Dear friends and comrades,
Very favourable feed back has been received from various parts of the country regarding the move to form an ALL INDIA FEDERATION consisting of the AIACEGEO, AICEIA AND IRS (IDT) OA.
Certain doubts have also been raised by certain members regarding the organizational structure, its purpose, whom it represents etc.
These three Associations have been functioning as a JAC of Inspector base Associations for more than a year now. Formation of the AIF is only a corollary to that.
The term Inspector base has created some doubts among members who have not perhaps followed the JAC proceedings. Hence, it is to be clarified to those members that 'Inspector base' does not mean 'Inspector Recruits only'. It includes all from the point of reaching the Inspector cadre, irrespective of whether by Direct Recruitment or by Promotion. It means that all those from the point of Inspectors up to the Promotee IRS in Central Excise, are to be brought under the banner of one AIF.
All members of these three Associations will automatically be members of the to-be-formed-AIF.
The bottleneck at the level of Group A is the main stumbling block in promotions of Superintendents to Group A and consequently for Inspectors to Superintendents. The other great problem is regarding the inequality in promotional avenues between the Central Excise and Customs Officers in the CBIC itself. The Board itself had committed in 1996 to integrate the three base cadres of Inspectors, Examiners and Preventive Officers, to do away with these inequalitites. That was not done. The Stagnation Committee which was constituted at the behest of the Hon'ble Finance Minister as per the request of the IRS (IDT) OA also reiterated that the main solution for the inequalities between the Central Excise and Customs streams in promotions to Group A, is integration of the base cadres. Thus the concept of 'Inspector Base', originates from this concept.
We require to concentrate on getting the integration of these three base cadres for getting this problem solved on a long term basis. Thus an AIF from the Inspector Cadre upwards becomes a natural requirement to put in concerted efforts.
Further, since the promotions to Superintendent from Inspector is 100% by promotion, whatever affects the cadre of Superintendents today, is to affect the Inspectors tomorrow. In this, there is no difference whether the Inspector is by Direct Recruitment or by Promotion. Hence, the entire community of Inspectors and Superintendents have to collectively take up these issues.
Some members sent in suggestion that instead of an AIF, a common Association could be formed for all the three cadres. But it could not be realized now, because there may not be commonality of interests between the three cadres in all matters. Hence separate Association for each cadre has to continue.
Since the cadres of Inspector, Superintendent and Promotee IRS would have their own issues, peculiar to each cadre also, the individual Associations will continue to function separately and only in the common issues they will go as the AIF to be formed.
Some observations have been made that formation of the AIF could be made after the division within the AIACEGEO has been settled.
With due respects to those sentiments, it is to be pointed out that the cadre interests cannot wait till a minority sees reason.
I would like to point out that when I lost an election to Shri. K.V.Srinivas in 1998 (in the then Inspectors' Federtation) or when Shri. Pyne lost an election to Shri. Ravi Malik in the Daman Convention, I or Shri. Pyne did not leave the organization. We did not stand out and create issues at each and every turn. But both of us contributed to the Organisation by being of assistance to the elected representatives. Hence, it is only to be expected that if one becomes a minority, he may continue to air his opinions that too within the organizational forum, but has to work with the majority. That is the basic principle of democracy.
I also would like to point out another instance. In 2006 at the Pune Convention of the AICEIA, Shri. K. P. Rao said that Shri. Pyne should step down as SG of the AICEIA because Shri. Pyne had served for one tenure (from 2003 to 2006). Shri. Pyne immediately stepped down. (Now Shri. Ravi Malik does not want to leave the post after serving more than 6 years and even after promotion as AC, and these very people who say one tenure enough for a person do not find the present situation odd). After making Shri. Pyne step down, Shri. Rao threw in his hat for the post in the same Convention at Pune. However, the majority was opposed to it. Consequently, I had to take the responsibility as SG, though personally I was not for it due to the situation in my local unit, only to avoid a division and Shri. Rao was accommodated as the President. However, I understand that when on my promotion in 2008 I demitted the post and handed over charge to the then ASG, Shri. Kousik Roy, Shri. Rao had started creating trouble and after the next round of elections when Shri. Kousik Roy was elected as the SG, Shri. K.P.Rao was out of office and had floated a new outfit to divide the Inspectors' Association.
(It is said by several people that the language and contents of the comments made by one Sathyam Singh resembles very much of that Shri. K.P.Rao.)
To white wash this episode, they have subsequently circulated a tale that, along with Com. Pyne and Com. Kousik, I had divided the Inspectors' Association, by holding a Convention at Kolkatta in 2003. In fact the Convention at Kolkatta had only revived the Inspectors' Association, which had become defunct from 2002, after the then SG could not be contacted, even by his local office bearers. Only as per the demand of a majority of the Unit Office bearers, I had notified an EC-cum-Convention at Kolkatta in 2003 as the President of the then Inspectors' Federation (to which post I had been elected in the 2001 Bhillai EC). The present AICEIA, is in fact only the child of that Kolkatta Convention.
