PDA

View Full Version : pay on par with direct recruits



spenke
03-10-2010, 09:57 PM
Hai friends

Everybody might have seen the minutes of 2nd anamoly committee meeting.

The official side infomed that the matter of issue of orders regarding fixation of pay of promotees on par with the pay of direct recruits on or after 1st Jan 2006, as was done in Railways will be examined for issue of necessary orders in other departments.
Is anybody know the status of the same?
If not when will be the next anamoly committee meeting?

SASI
04-10-2010, 06:07 AM
Dear friend,

No positive development on grant of pay of dirrect recruits to others. The Third Meeting was scheduled to be held in june 2010. But there is no further news about the meeting.

sasi

ankitsud36
06-10-2010, 06:26 PM
Hi Friends,

It is very surprising to know that the Railway has implemented the orders for pay fixation of promotees at par with pay of direct recruits on or afterafter 1/1/96. Either it is the mockery of CCS(RP) Rules 2008 or other deptts. are silly enough. Govt. of India should clarify its stand immediately.

ankitsud36
09-10-2010, 06:10 PM
Hi Friends,

It is very surprising to know that the Railway has implemented the orders for pay fixation of promotees at par with pay of direct recruits on or afterafter 1/1/96. Either it is the mockery of CCS(RP) Rules 2008 or other deptts. are silly enough. Govt. of India should clarify its stand immediately.

Can any body forward me the link/letter issued by railway under which railway has implemented these orders?
E-mail id - ankitsud36@gmail.com

SASI
09-10-2010, 06:26 PM
Can any body forward me the link/letter issued by railway under which railway has implemented these orders?
E-mail id - ankitsud36@gmail.com

Link : http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/directorate/pay_comm/PC6/rbe_28_2010.pdf

sasi

ankitsud36
12-10-2010, 08:33 AM
Link : http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/directorate/pay_comm/PC6/rbe_28_2010.pdf

sasi
There is clear cut instruction in this letter that the pay of senior(drawing less pay) can be stepped up at par with his junior borne on same cadre seniority( with direct recruit), but nowhere has written to upgrade the pay of all promotees at par with the minimum pay admissible to direct recruites.
Please clarify,
whether railway has fixed the pay of all promotees at par with minimum in the pay band pay as admissible to direct recruites (not borne on same cadre seniority)
OR
to only promotees with their counterparts in the same cadre seniority(direct recruites)

regards
-Ankit Sud

Victor
12-10-2010, 09:42 AM
There is clear cut instruction in this letter that the pay of senior(drawing less pay) can be stepped up at par with his junior borne on same cadre seniority( with direct recruit), but nowhere has written to upgrade the pay of all promotees at par with the minimum pay admissible to direct recruites.
Please clarify,
whether railway has fixed the pay of all promotees at par with minimum in the pay band pay as admissible to direct recruites (not borne on same cadre seniority)
OR
to only promotees with their counterparts in the same cadre seniority(direct recruites)

regards
-Ankit Sud

The stepping up of pay is admissible to only those seniors who are drawing less pay than their junior direct recruits.

Victor

SASI
13-10-2010, 06:39 AM
There is clear cut instruction in this letter that the pay of senior(drawing less pay) can be stepped up at par with his junior borne on same cadre seniority( with direct recruit), but nowhere has written to upgrade the pay of all promotees at par with the minimum pay admissible to direct recruites.
Please clarify,
whether railway has fixed the pay of all promotees at par with minimum in the pay band pay as admissible to direct recruites (not borne on same cadre seniority)
OR
to only promotees with their counterparts in the same cadre seniority(direct recruites)

regards
-Ankit Sud
Promotees are eligible for minimum pay admissible to direct recruits in cases where a junior has joined in the same cadre on direct recruitment after 1-1-2006.

sasi

ankitsud36
13-10-2010, 08:15 AM
Promotees are eligible for minimum pay admissible to direct recruits in cases where a junior has joined in the same cadre on direct recruitment after 1-1-2006.

sasi

my query was regarding whether railway has stepped up pay the pay of all promotees to minimum of pay corresponding to grade pay admissible,irrespective of the cadre in contra vention of CCS RP Rules 2008, if not then what wrong the railway has done?
Ankit Sud

SASI
13-10-2010, 11:07 PM
my query was regarding whether railway has stepped up pay the pay of all promotees to minimum of pay corresponding to grade pay admissible,irrespective of the cadre in contra vention of CCS RP Rules 2008, if not then what wrong the railway has done?
Ankit Sud

Railways treats this as anomaly whereas CCS RP Rules 2008 does not. I think railways has done the right.

sasi

jaleelethiyil
14-10-2010, 07:55 AM
my query was regarding whether railway has stepped up pay the pay of all promotees to minimum of pay corresponding to grade pay admissible,irrespective of the cadre in contra vention of CCS RP Rules 2008, if not then what wrong the railway has done?
Ankit Sud
Para 5 of this order clearly mentioned that stepping up of pay of senior promotee is possible only, if a direct appointed junior who is borne on the same seniority list drawing more pay than the senior,subjected to some condition given in this para.

spenke
16-10-2010, 01:44 PM
Hai friends
Like in Railways, is the pay of seniors stepped up on par with their juniors in any other offices?
For my earlier query on similar lines, Shri Jitender informed that stepping up of pay possible even with the existing rules of anamoly. I think, it does not work? As the present anamoly rules applicable only when the anamoly arises due to fixation of pay on promotion under FR 22.
If any aware of such situations, kindly let me know the authority under which it was allowed?

