Dear friends and comrades,
Wishing
one and all and their families, a very happy year of lights ahead.
To
travel from darkness to light is the essence to sustain life.
To
transverse to truth from falsehood, is an additional task assigned only to
humans.
This
year, the day of lights did not fall on the same day throughout India. But that does not deter us from celebrating
it all the same.
This
has a message for all of us too.
Strength does not lie merely in unity.
It is the unity of purpose that is important. The one who seeks to find light cannot afford
to continue to hold the hands of the minions of darkness.
Some
important issues require our attention and dissemination among members.
5400
case:
There
is a letter in circulation, issued by Ad. II A to the Commissioner of Salem, in
response to their letter dated 8.11.2013, with regard to the Subramaniam case,
stating that the benefit of the judgment may be given to the individual in
personam.
This has led
to wide speculation that the entire issue has been decided to be implemented
only in personam. I have got several
messages in whatsapp and other social media seeking clarification regarding
what other members have to do to get the benefit of the judgment.
It may be noted
that the above letter is issued only to the Commissioner of Salem in response
to their letter dated 2013. Though the
benefit of the High Court Order had been granted to Com. Subramaniam, after the
UOI failed to get a stay when the SLP was admitted, it was with a rider that it
would be recovered if the SLP/CA succeeds and was only subject to its
outcome. Now, after the CA and
subsequent Review Petition got dismissed, they have finalized the issue in
respect of Com. Subramaniam. That is
all.
It is very
reliably learnt that the CBIC has recommended the implementation of the
judgment in rem, considering the numerous cases in various Tribunals and High
Courts. The file has been sent to the
Expenditure for approval. We sincerely
feel that the Board is pursuing it and would get the approval of the
Expenditure considering that this only a small benefit that the CBIC would be
able to get for this cadre.
Parmar/Bharathan
case:
The case is supposed to come up for hearing again on
14.11.2018.
We
have already submitted our final affidavit well before the last hearing. We have sought early disposal of the issue so
that posts of ACs lying vacant could be filled up early. The department has not
filed any counter for the same till date.
Pay
scale matter /anomaly:
The
anomaly committee proceedings dated 4.10.2018 indicated that there was some
confusion on the part of the CBIC regarding placing Superintendents on GP
5400. The concerned officials who had
attended the said meeting have been met and the issues explained. Copy of our letters dated 17.1.18 and 18.1.18
have been once again handed over to them for reference. A separate letter has also been issued again explaining
the entire back ground and justifications. The contents of the letter are
reproduced below. It is expected that a favourable note will proceed from the
CBIC to the anomaly committee on this issue.
Recognition
issue:
It
has been intimated to us that the CBIC is actively finalizing the DDO
certificates submitted by the other group and once it is done, they will
finalise the recognition issue. We see
light at the end of the tunnel.
Let us hope for the best.
With fraternal greetings,
R. Manimohan,
SG, AIACEGEO
Extract of letter issued on pay anomaly:
Ref.
No: CBIC/47/2018 Date: 07.11.2018
To
Shri. S. Ramesh,
Chairman,
CBIC, North Block, New Delhi.
Respected Sir,
Sub: Pay anomaly with
regard to Superintendents of CBIC – reg.
Kind reference is invited to the minutes of the 3rd Meeting of the Departmental
Anomaly committee held on 04.10.2018, issued vide F. No. O.21036/1/2017-Coord of
the Department of Revenue. It is
observed from the minutes that there was some confusion regarding placing the
Superintendents of Central Excise and other analogous cadres in the Department
of Revenue on the pay scale of 5400 PB-2.
The relevant para is extracted below for ease of reference:
“3.1 Issue No. 1: Pay Parity of Inspectors of Income Tax at
par with Inspectors of IB (ACIO-I) and CBI.
3.1.3. The Special Secretary (Revenue) enquired from
the representative of CBIC, whether this demand has any bearing on CBIC. It was informed by CBIC that, if the proposal
of upgradation of Grade pay of Inspectors of Customs/Central Excise/Income tax
from Grade pay Rs. 4600 to Rs. 4800 (presently held by Superintendents/ITOs) is
acceded to, it will disturb vertical hierarchy.
If this demand is acceded to, both the posts of Inspectors as well as
Superintendents/ ITOs will be in the same scale. Any such proposal could not be
considered without upgrading pay scale of promotional post i.e. Grade Pay Rs.
