+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 121

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

  1. #21
    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

    To all concerned

    I have pasted below an e-mail received by me which is very informative and such of those falling under this may please join hand to strengthen the AICCPA. On my part I have sent 2 e-money order one each for PATRON membership and another as first instalment of donation to legal fund. Interested may contact secy on phone and get first hand information on the status. Also you can keep in touch with secy or visit web site of AICCPA www.cccgpa.in

    Subba Rao R S
    ================================================== ===============


    Dated 12-5-2011.

    Dear All,
    You are perhaps aware that Shri C.U.Sarma of Hyd. had started a campaign through All India Central Confederation of Pensioners Associations (AICCPA), Delhi for legal redressal inviting S-21 aggrieved Pensioners who are willing to joim him. Subsequently he informed that AICCPA will take up our case. Two days back I talked with Shri S.S.Ramachandran, Sec. Gen, AICCPA who said that it is desirable to have at least 200 pensioners for going to CAT or COURT. cocerning PB-3 / PB – 4 anomaly. In fact, AICCPA is a strong supporter of JAG Regular Scales aggrieved Pensioners ever since the implimentation of the VI CPC. I actually quoted some paras from their Journals in my Appeal for PB - 4. .
    AICCPA has started Legal Fund to help aggrieved pensioners, whose petitions have been turned down by GOI, even though genuine, to go for legal redressal. . Shri Ramachandran also informed that the National Anomaly Committee (NAC) have wound up their show on 31st March, 2011. As nothing favourable had come out from NAC for anybody, we are left with no alternative than to go to CAT or Court for legal redressal. I am not aware if there is any time limit.
    As such, I would very earnestly request you all to join AICCPA as Patrons by paying Rs.600/-. and by contributing to their Legal Fund a minimum of Rs.500/- ( more is welcome by them ). Patrons will get the AICCPA’s monthly Journal ‘ Pensioners Counsellor’ . Contributions can be sent by a bank draft favouring AICCPA, Delhi, drawn on any bank in Delhi or New Delhi.and sent along with a letter giving details of the sender to the address given below. .
    Shri M.V.Sankaranarayanan,
    Flat No.46, Kailash Apartments,
    Plot No.45, IP Extension,
    Delhi – 110092. Ph. 011 – 2272 4236
    Shri Ramachandran’s Ph no. is 011 – 2224 2322. . AICCPA’s e-mail address is [email protected] You can ring him up or send an e-mail to get more details. You can also send a copy of the representation, if any, sent by you earlier, to Shri Ramachandran.
    In addition, I would also request you to spread this message to as many JAG Regular Scale Pensioners ( i.e. S-21, S-22 & S-23 of V CPC) as possible of all Departments like DOT, GSI, SOI, IT, DMI, IBM, DAE. ISRO, Railways, P&T, Customs etc., so that more such aggrieved Pensioners can join us in our fight for justice and our strength increases. Those of you who are already getting Pensioners Counsellor, must have seen a list of pensioners, mostly from DOT (about 40 to 45) who already expressed their willingness to join at the instance of Shri C.U Sarma
    Shri Ramachandran opines that if the JAG Regular incumbents who are in Service also take up the fight through their Associations, it would strengthen our cause. Pl. try to contact such people, if you know anybody, and convince them. Pl. let me know your opinion in extending your support. If not through AICCPA, it would be very difficult for any body to enroll so many Pensioners. You may be aware that S-29 Pensioners , about 800 of them, joined together, got registered as ‘ S-29 Pensioners Association’ and went to CAT at Delhi to get redressal of their grievence. I wonder, whether we can do that and even so, who will take the initiative ? as our number may be too large compared to S-29, hope you will agree with me and convey your willingness and contributions to Shri Ramachandran at the earliest as our grievence is strongly genuine

    I request those who do not come under S-21 retirees,.if any, also to join AICCPA. And those who are in service may try through their Associations.

