1. Background
for the Meeting :- The CBEC commissioned
a Study to examine and suggest solutions to the problem of acute stagnation in
Group ‘B’ Gazetted and Non-gazetted Executive grades. Shri Parkash Chand, Retired Deputy Secretary, was
appointed as a Consultant for conducting the study, in association with Shri B
B Agrawal, Additional Director General, NACEN. The Terms of Reference of the
Study, as outlined vide the DGHRD O.M. F. No. 8/B/194/HRD(HRM)/2013 dated 4th
July 2014, are as under :-
I.
To examine and identify the reasons
for the acute stagnation in Group ‘B’ Gazetted and Non-gazetted Executive
grades ;
II.
To examine and identify the reasons
for intra-cadre disparity in
promotions in the three streams of Non-gazetted executive grades, viz.
Inspector Central Excise, Preventive Officer and Examiner ;
III.
To examine and identify the reasons
for inter-cadre disparity in
promotions in the three streams of Non-gazetted executive grades, viz.
Inspector Central Excise, Preventive Officer and Examiner.
IV.
To suggest an organizational Cadre
Structure, i.e. sanctioned strengths at various levels in Group ‘A’
(particularly JTS / STS), Group ‘B’ Gazetted Executive, and Group ‘B’
Non-gazetted Executive levels, which would :-
a)
fulfil the reasonable aspirations for
career progression of the Group ‘B’ Executive Officers by providing a
reasonable and permanent solution to the overall problem of stagnation,
b)
minimize the intra-cadre and
inter-cadre disparities in promotions, and
c)
meet the numerical need of officers
at various levels in keeping with the functional requirements of the Department.
V.
To suggest various ways in which,
pending the permanent solution of the stagnation problem, interim relief can be
given to the existing officers by way of schemes such as financial upgradation,
etc.
VI.
To assess the legal / practical /
administrative difficulties, if any, that may arise in implementation of their
suggestions, and to suggest solutions for the same.
2. The above O.M. was placed on CBEC
website www.cbec.gov.in under the link “Departmental Officers”→“Circulars”. A news item
was also carried in this regard on the website of taxindiaonline in the DDT
section.
3. With a view to ascertain the views of
the various Associations, a letter was issued to them on 20th July
2014, inviting them for a meeting on the 31st July 2014 at the DGHRD
office at Saket, New Delhi.
4. Accordingly, the meeting was held on 31st
July 2014. It was attended by the following persons :-
Department side :-
1. Ms. Neerja Shah, Director General, DGHRD
2. Shri B.B.Agrawal, Additional Director General, CoE, NACEN
3. Shri Parkash Chand, Consultant
4. Shri Sanjai Srivastava, AAD, DGHRD
Associations side :-
|
Name of
Association invited by the letter dated 20th July 2014
|
Names of
Office Bearers who attended the meeting
|
|
IRS
(C&CE) Association
|
Shri Metta Rama Rao, President
|
|
All India Central Excise Gazetted Executive Officers’ Association
|
Shri L N Mishra,
President,
Shri Ravi Malik,
Secretary General, and
Shri C S Sharma,
Office Secretary
|
|
All India Central Excise Inspectors’ Association
|
Shri Anupam Neeraj, President
Shri Abhishek Kamal, Secretary General, and
Shri Devender Kumar, Liaison Secretary
|
|
All India Federation of Superintendent of Customs
|
None
|
|
All India
Customs Preventive Service Federation
|
Shri I B
Mishra, Secretary General
|
|
Federation of All India Appraising Officers’ Association
|
None
|
|
All India Customs Officers’ (Direct Recruit Appraisers) Association
|
None
|
|
All India Central Excise and Service Tax Ministerial Officers’
Association
|
Shri
R.S.Gautam, Liaison Secretary
|
|
All India Customs Ministerial Employees Federation
|
Shri Saugata Chakaborty, Secretary General, and
Shri Swapan Kumar Das, Asstt. Secretary
|
5. Shri
B.B Agrawal ADG welcomed all the participants. He invited attention to the
above O.M. and invited their views on the various issues.
6. Written
views were submitted by the following Associations :-
(1)
All India Central Excise Inspectors’
Association
(2)
All India Association of Central
Excise Gazetted Executive Officers
(3)
All India Customs Ministerial
Employees’ Federation
(4)
All India Central Excise And Service
Tax Ministerial Officers’ Association
7. Shri
L.N. Mishra, President, All India Central Excise Gazetted Executive
Officers’ Association presented their views on stagnation
in the grades of Central Excise Inspectors and Superintendent at length.
Reference to various Committees constituted on the issue in the past was also made.
