Ref. No: CBIC/49/2020 Date : 27.10.2020
CLICK HERE FOR THE PDF VERSION
To
Shri. M. Ajit Kumar,
Chairman, CBIC, New Delhi.
Sir,
Sub: Pay scale issues affecting the morale of the staff and dignity of the department – reg.
Kind reference is invited to our letter in Ref. No. FS/ES/CBIC/48/2020 dated 27.10.2020 addressed to your Good self as well as the Finance Secretary, Expenditure Secretary and the Secretary, DOPT, in the matter of grant of 6600 as 3rd MACP in our department as per the interpretation to MACPS by the C&AG in the case of IA&AD Officials.
2. In this regard we would like to bring to your personal attention, certain matters pending before the CBIC in relation to the pay scales for the cadres of Inspectors and Superintendents in this department, pending before the CBIC:
i. Parity of pay scale at least with effect from 1.1.96 and at least notionally as granted to the IA&AD Officials. This issue has been sponsored by us as Point No. 4 of Annexure in Ref. No. CBEC/18/2017 dated 09.08.2017 and discussed with the Member (Admn) in the meeting held on 18.08.2017. Our issue is that though the Pay scale of Inspectors, Superintendents, etc in Revenue was revised based on the findings of the 5th CPC, it was done only prospectively with effect from 21.04.2004. The pay of Inspectors of Central Excise was revised from 1640 to 2000 with effect from 21.04.2004. On the other hand, the Section Officers in the IA&AD who were also on the scale of 1640 upto 1995, got their pay fixed in the replacement scale of 2000 (Rs. 6500) with notional effect from 1.1.96 when the 5th CPC recommendations were given effect to. In our case, even the notional effect has not yet been given for the Inspectors and Superintendents. Hence we have requested the CBIC to recommend to the Finance Ministry/Department of Expenditure to grant the Inspectors and Superintendents of Central Excise, notional effect at least from 1.1.96, since there was no apparent reason or justification to change the pay scale only on 21.04.2004.
ii. Placing of Superintendents on the Grade Pay of 5400 PB-2 to undo the anomaly created by the 7th CPC and also on the matter of parity with CBI. This issue has been sponsored by us for Anomaly Committee vide our Ref. No: 01/2018/CBEC dated 17.01.2018 and Ref. No: 04/2018/CBEC dated 18.01.2018 also discussed with the Member (Admn) in the meeting conducted on 17.01.2018. The disparities that have been caused in respect of pay scales between comparable cadres in other departments is tabulated below :
Name of post
Pay scales after each stage
4th CPC (w.e.f 1986)
5Tth CPC (w.e.f 1996)
6th CPC (w.e.f 2006)
7th CPC (w.e.f 2016)
Supdt of C.Ex
2000 - 3500
6500 - 10500 (7500 w.e.f 21.4.2004)
5400 PB-2 after 4 years in 4800 PB-2
Level 9 after 4 years in L 8
DySP, CBI
2000 - 3500 (2200 as per order dated 8.2.96)
8000 - 13500
5400 PB-3
Level 10
Supdt of Posts
2000 - 3500
6500 - 10500
5400 PB-2 after 4 years in 4800 PB-2
Level 9
Section Officer CSS
2000 - 3500
6500 - 10500 (7500 w.e.f 15.9.2006)
5400 PB-3 on completion of 4 years in 4800 PB-2
Level 9
It may please be noted that our point has been that there is an anomaly created by the Seventh CPC by distorting the horizontal relativities with that of the equivalent cadres in the other departments like CBI, Department of Posts and Section Officers of CSS with whom the Superintendents of Central Excise were having a parity till 2015 (Till implementation of the Seventh CPC recommendations). Hence we had requested for recommendation of this issue to the Anomaly Committee so that Superintendents of Central Excise are also placed on Level 10 on par with the CBI DySP and recommend to the Expenditure to place our cadre on Level 9 with effect from 1.1.2016 as done in 'Posts'.
iii. The third issue connected to pay of our officers pertains to the implementation of the Ashok Kumar judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in rem. On this issue, we have made representations vide Ref. No. CBIC/33/2018 dated 27.07.2018 and 11/CBIC/2019 dated 25.04.2019. The issue in brief is that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has in the case of Ashok Kumar, upheld the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan wherein it was held that though the ACP scheme makes the benefit personnel to those who are granted the same, the juniors cannot get a higher pay than the seniors and therefore the pay of the seniors who are not getting the ACP should be stepped up to that of the pay of their juniors who got a pay scale revision consequent on getting the benefit of ACP. Even after the Asok Kumar judgment has become final, the department is fighting cases of similarly placed employees. This is creating a great mental distress to the promotee officers in the department who are also stagnating in the cadre of Superintendent. Hence, it is requested that considering that it will not require a great expenditure to implement the Ashok Kumar judgment in rem, or at least for any other similarly placed applicants, like done in the case of M. Subramainam, the CBIC may get necessary approval from the Department of Expenditure.
3. We may kindly be intimated if any of the above issues have already been referred to concerned authorities so that we can pursue them from our end. If any further inputs are required to enable the CBIC to take favourable stands on any of the above issues, we request that a meeting may kindly be held with us by video conferencing or in person, along with the concerned officials of the Board and DGHRM, since most of the Officials with whom we have discussed the said issues are no longer in the Board’s Office/ DGHRM.
With regards,
Yours truly,
(R. Manimohan)
Secretary General
Copy for information and necessary action to:
1) The Member (Admn & Vig), CBIC, New Delhi.
2) The DG, DGHRM, CBIC, New Delhi.
3) The Commissioner (Co-Ordination), CBIC, New Delhi
4) The Joint Secretary (Admn), CBIC, New Delhi.
