+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 121

Thread: PB 4 for S 21,22 and 23 V CPC scales retirees

  1. #1
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default PB 4 for S 21,22 and 23 V CPC scales retirees

    I wish to draw the kind attention of all pensioners of V CPC S21,22,23 Scale that Shri M Joga Rao Retired Director from GSI has made an appeal to Prime Minister and Finance Minister under copy to various persons and Dept. The report is exhaustive and covers inustice to other catagories also. Soft copy can be obtained from him. His e-mail id is [email protected]. I also want to intimate that such of those who would like to add/correct can do so. In case legal channel becomes must we may also form a platform/association to fight.

    Subba Rao R S

  2. #2
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear Shri Subba Rao,

    This is a welcome intiative.

    You may like to copy and post Shri Joga rao's draft appeal. here.

    If the characters exceed 10000, please split the appeal as PART A/ PART B etc and post them in continuous posts as we didi for S29 Posts.

    Regards,
    VNatarajan

  3. #3
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default PB 4 for S 21,22 and 23 V CPC scales retirees

    Copy of Appeal Part A 19. Jan 2011
    Dr. Manmohan Singh,
    Honourable Prime Minister of India,
    Room No.148 B, South Block, Raisina Hill,
    New Delhi – 110001

    Shri Pranab Mukherjee,
    Honourable Finance Minister,
    Room No.134, North Block, Raisina Hill,
    New Delhi – 110001

    Sub : Inclusion of V CPC S-21, S-22 & S-23 JAG Regular Scales
    Under PB-4 of VI CPC – Request For
    Sir,
    1. I retired as Director (Geophysics) from Geological Survey of India, Central Region on 31-5-1988 on superannuation (58 yrs) in the scale 3700 -5000 (IV CPC ) after putting in 31 ˝ years of Service. My pro-rata pension was fixed as Rs.1989/- pm w.e.from 1-6-1988.
    2. Again as per V CPC my pro-rata pension was fixed as Rs.5728/- pm as on 1-1-1996 in the scale 12000 – 16500 (S-21 of V CPC) which corresponds to the above 3700 - 5000 scale.
    3. My pension was revised as Rs.12947/- pm. in the scale PB-3 (15600 – 39100 + GP 7600) of VI CPC as on 1-1-2006.
    4. I very earnestly request that the Scales S-21 to S-23 also may be placed in PB-4 along with S-24, to remove the injustice done to these incumbents. The justification is given in the succeeding paragraphs.
    Justification - 1
    5. The V CPC Pay Scales S-21 (12000-165000), S-22 (12750 – 16500), S-23 (12000 – 18000) and S-24 (14300 – 18300) all come under the same JAG Category. There is no difference in the duties and responsibilities in the nature of their work. Originally, all these Scales and even up to S-27 were placed in PB-3 by the VI CPC. But subsequently it was revised and PB-4 was brought down to S-24 from S-27. Thus, a line has been drawn between S-23 & S-24 within the JAG level scales, putting S-24 in PB-4 and the others Viz., S-21 to S-23 were left in PB-3. This has resulted in a huge disparity causing a large anomaly in the pensions of the incumbents of S- 21, 22, 23 as compared to those of S-24.
    6. As per the V CPC Pay Scales, taking 50 % of the Minima of the Scales, the pensions were Rs.6000 for S-21 & S-23, Rs.6375 for S-22, and that of S -24 was Rs. 7150. But as per VI CPC, the pension of the incumbents of S-21, 22, & 23 is Rs.11600 and that of S-24 it is Rs. 23050 The pension of S-21 to S-23 pensioners has increased not even two times ( from Rs.6000 to Rs. 11600) while that of the S-24 pensioner has increased by more that 3 times (from 7150 to 23050). The new pension of the S-24 pensioner is twice that of the S-21 to 23 Pensioners. The difference which was only about Rs.1150 as per V CPC has become Rs.11450 (as per VI CPC) i.e. a ten fold increase. Thus, injustice has been done to S-21 to S-23 Pensioners and a huge disparity has been created at this part of the Pay Band structure, which needs to be rectified.
    Justification - 2
    7. In this context, portions reproduced below from the letters of Secretary General of AICCPA, Delhi to the National Anomaly Committee, JCM, are relevant –
    “- - - .The GOI have solved the problem of stagnation by introducing a selection grade functional/nonfunctional or a % age of posts in a higher scale of pay or grant of stagnation increments or ensure assured financial enhancement at definite intervals in situ say 16 and 26 years of service - - -“ ( Para -2, AICCPA letter No.6 CPC/PB/2k6-CCPA, dtd.16-3-2009 to National Anomaly Committee, JCM, New Delhi – 1, Pensioners Counsellor, April. 2009, page 159 ).
    “ - - - But the greatest anomaly is the dividing line drawn between PB-3 & PB-4 relegating JAG regular to PB-3 band and nonfunctional JAG SG to PB-4. In GOI Pay structure JAG starts from 12000 (CPC V). Ministries/Departments/Secretariat level offices have introduced minor variations to this standard JAG initial scale and this has resulted in S-21, S-22, S-23 with S-24 as the non functional JAG S Grade. It will be seen the max of S-24 now in PB-4 is only 300/- more than S-23 max 18000. But as finalised by the Cabinet Review Committee and accepted by Govt. the grade pay for S-21, S-22 & S-23 is 7600 while for S-24 the grade pay is 8700. A difference of 300 in the maximum has resulted in a hike in Grade pay and a shift to the higher PB 4 band. In fact if the methodology followed by CPC VI is followed, the entire JAG together with SG should form a single block for purposes of Grade pay i.e., = 8700 instead of 7600 ., But the Govt. has allowed the anomaly to persist.” (AICCPA letter No.14-1(3)/2k6-CCPA dtd.19-3-09 to Chairman, National Anomaly Committee, Deptt. of Per & Trg, New Delhi, Pensioners Counselor, August, 2009, page 163, Para 4.1).
    8. The justifications presented by the AICCPA reproduced above may please be considered and the Pay Band structure at this level be revised by putting S-21 to S-23 also under PB-4.
    Justification - 3
    9. If the pay scales corresponding to these S-21 to S-24 by the earlier CPCs are

