PDA

View Full Version : Why fixation for the pre-revised 5500-9000 alone in 7450-11,500



krishnan09
21-04-2010, 11:40 AM
Why fixation for the pre-revised 5500-9000 alone in 7450-11,500 when three scales (5000-8000, 5500-9000 and 6500-10500) were merged and upgraded to 7450-11,500.


Few vested interest parties are already in a pre-set mind and they will not understand the real issues as they think that they are capable of twisting the government decisions. In order to avoid further unwanted arguments, I simply reproduce below few relevant sentences from the rules for the information of our beloved readers to arrive at a conclusion.

1. The OM F.No.1/1/2008-IC dated 30.8.2008 vide para 2 (ii) states that the fitment table is not applicable for the merged/upgraded scales . In case of merger of posts and upgradation of pre-revised pay scales, fixation of pay will be done as prescribed in Note 2A of Rule 7(1) in the manner indicated in illustration 4A. Whereas in many offices the fitment table of the existing scale only extended to the merged scales. otherwise they would have extended the fitment table of the higher replacement pre-revised scales instead of the existing scale.

2. The Rule 7(1)(A)(ii) stipulates that if the minimum of the revised pay band/pay scale is more than the amount arrived out of multiplication of existing pay with 1.86, the pay shall be fixed at the minimum of the revised pay band/pay scale.


3. So fixation done for the pre-revised 5500-9000 in 7450-11,500 with the minimum is 100% correct vide OM No.1/1/2008-IC dated 13th September, 2008. page No.4 under clarification 6 (i) & (ii) states where all posts in one or more pre-revised scales are merged/upgraded with a higher pre-revised scale and given a common replacement scale/grade pay, the suitability of the incumbents need not to be assessed for granting them the higher replacement scale. Hence fixing at the minimum of the higher replacement scale of 7450-11,500 is well within the purview of the existing rules.

4. However, it is not understood the denial of the same fixation for the other two scales merged along with 5500-9000 ie., 5000-8000 and 6500- 10,500. I am again reproducing the relevant para.

(ii) On account of merger of pre-revised scales of 5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10,500, some posts which presently constitute feeder and promotion grades will come to lie in an identical grade. The specific recommendations about some categories of these posts made by the Pay commission are included in Section II of the Part B. As regards other posts, the posts in these THREE SCALES should be merged.

5. It may please be noted that the posts of Assistants of CSS has not been included in the specific recommendations of the categories of posts included in Section II of Part B, whereas the Section Officers of CSS have been included. This gives the clarity of rules that the other posts includes CSS Assistants and field office assistants and all these posts (irrespective of CSS or field office) form part of the “three scales” merged and upgraded. Further it is also clear that the feeder and promotion grades will come to lie in an identical grade for merging and upgrdation and the question of non-feasibility does not come into picture.

6. The R.T.I.Reply given by Ministry of Finance vide U.O.No.22/01/2010-IC dated 25.01.2010 states that the revised pay structure as recommended by the 6th CPC for the posts in Non-secretariat offices vide para 3.1.14 ( parity between Field and Secretariat Offices is recommended) of the report has already been implemented vide Sl. ii of section I of part B of the first schedule of CCS(R.P)Rules 2008 .


Hence the denial of same fixation to the other two scales merged (ie., to 5000-8000 and 6500-10,500) are against the constitution and it is clear violation of government policies and rules.

paragmandle
21-04-2010, 01:10 PM
I was Publicity Assistant (Indian Information Servise Gr. B) in the pay scale of Rs. 5500. the next post of this grade was Rs. 6500 in the Gr. B. I was promoted in pay scale Rs. 6500 in June 2007. The 6th CPC recommended for IIS Gr B posts (Page 475, Para 4, copy enclosed):

“These posts will come into lie in the same pay scale on account of restructuring the pay scales. Functionally, the posts are similar. It is therefore, recommended that these posts should be merged”.

In the view of above recommendation, shoud my pay be fixed in the pre-revised scale of Rs. 6500 (which upgraded in Rs. 7450 later on) as on 1.1.2006? and in that case my promotion in june 2007 became null and void.

krishnan09
22-04-2010, 04:55 PM
Dear Friend,

You are supposed to get fixation in 7450-11,500 with bunching ie. one increment each for every two stages as per CCS(R.P)Rule,2008 Rule 7(1)(A)(ii).

paragmandle
23-04-2010, 01:42 PM
in that case am I eligible for getting ACP in 2008 as i was joined service in 1998?

teacher2009
10-05-2010, 12:03 PM
Dear sir, Iam working in a central govt org as a teacher. My pay has been fixed at 14330+ grade pay 4600.(7700x 1.86=14322= 14330) in 2006.My present basic is16730+4600=21330. Iwas in pre revised scale of 6500-200-10500 . kindly let me know whether my institute has done my fixation properly or not. If it is not done properly then what would be my fixation?
with regards

krishnan09
12-05-2010, 10:10 PM
Dear sir, Iam working in a central govt org as a teacher. My pay has been fixed at 14330+ grade pay 4600.(7700x 1.86=14322= 14330) in 2006.My present basic is16730+4600=21330. Iwas in pre revised scale of 6500-200-10500 . kindly let me know whether my institute has done my fixation properly or not. If it is not done properly then what would be my fixation?
with regards

Dear Teacher2009

Your pay has not been fixed as per the OM dated 30.8.2008 which would have been done as per illustration 4A or based on the fitment table of the upgraded scale w.e.f. 1.1.2006 vide Rule 7(1)(A)(ii) fixing in 7450-11,500 with bunching ie., for every two stages one increment each. So you must get three additional increment as on 1.1.2006 while fixing as was done in the upgraded scale vide illustration 4A.

Otherwise, the merging as per Part B Section I itel No.(ii) vide page No.44 of the CCS(R.P)Rules 2008 and its rule 7 (1)(A)(ii) are to be deleted from the Revised pay rules.

Alternatively, the Section Officers working in the Central Administrative Tribunal in the scale 6500-10,500 were given parity with the cSS Section Officers w.e.f. 1.1.2006 vide OA.164/2009 and they have fixed their pay first in 7500-12,000 in the prevised scale and thereafter correspondingly revised by multiplying with 1.86 and adding GP4600.

So it appears, your fixation is wrong as stated above. But the fixations done by your department is as was done by other field offices pending litigation. Revised clarification from DOPT are expected for the merged/upgraded scales.

Further, you may note when three scales (5000-8000, 5500-9000 and 6500-10,500) were merged as on 1.1.2006 and upgraded to 7450-11,500 and the fixation in 7450-11,500 was done only by CSS people who were in 5500-9000 and they misinterpret such fixations is available for the scale existing in the middle out of the three merged ie., that is the understanding level of employees in 2010.

Further, if you were a UDC(4000-6000) in the Central Secretariat and promoted as Assistant in 5500-9000 scale after 1.1.2006, you are eligible for fixation in 7450-11,500. Whereas the other two scales(5000-8000 and 6500-10,500) are not eligible. This is model fixation taking place in fools paradise. Now the constitution/CCS(R.P)Rules,2008 and precedences are violated which will be sorted out by Government of India/CAT/Supeme Court very soon. Till such enjoy with the present fixation

kp_rajan
09-08-2010, 01:42 PM
Why fixation for the pre-revised 5500-9000 alone in 7450-11,500 when three scales (5000-8000, 5500-9000 and 6500-10500) were merged and upgraded to 7450-11,500.


Few vested interest parties are already in a pre-set mind and they will not understand the real issues as they think that they are capable of twisting the government decisions. In order to avoid further unwanted arguments, I simply reproduce below few relevant sentences from the rules for the information of our beloved readers to arrive at a conclusion.

1. The OM F.No.1/1/2008-IC dated 30.8.2008 vide para 2 (ii) states that the fitment table is not applicable for the merged/upgraded scales . In case of merger of posts and upgradation of pre-revised pay scales, fixation of pay will be done as prescribed in Note 2A of Rule 7(1) in the manner indicated in illustration 4A. Whereas in many offices the fitment table of the existing scale only extended to the merged scales. otherwise they would have extended the fitment table of the higher replacement pre-revised scales instead of the existing scale.