Even if it is allowed in case by case basis also, please inform me?

Spenke

sundarar
16-10-2010, 08:48 PM
Hai friends
Like in Railways, is the pay of seniors stepped up on par with their juniors in any other offices?
For my earlier query on similar lines, Shri Jitender informed that stepping up of pay possible even with the existing rules of anamoly. I think, it does not work? As the present anamoly rules applicable only when the anamoly arises due to fixation of pay on promotion under FR 22.
If any aware of such situations, kindly let me know the authority under which it was allowed?

Even if it is allowed in case by case basis also, please inform me?

Spenke

Dear Sir,

Yes please. Stepping up of pay of seniors on par with junior's pay fixed on promotion if the former's is lesser than the junior's pay, provided the junior should not have been drawn more pay than the senior in the lower grade from time to time - possible even with the existing rules for removal of anomaly and the same is reiterated in Note 10 under Rule 7 of CCS(RP) Rules, 2008. On promotion, the fixation of pay always take place under FR22, which is already known. As far as RB's Circular referred to in the discussion, according to me, since the stepping up provision is already existing in the case of promotion, what has been allowed through the circular is the stepping up of pay on par with the direct recruits, provided the cadre has the element of direct recruitment.
That means, where certain posts are filled only by promotion, there the question of direct recruitment may not arise. But under 6th CPC's fixed amount of initial entry level pay in the pay band according to GP for a direct recruit after 1.1.2006, the need for removal of anomaly arises and hence the Circular - This is my view please.

Accordingly on introduction of fixed pay in the pay band corresponding to grade pay as per 6th CPC recommendation for personnel recruited after 1.1.2006, the anomaly between a pre-2006 appointee/promotee and a post-2006 promotee/appointee is being removed by stepping up the pay on promotion/appointment on par with the junior is being removed by inter departmental anomaly Committee,

At the same time, there is another type of anomaly that occurs in the case of post-2006 promotee when compared with a pre-2006 promotee.

To illustrate with an example:

Mr. A was promoted to the scale S-8 and got fixed his pay at minimum of the scale Rs.4500/- in the pre-revised scale of Rs.4500-125-7000 on 1.4.2008.

While a similar employee Mr. B who was promoted to the same scale on 1.4.2005 and got fixed at Rs.4500/- ie. at the minimum of the scale will get his gets his pay in the pay band on 1.1.2006 by application of 1.86 mf which works out to Rs.4500x1.86 = Rs.8370, as far as Mr. A, 3% of his pre-promoted revised pay gets added to his existing pay in the pay band, but not stepped upto Rs.8370 when after adding the 3% increment with the existing pay in the pay band, the same happens to be lesser than 8370. Because, as per the provision of CCS(RP) Rules, it can be stepped upto only the minimum of the pay band, ie. Rs.5200, which question will not arise at all.

Ultimately, though he was getting minimum of the pre-revised scale, viz. Rs.4500/- on 1.4.2008, on revision of his pay in the pre-promoted post as per 6th CPC w.e.f. 1.1.2006 and on fixation of pay in the revised structure on promotion, his pay happens to be lesser than the minimum of the pay band Rs.8370 as applicable to corresponding pre-revised scale's minimum ie. Rs.4500.

My view is that a minimum pay in the pay band should always correspond with a minimum pay of its respective pre-revised scale minimum.

First, it is to be noted that minimum of the 4 pay bands, while corresponding with the minimum of the lowest scale grouped under respective pay band particularly because, the pay in the pay band
corresponding with the minimum of such a lowest scale is also same.
But in respect of remaining scales grouped within the same pay band,
the case is not so. Every pay scale minimum has its respective
minimum pay in the pay band.

The pay in the pay band is nothing but running pay in the pay band.
At the same time, it cannot be lower than the corresponding pay in the pay band of a particular pre-revised scale of pay. While Grade Pay
on promotion corresponds with a particular pre-revised scale of pay applicable to the promoted post, the minimum pay in the pay band on promotion also should correspond with the minimum of the promoted post's pre-revised scale. Otherwise, the Revised Pay on promotion,
may not be corresponding with the pre-revised scale of the promoted post, in toto.

