly. The experience required for promotion from either of these grades was same, which was 2 years.

iii. Wherever there was provision for promotion / upgradation from S-30 to S-31 scale, experience required in S-30 grade was nil.

d. During implementation stage of 6th CPC, S-30 and S-31 scales were taken out of PB 4 Pay Band and were placed in separate scales of 67000 – 79000 for S-30 and 75500 – 80000 for S-31 with no grade pay. At this stage, a substantial difference in starting pay of these scales, which was never there earlier, occurred. This had no justification keeping in view submissions at sub-paras (a) to (c) above and was unjust and discriminatory.

e. The pay scales of S-29 and S-30 grades from 4rd CPC to 6th CPC were as under:
SAG / S-29 HAG / S-30
4th CPC 5900 – 7300 7300 – 7600
5th CPC 18400 – 22400 22400 – 24500
6th CPC 37400 – 67000 plus 10000 Grade Pay 67000 – 79000

Upto 5th CPC, the officers of S-29 grade always got less/equal pay than S-30 grade. Consequently retirees from S-29 grade could never get higher pension than S-30 retirees. After implementation of 6th CPC w.e.f. 2006, the scale of S-29 extended upto 77000 (67000 pay in the band + 10000 grade pay) whereas the minimum of S-30 scale was 67000. After 2006, the retirees of S-29 scale, drawing pay above 67000 upto 77000, got pension above 33500 upto 38500, which was more than the admissible pension of 33500 of S-30 scale retirees at the rate of fifty percent of 67000, the minimum 6th CPC pay of the scale. The equation between the pension of S-29 and S-30 scale retirees thus got disturbed for the first time, when lower scale S-29 retirees got more pension than higher scale S-30 retirees, as the minimum pay of 6th CPC scale was less than the maximum of S-29 scale.

3. In view of submissions in para 2 above, the implemented 6th CPC pay scale for S-30 grade was anomalous with reference to both S-31 and S-29 scales. The justified and reasonable minimum pay of S-30 scale of 6th CPC should have been equal to the minimum of S-31 scale and not less than the maximum of S-29 scale which was 77000. Based on this justified minimum pre-revised pay of 77000, the revised pay scale of S-30 grade (Level 15 of Pay Matrix of 7th CPC) should have been 209500 (77000 x 2.72). Accordingly minimum revised pension for retirees of HAG / S-30 grade (Level 15 of Pay Matrix) at the rate of fifty percent of 209500 should be 104750.

4. After 2006, on implementation of 6th CPC scales, not only retirees from S-29 scale, even some of the retirees from S-26 and S-24 scales which were also in Pay Band PB4 and were two to three grades junior retired at pay exceeding 67000 and started drawing pension above 33500 which was more than the pension admissible to S-30 grade retirees. This being highly unreasonable, unjust and discriminative, the pre-2006 retirees from S-30 scale had to approach the courts for legal remedy. 

The issue came up for judicial scrutiny keeping in view the rules and legal position, reasonability, natural justice, constitutional provisions and various judgments of Apex Court on pension admissibility. CAT PB New Delhi in OA No. 937 / 2010 reviewed under RA No. 10 / 2015 between All India S-30 Pensioners Association and U.O.I. and High Court Patna in Civil Writ Case No. 10757 / 2010 between Shri MMP Sinha (a pre-2006 retiree from S-30 grade) and U.O.I., upheld that pre-2006 retirees of S-30 grade getting pension less than post-2006 retirees of lower grades is absolutely unreasonable, unjustified and against natural justice. 

The courts ordered that the pension of pre-2006 S-30 grade retirees should be stepped up to 38500 which the pensioners of lower grade were getting. As per courts’ verdict, based on pre-revised pension of 38500, the revised pension of S-30 retirees will be 98945 (38500 x 2.57). On implementation of 7th CPC scales in accordance with these judgments, the pension entitlement for S-30 grade (Level 15) pensioners has to be not less than what is admissible to post-2016 S-29 (level 14) retirees which is 109100 (fifty percent of 218200). Accordingly the justified revised pension of Level 15 / S-30 retirees should be 109100.

5. Before implementation of 6th CPC, promotions of the officers of Organised Group ‘A’ Service were much delayed as compared to those of IAS. 6th CPC commented that the huge time gap in promotion to various pay scales between Organised Group ‘A’ Services and IAS needed to be minimised and recommended that the officers of Organised Group ‘A’ Services should be given financial upgradation such that a particular batch of these services gets promotional scale of higher grade at various levels when any IAS officer of two year junior batch gets posted to the centre to those grades / levels. Based on these recommendations, from 2006 onwards, 

Non Functional Financial Upgradation (NFFU) was given to the officers of Group ‘A’ Services on non functional basis and the upgraded officers continued to work in the lower grade posts from which they were upgraded though given the promotional scale of the higher post. With NFFU, after 2006, the officers’ pay got upgraded to the next promotional scale much earlier than prior to 2006, when higher scale was available only on regular promotion to higher grade / post.

