View Full Version : Anomalies

22-09-2008, 02:15 PM
I'm working in an autonomous organisation. We have a historical parity with the scales applicable to CSSS/CSS. The pay-scale of 1640-2900 (5500-9000) for Stenographers/Assistants was allowed in our Institute (this scale was only for CSSS/CSS). In the 6CPC the scale of PS/Section Officer/equivalent (6500-10500) was upgraded 7500-12000 with Grade pay 4800 and on completion of 4 years to 8000-13500 with grade pay 5400. In the notification it is mentioned that this scale shall be available only in such of those organizations/services which have had a historical parity with CSS/CSSS.

My question is whether our Institute can upgrade the scale 6500-10500 to 7500-12000 with GP 4800 and on completion of 4 years to 8000-13500 with GP 5400?

02-11-2008, 07:15 AM
Pay Scale revision in r/o Stenographers and Assistant Accountants


The IV Pay Commission Pay Scale of Rs.1400-2600 in respect of Stenographers was initially replaced in the year 1997 with a scale of pay of Rs.1640-2900 with retrospective effect from 1.1.1986 with arrears to accrue from July 1993.

In respect of Assistant Accountants who were also earlier drawing the same scale of 1400-2600 from 1.1.86 on par with the Stenographers was revised to 1640-2900 from 1.12.95 and the corresponding pay scale of 5500-9000 from 1.1.96, in the year 1998.

To remove discriminatory treatment among different categories of employees the replacement scale of 1640-2900 was given in the year 2003/2004 to Asst. Accountants also from 1.1.1986 in comparison with Stenographers with arrears to accrue from DECEMBER 1990.

Subsequently the said scale of 5500-9000 for Asst. Accountants was upgraded further to 6500-10500 from 1.1.1996.

At present the said Asst. Accountants are upgraded to a pay scale of Rs.7450-11500 from 1.1.2006.

Whereas, the case of Stenograpahers, with whom the case of Asst. Accountants was compared as equally placed category with regard to the scale 1640-2900, has never undergone any change till the 6th Pay Commission. The arrears also in their case was to accrue only from 1993, as against 1990 in the case of Asst. Accountants. The Asst. Accountants who were attempting to be on par with the pay scale of 1986 of their counterparts ie. Stenographers, have so far seen two scale revision in every 10 years. But the Stenographers were put on still from 1986 onwards with no scale revision, but only pay revision to the corresponding equivalent revised pay structure in both the pay commission. My question here is whether discriminatory treatment among different categories equally placed, has finally been removed at all?

Best regards.

06-11-2008, 10:48 PM
Dear friend Kanwal
If there is historical parity with CSS/CSSS in your department, pay scales can be upgraded. there is no doubt about it.

badri mannargudi
13-11-2008, 04:04 AM

The past experience shows that the mere history of parity may not yield us the fruits automatically.

More often than not, the powers that be do not accept your arguments.U may have to move CAT for remedy.

Yes, it is a long drawn and time consuming process.

By the time, results come, 5% to 10% of the employees may have retired in the meanwhile, and the implementation would be prospective.

(This happened when Inspectors of Central Excise won a parity case, the battle( one may as well call it a war) started in 1992 and ended on 21.04.2004 and the result was positive but was implemented prospectively.
My advice to Kanwaljee: Do not sit and keep counting. Get your facts, start action now. You may succeed one day.
With regards,
Badri Mannargudi

13-11-2008, 08:46 PM
Dear friend
Your advise is good but it is the last course of action and can not be used at every step or for every anamoly. Any one should first use all the available method with in his department to sort out his problem and should take help of other available means like RTI etc. In case the institute still denied the benefit due, he can go to court. We must not forget that C.A.T. also asked whetehr all possible means have been exhausted or not, only then they except the O.A. for further hearing. Am I not correct.

14-11-2008, 11:17 AM

You are right. Going to court should be the last option to adopt. In our office, we all together represented it quoting the example of CSIR and accordingly our office has forwarded our representation to the MoF. We are waiting at the moment. As soon as we get negative reply, we once again represent to MoF directly. And after that we will go to CAT. Whats your advice? Are we going on right track? Thanks

14-11-2008, 10:56 PM
Dear Sir,

This is definitely the right way to approach the anamolies and this makes our case strong for CAT. You may also collect some data from similarly placed other departments. This will also help a lot in fighting the case. Every instance of parity previously given to you people will also help to strengthen your case. Go ahead. Justice can not be denied.

21-11-2008, 11:03 AM
In autonomous bodies, if a stenographer (5500-9000) and a PS (6500-10500) are appointed today, what monetary benefit a PS will get? Their PB is same. There GP is same i.e., 4200. I think nothing? This is a great anomaly. The government should resolve this anomaly. Comments welcome.

21-11-2008, 10:14 PM
Dear Shri kanwal

As per data given by you, your contention is correct but I think that pay scale of PS(pre revised 6500-10500) has been upgraded to Rs.7500-12000/-. If this is the case then there will be no anomaly. But if it is not, then both of them will join in similar pay since both these scales do not exist now. As per your earlier posts, I came to know that there is parity with CSS/CSSS in your department. Then it must have been upgraded. If not allowed at present, it definitely will come in future. No doubt about it.

Sanjay Gandhi
24-11-2008, 10:27 AM
Dear Mr. Kanwal,

I am also working in an autonomous organization as a Private Secretary since 2000. We have a historical parity with the scales applicable Central Government employees.

Govt. of India had issued orders in the year 2005 & 2006 for implementation of non-functional scale ofRs. 8000-13500 for the Private Serectaries/ Stenographers working in the scale of Rs. 6500-10500 after approved service of 4 years. This order has been implemented by most of the autonomous organizations like CPCB, NHAI, ICAR etc. for their private secretaries.

Various Courts/CAT has also given orders for equal pay for equal work in the recent/past.

Ministry of Finance had given orders that the Organizations which are fully or substantially funded from the Government Grant will have to adopt pay scales and allowances as applicable to the corresponding employees of Central Government.

Last Finance Commission in its report has clearly stated that almost all the autonomous institutions/organizations under various ministries have adopted central Government pay scales & allowances, GPF, CGHS etc. as per the Central Government and pay revision as per the pay commission, thus these institutions/organizations are working as good as controlled or sub-ordinate offices of the Central Government.

The same order had not been implemented in my organization, therefore, I had filed a case in the High Court of Delhi. Similar types of case has been filed by many Private Secretaries in the past in the Delhi High Court against the Union of India and they had succeeded.

No doubt boss, this is applicable for the PS of autonomous orgnaizations.

24-11-2008, 05:55 PM
My dear pk kanwal. While talking of upgradation, pl. see the latest Notification from Govt. They have given examples. Upgradation is only in respect of grade pay and nothing else. I do not know to which Autonomus Organisation you are working in. Is it NVS ? If so they have only sent a proposal. It is yet to be accepted. Same is the case with KVS. Therefore, it would be prudent to first find out the real position. Thereafter, if you and other affected people think it necessary, submit representation. If no response is received in reasonable time, you may ask for information concerning the representation under RTI Act 2005. However, I am sure this would not be required.