Similarly, in the case of merged scales, for example, S-9, S-10 and S-11 merged into Rs.6500-200-10500 though the grade pay is allowed as applicable to the merged scale, the pay in the pay band as applicable to the upgraded scale ie. 6500-200-10500 is not allowed. Otherwise, the actual pay in the pay band shall start its journey from 6500x1.86=12090
alongwith the gp Rs.4200 from 1.1.2006 particularly for persons at minimum of the respective scales, S-9 and S-10, ie. 5000 and 5500. Whereas the pay in the pay band in spite of merger is decided by application of 1.86 mf, ie. 5000 x 1.86 and 5500 x 1.86, but not 6500 x 1.86.

Similarly in the case of upgraded scale, the pay scale Rs.6500-200-10500 has been upgraded to Rs.7450-225-11500. While, the GP Rs.4600 applicable to the upgraded grade is allowed, there is no change in the pay in the pay band. Otherwise, here too, the pay in the pay band, being running pay in the pay band, shall start its journey from 7450 x 1.86 = 13860.

If a person was drawing Rs.7100/- on 1.1.2006 in the pre-revised scale Rs.6500-200-10500 and when the scale gets upgraded to Rs.7450-225-11500, his pay in the pay band is only Rs.7100x1.86=Rs.13210, but not Rs.13860. The GP Rs.4600 however is given because it is said to have been as applicable to the upgraded scale. There cannot a minimum less than a minimum.

As long as it is maintained that both pay band and pay in the pay band are one and same, this problem do occur. The minimum of the pay band and the minimum of the pay in the pay band can never be one and same except the 4 scales, viz. S-4, S-9, Gr.A Entry and S-24.

Once at minimum level the anomaly is removed by treating the minimum of the pay in the pay band will always correspond with the pre-revised scale minimum, the appropriate stages in the promoted scale's pre-revised pay will automatically get its applicable pay in the pay band corresponding to that stage.

Because in the case of serving employees, such cases may be rare and hence the impact has not been realised. But in the case of pre-2006 pensioners, very hectic discussions had been taking place in Gconnect Discussion Forum and even cases are filed in courts to establish the fact that a minimum of the pay in the pay band will always correspond with its corresponding pre-revised scale minimum/bottom.

The concept must be clear. There can be no minimum pay in the pay band irrespective of its pre-revised scale minimum, and even in the aforesaid 4 scales the minimum of the respective pay bands happens to be the minimum of the pay in the pay band also. As such, the minimum of the pay band can never be minimum of the pay in the pay band for remaining scales grouped alongwith it under a same pay band.

Incidentally, the bottom of the revised pay shall necessarily correspond with the bottom of the pre-revised scale of pay even on promotion, merger, upgradation after 1.1.2006 if such a bottom of the revised pay happens to be lesser than minimum revised pay as applicable to a particular pre-revised scale, as every pre-revised scale do have a corresponding revised pay (consisting of pay in the pay band and gp, but not pay band and gp). Pay Band is just an identification of category like Gr.A, Gr.B, Gr.C and Gr.D and as such its minimum has nothing to do with revised pay/revised pension. It is Pay in the Pay Band that has been clearly defined under the CCS(RP) Rules, 2008 and hence a revision also shall be in terms of pay in the pay band only apart from GP which too has relevance to a corresponding pre-revised scale.

spenke
17-10-2010, 05:13 PM
Dear Sri Sunder

Thank you very much for your reply. Please read the following case and if possible quote the relevant orders if any to solve it.
Mr X (Promotee) was drawing pay of Rs 6900 in the pre-revised scale of 6500-200-10500 as on 1.1.2006. His pay was fixed at Rs 17640
Mr Y (direct recruitee in the same post in the 2004) was drawing 6700 as on 1.1.2006 in the same scale. His pay was fixed at Rs 17270
Mr Z (also direct recruitee in the same post appointed in the June 2006) was fixed at Rs 18150 from the date of his appointment.
Is this anamoly rectified in the Revised Pay Rules.
According to my knowledge it is not rectified.
If I am correct, I would like to seek the information from Ministry Personnel, as I learnt that it would deal the same on case to case basis.

Spenke

Victor
17-10-2010, 06:26 PM
Dear Sri Sunder

Thank you very much for your reply. Please read the following case and if possible quote the relevant orders if any to solve it.
Mr X (Promotee) was drawing pay of Rs 6900 in the pre-revised scale of 6500-200-10500 as on 1.1.2006. His pay was fixed at Rs 17640
Mr Y (direct recruitee in the same post in the 2004) was drawing 6700 as on 1.1.2006 in the same scale. His pay was fixed at Rs 17270
Mr Z (also direct recruitee in the same post appointed in the June 2006) was fixed at Rs 18150 from the date of his appointment.
Is this anamoly rectified in the Revised Pay Rules.
According to my knowledge it is not rectified.
If I am correct, I would like to seek the information from Ministry Personnel, as I learnt that it would deal the same on case to case basis.

Spenke

There is no provision in CCS(RP) Rules, 2008 to rectify the anomaly indicated. The issue has to be dealt with on a case to case basis in consultation with the Department of Expenditure.