5400 (Pay Band 2), which is
non-functional scale, applicable to similar posts in other
Minsteries/departments too. It would require conversion from Non-functional pay
scale of Rs. 5400 (Pay Band 2) to functional pay scale, which would not be in
scope and ambit of Departmental Anomaly Committee, constituted for examination
of the issues arising out of the recommendations of 7th CPC.”
2. In this context, we would like to submit that the 7th
CPC, has unsettled the horizontal relativity in respect of pay scale that
existed between
(a) the Superintendents of
Central Excise (and analogous cadres in the Department of Revenue) and that of
(b) the Superintendents of
Posts and Section Officers in CSS,
by placing the officers in
category (a) on Level 8 only with Level 9 to be obtained on completion of a
regular service of 4 years in Level 8, while the officers in category (b) have been
placed in Level 9 straightaway. All the
above category of officers were on the pay
scale of 4800 P.B-2 with 5400 PB-2 to be obtained on completion of 4 years
regular service in 4800 PB-2. This has been pointed out vide our letter dated
17.01.2018 in the meeting with the Member (Admn), CBEC. Thus, not only that the functional scale on
5400 PB-2 already exists, this is squarely within the ambit of the 7th
CPC anomaly.
3. Further
another anomaly has been created by the 7th CPC by recommending
Level 10 to the Deputy Superintendents of CBI, but not recommending the same
for the Superintendents of Central Excise and analogous cadres, based on an
erroneous understanding of the recommendations of the 5th CPC in the
matter. This has also been stated by us
in our letter dated 17.1.18 and amplified in our letter dated 18.1.18 addressed
to the Member (Admn) with reference to the meeting held by the Member (Admn) on
17.1.18. The paras of the 7th CPC where the error has crept in, are reproduced
below:
“11.18.61: It has been demanded that the post of Superintendents and
Appraisers may be upgraded from GP 4800 to GP 5400 (PB-3) on the grounds of
historical parity between the gazetted executive officers of CBI, IB, Central
Police Organisations, Enforcement Directorate, Customs, Income Tax and Central
Excise.”
11.18.62: As reflected earlier, the V CPC
had specifically noted that no relativity could be established between
executive posts in Income Tax and Customs vis-à-vis those existing in CBI/IB.”
4. To understand the error in the above recommendations of the 7th
CPC, the details of the 5th CPC recommendations and their back
ground would be required to be noted.
They are narrated below for ease of reference:
4.1. After the implementation of the 4th
CPC, on 22.09.1986, by a separate order, the GOI upgraded the pay scales of
Inspectors of CBI, IB, Andaman & Nicobar Police, Delhi Police, etc.
4.2. Since this unsettled the horizontal
relativity that existed between the said cadres and that of the Inspectors of
Central Excise, etc, an Original Application was filed before the Jabalpur
Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal by the Central Excise Executive
Officers’ Association (Gr. C), Indore and others.
4.3. After detailed hearings in the said matter
in O.A. No. 541 of 1994 in Central Excise Executive Officers’ Association (Gr.
C), Indore and others Vs. UOI, the Hon’ble Tribunal vide judgment dated
24.02.1995 ordered interalia as follows:
“3……A reading of the report of the IVth Pay Commission does provide an
inkling that the Inspectors Customs and Central Excise were intended to be
brought at par with the Inspectors, Central Bureau of Investigation. However since IVth Pay Commission has not
expressly evaluated the job contents of the above said two category of
employees, we consider proper to withhold our hands in regard to any
comparative assessment. All the same, we
do not find any justification for the Govt. of India not to specifically refer
the issue to the Vth Pay Commission with full justification as to why the
recommendations of the IVth Pay Commission for parity of pay of the above two
categories of Inspectors was not adhered to.
It is still unfortunate that reasons have not been disclosed to us at
any stage during the proceedings pending for the last six months. We have therefore every reason to assume that
there does not exist cogent reasons for creating a disparity in the pay scale
of the above categories of Inspectors.
We were therefore inclined to grant the relief prayed for but taking
into account the fact that equalization of pay is the domain of an Expert body,
we are restraining ourselves to adjudicate the matter. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion
that the applicants have a strong case for consideration of parity of pay by
the Vth Pay Commission. Since the Govt.
of India has failed to refer the matter to the Pay Commission despite the
grievance ventilated by the applicants, we consider it proper to issue a mandamus.