He expressed dismay over the non-implementation of their recommendations and
wondered about the utility of the present study. The DGHRD intervened and
assured that the house is meeting in good faith and the attempt is to find an
amicable solution to the problems. Shri
Mishra referred to the frustration on account of non-implementation of earlier
committees’ reports and said they have lost faith in the system. MACP available
now is no solution of the problem. He suggested flexible promotional schemes as
available to the Scientist etc. or batch wise promotion/upgradation to be
considered. He further suggested that Cadre Reviews should also take place
every 5 years. As three streams of
Inspectors Central Excise, Preventive Officers and Examiner get merged at group
‘A’ level, there is no need to keep the 3 different streams in the feeder
grades of Inspectors/ Superintendent. The trifurcation has led to severe
distortion as in some cases junior Inspector is heading the senior Inspectors selected
through the same examination.
8. Shri
Metta Rama Rao, President, IRS(C&CE) Association stated that once a promotee
is inducted into IRS, he is welcome by them. He further stated that Cadre
Reviews should be held every 5 years. IRS Being a organized group ‘A’ service,
no dilution of 50-50 DR / Promotees is possible. He further suggested that JTS
Officers can be posted on national borders, more preventive formations on land
customs and sea borders etc., which will facilitate creation of more group ‘A’
posts and may meet the hardship of feeder cadres to some extent. Needless to
say it will require more vehicles and may also result in posting problems.
9. Shri
I.B. Mishra, Secretary General All India Customs Preventive service Federation,
Chennai stated that RRs of Appraisers
have not been amended till today though DR posts are not being filled since
2002. He suggested more posts of JTS on functional need-basis and suggested a
ratio of 1 DR to 3 Promotees for Group ‘A’. He also suggested creation of a
separate Service of Inspectors/ Superintendent /ACs/DCs and so on which can be a
parallel service to IRS and also cited the case of CSS and demanded parity in
pay including NFSG and in- situ promotion at the level of Joint secretary as in
CSS. He further stated that comparison can also be made to Income Tax Service.
10. Shri.
Saugata Chakrabothy Secy. General All India Customs Ministerial Employees
Federation suggested promotions of Ministerial Staff to Inspectors should be in
the ratio of 1 DR to 2 Promotees like in CBDT. He also raised the issue of 5%
quota for the ministerial staff to Appraiser which was available earlier. He
was asked to give his suggestion in writing which he agreed to give.
11. Shri.
Anupam Neeraj, President All India Central Excise Inspectors Association pointed out intra-cadre disparity and inter-Cadre
disparity. Supreme Court Judgment of Radhe Shaym Singh Vs Union of India was
quoted. Further he desired that DOPT orders dated 03.07.86 para 2(1) be
referred to for purposes of seniority of 1996 batch inspectors who ultimately after
re-examination joined in 2003 be considered for promotion on All India
Seniority basis so that disparity is removed to some extent. Mr. Abhishek Kamal
, Secretary General, All India Central Excise Inspector Association and
Devender Kumar, Liason Secretary All India Central Excise Inspector Association,
also spoke on the same lines and favoured the merger of the 3 streams i.e.
Inspector Central Excise, Preventive & Examiner. (At this juncture, Shri
I.B Mishra representing All India Custom Preventive service Federation opposed
the merger of 3 streams).
12. Shri Ravi Malik, Secretary Genertal, All India Central
Excise Gazetted Executive Officers’ Association
desired that RRs of Inspectors and above be amended as per guidelines of DOPT
which provide 2 years’ service as qualifying service for promotion from
Inspector to Superintendent. He also reiterated the points raised by Shri
L.N. Mishra.
13. Shri
R.S. Gautam, Liason Secretary, All India Central Excise and Service tax
Ministerial Association desired that ratio of promotee to DR should be 66% and
their interests be protected while addressing the hardship of Inspectors and Superintendents.
14. Shri
L.N. Mishra stated that Fundamental Rules talk about the Cadre and there should
be parity in all Cadres. 3 separate All India seniority lists of 3 streams i.e.
Inspector Central Excise, Preventive Officer and Examiner be drawn and parity
maintained. He also referred to decision by Hon’ble Apex Court to which Shri
Sanjay Srivastav of HRM responded that as per orders of the Supreme Court, present
ratio of 6:1:2 is being maintained. There was request for some interim relief
as officers in the grade of Inspector/ Superintendent are retiring every month
and as such they will be deprived of the benefits of this study team
recommendations as and when implemented. Further flexible promotion / batchwise
promotion and in-situ promotion was also demanded by almost all the
representatives of various associations.
15. The
Associations’ representatives also desired that minutes of the meeting be also issued
to them, and another meeting be held before finalizing the Study report, which
was agreed to by DGHRD and the Study Group.
16. Shri
B.B Agrawal ADG thanked all the participants for their views, and requested
them to also send soft copies of their representations. He also mentioned that they could send
further views if any (including the oral submissions made today if these are not
already included in their written submissions), in hard as well as soft copy.