Victor

sundarar
17-10-2010, 07:08 PM
Dear Sri Sunder

Thank you very much for your reply. Please read the following case and if possible quote the relevant orders if any to solve it.
Mr X (Promotee) was drawing pay of Rs 6900 in the pre-revised scale of 6500-200-10500 as on 1.1.2006. His pay was fixed at Rs 17640
Mr Y (direct recruitee in the same post in the 2004) was drawing 6700 as on 1.1.2006 in the same scale. His pay was fixed at Rs 17270
Mr Z (also direct recruitee in the same post appointed in the June 2006) was fixed at Rs 18150 from the date of his appointment.
Is this anamoly rectified in the Revised Pay Rules.
According to my knowledge it is not rectified.
If I am correct, I would like to seek the information from Ministry Personnel, as I learnt that it would deal the same on case to case basis.

Spenke


Dear Sri Sunder

Thank you very much for your reply. Please read the following case and if possible quote the relevant orders if any to solve it.
Mr X (Promotee) was drawing pay of Rs 6900 in the pre-revised scale of 6500-200-10500 as on 1.1.2006. His pay was fixed at Rs 17640
Mr Y (direct recruitee in the same post in the 2004) was drawing 6700 as on 1.1.2006 in the same scale. His pay was fixed at Rs 17270
Mr Z (also direct recruitee in the same post appointed in the June 2006) was fixed at Rs 18150 from the date of his appointment.
Is this anamoly rectified in the Revised Pay Rules.
According to my knowledge it is not rectified.
If I am correct, I would like to seek the information from Ministry Personnel, as I learnt that it would deal the same on case to case basis.

Spenke

Dear Sir,

Mr. X's pay has nothing to do with the remaining two personnel. It is however,
understood that he has been allowed the grade pay Rs.4800 as applicable to the upgraded pay scale 7500-12500 w.e.f. 1.1.2006. In that case, actually, his existing pay in the pre-upgraded scale being Rs.6900, that is less than the bottom/minimum of the upgraded scale minimum, his pay in the pay band also should correspond with such an upgraded scale w.e.f. 1.1.2006, ie. 7500 x 1.86 = 13950 + 4800= 18750. (This is what I was emphasising in my earlier post in the same thread as follows:Similarly in the case of upgraded scale, the pay scale Rs.6500-200-10500 has been upgraded to Rs.7450-225-11500. While, the GP Rs.4600 applicable to the upgraded grade is allowed, there is no change in the pay in the pay band. Otherwise, here too, the pay in the pay band, being running pay in the pay band, shall start its journey from 7450 x 1.86 = 13860.

If a person was drawing Rs.7100/- on 1.1.2006 in the pre-revised scale Rs.6500-200-10500 and when the scale gets upgraded to Rs.7450-225-11500, his pay in the pay band is only Rs.7100x1.86=Rs.13210, but not Rs.13860. The GP Rs.4600 however is given because it is said to have been as applicable to the upgraded scale. There cannot a minimum less than a minimum). I wish to point out that the pay scale Rs.1400-2600 in respect of Sr. Stenographers whose corresponding revised scale previously was Rs.5500-9000 on 1.1.86 as per 4th CPC reco., the said scale was revised to Rs.1640-2900 at a later stage after a period of 12 years but retrospectively from 1.1.1986. Those who were drawing lesser pay than Rs.1640, got their pay stepped upto the minimum of the replaced/upgraded scale. Similar stepping up in the case of persons like Mr. X, to the minimum of the pay in the pay band corresponding to the upgraded scale Rs.7500/- shall be allowed, but it is not so, hence there is an anomaly. This has happened as the emphasis was incorrectly attached to minimum of the pay band rather than minimum of the pay in the pay band, and this aspect in particular was pointed out in my previous post.
For removal of this anomaly, as Shri Victor has pointed out that only the DOE/MOF or DOP can have a final say. First requirement to understand the differentiation between a minimum of the pay band and minimum of the pay in the pay band. Though Mr. X is said to have been holding the pre-revised scale of Rs.7500-12500/- his revised pay at bottom is not corresponding to the pre-revised scale bottom ie. Rs.7500. This is the real anomaly.

As far as Mr. Y and Mr. Z, the former being an appointee of pre-2006 and the latter a post-2006 appointee, for the purpose of stepping up of the former's pay on par with the latter one, has to be decided by the inter departmental anomaly committee with the Competent Authority's approval in the concerned dept. or otherwise with the concurrence of DOE/MOF or DOPT if need be. It is to be noted that in the case of Mr. Y too, his pay like Mr.X
was not corresponding to his pre-revised revised scale bottom, ie. Rs.7500 and in his case also should be Rs.18750 although in such an event Mr. X and Mr. Y may happen to receive the same amount, Mr. X will retain his seniority over Mr. Y as usual.

