HOW THE REGIONAL DISPARITY IN
PROMOTIONS EXISTED IN THE CADRE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE CAN BE REMOVED?
Back grounds history—The cadres of Inspector
and Superintendent are not falling under any service ( like CSS, IRS etc.) The
promotions to the post of Superintendent are being awarded on the basis of the valid Superintendent of Central Excise Recruitment
Rules which has been issued under the
provisions article 309 of the Constitution of India. This RR has been providing for promotion on
CCA (Zonal ) basis. Therefore Seniority Lists as per DOPT guidelines are being
issued in the cadre of Inspector of Central Excise on Zonal basis since
creation of this department. This RR was challenged in High Court of Andhra
Pradesh by Supdts. Association of Hyderabad and one Mr.Laxamana Rao. But High
court rejected the writ and up held the RR as valid one. Against such decision
of High Court, Hyderabad Association moved to SC but SC rejected the petition. It is a one line order.,WP no.3835 of
1981.."The wp has become infructuous and accordingly dismissed .No costs.
'on 24/9/1996.However another linked matter WP nos 512 and 835 of 1988 was
disposed relying
on Gaya baksh yadav caseJT 1996 (5)SC 118.The contention of Laxaman .Rao in the petn
was for all India SL of Insprs or count total service as inspr and supdt
considering the disparity in various commtes.It was also pleaded that if each
commte is treated as separate.then separate quota must be allotted just like cus apprs and supdts. Of
course, the case was linked with 306/88 at various stages but disposed differently.. . WP No 302/88 was filed by both the
Federations of Inspectors and Superintendents jointly The Gr-A RR published on
the basis of the decision in WP no 302/88 was valid up to October 2011. In the petition
both the Federations have accepted promotions on regional/zonal basis. The honourable Apex Court in 302/88 had
directed to cast seniority list of Superintendents of Central Excise basing on the date of joining
in the post of Superintendent of Central Excise on All India basis.
Moreover creation of CCAs is a policy decision
, which can not be challenged in CAT. Therefore those joined in the grade of
Supdt early are seniors to those joined in the grade of Supdt subsequently
irrespective of date of joining in Inspector grade. The Guideline of DOPT vide
OM NO. AB-14017/12/88-ESTT is not helpful for removal of regional
disparity in promotions. FR has also
accepted for creation of separate cadre on regional basis for which step up of
pay is not allowed to seniors of other
zones.
AICEIA is very correctly
demanding to up grade all Inspectors who joined in service on or before 2002 to
maintain parity amongst Inspectors of all zones.
After
a long time without knowing the back grounds of the issue, few units of
AIACEGEO are raising the issue of regional disparities in
promotions and asking that the promotions to the post of Asstt. Commissioner
should be granted on the basis of joining in the Inspector cadre. They insisted
that the combined length of service as Inspector + Superintendent should be
counted for the grant of promotion to the post of Asstt. Commissioner by
treating the already promoted senior Superintendents as ad hoc. Actually AIACEGEO is pursuing the matter of parity with the common
entry counterparts which automatically solve this problem. The AIACEGEO has
already filed a case in the CAT for parity in promotions with the Examiners as
the Examiner of 1992 has already become Asstt. Commissioner. Therefore at this stage no one
should engage themselves with intra-Central Excise fighting. Instead
of it, we should fight unitedly with common opponents to get actual relief.
This would also cause litigations in the
legal courts and nobody among us would be able to get any benefit from cadre
restructuring while others would enjoy it. No rule permit to place any senior
Superintendent to lower position and grant him/her ad hoc status..
Thousands
of our senior Superintendents are already waiting for the implementation of
cadre restructuring expecting for next promotion at the fag end of the career.
The issue should have been taken up at the time of arising of these regional
disparities in the promotions to the post of Superintendents from Inspectors.
Moreover, regional disparities will automatically be removed if we are able to
get parity with Examiners & other counterparts. The issue of regional
disparities is basically related to the Inspectors Association regarding
promotion of Inspector to the post of Superintendent. The promotion to the post
of Asstt. Commissioner can never be granted by counting the length of service
rendered as Inspector to remove the regional disparities.
