Dear
friends and comrades,
There have been several calls and
messages seeking to know the position of the DPC as well as our proposal for
re-designation.
To the best of our knowledge, the CBIC
taking efforts to conduct the DPC by 30.06.2020.
In the meanwhile, there are pressures
and counter pressures regarding the correctness of the AISL. Our AIEC had decided not to get into it
now.
Only
considering all aspects we have decided that we have to get the anomalies
corrected by getting the Branch B Service moving and with necessary number of
posts to take care of the stagnation.
Only towards that, we have given our proposal for re-designation on
01.06.2020 even before the video conference with the Chairman on 10.06.2020.
When
we suggested to the DGHRM on earlier occasions that all states are
re-designating their CTOs as ACs, they said that there was no pay revision in
those cases. Hence, now we have proposed
a re-designation which does not require a pay revision.
This proposal has gained wide
acceptance among the cadre since it is a panacea to many of the ills afflicting
the AISL and ratio between Central Excise and Customs.
Hence, even in the video conference on
10.06.2020, we requested the Chairman to consider this proposal for
re-designation, along with or apart from the efforts for DPC. He also agreed to look into it.
Hence, to avoid any further
litigations pertaining to the AISL and to resolve the existing ones, we are
buttressing our proposal with the necessary statistics and justifications. (CLICK HERE FOR THE LETTER DATED 22.06.2020)
Let us be united in this effort so
that when the Branch B service is brought in, the strength of the re-designated
ACs could be added to that strength and elongated/elevated to the level of JCs,
as per our original demand so that time bound promotions could be ensured to
that level at the least.
We therefore request all our members
in all parts of the country to kindly focus their energy towards achieving this
demand, instead of fretting away their energy and resources on litigations.
Fraternally
yours,
R.
Manimohan,
Secretary
General,
AIACEGEO
Until and unless the Board is earnest in acting to remove the anomalies and create posts by redesignation as sugested and instead intends to carry on with the existing AISL, the litigations are bound to increase. This is the only option available to the Board and to our cadre too.
ReplyDeleteDear Mani Mohan ji, your letter dt 22.6.2020 should be an eye opener for any Administrative department, which want to care for its own Organisation.
ReplyDeleteThe tabular data shows severity of problem.
The issue of zonal disparity within Cx has root cause in wrong 'collation of zonal Seniority lists', to prepare AISL. The AISL should be prepared with reference to the "date of attaining eligibility" by the Supdts in their feeder grade viz: Inspr Cx. Because, due to typical situation in given zone, there shall always be difference in rate of promotion as Supdt.
But, this variation can always be corrected while preparing AISL by collating them w.r.t.their dt of attaining eligibility in Inspr Cx grade.
THIS IS PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY OF ANY CARING ADMINISTRATION.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in judgement of 2014 in CA No.979 of 2014 (Renu&Ors Vs Dist& Session Judge Tis Hazari) has held that any RRs/Rules should respect the Constitutional principles of justice and equality. And, if not, such Rules have to be scrapped.
The CBIC must take immediate steps to ensure that senior person is promoted as AC before anyone subsequent recruitee of him is promoted as AC.
CBIC can not put reasons that Custom Officers will object or forward Cx zone will object.
It is the DUTY of Administration to follow Constitutional principles.
Sir, I agree with you. But recruitment by promotion can not be done for the sake of deprived groups or disparity between inter-cadres or intra-cadre. We have to write a letter to the Chairman that how inter-cadre or intra-cadre disparity is ultimately affecting and defying the very purpose of section of the constitution.
DeleteSir,from beginning I know the motto of Ravi Mallik and team. They never talked about intra-cadre disparity in effective way as it was beneficial to some specific cca employees. I have written a material which could be very helpful for you to establish the fact that disparity is badly affecting the departmental and national interest and is also against the real essence of constitution. If you say, I will send the same.
DeletePl send the material to aisacbitc@gmail.com
DeleteBefore giving consent to the present DPC the Association may get assurance from the Board that our alternate proposal would be considered.
ReplyDeleteबहुत अच्छा प्रपोजल है। लेकिन इस इंसिडेंट से हमें ये समझना चाहिए कि सीनियोरिटी रिलेटेड इश्यूज को और ज्यादा सेंसिओरिटी एंड प्रायोरिटी से लिये जाने की आवश्यकता है। भरथन केस में SLP dismissed हुए करीब 9 मंथ हो गए हैं, अगर हमने थोड़े बेहतर प्रयास किये होते तो अभी तक AISL रिवाइज्ड हो गयी होती।
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCBIC is probably the worst organisation in this country when it comes to career development and morale boosting of the non-IRS cadre. At times I feel as to even why I give an effort in my work
ReplyDeleteआप सही कह रहे हैं सर, हमें आउट साइड CBIC, जैसे रेवेन्यू सेक्रेटरी एंड PMO के लेवल पर इशू रेज करना चाहिए रेगुलर बेसिस पर।
DeleteSo you have now withdrawn your commitment to get Bharathan judgement implemented. Can you elaborate the reasons?
ReplyDeleteअगर हम भरथन केस के जजमेंट को इम्पलीमेंट के विषय मे अपने स्टैंड को छोड़ देते हैं तो रीजनल डिस्पेरिटी की समस्या और बढ़ेगी। मुंबई जैसे CCA में हार्डली 1985 बैच स्टार्ट हो पायेगा जबकि दूसरे जोन में 10 साल जूनियर भी प्रमोट हो जाएगा।
DeleteSeptember-2019 में जजमेंट आया था और अगर 1 साल के अंदर एसोसिएशन कंटेम्प्ट फ़ाइल नहीं करती है तब एसोसिएशन कंटेम्प्ट फ़ाइल करने के अधिकार को खो देगी। 10 जून की मीटिंग से ये तय है कि बिना कंटेम्प्ट में जाये बोर्ड सीनियोरिटी रिवाइज्ड नहीं करेगा।