2. The Rule 7(1)(A)(ii) stipulates that if the minimum of the revised pay band/pay scale is more than the amount arrived out of multiplication of existing pay with 1.86, the pay shall be fixed at the minimum of the revised pay band/pay scale.


3. So fixation done for the pre-revised 5500-9000 in 7450-11,500 with the minimum is 100% correct vide OM No.1/1/2008-IC dated 13th September, 2008. page No.4 under clarification 6 (i) & (ii) states where all posts in one or more pre-revised scales are merged/upgraded with a higher pre-revised scale and given a common replacement scale/grade pay, the suitability of the incumbents need not to be assessed for granting them the higher replacement scale. Hence fixing at the minimum of the higher replacement scale of 7450-11,500 is well within the purview of the existing rules.

4. However, it is not understood the denial of the same fixation for the other two scales merged along with 5500-9000 ie., 5000-8000 and 6500- 10,500. I am again reproducing the relevant para.

(ii) On account of merger of pre-revised scales of 5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10,500, some posts which presently constitute feeder and promotion grades will come to lie in an identical grade. The specific recommendations about some categories of these posts made by the Pay commission are included in Section II of the Part B. As regards other posts, the posts in these THREE SCALES should be merged.

5. It may please be noted that the posts of Assistants of CSS has not been included in the specific recommendations of the categories of posts included in Section II of Part B, whereas the Section Officers of CSS have been included. This gives the clarity of rules that the other posts includes CSS Assistants and field office assistants and all these posts (irrespective of CSS or field office) form part of the “three scales” merged and upgraded. Further it is also clear that the feeder and promotion grades will come to lie in an identical grade for merging and upgrdation and the question of non-feasibility does not come into picture.

6. The R.T.I.Reply given by Ministry of Finance vide U.O.No.22/01/2010-IC dated 25.01.2010 states that the revised pay structure as recommended by the 6th CPC for the posts in Non-secretariat offices vide para 3.1.14 ( parity between Field and Secretariat Offices is recommended) of the report has already been implemented vide Sl. ii of section I of part B of the first schedule of CCS(R.P)Rules 2008 .


Hence the denial of same fixation to the other two scales merged (ie., to 5000-8000 and 6500-10,500) are against the constitution and it is clear violation of government policies and rules.

Can U pl mail me the reply under RTI at [email protected] I shall be thankful

sundarar
22-01-2011, 07:18 AM
Kindly refer to OM dated 13.10.2008 available at (http://finmin.nic.in/6cpc/fno112008dt131008.pdf) clarifying the methodology to be used in all cases where posts have been upgraded as a result of the recommendations of the 6CPC. Para 3 of the OM clearly indicates that "pay in the pay band will be fixed in accordance with the fitment table of the pre-revised scale... To this the Grade Pay... corresponding to the upgraded pay scale ... will be added". An illustration has also been given which makes the case crystal clear.

However, subsequently DOPT has issued orders vide OM dated 22/12/2010 (http://persmin.gov.in/WriteReadData/CS/Steppingup.pdf) giving the benefit of stepping up of pay to senior Assistants/PAs who were promoted before 1.1.2006 w.r.t. to their junior Assistants/PAs who were promoted during 1.1.2006 to 31.8.2008 and who got the benefit of fixation of pay at 13,860.

In partial modification of the above Order, another Order is issued for stepping up of pay on par with junior who got ACP benefits w.e.f. 2.1.2006 in the upgraded scale of 7450-11500. Coincidentally, such a junior's pre-revised pay happened to be Rs.7450 and thereby he got pay fixed as per fitment table as on 2.1.2006 at 13860 with GP Rs.4600.
The seniors who were drawing less than the junior as on 1.1.2006 in the pre-upgraded scale 5500-9000 have been granted stepping up in accordance with the provisions of Note 10 under Rule 7 of CCS (RP), 2008.

Once we relate to Note 10, the junior should not have been drawing more pay in the lower grade from time to time than the senior.

Whereas, in the instant case, as against the clarifications provided by DOE OM dated 13.10.2008 and subsequent internal U.O. dated 14/12/2009 attached with DOPT OM dated 22.12.2010, the DOPT has issued separate order dated 7.1.2011 in the name of stepping up of pay, as the internal U.O. suggested that in cases where a senior Govt. servant is drawing lesser pay than his directly recruited junior borne on the same gradation list.

We come across various types of scales, viz. Upgraded scales, Merged scales, Replacement Scales, etc.

As far as ACP is concerned, the individual who served about 12 years or more and earned higher pay in the present grade - here it is 5500-9000 - get financial upgradation which happened to be the lowest stage of the upgraded scale of 5500-9000. Whereas, in the case of `seniors' in the same grade, the case is not so. They never earned higher pay than the aforesaid individual even on 2.1.2006 but by virtue of upgradation of the scale 5500-9000 to 7450-11500 their pre-revised pay got elevated to the lowest stage of the upgraded higher scale as on 1.1.2006.

As per DOE clarification dated 13.10.2008, their minimum of the pay in the pay band got fixed at the pay in the pay band in accordance with the fitment table of the pre-revised scale...To this the Grade Pay...Rs.4600 corresponding to the upgraded pay scale has also been added.

In the Order dated 7.1.2011, (The link for Order dated 7.1.2011 is
http://www.cssofficers.in/drstepup.pdf) the pre-revised/pre-ACP pay of junior Shri G.M. Kabui, Assistant working in the cadre of Ministry of Urban Development must also have been fixed as per the above procedure.
Or he would have retained the pre-revised scale till 2.1.2006 for the purpose of availing ACP benefits, which may not be required as by virtue of ACP, his pre-revised pay will get elevated to 7450 after adding an increment in the old structure. As on 1.1.2006 itself he must have acquired the upgraded scale. The financial increment equivalent to one increment must have got added on 2.1.2006.

Now, the question is whether the stepping up issued on 7.1.2011 on par with the aforesaid junior Shri G.M. Kabui, satisfies the provisions of Note 7 and Note 10 under Rule 7 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008.

While many illustrations are possible in the case of Note 10, we could not come across any specific illustration w.r.t. Note 7. To that extent, the note itself is silent as to whether it is applicable for only on 1.1.2006 or all along. By taking reference to only Note 7, stepping up of all seniors even if they draw lesser pay in the lower grade could be possible. Then, what is the purpose of Note 10? Whether both can travel together?

In spite of the views above, I am of the firm belief, that when a scale gets merged, upgraded, replaced, the lowest stage of the pre-revised scale shall be revised according to the fitment table meant for the merged higher scale, upgraded higher scale, replaced higher scale and not according to the pre-merged pre-revised scale, pre-upgraded pre-revised scale, pre-replaced pre-revised scale.

Same applies to the promoted scale too. On promotion after 1.1.2006, if the pay in the pay band happens to be lesser than that of corresponding lowest stage of the promoted scale, the same ought to be stepped up to the pay in the pay band applicable to the promoted scale bottom - Here is where, the terminology `Minimum Pay in the Pay Band' acquires significance.

Same shall apply to direct recruits after 1.1.2006. Wherever, the pay in the pay band being a fixed element, happened to be lesser than the aforesaid Minimum Pay in the Pay band, the stepping up is all the more necessary. Actually, the concept of fixed element for direct recruits does not serve any purpose, except grant of higher fixed element to particular GPs, while the duties and responsibilities are one and same of a particular post, though the scale of which may be upgraded/merged/replaced/promoted/induction level, etc. If we believe
Equal Pay for Equal work, the Minimum Pay in the Pay Band needs to be ensured wherever the pay in the running pay band happens to be less than that.

A detailed clarificatory OM is all the more necessary, for removing all disparities among the 34 pre-revised scales when the same undergoes revision on 1.1.2006 and afterwards too. The tenure of the National Anomaly Committee may expire by March 2011 unless it is further extended. Whether suitable remedy to all the problems being encountered owing to pay band concepts, can be expected?