    studied, the injustice done by VI CPC can be seen clearly as shown below :–
    (a) In Table – 1 below is presented the corresponding Pay Scales recommended by the earlier CPCs and the Pay Band + GP of VI CPC for S-21 to S-24.
    TABLE -1
    III CPC Scale IV CPC Scale V CPC Scale VI CPC Scale
    S-21 1500-1800 3700-5000 12000-16500 15600-39100 + GP 7600
    S-22 1500-1800 3950- 5000 12750-16500 15600-39100 + GP 7600
    S-23 1500-2000 3700-5700 12000-18000 15600-39100 + GP 7600
    S-24 2000-2250 4500-5700 14300-18300 37400-67000 + GP 8700
    (b) The ratios of the increase of the Minima of the above pay scales by the successive CPCs are shown below in Table – 2:-
    TABLE - 2
    CPC Ratios
    V CPC
    Scales IV / III V / IV VI / V
    S-21 3700/1500=2.467 12000/3700=3.243 23200/12000=1.933(lowest)
    S-22 3950/1500=2.633 12750/3950=3.228 23200/12750=1.820(lowest)
    S-23 3700/1500=2.467 12000/3700=3.243 23200/12000=1.933(lowest)
    S-24 4500/2000=2.250 14300/4500=3.178 46100/14300=3.224
    10. It can be seen from the above that the ratio of increase in the Minima of the scales of the VI CPC to V CPC are significantly lower being 1.933 & 1.820 only for S-21, 22 & 23 incumbents as compared to the others. This is not at all comparable with other ratios. This means that while the pay raise was 2.25 to 3.446 times in all the earlier cases, the pay raise in the case of S-21 to S-23 after VI CPC was not even 2 times. Also, it can be seen that the ratio increases from one CPC to the next CPC (pl. see horizontally) but when we come to the ratio of VI to V, instead of improving over the previous ratio, it decreased drastically in the case of S-21, S-22 & S23 incumbents. The great injustice done to S-21 to S-23 pensioners by the VI CPC is quite apparent & glaring. Hence, a reconsideration for placing these JAG cadre scales also under PB-4 along with S-24 (JAGSG) is highly justified.
    Justification - 4
    11. A brief analysis of the VI CPC Pay Band Structure is given below bringing out the large disparities at different levels which created huge anomalies in the pensions especially of the S-21 to S-23 (PB-3) incumbents vis-ŕ-vis S-24 (PB-4) pensioners.
    12. In Table – 3 (Enclosure -1) are given S-1 to S-34 scales of pay of V CPC, the original and the revised Pay Bands ‘Minima + Grade pay‘ of VI CPC and the ratios of Revised Pay Bands ‘Minima + GP‘ of VI CPC to the ‘Pay Minima’ of V CPC scales. In the Revised Pay Band structure of VI CPC, S-4 to S-8 are combined into PB-1, S-9 to S-15 are combined into PB-2, New Scale to S-23 are combined into PB-3, and S-24 to S-29 are combined into PB-4. If the ratios of the ‘minima + GP’ of VI CPC to the ‘Minima’ of the V CPC at both ends of each Pay Band are worked out, they will be as under:-
    (a) For PB-1, the ratios are 2.55 (i.e., 7000/2750) for S-4 and 1.78 (8000/4500) only for S-8.
    (b) For PB-2. the ratios are 2.70 (13500/5000) for S-9 and 1.84 (14700/8000) only for S-15.
    (c) For PB-3, the ratios are 2.63 (21000/8000) for New Scale and 1.75 (23200/12000) only for S-21 & S-23 and 1.82 (23200/12750) only for S-22.
    (d) For PB-4, the ratios are 3.22 (46100/14300) for S-24 and 2.58 (47400/18400) for S-29.
    13. The above ratios show that the incumbents of the ending scales of each Pay Band were the maximum sufferers, be they in service or retired, with a pay rise of only 1.75 to 1.84 times, while the incumbents of the Pay scales at the beginning of the Pay Bands were the maximum gainers with an increase in their pay of more than 2.55 to 3.22 times. This is an anomaly which deserves the attention of the Government to rectify.
    Justification - 5
    14. Two graphs are presented in Fig.1 (Enclosure - 2), one showing the increase in the minima of the successive Pay scales of V CPC from S-1 to S-34 ( Fig.1A) and the other, the Revised ‘ minima + GP ‘ of the corresponding Pay Bands of VI CPC (Fig.1B). It can be seen that the minima of the Pay Scales of V CPC increases gradually from S-1 to S-34 showing a more or less a uniform gradient indicating a gradual increase. On the contrary, the ‘ Minima + GP ‘ of the corresponding VI CPC Pay Bands shows a step structure with steps at 3 places ( Viz., at the junctions of different Pay Bands), the one at the junction of PB-3 & PB-4 being the largest, giving rise to huge disparities.
    Contnued as part B