6. The same method of pension formulation based on increments earned in retirement scale of Level 15 (HAG / S-30) of the Pay Matrix recommended for both, i.e. pre-2006 regular promotees to the grade and to post-2006 promotees who were upgraded to the same scale under NFFU after 2006, is therefore unjust for pre-2006 regular promotees who have been put to a great disadvantage. Pre-2006 promotees to HAG / S-30 grade (Level 15 of Pay Matrix) were promoted to HAG / S-30 grade against the vacant posts in higher grade and the entire period spent in the scale was much less, the maximum being around three years. 

The increment earned by them ranged from nil to two and as per 7th CPC formulation, their notional pay will range from 182200 to 193300 and revised pension will range from 91100 to 96650. As far as post-2006 promotees to HAG / S-30 grade are concerned, they were granted NFFU from SAG / S-29 grade on non functional basis to the higher Level scale tenable by HAG / S-30 grade officers irrespective of availability of posts in that grade in the year in which two years junior IAS officers batch got promotion to that grade. The period spent in the scale by them was around six years during which they were either functioning in the post of SAG / S-29 (Level 14) or could have got regular promotion / higher post for part of the period. 

These officers earned at least five increments in the higher Level unless they retired earlier and the period when they were working in lower posts is also being counted towards the increments earned in Level 15. As per 7th CPC formulation, their notional pay will be at least 211300 in recommended scale at Level 15 of Pay Matrix and pension will be 105650 minimum against the entitlement of 91100 to 96650 for pre-2006 promotees in that Level.

7. All the pensioners promoted before 2006 or upgraded after 2006 to the same Level, i.e. Level 15 form the same class of past pensioners having joined the same service through the same recruitment procedure and having retired at the same Level. Entitlement of different pensions to these two group of officers who are of the same class is unreasonable. The group of post-2006 promotees were not holding higher post for the entire period for which increments are being considered in the formulation of pension. 

The method of 7th CPC pension formulation is therefore discriminatory to pre-2006 promotees to the scale. In the past, the Apex Court has struck down any such unreasonable, unjust and discriminatory pension entitlement of the past pensioners. With a view to provide justice to pre-2006 pensioners of HAG grade (Level 15), their minimum notional pay needs to be stepped up by maximum number of increments drawn by post 2006 officers, upgraded under NFFU to HAG / S-30 scale from the year 2006 onwards, for the period they functioned in the lower post of SAG / S-29 or upto one year of their regular promotion / placement in posts tenable by higher grade of HAG. The revised minimum pension should be according to this stepped up notional pay.

8. In view of foregoing, the reasonable and just minimum pension entitlement of the pensioners of Organised Group ‘A’ Services, who retired from Level 15 (HAG / S-30) works out to be as under on the basis as mentioned against each:

a. 104750. As per minimum pay of 209500 for Level 15 of Pay Matrix based on reasonable and just minimum pay of HAG / S-30 in 6th CPC scale (para 2 and 3 refer).

b. 98945 (38500 x 2.57). As per pension entitlement of the past pensioners retired before 2016 from lower level, i.e. Level 14 of Pay Matrix (SAG / S-29 grade), based on pension of 38500 being drawn by them prior to 2016 (para 4 refers).

c. 109100. As per pension entitlement of the pensioners of lower level, i.e. Level 14 of Pay Matrix (SAG / S-29 grade) retiring in 7th CPC regime, i.e. 2016 onwards (para 4 refers).


“Anomaly in Pension Fixation as per Recommendations of 7th Pay Commission”

Payment of Agency Commission on pension accounts – RBI Circular on 21.1.2016

with 0 Comment
Payment of Agency Commission on pension accounts – RBI Circular on 21.1.2016

Reserve Bank Of India

RBI/2015-16/294
DGBA.GAD.No.2278/31.12.2010/2015-16
January 21,2016
The Chairman & Managing Director/
The Chief Executive Officer
All Agency Banks

Dear Sir/Madam

Payment of Agency Commission on pension accounts

As you may be aware, agency banks are being compensated at Rs.65 per transaction for handling pension computation, payment and related services on behalf of Central and State Governments. As per the norms followed by the Government, a pensioner’s account should not have more than 14 credit transactions in a calendar year attributable to pension and related arrear payments, if any.

2. It has however come to our notice that certain banks are apportioning payment of arrears on account of Dearness Relief (DR) and/or delay in start of pension monthwise, thus, resulting in inflated agency commission claims. It is reiterated that number of commisionable transactions for payment of agency commission on account of pension in a year should not exceed 14. This includes one monthly credit for payment of net pension and a maximum of two per year for payment of arrears on account of increase in DR, if applicable.