Ms. Srivastava
08-02-2011, 11:35 AM
Sir..your article indicates the scale of 5500-9000 is upgraded to 7450....., but i could not locate the OM on this. I could only find one on upgrading of 6500 scale to 7450..... which does not give a clear pictue that 5500-9000 has been already upgraded. I am at a sclae of 5500 since 1998..and i work as Senior Research Assistant in an autonomous institute. can i ask for fixation of 7450 wef 2006? there is evidence of staff at 5500 getting a upgraded scale of 7450.. with GP of 4600...

second... is there any guideline for fixing pay scale as per qualification?. i.e. posts requiring an eligibility of masters degree in relevant disciple to be given minimum of 1640-2900, or 6500-9000 ( pre revised as per 4th and 5th CPC) ?

Please enlighten on this issue.

Victor
08-02-2011, 03:58 PM
Sir..your article indicates the scale of 5500-9000 is upgraded to 7450....., but i could not locate the OM on this. I could only find one on upgrading of 6500 scale to 7450..... which does not give a clear pictue that 5500-9000 has been already upgraded. I am at a sclae of 5500 since 1998..and i work as Senior Research Assistant in an autonomous institute. can i ask for fixation of 7450 wef 2006? there is evidence of staff at 5500 getting a upgraded scale of 7450.. with GP of 4600...

second... is there any guideline for fixing pay scale as per qualification?. i.e. posts requiring an eligibility of masters degree in relevant disciple to be given minimum of 1640-2900, or 6500-9000 ( pre revised as per 4th and 5th CPC) ?

Please enlighten on this issue.

The pre-revised scale of Rs. 5500-9000 has been replaced by PB-2 + GP 4200.
The pre-revised scale of Rs. 6500-10500 & 7450-11500 have bee replaced by PB-2 + GP 4600.

Victor

krishnan09
08-02-2011, 09:32 PM
The pre-revised scale of Rs. 5500-9000 has been replaced by PB-2 + GP 4200.
The pre-revised scale of Rs. 6500-10500 & 7450-11500 have bee replaced by PB-2 + GP 4600.

Victor

Dear Mr.Victor
If so, how Mr.Kabui who was promoted as Assistant and drawing pre-scale of pay 5500-9000 from 2.1.2006 were refixed in 7450-11,500 ie., given 7450x1.86+4600 w.e.f. 2.1.2006. This gives clear version of 5500-9000 and 6500-10,500 were merged and upgraded to 7450-11,500.

krishnan09
08-02-2011, 10:00 PM
Dear Mr.Victor
If so, how Mr.Kabui who was promoted as Assistant and drawing pre-scale of pay 5500-9000 from 2.1.2006 were refixed in 7450-11,500 ie., given 7450x1.86+4600 w.e.f. 2.1.2006. This gives clear version of 5500-9000 and 6500-10,500 were merged and upgraded to 7450-11,500.


kindly see this link also http://90paisa.blogspot.com/2010/08/revised-pay-stcuture-for-school.html which shows that Railway has also granted GP4600 to pr-revised 5500-9000. Like this there are many .

SASI
09-02-2011, 06:28 AM
Vide OM No.F.No.1/1/2008-IC dated 16-11-2009, Government decided to extend the pay structure of Grade Pay of 4600 to Assistants of CSS, Armed Forces Headquarters, Indian Foreign Service etc. who were in the pre revised scale of 5500-9000 as on 1-1-2006. Vide OM No.7/7/08-CS.1(A) dated 22-12-2010,DOPT clarified “the manner of fixation of pay of officials promoted as Assistants/PAs between 1.12006 and 31.8.2008t”as “they can opt to have their pay fixed from the date of promotion with reference to the fitment table of the upgraded pay scale i.e. pre-revised scale of Rs.7450-11500”.

Only these category of employees are granted Rs.4600 as Grade Pay and also the benefit of fixation from Rs.7450/- Others who were in the Pay Scale of 5500-9000 are given the Grade Pay of 4200 and fixation from their pre revised pay.

Regarding Teachers, the Pay Commission had recommended 4600 as Grade Pay for 5500-9000 and Government had accepted the same.


SASI

krishnan09
11-02-2011, 10:34 AM
Vide OM No.F.No.1/1/2008-IC dated 16-11-2009, Government decided to extend the pay structure of Grade Pay of 4600 to Assistants of CSS, Armed Forces Headquarters, Indian Foreign Service etc. who were in the pre revised scale of 5500-9000 as on 1-1-2006. Vide OM No.7/7/08-CS.1(A) dated 22-12-2010,DOPT clarified “the manner of fixation of pay of officials promoted as Assistants/PAs between 1.12006 and 31.8.2008t”as “they can opt to have their pay fixed from the date of promotion with reference to the fitment table of the upgraded pay scale i.e. pre-revised scale of Rs.7450-11500”.

Only these category of employees are granted Rs.4600 as Grade Pay and also the benefit of fixation from Rs.7450/- Others who were in the Pay Scale of 5500-9000 are given the Grade Pay of 4200 and fixation from their pre revised pay.

Regarding Teachers, the Pay Commission had recommended 4600 as Grade Pay for 5500-9000 and Government had accepted the same.


SASI

Dear Mr.Sasi,
The letter referred by you here, dated 16.11.2009 is not as per the decision of the government. The government decision was communicated through gazettee notification based on 6th cpc recommendation. This letter issued on 16.11.2009 brought so much discrimination among the employees and it is under dispute and subjudice in many CATs and courts as the same was not in confirmity with the gazettee notification and government decision.

As regards your statement about the teachers granting 4600 is correct and is based on government decision and 6th cpc recommendation. This itself indirectly reveal the fact that neither the 6th cpc nor the government made any separate pay scales for Central Secretriat staff - So this discriminatory attitude of the officers are also under subjudice. Wait and see whether we have separate FR for cSS and Field office and also different type of citizens. Let the next NAC take a suitable decision failing which there will be number of court cases for this type of discriminatory and partiality attitude and such unnecessary legal expenses are to be recovered from the officers who issued such orders totally ignoring the provisions CCS(R.P)Rules 2008 eg.Rule 13.

Victor
11-02-2011, 12:01 PM
Dear Mr.Victor
If so, how Mr.Kabui who was promoted as Assistant and drawing pre-scale of pay 5500-9000 from 2.1.2006 were refixed in 7450-11,500 ie., given 7450x1.86+4600 w.e.f. 2.1.2006. This gives clear version of 5500-9000 and 6500-10,500 were merged and upgraded to 7450-11,500.

The pay scale of Assistants/PAs was upgraded from 5500-9000 to 6500-10500 in Sep 2006 and subsequently further upgraded to 7450-11500 after 6CPC. This does not imply that all posts in the scale of pay of 5500-9000 automatically stands upgraded to 7450-11500.

As regards the issue of parity (between Sectt. and Field Offices) and the manner of fixation of pay on upgradation, I am in agreement with your view that there should be parity as recommended by 6CPC and that there has to be a uniform method of pay fixation irrespective of post, cadre or service.

Victor

SASI
11-02-2011, 06:03 PM
Dear Mr.Sasi,
The letter referred by you here, dated 16.11.2009 is not as per the decision of the government. The government decision was communicated through gazettee notification based on 6th cpc recommendation. This letter issued on 16.11.2009 brought so much discrimination among the employees and it is under dispute and subjudice in many CATs and courts as the same was not in confirmity with the gazettee notification and government decision.

As regards your statement about the teachers granting 4600 is correct and is based on government decision and 6th cpc recommendation. This itself indirectly reveal the fact that neither the 6th cpc nor the government made any separate pay scales for Central Secretriat staff - So this discriminatory attitude of the officers are also under subjudice. Wait and see whether we have separate FR for cSS and Field office and also different type of citizens. Let the next NAC take a suitable decision failing which there will be number of court cases for this type of discriminatory and partiality attitude and such unnecessary legal expenses are to be recovered from the officers who issued such orders totally ignoring the provisions CCS(R.P)Rules 2008 eg.Rule 13.
In my post I had not stated that that the Sixth Pay Commission had recommended higher scale for Assistants/PAs. I referred to the Government of India OM No. F.No.1/I/2008-IC dated 16-11-2009 and this directly reveals that this is not the recommendation of the Sixth Pay Revision.

SASI

sundarar
12-02-2011, 12:35 AM
Dear Mr.Victor
If so, how Mr.Kabui who was promoted as Assistant and drawing pre-scale of pay 5500-9000 from 2.1.2006 were refixed in 7450-11,500 ie., given 7450x1.86+4600 w.e.f. 2.1.2006. This gives clear version of 5500-9000 and 6500-10,500 were merged and upgraded to 7450-11,500.