While Shri. R.C. Sharma held the post of SG of the Inspectors' Federation for more than 7 years, while the term was for 3 years, without a re-election and even after his promotion as Superintendent, and Shri. K.V.Srinivas did not hold the Convention even after expiry of the term and as mandated by the EC at Bhilai, after the re-structuring of 2002, the AICEIA which was revived in 2003, has produced several All India Office Bearers, from that date, only due to the revival and its subsequent democratic functioning. The names of the Office Bearers who occupied the posts of President and Secretary General of AICEIA apart from myself from 2003 till date are:
Coms. Tirthankar Pyne, Kousik Roy, Arun Zachariah, K.P.Manoj, Ajit Kumar K.G, Abhishek Kamal, Anupam Neeraj and today Rananjay Pratap Singh and Anuvuthi Chatterjee.
Apart from the above, the AICEIA produced several other Office Bearers at the next rung also, capable of taking up the mantle, whenever the requirement arose.
In sharp contrast, the immediately former SG of the AIACEGEO, continues to call himself the SG even today, with not even a hand full of functional units to support him. He has given a call to divide the cadre and association at all levels, without consideration to the numbers, which itself highlights his desperation.
The way in which he obliged the administration at Ahmedabad to enable them suspend a Unit Office bearer Shri. Kundu, is fresh in the memory of the cadre.
Before that, there have been repeated instances where the interests of the cadre had been mortgaged, lock stock and barrel by this very person. That had been in fact the genesis of the revival of the AIACEGEO itself in very many units. This was one classical example which proves that a so called unity, without following democratic methods, becomes a feudalistic set up and permits those at the helm, to compromise with authorities, against the interests of those very whom they are supposed to represent. Why it is done and why the authorities permit it or even encourage it, could easily be understood. This is a classic case of how unity alone does not ensure strength of the cadre but an illusion of unity is utilized to sell them out, whole sale.
So the best antidote to divisionism is organization. Organization of members who are alert and aware.
Any form of authoritarianism, whether within the department or in an organization, have to be fought tooth and nail, if the dignity and self-esteem of the cadre is to be protected.
Long live Association.
Long live the spirit of organizing.
with fraternal greetings,
R. Manimohan,
SG, AIACEGEO
Very favourable feed back has been received from various parts of the country regarding the move to form an ALL INDIA FEDERATION consisting of the AIACEGEO, AICEIA AND IRS (IDT) OA.
Certain doubts have also been raised by certain members regarding the organizational structure, its purpose, whom it represents etc.
These three Associations have been functioning as a JAC of Inspector base Associations for more than a year now. Formation of the AIF is only a corollary to that.
The term Inspector base has created some doubts among members who have not perhaps followed the JAC proceedings. Hence, it is to be clarified to those members that 'Inspector base' does not mean 'Inspector Recruits only'. It includes all from the point of reaching the Inspector cadre, irrespective of whether by Direct Recruitment or by Promotion. It means that all those from the point of Inspectors up to the Promotee IRS in Central Excise, are to be brought under the banner of one AIF.
All members of these three Associations will automatically be members of the to-be-formed-AIF.
The bottleneck at the level of Group A is the main stumbling block in promotions of Superintendents to Group A and consequently for Inspectors to Superintendents. The other great problem is regarding the inequality in promotional avenues between the Central Excise and Customs Officers in the CBIC itself. The Board itself had committed in 1996 to integrate the three base cadres of Inspectors, Examiners and Preventive Officers, to do away with these inequalitites. That was not done. The Stagnation Committee which was constituted at the behest of the Hon'ble Finance Minister as per the request of the IRS (IDT) OA also reiterated that the main solution for the inequalities between the Central Excise and Customs streams in promotions to Group A, is integration of the base cadres. Thus the concept of 'Inspector Base', originates from this concept.
We require to concentrate on getting the integration of these three base cadres for getting this problem solved on a long term basis. Thus an AIF from the Inspector Cadre upwards becomes a natural requirement to put in concerted efforts.
Further, since the promotions to Superintendent from Inspector is 100% by promotion, whatever affects the cadre of Superintendents today, is to affect the Inspectors tomorrow. In this, there is no difference whether the Inspector is by Direct Recruitment or by Promotion. Hence, the entire community of Inspectors and Superintendents have to collectively take up these issues.
Some members sent in suggestion that instead of an AIF, a common Association could be formed for all the three cadres. But it could not be realized now, because there may not be commonality of interests between the three cadres in all matters. Hence separate Association for each cadre has to continue.
Since the cadres of Inspector, Superintendent and Promotee IRS would have their own issues, peculiar to each cadre also, the individual Associations will continue to function separately and only in the common issues they will go as the AIF to be formed.
Some observations have been made that formation of the AIF could be made after the division within the AIACEGEO has been settled.
With due respects to those sentiments, it is to be pointed out that the cadre interests cannot wait till a minority sees reason.
I would like to point out that when I lost an election to Shri. K.V.Srinivas in 1998 (in the then Inspectors' Federtation) or when Shri. Pyne lost an election to Shri. Ravi Malik in the Daman Convention, I or Shri. Pyne did not leave the organization. We did not stand out and create issues at each and every turn. But both of us contributed to the Organisation by being of assistance to the elected representatives. Hence, it is only to be expected that if one becomes a minority, he may continue to air his opinions that too within the organizational forum, but has to work with the majority. That is the basic principle of democracy.