    You are perhaps aware that BPC introduced the PB-3/PB-4 anomaly in their Agenda of the II National Convention held at Secunderbad on 13th February, 2011 probably on the basis of my Appeal. They have included it as Resolution No.8 in their letter dated 4-3-2011 to the Secretary, D/o P & PW, GOI, M/o P, PG & Pensions. They have also included it as Resolution No.7 in their Journal of March, 2011. Those who have not seen, can see these two in their website rrewa.org
    Confederation of Central Govt. Employees and workers have also sent a letter regarding this anomaly to Govt. as informed by Shri S.K.Vyas. I do not know the reply of the Govt. to these two.
    I am highly grateful to these two organisations for taking up our case.
    My Appeal is now pending with Jt. Secretary (PF-1), D/o Expenditure, GOI, since 7 – 2 – 2011. No reply as yet.

    M.V.Joga Rao
    Director (Geophysics), Retd, GSI,
    Ph.0712 - 2535290, Mob. 9373286423

    ================================================== ===============
    Last edited by subba Rao R S; 01-06-2011 at 08:18 PM. Reason: Additional info on website

  2. #22
    Junior Member kittu23 is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    13

    Default Poor 12K people without moral support

    Every one, who eats food will agree that 12K (old) people are cheated in 6PC. Besides many departments/state govts placed 12K to PB4. But the central govt did not do this. We all should bring this parity through the press to understand our PM.

  3. #23
    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

    Here is a bit of information to S 21-S 23 Scale retirees of V CPC please.

    I got the news that the appeal by a few pensioners has reached Department expenditure and is under consideration. Request all the affected to send the Follwoing savingarm (in an inland letter) to Hon Finance minister Shri Pranab Mukharjee central secretaiat North Block new delhi 110001 with copy to hon Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh, race Coursre Road, new Delhi.


    'Pray consider our pettions pending with Dept of Expenditure for restoring S 21-24 in JAG in one pay band as recommended by CPC VI (.) pray order S21-S24 in one pay band to avoid man made anomalies (.) pray intervene addsd Hon Minister Finance copy Hon Prime Minister Dr manmohan singh, Race course Road, New delhi.

    = Adversely affected pettioner pensioner=

    postal Address and Name


    Subba Rao R S
    Last edited by subba Rao R S; 21-06-2011 at 04:02 PM. Reason: Correction in format

  4. #24
    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 attention of Aggrieved pensioners retired from S-21, S-22 and S-23 of V CPC scales that AICCPA is planning to appeal in Pr bench of CAT Delhi for anomaly in separating S-24 (from erstwhile JAG ) and placing this under PB 4 of 6 CPC scales.
    Originally all the above were in JAG as per V CPC. Similarly in Armed forces Lt Col and Col were in JAG. Col was placed in PB 4. Subsequently Lt Col were also placed in PB 4 to set right the anomaly.
    However this has not been done in the case of civilian equivalent ranks namely S-21, S-22 and S-23 of V CPC scales. Lt Col in armed forces and S-21 scales were in JAG as per V CPC.
    Draft petition is being prepared by AICCPA to fight the anomaly legally and is in the final stage. AICCPA have set up a legal fund and contribution to this fund is Rs 3000/-. Affected can become patron members by paying Rs 600/- for life and send legal fund money to Treasurer Shri Sankaranarayanan M V and sign vakalath. He is available on Phone no 01122724236 . In addition you may approach Shri Ramachandran S S (Secretary General) on ph No 01122242322 for details. You can also visit their web site www.cccgpa.in

    Subba Rao R S

  5. #25
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default

    PART _ !

    Write up by Shri M V Joga Rao Director (retired) (Geophysics) GSI, on how JAG civilian officers of V CPC S 21, 22, and 23 scales were treated badly by GOI while implementing the 6 CPC recommendations. Details are in the following paragraphs.

    The anomaly in 6 CPC recommendations and implementations.


    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

    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

    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.

    Effects on revision of pension to these scales.

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

    2. As per Table 5.1.1 originally given by VI CPC for Existing Pensioners 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 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. The M/F used was 2.26 for S-21, S-22 & S-23 and nearly 3.2238 were 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.