  4. #4
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default

    PB 4 for S 21,22 and 23 V CPC scales retirees Part B appeal by Shr Joga Rao

    15. In Fig.2. (Enclosure - 3), the ratio ‘G’ (i.e., F/B) (pl. refer to enclosed Table 3) of the “Pay Minima + GP “ (F) of the VI CPC Pay Bands to the Pay Minima (B) of the corresponding V CPC scales S-1 to S-34 is presented. This graph shows several peaks indicating high ratio of G (F/B) indicating that maximum benefit has been enjoyed by the incumbents of the Scales at S-4, S-9, New Scale, S-24, S-28, and S-31. This ratio decreases from each of these peak levels up to the next Pay Band junction. The worst sufferers are those who fall in the troughs Viz. S-7& S-8, falling in PB-1, S-13, S-14 & S-15 falling in PB-2 and S-21, S-22 & S23 falling in PB-3. The injustice done was greatest for incumbents of S-21, S-22 & S-23 in the Pay Band Structure of VI CPC and needs to be redressed.
    Justification - 6
    16. In the original VI CPC recommendations, the following changes have been made by Govt:-
    (a) The PB-1 (5 Scales) changed from 4860 – 20200 to 5200 – 20200.
    (b) The PB-2 (7 Scales) changed from 8700 – 34800 to 9300 – 34800.
    (c) The PB-3 (9 Scales) 15600- 39100 - No Change.
    (d) The PB-4 (6 Scales) changed from 39200 – 67000 to 37400 - 67000
    (e) The Grade Pay also was revised at several places.
    (f) The PB-3 was originally recommended from a new scale (8000-13500) (Group A Entry) and from S-16 (9000) to S-27(16400-20900) (12 scales of V CPC + 1 new Scale). This was subsequently made applicable to the new scale and from S-16 to S-23.(12000-18000) (8 Scales + 1 new Scale). (S-24 to S-27 were removed from PB-3 and upgraded to PB-4).
    (g) Originally PB-4 was from S-28 (14300-22400) to S-32 (24050-26000) (5 scales) but later it was made applicable from S-24 (14300 - 18300) to S- 29 (18400-22400) (6 scales). (S-30 to S-32 removed and upgraded)
    (h) S-30, S-31 & S-32 scales have been removed from PB-4 (37400-67000). A new HAG scale 67000 - 79000 was introduced against S-30 (22400-24500) and S-31 & S-32 scales have been brought under new HAG + scale of 75500-80000, all the three with no Grade Pay.
    (j) Similarly, in the Defence Services also, PB-3 was initially recommended from Lieutenant up to Brigadier level but later it was changed to PB-4 and made applicable from Colonel & Brigadier level. Subsequently, Lieutenant Colonels (13500-17100) also were brought under PB-4.
    (k) Merging of V CPC Scales.
    (i) S- 1 to S - 3 (4 Scales) have been merged as PB -1S.
    (ii) S- 4 to S - 8 (5 Scales) have been merged as PB -1.
    (iii) S- 9 to S -15 (7 Scales) have been merged as PB -2.
    (iv) S-16 to S-23 (9 Scales including the New) have been merged as PB-3.
    (v) S-24 to S-29 (6 Scales) have been merged as PB-4.
    17. It is seen from the above that the PB-3 incumbents, be they in service in any of the Central Govt. Departments including the Ministries or retired, were the maximum sufferers as the difference in the starting of the old scales (Lowest & Highest) was 4000 or even 4750 (8000 for New Scale & 12000 for S-23 and even 12750 for S-22) and the new scale (PB-3) is same for all the 9 Scales (15000 – 39100 + GP varying from 5400 to 7600), The Grade Pay difference is only 2200 which is not commensurate to offset the disadvantage. This gave maximum benefit to the lowest scale pensioner and least to the top scale pensioner. Further, there are jumps at the junctions of the Pay Bands, the maximum being at the Junction of PB-3 and PB-4 (the starting Pay being nearly 2 ˝ times i.e., 15600 & 37400 respectively) These jumps and the coalescing of a number of scales have given rise to anomalies in the pensions and consequently in the arrears. Even in the Grade Pay also, there is a big jump of 1100 from 7600 to 8700 between PB-3 (S-23) & PB-4 (S-24). Also, adopting different pension fixation rules for pre-2006 & post –2006 pensioners has aggravated the anomaly especially at the junction of PB – 3 & PB-4 in so far as S-21 to S-23 (JAG Regular) Pensioners are concerned as against S-24 Pensioners. Consequently, the pension of S-24 pensioners has become double that of the S-21 to S-23 pensioners which was not so in the V CPC Scales. This can be clearly seen in the Table of pre-2006 Pensioners (Annexure – 1 of OM No.38-37/08-P&PW(A) pt.1,dtd.14-10-2008 od D/o Pensions & PW – (From Pensioners Counselor, Dec, 2008) ) which shows 11600 for S-21 to S-23 Pensioners and 23050 for S-24 Pensioners. Also, while S-21 to S- 23 (PB-3) pensioners got around 70,000 as arrears, those in S-24(PB-4) got nearly 4 to 5 times. It is pertinent to mention here that an intermediate HAG Scale against S-30 (67000 – 79000 w/o GP) has been introduced which removed the big jump at this level. (i.e. between S-30 & S-31). Further, the two new scales HAG+ against S-31 & S-32 (both 75500 – 80000 w/o GP) have also been introduced later.
    Redressals Prayed For
    18. The Cabinet Review Committee subsequently made several changes in the original Recommendations of the VI CPC as enunciated above and were accepted by the GOI. They left the regular JAG Cadre untouched. As an aggrieved pensioner of S – 21 Scale and aged 80 years, I would request your Honour to spare a few of your precious moments to go through the above mentioned facts and issue suitable directions to undo the injustice done to the regular JAG Cadre incumbents ( S - 21, S - 22 & S - 23 ) by placing them also along with S – 24 (JAG NFSG) in PB – 4 of the VI CPC. For this act of your generosity and kindness, the entire pensioner community, who are adversely affected, would be ever grateful to you.
    19. Further, I would pray for the following:-
    (a) Pensioners, after retirement do not get HRA, CCA, LTC facilities. To compensate for this and to fill up the gap, it is requested that additional Pension at 5%, 10% and 15% may please be granted respectively when they attain the ages of 65, 70, and 75. VI CPCs recommendation is already there from the age of 80 and onwards.
    (b) Pensioners do not get any increments after retirement and as such their pension may be allowed the benefit of calculating the Notional Pay as was done for pre-1986 pensioners and then fixing their pension on that basis whenever there is a revision due to CPCs.
    (c) Treating the pre and post 2006 pensioners alike and applying the same rules for calculating the pensions.
    (d) Extending the benefit of full pension for those pre 2006 pensioners also who had less than the qualifying service of 33 years since such pensioners may be a few only in number.

    Thanking you,
    Yours Sincerely,

    (M.V.Joga Rao)
    Retd.Director (Geophysics), GSI.

    Copy for information and necessary action to:
    1. The Chairman, National Anomaly Committee & Secretary, to GOI, Deptt. of Personnel & Training, III Floor, Lok Nayak Bhavan, Khan Market, New Delhi – 110003.
    2. The Secretary to GOI, Deptt. of Pensions, AR & Public Grievances, 5th Floor, Sardar Patel Bhavan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi – 110001.
    3. The Secretary, to GOI, Deptt. of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance, Central Secretariat, North Block, New Delhi – 110001.
    4. The Dy. Secretary (JCA) & Member Secretary, National Anomaly Committee, Deptt. of Personnel & Training, III Floor, Lok Nayak Bhavan, New Delhi – 110003.
    5. The Jt. Secretary (PG), M/o Mines, Room No. 322, 3rd Floor, ‘A’ Wing, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi – 110001.
    6. Shri Umrao Purohit, Secretary (Staff Side).NC (JCM), National Anomaly Committee, 13-C, Firozshaw Road, New Delhi – 110001.
    7. Shri S.S.Ramachandran, Hony. Secretary General, AICCPA, 144, Surya Kiran Apartments, Plot. No.65, Fifth Avenue, I.P.Extension, Patparganj, Delhi – 110092.
    8. Shri S.K.Vyas, Member, National Anomaly Committee (Staff Side), 13-C, Firozshaw Road, New Delhi – 110001.
    9. The Secretary General, The Co-ordination Committee of Central Govt. Pensioners Association, 1874/2, Sector 64, Phase X, Chandigarh – 160059. (SCOVA Member)
    10. The President, Coordination Committee of Central Government Pensioners Association, Pensioners’ Room, AG’s Office Premises. Saifabad, Hyderabad – 500 004. (SCOVA Member).
    11. Shri M. Raghavaiah, Member (Staff Side), NC (JCM), National Anomaly Committee. 13 – C Firozshaw Road, New Delhi - 110001

    (M.V.Joga Rao)
    Retd. Director (Geophysics). GSI.