Certain inputs are not available to conclude the actual position :

(1) What was the Pre-revised pay and scale Shri Kabui was holding as on 31.12.2005
(2) What was his revised pay in the pay band and GP as on 1.1.2006
(3) How the revised pay in the pay band and GP as on 1.1.2006 gets re-revised corresponding to a pre-revised scale 7450-11500
(4) Whether there exists a `MINIMUM OF THE PAY IN THE PAY BAND' on only 1.1.2006
(5) If there exists always a `Minimum of the Pay in the Pay Band' after 1.1.2006 also
why promotees' pay on promotion is not stepped upto the minimum of the pay in the pay band corresponding to promoted post's pre-revised scale?
(6) If the scale in r/o PAs/Assistants is revised to 6500-10500 in September 2006 and further upgraded to 7450-11500 as per 6th CPC, then why not on 1.1.2006 itself, the pay of the seniors have not been stepped upto minimum of the pay in the pay band as applicable to the upgraded scale and what is the significance of 2.1.2006? (Ref. DoPT OM dated 7.1.2011.
(7) If an upgraded scale can have its corresponding minimum of the pay in the pay band (where the incumbent has not actually held the scale at all till 2.1.2006) why not the merged higher scale's (viz. 6500-200-10500) in r/o all govt. employees (holding 5000-8000, 5500-9000) cannot have its corresponding minimum pay in the pay band as applicable to pre-revised merged higher scale bottom ie. 6500 x 1.86 even on 1.1.2006?
It is significant to note that all the three scale holders carry same GP but three different pay in the pay band and it is quite possible that the same happens to be lesser than the Minimum pay in the pay band as applicable to the scale 6500-10500, ie. 6500 x 1.86.
For instance in the DOPT OM dated 7.1.2011, Sl. No.1 was drawing Rs.5500 on 1.1.2006 and getting 5500 x 1.86, but not even 6500x1.86 whereas the same person gets 7450 x 1.86 on the very next day.

The manner and method of fixation of pay in the revised structure consequent on implementation of 6th CPC in r/o upgraded/merged/replaced/promoted scales on or after 1.1.2006 shall be uniform - which concept every one will agree, I suppose.

sundarar
12-02-2011, 07:33 AM
(6) If the scale in r/o PAs/Assistants is revised to 6500-10500 in September 2006 and further upgraded to 7450-11500 as per 6th CPC, then why not on 1.1.2006 itself, the pay of the seniors have not been stepped upto minimum of the pay in the pay band as applicable to the upgraded scale and what is the significance of 2.1.2006? (Ref. DoPT OM dated 7.1.2011.
(7) If an upgraded scale can have its corresponding minimum of the pay in the pay band (where the incumbent has not actually held the scale at all till 2.1.2006) why not the merged higher scale's (viz. 6500-200-10500) in r/o all govt. employees (holding 5000-8000, 5500-9000) cannot have its corresponding minimum pay in the pay band as applicable to pre-revised merged higher scale bottom ie. 6500 x 1.86 even on 1.1.2006?
It is significant to note that all the three scale holders carry same GP but three different pay in the pay band and it is quite possible that the same happens to be lesser than the Minimum pay in the pay band as applicable to the scale 6500-10500, ie. 6500 x 1.86.
For instance in the DOPT OM dated 7.1.2011, Sl. No.1 was drawing Rs.5500 on 1.1.2006 and getting 5500 x 1.86, but not even 6500x1.86 whereas the same person gets 7450 x 1.86 on the very next day.

The manner and method of fixation of pay in the revised structure consequent on implementation of 6th CPC in r/o upgraded/merged/replaced/promoted scales on or after 1.1.2006 shall be uniform - which concept every one will agree, I suppose.

The following recommendation of the 6th CPC may be seen.

Para 2.2.19 The revised scheme of pay bands being recommended has the
following characteristics: -
.. ….
…..

vii. Many pre-revised scales are being merged. Barring the Group D posts, this merger has been done by extending the existing minimum prescribed for the highest pay scale with which the other scales are being merged. However, the grade pay for the merged scale so derived has been computed with reference to the maximum of the highest scale. This, besides ensuring a uniform benefit, will also prevent bunching.

Scales of Rs.5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500 have been merged to bring parity
between field offices; the secretariat; the technical posts; and the work shop staff. This
was necessary to ensure that due importance is given to the levels concerned with actual
delivery. It is also noted that a large number of anomalies were created due to the placement of
Inspectors/equivalent posts in CBDT/CBEC and Assistants/Personal Assistants of CSS/CSSS in the scale of Rs.6500-200-10500. The scales of Rs.5500-175-9000 and Rs.6500-200-10500, in any case, had to be merged to resolve these anomalies”.

In spite of the merger to resolve the said anomalies, although the GP Rs.4200 was granted to both the
Merged scales, the pay in the pay band fixed on 1.1.2006 in respect of a person carrying a pre-revised
Pay Rs.6375 in the pre-merged scale 5500-9000 as 6375 x 1.86 and not 6500 x 1.86.

Similarly, in the case of upgraded scale 7450-11500, for a person carrying Rs.7300 in the pre-upgraded scale of 6500-10500, the pay in the pay band was determined as 7300 x 1.86 and not 7450 x 1.86 although the GP Rs.4600 applicable to the upgraded scale was given.

Whereas, in the case of seniors to Mr. Kabui, their initial pay in 5500-9000 was fixed normally on 1.1.2006 and on 2.1.2006, their pay in the upgraded scale got refixed as 7450 x 1.86 If the upgraded scale 7450-11500 is applicable only to Assistants/PAs in CSS, they why not the same 7450 x 1.86 could be
Applied as on 1.1.2006 itself. Here only our doubts get multiplied.

We could only guess that Mr. Kabui must have got ACP on 2.1.2006. Probably he would have retained his pre-revised scale till ACP. By virtue of drawing a pay lesser than 7450 in the lower scale of 5500-9000, his financial upgradation has provided 7450 being the bottom of the upgraded scale on 2.1.2006.

The seniors’ pay too accordingly, must have got stepped up on par with Mr. Kabui based on Rule 7 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 as per which, the junior should not have been drawing more pay at the time of promotion here in the instant case, at the time of ACP, we could interpret. Whereas, in the instant case it could not be so, because the junior must be drawing more pay than seniors. Moreover, ACP benefits are said to have been Attached to the incumbent as his personal. In which case, extension of the said benefits to seniors who may be even drawing lesser pay than Mr. Kabui, only could not be understandable.

By discussing at length, we are only trying to find out the methodology/manner of fixation of pay in the revised pay under various circumstances on 1.1.2006 or afterwards too. Practically, once merged, the scale 6500-10500 only has life on 1.1.2006 and not the pre-merged scales. When such a merged scale gets upgraded further to 7450-11500, naturally the upgraded scale only will have life on 1.1.2006. In the instant case, it is 2.1.2006 also, ie. Even after fixation of pay in the revised structure on 1.1.2006..

krishnan09
12-02-2011, 12:13 PM
The following recommendation of the 6th CPC may be seen.

Para 2.2.19 The revised scheme of pay bands being recommended has the
following characteristics: -
.. ….
…..

vii. Many pre-revised scales are being merged. Barring the Group D posts, this merger has been done by extending the existing minimum prescribed for the highest pay scale with which the other scales are being merged. However, the grade pay for the merged scale so derived has been computed with reference to the maximum of the highest scale. This, besides ensuring a uniform benefit, will also prevent bunching.

Scales of Rs.5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500 have been merged to bring parity
between field offices; the secretariat; the technical posts; and the work shop staff. This
was necessary to ensure that due importance is given to the levels concerned with actual
delivery. It is also noted that a large number of anomalies were created due to the placement of
Inspectors/equivalent posts in CBDT/CBEC and Assistants/Personal Assistants of CSS/CSSS in the scale of Rs.6500-200-10500. The scales of Rs.5500-175-9000 and Rs.6500-200-10500, in any case, had to be merged to resolve these anomalies”.