4. In the result, Union of India is hereby mandated to issue a
notification within thirty days of the communication of the judgment referring
the matter to the Vth Pay Commission disclosing its stand as to why the
Inspectors of Central Bureau of Investigation and Intelligence Bureau etc. have
been granted higher pay than the Inspectors, Customs & Central Excise for
consideration of the Vth Pay Commission.
The Union of India is further directed to place the Inspectors, Customs
& Central Excise in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3200 with effect from the
date of Inspectors of Central Bureau of Investigation were placed in the said
scale and pay arrears in the light of the Vth Pay Commission’s findings as a
result of the reference made by the Govt….”
4.4. When the matter was referred to the 5th
CPC, the CBEC vide D.O letter No. DOF A
26011/5/94 Ad.II – A (PC) dated 27.10.95, informed the 5th CPC that
‘the duties and responsibilities being performed by Inspectors of Customs and
Central Excise and Preventive Officers are much more arduous and hazardous than
the Inspectors in Delhi Police, CBI etc’ and that ‘having regard to the facts
mentioned above, the Department strongly recommend parity in pay scales and
other perks of Inspectors of Central Excise/Preventive Officers and Examining
Officers of Customs and Inspectors of Narcotics Department with the Inspectors
in Delhi Police, CBI, etc”. After
going through all facts and hearing all parties concerned, the 5thCPC came to
the following conclusions (paras of the report are given within brackets):
(i) (a) Inspectors of C.B.I to be placed on Rs.
1640-2900 only and those who have already been placed on the higher scale would
have them as personal to them (para 79.36(c))
(b)
Asstt Central Intelligence Officer will be placed in the scale of Rs. 1640-2900
and those who are already drawing the scale of pay of Rs. 2000-3200 may
continue to draw it as personal to them. (para 70.54 (c)).
(ii) (a) As
a result of the review of the entire situation, we have separately decided to
place the Inspectors of C.B.I and I.B. in the pay scale of Rs. 1640-2900
instead of Rs. 2000-3200, because there was no justification to take them to
the higher pay scale of Rs. 2000-3200.
As a consequence of this recommendation, the demand relating to the
grant of higher pay scale, that too with a retrospective date, to the
inspectors of Income Tax, Central Excise etc. have become infructuous. (para
66.107)
(b)
Moreover, in the context of our recommendation that the Inspectors of CBI and
IB should be placed only in the replacement scale corresponding to Rs. 1640 –
2900, the analogy no longer holds good. (para 66.119)
(iii) (a)
But for the sake of clearing the record, we would like to state that even
otherwise we do not consider the duties of the posts of inspectors of Income
Tax, Excise and Customs to have any linkage or parity with the Inspectors of
Police. The two categories are not
comparable. (para 66.107).
(b)
After considering the matter in all its aspects we are of the view that
Inspectors of Central Excise and Customs are not comparable with Inspectors in
Police Organisations. (para 66.119)
(iv) Our
view is that the existing parity between the scales of pay of I.B., C.B.I and
Delhi Police is misplaced and has no logical basis. Delhi Police is like any other State Police
Force and has hardly anything in common with I.B and C.B.I or with the Central
Police Organisations. (para 70.64)
4.5.
Thus it was evident that the 5th
CPC recommended one scale for the Inspectors of Central Excise, Customs, Income
Tax, C.B.I., and I..B and another scale for Police Organisations including the
Delhi Police. To demarcate the
difference between investigative agencies and Police Organisations, they had
stated about the non-comparable nature of the two, in the chapters pertaining
to Central Excise, etc as well as that of Delhi Police. It was in this context that the Pay
Commission recommended to bring down the scales of Inspectors of CBI and IB and
noted that the Inspectors of Income Tax, Central Excise and Customs were not
comparable to the Inspectors of Police Organisations, just like they had said
that no logical basis existed for having the same pay scales for I.B., C.B.I.,
etc along with that of the Police.
4.6. However, the GOI did not accept the
recommendations of the 5th CPC to reduce the pay scale of Inspectors
of CBI and IB, which had been held by the CPC as having increased without any
logical basis. In the Revised Pay Rules, 1997, the Inspectors of CBI and IB
continued to be in the replacement scale of Rs. 2000-3200.