  6. #26
    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 _ 2

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

    V CPC Scale Nos. V CPC
    Scales VI CPC Scales +GP
    Original VI CPC Scales + GP Revised
    A B C D
    New Scale 8000-13500 15600-39100+5400 PB-3_ 15600-39100+5400 PB-3
    S-16 9000 15600-39100+5400 “ 15600-39100+5400 “
    S-17 9000-9550 15600-39100+5400 “ 15600-39100+5400 “
    S-18 10325-10975 15600-39100+6100 “ 15600-39100+6600 “
    S-19 10000-15200 15600-39100+6100 “ 15600-39100+6600 “
    S-20 10650-15850 15600-39100+6500 “ 15600-39100+6600 “
    S-21 12000-16500 15600-39100+6600 “ 15600-39100+7600 “
    S-22 12750-16500 15600-39100+7500 “ 15600-39100+7600 “
    S-23 12000-18000 15600-39100+7600 “ 15600-39100+7600 “
    S-24 14300-18300 15600-39100+7600 “ 37400-67000+8700 PB-4
    S-25 15100-18300 15600-39100+8300 “ 37400-67000+8700 “
    S-26 16400-20000 15600-39100+8400 “ 37400-67000+8900 “
    S-27 16400-20900 15600-39100+8400 “ 37400-67000+8900 “
    S-28 14300-22400 39200-67000+9000 PB-4 37400-67000+10000 “
    S-29 18400-22400 39200-67000+9000 “ 37400-67000+10000 “
    S-30 22400-24500 39200-67000+11000 “ 67000-79000+ Nil HAG
    S-31 22400-26000 39200-67000+13000 “ 75500-80000+ Nil HAG+
    S-32 24050-26000 39200-67000+13000 “ 75500-80000 + Nil HAG+


    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

    V CPC Scale Nos. V CPC Pension
    (50% of Min.of Scale VI CPC Pension as per Table 5.1.1
    (original) VI CPC Pension as per Revised Pay Bands & GPs.
    E F G H
    S-21 JAG 6000 12840 13560*
    S-22 JAG 6375 13643 14408*
    S-23 JAG 6000 12840 13560*
    S-24 JAGSG 7150 15301 23050 **

    From Table 2 above it can be seen that

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

    7. 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.

    8. 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).

    9. 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).

    10. 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.

    M.V.Joga Rao

    In view of the above;

    Even now it is not late for the aggrieved pensioner/serving officers to join hand with AICCPA in their effort to appeal this anomaly through legal channels. My earlier post in this thread has the details of AICCPA and how to contact them.
    (Post No 24) in this thread
    Last edited by subba Rao R S; 13-05-2012 at 10:07 PM. Reason: To give refernce to earlier post

  7. #27
    Senior Member sundarar is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    631

    Default

    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.


    Our thanks to Shri MVJRji and Shri RSSRji for detailed inputs with alternative solution. The pre-revised scales S-24, 25, 31, 32 and 33 got 3+ as the actual MF. Thus, the alternate solution suggested above need to cover all the remaining scales including 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30 even..

    "Nakara decision directed parity in the principle of calculation of pension"

    But, in the instant case of all remaining scales cited above, parity in the principle of calculation of pension even within the homogenous class of pre-2006 pensioners, who form a single homogenous group alongwith their post-2006 counterpart, is yet to take place.

    Whether the formula adopted for computation of pension of all pensioners is the same? Yes but only to the extent of revised basic pension under para 4.1 of OM dated 1.9.2008. Whereas, the para 4.2 of OM dated 1.9.2008 supercedes para 4.1 quantum for certain scales with application varying multiplication factors. which inter alia means
    different formulae adopted for computation of pension as a whole. Thus, the need for parity in the principle of calculation of pension even within the homogenous class of pre-2006 pensioners who form part of single homogenous group that includes post-2006 pensioners also.

    "when body of persons formed a homogenous class for the purpose of availment of certain benefits, they cannot be subjected to sub-classification"

    Whereas, all the remaining scales of pre-2006 have since been subjected sub-classification as far as Minimum Revised Pension is concerned.

    Any remedial solution shall, therefore, remove the said sub-classification in toto, irrespective of the scales from which the pensioner had retired prior to 1.1.2006, particularly in order to avoid any similar sub-classification in future revisions of pension also.

  8. #28
    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 retirees

    Attention : Retirees of V CPC Scale S 21-22 and 23 V CPC retirees

    For information of the affected pensioners I write to inform, That Under leadership of AICCPA Gen Secy S S Ramachandran, petition has been filed on 22nd Feb 2013 at Pr bench of Delhi CAT on behalf of all retirees from most of the central Govt departments unlike AERWA who have filed the petition for Retirees of BARC under the leadership of AERWA.