17. Shri
Agrawal then invited the participants’ attention to the fact that one of the
objectives of their Study is to arrive at a model structure for the
relevant cadres, which if adopted in future, for future officers,
would meet all the reasonable expectations in terms of career progression. He said that the relevant numbers are as
under :-
|
Level (in terms of promotional
avenues)
|
Number of sanctioned posts
(before CR)
|
Number of sanctioned posts
(after CR)
|
Remarks
|
|
|
Assistant Commissioner (JTS)
|
949
|
1249
|
Excluding the 2118 temporary posts
|
|
|
Superintendents
|
13948
|
19108
|
Including the equivalent posts of
Supdt (Cus Prev) and Appraisers
|
|
|
Inspectors
|
20163
|
25203
|
Including the equivalent posts of Prev
Officer (Cus) and Examiners
|
|
|
Total
|
35060
|
45560
|
|
|
Thus, there are about 25,000
Inspectors. In the model structure, an officer joining as Inspector would
expect to get the next functional promotion, say, for example, in 10 years (residency
period). By the time he becomes ripe for promotion, 10 more lots would have
joined. Thus, it can easily be seen that for the stream to keep moving, the
number of officers required to be moved up every year would be equal to the
total corpus (i.e. 25,000) divided by the residency period (i.e. 10), which
means that 2500 Inspectors would need to be promoted to Superintendent every
year. Then, for 2500 newly promoted Superintendents to join the corpus of
Superintendents every year, it would in turn mean that 2500 Supdts at the top
would need to move out by way of promotion into the JTS. This would mean that
the Supdts would need 19108 / 2500 = 8 years (approx) for promotion into JTS.
This makes it 10+8=18 years. An Inspector joins at the age of say 26 years, so
he would have 34 years of service. After the above 18 years for reaching the
JTS, he would still have 16 years of service left. To continue with the
calculations, for 2500 Supdts to move into JTS every year, 2500 direct recruit
ACs would also need to join JTS every year (1:1 as per RR, unless changed).
Hence, the JTS corpus would need to be 2x2500x4 = 20,000 (because in 4 years a
JTS becomes STS, so every year, one-fourth of the JTS would move up).
18. To
recapitulate, the above argument yields the following numbers :-
|
Level (in terms of promotional
avenues)
|
Number of sanctioned posts (after
CR)
|
Number of years for next promotion
|
Number of posts required for the
above “model” structure (working upwards)
|
|
Assistant Commissioner (JTS)
|
1249
|
4
|
20000
|
|
Superintendents
|
19108
|
8
|
10000
|
|
Inspectors
|
25203
|
10
|
25000
|
|
Total
|
45560
|
|
55000
|
Shri Agrawal
explained that thus the total corpus of JTS+Supdt+Inspr would need to be 55000,
for an Inspector to become Supdt in 10 years and for a Supdt to become AC in 8
years. Even if we modify the above figures for the fact that one-third of the
Inspectors would be those promoted from the ministerial cadres and would thus
have less service left, even then the numbers would pose a challenge. (The
different assumptions made in the above calculations can all be changed, and
the resultant figures can be worked out to arrive at various permutations and
combinations, as long as we are able to find a model which is reasonable in
overall terms).
19. After
having explained the above mathematical logic of the overall numbers, he
requested the Associations to come up with a model structure of overall numbers
from Inspector upwards (i.e. Inspector, Supdt, AC, DC, JC and so on), making
various reasonable assumptions in terms of residency periods etc., which in their view would meet all the reasonable aspirations that a direct
recruit Inspector could have in terms of career progression. He said that if it
is possible to work out such an overall structure, then the internal
details could always be worked out, and also the changes required in the RRs
and other guidelines, if any, could also be taken up for a discussion with the
appropriate authorities. However, while working out the revised numbers in
various grades from Inspector (or equivalent) upwards, it was important to keep
in mind the functional requirements at various levels, in view of the
tasks that our department is required to perform. In other words, while there
may be a reasonable flexibility to suggest changes in the strength at various
levels so as to have a structure that removes stagnation, but revolutionary
changes may not be possible.
20. The
representatives of the various Associations agreed to work on the above problem
and come up with their suggestions about the possible alternatives for the
overall numbers from Inspector upwards, keeping in mind the functional
imperatives of the Department.
( N.B.- SOME POINTS ABOUT ADHOC REGULARIZATION, MERGER OF CADRES, REMOVAL OF INTRA CADRES/INTER CADRES DISPARITY IN PROMOTIONS , ROSE BY AIACEGEO HAVE NOT BEEN CORRECTLY REFLECTED, HENCE IT HAS ALREADY BEEN REQUESTED TO THE COMMITTEE FOR NECESSARY AMENDMENTS.