    Contnued as Part C
    Last edited by subba Rao R S; 30-01-2011 at 04:41 PM. Reason: Missing heading

  5. #5
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default PB 4 for S 21,22 and 23 V CPC scales retirees

    Appeal by Shri Joga Rao Part C
    Table – 3 Enclosure -1

    Table Showing V CPC Minima, VI CPC Original Minima + GP & VI CPC Revised
    Minima + GP of Scales

    V CPC Scale V CPC Minima VI CPC Original Minima VI CPC (Original Minima + GP) VI CPC Revised Minima VI CPC (Revised Minima + GP) Ratio
    (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) f/b
    S - 1 2550 4440 5740 4440 5740 2.25
    S - 2 2610 4440 5840 4440 5840 2.24
    S - 2A 2610 4440 6040 4440 6040 2.31
    S - 3 2650 4440 6090 4440 6090 2.30
    S - 4 2750 4860 6660 5200 7000 2.55
    S - 5 3050 4860 6760 5200 7100 2.33
    S - 6 3200 4860 6860 5200 7200 2.25
    S - 7 4000 4860 7260 5200 7600 1.90
    S - 8 4500 4860 7660 5200 8000 1.78
    S - 9 5000 8700 12900 9300 13500 2.70
    S –10 5500 8700 12900 9300 13500 2.45
    S - 11 6500 8700 12900 9300 13500 2.08
    S - 12 6500 8700 12900 9300 13900 2.14
    S - 13 7450 8700 13300 9300 13900 1.87
    S - 14 7500 8700 13500 9300 14100 1.88
    S - 15 8000 8700 14100 9300 14700 1.84
    NEW 8000 15600 21000 15600 21000 2.63
    S - 16 9000 15600 21000 15600 21000 2.33
    S - 17 9000 15600 21000 15600 21000 2.33
    S - 18 10325 15600 21700 15600 22200 2.15
    S - 19 10000 15600 21700 15600 22200 2.22
    S - 20 10650 15600 22100 15600 22200 2.08
    S - 21 12000 15600 22200 15600 23200 1.93
    S - 22 12750 15600 23100 15600 23200 1.82
    S - 23 12000 15600 23200 15600 23200 1.93
    S - 24 14300 15600 23200 37400 46100 3.22
    S - 25 15100 15600 23900 37400 46100 3.05
    S - 26 16400 15600 24000 37400 46300 2.82
    S - 27 16400 15600 24000 37400 46300 2.82
    S - 28 14300 39200 48200 37400 47400 3.31
    S - 29 18400 39200 48200 37400 47400 2.58
    S - 30 22400 39200 50200 67000 67000 2.99
    S - 31 22400 39200 52200 75500 75500 3.37
    S - 32 24050 39200 52200 75500 75500 3.14
    S – 33 26000 80000 80000 80000 80000 3.08
    S - 34 30000 90000 90000 90000 90000 3.00

    Enclosure – 2
    Figure – 1.

    These are graphs are posted since this is accepted.
    Subba Rao R S




    Enclosure - 3
    Figure – 2.

  6. #6
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vnatarajan View Post
    Dear Shri Subba Rao,

    This is a welcome intiative.

    You may like to copy and post Shri Joga rao's draft appeal. here.

    If the characters exceed 10000, please split the appeal as PART A/ PART B etc and post them in continuous posts as we didi for S29 Posts.

    Regards,
    VNatarajan
    Thanks for advise. I have posted the same may be some error in posting. This post did not accept figures.

    Subba Rao R S

  7. #7
    Junior Member kittu23 is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    13

    Default 12k issue

    It is really astonishing fact that 12K is so deprived. The pension difference is too high and it attracts legal issues. I request, some one may file a case for this anomaly in the Apex court immediately.

  8. #8
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default PB 4 for S 21,22 and 23 V CPC scales retirees

    Quote Originally Posted by kittu23 View Post
    It is really astonishing fact that 12K is so deprived. The pension difference is too high and it attracts legal issues. I request, some one may file a case for this anomaly in the Apex court immediately.
    I suggest that some serving officers of these scales should go for legal channel if the appeal is not favouarably accepted.

  9. #9
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Dear Shri Subba Rao/ Others interested,

    YOU ARE VERY CORRECT.

    SERVING OFFICERS OF S21/ 22/ 23 MUST GO FOR STRONG PROTEST/ INDIVIDUAL & MASS APPEAL/ AND THEN ON TO COURTS FOR JUSTICE.

    BEFORE THAT THEY MUST CONSOLIDATE THEIR POINTS FOR JUSTIFYING THE DEMAND.

    MY EXPERIENCE IS - NOWADAYS- AS MOST OF THE DEPTTS ARE IN THE ORG. SERVICES MODE, PROVISIONS LIKE NFSG/ NFFU MAKE THEM COMPLACENT.

    WE TRIED OUR BEST TO CONVINCE THE S29 SERVING OFFICIALS TO SEEK "SEPARATE SCALE" AS IN THE CASE OF "S30" BUT NONE HAVE REACTED NOR DID THEY WANT TO TAKE UP THE CUDGELS.

    FOR SERVING S21/ 22/ 23 NOWADAYS, CROSSING FROM PB3 TO PB4 IN THE NFFU MODE MAY NOT BE THAT DIFFICULT, AND HENCE COMPLACENCY MUST HAVE CREPT IN.

    SOME SERVING S21/ 22/ 23 FEEL THAT PENSIONERS LIKE SHRI JOGA RAO MUST FIGHT!THIS IS NOT JUSTIFIED.

    I AM NOT SURE- WHAT THE RESULT WILL BE!

    PROBLEM IS THAT OF SERVCING PERSONNEL - AND HOW A PENSIONER OF PRE 1996 ERA DEMAND FOR THE S21 ELEVATION/UPGARADATION TO PB4? NO COURT OR CAT WILL EVEN ADMIT A CASE ON THIS. EVEN IF THE CAT IS SYMPATHETIC, THEY WILL "DISPOSE THEM OFF" STATING MATTER IS THE CONCERN OG GOVT. AND CAT CAN NOT INTERFERE.!

    AT BEST SUCH PENSIONERS CAN DEMAND FOR "MODIFIED PARITY" ONLY, IF SOME OF THEM ARE AFFECTED!

    Let the affected serving/ pensioners of these categories ponder/ analyse and then act.