    Details of OA No is awaited. For details, interested may contact Shri S S Ramachandran Secy Gen AICCPA on Phone No 011 22242322. or e mail id
    [email protected]

    Subba Rao R S

  9. #29
    Senior Member vnatarajan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chennai
    Posts
    1,249

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by subba Rao R S View Post
    Attention : Retirees of V CPC Scale S 21-22 and 23 V CPC retirees

    For information of the affected pensioners I write to inform, That Under leadership of AICCPA Gen Secy S S Ramachandran, petition has been filed on 22nd Feb 2013 at Pr bench of Delhi CAT on behalf of all retirees from most of the central Govt departments unlike AERWA who have filed the petition for Retirees of BARC under the leadership of AERWA.

    Details of OA No is awaited. For details, interested may contact Shri S S Ramachandran Secy Gen AICCPA on Phone No 011 22242322. or e mail id
    [email protected]

    Subba Rao R S
    Welcome development.
    Better late than never.

    My hearty wishes for a successful outcome. Spl Congrats to Shri SSR/ Shri SCM/ Shri Subba Rao etc who had been active on this front.
    THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE LONG BACK- SOON AFTER THE RETD .LT COLS WERE HIGH-JACKED TO PB 4.

    Now it is for the counsel to handle the matter precisely and with force.
    Regards,
    VN

  10. #30
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vnatarajan View Post
    Welcome development.
    Better late than never.

    My hearty wishes for a successful outcome. Spl Congrats to Shri SSR/ Shri SCM/ Shri Subba Rao etc who had been active on this front.
    THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE LONG BACK- SOON AFTER THE RETD .LT COLS WERE HIGH-JACKED TO PB 4.

    Now it is for the counsel to handle the matter precisely and with force.
    Regards,
    VN

    Many many thanks for your wishes.

    You may please re-call way back in 2010 I had taken your's and Shri SCM's advsise. My posting in gconnect also you have seen and advised me to pool up aggrieved. It has taken so much of time to reach this stage. Also Shri Nagarajan Sunderarajan and many others have also given lot of input for this case.

    My special thanks to Shri S S Ramachandran Secy Gen of AICCPA who came forward to fight for our cause and pooled petitioners all over the country. I hope with this case and the on going case at CAT Mumbai by AERWA authorities will give us due justice.

    I have appealed to RREWA and RSCWS to examine this and fight for the affected in Railways. I am yet to see their response. Thanking you once again

    Subba Rao R S

  11. #31
    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 retirees

    For information of aggrieved pensioners of V CPC S-21, 22 and 23 scales

    Petition has been filed in Pr Bench of CAT Delhi on the subject under leadership of AICCPA and the same has been admitted.

    Details are as under;

    COURT NO: II CAT Pr Bench Delhi



    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    HON’BLE MR GEORGE PARACKEN JUDICIAL MEMBER
    HON’BLE MR. SHEKHAR AGARWAL ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    O A 789/2013

    H.V. Dasen & Ors.

    Vs

    UOI Min of Finance Advocate Shri . Soumyajit Pani
    MA 607/2013 Advocate Shri Krishnamani

    Admitted on 06-03-2013

    Next hearing on 25-04-2013



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

    Subba Rao R S
    Last edited by subba Rao R S; 10-03-2013 at 08:22 PM.

  12. #32
    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

    For info of aggrieved pensioners of S-21 to 23,

    Details of case No etc are given below. Further info can be had from AICCPA

    COURT NO: II CAT Pr Bench Delhi

    HEARD ON WEDNESDAY THE
    06TH DAY OF MARCH, 2013

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    HON’BLE MR. GEORGE PARACKEN JUDICIAL MEMBER
    HON’BLE MR. SHEKHAR AGARWAL ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OA 789/2013
    H.V. Dasen & Ors.

    Vs
    UOI Min of Finance
    MA 607/2013


    Advocate Shri . Soumyajit Pani
    and Advocate Shri Krishnamani

    Admitted on 6-03-2013

    Next hearing on 25-04-2013

  13. #33
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default PB 4 to S 21, 22 and 23

    Earlier a proposal about grnt of PB 4 to the Deputy Secretaries of CSS(12000-16500 now in PB II was taken up by the Department of Personnel with the Department of Expenditure. The latter did not agree to the proposal moved by the Department of Personnel. However, subsequently on the basis of the CSS Group A Officers Association the matter was again taken up in September, 2011 with the Ministry of Finance as directed by the Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel etc. In other words the proposal had the support of the Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel.