3. It is also reiterated that cases involving payment of arrears on account of late start/restart of pension qualifies as a single transaction for claiming of agency commission. In other words, any payment of arrears on account of late start/restart of pension should be effected in a single credit transaction instead of separate monthly credits.

4. Some of the Central Government Departments and State Governments prefer to compute the pension figures on their own and pass them on to banks for payment. Such transactions may be included under non-pension payments, on which agency commission is payable on a turnover basis as per the existing norms (currently at 5.5 paise per Rs. 100/-).

Yours faithfully

(Manish Parashar)
Deputy General Manager

Admissibility of Travelling Allowance (TA) and other expenditure incurred while on training by the Government Servants on probation

with 0 Comment
Admissibility of Travelling Allowance (TA) and other expenditure incurred while on training by the Government Servants on probation

No.T-25014/1/2016-TRG(ISTM Section)
Government of India
Ministry Of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions
Department of Personnel and Training
(Training Division)

Old JNU Campus, Block IV,
New Mehrauli Road, New Delhi – 110 067
Dated: 21st January, 2016

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Admissibility of Travelling Allowance (TA) and other expenditure incurred while on training by the Government Servants on probation.

Institute of Secretariat Training and Management (ISTM) is conducting Foundation Training Course of newly recruited Assistant Section Officers (DR) and Stenographers (DR). ISTM has received number of references from various Ministries and Departments, requesting for clarification, whether the expenditure incurred by trainee Assistants, now re-designated as Assistant Section Officers, for their boarding, lodging etc. while undergoing Foundation Training, under the aegis of ISTM can be reimbursed to them. Representations have also been received from Assistant Section Officers, through their administrative Ministries in this regard.

2. The matter has been examined in consultation with the IFD(MHA) with reference to the Supplementary Rules 164 and instructions issued by the Government from time to time under the aforesaid Rules, which govern claims of Travelling Allowances while on training by probationers. The rule position is clarified as under:-

(i) No Travelling Allowance may be allowed for the onward journey for joining the training institute;
(ii) No Travelling Allowance may be allowed to the probationers while they are taken for outstation for training activity;
(iii) Probationers have to pay boarding /lodging /transport charges, if any, from their pocket.
(iv) No daily allowance may be admissible.
(v) One side TA may be allowed to the participants while reporting for duty in the allocated Ministry/Department on completion of the Training Programme from an outstation Institute, which are located at Hyderabad, Kolkata, Chandigarh, Shimla and Jaipur, where such training is being conducted by ISTM at present, or any other State Training Institute, which may be identified later, outside NCR.

3. All Ministries/Departments of Government of India are, therefore, advised to decide the claims made by Assistant Section Offices in respect of reimbursement of expenditure by them for boarding/lodging and other transport charges during the period of their Foundation Training conducted by ISTM, in accordance with the provisions contained at para (2) of this O.M. In case, any reimbursement has already been made, the same may be recovered immediately.

4. This issues with the concurrence with the IFD(MHA), vide their Dy. No. 299/Fin.II/15, dated 31.12.2015.

sd/-
(O.P.Chawla)
Under Secretary to the Government of India

Authority : www.persmin.gov.in


Facilitation Fee levied by authorized travel agents on Air Tickets

with 0 Comment
Facilitation Fee levied by authorized travel agents on Air Tickets

Principal Controller of Accounts (Ordnance Factories), Kolkata

Important Circular
Office of the PCA (Fys) Kolkata,
10A, S. K. Bose Road, 
Kolkata -700001
Dated: 20/1/2016
NO.2078/AN-VIII/TA/LTC/BL

Sub: Facilitation Fee levied by authorized travel agents on air tickets book on Government account

A copy of Gol, MoF, DoE, OM no. 19024/1/2012-E-IV, dated 5/9/2014 on the above subject along with M/s Balmer Lawrie Co. Ltd. Letter dated 3/11/2015 is forwarded herewith for your information and guidance, please.

sd/
Nabarun Dhar
Jt. C of A.(Fys)

No.19024/1/2012-E-lV
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Departrnent of Expenditure

North Block, New Delhi.
Dated the 5th September, 2014.

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject- Facilitation Fee levied by authorised travel agents on air tickets booked on Government account – Withdrawal regarding.

Attention is invited to this Department’s O.M of even number dated 10th October 2013 wherein the authorized travel agents namely M/s Balmer Lawrie & Company Limited (BLCL) M/s ,Ashok Travels & Tours (ATT) and Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. (IRCTC) were allowed to levy ‘Facilitation Fee’ @ Rs.100/- per ticket for domestic sector and Rs.300/- per ticket for international sector for air travel. Wherein Government of lndia bears the cost of air passage.