    Regards,
    vnatarajan
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 12-02-2011 at 04:47 PM. Reason: improvement

  10. #10
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default


    SUBSTANTIAL DISPARITY BETWEEN PRE-REVISED JAG SCALES 12000/12500- 18000 AND 14300-18300 WEST BENGAL GOVT

    PL SEE HOW THEY HAVE RESOLVED THE PROBLEM TO SOMEXTENT THRU THEIR RECENT ORDERS DT 7TH FEB 2011.

    APPLICATION IS EXTENDED TO THE PRE 2006 PENSIONERS ALSO - SOTHAT THE "MIN OF PAY BAND" CONTROVERSY IS REMOVED FOR THIS CATEGORY.

    THEIR PB 4 (DIFFERENT FROM OUR PB 4 WHICH IS HIGHER)IS RESTRUCTURED INTO PB 4A AND PB4B.

    Mature administration! Wise action.

    vnatarajan

    http://wbfin.nic.in/writereaddata/96...20Band%204.pdf

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Government of West Bengal

    Finance Department

    Audit Branch

    No. : 961-F(P) Kolkata, the 7th February, 2011

    MEMORANDUM

    After promulgation of the West Bengal Services (Revision of Pay and Allowance) rules, 2009 on

    the recommendation of the 5th Pay Commission, it has come to the notice that there occurred

    substantial disparity in the matter of fixation of pay of the employees drawing pay in the unrevised

    Scale No. 18 (Rs. 12000 – 18,000/-) and No. 19 (Rs. 14300 – 18,300/-) while they have been put into

    Pay Band No. 4 and Pay Band No. 5 and corresponding Grade Pay for the unrevised Scales

    respectively in the revised pay structure.

    A huge difference has been notice in between minimum pension and family pension of the

    Officers retired prior to 01.01.2006 from the unrevised Scale No. 18 and Scale No. 19 respectively as

    per application of the provision of Para 4.4 of Finance Department Memo No. 200-F(Pen), dated

    25.02.2009 as clarified in the Annexure-I to Finance Department Memo No. 460-F(Pen), dated

    20.05.2009.

    2. As the matter has been brought to the notice of the 5th Pay Commission, the Commission has

    suggested some modifications in the structure of the Pay Band Scale No. 4.

    3. After careful consideration of the recommendations of the Pay Commission the undersigned is

    directed by order of the Governor to say that the Governor has been pleased to make the following

    modifications in the WBS (ROPA) Rules, 2009 and in the Annexure-I to Finance Department Memo

    No. 460-F(Pen), dated 20.05.2009 for removing the disparities in the matter of fixation of pay and

    pensionery benefits to Pre-2006 Pensioners/Family Pensioners :-

    (i) In the revised pay structure the existing Pay Band No. 4 (Rs. 9000 – 40,500/-) shall be

    splitted in the following manner :-

    Existing Pay Scales (Rs.) Revised Pay Structure

    Pre-revised

    Scale No.

    Pre-revised Scales under the

    WBS (ROPA) Rules, 1998

    Name of

    Pay Band Pay Band Scale Grade Pay

    12 4800-175-5850-200-6650-225-

    8675-250-10,925/- PB - 4 Rs. 9000-40500/- Rs. 4,400/-

    13 5000-175-5700-200-6500-225-

    8525-250-11,275/- PB - 4 Rs. 9000-40500/- Rs. 4,600/-

    14 5500-200-6300-225-8325-250-

    11,325/- PB - 4 Rs. 9000-40500/- Rs. 4,700/-

    15 6000-225-7800-250-9800-275-

    12,000/- PB - 4 Rs. 9000-40500/- Rs. 4,800/-

    16 8000-275-13,500/- PB – 4A Rs.15600-42000/- Rs. 5,400/-

    17 10000-325-15,525/- PB – 4A Rs.15600-42000/- Rs. 6,600/-

    22 10000-300-15100-350-16500-

    375-18,000/- PB – 4A Rs.15600-42000/- Rs. 7,000/-

    18 12000-375-18,000/- PB – 4B Rs.28000-52000/- Rs. 7,600/-

    24 12500-375-18,500/- PB – 4B Rs.28000-52000/- Rs. 8,000/-

    (ii) For allowing the benefit of fixation of pension and Family Pension as per provisions of Para

    4.4 of Finance Department Memo No. 200-F(Pen), dated 25.02.2009 to the Pre-2006 Pensioners and

    the Family Pensioners, the Annexure-I to Finance Department Memo No. 460-F(Pen), dated

    20.05.2009 shall stand modified to that extent in case of newly introduced PB-4A : Rs. 15,600 –

    42,000/- (in case of un-revised Scales No. 16, 17 and 22) and PB-4B : Rs. 28,000 – 52,000/- (in case

    of un-revised Scales No. 18 and 24).

    4. Consequent upon above restructuring of Pay Band No. 4 and introduction of new Pay Bands

    namely PB-4A and PB-4B the provisions of the WBS (ROPA) Rules, 2009 shall stand modified to that

    extent for the purpose of fixation of initial pay in the revised pay structure while other provisions of

    the rules ibid shall remain unchanged.

    5. This order shall be deemed to have effect from the 1st day of January, 2006.

    6. Necessary amendments of the relevant rules will be done in due course
    Last edited by vnatarajan; 12-02-2011 at 09:22 PM. Reason: correction

  11. #11
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Question PB 4 for S 21,22 and 23 V CPC scales retirees

    Quote Originally Posted by vnatarajan View Post

    SUBSTANTIAL DISPARITY BETWEEN PRE-REVISED JAG SCALES 12000/12500- 18000 AND 14300-18300 WEST BENGAL GOVT

    PL SEE HOW THEY HAVE RESOLVED THE PROBLEM TO SOMEXTENT THRU THEIR RECENT ORDERS DT 7TH FEB 2011.

    APPLICATION IS EXTENDED TO THE PRE 2006 PENSIONERS ALSO - SOTHAT THE "MIN OF PAY BAND" CONTROVERSY IS REMOVED FOR THIS CATEGORY.

    THEIR PB 4 (DIFFERENT FROM OUR PB 4 WHICH IS HIGHER)IS RESTRUCTURED INTO PB 4A AND PB4B.

    Mature administration! Wise action.

    vnatarajan

    http://wbfin.nic.in/writereaddata/96...20Band%204.pdf

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Government of West Bengal

    Finance Department

    Audit Branch

    No. : 961-F(P) Kolkata, the 7th February, 2011

    MEMORANDUM

    After promulgation of the West Bengal Services (Revision of Pay and Allowance) rules, 2009 on

    the recommendation of the 5th Pay Commission, it has come to the notice that there occurred

    substantial disparity in the matter of fixation of pay of the employees drawing pay in the unrevised

    Scale No. 18 (Rs. 12000 – 18,000/-) and No. 19 (Rs. 14300 – 18,300/-) while they have been put into

    Pay Band No. 4 and Pay Band No. 5 and corresponding Grade Pay for the unrevised Scales

    respectively in the revised pay structure.