A minimum of the Pay in the Pay Band shall always correspond with its respective pre-revised scale of pay for the purpose of revision of pay/pension, is what we want to emphasise. On the contrary, the minimum of the pay band is being maintained as minimum of the pay in the pay band irrespective of pre-revised scale, and hence even in the case of fixation of pay on promotion after 1.1.2006, such anomaly very well exists, as illustrated in my previous post.

Since such cases are quite few, the impact has not been realised and taken up appropriately so far, according to me.

spenke
04-11-2010, 06:35 PM
Hi friends

Everybody might have seen the order of stepping up of pay of senior on par with direct recruits in respect of Income tax department. We may hope the same will follow in respect of other departments also.

Spenke

tvenkatam
06-11-2010, 10:37 PM
Hi friends

Everybody might have seen the order of stepping up of pay of senior on par with direct recruits in respect of Income tax department. We may hope the same will follow in respect of other departments also.

Spenke

Dear Friends,

The order of CBDT is at the link below:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/41240732/6cpc-Pay-Promo-Officers-Incometax-With-Dr-Officers-2-11-2010

Part of para 3 of this order reads as under:
“As far as the matter relating to bringing the pay of existing Government servants as on 1.1.2006 at par with the pay of direct recruits recruited on or after 1.1.2006 is concerned, it is clarified that the pay of those Government servants who joined the Income Tax Department as direct recruits on or after 1.1.2006 is to be fixed as per Section II , Part ‘A’ of the First Schedule to the CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 and the procedure of pay fixation is based on a specific recommendation of the Sixth Pay Commission, which has been accepted by the Government”.

Can any one trace out the afore referred ‘specific recommendation’ of SCPC and recall when this recommendation was accepted by the Government?

sundarar
07-11-2010, 08:28 AM
The RB Order dated 17.2.2010 also indicates,
"3. As far as the matter relating to bringing the pay of existing Railway servants as on 1.1.2006 at par with the pay of direct recruits recruited on or after 1.1.2006 is concerned, it is clarified that the pay of those Railway servants who joined the Railway as directrecruits on or after 1.1.2006 is to be fixed as per Section II, Part ‘A’ of the First Schedule to the RS(RP) Rules, 2008 and the procedure of pay fixation is based on a specific recommendation of the Sixth Pay Commission, which has been accepted by the Government. As far as pay fixation in respect to those Railway servants who were already in service on 1.1.2006 is concerned, the same is to be done as per the provisions of Rule 7 of RS(RP) Rules, 2008 and in accordance with the fitment tables annexed with this Ministry’s letter No.PC-VI/2008/I/RSRP/1 dated 11.9.2008.

4. In the light of the foregoing, it is clarified that in terms of RS(RP) Rules,2008:-

(a) no minimum pay in the pay band can be prescribed in the case of promotion of Railway servants from one grade to another (except in the case of change in pay band); and"

As per para 4(a) above, there will be pay anomaly between a post-2006 promotee and a
Direct Recruitee, where the pay in the pay band on fixation of pay on promotion of the post-2006 promotee happens to be lesser than that of the DR. While both will be holding same duties and responsibilities as has been in the case of pre-2006 promotee and post-2006 Direct Recruitee, by virtue of promotion, a promotee's pay shall not be reduced from than that of Direct Recruitee to the same post. As per the above para 4(a), in the
case of change in the pay band, the minimum pay in the pay band is allowed for stepping up. In that case, only there will be only 4 pre-revised scales having same amount as min. of pb and min. of pay in the pay band. Whereas, the remaining 25 scales do have their own respective minimum pay in the pay band and when the same are existing, such minimum pay in the pay band can very well be prescribed in the case of promotees also wherever the pay in the pay band happens to be lesser than that of the pay in the pay band corresponding to the minimum of the pre-revised scale of the promoted post. A minimum of pay band is nothing but the minimum of the pay in the pay band corresponding to minimum of the lowest pre-revised scale grouped under such pay band. Prescribing such pay in the pay band for remaining pre-revised scales grouped under such pay band will not remove the disparity between a promotee and a direct recruitee after 2006. Like Every Pre-revised scale minimum has its corresponding minimum/bottom of the pay in the pay band, such a minimum/bottom of the pay in the pay band can at least be prescribed for a promotee of post-2006 too, even if the same happens to be lesser than that of a Direct Recruitee in whose case, a fixed element of pay in the pay band is prescribed.

Victor
25-11-2010, 12:53 PM
Dear Friends,

The order of CBDT is at the link below:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/41240732/6cpc-Pay-Promo-Officers-Incometax-With-Dr-Officers-2-11-2010

Part of para 3 of this order reads as under:
“As far as the matter relating to bringing the pay of existing Government servants as on 1.1.2006 at par with the pay of direct recruits recruited on or after 1.1.2006 is concerned, it is clarified that the pay of those Government servants who joined the Income Tax Department as direct recruits on or after 1.1.2006 is to be fixed as per Section II , Part ‘A’ of the First Schedule to the CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 and the procedure of pay fixation is based on a specific recommendation of the Sixth Pay Commission, which has been accepted by the Government”.