In spite of the merger to resolve the said anomalies, although the GP Rs.4200 was granted to both the
Merged scales, the pay in the pay band fixed on 1.1.2006 in respect of a person carrying a pre-revised
Pay Rs.6375 in the pre-merged scale 5500-9000 as 6375 x 1.86 and not 6500 x 1.86.

Similarly, in the case of upgraded scale 7450-11500, for a person carrying Rs.7300 in the pre-upgraded scale of 6500-10500, the pay in the pay band was determined as 7300 x 1.86 and not 7450 x 1.86 although the GP Rs.4600 applicable to the upgraded scale was given.

Whereas, in the case of seniors to Mr. Kabui, their initial pay in 5500-9000 was fixed normally on 1.1.2006 and on 2.1.2006, their pay in the upgraded scale got refixed as 7450 x 1.86 If the upgraded scale 7450-11500 is applicable only to Assistants/PAs in CSS, they why not the same 7450 x 1.86 could be
Applied as on 1.1.2006 itself. Here only our doubts get multiplied.

We could only guess that Mr. Kabui must have got ACP on 2.1.2006. Probably he would have retained his pre-revised scale till ACP. By virtue of drawing a pay lesser than 7450 in the lower scale of 5500-9000, his financial upgradation has provided 7450 being the bottom of the upgraded scale on 2.1.2006.

The seniors’ pay too accordingly, must have got stepped up on par with Mr. Kabui based on Rule 7 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 as per which, the junior should not have been drawing more pay at the time of promotion here in the instant case, at the time of ACP, we could interpret. Whereas, in the instant case it could not be so, because the junior must be drawing more pay than seniors. Moreover, ACP benefits are said to have been Attached to the incumbent as his personal. In which case, extension of the said benefits to seniors who may be even drawing lesser pay than Mr. Kabui, only could not be understandable.

By discussing at length, we are only trying to find out the methodology/manner of fixation of pay in the revised pay under various circumstances on 1.1.2006 or afterwards too. Practically, once merged, the scale 6500-10500 only has life on 1.1.2006 and not the pre-merged scales. When such a merged scale gets upgraded further to 7450-11500, naturally the upgraded scale only will have life on 1.1.2006. In the instant case, it is 2.1.2006 also, ie. Even after fixation of pay in the revised structure on 1.1.2006..


Mr.Kabui was UDC in the scale of 4000-6000 on 1.1.2006 and he was promotted as Assistant w.e.f. 2.1.2006 in the pay scale of 5500-9000. When 5500-9000 and 6500-10,500 were merged and upgraded to 7450-11,500 w.e.f. 1.1.2006 as per 6th cpc, not only Mr.Kabui all employees through out India would have been given fixation as 7450x1.86+4600 w.e.f. 1.1.2006. Whereas due to the discriminatory attitude of the DOPT, they interpretted without any cabinet decision and issued a departmental letter exclusively for Central Secretariat from the date of promotion ie., 2.1.2006. Another blunder was that their intial demand was that they were drawing 6500-10,500 from 15.9.2006 which was not all recommended by 6th cpc to retain as separate case and what is recommended and approved by government only eligible for these people also w.e.f. 1.1.2006. If they are very particular that these 5500-9000 were holding 6500-10,500 from 15.9.2006, they are likely to get the upgraded scale (7450-11500) from 15.9.2006. Whereas all others through out India (those who are drawing similar scale) are to be provided the upgraded scale 7450-11,500 w.e.f. 1.1.2006 as per the government decision published in the official gazette of India fixing at the minimum or otherwise .

As Mr.Sundarar said, otherwise all would have been given the pay (existing x 1.86+4600) instead of fixing at the minimum (7450). This kind of attitude of DOPT divided the employees as two type of citizens when there is only one FR and hence Mr.Kabui was given 7450x1.86+4600 and for the same cadre field staff was given 5500x1.86+4200 for which the present leaders are very much happy and not opening their mouth for the common cause. That is the fate of Central government emloyees through out India.

sundarar
12-02-2011, 06:31 PM
Mr.Kabui was UDC in the scale of 4000-6000 on 1.1.2006 and he was promotted as Assistant w.e.f. 2.1.2006 in the pay scale of 5500-9000. When 5500-9000 and 6500-10,500 were merged and upgraded to 7450-11,500 w.e.f. 1.1.2006 as per 6th cpc, not only Mr.Kabui all employees through out India would have been given fixation as 7450x1.86+4600 w.e.f. 1.1.2006. Whereas due to the discriminatory attitude of the DOPT, they interpretted without any cabinet decision and issued a departmental letter exclusively for Central Secretariat from the date of promotion ie., 2.1.2006. Another blunder was that their intial demand was that they were drawing 6500-10,500 from 15.9.2006 which was not all recommended by 6th cpc to retain as separate case and what is recommended and approved by government only eligible for these people also w.e.f. 1.1.2006. If they are very particular that these 5500-9000 were holding 6500-10,500 from 15.9.2006, they are likely to get the upgraded scale (7450-11500) from 15.9.2006. Whereas all others through out India (those who are drawing similar scale) are to be provided the upgraded scale 7450-11,500 w.e.f. 1.1.2006 as per the government decision published in the official gazette of India fixing at the minimum or otherwise .

As Mr.Sundarar said, otherwise all would have been given the pay (existing x 1.86+4600) instead of fixing at the minimum (7450). This kind of attitude of DOPT divided the employees as two type of citizens when there is only one FR and hence Mr.Kabui was given 7450x1.86+4600 and for the same cadre field staff was given 5500x1.86+4200 for which the present leaders are very much happy and not opening their mouth for the common cause. That is the fate of Central government emloyees through out India.

Thank you Shri Krishnanji for kind response.

The following are significant to travel further:

1. The initial OM dated 7.9.2010 of the Dept. of Expenditure which stands partially modified through their subsequent OM dated 7.1.2011. The OM dated 7.9.2010 if available, it will be useful for better understanding.

2. The stepping up of pay as per Note 7 and 10 under Rule 7 of CCS (RP) are involved.

3. It is not clear whether Mr. Kabui was drawing lesser pay than his seniors in the lower grade or only as per seniority list, the seniors were granted stepping up.

4. By issuing an order to have effect from 2.1.2006, 7450 x 1.86 is allowed. If the effect was given on 1.1.2006, whatever pay fixed as on 1.1.2006 with GP Rs.4600 is sufficient and no further order is required to be issued by comparing a junior on the date of his promotion, which is surprisingly 2.1.2006, for stepping up of pay. That means, the junior Shri Kabui's pay fixed on promotion must be Rs.7450 as on 2.1.2006 and since he is placed in the upgraded scale of 7450-11500 and got his pay revised in the revised structure w.e.f. 2.1.2006, by virtue of which he was drawing more pay in the revised structure and thus, the stepping up of seniors. Assuming that Shri Kabui's placement is by ACP and not by promotion, whether such a stepping up is permissible, when the ACP benefits are personal to the incumbent.
Whether it is a case of ACP or promotion - needs to be confirmed.

I wish to conclude by drawing reference to DOE U.O. Note attached to DOPT OM dated 22.12.2010 wherein it is stated that there exists a minimum of the pay in the pay band as on 1.1.2006 and if so,
for an upgraded scale of 7450-11500, the seniors indicated in the
DOE Order dated 7.1.2011 are equally qualified to get their pay in the pay band as 7450 x 1.86 on 1.1.2006 itself and there is no need to step up their pay on the basis of Shri Kabui's promotion, etc. on 2.1.2006.

SO, IS THE CASE OF ALL THOSE WHO WERE IN THE PRE-MERGED/PRE-UPGRADED SCALE/PRE-REPLACED SCALE IN ALL DEPARTMENTS OF GOVT. OF INDIA.

THE SAME MINIMUM PAY IN THE PAY BAND APPLICABLE TO ANY PROMOTED POST/SCALE CAN VERY WELL BE UTILISED IN THE CASE OF POST-2006 PROMOTEES FOR STEPPING UP AS AGAINST WHAT HAS BEEN INDICATED UNDER RULE 13 OF CCS (RP) RULES 2008.

THE SAME MINIMUM PAY IN THE PAY BAND APPLICABLE TO ANY PRE-REVISED SCALE RETIREE CAN FORM PART TO THE EXTENT OF 50% OF THE SAME ALONGWITH 50% OF GP TOWARDS MINIMUM ASSURED GUARANTEED REVISED PENSION.