I also would like to point out another instance. In 2006 at the Pune Convention of the AICEIA, Shri. K. P. Rao said that Shri. Pyne should step down as SG of the AICEIA because Shri. Pyne had served for one tenure (from 2003 to 2006). Shri. Pyne immediately stepped down. (Now Shri. Ravi Malik does not want to leave the post after serving more than 6 years and even after promotion as AC, and these very people who say one tenure enough for a person do not find the present situation odd). After making Shri. Pyne step down, Shri. Rao threw in his hat for the post in the same Convention at Pune. However, the majority was opposed to it. Consequently, I had to take the responsibility as SG, though personally I was not for it due to the situation in my local unit, only to avoid a division and Shri. Rao was accommodated as the President. However, I understand that when on my promotion in 2008 I demitted the post and handed over charge to the then ASG, Shri. Kousik Roy, Shri. Rao had started creating trouble and after the next round of elections when Shri. Kousik Roy was elected as the SG, Shri. K.P.Rao was out of office and had floated a new outfit to divide the Inspectors' Association.
(It is said by several people that the language and contents of the comments made by one Sathyam Singh resembles very much of that Shri. K.P.Rao.)
To white wash this episode, they have subsequently circulated a tale that, along with Com. Pyne and Com. Kousik, I had divided the Inspectors' Association, by holding a Convention at Kolkatta in 2003. In fact the Convention at Kolkatta had only revived the Inspectors' Association, which had become defunct from 2002, after the then SG could not be contacted, even by his local office bearers. Only as per the demand of a majority of the Unit Office bearers, I had notified an EC-cum-Convention at Kolkatta in 2003 as the President of the then Inspectors' Federation (to which post I had been elected in the 2001 Bhillai EC). The present AICEIA, is in fact only the child of that Kolkatta Convention.
While Shri. R.C. Sharma held the post of SG of the Inspectors' Federation for more than 7 years, while the term was for 3 years, without a re-election and even after his promotion as Superintendent, and Shri. K.V.Srinivas did not hold the Convention even after expiry of the term and as mandated by the EC at Bhilai, after the re-structuring of 2002, the AICEIA which was revived in 2003, has produced several All India Office Bearers, from that date, only due to the revival and its subsequent democratic functioning. The names of the Office Bearers who occupied the posts of President and Secretary General of AICEIA apart from myself from 2003 till date are:
Coms. Tirthankar Pyne, Kousik Roy, Arun Zachariah, K.P.Manoj, Ajit Kumar K.G, Abhishek Kamal, Anupam Neeraj and today Rananjay Pratap Singh and Anuvuthi Chatterjee.
Apart from the above, the AICEIA produced several other Office Bearers at the next rung also, capable of taking up the mantle, whenever the requirement arose.
In sharp contrast, the immediately former SG of the AIACEGEO, continues to call himself the SG even today, with not even a hand full of functional units to support him. He has given a call to divide the cadre and association at all levels, without consideration to the numbers, which itself highlights his desperation.
The way in which he obliged the administration at Ahmedabad to enable them suspend a Unit Office bearer Shri. Kundu, is fresh in the memory of the cadre.
Before that, there have been repeated instances where the interests of the cadre had been mortgaged, lock stock and barrel by this very person. That had been in fact the genesis of the revival of the AIACEGEO itself in very many units. This was one classical example which proves that a so called unity, without following democratic methods, becomes a feudalistic set up and permits those at the helm, to compromise with authorities, against the interests of those very whom they are supposed to represent. Why it is done and why the authorities permit it or even encourage it, could easily be understood. This is a classic case of how unity alone does not ensure strength of the cadre but an illusion of unity is utilized to sell them out, whole sale.
So the best antidote to divisionism is organization. Organization of members who are alert and aware.
Any form of authoritarianism, whether within the department or in an organization, have to be fought tooth and nail, if the dignity and self-esteem of the cadre is to be protected.
Long live Association.
Long live the spirit of organizing.
with fraternal greetings,
R. Manimohan,
SG, AIACEGEO
Let me add with few facts.
ReplyDeleteWe at IRS-IDT-OA have been Advocating ab-initio(since 2015) that wooes of todays promotee ACs, would be of Supdt tommorrow (& of Inspr day after); and have been in touch with the then AIB leaders of AIACEGEO as well as AICEIA. And, responding to our call Ravi has attended our meetings at Kolkata (June 2015), Chennai (March 2016), Mumbai (2016), Hyderabad (2016) a/w Chandramouli ji.
Thus, he too understand the need of collective bargaining to bring legitimate career progression of Inspr Cx born fraternity...
It's very clear that Inspr Cx born (includes all those who worked in that Grade).
The Inspr Grade (when adopted by ministerial staff), s/he becomes eligible for Supdt - Gr-A... hence we have to talk from 'Inspr Cx born' phrase...
In fact, Supdt or Promotee ACs are originally Inspr only... for eg:I am Inspr Cx of 1982, Supdt Cx of 2001 & AC of 2014...
So no ambiguity of any sort..