Can any one trace out the afore referred ‘specific recommendation’ of SCPC and recall when this recommendation was accepted by the Government?

The "procedure" referred to above, could be para 2.2.22 (iv) of the 6CPC Report.

Victor

sundarar
25-11-2010, 08:00 PM
The para 2.2.22(iv) of the 6th CPC Recommendation is as follows:
"(iv) In case of new recruits, fixation in the running pay band of the group (viz. ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’) to which the post belongs will be done in the following manner:-
a. Initially the fixed qualifying service prescribed in DOPT’s OM dated 25/5/1998 (as may be amended by
the Government in future) for movement from the first grade in the running band to the grade in which recruitment is being made will be computed.

b. Thereafter, one increment for every year of fixed qualifying service prescribed in the aforesaid OM of DOPT shall be provided on the sum total of the minimum of the running pay band and the lowest grade pay in that pay band.

c. The pay band on joining shall be the stage so computed in the corresponding running pay band. Additionally, grade pay corresponding to the grade in that running pay band shall be payable.

d. To exemplify the fitment of new recruits in any grade in the revised pay bands, a case of direct recruitment in the revised pay band PB-1 of Rs.4860-20200 along with grade pay of Rs.2000 that corresponds to the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.3200-4900 has been taken up.- DOPT’s OM dated 25/5/1998 prescribes minimum six years of service for promotion from the pre-revised scale of Rs.2750-4400 (being the first grade in the running pay band) to the scale of Rs.3200-4900 (3 years from scale of Rs.2750-4400 to Rs.3050-4590 and thereafter 3 years from the scale of Rs.3050-4590 to Rs.3200-4900). - Hence, 6 increments at the rate of 2.5% for each increment – adding upto 15% - will need to be given. The minimum pay in the revised pay band for a person recruited to a post carrying grade pay of Rs.2000 will therefore be Rs.5859 i.e. the minimum of the pay (Rs.4860) attached to pay band PB-1 and 15% (being six increments at the rate of 2.5% each) of sum total of the minimum of the running pay band and the lowest grade pay in that pay band. - Grade pay of Rs.2000 will additionally be payable. Consequently, the consolidated pay in the pay band and grade pay, at the time of recruitment of an employee directly recruited in the pay band PB-1 with grade pay of Rs.2000, will be Rs.7859".


Whereas, as per CCS(RP) Rules, 2008 a direct recruit to a post carrying GP of Rs.2000/-
the initial entry level pay in the pay band is fixed at Rs.6460 and thus, the consolidated pay in the pay band and grade pay will be amounting to Rs.8460.

And, as per fitment rules for revision of pay as on 1.1.2006 for those who were serving in the pre-revised scale of Rs.3200-4900, the pay in the pay band corresponding to bottom of the pre-revised scale Rs.3200 is Rs.6060 and the consolidating pay in the pay band and grade pay will be amounting to Rs.8060.

In the case of a promotee to the post carrying GP Rs.2000/- the fixation of Revised pay will be as per Rule 13 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008.

Ultimately, all those with the grade pay of Rs.2000/- will be having the same duties and responsibilities being similarly situated.

THE SIGNIFICANT POINT TO BE NOTED IS THAT THERE EXISTS A MINIMUM OF THE RUNNING PAY BAND (MINIMUM OF THE RUNNING PAY IN THE PAY BAND?), as per para 2.2.22 (iv) (b) indicated above.
Whether such a Minimum of the Running Pay in the Pay Band will be common to
a. existing employees of the grade at the bottom of the pre-revised scale from 1.1.2006 whose revised pay is fixed as per fitment table
b. promotees to the grade with pre-revised pay fixed at bottom of the scale after 1.1.2006 whose pay will be fixed on promotion as per CCS(RP) Rule 13.
c. direct recruits to the grade with pre-revised pay fixed at bottom of the scale after 1.1.2006 who got his fixed pay in the pay band applicable to GP of Rs.2000.

It is already indicated somewhere that stepping up of pay of promotees on par with direct recruits will not serve the purpose of introduction of running pay in the pay band.

However, the final recommendation of the NAC may be addressing suitably if any anomaly exists in this regard.

sundarar
02-12-2010, 03:09 AM
Dear Sirs,

We have so far seen that there are three categories of employees for whom different pay in the pay band is made admissible although GP may be same for all the three categories.
a. Existing employees of a particular grade `X' as per fitment table as on 1.1.2006
b. Promotees to the said particular grade `X' as per Rule 13 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008
c. Direct Recruits to the said paritcular grade `X' as initial entry level pay in the pay band

Now, a fourth category also happens to exist in cases like Nurse grade.
For instance, a Nurse `A' carrying a GP of Rs.4600 as on 1.1.2006 may get her pay stepped up on par with a direct recruit to the same post after 1.1.2006 if the former's pay is less than the direct recruit as per inter departmental anomaly committee decisions.