    According to the information available that proposal was also not agreed to by the Ministry of Finance.


    Gopal Krishan
    9911178250
    Last edited by Gopal Krishan; 18-03-2013 at 08:12 PM.

  14. #34
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gopal Krishan View Post
    Earlier a proposal about grnt of PB 4 to the Deputy Secretaries of CSS(12000-16500 now in PB II was taken up by the Department of Personnel with the Department of Expenditure. The latter did not agree to the proposal moved by the Department of Personnel. However, subsequently on the basis of the CSS Group A Officers Association the matter was again taken up in September, 2011 with the Ministry of Finance as directed by the Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel etc. In other words the proposal had the support of the Minister of State in the Ministry of Personnel.

    According to the information available that proposal was also not agreed to by the Ministry of Finance.


    Gopal Krishan
    9911178250
    Thanks for the info. I have requested AERWA and AICCPA to take note of this while progressing the case at CAT Mumbai and Delhi.

    Subba Rao R S

  15. #35
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default

    In fact I had obtained a copy of the note from the Department of Personnel and Training, which was sent to the Department of Expenditure as directed by the Minister of State. In case a copy of the same is required I would send the same.


    Gopal Krishan
    9911178250

  16. #36
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Dear Shri Rao,

    I am reproducing below the note which was sent to the Ministry of Finance by the Department of Personnel and Training.

    "The proposal under consideration on this file is about grant of PB-4 to the Depuuty Secretaries of CSS. Earlier, the representations of the CSS Forum in this regard were examined in the preceding notes (pp1-5/N and pp 8-11/N) and a proposal was referred to the Ministry of finance for grant of PB 4 to CSS Deputyr Secretaries. The proposal has not been agreed to the Minisgtry of Finance (pp 6-7/N and p 12/N).

    2. On a representation from CSS Group A Officers Association , the matter has been reconsidered and Hon'ble MOS(PP) has directed that the proposal my be referred to the Ministry of Finance again.

    3. The points raised in the representation of the CSS Group A Officers Association are recapitulated in the suggeeding paragraph.

    4. The Assocation has put forth the following arguments in support of the proposal for grant of PB 4 to CSS Deputy Secretaries:-

    i) The 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC) had placed Under Secretries, Deputy Secretaries, Director and DIGs on the civilian side and Majors, Lt. Colonelsl, Cplonels and Brigadiers on the Defence Forces side, in Pay Bnd 3

    ii) However based on the recommendation of the Committee of Secretries, the Govenment placed Brigadiers/DIG/equilant and Directors/Colenels/equivalent in PB=4 and also changed the pay scale of the Pay Band-4 from 39200-67000 as recommended by Sixth CPC to 37400-67000 to accommodate more pre-revised pay scales as compared to the recommendation of the Sixth CPC. Lt. Colonel and Deputy Secretaries of CSS, however, were not included in the Pay Band=4.
    Last edited by Gopal Krishan; 23-03-2013 at 01:40 PM.

  17. #37
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default

    iii) SDubsequently, on the representations of the Armed Forces Service Associations of the Armed Forces Service Association, Lt. Colonels were also granted Pay Band-4 with grade pay of Rs. 8000, leaving Deputy Secretaries of CSS in PB-3. This has not only disturbed the equivalance provided by the 6th CPC between the Lt. Colonel and Deputry Secretaries and fonfirmed by the Committee of Secretries but has also placed the Deputry Secretarfies of CSS in disadv antageous position.

    iv) The Government, while rightly placing the Directors and Lt.; Colonesl in modified PB-4 with grade pay of Rs. 8700 and Rs. 8000 respectively, letting alon undortunately, the post of Deputy Secretary in the old Pay Band-3, whihc was againt the broad directions and principles enunciated by the 6th CPC and also the recommendation of the Committee of Secretaries.

    v) The Director and Deputy Secretary as in charge of Division perform the same duties and responsiboiities so far as the Central Secretariat is concerned. Therefore, the posts of Director (pre revised scale of Rs. 14300-18300) and Deputry Secretry (pre revised scale of Rs. 12000-16500) have always been kept almost at par with reasonable difference in pay and perks. However, on implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission'srecommendations, it is seen that glaring difference has been made in their salary as under:-

    DS Director Remarks

    Pre-revised pay scale Rs. 12000-16500
    Rs. 14300-18300
    Difference of Rs 2000 at the minimum and the maximum

    Revised Pay Band Rs. 15600-39100(PB-3)
    Rs. 37400-67000(PB-4)
    Difference of Rs. 20000 and Rs.28000 at the minimum and the maximun respectively
    Last edited by Gopal Krishan; 23-03-2013 at 02:06 PM.