(R. Manimohan)
Secretary General
Shri. M. Ajit Kumar,
Chairman, CBIC, New Delhi.
Sir,
Sub: Pay scale issues affecting the morale of the staff and dignity of the department – reg.
Kind reference is invited to our letter in Ref. No. FS/ES/CBIC/48/2020 dated 27.10.2020 addressed to your Good self as well as the Finance Secretary, Expenditure Secretary and the Secretary, DOPT, in the matter of grant of 6600 as 3rd MACP in our department as per the interpretation to MACPS by the C&AG in the case of IA&AD Officials.
2. In this regard we would like to bring to your personal attention, certain matters pending before the CBIC in relation to the pay scales for the cadres of Inspectors and Superintendents in this department, pending before the CBIC:
i. Parity of pay scale at least with effect from 1.1.96 and at least notionally as granted to the IA&AD Officials. This issue has been sponsored by us as Point No. 4 of Annexure in Ref. No. CBEC/18/2017 dated 09.08.2017 and discussed with the Member (Admn) in the meeting held on 18.08.2017. Our issue is that though the Pay scale of Inspectors, Superintendents, etc in Revenue was revised based on the findings of the 5th CPC, it was done only prospectively with effect from 21.04.2004. The pay of Inspectors of Central Excise was revised from 1640 to 2000 with effect from 21.04.2004. On the other hand, the Section Officers in the IA&AD who were also on the scale of 1640 upto 1995, got their pay fixed in the replacement scale of 2000 (Rs. 6500) with notional effect from 1.1.96 when the 5th CPC recommendations were given effect to. In our case, even the notional effect has not yet been given for the Inspectors and Superintendents. Hence we have requested the CBIC to recommend to the Finance Ministry/Department of Expenditure to grant the Inspectors and Superintendents of Central Excise, notional effect at least from 1.1.96, since there was no apparent reason or justification to change the pay scale only on 21.04.2004.
ii. Placing of Superintendents on the Grade Pay of 5400 PB-2 to undo the anomaly created by the 7th CPC and also on the matter of parity with CBI. This issue has been sponsored by us for Anomaly Committee vide our Ref. No: 01/2018/CBEC dated 17.01.2018 and Ref. No: 04/2018/CBEC dated 18.01.2018 also discussed with the Member (Admn) in the meeting conducted on 17.01.2018. The disparities that have been caused in respect of pay scales between comparable cadres in other departments is tabulated below :
Name of post
Pay scales after each stage
4th CPC (w.e.f 1986)
5Tth CPC (w.e.f 1996)
6th CPC (w.e.f 2006)
7th CPC (w.e.f 2016)
Supdt of C.Ex
2000 - 3500
6500 - 10500 (7500 w.e.f 21.4.2004)
5400 PB-2 after 4 years in 4800 PB-2
Level 9 after 4 years in L 8
DySP, CBI
2000 - 3500 (2200 as per order dated 8.2.96)
8000 - 13500
5400 PB-3
Level 10
Supdt of Posts
2000 - 3500
6500 - 10500
5400 PB-2 after 4 years in 4800 PB-2
Level 9
Section Officer CSS
2000 - 3500
6500 - 10500 (7500 w.e.f 15.9.2006)
5400 PB-3 on completion of 4 years in 4800 PB-2
Level 9
It may please be noted that our point has been that there is an anomaly created by the Seventh CPC by distorting the horizontal relativities with that of the equivalent cadres in the other departments like CBI, Department of Posts and Section Officers of CSS with whom the Superintendents of Central Excise were having a parity till 2015 (Till implementation of the Seventh CPC recommendations). Hence we had requested for recommendation of this issue to the Anomaly Committee so that Superintendents of Central Excise are also placed on Level 10 on par with the CBI DySP and recommend to the Expenditure to place our cadre on Level 9 with effect from 1.1.2016 as done in 'Posts'.
iii. The third issue connected to pay of our officers pertains to the implementation of the Ashok Kumar judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in rem. On this issue, we have made representations vide Ref. No. CBIC/33/2018 dated 27.07.2018 and 11/CBIC/2019 dated 25.04.2019. The issue in brief is that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has in the case of Ashok Kumar, upheld the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan wherein it was held that though the ACP scheme makes the benefit personnel to those who are granted the same, the juniors cannot get a higher pay than the seniors and therefore the pay of the seniors who are not getting the ACP should be stepped up to that of the pay of their juniors who got a pay scale revision consequent on getting the benefit of ACP. Even after the Asok Kumar judgment has become final, the department is fighting cases of similarly placed employees. This is creating a great mental distress to the promotee officers in the department who are also stagnating in the cadre of Superintendent. Hence, it is requested that considering that it will not require a great expenditure to implement the Ashok Kumar judgment in rem, or at least for any other similarly placed applicants, like done in the case of M. Subramainam, the CBIC may get necessary approval from the Department of Expenditure.
3. We may kindly be intimated if any of the above issues have already been referred to concerned authorities so that we can pursue them from our end. If any further inputs are required to enable the CBIC to take favourable stands on any of the above issues, we request that a meeting may kindly be held with us by video conferencing or in person, along with the concerned officials of the Board and DGHRM, since most of the Officials with whom we have discussed the said issues are no longer in the Board’s Office/ DGHRM.
With regards,
Yours truly,
(R. Manimohan)
Secretary General
Copy for information and necessary action to:
1) The Member (Admn & Vig), CBIC, New Delhi.
2) The DG, DGHRM, CBIC, New Delhi.
3) The Commissioner (Co-Ordination), CBIC, New Delhi
4) The Joint Secretary (Admn), CBIC, New Delhi.
(R. Manimohan)
Secretary General
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave your Name, email and phone number so that we can get in touch with you for any clarification.