Whereas, another Nurse `B', which post is the next higher grade for Nurse/A and carrying a GP of Rs.4800 as on 1.1.2006 happens to draw lesser than a direct recruit recruited
after 1.1.2006. While the Nurse/A direct recruit has a fixed amount of pay in the pay band, viz. Rs.12540/-, the Nurse/B whose pay in the pay band was fixed as per fitment table as on 1.1.2006 with GP of Rs.4800 and also got her increment on 1.7.2006 too,
is drawing lesser than a directly recruited Nurse/A on 1.9.2006.

In those cases, there is no stepping up procedure is available. Because, as per Rule 7,
stepping up can be possible only in r/o promotees prior to 1.1.2006 in comparison with a post-2006 promotee. But here it is a case of pre-2006 promotee (to the grade of Nurse/B) and post-2006 recruitee to a lower grade (Nurse/A)

Whether stepping up of pay is possible in the aforesaid case? If so, it would be helpful to the aggrieved Nurse/B personnel pl.

Victor
02-12-2010, 10:17 AM
No Stepping up of Pay is permissible at present. Probably if a concept of minimum pay in the pay band on promotion is introduced (similar to DR recruits), then this type of anomalies could be resolved.

Victor

sundarar
03-12-2010, 07:59 PM
Victor

No Stepping up of Pay is permissible at present. Probably if a concept of minimum pay in the pay band on promotion is introduced (similar to DR recruits), then this type of anomalies could be resolved.

Victor
Thank you very much Shri Victorji.

It is a fact that in the case of Nurse/A, though they were holding
the scale of pay of Rs.5000-150-8000 till 1.1.2006, since they have been
granted a GP of Rs.4600 which is the applicable GP for the upgraded scale Rs.7450-11500. However, while revising their pay, their minimum pay in the pay band has not been derived as applicable for the upgraded scale. At the same time, a similar Nurse/A appointed after 1.1.2006 is carrying Rs.12540 as initial entry level pay in the pay band, which of course, lesser than Rs.7450x1.86, but more than 5000 x 1.86.

On subsequent promotion to the grade of Nurse/B, though the GP for the promoted grade is Rs.4800/- (which is the applicable GP for the scale Rs.7500-12000), the pay on promotion is fixed as per Rule 13 of CCS(RP) Rules, 2008. Already, it was specified that there is no minimum pay in the pay band for promotees. It was also specified, the purpose of introducing running pay in the pay band will not be served if such minimum is prescribed. Though the GP is the indicator for assuming higher responsibilities, as indicated above, a Direct Recruit in the lower grade happens to draw more pay by virtue of fixed element of pay in the pay band as initial entry level than a promotee to the next higher grade and thereby drawing only higher grade pay, but not higher pay in the pay band, and it results in reduced Pay on promotion as compared to a Direct Recruit.

At this point only, having seen three different categories of same grade holders, viz. Direct Recruit after 1.1.2006, Promotee after 1.1.2006, Existing employee from 1.1.2006 and certain specific grades like the one indicated, viz. Nurse/B owing to the methodology adopted
in not allowing pay in the pay band corresponding to the upgraded pre-revised scale w.e.f. 1.1.2006, the significance of Revised Pay based minimum, if at all made available for all the three categories specified above, to get a common minimum revised pay, particulary on the concept of `Equal Pay Equal work' when all the three are similarly situated and assuming same duties and responsibilities..

Although the Nurse/A grade is taken for illustrative purpose,
the three type of categories exist almost in all grades. In order to
treat on par among the homogenous class of serving employees of the same grade, between promotees of pre-2006 and post-2006, the stepping up of pay was allowed subject to meeting other conditions specified in Note 10 under Rule 7 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008.

Similar stepping up of pay for existing employees of the same grade on par with direct recruits of post-2006 of same grade, the inter departmental anomaly committees have been examining and settling the anomaly appropriately.

The left out is the promotee of post-2006 who, since no minimum pay in the pay band corresponding to bottom of the pre-revised scale of the promoted post, is prescribed for them, happens to draw
less than a Direct Recruit.

In certain cases, anomaly among post-2006 promotees, ie.
one who get promoted in the previous year and the one who get promotion in the subsequent year also occur.

As such, particularly when a Revised Pay is very much existing, and already, the Punjab & Haryana Stage Govt. had set a very good precedence by fixing the initial/minimum revised pay as on 1.1.2006,
the same, if followed, such stepping up for removal of anomaly, etc. may not be necessary. Direct Recruit, Existing employee, Pre-2006 promotee all the three can have same revised pay. As such, the Direct Recruit
has been prescribed higher pay in the pay band than that applicable to bottom of the concerned pre-revised scale (exceptions are there of course).

Ultimately, in short, the pre-revised scale cannot be allowed to loose its identity. But, in the case of pensioners of pre-2006 also,
the aforesaid situation does prevail owing to the concept of mini. of pay band as against mini. of pay in the running pay band, though no stepping up sort of methodology is not prescribed in their case for treating on par with a post-2006 pensioner at least for the sake of minimum assured pension that was initially ordered vide para 4.2 of OM dt.1.9.2008 and subsequently modified vide OM dt. 3.10.2008..

