PDA

View Full Version : Removal of anomalies between promotees of pre-2006 and post 2006



sundarar
05-12-2008, 07:31 AM
Dear Sirs,

In all the pre-revised scales of pay, the increment was a fixed amount and on promotion one notional increment is allowed, till 31.12.2005 in respect of pre-2006 promotees.

On introduction of Grade Pay and Pay Band that will comprise as a basic pay from 1.1.2006, and the increment formula of 3% on existing pay in PB + GP to be added with the pay in PB, there are so many representations for removal of anomaly from persons who were promoted and drawing more pay than the other who got promoted after 1.1.2006 and on promotion got notional increment fixed as per the formula. Whether in all such cases stepping up of pay is required to be done in toto? Removal of such anamolies have not been clarified elaborately in the CCS(RP) Rules.

May there be a need to another O.M. mainly on removal of
anomalies illustrated but not exhaustive.

Best Regards.

jitendraacr
07-12-2008, 10:32 PM
Dear Sir

It is for sure that stepping up of pay is not admissible in this case. Notional increment on promotion is still there. The issue is only to opt right option. Where is the problem Sir.

badri mannargudi
07-12-2008, 11:04 PM
Dear friends,
At the outset I must admit that the question (raised by Srrjee)us is not clear. Who gets more pay and who gets less pay is not specified. If the sernior got more pay, where does the anamoly arise?
And in one way my learned friend Jjee has erred technically.There is no more notional increment. It is regular increment. [Please read Rule 13(1) of CCS(RP)2008].
The increment on promotion was called "Notional" while the revised Rule calls it "increment" [sum of 3% of Pay plus 3% of GP is added to Pay, (The provision of "Rounding off " applies)], in addition to it, the officer goes one step up in the ladder of GP(if the individual had not got the benefit under ACP scheme].
I request Srrjee to redraft the query, if possible.
With Regards,
Badri

sundarar
08-12-2008, 07:42 AM
Dear Sir

It is for sure that stepping up of pay is not admissible in this case. Notional increment on promotion is still there. The issue is only to opt right option. Where is the problem Sir.

Dear Shri Jjee and Shri Badri,

Yes, I was not earlier in my earlier query, which now I furnish hereunder in detail.

1. People have got promoted prior to 1.1.2006 to a particular grade will be drawing certain pay `X' on fixation on promotion. (The year of promotion is 2004, 2005). Under pre-revised rules, on promotion one notional increment is allowed.

At the same time, other people who got promoted after 1.1.2006 on fixation to the same grade, get their pay fixed at the rate of 3%. For example, a person who got promoted on April 1, 2006 by his option get pay fixed on promotion from date of next increment viz. 1.7.2006 as well as the normal increment.

The increment amount (fixed) of the pre-revised scale is not going to be the same as that of 3%, as the 3% increment is over the pay in the pay band and the Grade Pay (which factor is newly introduced). Definitely,
the senior person who got promoted before 1.1.2006 will be drawing less pay in pay band when junior got his pay fixed on promotion with the above formula and drawing more pay in pay band.

We have live cases and the same are under scrutiny. I can quote
live examples shortly.

2. Apart from the above, I have another view with regard to exercising option on promotion in general after 1.1.2006 for all Govt. employees.
Promotion is a one time affair in a period of 4-10 years. When the increment date is made common for all, viz. 1.7.2006, there is no necessity to link fixing the pay on promotion with date of increment. Already, people
have suffered in 2006, when their date of increment in pre-revised scale used to be after 2nd Jan. till 30th June, the revised date of increment has been 1st July, their increment date is virtually postponed to July. On the contrary,
those who got increment date of pre-revised scale after 1.7.2006 and 31.12.2006, get their increment date pre-poned to 1.7.2006 - in their case
they are advantageous.

Same repeats at the time of promotion also. If a person got promoted
during 1st half of the year, the beneficial option will be to get fixed from the date of next increment, viz. 1st July.Only exceptions are scales from S-24(PB-4) onwards. At the same time, one who get promotion after July 1, will exercise option from the date of promotion itself. This holds good for scales S-1 onwards.

Is there any use of calling for option in this situation when common increment date is very much available and the beneficial option varies for 1st half and 2nd half of the year. So, it is time to consider dispensation of linking the pay fixation on promotion with increment forthwith.

3. There is one more view reg. promotion. The pay in the pay band
after adding the increment need to be stepped up if it is lesser than the minimum of the higher pay band as per Rule 13 of CCS(RP) Rules. This also applies to only from S-24 (PB) onwards.In my view, no pre-revised minimum of the scale happens to be lesser than minimum of the higher pay band in respect of scales from S-5 to S-23 (PB-1 to PB-3). When the min. of pre-revised scale already got multiplied by 1.86 which becomes minimum pay in the pay band, where is the question of lesser than the minimum of higher pay band. THAT IS THE REASON, AS IN THE CASE OF PENSIONERS OF PRE-2006, IN CCS (RP) RULES ALSO, IT SHALL BE `MINIMUM PAY IN THE HIGHER PAY BAND'. It is the incorrect interpretation through O.M. as well as RP Rules, the main purpose behind the prescription does not cure the problem, rather creates it. The RP Rule itself shall add that it is not applicable to scales other than S-24 to S-30, then there will not be any problem.

3 (a) For ready reference, I furnish herewith the details in this regard.

Read serially please.
Pay scale//New Pay Band///Minimum Pay in PB)

S 5 PB 1 3050 5880
S 6 PB 1 3200 6060
S 7 PB 1 4000 7440
S 8 PB 1 4500 8370
S 9 PB 2 6050 9300
S10 PB 2 5975 10230
S11 PB 2 5500 12090
S12 PB 2 6500 12090
S13 PB 2 7450 13860
S14 PB 2 7500 13950
S15 PB 2 8000 14880
S16 PB 3 9000 16740
S17 PB 3 9000 16740
S18 PB 3 10325 19210
S19 PB 3 10000 18600
S20 PB 3 10650 19810
S21 PB 3 12000 22320
S22 PB 3 12750 23700
S23 PB 3 12000 22320
S24 PB 4 14300 37400
S25 PB 4 15100 39690
S26 PB 4 16400 39690
S27 PB 4 16400 39690
S28 PB 4 16400 37400
S29 PB 4 14300 44700
S30 PB 4 18400 51850

Note: The Min. of PB are given in bold for PB 2 4. For PB-1 5200 and PB 3 it is 15600. There can be only 4 minimum of pay bands whereas, promotions are taking within 24 scales/posts. The posts have not been abolished corresponding to 4 pay bands. They remain as it is as in the case of pre-revised scales. Only the corresponding pay in pay band has been packed in respective pay bands. The pay in pay band and pay band are not one and the same, which factor the O.M.s have conveniently been misinterpreting.

The Pay Band Passenger Train upto PB-3 had become Rajdhani in respect of serving employees for onward journey to Pay Band 4 and even within PB 4 intermediately. (Here with due respect to Pay Band 4).

4. My thanks to both of you and our members of the forum to give a patient reading of this message, which has become too lengthy and travelled beyond the instant subject. However, whatever we do the intentions are bonafide and have common interest. Hence, no regrets. At least the concerned authorities if happen to see they may reconsider. That is the one idea behind elaborating too much of what you all knew very well than myself. I thank gconnect as well particularly because they have not restricted maximum words for messages. Coincidentally, I scored one century runs (100 messages) and start scoring further.

Thanks for the kind opportunity.

Best Regards.