    A huge difference has been notice in between minimum pension and family pension of the

    Officers retired prior to 01.01.2006 from the unrevised Scale No. 18 and Scale No. 19 respectively as

    per application of the provision of Para 4.4 of Finance Department Memo No. 200-F(Pen), dated

    25.02.2009 as clarified in the Annexure-I to Finance Department Memo No. 460-F(Pen), dated

    20.05.2009.

    2. As the matter has been brought to the notice of the 5th Pay Commission, the Commission has

    suggested some modifications in the structure of the Pay Band Scale No. 4.

    3. After careful consideration of the recommendations of the Pay Commission the undersigned is

    directed by order of the Governor to say that the Governor has been pleased to make the following

    modifications in the WBS (ROPA) Rules, 2009 and in the Annexure-I to Finance Department Memo

    No. 460-F(Pen), dated 20.05.2009 for removing the disparities in the matter of fixation of pay and

    pensionery benefits to Pre-2006 Pensioners/Family Pensioners :-

    (i) In the revised pay structure the existing Pay Band No. 4 (Rs. 9000 – 40,500/-) shall be

    splitted in the following manner :-

    Existing Pay Scales (Rs.) Revised Pay Structure

    Pre-revised

    Scale No.

    Pre-revised Scales under the

    WBS (ROPA) Rules, 1998

    Name of

    Pay Band Pay Band Scale Grade Pay

    12 4800-175-5850-200-6650-225-

    8675-250-10,925/- PB - 4 Rs. 9000-40500/- Rs. 4,400/-

    13 5000-175-5700-200-6500-225-

    8525-250-11,275/- PB - 4 Rs. 9000-40500/- Rs. 4,600/-

    14 5500-200-6300-225-8325-250-

    11,325/- PB - 4 Rs. 9000-40500/- Rs. 4,700/-

    15 6000-225-7800-250-9800-275-

    12,000/- PB - 4 Rs. 9000-40500/- Rs. 4,800/-

    16 8000-275-13,500/- PB – 4A Rs.15600-42000/- Rs. 5,400/-

    17 10000-325-15,525/- PB – 4A Rs.15600-42000/- Rs. 6,600/-

    22 10000-300-15100-350-16500-

    375-18,000/- PB – 4A Rs.15600-42000/- Rs. 7,000/-

    18 12000-375-18,000/- PB – 4B Rs.28000-52000/- Rs. 7,600/-

    24 12500-375-18,500/- PB – 4B Rs.28000-52000/- Rs. 8,000/-

    (ii) For allowing the benefit of fixation of pension and Family Pension as per provisions of Para

    4.4 of Finance Department Memo No. 200-F(Pen), dated 25.02.2009 to the Pre-2006 Pensioners and

    the Family Pensioners, the Annexure-I to Finance Department Memo No. 460-F(Pen), dated

    20.05.2009 shall stand modified to that extent in case of newly introduced PB-4A : Rs. 15,600 –

    42,000/- (in case of un-revised Scales No. 16, 17 and 22) and PB-4B : Rs. 28,000 – 52,000/- (in case

    of un-revised Scales No. 18 and 24).

    4. Consequent upon above restructuring of Pay Band No. 4 and introduction of new Pay Bands

    namely PB-4A and PB-4B the provisions of the WBS (ROPA) Rules, 2009 shall stand modified to that

    extent for the purpose of fixation of initial pay in the revised pay structure while other provisions of

    the rules ibid shall remain unchanged.

    5. This order shall be deemed to have effect from the 1st day of January, 2006.

    6. Necessary amendments of the relevant rules will be done in due course
    Thanks for enlightening. In my opinion this is the best advise one can give. If serving officers can not take this advise and act accordingly nothing can be done. West Bengal governments' move is a very good step for better morale boost to serving officers which results in higher efficiency from these officers. Will Central Government on its own do similar action?. Let us hope for best.

    Subba Rao R S

  12. #12
    Junior Member kittu23 is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    13

    Default 12K to PB4

    Our beloved PM moved Lt. Col who is in 12K (5th pay) to PB4 in (6th Pay)
    UGC moved 12K to PB4.
    I donot know, how and why DoPT issues orders with such disparity. We all should shoot mails to PM as done by Mr. Joga Rao.
    Tell the press, what is happening. If you are afraid, ask your close friend to send a mail to PM.

  13. #13
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Question PB 4 for S 21,22 and 23 V CPC scales retirees

    Thanks to Shri kittu.

    Shri Kittu has given yet another info that !2K V CPC scale Assistant Prof in UGC were moved to PB 4. This is very good input to BPS who have wriitten a letter to PM for moving !2K Scale of V CPC to PB 4. Hope this will be taken note off by concerned in BPS. Shri Joga Rao may please draw the attention of BPS on this. Can BPS explain this to PM after fixing appointment personaly.

    Subba Rao R S

  14. #14
    Junior Member ssr is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    13

    Default

    checkmail xxxx xxxxxx xxxxx

  15. #15
    Junior Member ssr is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    13

    Default Sufferings of Serving 12K officers/engineers/scientists

    We, the 12k engineers and scientists in leading scientific organisation of India are suffering a lot psychologically, due to the grave mistake of the goyt while implementing the SPC. recommendations. we 12k and 14.3K people had very narrow salary difference of Rs.2300 prior to SPC, were put into a state where the 14.3K people have awarded a basic salary of Rs.46100 and we are getting a basic of Rs.22900 - a huge difference.
    In the absence of no major difference in service conditions and responsibilities, this difference is not at all justifiable.

    Corrections to be done:
    The state govts like tamilnadu and WB have taken a wise decision to put 12K officers into PB4.
    Even a central govt organisation, the Indian Institute of agricultural research has awarded PB4 to 12K officers after the completion of 3 years service.

    we had information that the dept level anomaly committees had recommended four increments to the 12K officers.
    However, the NAC which was in place for last two years didnt look into this issue.
    Hence the DOPT, must sort out this issue immediately, otherwise the srving engineers and scientists would be compelled to approach supreme court.
    Also the seniors(pensioners) may take us along with you in the fight and advise us suitably.