The solution based concept lies, therefore, in fixing a common minimum revised pay/pension on par with a post-2006 recruitee-post-2006 promotee/post-2006 pensioner of the same grade as applicable for bottom of the corresponding pre-revised scale, or stepping up of the min. assured revised pension of pre-2006 pensioners on par with post-2006 pensioner of the same grade as applicable for bottom of the corresponding pre-revised scale.
Once again thanks to Shri Victorji.

BUMBA
04-04-2011, 05:30 PM
The stepping up of pay is admissible to only those seniors who are drawing less pay than their junior direct recruits.

Victor

Please read the following case and if possible quote the relevant orders if any to solve it.
Mr X ( Senior direct) was drawing Basic pay of Rs 4200 in the pre-revised scale of 4000-100-6000 as on 1.1.2006.
Mr Y (junior direct recruitee in the same post in the 2000) was drawing Basic pay 4500 as on 1.1.2006 in the same scale and same cadre.

Date of joining of Mr. X and Mr. Y is 29.05.04 and 01.08.2000 resp.
Is this anamoly rectified in the Revised Pay Rules.
If any aware of such situations, kindly let me know the authority under which it was allowed?

Victor
05-04-2011, 09:36 AM
Please read the following case and if possible quote the relevant orders if any to solve it.
Mr X ( Senior direct) was drawing Basic pay of Rs 4200 in the pre-revised scale of 4000-100-6000 as on 1.1.2006.
Mr Y (junior direct recruitee in the same post in the 2000) was drawing Basic pay 4500 as on 1.1.2006 in the same scale and same cadre.

Date of joining of Mr. X and Mr. Y is 29.05.04 and 01.08.2000 resp.
Is this anamoly rectified in the Revised Pay Rules.
If any aware of such situations, kindly let me know the authority under which it was allowed?

How is Mr. Y who joined 4 years prior to Mr. X junior to Mr. X

Victor

BUMBA
06-04-2011, 04:50 PM
How is Mr. Y who joined 4 years prior to Mr. X junior to Mr. X

Victor

The anomaly starts when a senior joined on a later date due to administrative reason (delay). During recruitment procedure, a CAT case was made by few other (6) candidates, due to which rests of the candidates of said batch and all the candidates of subsequent batches got a chance for early appointment, while 6 candidates of earlier batch had to wait for a period of 4 years till settlement of the CAT case.

Though it was clearly mentioned for those 6 candidates that they should rank “senior” to the candidates of subsequent selection and the same has been reflected in the Departmental Seniority list by placing those 6 candidates at the higher place than the candidates of subsequent selection but appointed at an early date, but these 6 candidates are getting less pay than their juniors. Even due to their late joining, these 6 candidates have lost Pension benefit as per CCS (Pension) Rule’1972.

That’s the matter causing anomaly.

Victor
06-04-2011, 07:14 PM
The anomaly starts when a senior joined on a later date due to administrative reason (delay). During recruitment procedure, a CAT case was made by few other (6) candidates, due to which rests of the candidates of said batch and all the candidates of subsequent batches got a chance for early appointment, while 6 candidates of earlier batch had to wait for a period of 4 years till settlement of the CAT case.

Though it was clearly mentioned for those 6 candidates that they should rank “senior” to the candidates of subsequent selection and the same has been reflected in the Departmental Seniority list by placing those 6 candidates at the higher place than the candidates of subsequent selection but appointed at an early date, but these 6 candidates are getting less pay than their juniors. Even due to their late joining, these 6 candidates have lost Pension benefit as per CCS (Pension) Rule’1972.

That’s the matter causing anomaly.

I am afraid no relief is admissible in the instant case. In fact this is not an anomaly at all, as there is no link between seniority and pay. So the seniors who joined late due to any reason whatsoever are not entitled for stepping up of pay with respect to their juniors who joined earlier.

Victor

BUMBA
07-04-2011, 11:22 AM
I am afraid no relief is admissible in the instant case. In fact this is not an anomaly at all, as there is no link between seniority and pay. So the seniors who joined late due to any reason whatsoever are not entitled for stepping up of pay with respect to their juniors who joined earlier.

Victor

If it does not creat anomaly, then in what occassions "Notional Seniority" is granted? There are various examples for steeping up of pay based on "notional Seniority" in different Govt. Institutions.

Whether Mr. X is not entitled for grant of steeping up of pay at par with his counterparts and immediate juniors in the Dept . based on "Notional Seniority"? Where the Dept. is agreed about his Seniority by placing his name at the higher place in the seniority list and also as the below mention condition is matching for stepping up of pay.

Conditions:-

1. Both the senior and junior employees should belong to same cadre and the posts to which they have been promoted or appointed should be identical and in the same cadre.