4.7. Based on the findings of the 5th
CPC and in the light of the Hon’ble CAT Jabalpur order dated 24.02.1995, since
the Inspectors of CBI and IB were continuing in the scale of Rs. 2000-3200, the
Inspectors of Central Excise, etc also should have been placed in the same
scale. The anomaly was taken up with the
CBEC and CBDT. To study the matter, a
High Power Committee was set up by the Finance Minister including the Chairman,
CBEC, CBDT, Joint Secretary of both the Boards, etc. The High Power Committee recommended accord
of higher pay scale at par with CBI and IB to the Inspectors of Central Excise,
Income Tax, etc and the same was also approved by the Secretary Revenue and
Minister of State for Finance. However,
it was not approved by the Department of Expenditure.
4.8. Hence an OA in No. 45 of 2000 was filed
before the Jabalpur bench of the CAT by the All India Federation of Central
Excise Executive Officers. After
detailed hearing in the matter, the Hon’ble Tribunal vide their judgment dated
22.03.2002 ordered interalia as below:
“7…….The contention of the respondents by referring to the
recommendations in paras 66.118 and 66.119 is that the applicants have not been
found comparable with that of Inspectors of Police Organisations. We find that the same does not inter alia,
include the CBI and IB and that has been referred in the Delhi Police and the
CBI and IB do not come within the purview of the Police Organisation and cannot
be treated as such. Apart from it by
their further recommendation placing the Inspectors in IB/CBI in the
replacement scale of Rs. 1640-2900 the anomaly which has been created in the
year 1986 has been removed. In our
considered view this recommendation after going into all the aspects and
factors for determination of pay scale i.e., eligibility, educational
qualification, nature of duties and responsibilities as well as professional
skills the applicants Inspectors of Customs and Excise have been found at par
with the Inspectors of CBI and IB. The
recommendation of expert body also places these two sets of employees in parity
in all respects. Subsequent decision of
the Government by disagreeing with the recommendations of the expert body as
far as CBI and IB is concerned and recommending the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3200
to the Inspectors of CBI and IB vide their letter dated 6.10.97 certainly
creates an anomaly in the pay scale of two equally placed sets of
employees. This decision of the
Government is without any logic, rational and shows hostile discrimination
between the two sets of employees having been treated alike by the 5th
CPC. In our considered view the expert
body, i.e., HPC set up by the Ministry of Finance has recommended the revision
of pay scale of the applicants at par with the Inspectors of CBI and IB and the
same has been accepted by the Ministry of Finance. There was no reason for the
Government to have taken a contrary view by rejecting their request without
recording any justified reasons. The
stand of the Government to adopt restructuring in no way would be relevant for
upgradation of their pay scale at par with their counter-parts in CBI/IB. As
per the ratio of P.V. Hariharan’s case (supra) the Tribunal can interfere in
the matter of pay scale if there exists a hostile discrimination between the
two sets of employees similarly situated, without any justification.
8. In the result, we find the action of the Government to deny the
applicants pay scale at par with those of Inspectors of CBI/IB as violative of
Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. However, we refrain from ordering accord of
pay scale to the applicants and in this view of the matter the OA is disposed
of with the direction to the respondents to reconsider the claim of the
applicants for being accorded the pay scale at par with the Inspectors of CBI
and IB and having regard to the observations made above by us and to take a
final decision by passing a detailed and speaking order, within a period of
three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order…”
4.9. The CBEC vide F.No. A-26-17/13/2002-Ad.II(A)
dated 17.12.2002 rejected the representation of application in OA No. 45/2000
to place the post of Inspector of Central Excise in the higher pay scale of Rs.
6500-10500 (the replacement scale for Rs. 2000-3200). The rejection was based on the contention
that the 5th CPC had held that Inspectors of Central Excise, Income
Tax, etc are not comparable with Police.
4.10. The above rejection order was contrary to the
clear observation of the Hon’ble CAT vide its order dated 22.03.2002 cited
above that “The contention of the respondents by referring to the
recommendations in paras 66.118 and 66.119 is that the applicants have not been
found comparable with that of Inspectors of Police Organisations. We find that the same does not inter alia,
include the CBI and IB and that has been referred in the Delhi Police and the
CBI and IB do not come within the purview of the Police Organisation and cannot
be treated as such. Apart from it by
their further recommendation placing the Inspectors in IB/CBI in the replacement
scale of Rs. 1640-2900 the anomaly which has been created in the year 1986 has
been removed. In our considered view
this recommendation after going into all the aspects and factors for
determination of pay scale i.e., eligibility, educational qualification, nature
of duties and responsibilities as well as professional skills the applicants
Inspectors of Customs and Excise have been found at par with the Inspectors of
CBI and IB. The recommendation of expert
body also places these two sets of employees in parity in all respects.”