Under
the circumstances it is to be examined as to how this regional disparity in
promotions can be removed?
SUGGESTIONS:
1.
First Merger Committee ( Bhardwaj
Committee) report has to be implemented w.e.f 01.01.2006 as per recommendation
so that parity in promotions can be maintained amongst the officers of three base cadres who have joined in the
cadres of Inspector/PO/Examiner w.e.f 01.01.2006. Both the Associations should raise demand for
implementation of such committee report.
2.
In the ensuing CR, as per the seniority list the Superintendents
of Central Excise up to part of 2002 are likely to be promoted
to Gr-A. Since during 96-97 upgradations were allowed and during 96-97 & 2002 all were directed to
join in a particular date, the senior Inspectors have already retained their
senior positions in the seniority list, therefore the effect of disparity in
promotion will be very negligible. Thus other possibilities are required to be explored
for removal of such disparity. ( Other possibilities are creation of separate
service , in situ scheme and one time
upgradtion etc. These demands are required to be raised after approval of CR
only)) .
NB--
If separate service for Gr-B
executive cadres (for Central Excise and Customs both) would be created then automatically Inspector cadre would be all India and common seniority list would be issued in the grade of Inspector
retrospectively and Superintendent post would
be considered as ex-cadre and in
that case promotion to the post of AC would
be allowed from the grade of
Inspector ( Gr-B). Up gradation and in situ promotion can be granted on
completion of particular qualifying years of service. In situ scheme was about
to be approved by Board but due to
raising of objection by Pune Unit , this
has been kept in abeyance and therefore many seniors retired without getting
promotion to Gr-A. In this connection Mr Khaleel
Sayed
Ex-GS of Pune Unit of AIACEGEO and Ex Vice President of AIACEGEO has stated that “
Pune Unit has opposed the In-situ scheme and directly made correspondence with
the Board without even consulting the AIB and Zonal Office bearers”..
.
.
( The author of this article is an
ex office bearers of AIACEGEO)
EXACT POSTING MADE BY MR KHALEEL SAYED IN FACE BOOK (Punecex Aicegoa) IS REPRODUCED BELOW FOR INFORMATION
EXACT POSTING MADE BY MR KHALEEL SAYED IN FACE BOOK (Punecex Aicegoa) IS REPRODUCED BELOW FOR INFORMATION
While
recommending grant of in situ promotion to Assistants of CSS as Section
Officer, the Department related Parliamentary Standing Committee on
Home Affairs in its 83rd Report on Personnel Policies of CSS and CISF
has observed in para 7.13 -7.14 (page 29) recommended that grant of ACP
should not stop grant of in situ promotion to stagnated Assistants.
Accordingly, a large number of posts in higher grades were created in
the year 2002-03 to remove stagnation from the Group ‘B’ cadres.
What are the hurdles in implementing the same
by CBEC ?
Sunil Patil Except strong will,no other hurdle. It has to be in CBEC, in our AIB, in our every individual Gr-B executive officer
Khaleel Sayed but, Pune Unit has opposed the In-situ scheme and directly made correspondence with the Board without even consulting the AIB and Zonal Office bearers.- Sunil Patil This is just a 'tinaka' reason, for not doing the work for us. If likes of Pune unit were so heard in corridors of CBEC then there were (&there are) many demands made by Pune for the benefit of our Gr-B Cadre that are not concurred/accepted!! Let us find reasons with CBEC for not doing many things (including non-implementation of SC order). The Pune has experience of AIB in 'Boycott' episode during All India Revenue Sport & about 20-25 Supdts (those attended meeting) with SG at Balewadi stadium knows the facts. Let us all spend our time n energy to do some good constructive that we all are doing. Best of Luck.
It is thus required that no individual unit should approach Board directly. Because of unnecessary interference by Pune Unit , the in situ scheme could not be approved by Board till date to remove regional disparity in promotions.