Thanks to all.

krishnan09
12-02-2011, 07:14 PM
Thank you Shri Krishnanji for kind response.

The following are significant to travel further:

1. The initial OM dated 7.9.2010 of the Dept. of Expenditure which stands partially modified through their subsequent OM dated 7.1.2011. The OM dated 7.9.2010 if available, it will be useful for better understanding.

2. The stepping up of pay as per Note 7 and 10 under Rule 7 of CCS (RP) are involved.

3. It is not clear whether Mr. Kabui was drawing lesser pay than his seniors in the lower grade or only as per seniority list, the seniors were granted stepping up.

4. By issuing an order to have effect from 2.1.2006, 7450 x 1.86 is allowed. If the effect was given on 1.1.2006, whatever pay fixed as on 1.1.2006 with GP Rs.4600 is sufficient and no further order is required to be issued by comparing a junior on the date of his promotion, which is surprisingly 2.1.2006, for stepping up of pay. That means, the junior Shri Kabui's pay fixed on promotion must be Rs.7450 as on 2.1.2006 and since he is placed in the upgraded scale of 7450-11500 and got his pay revised in the revised structure w.e.f. 2.1.2006, by virtue of which he was drawing more pay in the revised structure and thus, the stepping up of seniors. Assuming that Shri Kabui's placement is by ACP and not by promotion, whether such a stepping up is permissible, when the ACP benefits are personal to the incumbent.
Whether it is a case of ACP or promotion - needs to be confirmed.

I wish to conclude by drawing reference to DOE U.O. Note attached to DOPT OM dated 22.12.2010 wherein it is stated that there exists a minimum of the pay in the pay band as on 1.1.2006 and if so,
for an upgraded scale of 7450-11500, the seniors indicated in the
DOE Order dated 7.1.2011 are equally qualified to get their pay in the pay band as 7450 x 1.86 on 1.1.2006 itself and there is no need to step up their pay on the basis of Shri Kabui's promotion, etc. on 2.1.2006.

SO, IS THE CASE OF ALL THOSE WHO WERE IN THE PRE-MERGED/PRE-UPGRADED SCALE/PRE-REPLACED SCALE IN ALL DEPARTMENTS OF GOVT. OF INDIA.

THE SAME MINIMUM PAY IN THE PAY BAND APPLICABLE TO ANY PROMOTED POST/SCALE CAN VERY WELL BE UTILISED IN THE CASE OF POST-2006 PROMOTEES FOR STEPPING UP AS AGAINST WHAT HAS BEEN INDICATED UNDER RULE 13 OF CCS (RP) RULES 2008.

THE SAME MINIMUM PAY IN THE PAY BAND APPLICABLE TO ANY PRE-REVISED SCALE RETIREE CAN FORM PART TO THE EXTENT OF 50% OF THE SAME ALONGWITH 50% OF GP TOWARDS MINIMUM ASSURED GUARANTEED REVISED PENSION.

Thanks to all.


Dear Mr.Sundararji,
I am giving below two links to prove that the pre-revised scales of 5500-9000 were refixed/stepped up as 7450x1.86+4600 in 7450-11,500.

http://www.cssofficers.in/doptfixation.pdf

http://www.cssofficers.in/drstepup.pdf

The major/serious anomaly is that why similar fixation/stepping are not given to the same pay scale holders and not applying same FR.

sundarar
12-02-2011, 09:13 PM
Dear Mr.Sundararji,
I am giving below two links to prove that the pre-revised scales of 5500-9000 were refixed/stepped up as 7450x1.86+4600 in 7450-11,500.

http://www.cssofficers.in/doptfixation.pdf

http://www.cssofficers.in/drstepup.pdf

The major/serious anomaly is that why similar fixation/stepping are not given to the same pay scale holders and not applying same FR.

Dear Shri Krishnanji. Thanks for providing valuable input.

The question lies in - whether Mr. Kabui was drawing more pay than the seniors as on 1.1.2006, and so on promotion to the upgraded scale, his pay on promotion was fixed at 7450. So, the pay details in the 4000-6000 scale as well as 5500-9000 may be very useful.

Whether Mr. Kabui got promotion or ACP benefits as on 2.1.2006.

If he got promotion, and if Note No.7 and 10 under Rule 7 of CCS(RP) Rules subject to the condition that Shri Kabui was drawing lesser pay than the seniors in the lower grade from time to time is involved, then the stepping up done on 2.1.2006 seems to be in order.

That is anyway separate issue, if we look at the other side.

There exists a minimum of the pay in the pay band for all scales, so for upgraded scale too.
In that case, allowing a pay in the pay band applicable to bottom of the upgraded pre-revised scale, only can render justice and only then, the purpose of introduction of running pay band can be served. Thus, the seniors whose pay have been stepped up on par with that of Shri Kabui w.e.f. 2.1.2006 vide the two OMs indicated by your goodself, are very much entitled for 7450 x 1.86 on 1.1.2006 itself rather than 2.1.2006 by virtue of upgradation of their pre-revised scale from 5500-9000 to 7450-11500 as they had already been granted GP of Rs.4600 applicable to the upgraded pre-revised scale as on 1.1.2006.

Similarly, all personnel who were in the pre-merged/pre-upgraded/pre-replaced scales as on 1.1.2006 shall also be entitled for minimum pay in the pay band as applicable to bottom of the merged higher scale/upgraded higher scale/replaced higher scale, in case their pay in the pay band fixed under the extant orders happen to be lesser than that. To that extent, existing clarifications need to be amended further.

Since the NAC will be meeting on 15.2.2011, the anomaly being a serious one like other such anomalies getting discussed ever since implementation of 6th CPC recommendation and a concrete recommendation for finalising all such anomalies is inevitable. To that extent, the Staff Side also may kindly ensure that none of the efforts are spared.

Best wishes,
Sundarar.

krishnan09
12-02-2011, 10:00 PM
Dear Shri Krishnanji. Thanks for providing valuable input.

The question lies in - whether Mr. Kabui was drawing more pay than the seniors as on 1.1.2006, and so on promotion to the upgraded scale, his pay on promotion was fixed at 7450. So, the pay details in the 4000-6000 scale as well as 5500-9000 may be very useful.

Whether Mr. Kabui got promotion or ACP benefits as on 2.1.2006.

If he got promotion, and if Note No.7 and 10 under Rule 7 of CCS(RP) Rules subject to the condition that Shri Kabui was drawing lesser pay than the seniors in the lower grade from time to time is involved, then the stepping up done on 2.1.2006 seems to be in order.

That is anyway separate issue, if we look at the other side.

There exists a minimum of the pay in the pay band for all scales, so for upgraded scale too.
In that case, allowing a pay in the pay band applicable to bottom of the upgraded pre-revised scale, only can render justice and only then, the purpose of introduction of running pay band can be served. Thus, the seniors whose pay have been stepped up on par with that of Shri Kabui w.e.f. 2.1.2006 vide the two OMs indicated by your goodself, are very much entitled for 7450 x 1.86 on 1.1.2006 itself rather than 2.1.2006 by virtue of upgradation of their pre-revised scale from 5500-9000 to 7450-11500 as they had already been granted GP of Rs.4600 applicable to the upgraded pre-revised scale as on 1.1.2006.

Similarly, all personnel who were in the pre-merged/pre-upgraded/pre-replaced scales as on 1.1.2006 shall also be entitled for minimum pay in the pay band as applicable to bottom of the merged higher scale/upgraded higher scale/replaced higher scale, in case their pay in the pay band fixed under the extant orders happen to be lesser than that. To that extent, existing clarifications need to be amended further.

Since the NAC will be meeting on 15.2.2011, the anomaly being a serious one like other such anomalies getting discussed ever since implementation of 6th CPC recommendation and a concrete recommendation for finalising all such anomalies is inevitable. To that extent, the Staff Side also may kindly ensure that none of the efforts are spared.

Best wishes,
Sundarar.