  16. #16
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default PB 4 for S 21,22 and 23 V CPC scales retirees

    Quote Originally Posted by ssr View Post
    We, the 12k engineers and scientists in leading scientific organisation of India are suffering a lot psychologically, due to the grave mistake of the goyt while implementing the SPC. recommendations. we 12k and 14.3K people had very narrow salary difference of Rs.2300 prior to SPC, were put into a state where the 14.3K people have awarded a basic salary of Rs.46100 and we are getting a basic of Rs.22900 - a huge difference.
    In the absence of no major difference in service conditions and responsibilities, this difference is not at all justifiable.

    Corrections to be done:
    The state govts like tamilnadu and WB have taken a wise decision to put 12K officers into PB4.
    Even a central govt organisation, the Indian Institute of agricultural research has awarded PB4 to 12K officers after the completion of 3 years service.

    we had information that the dept level anomaly committees had recommended four increments to the 12K officers.
    However, the NAC which was in place for last two years didnt look into this issue.
    Hence the DOPT, must sort out this issue immediately, otherwise the srving engineers and scientists would be compelled to approach supreme court.
    Also the seniors(pensioners) may take us along with you in the fight and advise us suitably.
    Shri SSR,

    I request you and other serving officers to contact UGC 12 K Assistant Professors and Lt Col/Wg etc of serving Armed forces who have fought through department heads mustering their support leading to intermediation of no less than Hon PM himself. You have lot of input from the info posted in this thread to appeal leading to legal approach if this fails. Already 5 years have passed now. Only pensioners are raising this issue with lukemarm response. Late than never please start now and convince the authories for a justfull action. West Bengal govt move is a very good input for you. we pensioners are in the fag end of life and no energy to fight the injustice. I hope I have conveyed the message.

    Subba Rao R S

  17. #17
    Senior Member sundarar is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    631

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ssr View Post
    Hence the DOPT, must sort out this issue immediately, otherwise the serving engineers and scientists would be compelled to approach supreme court. Also the seniors(pensioners) may take us along with you in the fight and advise us suitably.
    BETTER LATE THAN NEVER. NO TIME BARRED CASES MAY BE ENTERTAINED AND HENCE THE TIME FACTOR APART FROM EXHAUSTING EXISTING AVAILABLE REMEDIAL MECHANISMS IS MORE SIGNIFICANT. THE LITIGATION PROCESS STARTS WITH EXHAUSTING DEPARTMENTAL REMEDIAL MECHANISMS, CAT/HIGH COURT AFTERWHICH CAN ONE MOVE TO HON. SC, .

    Meanwhile, the Official Minutes of 3rd NAC Meeting held on 15.2.2011 released on 21.4.2011 concluded that `the Chairperson requested the Staff Side to prioritse the issues to be discussed in the next Meeting'. Thus, it is for the Staff Side to ensure that no efforts are spared in removing all types of anomalies of serving employees and pensioners.

    With regard to the instant subject, according to me, application of uniform multiplication factor over the existing pay/pension can bring in justice among the homogenous class of serving employees and the homogenous class of pensioners.

    The following extracts of MEMORANDUM DATED 16.3.2011 SUBMITTED TO HON. PM BY BHARAT PENSIONERS' SAMAJ (Courtesy: www.rrewa.org) may please be noted in this regard.
    .......
    .......
    "5 : Equal fitment benefit to pensioners at par with employees by adding 50% of Grade Pay.

    There was no reason for the VI CPC to give a different fitment benefit to the pre-2006 retirees other than what was actually given to serving employees especially when the VI CPC in their Report (para 5.1.47) talk of granting equal fitment benefit to serving employees and pensioners. Merely adding 86% DR to their basic pensions did not amount to giving the same fitment benefit to the pensioners. While grade pay benefit given to employees ensured equal benefit to all those coming under each grade pay, the same was not the case with the pensioners since pensioners retired at various stages in pre-revised pay scales. This glaring anomaly in the matter of fitment benefit recommended to pre-2006 pensioners was not properly dealt with by the VI CPC while making the recommendation. The Government has also not come forward to do full justice to pensioners considering that different fitment benefits given to pensioners and serving employees resulted in further widening of disparities in pensions / family pensions of pre and post 2006 pensioners / family pensioners. Further, the benefit is not uniform at all levels in as-much-as the increase in basic pension was 2.26 times upto certain levels (ie PB III), it is much more at higher levels (upto 3.4) leaving a trail of deep sense of frustration and injustice at the lower levels.

    This Convention therefore appeals to the Government to do justice to all the pre-2006 pensioners and family pensioners by giving them same fitment benefit as given to serving employees w.e.f. 1- 1-2006 i.e. Basic pension + 86% DR + 50% of Grade Pay as allotted to the post from which they retired w.e.f. 1-1-2006 and uniform multiplication factor of i.e. Existing Pension x 3.4 be adopted to arrive at the minimum guaranteed pension".

    In similar lines, if a uniform multiplication factor, let us say for illustration purpose, 3 for a while, if applied with the bottom of the pre-revised basic pay, viz. 12000/- (for S-21, 22 and 23), the revised pay in the pay band will be Rs.36000/- even in the absence of placing the same under PB4 exclusively.

    Further, it is seen from the official minutes that there many items required to be revisited many issues by the Staff Side for reverting on whether they wish to pursue further. It is also indicated in the Minutes that issues relating to Officers of the grade of Addl. Secretary and equivalent are outside the ambit of the NAC and therefore not admitted for discusssions. In such a case, the issues relating to lower level than Addl. Secretary and equivalent must be within the ambit of the NAC and hence, the Staff Side may be able to present all such anomalies pertaining to serving employees as well as pensioners, in line with the Memorandum cited above, presented by the Bharat Pensioners' Samaj.

    As a pensioner, these are my views.
    Last edited by sundarar; 24-04-2011 at 10:56 AM.

  18. #18
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default PB 4 for S 21,22 and 23 V CPC scales retirees

    Quote Originally Posted by ssr View Post
    We, the 12k engineers and scientists in leading scientific organisation of India are suffering a lot psychologically, due to the grave mistake of the goyt while implementing the SPC. recommendations. we 12k and 14.3K people had very narrow salary difference of Rs.2300 prior to SPC, were put into a state where the 14.3K people have awarded a basic salary of Rs.46100 and we are getting a basic of Rs.22900 - a huge difference.
    In the absence of no major difference in service conditions and responsibilities, this difference is not at all justifiable.

