PDA

View Full Version : PB-3, PB-4 Anomaly



mvjogarao
15-05-2012, 09:00 PM
It is well known that the Govt. have effected several changes in the original Recommendations of the VI CPC especially in the middle level cadres. While doing so, JAG Cadre posts consisting of S-21, 22 & 23 ( JAG Regular) and S-24 (JAGSG) have been divided by taking S-24, which was also originally in PB-3 into PB-4, leaving the others in PB-3, though all the four cadres come under Administrative Group with no difference in the duties and responsibilities. This has resulted in large disparities in the pensions of the incumbents within the JAG Cadre. Apart from this, the multiplication factors (M/Fs) used were also different. A higher factor was taken for S-24 as compared to S-21, 22 & 23. This has further aggravated the disparity in pensions of pre 1-1-2006 JAG and JAGSG pensioners. The following Tables and the explanations given there under reveal these anomalies :



Table – 1
V CPC Scales from New Scale to S-32 and corresponding VI CPC Original and
Revised Pay Bands with Grade Pay


108

1. Figures in bold in Col. D indicate changes made by the Cabinet Review Committee and accepted by Govt.

2. PB-4 was taken from S-28 up to S-24 (JAGSG) leaving JAG Regular Scales in PB-3 thus clubbing them with non-administrative STS & JTS Scales (See Col. D)

3. Originally, Scales S-28 to S-32 were under PB-4 (See Col. C). After Revision, Scales S-24 to S-29 were placed in PB-4 removing S-30, S-31 & S-32 which were upgraded and new scales were introduced as HAG & HAG+ against these.

4. These changes have resulted in large disparities in the pensions of pre 1-1-2006
pensioners, especially in the case of JAG Regular (S-21, S-22 & S-23) and JAGSG (S-24) falling on both sides of the junction of PB-3 and PB -4 as shown below:

Table – 2

106


From Table 2 above it can be seen that

1. As per V CPC, the difference in pension between JAG and JAGNFSG ( See Col. F ) was only 1150 ( or even less for S-22 )

2. As per Table 5.1.1 originally given by VI CPC for Existing Pensioners (See Col. G), the difference between S-21 & S-24 comes to 2461 only (slightly more than double which is almost in conformity with the increase in pensions). It can be seen that same M/F of 2.14 has been used for all.

3. But as per VI CPC Revised Pay Bands accepted by Govt., the difference in pensions between S-21 & S-24 ( See Col. H ) becomes 9490, which is nearly 9 times the difference existing before VI CPC. ( If we actually take the figures given in the Annexure I of OM. Dt. 14-10-2008, the difference becomes 11450 (23050 minus 11600 which is almost 10 times).

4. In Column H, the M/F used was 2.26 for S-21, S-22 & S-23 (marked by single star) and nearly 3.2238 (marked by double star) was used for S-24 for calculating the pensions. This resulted in large disparity in pensions. If the same M/F viz., 2.26 had been used, the new pension for S-24 would have been 16159; and the difference would then be 2599 only which is not much different from that shown in Para 2 above (i.e.2461).

5. Using a comparatively higher M/F ( 2.42 to 3.37 ) for S-24 to S-32 which Scales are already higher, had aggravated the disparities between PB-3 and PB-4.
(starting (37400) itself of PB-4 is nearly 2.4 times that of PB-3 starting (15600))


In the light of the above stated facts, there is a need to create an intermediate scale such as say, 28000 – 52000 with a Grade Pay of 8200 covering the JAG Regular Scales of S-21, S-22 and S-23 which removes the large disparity at the junction of PB-3 and PB-4. Or alternatively, to place these Scales also in PB-4 with a Grade Pay of 8000 as was done in the case of Lt. Colonels who also come under JAG. A second alternative is to adopt a M/F of 3.2 (which was used for S-24) for all the V CPC Scales from S-1 to S-23.

Suggestion
In the context of the above facts, it is intimated that AICCPA, Delhi on behalf of the aggrieved pre 1-1-2006 JAG Regular cadre pensioners, have taken up redressal of the PB- 3/PB-4 disparity i.e., JAG and JAGSG Anomaly through legal means by filing a case before Principal CAT, Delhi. AICCPA has been collecting Legal Fund to meet such expenses. The details can be found in the thread created earlier by Shri R.S.Subba Rao under the title “PB-4 for S-21, 22 & 23 V CPC Scale Retirees”. It is therefore felt that ifmore such aggrieved pensioners join, it will strengthen AICCPA’s efforts. Those in service also may consider as it is a common grievance whether one is in service or retired.


To view pdf version of the document with full tables click the link below:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B1FonSBiQzL1NzhXMmNTSXlSZG8

M.V.Joga Rao

goverdhanvalasa
24-05-2012, 12:39 PM
AICCPA hasstarted collecting a legalfund of Rs.3000/-along with vakaltnama .I have also sent this.As mentioned in one of the blog of BPS groups this is going to comeup at CAT/Mumbai on 12/06/2011.however this has to be confirmed by AICCPA.Can any body advise the latest

mvjogarao
25-05-2012, 05:19 PM
AICCPA hasstarted collecting a legalfund of Rs.3000/-along with vakaltnama .I have also sent this.As mentioned in one of the blog of BPS groups this is going to comeup at CAT/Mumbai on 12/06/2011.however this has to be confirmed by AICCPA.Can any body advise the latest

The Mumbai CAT case is different. It was filed by DAE Retirees. AICCPA has not yet filed the case. It is under finalisation asd I understand it is going to filed before the Principal CAT, Delhi after the vacation period,

M.V.Joga Rao