Dear Mr.Sundarar
Mr.Kabui got promotion from 2.1.2006 as Assistant(5500-9000)from UDC . ACP/MACP cannot be treated for stepping up of seniors. The partiality of DOPT in implementing the Fundamental Rule is proved beyond doubt. If the NAC considers this serious anomaly in its spirit, it is well and good. Otherwise also it will be fought and succeeded in Court. If so at least the goverment has to come forward to levy such judicial expenses from the culprit.

sundarar
13-02-2011, 12:41 PM
Dear Mr.Sundarar
Mr.Kabui got promotion from 2.1.2006 as Assistant(5500-9000)from UDC . ACP/MACP cannot be treated for stepping up of seniors. The partiality of DOPT in implementing the Fundamental Rule is proved beyond doubt. If the NAC considers this serious anomaly in its spirit, it is well and good. Otherwise also it will be fought and succeeded in Court. If so at least the goverment has to come forward to levy such judicial expenses from the culprit.

Dear Shri Krishnanji,

I could understand your concerns. Actually, the pre-2006 pensioners including myself, in pensioners thread of this Forum have all along been discussing the aspect of Minimum of the Pay in the Pay band applicable to all pre-revised scales, whether it be an upgraded/merged/replaced one or otherwise. For pre-2006 pensioners, the benefit of upgraded/merged/replaced scales have not been extended based on K.S.Krishnaswamy case judgment. But, in the case of serving employeers too denying the same is incorrect.
As you may be aware, in the case of pre-2006 pensioners, 50% of the minimum of the pay in the pay band irrespective of pre-revised scale from which the pensioner had retired alongwith 50% of GP as applicable to the pre-revised scale from which the pensioner had retired, together become a Minimum Revised Assured Guaranteed Pension as per Modified OM dated 3.10.2008. Their pre-revised scale thus lost its identity.
Whereas, in the case of Assistants/PAs or similarly situated personnel of all Central Govt. Departments, the pre-revised scale actually held only has been taken into account and not the upgraded scale for determining the pay in the pay band and wherever, it happens to be lesser than the Minimum of the Pay in the Pay band as applicable to the upgraded/replaced scale, the stepping up as on 1.1.2006 itself is not ensured.

The problem lies in not differentiating the Minimum of the Pay in the Pay band from Minimum of the Pay band. That is the reason for ambiguity in CCS RP Rule No.13 in the case of fixation of pay on promotion. You may also pl. refer to the new thread `Purpose of introduction of running Pay band'.

As far as Mr.Kabui issue is concerned, even if he got promotion
from any date subsequent to 2.1.2006, then also the seniors may be entitled for stepping up subject to meeting the requirements under Note No.7 and 10 of CCS Rule No.7. Therefore, my suggestion is that
your point of view needs to be stressed upon the Minimum of the Pay in the Pay band that ought to have been ensured in the case of an upgraded scale, here it happens to be 7450-11500, all Govt. servants whose pre-revised pay has been upgraded either from 5500-9000 or 6500-10500 are entitled for 7450 x 1.86= 13860 on 1.1.2006 itself.

Similarly, in the case of 5500-9000 merged with its higher scale 6500-9000 shall also be provided 6500 x 1.86 = 12090 if their pay in the pay band happens to be less than this amount.

In the DOPT OM dated 22.12.2010 referred to by your goodself, there is a reference to another DOPT OM dated 22.12.2010 with which there is a DOE U.O. Note also available.. The link for the same was earlier provided by Shri Victorji in Stepping up of pay thread as follows:
"DOPT has issued orders vide OM dated 22/12/2010 (http://persmin.gov.in/WriteReadData/CS/Steppingup.pdf) giving the benefit of stepping up of pay to senior Assistants/PAs who were promoted before 1.1.2006 w.r.t. to their junior Assistants/PAs who were promoted during 1.1.2006 to 31.8.2008 and who got the benefit of fixation of pay at 13,860".


You may please see the same for further input.

As long as there exists a Minimum Pay in the Pay Band - as asserted in the DOE U.O. Note attached with the above cited OM of 22.12.2010,
the same as corresponding to upgraded scale, shall be made applicable while revising the pay of a pre-upgraded scale on 1.1.2006 itself.

Utilising the upgraded pre-revised scale only for the purpose of GP and not for ensuring the corresponding minimum of the pay in the pay band as applicable to the upgraded pre-revised scale on 1.1.2006, would acutally defeat the very purpose of introduction of running pay band as recommended by the 6th CPC, according to me.

susant270774
04-04-2011, 04:39 PM
I have collected the copy of fixation Gm kabui & and n which no such new rule of CCS RP 2008 is mentioned only directly upgradtion the copyu of the pay fixation is uploaded for your information

Dear Shri Krishnanji,

I could understand your concerns. Actually, the pre-2006 pensioners including myself, in pensioners thread of this Forum have all along been discussing the aspect of Minimum of the Pay in the Pay band applicable to all pre-revised scales, whether it be an upgraded/merged/replaced one or otherwise. For pre-2006 pensioners, the benefit of upgraded/merged/replaced scales have not been extended based on K.S.Krishnaswamy case judgment. But, in the case of serving employeers too denying the same is incorrect.
As you may be aware, in the case of pre-2006 pensioners, 50% of the minimum of the pay in the pay band irrespective of pre-revised scale from which the pensioner had retired alongwith 50% of GP as applicable to the pre-revised scale from which the pensioner had retired, together become a Minimum Revised Assured Guaranteed Pension as per Modified OM dated 3.10.2008. Their pre-revised scale thus lost its identity.
Whereas, in the case of Assistants/PAs or similarly situated personnel of all Central Govt. Departments, the pre-revised scale actually held only has been taken into account and not the upgraded scale for determining the pay in the pay band and wherever, it happens to be lesser than the Minimum of the Pay in the Pay band as applicable to the upgraded/replaced scale, the stepping up as on 1.1.2006 itself is not ensured.

The problem lies in not differentiating the Minimum of the Pay in the Pay band from Minimum of the Pay band. That is the reason for ambiguity in CCS RP Rule No.13 in the case of fixation of pay on promotion. You may also pl. refer to the new thread `Purpose of introduction of running Pay band'.

As far as Mr.Kabui issue is concerned, even if he got promotion
from any date subsequent to 2.1.2006, then also the seniors may be entitled for stepping up subject to meeting the requirements under Note No.7 and 10 of CCS Rule No.7. Therefore, my suggestion is that
your point of view needs to be stressed upon the Minimum of the Pay in the Pay band that ought to have been ensured in the case of an upgraded scale, here it happens to be 7450-11500, all Govt. servants whose pre-revised pay has been upgraded either from 5500-9000 or 6500-10500 are entitled for 7450 x 1.86= 13860 on 1.1.2006 itself.

Similarly, in the case of 5500-9000 merged with its higher scale 6500-9000 shall also be provided 6500 x 1.86 = 12090 if their pay in the pay band happens to be less than this amount.

In the DOPT OM dated 22.12.2010 referred to by your goodself, there is a reference to another DOPT OM dated 22.12.2010 with which there is a DOE U.O. Note also available.. The link for the same was earlier provided by Shri Victorji in Stepping up of pay thread as follows:
"DOPT has issued orders vide OM dated 22/12/2010 (http://persmin.gov.in/WriteReadData/CS/Steppingup.pdf) giving the benefit of stepping up of pay to senior Assistants/PAs who were promoted before 1.1.2006 w.r.t. to their junior Assistants/PAs who were promoted during 1.1.2006 to 31.8.2008 and who got the benefit of fixation of pay at 13,860".


You may please see the same for further input.

As long as there exists a Minimum Pay in the Pay Band - as asserted in the DOE U.O. Note attached with the above cited OM of 22.12.2010,
the same as corresponding to upgraded scale, shall be made applicable while revising the pay of a pre-upgraded scale on 1.1.2006 itself.

Utilising the upgraded pre-revised scale only for the purpose of GP and not for ensuring the corresponding minimum of the pay in the pay band as applicable to the upgraded pre-revised scale on 1.1.2006, would acutally defeat the very purpose of introduction of running pay band as recommended by the 6th CPC, according to me.

sundarar
05-04-2011, 07:38 AM
Thanks for providing the vital information. I could only guess that Shri Kabui must have opted
for fixation of his pre-revised pay in the revised structure w.e.f. the date of his promotion, viz.
2.1.2006 as against 1.1.2006. In a rarest of rarest, in the instant case, the individual would have
retained his pre-revised scale of pay for only a day! On promotion, his pre-revised pay when undergone
refixation on promotion and the re=fixed pay when undergone further revision to the revised structure,
the corresponding minimum of the pay in the pay band applicable to the upgraded/replaced higher pay scale bottom, viz. 7450 appear to have been granted.