  18. #38
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default

    5. In continuation of their representation, the Assocation vide its letter dated 12th September, 2011 has mentioned that the Department of Expenditure, while disagreeing to the proposal for grant of PB-4 to the Deputry Secretries of CSS, cited the following two grounds in suport of their plea:

    i) The department of Expenditure had already agreed to the proposal of DOP&T to grant two increments in the pay band to CSS officers on their promotion from the grade of Under Secretary to the grde of Deputry Secretry to provide additional monetrary benefits and improve the career porspects of deputry Secretary working in Secretariat, and

    ii) The Department of Expenditure as part of the cadere restructuring proposals for the CSS agreed to extend to the CSS separately the dispensation approved by the Government on the recommendation of the 6th CPC in the case of CSS under whihc 15% of the posts of the Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary will be placed in Director's pay scale in PB-4

    6. With regard to the above poits, the ASSciation has submitted that

    i) The nenefit of two additional increments at the time of promotion from rade of Under Secretry to Deputry Secretar was available to CSS officers even prior to implementation of 6th CPC Report. Therefor, grant to two increments on promotion ws only restoration of benefit already available to CSS officers and has nothing to do with any additional benefit as claimed by the Department of Expenditure.

    ii) Furth, benefit of the dispensation of 15% posts in PB-4 given to CSSS said to be extended tdo CSS, it is clarified that no such benefit has been granted to CSS by the Dop&T so far and also promotion to the GRde ofDirector has has no link with the grant of scale of Deputy Secretary. Even after grant of this dispensation by the Dopt majority of Deputry Secretaries of CSS will no receive the benefit of Pay Band 4 as majority of them would retire witht promotion to the higher grade.

    7. The Assocation is of the view tht there were no justifiable grounds for the Departmnt of Expenditure to reject the propo0sal for grant of PB4 to Deputry Secretary. The CSS Group A Officers Assocation has therefore prayed that in the interest of justice and to keep up the morale of the CSS officers, the posr of Deputry Secretary of CSS be placed in Pay Bandd 4 with a gradepay of Rs. 8000 equivalent to Lt. Colonel.
    Last edited by Gopal Krishan; 23-03-2013 at 02:24 PM.

  19. #39
    Senior Member Gopal Krishan is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    472

    Default

    8. It may be seen that after the implementtion of the recommendations of the 6th CPC with modifications there is a huge gap in the pay of a Depuitry Secretary and a Director, the Pay Bands heing differentl Earlier the difference in pay was minimal. Further historically the Under Secretaries were being allowed the benefit of two increments on their promotion to the post of Deputy Secretry. This was continued after the 6th CPC with the approval of the Department of Expenditure.

    8.1 Earlier parity was being maintained between the pay of a Deputry Secretary of CSS and Lt. Colonel of the Defence Forces, wnbich has been disturbed after the 6th CPC as would be clear from the following:-

  20. #40
    Member subba Rao R S is on a distinguished road
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    88

    Default

    For information of those interested,

    I would like to use this forum to inform interested the following.

    As already known, petition has been filed at Pr Bench of Delhi CAT under OA no 789/2013 by AICCPA with 123 affected petitioners. Earlier some have contacted me to include their name as petitioners and I do not remember their names. Hence this communication

    To day I got a tele call from Shri S S Ramachandran Secy Gen AICCPA intimating that he has to file an "imp-leading application" to CAT case OA 789 since two petitioners name was left out in the original petition. He would like to include other affected also if details are given. He may be contacted for details. Tel No and email ids are available in this thread above.

    He asked me to inform others interested to contact him with details so that he can include others names also in the imp-leading application. Hence I request interested to contact him along with others who are interested.

    Subba Rao R S
    Last edited by subba Rao R S; 24-03-2013 at 07:42 PM. Reason: For clarity

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... 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