2. The issue has been re-examined in consolation with the Ministry of Civil Aviation and Department of Legal Affairs in the light of provisions of the Air craft’s Rules,1937, as amended from time to time and it has been decided to Withdraw this Department’s O.M of even number dated 10th October 2013 with immediate effect. Consequently, no service charges (by whatever nomenclature), which are not included in the tariff charged by Air India / Airlines, are required to be paid to the authorized travel agents.

3. payment to the authorized travel agents for the Bills raised by them for air tickets produced/ purchased till date in respect of air travel already undertaken or due to be undertaken would be regulated as per O.M of even number dated 10.10.2013. it is reiterated that as far as possible air tickets on Government account may be obtained directly from Air India/ Airlines (booking counter/offices/website) and if obtaining tickets directly from Air India/ Airlines is not possible should the services of authorized travel agents be availed of.

4. All Ministries/Departments are advised to bring these instructions to the notice of all concerned from compliance.

Sd/-
(Subhash Chand)
Director

Balmer Lawrie
TOURS & TRAVEL

Date: November 03, 2015

To
Principal Controller of Accounts (FYS)
1OA, S K Bose Road
Kolkata – 700001

Kind attention: Mr. Nabarun Dhar, JT. Controller of Accounts (AN)

Dear Sir,

Kindly refer to your letter ref. no. 2078/ AN-VIII/TA-DA/BL dated 16/10/15, please note that in accordance with GOI, MoF, DoE OM no. 19024/1/2012-E.IV, dated 5/09/2014, we are not charging any Service Charge/Facilitation Fee/ Processing Fee etc. in our bill.

But SERVICETAX, EDU. Cess, & High Edu. Cess, are Govt. Statutary Taxes which are chargeable if you purchase any ticket from an agency and we are regularly depositing this Service Taxes to the service tax authority vide service tax registration no. AABCB0984EST047, which is already mentioned in our bill.

Hence you are kindly requested to make payment of service taxes accordingly.

Thanking you.

Yours faithfully,
For Balmer Lawrie & Co. Ltd.,

Sd/-
(S. Nath)
Sr. Branch Manager (Travel & Vacations)

Authority: http://pcafys.gov.in/

7th CPC and Central Government finances

with 0 Comment
7th CPC and Central Government finances

Comrades,
There are various reports in the media about the impact of the 7th CPC recommendations on the common man and the government resources at large, the reports suggest that the Government may postpone the 7th CPC implementation also till its finances are set right.

These reports are totally wrong.

A) Let us examine the Revenue Secretary Shri Hasmukh Adhia statements which are also published in the news papers.

“So far, 1.8 crore refunds for assessment year 2015-16 have been processed, he said. In the past, refunds have been held up for years as the government sought to show healthier finances.”

“Data released by the government showed that over Rs 5 lakh crore was locked up in tax disputes at various levels, with some of the cases going back over 10 years. In value terms, over half the cases related to income tax with 30% of the cases involving corporation tax.”

B) The crude oil prices has come down from 140 $ to just 30$ a barrel in last year thus the Central Government finances have improved a lot.

Grant of MACP benefit in the promotional hierarchy – Copy of the stay order dated 08.08.2014 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court

with 1 comment
Grant of MACP benefit in the promotional hierarchy – Copy of the stay order dated 08.08.2014 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court

References/Representations/Court Cases in various Ministries/Departments/Organisations for grant of MACPS benefits in the promotional hierarchy – reg.

No. 22034/04/2013-Estt.(D)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel Public Grievance & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training

North Block, New Delhi
Dated: 20.01.2016

Office Memorandum

Subject :- References/Representations/Court Cases in various Ministries/Departments/Organisations for grant of MACPS benefits in the promotional hierarchy – reg.

The undersigned is directed to forward herewith a copy of the stay order dated 08.08.2014 passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in CC No. 8271/2014 (converted to SLP No. 21803/2014) in the matter of UOI Vs. Shri M.V. Mohanan Nair on the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in OP(CAT) No. 2000/2013(Z) regarding grant of MACP benefit in the promotional hierarchy, for information.

sd/-
(Gayatri Mishra)
Director (E-I)

Authority: www.persmin.gov.in



Disclaimer:As and when orders amending the rules are published by the Government, the amendment orders will be published in our blog immediately. Readers are requested to refer to the source link is given at the end of the post. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy of the content on this blog, the same should not be construed as a statement of law or used for any legal purposes. 90paisa accepts no responsibility in relation to the accuracy, completeness, usefulness or otherwise, of the contents. Users are advised to verify/check any information with the relevant department(s) and/or other source(s), and to obtain any appropriate professional advice before acting on the information provided in the blog. Links to other websites that have been included on this blog are provided for public convenience only. 90paisa is not responsible for the contents or reliability of linked websites and does not necessarily endorse the view expressed within them. We cannot guarantee the availability of such linked pages at all times.

Recent Posts