The pay anomaly in view of the above occur in two counts.

1. In the case of employees who got their pay fixed in the revised structure corresponding to upgraded/replaced pre-revised scale of pay have been given only the benefit of enhanced GP, Rs. 4600 as against Rs.4200; but their revised pay on 1.1.2006 has not been stepped upto minimum of the pay in the pay band, ie. Rs.7450 x 1.86.

2. In the case of employees who got their pay fixed in the revised structure in the pre-revised scale of pay that was held till 2.1.2006 by Shri G.M.Kabui and got subsequent promotion as Assistants, would have got only fitment benefit under CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 ie. one increment. It is quite possible that such a promoted pay lesser than that of Shri Kabui. Even if a person got fixation of pay on promotion on the very next day of Shri Kabui's, ie. 3.1.2006, the same would have been the situation in case he had opted to revise his pre-revised in the pay of pre-promoted scale on 1.1.2006 itself.

In the case of ACP/MACP also, the situation cited above under Sl.No.2 happens.

The remedial solution is that the Department ought to realise that pay band and pay in the pay band
are not one and same. Minimum pay in the pay band of a particular scale shall be ensured wherever it happens to be less.

The serving employees are requested to focus their attention to this particular phenomenon - Minimum of the Pay band and Minimum of the Pay in the Pay Band.

sundarar
05-04-2011, 08:25 PM
[QUOTE=sundarar;12273] Shri Kabui must have opted
for fixation of his pre-revised pay in the revised structure w.e.f. the date of his promotion, viz. 2.1.2006 as against 1.1.2006. In a rarest of rarest, in the instant case, the individual would have retained his pre-revised scale of pay for only a day! On promotion, his pre-revised pay when undergone refixation on promotion and the re=fixed pay when undergone further revision to the revised structure, the corresponding minimum of the pay in the pay band applicable to the upgraded/replaced higher pay scale bottom, viz. 7450 appear to have been granted.
-------------------------------------------------------------
In continuation of my above post, I have observed the following:

1. The date 1.1.2006 was a Sunday and hence closed holiday. A promotee can thus assume charge of the promoted post only on the next working day, viz. 2.1.2006.
Thus, there would not have been any question of retaining the scale till promotion.

2. Further, when the date of promotion happened to be 2nd January, 2006
as per DOE OM dated 13.9.2008 Clarification para 2 (b), "In case the Govt. servant opts to get his pay in the higher grade from the date of his promotion, he shall get his first increment in the higher grade on the next 1st July if he was promoted between 2nd July and 1st January. However, if he was promoted between 2nd January and 30th June of a particular year, he shall get his increment on 1st July of next year".

Thus, since Mr. Kabui was promoted between 2nd January and 30th June of 2006, he shall get his increment only on 1st July of 2007.

Whereas, Mr. Kabui was given increment on 1st July 2006 itself in spite of his date of promotion, viz. 2nd January 2006.

By virtue of increment granted on 1st July 2006 how his promotion will take effect, only experts can tell.

I request Shri Victorji, Shri TVenkatamji, Shri Krishnanji and Shri Susantji to post their views in this regard. If Mr. Kabui can be considered for grant of minimum pay in the pay band on promotion after 1.1.2006, then all those who got promoted to the grade of Assistant during pre and post-2006 may also become eligible to get the same amount if their pay in the pay band happens to be less than the said minimum. Same is the case of ACP/MACP holders too. Ultimately, all are similarly situated personnel and hence there could not be disparity in pay fixation. I am prepared to stand corrected if my views are incorrect.

sundarar
05-04-2011, 08:27 PM
I could only guess that Shri Kabui must have opted
for fixation of his pre-revised pay in the revised structure w.e.f. the date of his promotion, viz. 2.1.2006 as against 1.1.2006. In a rarest of rarest, in the instant case, the individual would have retained his pre-revised scale of pay for only a day! On promotion, his pre-revised pay when undergone refixation on promotion and the re=fixed pay when undergone further revision to the revised structure, the corresponding minimum of the pay in the pay band applicable to the upgraded/replaced higher pay scale bottom, viz. 7450 appear to have been granted.

In continuation of my above post, I have observed the following:

1. The date 1.1.2006 was a Sunday and hence closed holiday. A promotee can thus assume charge of the promoted post only on the next working day, viz. 2.1.2006.


2. Further, when the date of promotion happened to be 2nd January, 2006
as per DOE OM dated 13.9.2008 Clarification para 2 (b), "In case the Govt. servant opts to get his pay in the higher grade from the date of his promotion, he shall get his first increment in the higher grade on the next 1st July if he was promoted between 2nd July and 1st January. However, if he was promoted between 2nd January and 30th June of a particular year, he shall get his increment on 1st July of next year".

Thus, since Mr. Kabui was promoted between 2nd January and 30th June of 2006, he shall get his increment only on 1st July of 2007.

Whereas, Mr. Kabui was given increment on 1st July 2006 itself in spite of his date of promotion, viz. 2nd January 2006.

By virtue of increment granted on 1st July 2006 how his promotion will take effect, only experts can tell.

I request Shri Victorji, Shri TVenkatamji, Shri Krishnanji and Shri Susantji to post their views in this regard. If Mr. Kabui can be considered for grant of minimum pay in the pay band on promotion after 1.1.2006, then all those who got promoted to the grade of Assistant during pre and post-2006 may also become eligible to get the same amount if their pay in the pay band happens to be less than the said minimum. Same is the case of ACP/MACP holders too. Ultimately, all are similarly situated personnel and hence there could not be disparity in pay fixation. I am prepared to stand corrected if my views are incorrect.

RKPATHAK
06-04-2011, 09:02 AM
My case is unique
appointed assistant w.e.f. 14.07.2011 pay scale rs 425-800
promoted confidential assistant 17.06.1987 pay scale 1640-2900
promoted asst admn officer 17.04.1990 pay scale 2000-3200
sought reversion assistant 17.06.1991 pay scale 1400-2600 personal reason
promoted accountant 17.08.1995 pay scale 1640-2900
granted 2nd acp 14.07.2007 pay scale 7450-11500
vi cpc pay fixed grade pay 01.01.2006 rs 4200; 14.07.2007 rs 4600

Victor
06-04-2011, 09:36 AM
In continuation of my above post, I have observed the following:

1. The date 1.1.2006 was a Sunday and hence closed holiday. A promotee can thus assume charge of the promoted post only on the next working day, viz. 2.1.2006.


2. Further, when the date of promotion happened to be 2nd January, 2006
as per DOE OM dated 13.9.2008 Clarification para 2 (b), "In case the Govt. servant opts to get his pay in the higher grade from the date of his promotion, he shall get his first increment in the higher grade on the next 1st July if he was promoted between 2nd July and 1st January. However, if he was promoted between 2nd January and 30th June of a particular year, he shall get his increment on 1st July of next year".

Thus, since Mr. Kabui was promoted between 2nd January and 30th June of 2006, he shall get his increment only on 1st July of 2007.

Whereas, Mr. Kabui was given increment on 1st July 2006 itself in spite of his date of promotion, viz. 2nd January 2006.

By virtue of increment granted on 1st July 2006 how his promotion will take effect, only experts can tell.

I request Shri Victorji, Shri TVenkatamji, Shri Krishnanji and Shri Susantji to post their views in this regard. If Mr. Kabui can be considered for grant of minimum pay in the pay band on promotion after 1.1.2006, then all those who got promoted to the grade of Assistant during pre and post-2006 may also become eligible to get the same amount if their pay in the pay band happens to be less than the said minimum. Same is the case of ACP/MACP holders too. Ultimately, all are similarly situated personnel and hence there could not be disparity in pay fixation. I am prepared to stand corrected if my views are incorrect.

Mr. Kabui has probably got the benefit of OM No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 13th March 2009 (http://finmin.nic.in/6cpc/fno1108dt130309.pdf).

Victor