4.11. Hence, the Co-Ordination Committee of
Associations in the Department of Revenue, representing the Organisations of
the Inspectors and Superintendents in Central Excise & Customs and their
counterparts in Income Tax, approached the Finance Ministry for justice.
4.12. The issue was dealt with by the Department of
Expenditure in their F
No. 6/37/98-1C (Note pages 51 to 54).
While concluding the discussion, the Expenditure Ministry stated in the
above note thus:
“13. To sum up, it may be mentioned that in no two organizations, the
assigned duties of comparable posts can be totally identical and so is the case
with the Inspectors of CBI, IB, Central Police Organisations, Customs, Income
Tax and Central Excise. However, the 3rd,
4th and the 5th Pay Commissions by assigning identical
pay scales to the Inspectors of CBI, IB, Central Police Organisations,
Inspectors of Income Tax, Customs and Central Excise have established the
comparable nature of the level of responsibilities assigned to the Inspectors
of each of the categories mentioned above.
This was also upheld by the Committee set up by the former Finance
Minister on this subject as well as in the judgment dated 22.3.2002 of Jabalpur
Bench of CAT. In view of this, it may perhaps be appropriate if the instant
proposal of Department of Revenue to upgrade pay scales of the posts of Income
Tax Inspectors and Income Tax Officers to Rs. 6500-10500 and Rs. 7500-12000
with prospective effect is approved. A
similar dispensation will also need to be extended to analogous posts in CBEC
as the posts in these two departments have a distinct relativity and have
always been on par…”
4.13. The Hon’ble Finance Minister Shri. Jaswant Singh,
approved the above note and accordingly upgradation of the pay scales of the
Officers of CBEC and CBDT was notified vide Order dated 21.04.2004 in F No.
6/37/98-1C as below:
|
Post
|
Existing Pay Scale
|
Revised Pay Scale
|
|
Income
Tax Officer
|
Rs. 6500 - 10500
|
7500 - 12000
|
|
Appraiser
(Central Excise)
|
Rs. 6500 - 10500
|
7500 - 12000
|
|
Superintendent
(Central Excise)
|
Rs. 6500 - 10500
|
7500 - 12000
|
|
Superintendent
(Customs Preventive)
|
Rs. 6500 - 10500
|
7500 - 12000
|
|
Income
Tax Inspector
|
Rs. 5500 - 9000
|
6500 - 10500
|
|
Inspector
(Central Excise)
|
Rs. 5500 - 9000
|
6500 - 10500
|
|
Examiner
(Custom)
|
Rs. 5500 - 9000
|
6500 - 10500
|
|
Preventive
Officer (Custom)
|
Rs. 5500 - 9000
|
6500 - 10500
|
5. From the above, it would be evident that
the Superintendents of Central Excise
and their analogous cadres are rightly to be placed in Level 10 i.e the replacement
scale for 5400 P.B-3 on par with the Deputy Superintendents of CBI, etc.
6. Since we are Gazetted Officers, we do not
have a seat in the Anomaly Committee, being not part of the Staff Side in the
Departmental Council. Hence it is requested that the above issue may kindly be
recommended favourably to the Anomaly Committee.
7. Further, it would not be out of place to
mention that though the pay scale matter was fought by Associations in the CBEC
from 1994 onwards (The then Inspectors’ Associations), and even though the
favourable findings by the 5th CPC was mainly on account of the
favourable recommendation of the CBEC, ultimately when the matter went upto the
Expenditure in 2004, the CBEC did not support the issue. Our cadres got the
benefit only on the grounds that they were analogous to the cadres in the
CBDT. This would be evident from the
note of the Expenditure reproduced in para 4.12 above. Hence it is our humble prayer that this time
around, the CBIC should protect the interests of its cadres by recommending this
pay anomaly to the Anomaly Committee.
Thanking you,
Yours truly,
(R. Manimohan)
Secretary General
