Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
Dear Member and Friends, Hearty Congratulations to all the Superintendents who are promoted as Assistant Commissioners in the order dated 1...
-
Dear Members and Friends, On the eve of this Iconic day of our 76 th Independence day, our Azaadi Ka Amruth Mahothsav we will complete ...
-
Dear Members and Friends, Wishing all of you and your families a very Happy Diwali, Celebrated as Dantheras, Lakshmi Pooja, Durga pu...
A very good initiative. If it is thro, it will be a big achievement and it will end the long pending ordeal at one stroke.
ReplyDeleteThis resolution is self contradictory. One hand it state that the proposal is given as there is no seniority list and on other hand it proposed that charge may be given on the basis of seniority.
ReplyDeleteSeniority for this can be only based on length of service.
DeleteIt is also total compromise on issue of P Bharathan judgement.
ReplyDeleteIt is consistent demand of Association that GP 5400 in PB-2 and in PB-3 is one and same but unfortunately the Association it self differentiate in GP 5400 in PB-2 and in PB-3 in its proposal.
It will also weakened the demand of Association for MACP in GP 6600 as the Association it self explained in the proposal that after 26 years of service as Inspector officers are eligible for GP 5400 in PB-3 only.
It is also in consistent of the Association earlier stand of regular promotion as the resignation is not a promotion at all forget out Ad-hoc or regular.
It is also inconsistent with the Association's earlier demand of AC after 15 years of service as in this proposal association demand resignation (not actual promotion) after 26 years of service.
No. See, whatever demand we made earlier with regard to AC promotion or pay scale etc., nothing comes out of it. The present proposal is only an alternate idea suggested by the association. This should be seen as a desperate attempt to attain the goal or going near to the goal. So it does not mean that association changed their stance or compromising etc.
DeleteThis will have resulted in nothing. The department use it as a justification of non implementation of SC judgement in P. Bharathan case.
DeleteThere is no hope from the association lead by mani mohan . Faltu ki bakwas
ReplyDeleteAIB is direction less completely. Since, last 3-4 years nothing positive has been happened at All India Level.
ReplyDeleteThe Association write for uniformity in own merit issue one year before but no follow up. Now they suggest just by pass the own merit litigation and instead of promotion the department can redesignate.
The Association spent huge amount in fighting P. Bharathan case before Supreme Court. Now, when the SC granted favourable judgement. The Association is not interested in persuasion for implementation of the same.
The issue of DPC for the year 2018 & 2019 is being opposed one way or the other. 20-25 members are retiring every month. The intentions are more than evident. On the pretext of Parmar/Bharathan, process of stalling DPC is being done. Isn't it a condemnable approach?
ReplyDeleteSir,अगर सुप्रीम कोर्ट के जजमेंट के बाद भी डिपार्टमेंट उसे इम्पलीमेंट नहीं करना चाहता तो क्या किया जा सकता है, सब्जेक्ट टू आउटकम प्रोमोशन की संभावना तभी है जब कोई मैटर का आउटकम नहीं आया है लेकिन जहाँ आउटकम पहले से आया हुआ है और आउटकम आने के बाद पर्याप्त समय गुजर गया है तो फिर ऐसे में सब्जेक्ट टू आउटकम का कोई सेंस नहीं रह जाता।
Deleteइसके बाद भी अगर डिपार्टमेंट जजमेंट को इम्पलीमेंट करने की जगह एसोसिएशन को मीटिंग बुलाकर ये बोले कि अगर एसोसिएशन जजमेंट इम्पलीमेंट करने की कहेगी तो हम जजमेंट तो इम्पलीमेंट नहीं ही करेंगे डीपीसी भी नहीं करेंगे और आपके मेंबर्स बिना प्रोमोशन के रिटायर्ड हो जाएंगे। ये तो सीधा सीधा ब्लैकमेलिंग हैं।