    Corrections to be done:
    The state govts like tamilnadu and WB have taken a wise decision to put 12K officers into PB4.
    Even a central govt organisation, the Indian Institute of agricultural research has awarded PB4 to 12K officers after the completion of 3 years service.

    we had information that the dept level anomaly committees had recommended four increments to the 12K officers.
    However, the NAC which was in place for last two years didnt look into this issue.
    Hence the DOPT, must sort out this issue immediately, otherwise the srving engineers and scientists would be compelled to approach supreme court.
    Also the seniors(pensioners) may take us along with you in the fight and advise us suitably.
    Another input for shri SSR and others. This is from web of retired raiealy employees welfare association. This in put may help in case of appeal/legal action.
    ================================================== =
    Resolution No. 8 Anomaly in the case of JAG (S 21 to S 23)

    Once an employee from Departmental channels is inducted into Group ‘A’ cadre on promotion, he/she is interpolated into Group ‘A’ seniority when he/she becomes member of homogenous Group ‘A’ services for further benefits. If the duties and responsibilities do not differ, he/she should not be discriminated against in the matter of pay fixation – {Supreme Court decision reported as 1987 (1) SCC 582 Telecommunication Research Centre Scientific Officers (Class-I) Association & Ors. vs. UOI}.

    In all departments of the Central Government including Railways, a Non Functional Selection Grade (NFSG Rs 14300—18000 ‘Vth CPC scale’) is provided in the JUNIOR ADMINISTRATIVE GRADE (JAG) to prevent stagnation. It constitutes 30% of the total Functional Junior Administrative Grade. (5th CPC Scales S-21 to 23). The designation, duties, Schedule of Powers, (Disciplinary and Financial) and responsibilities are the same for JAG as well as NFSG. In any case, NFSG is not a promotional grade. Railway Board’s letter RBE 135/2000 of 14-07-2000 which clearly spells out that “NFSG is a segment of JAG” and that “it will not be treated as a Promotion”. But while implementing 6th CPC recommendations, the said existing Scale 24 has been placed in PAY BAND 4 leaving behind JAG in PAY BAND 3. This has resulted in higher pay/Pension packet to the erstwhile S 24 than JAG (S-21 to 23) though the the duties & responsibilities remain identically the same and all these officers come from one source, i.e, “A” Group classified list / seniority.

    This is an anomaly which is adversely affecting the minimum guaranteed pension of pre 2006 retirees & needs to be set right early by including these scales in PB 4
    ================================================== =
    Subba Rao R S

  19. #19
    Senior Member sundarar is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    631

    Default Need for application of uniform multiplication factor

    While the purpose of introducing pay band concept is to remove scale based anomalies, what would happen if all the pre-revised scales of pay as on 31.12.2005 are placed under one single pay band for while subjecting to a band based revised structure, particularly when a minimum of the pay band is Rs.5200 and maximum of pay band is Rs.56680 (which is also a minimum and maximum of the single RUNNING pay in the pay band respectively). In such an event, a minimum of the pay in the pay band will be Rs.5200 starting from pre-revised scale S-4 and maximum will be Rs.56680 upto S29 scale.

    The Grade Pay has its own independent relevance to corresponding pre-revised scale, based on which classification of posts also have been prescribed. As such, no useful purpose gets served by 4 different pay bands and their respective minimums.

    The only missing point will be application of uniform multiplication factor over the pre-revised basic pay as on 31.12.2005. When a scale based revision can be prescribed for S-30 onwards with a multiplication factor of 3/3+ over the actual pre-revised basic pay drawn till 31.12.2005 , an average `3' MF can very well be applied over such a pre-revised basic pay as on 31.12.2005 for all scales from S-4 to S-29 to accommodate in the corresponding running pay in the pay band.

    In the same manner, for pensioners retired prior to 1.1.2006 irrespective of their pre-revised scale from which they retired, the pre-revised basic pension if applied with such an uniform multiplication factor of `3' a judicious revision is quite possible.

    In the present scenario of applying with different/varying multiplication factor, the same will prove that - in the past, the existing pay structure recommended by 5th CPC and implemented then was not rendering full justice till 31.12.2005 and hence this band based revision got introduced. If that is so, what will be the remedy for the past service rendered with lesser pay structure. In order to clear such ambiguities after a period of 10 years, a uniform methodolgy/manner in the application of multiplication factor, be it over the minimum of the pre-revised scale or with the actual basic pay/pension as on 31.12.2005, could be the only answer.

    As far as duties and responsibilities of individual scale/post are concerned, I could not find any such guidelines on respective enhanced duties and responsibilities commensurating with the revised pay structure involving as far as application of varying multiplication factor for scales from S-4 onwards. At the same time, enhanced pay structure for all the scale holders/retirees do have so many factors based on economic conditions prevailing for leading a minimum reasonable life, which applies uniformly to all.

    Being a past pensioner, I may not be aware too much about the intricacies and practicality of this suggestion in the present working environment. I know that my views could be incorrect also as considerable financial constraints do get involved. But we have to remember, we are subjecting a revision once in 10 years and we don't know when the next revision will take place. If we ought to involve a fair and justified manner of revision, financial constraints should not come in between. As I have been witnessing the grievances being shared by the serving as well as pensioners community, this is the only suggestion that comes in my mind that I have been sharing at this moment. It will definitely remove all kinds of major anomalies that may be existing as of date, according to me.

    If at all this suggested methodology is required to be ruled out for the present, at least, by next revision, this can be thought of, so that grievances of date will not get repeated again and again. It is a fit case for discussion at appropriate levels too, particularly the staff side of the National Anomaly Committee as a priority item.
    Last edited by sundarar; 24-04-2011 at 09:12 PM.

  20. #20
    Junior Member vvenkateswarrao is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    16

    Default Anomaly and how to resolve

    The present problems come to fore because the equivalent minimum of the pay in the old scales and the new pay bands do not carry equivalent ratios. If a uniform yardstick of increasing the minimum by 1.5/2.0/2.5/3.0/3.5 is used, there would have been no problem because every one would have got equivalent benefit.
    Also, when the Pay Commissions were revising the pay scales, till V Pay Commission, the new minimum of the proposed equivalent pay scale is always higher than the minimum of the old scale+DA etc. In VI Pay Commission, this is thrown to winds and the new minimum were put at lesser than the total emoluments at the minimum of the old scale.
    Unfortunately, none of the serving colleagues realise that at one day they will become pensioners and will have to face the same consequences.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 367
    Last Post: 07-04-2016, 05:06 PM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 17-09-2010, 01:31 PM
  3. Notional Incrtement for June Retirees
    By ONKAR SINGH RIAR in forum Contribution of admin contents and useful links by members
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 19-07-2010, 12:53 PM
  4. retirement benefits for post sept 08 retirees
    By dkarthikeyan in forum Pensioners
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 17-03-2010, 10:09 PM
  5. New O.M. dt. 11.12.2008 for post-2006 retirees.
    By sundarar in forum Pensioners
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 29-12-2008, 11:05 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts