Dear friends,
Namaste.
1. A meeting
of the DOPT Minister was held yesterday on 03.08.15 combinedly under a joint
forum with IRS promotee and C E Superintendents Associations. He was pleased
to listen us kind heartedly. We are really grateful to him to spare time for
us even during his very tight parliament session. We were to see him first at
12.30 p.m. but couldn’t happen due to some miscommunication. He again came to
see us in the evening giving regular messages to his staff to wait for the
meeting. Submissions made to him are attached herewith. He assured us to do
the needful and handed over our representations to the DOPT Secretary. The
worthy Secretary was also kind enough to make due note on our representation.
Actually, Hon’ble Minister was already having good knowledge of our issues
based on our request for appointment and initiated the action even before the
meeting giving due directions to the concerned staff. Tow representations
submitted to him on behalf of IRSITOA are also attached herewith. The meeting
ended with a photograph with the Minister.
2. I am
getting regular calls about the DPC for the post of AC for the year 2014-15.
Friends, no doubt that it was to be held on 23.06.15 but couldn’t happen due
to some unavoidable circumstances. Even DPC for the year 2015-16 is also
overdue as per the DOPT calendar. Now as being listened, the Hon’ble
Parliamentary Committee for welfare of SC/ST has objected the DPC for the
year 2013-14 on account of reservation not given to the SC/ST officers. Now,
it is expected that first review DPC will be conducted for the year 2013-14
with reservation to our SC/ST officers. Only after that, the DPCs for the
years 2014-15 and 2015-16 are likely to be conducted. Thus, it may take more
time for holding of next DPC. No need to say that many more of our officers
including our SC/ST officers may retire without promotion due to this
prolonged process. All of the units are once again requested to expedite the
information already asked.
Love.
RAVI MALIK.
|
ALL
INDIA ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL EXCISE
GAZETTED
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
President: Address for communication: Secretary
General:
R.
Chandramouli 240, Razapur,
Ghaziabad-201001 (U.P.)
Ravi Malik
Vice
Presidents: P. Parwani, L. L. Singhvi (Central);
AnuragChaudhary, Ravi Joshi (North); N. Raman, G. Srinath (South); B. K. Sinha,
AshwiniMajhi (East); Rajesh Chaher, J. D. Patil (West) Joint Secretaries: Anand
Kishore, J. S. Aiyer (Central); R. K. Solanki, AshishVajpeyi (North); M.
Nagaraju, Ajithkumar P. C. (South); P. K. Sen, S. Bhattachariya (East);
JasramMeena, M. K. Mishra (West) Office Secretary: C. S. Sharma Treasurer:
N. R. MandaLiaison Secretary: A.
S. KunduCoordinator on Telangana: P.
Shravan Kumar
(Recognised
by G.O.I., Min. of Fin. vide letter F.No. B. 12017/10/2006-Ad.IV A Dt.21.01.08)
Ref. No. 97/A/15
Dt. 03.08.15
To,
Sh.
Jitendra Singh,
Hon’ble
Minister of State, DOPT,
New
Delhi.
Sub: Request to
look into the career prospects of Central Excise Superintendents.
Sir,
Kindly refer to
the Ref. No. 91/A/15 Dt. 15.07.15 of the Association.
2. It
is submitted with due regards that Central Excise Superintendents are
forced to retire on a PB2 post with
single promotion in the career after joining as Inspector barring 1% whereas their common
entry counterparts are easily enjoying PB4 levels after getting 5-6 promotions. Central Excise Superintendents are getting promotion (if any) merely
to Junior Time Scale while their counterparts of CPWD, CSS, CSSS, AFHQS,
Railway Board, MEA, CVC, UPSC, MPA, RajyaSabha Secretariat, Enforcement
Directorate under the same Department of Revenue&
many others
like Administrative Services, Police Services, Forest Services, Engineering
Services, State Services etc. to Senior Time Scale. They are also forced to work under the
extreme juniors of Customs belonging to the same cadre. Their counterparts
of Income Tax (CBDT) and the Assistants of CSS under the same Department of
Revenue are able to reach the post of Commissioner and Joint Secretary. Almost
all other counterparts of them are also reaching the PB4 levels.
3. In view of the above, your
goodself is requested to kindly lookinto the following points to save the
sinking career of Central Excise Superintendents-
(A)
DIRECT PROMOTION TO STS POST: As submitted
above, the
most of group ‘B’ gazetted officers in the Central as well as State governments
are being promoted directly to a Senior Time Scale (STS) post with Grade Pay of
Rs. 6600/- including CSS, CPWD, Railway Board, CSSS, AFHQ, MEA, RajyaSabha
Secretariat, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs, CVC, UPSC, Directorate of
Enforcement in Revenue Department itself,DANICS, DANIPS, Forest services,
Police services, Engineering services, State Services etc. while Central Excise
Superintendents are being promoted merely to a Junior Time Scale (JTS) post
with Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/-. It is requested that Central Excise
Superintendents (Group ‘B’ Gazetted post) may also kindly be granted promotion
directly to a Senior Time Scale post with Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- to maintain
parity with similarly placed employees of other departments.A bit detailed submissions
are enclosed herewith under Ref. No. 98/STS/15 Dt. 03.08.15 of the Association
on this issue.
(B) UNIFORM PROMOTIONAL HIERARCHY: Thepromotional hierarchy is varying
department to department for group B officers as below-
(i)
Somewhere
Group ‘B’ Gazetted Officers are promoted merely to a post carrying a Grade Pay
of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 (in CBEC, CBDT, Department of Post etc.) whereas to a post
carrying a Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- at other places (CSS, RajyaSabha
Secretariat, CSSS, AFHQ, MEA, MPA, CVC, UPSC, Enforcement Directorate in
Revenue Department itself, Railway Board, Administrative services, Police
services, DANICS, DANIPS, CPWD, State services etc.).
(ii)
Like
it, somewhere Group ‘B’ Non-Gazetted Officers are promoted to a post carrying a
Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 (CBI, IB, Hindi departments, CESTAT in CBEC
itself etc.) whereas to a post carrying a Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- (CBEC,
CBDT,Department of Posts etc.) or Rs. 4600/- (CPWD etc.) at other places.
(iii)
(a) Somewhere
promotional hierarchy is “à4600à6600à8700à” (CPWD etc.),
(b) Somewhere “à4600à4800à6600à7600à8700à” (CSS, CSSS, AFHQ, MEA, MPA,
CVC, UPSC, Railway Board,DANICS, DANIPS etc.),
(c) Somewhere “à4600à5400à6600à7600à8700à” (Hindi departments, CBI, IB, CESTAT
in CBEC itself etc.) and
(d) Somewhere it is “à4600à4800à5400à6600à7600à8700à” (CBEC, CBDT, Department of
Posts etc.).
The promotional hierarchy after
entry into group ‘B’ is, therefore, required to be made uniform for the sake of
justice to all. The posts under the
grade pays of Rs. 5400/- & 6600/- and also Rs. 7600/- & 8700/- being
functionally same, the ideal promotional hierarchy for all after entry
into Group ‘B’ seems only to be “à4600à6600à8700à10000à”. It is, therefore, requested to
make the promotional hierarchy for all Group ‘B’ officers as “à4600à6600à8700à10000à”for the sake of uniformity and
justice. A bit detailed submissions are enclosed herewith under Ref. No.
99/PH/15 Dt. 03.08.15 of the Association on this issue.
(C) BATCH TO
BATCH NON FUNCTIONAL FINANCIAL UPGRADATION TO THE CENTRAL EXCISE EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS AT PAR WITH THE BEST PLACED COUNTERPARTS OF CSS ETC. All organised
group ‘A’ officers recruited with IAS, the best placed group ‘A’ service, in
the same pay scale through common examination have been granted financial
parity with counterparts of IAS. They have been granted non-functional
financial up-gradation vide DOPT OM No. AB.14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) dt.24.04.09
to compensate the lack of promotions as compared to IAS. As far as group ‘B’
officers are concerned, the CSS and RajyaSabha Secretariat etc. officers are
the best placed group ‘B’ officers like IAS in group ‘A’. The group ‘B’
officers at Central Excise Inspector and Assistant of CSS level are recruited
in a common scale of pay through common examination conducted by
SSC. The officers recruited as Assistant (Group-B, Non Gazetted) in the
Ministries get the benefit of promotions upto the Joint Secretary or above
level. However, their counterpart Central Excise Inspectors recruited also as
Group-B (Non Gazetted) through same common All India competitive examination
get only one functional promotion in 35/40 years of service despite of working
on more important seats of revenue collection. Thus, the CSS counterparts are
retiring 4-5 grades above the officers recruited as the Central Excise
Inspector. On account of this, the CSS counterparts are getting 60% more pay
than the officers recruited as Central Excise Inspector. Even the pension of
CSS counterparts is more than the salary of the officers recruited as Central
Excise Inspector. It is requested that the
officers recruited as Central Excise Inspector may kindly be granted at least
non-functional financial upgradation at par with their counterparts of CSS on
batch to batch basis after entry into non-gazetted group B grade.A bit
detailed submissions are enclosed herewith under Ref. No. 100/NFU/15 Dt.
03.08.15 of the Association on this issue.
(D)
INTRODUCTION OF FLEXIBLE/DYNAMIC PROMOTION/COMPLEMENTING SCHEME: The problem of
acute stagnation in the cadre of Superintendent can be solved, if a
flexible/dynamic promotional scheme is introduced for them after joining as
Inspector. The flexible
promotional scheme was introduced in the Department of Science and Technology
by DOPT. The DOPT vide Notification No. 2/41/97-Plc dated 9.11.98 made the
regulation of in-situ promotion under such Flexible Promotional Scheme. It has
been further reviewed by DOPT and modified Flexible Complementing Scheme
guidelines issued vide OM No. AB/4017/37/2008-Esst(R) dated 10.09.10. FCS and
MACPS both are also applicable simultaneously. In the same manner, dynamic
promotions scheme was adopted for other categories including drivers. It
is requested to kindly introduce a
Flexible/Dynamic promotional/complementing scheme on completion of qualifying
years of service as prescribed by DOPTto go from one grade to other under OM
No. AB-14017/61/2008-Estt.(RR) dt. 24.03.09 of DOPT(not being followed by
CBEC)for granting in-situ promotions or time scaleafter every 5 years in the
service career of the officer in the hierarchy of functional promotions after
joining as Inspector.A bit detailed submissions are enclosed herewith under
Ref. No. 101/P/15 Dt. 03.08.15 of the Association on this issue.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
Encls: As above.
(A. K. SHARMA), (RAVI
MALIK),
President, IRSITOA Secretary
General, AIACEGEO.
ALL INDIA ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL EXCISE
GAZETTED EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS
President:
Address for communication:
Secretary General:
R.
Chandramouli 240, Razapur,
Ghaziabad-201001 (U.P.) Ravi
Malik
Vice Presidents: P. Parwani, L. L. Singhvi (Central);
AnuragChaudhary, Ravi Joshi (North); N. Raman, G. Srinath (South); B. K. Sinha,
AshwiniMajhi (East); Rajesh Chaher, J. D. Patil (West) Joint Secretaries: Anand
Kishore, J. S. Aiyer (Central); R. K. Solanki, AshishVajpeyi (North); M.
Nagaraju, Ajithkumar P. C. (South); P. K. Sen, S. Bhattachariya (East);
JasramMeena, M. K. Mishra (West) Office Secretary: C. S. Sharma
Treasurer: N.
R. MandaLiaison Secretary: A. S.
KunduCoordinator on Telangana: P.
Shravan Kumar
(Recognised
by G.O.I., Min. of Fin. vide letter F.No. B. 12017/10/2006-Ad.IV A Dt.21.01.08)
Ref.
No. 98/STS/15
Dt. 03.08.15
To,
Sh. Jitendra
Singh,
Hon’ble Minister
of State, DOPT,
New Delhi.
Sub: Direct
promotion to STS post.
Sir,
It is submitted with due regards
that the most of group ‘B’ gazetted officers in the Central as well as State
governments are being promoted directly to a Senior Time Scale (STS) post with
Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- including CSS, CPWD, Railway Board, CSSS, AFHQ, MEA,
RajyaSabha Secretariat, Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs, CVC, UPSC,
Directorate of Enforcement in Revenue Department itself, Forest services,
Police services, Engineering services, State Services etc. while Central Excise
Superintendents are being promoted merely to a Junior Time Scale (JTS) post
with Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/-.
2. Not only the promotion
directly to STS post, counterparts of Central Excise Superintendents are also
given benefit (weightage) of seniority in group ‘A’ at many places in lieu of
the service rendered in group ‘B’. At many places like various services in
Railways, Administrative Services, Police Services, Forest Services, State
Services etc., the group ‘B’ gazetted officers are allowed the weightage of
minimum of 4 years at the time of entry into group ‘A’ also giving them the due
benefit of seniority in lieu of the service rendered by them in the group ‘B’.
For example, the officers of Provincial Services in Southern States enter into
IAS in a grade pay of Rs. 6600/- within 8 years with 4 years of seniority
benefit while the Central Excise Superintendents enter into IRS (if any) in a
grade pay of Rs. 5400/- and also without any weightage for seniority in group
‘A’. The weightage of service for
group B officers was also recommended by the IIIrd CPC. 3. The rationale behind such a
provision of weightage or direct promotion to STS group ‘A’ is based on the
fact of the promotee officers having gained rich job experience at the time of
working as group ‘B’ as compared to fresh direct recruit group ‘A’ officers.
But very unfortunately, the Central Excise Superintendents are not being given
the said benefit despite of being served for the longest period in group ‘B’ as
compared to any other category of the group ‘B’ employees of the Govt. of
India. They are not allowed the benefit of their rich experience even despite
of the quasi-judicial responsibilities being conferred on them.
4. Before the enactment of Indian
Customs & Central Excise Service Group ‘A’ Rules, 1987, the group ‘B’ gazetted
executive officers in CBEC were allowed five increments in their group ‘A’ pay
scale on promotion to group ‘A’ since senior time scale was not available at
that point of time. It is also worth to
mention that the common entry counterparts of CSS are not only being promoted
directly to a STS post after Section Officer (analogous to Superintendent) but
also reaching the level of Joint Secretary (GP-Rs. 10000/-). The position in
CPWD is even more interesting where an officer with a grade pay of Rs. 4600/-
is directly being promoted to a post with a grade pay of Rs. 6600/- (STS) and
further promoted directly to a post with the grade pay of Rs. 8700/- from a
post with a grade pay of Rs. 6600/-. Thus, they don’t need to serve on a post
with a grade pay of Rs. 4800/-, 5400/- and 7600/- for promotion to the post
with a grade pay of 8700/- after entry into a post with merely a grade pay of
Rs. 4200/-.
5. Further; the Central Excise
Inspectors and Assistants of the Central Secretariat Services (CSS), being analogous
posts, are recruited through a common entrance examination conducted by the
Staff Selection Commission and in a common scale of pay. Once upon a time, the
pay scale of the Assistants was lower than the pay scale of the Central Excise
Inspectors but was upgraded at par later on. Like it, the pay scale of the
Section Officers was also lower than the pay scale of the Central Excise
Superintendents but was upgraded at par later on. Eventually, the Inspectors
are promoted to the grade of Superintendent whereas the Assistants are promoted
as Section Officer. The posts of Central Excise Superintendent and Section
officer of CSS are also analogous, yet the similarity ends here. Section Officers are promoted directly to the
Senior Time Scale post with a grade pay of Rs. 6600/- and reach upto the level
of Joint Secretary in the grade pay of Rs. 10000/- whereas the Central Excise
Superintendents are promoted to the Junior Time Scale post merely with a grade
pay of Rs. 5400/-.
6. It is also worth to resubmit that
the Superintendents are not only discharging all functions relating to
assessment, investigation & intelligence, drafting of SCN and adjudication
but have also been conferred with the quasi-judicial responsibilities of
recording statements of various persons in terms of Section 14 of the Central
Excise Act, 1944 and Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. The statements tendered before the Central
Excise Superintendent have a legal binding and are treated as a valid piece of
evidence by various courts including the Hon’ble Supreme Court just like the
statements tendered before a Magistrate. They are also conferred with the
adjudication responsibilities. However, though the Central Excise
Superintendents are performing more responsible work functions as compared to
other group ‘B’ gazetted counterparts yet they are facing the worst career
prospects instead of being given better treatment. They are being maltreated
despite of being the ‘backbone of the government revenue’. In the actual terms,
though they are the ‘backbone of the government’ on account of being
responsible to earn the finance for the government yet are being totally
ignored & discriminated in every matter.
7. Like
CSS and many others, the Group B gazetted officers of Central Excise and Customs
are required to be promoted directly to a post having senior time scale. As
an instant measure and keeping in view their extraordinarily acute stagnation,
they are also required to be promoted to STS post after completing 1½ of
qualifying service as was done in CSS during 1999.
8. In view of the above, it is
requested that Central Excise Superintendents (Group ‘B’ Gazetted post) may
also kindly be granted promotion directly to a Senior Time Scale post with
Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- to maintain parity with similarly placed employees of
other departmentsgiving due weightage of the service rendered in group ‘B’for
the sake of justice.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(A. K. SHARMA), (RAVI
MALIK),
President, IRSITOA Secretary
General, AIACEGEO.
ALL
INDIA ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL EXCISE
GAZETTED
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
President:
Address for communication:
Secretary General:
R.
Chandramouli 240, Razapur,
Ghaziabad-201001 (U.P.)
Ravi Malik
Vice Presidents: P. Parwani, L. L. Singhvi (Central);
AnuragChaudhary, Ravi Joshi (North); N. Raman, G. Srinath (South); B. K. Sinha,
AshwiniMajhi (East); Rajesh Chaher, J. D. Patil (West) Joint Secretaries: Anand
Kishore, J. S. Aiyer (Central); R. K. Solanki, AshishVajpeyi (North); M.
Nagaraju, Ajithkumar P. C. (South); P. K. Sen, S. Bhattachariya (East);
JasramMeena, M. K. Mishra (West) Office Secretary: C. S. Sharma
Treasurer: N.
R. MandaLiaison Secretary: A. S.
KunduCoordinator on Telangana: P.
Shravan Kumar
(Recognised
by G.O.I., Min. of Fin. vide letter F.No. B. 12017/10/2006-Ad.IV A Dt.21.01.08)
Ref.
No. 99/PH/15
Dt. 03.08.15
To,
Sh. Jitendra
Singh,
Hon’ble Minister
of State, DOPT,
New Delhi.
Sub: Uniform
promotional hierarchy.
Sir,
It is submitted with due regards
that the promotional hierarchy is varying department to department in the Govt.
of India causing discrimination in the promotional avenues of group ‘B’ officers.
Some example of the varying promotional hierarchy are submitted as below-
(i)
Somewhere
Group ‘B’ Gazetted Officers are promoted merely to a post carrying a Grade Pay
of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 (in CBEC, CBDT, Department of Post etc.) whereas they are being
promoted to a post carrying a Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- at other places (CSS,
RajyaSabha Secretariat, CSSS, AFHQ, MEA, MPA, CVC, UPSC, Enforcement
Directorate in Revenue Department itself, Railway Board, Administrative
services, Forest services, Police services, DANICS, DANIPS, CPWD, State
services etc.).
(ii)
Like
it, somewhere Group ‘B’ Non-Gazetted Officers are promoted to a post carrying a
Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 (CBI, IB, Hindi departments, CESTAT in CBEC itself
etc.) whereas they are being promoted to a post carrying a Grade Pay of Rs.
4800/- (CBEC, CBDT, Department of Posts etc.) or Rs. 4600/- (CPWD etc.) at
other places.
(iii)
(a) Somewhere
promotional hierarchy is “à4600à6600à8700à” (CPWD etc.),
(b) Somewhere “à4600à4800à6600à7600à8700à” (CSS, CSSS, AFHQ, MEA, MPA,
CVC, UPSC, Railway Board, DANICS, DANIPS etc.),
(c) Somewhere “à4600à5400à6600à7600à8700à” (Hindi departments, CESTAT in
CBEC itself, CBI, IB etc.) and
(d) Somewhere itis“à4600à4800à5400à6600à7600à8700à” (CBEC, CBDT, Department of
Posts etc.).
2.The promotional hierarchy after
entry into group ‘B’ is, therefore,
required to be made uniform for the sake of justice to all. The posts under the grade pays of Rs. 5400/-
& 6600/- and also Rs. 7600/- & 8700/- being functionally same, the
ideal promotional hierarchy for all after entry into Group ‘B’ seems only to be
“à4600à6600à8700à10000à”.
3. It is, therefore, requested to
make the promotional hierarchy uniform for all Group ‘B’ officers as “à4600à6600à8700à10000à” to maintain parity with
similarly placed employees of other departmentsfor the sake of justice.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(A. K. SHARMA), (RAVI
MALIK),
President, IRSITOA Secretary
General, AIACEGEO.
ALL
INDIA ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL EXCISE
GAZETTED
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
President:
Address for communication: Secretary
General:
R.
Chandramouli 240, Razapur,
Ghaziabad-201001 (U.P.)
Ravi Malik
Vice Presidents: P. Parwani, L. L. Singhvi (Central);
AnuragChaudhary, Ravi Joshi (North); N. Raman, G. Srinath (South); B. K. Sinha,
AshwiniMajhi (East); Rajesh Chaher, J. D. Patil (West) Joint Secretaries: Anand
Kishore, J. S. Aiyer (Central); R. K. Solanki, AshishVajpeyi (North); M.
Nagaraju, Ajithkumar P. C. (South); P. K. Sen, S. Bhattachariya (East);
JasramMeena, M. K. Mishra (West) Office Secretary: C. S. Sharma
Treasurer: N.
R. MandaLiaison Secretary: A. S. KunduCoordinator on Telangana: P. Shravan
Kumar
(Recognised
by G.O.I., Min. of Fin. vide letter F.No. B. 12017/10/2006-Ad.IV A Dt.21.01.08)
Ref.
No. 100/NFU/15
Dt. 03.08.15
To,
Sh. Jitendra
Singh,
Hon’ble Minister
of State, DOPT,
New Delhi.
Sub: Batch to batch non-functional financial
upgradation to the Central Excise executive officers at par with the best
placed counterparts of CSS etc.
Sir,
It is submitted with due regards
that the all organised group ‘A’ officers recruited with IAS, the best placed
group ‘A’ service, in the same pay scale through common examination have been
granted financial parity with the counterparts of IAS. They have been granted non-functional
financial up-gradation vide DOPT OM No. AB.14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) dt.24.04.09
to compensate the lack of promotions as compared to IAS.
2.
As far as the group ‘B’ officers are concerned, the CSS and RajyaSabha
Secretariat etc. officers are the best placed group ‘B’ officers of Govt. of
India like IAS in group ‘A’. The group ‘B’ officers at the level of Inspector
of Central Excise and the Assistant of CSS are recruited in a common scale of
pay through common examination conducted by SSC. The officers
recruited as Assistant (Group-B, Non Gazetted) in the Ministries get the
benefit of promotions upto the Joint Secretary or above level. However, their
counterpart Central Excise Inspectors recruited also as Group-B (Non Gazetted)
through same common All India competitive examination get only one functional
promotion in 35/40 years of service despite of working on more important seats
of revenue collection. Thus, the CSS counterparts are retiring 4-5 grades above
the officers recruited as the Central Excise Inspector. On account of this, the
CSS counterparts are getting 60% more pay than the officers recruited as
Central Excise Inspector. Even the pension of CSS counterparts is more than the
salary of the officers recruited as Central Excise Inspector. We wish them to
get even better career prospects but also request to grant us the career
prospects at least at par with them.
3.
Central Excise Inspectors are recruited in PB2 and also retire on a PB2 post of
Superintendent barring around 1% while all of their common entry counterparts
of CSS etc. easily reach PB4 levels after being recruited with them in PB2
through same common examination with same eligible conditions (in addition, the
Central Excise Inspectors also have to pass physical examination with extra
physical standards). It is also worth to submit that revenue officers are
highly placed throughout world in the matter of salary, perks and career
prospects as compared to other employees but, very unfortunately, our officers
are facing the worst prospects in each & every matter in our own
country.
4.
The group ‘A’ officers in the Ministries are selected under Central Staffing
Scheme on deputation basis from organized Group ‘A’ Services or from CSS
officers being promoted from the post of Assistant/Section Officer but no such
opportunity is available for the Inspectors/Superintendents of Central Excise
who are not only looking after the work relating to collection of Central
Excise duty but also looking after the work of
collection of Customs duty (including Inland Air Travel Tax and Foreign Travel
Tax) and Service Tax. Needless to submit that they have already been earning
the maximum portion of the govt. revenues. It is also worth to submit that the
Govt. of India has regularly been earning the revenue far ahead of the revenue
targets in r/o of Central Excise duty, Customs duty and Service Tax
particularly due to the efficient, committed & effective efforts of the
workforce in the form of Central Excise Inspectors/Superintendents despite of
their total demoralisation, disappointment and job-dissatisfaction in r/o pay
& perks, career prospects and working conditions.
5. Above facts very well manifest
the injustice meted out to officers recruited as Central Excise Inspector
despite of the most important work of revenue collection being done by them for
govt. During this course, they have been facing every threat including life of
them as well as their families by the hard core criminals, smugglers, drug
traffickers and white collared criminalsalongwith facing tremendous
administrative pressures. Thus, the officers recruited as the Central Excise
Inspector deserve a far better treatment in every aspect including pay, perks
and career prospects. The grant of the non-functional financial upgradation on
batch to batch basis with the common entry counterparts of CSS etc. may really
be a solace to these hard working Central Excise officers.
6. As far as the importance of the
work responsibilities is concerned, the Central Excise Superintendents are
discharging all functions relating to assessment, investigation &
intelligence, issuance of Show Cause Notices and adjudication. They have not
only been conferred with the quasi-judicial responsibilities in the matter of
adjudication but also conferred with the quasi-judicial responsibilities of
recording statements of various persons in terms of Section 14 of the Central
Excise Act, 1944 and Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. The
statements tendered before Central Excise Superintendent have a legal binding
and are treated as a valid piece of evidence by various courts including
Hon’ble Supreme Court like the statements tendered before a Magistrate. No such
responsibilities have been conferred to CSS officers or any other counterpart
of Central Excise Superintendents.
7.
Though the Central Excise Superintendents are performing more responsible work
functions as compared to other common entry counterparts, yet they are forced
to face the worst career prospects instead of being given better treatment.
This injustice is being faced by them despite of being the ‘backbone of the
government revenue’ on account of being the major revenue collectors for the
government in the form of Central Excise duty, Customs duty and Service Tax and
also GST in the forthcoming times. As already submitted, they are the ‘backbone
of the government’ on account of being responsible to earn the finance for the
government. But very unfortunately, they are being totally ignored &
discriminated in every matter.
8.
The parity is the basic concept of our Constitution and the parity in
promotions is required to be maintained for the similarly placed employees but
the Government has not initiated any action to maintain parity in promotions as
well as pay packages for the Group ‘B’ Gazetted and also Non-Gazetted officers.
The group ‘A’ officers have already been granted financial parity by the
Government by the way of non-functional financial upgradation to other group
‘A’ officers at par with the counterparts of IAS. The grant of the batch to batch non-functional financial upgradation
after entry into group ‘B’ or equivalent grade is also the immediate need of
the time for all group ‘B’ officers to bring them at par at least financially
with the best placed group ‘B’ counterparts like CSS etc. for the
sake of justice. Unfortunately & particularly, the Inspectors and
Superintendents of Central Excise are being discriminated by not awarding the
due career prospects as well as appropriate pay packages despite of collecting
the maximum portion of Government revenue always above set targets.
9. In view of above, it is
requested that theofficers recruited as Inspector of Central Excise may kindly
be granted at least non-functional financial upgradation at par with their
counterparts of CSS on batch to batch basis w.e.f. their initial joining in
group ‘B’ or equivalent gradeto enable them to retire in PB4 toomaintaining
parity with similarly placed employees of other departmentsfor the sake of
justice. No need to submit that the claim of the Central Excise Superintendents
becomes even stronger than other Group ‘B’ counterparts on account of the
quasi-judicial responsibilities conferred on them to adjudicate the relevant
cases and recording statements like a Magistrate under Section 14 of Central Excise
Act and Section 108 of Customs Act having validity even before the Supreme
Court and also the Adjudication Orders being prepared by them for the
Commissioner level officers.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(A. K. SHARMA), (RAVI MALIK),
President, IRSITOA Secretary
General, AIACEGEO.
ALL
INDIA ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL EXCISE
GAZETTED
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
President:
Address for communication: Secretary General:
R.
Chandramouli 240, Razapur,
Ghaziabad-201001 (U.P.)
Ravi Malik
Vice Presidents: P. Parwani, L. L. Singhvi (Central);
AnuragChaudhary, Ravi Joshi (North); N. Raman, G. Srinath (South); B. K. Sinha,
AshwiniMajhi (East); Rajesh Chaher, J. D. Patil (West) Joint Secretaries: Anand
Kishore, J. S. Aiyer (Central); R. K. Solanki, AshishVajpeyi (North); M.
Nagaraju, Ajithkumar P. C. (South); P. K. Sen, S. Bhattachariya (East);
JasramMeena, M. K. Mishra (West) Office Secretary: C. S. Sharma
Treasurer: N.
R. MandaLiaison Secretary: A. S.
KunduCoordinator on Telangana: P.
Shravan Kumar
(Recognised
by G.O.I., Min. of Fin. vide letter F.No. B. 12017/10/2006-Ad.IV A Dt.21.01.08)
Ref.
No. 101/P/15
Dt. 03.08.15
To,
Sh. Jitendra
Singh,
Hon’ble Minister
of State, DOPT,
New Delhi.
Sub:
Introduction of flexible/dynamic promotion/complementing scheme.
Sir,
It is submitted with due regards
that the Central Excise Superintendents are facing
extraordinarily acute stagnation and worst career prospects in the Govt. of India. They are retiring on a PB2 post after getting only one promotion in the
service career of 35-40 years after joining the job as Inspector in PB2 while
their common entry counterparts of CBDT, CSS etc. easily enter & enjoy PB4
levels after getting 5-6 promotions. Only 1% of Central Excise executive officers are able to enter into JTS level of
Group ‘A’ at the fag end of the career after joining the job as Inspector. They are also forced to work under the extreme juniors of Customs
recruited as Examiner through same process through common entry with same
eligibility conditions belonging to the same cadre of Inspector in the same
organisation of CBEC performing same nature of duties with same administrative
hierarchy under the same Department of Revenue of same
Ministry of Finance.
2.
The Tax Reforms Committee headed by
Dr. Raja Chelliah has categorically mentioned in para 10.2 of Page 126 of its
Interim Report that the Government should recognize the paramount importance of
the Revenue Department and should spare no efforts in improving their
conditions of service, technical skills and work environment. In para 10.3
interealia it is also mentioned that taking into account the vital role that
Revenue Department should play in garnering adequate resources for ensuring the
security of the country as well as substantial economic growth with social
justice, the committee is firmly of the view that the salary scales and promotional
prospects of the officers and staff in the revenue department should at least
be comparable with the best that Government offers to its employee. But very
unfortunately, no consideration has been given to the above recommendations.
3. The Inspector cadre has been
trifurcated by the CBEC into three categories without any justification, i.e.,
Inspector of Central Excise, Preventive Officer of Customs and Examiner of
Customs (all analogous posts) recruited through the common competitive
examination under same eligibility conditionsin the same organization of CBECof
the same Department of Revenue in the same Ministry of Finance having same
administrative hierarchy and performing same nature of job of tax collection
but with huge discriminatory difference in promotional avenues (admitted by
CBEC). All of these are mentioned as “Inspector only” in the recruitment rules
and other relevant documents getting next promotion as Superintendent of
Central Excise, Superintendent of Customs and Appraiser of Customs (again all
analogous posts) respectively at group ‘B’ gazetted level performing again the
same nature of job. The single cadre trifurcated at the level of Inspector is
re-merged at the level of Asstt. Commissioner(JTS group ‘A’ entry level)
placing Central Excise Inspectors decades behind the Examiners of Customs.
4. The Central Excise stream
officers work in all of three streams of the CBEC, i.e., Central Excise,
Service Tax and Customs. On the other hand, the Customs stream officers work
only in the Customs stream but they are posted to Central Excise and Service
Tax after entry into group ‘A’. Thus, it is even more surprising that a junior
officer having worked only in the Customs stream and having no knowledge of
Central Excise or Service Tax heads his seniors of Central Excise and Service
Tax. Such a horrible situation of humiliation and discrimination to work under
an extreme junior happens only in the organization of CBEC which is neither
justifiable by any rule of law or any principle of natural justice. Ourofficers
are now forced to opt for the opportunities outside and leaving the department
due to being faced the worst career prospects and inadequate pay scales.
5. The rule in conformity with
the Law as well as Constitution is that any person lower in rank & merit
and selected through same all India combined competitive examination conducted
on the basis of same qualification for same level posts belonging
particularly to same cadre of Inspector
and having been appointed in the same organisation/service can never become
superior/senior to other officer higher in rank/merit and selected through the same all India combined competitive
examination for same service in the same organisation. But the situation in the
CBEC is very astounding as the Examiners of 1984 batch have already become
Addl. Commissioner (5 promotions) whereas 1984 batch Inspectors of Central
Excise still wait to become temporary Asstt. Commissioner (only 1 promotion).
Thus by the wrong acts of the concerned authorities, the Superintendents/Inspectors
of Central Excise are forced to work under the junior officers. Even ACP
or MACP Scheme is unable to give them any solace in the form of financial
relief/parity as they are getting merely a grade pay of Rs. 5400/- (after
joining the job in a grade pay of Rs. 4600/-) after 30 years of service under
MACPS which they were able to get after 24 years of service under ACPS.
6. Thus, the
Recruitment Rules should kindly be framed without trifurcating the single cadre
at Inspector as well as Superintendent level prescribing the qualifying
services as below in strict consonance of OM No. AB-14017/61/2008-Estt.(RR) dt.
24.03.09 of DOPT (not being followed by CBEC) which stipulates the promotion
of Inspector grade officer completing 12, 17 & 20 years of service to the
grade of Joint Commissioner, Additional Commissioner & Commissioner
respectively. The validity of this OM was also admitted by CBEC during the
presentation of cadre restructuring proposal on 18.01.11. No need also to
submit that the said qualifying services/residency periods have been prescribed
by the DOPT with the due diligence and application of mind. As per the said OM,
the residency periods are prescribed as under-
(i) 3 years for
promotion to a post with a grade pay of Rs. 5,400/- after joining as Inspector.
(ii) 7 years for
promotion to a post with a grade pay of Rs. 6,600/- after joining as Inspector
(There is no justification of promoting an officer from a grade pay of Rs.
5,400/- to 5,400.).
(iii) 12 years
for promotion to a post with a grade pay of Rs. 7,600/- after joining as
Inspector.
(iv) 17 years
for promotion to a post with a grade pay of Rs. 8,700/- after joining as
Inspector.
(v) 20 years for
promotion to a post with a grade pay of Rs. 10,000/- after joining as
Inspector.
(vi) and so on.
7. Keeping in
view the extraordinarily acute stagnation of the Central Excise executive
officers, it is also required to
incorporate a permanent provision
in the RRs at every level framed on the above lines in addition to the above
qualifying services/residency periods to promote (even in-situ or
otherwise) the officer automatically to the next higher grade, if his/her
stagnation in a grade reaches 1½ times of qualifying service based on the
precedent of CSS where all Group ‘B’ Gazetted Officers were promoted to STS
post of Under Secretary in 1999 on completion of 1½ times of qualifying
service. CSS officers are also getting the promotion on in-situ basis to
the post of Joint Secretary or above.
8. It is also
submitted that other common entry counterparts of Central Excise
Superintendents are easily reaching PB4 levels (Addl.
Commissioner/Commissioner & Director/Joint Secretary) getting 5/6
promotions. 1994 Examiners as well as Inspectors of Income Tax have long back
entered into group ‘A’ and 1997 Assistants into senior group ‘A’ while our
Inspector of 1983/84 has entered only into the temporary junior group ‘A’. The
Assistants of CSS of the year of 1985 have already become Deputy Secretary
(equivalent to Joint Commissioner). Like it, the Assistant of RajyaSabha
Secretariat of the year of 1985 have already become Director (equivalent to
Addl. Commissioner). The parity (functional or at least financial) with other
better placed counterparts to our officers is the need of the time in the interest
of the Govt. revenue and is very well possible by framing the RRs in the manner
as submitted in the preceding para or by adopting the measures like time
bound promotions/scales, separate service, notional promotions, supernumerary
posts, in-situ promotions, non-functional financial upgradation, flexible
complementary promotions, dynamic promotions, fast track promotions etc. The
promotional avenues available to other counterparts vis-a-vis the officers
joining the job as Inspector of Central Excise are furnished as below:
(1) PROMOTIONAL
AVENUES OF INSPECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE
(1)
Inspector
(2)
Superintendent
(3)
Asstt. Commissioner-JTS (only around 1%) {ONLY ONE PROMOTION barring 1%}
(2) PROMOTIONAL
AVENUES OF EXAMINER OF CUSTOMS
(1)
Examiner
(2)
Appraiser
(3)
Asstt. Commissioner
(4)
Deputy Commissioner
(5)
Joint Commissioner
(6)
Addl. Commissioner {5 PROMOTIONS with possibility of getting 6th
promotion}
(3) PROMOTIONAL
AVENUES OF INSPECTOR OF INCOME TAX
(1)
Inspector
(2)
Income Tax Officer
(3)
Asstt. Commissioner
(4)
Deputy Commissioner
(5)
Joint Commissioner
(6)
Addl. Commissioner
(7)
Commissioner {6 PROMOTIONS}
(4) PROMOTIONAL
AVENUES OF ASSISTANT OF CSS
(1)
Assistant
(2)
Section Officer
(3)
Under Secretary (STS-equivalent to 2 promotions)
(4)
Deputy Secretary
(5)
Director
(6)
Joint Secretary {EQUIVALENT TO 6 PROMOTIONS}
(5) PROMOTIONAL
AVENUES OF ASSISTANT OF RAJYA SABHA SECRETARIAT
(1)
Assistant
(2)
Section Officer
(3)
Under Secretary (STS-equivalent to 2 promotions)
(4)
Deputy Secretary
(5)
Director
(6)
Joint Secretary {EQUIVALENT TO 6 PROMOTIONS}
9. Thus, all of the intra-organisational,
intra-departmental as well as inter-departmental disparities in promotions are
required to be undone for the sake of justice because the promotion is
not only an incentive to the working personnel but it is also their legitimate
right. Hence, the policy of promotion should be designed in such a manner so
that an officer can expect his/her progress within a scheduled time-frame. This
principle is absolutely absent in CBEC for the officers except Group ‘A’. A
series of unscientific, irregular and unjust mismanagement like amalgamated
service at the Group ‘A’ level and trifurcated service for the Group ‘B’ ‘C’
and ‘D’ categories have done gross injustice particularly to the Group ‘B’
Central Excise executive officers. Merger of Group ‘A’ services has totally
shut down the progress of these employees.
10. It is reiterated that our
officers are retiring only with single promotion at a PB2 post in the career of
35-40 years after entering the job as Inspector of Central Excise in PB2 while
our counterparts of CSS, CSSS, RajyaSabha Secretariat, CBDT etc. recruited in
PB2 are easily attaining the PB4 levels after getting 5/6 promotions despite of
our officers performing hazardous & arduous duties during the course of
discharging executive as well as quasi-judicial functions taking every risk on
life of self & family on account of countering with the white collared
criminals, habitual revenue offenders, drug traffickers & dreaded hard-core
smugglers alongwithfacing tremendous administrative pressures.
11.
Govt. has adopted measures to bring parity, functional or non-functional, for
group ‘A’ officers but no such measures are being taken for group ‘B’ officers.
The IRS officers of CBEC got the parity with their counterparts of CBDT in the
last cadre restructuring and with other better placed group ‘A’ counterparts in
the current cadre restructuring but no such measures have been taken for the
Central Excise executive officers namely Central Excise Inspectors and
Superintendents to grant parity with the counterparts of CBDT or any other
better placed department. Every effort is also being made to promote group ‘A’
officers of CBEC within qualifying service but no such efforts have ever been
made to promote Central Excise group ‘B’ executive officers within residency
period in consonance of DOPT guidelines. We wish IRS officers and all of our
counterparts including Customs, CSS, MPA, CBDT etc. to get even better career
prospects but also request to grant us the career prospects at least at par
with our better placed counterparts.
12. On account of no efforts
being made to bring group ‘B’ counterparts at par, there is huge discriminatory
disparity between Central Excise group ‘B’ executive officers and other
counterparts resulting in huge discriminatory difference between their
salaries, pension and other pre/post-retirement benefits.
13. Thus, it is very necessary to
take some concrete steps to bring Central Excise group ‘B’ executive officers
at par with their best placed counterparts of CSS etc. on the lines of group
‘A’. Otherwise the Central Excise executive officers shall keep working under
their juniors even of Customs recruited in the same cadre of Inspector in the
same organisation of Central Board of Excise & Customs (CBEC).
14. The parity, functional or
even non-functional, with other counterparts is very well possible by taking the
measures like time bound promotions, time bound scales after every 5 years(no
creation of posts required), notional promotions (there exist so many legal
verdicts in the favour of various employees on notional promotions), creation
of supernumerary posts (which will be personal to the officer at each level of
the promotion and will abolish with the retirement of the officer, there
already exist so many legal verdicts on supernumerary posts too), creation of
separate service, direct promotion to higher post/s(Customs Ministerial
officers are being promoted as Appraiser without working even for a single day
on feeder post of Examiner in CBEC), in-situ promotions (no creation of posts required) after
completion of residency periods prescribed by DOPT, batch to batch functional upgradation at par with the best
placed counterparts, batch to batch non-functional upgradation at par with the best placed counterparts like
CSS etc. (also requiring no creation of posts).
15. The claim of the Central
Excise Superintendents becomes even stronger on account of the quasi-judicial
responsibilities conferred upon them to adjudicate the relevant cases and
recording statements like a Magistrate under Section 14 of Central Excise Act
and Section 108 of Customs Act having validity even before the Supreme Court
and also the Adjudication Orders being prepared by them for the Commissioner
level officers. They are also bearing technical responsibilities in ACES
single-handedly. No such responsibilities (quasi-judicial as well as technical)
have been conferred upon any other Group ‘B’ Gazetted officer of the Govt. of
India.
16.
Keeping in view the above submissions, due steps may kindly be taken to devise
the specific scheme (by means of functional or even non-functional financial
upgradation) for bringing the Central Excise group ‘B’ executive officers
at par with their best placed common entry counterparts like CSS etc. on batch
to batch basis after entry into group ‘B’ non-gazetted or equivalent grade to undo the
injustice, disparity and discrimination meted out to the former category for
decades.
17. The problem of acute
stagnation in the cadre of Superintendent can be solved, if a flexible/dynamic
promotional scheme is introduced for them after joining as Inspector.
Initially, the flexible promotional scheme was introduced in the Department of
Science and Technology by DOPT. The DOPT vide Notification No. 2/41/97-Plc
dated 9.11.98 made the regulation of in-situ promotion under such Flexible
Promotional Scheme. It has been further reviewed by DOPT and modified Flexible
Complementing Scheme guidelines were issued vide OM No. AB/4017/37/2008-Esst(R)
dated 10.09.10. FCS and MACPS both are also applicable simultaneously. In the
same manner, dynamic promotions scheme was adopted for other categories
including drivers.
18. In view of the above, it is
requested to kindly introduce a Flexible/Dynamic promotional/complementing
scheme to promote the officer on completion of qualifying years of service as
prescribed by DOPT under OM No. AB-14017/61/2008-Estt.(RR) dt. 24.03.09 for
granting at least 5 in–situ promotions or upgradation after every 5 years in
the service career of each and every officer in the hierarchy of functional
promotions after joining as Central Excise Inspectorto maintain parity with
similarly placed employees of other departmentsfor the sake of justice.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(A. K. SHARMA), (RAVI
MALIK),
President, IRSITOA Secretary
General, AIACEGEO.
IRS (INDIRECT TAXES)OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION.
Secretary
General: Address for
communication: President:
Lokanath
Mishra C.R.Building
, Bhubaneswar-751007. A.K.Sharma
Mob. 09437314941
mail Id:jailoknathjee@gmail.com Mob.09815300006
Ref No.IRSITOA/2015/120 Dated:-03.08.15
To
Dr.Jitendra
Singh,
Hon’able
Minister of States
Govt. of
India, North Block
New Delhi-
110001
Sir,
Sub.: MACP- Order dt. 08.12.2014 of Hon’ble Madras
High Court in Writ Petition no. 19024 of 2014 & M.P. no. 1 of 2014
filed by Sri R Chandrasekharan against order dt. 24.02.2014 in OA no. 675 of
2013 passed by Hon’ble CAT, Madras Bench
We
beg to state that Central Board of Excise and Customs vide letter under F no. A-23011/25/2013.Ad.IIA dt.
24th May 2015, addressed to the Chief Commissioner of Central
Excise, Chennai Zone, on the above subject in terms of which the benefit of 3rd
MACP has been allowed to the petitioner Sri Chandrasekharan as a consequence of
the Hon’ble Madras High Court Order dt 08.12.2014, as referred to above. The
opinion of the DOPT in this regard has also been enclosed with the said letter
of the CBEC .
The
penultimate paragraph no. 17 of the said Order contains direction of the
Hon’ble Court to the effect that “The Department of Personnel, Public
Grievances and Pensions is directed to consider the issue in extenso in the
light of the provisions of MACP scheme and the benefits given to the employees
like the petitioner to count the non-functional scale for the purpose of ACPS”.
The letter and spirit of the direction clearly indicates that the benefit
allowed to Sri R Chandrasekharan is
required to be extended to all the similarly placed officers in the CBEC.
Accordingly, necessary order may kindly be issued to that effect ensuring
benefit of MACP in the grade Pay of Rs 6600/- to all the similarly placed
officers in CBEC in the light of the Hon’ble Madras High Court’s Order.
Yours
faithfully,
(A.K.SHARMA)
PRESIDENT.
IRS (INDIRECT TAXES)
OFFICERS’ASSOCIATION
PRESIDENT: Address for
communication:
SECRETARY GENERAL:
AK SHARMA CR Building, Bhubaneswar-751007. LOKANATH MISHRA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To,
Dr.Jitendra Singh
Govt. of India, North Block,
New Delhi.
Respected Sir,
Sub: Non framing of Recruitment Rules by Central
Board of Excise and Customs as per DOPT Guidelines &Hon’able Supreme Court
directions - regarding.
………………
We beg
to state that during the year 1978, Appraisers of Customs (A. K. Chatterjee and
others)filed a writ petition before the Apex Court for the reason that
some of their counterparts from Central Excise (Superintendents of Central
Excise) junior to them by 1 or 1½ half years in the service have been promoted
ahead of them. They wanted that Recruitment Rules should be framed &
promotions should be done on the basis of length of service in the feeder
cadre. As per the directions of Apex Court, Govt.
framed Indian Customs and Central Excise (Group-A) Recruitment Rules in
1987 based on length of service in the feeder cadre (i.e., to allow promotions
to the post of Asstt. Commissioner based on a common seniority list on the
basis of length of service of the officers belonging to three feeder
categories). This was challenged by the then office bearers of
AIFCEGEO (now AIACEGEO) & AIFCEEO (now AICEIA) in the Supreme Court
jointly under WP(C) No. 306/1988. While the matter was pending in the
Supreme Court for decision, the CBEC made a deceptive proposal dt.
08.10.1988 in total disregard of the facts by distributing the posts within the
Customs and Central Excise on the basis of the number of Custom
Service posts and Central Excise Service posts of Asstt. Commissioner at group
A entry level. Whereas the fact is that the Customs Service Group ‘A’ and
Central Excise Service Group ‘A’ were merged w.e.f. 15th August,
1959 into a single service of Customs and Central Excise Service Group
‘A’. The Apex Court vide WP No 306/1988 without any judicial
determination accepted the proposal of CBEC of 6:1:2 ratio for promotion to
Group-A to amend the Group-A RRs in 1998.
The Superintendents of Customs Preventive filed O.A. No. 489/1999
in Hon’able CAT Mumbai Bench . The Hon’able
CAT directed in July, 2001 to consider the grievances of the
Superintendents of Customs. Against this decision of hon’able CAT, the Appraisers of Customs filed
Appeal before the Hon’able High Court
of Bombay. The Hon’able
Bombay High Court decided that Bombay CAT didn’t have any jurisdiction
of passing the orders of July, 2001. Superintendents of Customs
filed an Appeal against the orders of the Hon’able Bombay High Court in the Hon’able Supreme Court of India. While the matter was pending
before Hon’able Apex Court WP(C)
No. 385/2010 was also filed by AIACEGEO in the Hon’able Apex
Court. The Hon.able Supreme Court delivered the following judgment on 03.08.11 by consensus in the Writ
Petition (Civil) No. 385 of 2010:-
“We
have heard learned
counsels for the parties in Civil Appeal No. 1198
of 2005 and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 385 of 2010.
It has been brought to our notice that the Union
of India in terms of our previous order/directions dated 22nd
November, 2010 and 06th December, 2010, has filed an affidavit
in Civil Appeal No. 1198 of 2005, inter alia, stating, that it
has initiated the process of reviewing the
Recruitment Rules, 1987 for promotion from Group 'B' posts to Group 'A'
posts. The entire scheme is being re-looked and worked out at the
departmental level in consultation with an expert body including the Department
of Personnel and the entire process is likely to be completed by 31st December,
2011.
In the aforesaid background, we deem
it proper and in the interest of all parties concerned to dispose of both the
Civil Appeal as also the Writ Petition without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the impugned judgment or the writ petition
but with the following directions:
1.
All the 3 groups of officers in the feeder categories, i.e., (i)
Superintendents of Central Excise; (ii) Superintendents of Customs (Preventive);
and (iii) Customs Appraisers, may make representations to
the Union of India suggesting the changes which
according to them should be made in the Recruitment Rules for their
promotion to Group-A post of Assistant Commissioner (Central Excise &
Customs).
2.
The Union of India shall duly consider all such representations including those
made before it in light of the subsequent development in the cadre
strength of the 3 feeder
categories of group-B services and amend/revise the Recruitment
Rules including altering the existing ratio to secure
just and fair representation of all the 3 feeder categories.
3.
Union of India shall try to complete the entire process by 31st December, 2011,
uninfluenced by any observations made in the previous judgment of this Court in
All India Federation of Central Excise vs. Union of India &Ors. [(1997) 1
SCC 520], in which the existing ratio was approved as also
the observations in the impugned judgment dated 19th
December, 2003 of the High Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1324 of 2002 with
regard to the jurisdiction of the Central
Administrative Tribunal.
4.
Having perused one of the Office Orders (No. 51/2011 dated 18th
March, 2011), whereby some officers were promoted from Group 'B' to the grade
of Assistant Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise in the
Pay Band 3 with Grade Pay of Rs.5400/- on purely ad hoc
basis, we direct that all such ad hoc promotions shall abide by the final
decision to be taken by the Department in terms of this order”.
As per Hon’able Apex court decision dt.
3.8.2011, CBEC in its board meeting held on dt.16.9.2011
took the decision for preparation of
RRs by altering existing ratio for 3 feeder
cadres to 13:2:1 and also
decided to make regularization of all adhoc promotions pending since
97 in old ratio under the provisions of previous RRs. The
new RRs were notified on 13.9.2012. The prayer of CBEC for amendment
of Supreme Court order dated 03.08.11 seeking clarification to make regularisation
of all adhoc promotions pending since 1997 in old ratio was rejected by Apex
Court on 30.3.2012. In the old Recruitment Rules, the ratio of 6:1:2 was
fixed very unscientifically and the same was not fixed considering the
sanctioned strength of three feeder categories for which during the period of
1987 to 2011 one of the feeder categories namely Appraiser took the undue benefit in getting early
promotion than the seniors of other two feeder categories. The Recruitment
Rules, therefore, are required to be framed to grant promotion on the basis of
common seniority list of feeder categories instead of any ratio system. The
ratio system is also against the DOPT guidelines because the number of
promotional posts is too less. Further, the promotional prospects of
Superintendents of Central Excise were adversely affected due to the fixation
of 6:1:2 ratio in old Recruitment Rules giving undue benefit to one of the
feeder categories namely Appraisers of Customs. However, the said ratio has
been revised to 13:2:1but the adhoc promotions have not been regularised based
on the new ratio, i.e., the rules existing on the date of regularisation. It is
also pertinent to resubmit that no ratio system for promotion to Group ‘A’ is
mandated in our case as per DOPT guidelines on account of the number of
promotional posts being too less. Therefore, the promotions should be affected
on the basis of length of service in Group B gazetted cadre instead of any
ratio. As per DOPT Handbook on Recruitment Rules, the Recruitment Rules
(RRs) should be reviewed once in 5 yearsvide para 3.1.5 with a view to affect
such changes as are necessary to bring them in conformity with the changed
position including additions to or reductions in the strength of the lower and
higher level posts but CBEC never implemented such instructions of DOPT. The
Group-A RRs framed during 1987 were revised during 2012 instead of every 5
years.
Having been grossly aggrieved after grave
suffering for thousands of silent, frustrated, depressed, disappointed,
humiliated, demoralised and anguished Superintendents of Central Excise &
Superintendents Cus(Prev), we would like to express the disillusionment and
heartburn of such a large number of officers due to the malaise prevailing in
their hearts affecting their morale and work culture. The main cause of this
state of deterioration is that the Superintendents of Central Excise , and
Superintendents , Cus (Prev) are getting just one promotion in their entire
service span of about 35 to 40 years after joining the job as Inspector/ PO,
whereas other officers like Examiners of Customs having joined in the same
service and selected through the same all India combined competitive
examination on merit and option basis conducted by the selection body, i.e.,
Staff Selection Commission, are getting 4 to 5 promotions in the similar
duration of service. More condemnable is the reason that the Central Excise
Inspectors and Preventive Officers of Customs (General, Scheduled Castes &
Scheduled Tribe all) are compelled to work under the Examiners of Customs even
having lower merit or selected through a later examination (upto 20 years
afterwards) despite of all Central Excise Inspectors, Preventive Officers of
Customs and Examiners of Customs having been selected through the same all
India combined competitive annual examination and appointed in the same service
of same organisation in same Department under same Ministry to the same level
of post (Promotions are made as mere simple promotion and not on selection
basis or selection post but to the cadre posts at different levels in the same
service). We have been fighting for justice as per Rule of Law and Constitution
of India for the last over three decades with no tangible results so far due to
the malafide acts of commissions & omissions by the concerned officials.
The right to live with dignity & respect has been snatched from us.
Hon'ble Apex court in the case of RadheyShyam
Singh upheld that "Direct Recruitment" made on the basis of
"Zonal Examination" conducted by SSC is contrary to Fundamental
Rights. Thereby, it was struck down and the examination on all India basis
started since 1996 as per the directions of the Hon’ble Apex Court. In the year 1999, the then Director/Commissioner of DOPM made a
self speaking elaborate noting in the concerned file that it is unfair &
unjust and also unconstitutional to have separate cadres of (a) Inspector of
Central Excise (b) Preventive Officer of Customs &( c) Examiner of Customs
and also of (d)Superintendent of Central Excise (e) Superintendent of Customs
Preventive and ( f) Appraiser of Customs in the same service and should be
merged in one single cadre at each such level (just like in Income Tax).
Subsequently after his transfer however, no efforts were made though shown to
have been made (with dilatory tactics, pre-planned motives & conclusions)
without any tangible, legal and justified results by the CBEC as obvious from
the factual position submitted under forthcoming paras:
Present
Hierarchy of executive Posts in CBEC:
Level (I) Group ‘B’ – Non Gazzetted
(i) Inspector (Central Excise).
(ii) Inspector (Preventive Officer of
Customs).
(iii) Inspector
(Examiner of Customs).
All recruited through one and same process.
Level (II) Group ‘B’ Gazzetted
(i) Superintendent of
Central Excise
(ii) Superintendent of
Customs
(iii) Appraiser of
Customs
Respective promotional post for the Level (I)
posts.
Level (III) Group ‘A’ entry JTS
Asstt.Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs
& Service Tax.
Single promotional
post for all Level (II) posts (filled-up based on ratio formula against DOPT
provisions because number of promotional posts is too less).
Level (IV) Group ‘A’ STS
Deputy Commissioner of
Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax.
Time scale promotional
post for Group ‘A’ Asstt. Commissioner.
Level (V) Group ‘A’
Joint Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs
& Service Tax.
Promotional post for
Group ‘A’ Deputy Commissioner.
Level (VI) Group ‘A’
Addl. Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs
& Service Tax.
Time scale promotional
post for Group ‘A’ Joint Commissioner.
Level (VII) Group ‘A’
Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs &
Service Tax.
Promotional post for Group ‘A’ Addl. Commissioner.
Level (VIII) Group ‘A’
Chief Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs
& Service Tax.
Promotional post for
Group ‘A’ Commissioner.
Level (IX) Group ‘A’
Member of CBEC-Promotional post for Group ‘A’
Chief Commissioner.
Level (X) Group ‘A’
Chairman of CBEC-Promotional post for Member
of CBEC.
4.
Two more levels with new pay scales have been created between Level (VIII) and
Level (IX) for Group ‘A’ officers in the current cadre restructuring.
The rule in conformity
with the Law as well as Constitution of India is that any person lower in rank
& merit and selected through the same all India combined competitive
examination conducted on the basis of same qualification for the same level posts
and having been appointed in the same organisation/service can never become
superior to the other officer higher in rank & merit and selected through the same all India combined competitive
examination for same service in the same organisation. But the situation in the
CBEC is very astounding as the Inspectors of Central Excise of 1982 batch have
yet not been promoted to Group-A while the Preventive Officers of 1990 batch
and Examiners of 2002batch have already
been promoted to Group-A. Also the Examiners of 1984 batch are at present
Additional Commissioner whereas the 1982 batch Inspectors of Central Excise are
still Superintendent. Thus by the wrong acts of the concerned authorities, the
Superintendents/Inspectors of Central Excise are forced to work under the
junior officers recruited as Examiner.
The most of group ‘B’ gazetted officers in the Central as well
as State governments are being promoted directly to a Senior Time
Scale (STS) post with Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- in PB-3 including CSS, CPWD, Railway Board,
CSSS, AFHQ, RajyaSabha Secretariat, Forest services, Police services, Foreign
Services, Engineering services, State services etc., the Group ‘B’ gazetted
officers are being promoted while
Central Excise Superintendents are being promoted (if any) merely to a Junior
Time Scale (JTS) post with Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB-3. The Superintendents
of Central Excise (Group ‘B’ Gazetted post) should also be granted promotion
directly to a Senior Time Scale post with Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- in PB-3 to
maintain parity with similarly placed employees of other departments.
Not only the promotion directly to STS post,
the counterparts of Central Excise Superintendents are also given benefit of
seniority in group ‘A’ at many places in lieu of the service rendered by them
in group ‘B’. At many places like various services in Railways, Administrative
Services, Police Services, State Services etc., the group ‘B’ gazetted officers
are allowed the weightage of minimum of 4 years at the time of entry into group
‘A’ also giving them the due benefit of seniority in lieu of the service
rendered by them in the group ‘B’. For example, the officers of Provincial
Services in Southern States enter into IAS in a grade pay of Rs. 6600/- within
8 years with 4 years of seniority benefit while the Central Excise
Superintendents are unable to enter into IRS in a lower grade pay of Rs. 5400/
even after serving for 35-40 years. They enter (if any) into IRS in a grade pay
of Rs. 5400/- only and retire at same level without any weightage for seniority
in group ‘A’. The rationale behind such
a provision of weightage or direct promotion to STS group ‘A’ is based on the
fact of the promotee officers having gained rich job experience at the time of
working as group ‘B’ officer as compared to direct recruit group ‘A’ officers.
But very unfortunately, the Central Excise Superintendents are not being given
the said benefit despite of being served for the longest period in group ‘B’ as
compared to any other category of the group ‘B’ employees of the Govt. of
India. They are not allowed the benefit of their rich experience even despite
of the Adjudication Orders also being prepared by them for the Commissioner
level officers. Before the enactment of
Indian Customs & Central Excise Service Group ‘A’ Rules, 1987, the group
‘B’ gazetted executive officers in CBEC were allowed five increments in their
group ‘A’ pay scale on promotion to group ‘A’ since senior time scale was not
available at that point of time. It is
also worth to mention that the common entry counterparts of CSS are not only
being promoted directly to a STS post after Section Officer (analogous to
Superintendent) but also reaching the level of Joint Secretary (GP-Rs.
10000/-). The position in CPWD is even more interesting where an officer with a
grade pay of Rs. 4600/- is directly being promoted to a post with a grade pay
of Rs. 6600/- (STS) and further directly to a post with the grade pay of Rs.
8700/- from a post with a grade pay of Rs. 6600/-. Thus, they don’t need to
serve on a post with a grade pay of Rs. 4800/-, 5400/- and 7600/- for promotion
to the post with a grade pay of 8700/- after entry into a post with merely a
grade pay of Rs. 4200/-. The very
purpose in framing the Human Resource Management policy through RR’s has not been
followed by the CBEC. Article 309 of the Constitution of India has been
violated on account of failure to maintain equity, fairness and justice in
recruitment/placement/promotions and all service related matters of Group ‘B’
Executive Cadres. Equality is the basic concept of Indian Constitution and,
hence, it is required to frame the Group ‘A’ Recruitment Rules to maintain
parity in promotions amongst the three base level Inspectors (i.e., Central
Excise Inspector, Preventive Officer and Examiner)
Recently
Central Board of Excise has forwarded a draft Recruitment Rules for Gr-A
services to DOPT without considering the grievance raised by our Association
which is pending with DOPT for concurrence. The suggestions of
our Association with reference to such draft Recruitment Rules is enclosed here
with for your kind perusal.
In view of the above, it is requested
that kindly direct the Central Board of Excise and Customs to make necessary
amendments in the RR’s retrospectively
for regularizations of all adhoc promotions since 1997 and framing of new Gr-A
RRs as per our suggestions in consonance of the Hon’able Apex Court decision
dated 03.08.11 and the provisions of Article 309 of the Constitution of India
and the provisions of DOPT guidelines.
Thanking
you,
Yours faithfully,
Enclosed- as above.
( A.K.SHARMA)
PRESIDENT.
ANNEXURE
Suggestions
to amend Indian Revenue Service (Customs and Central
Excise) Group ARecruitment Rules 2014 as circulated by CBEC
1.Suggested amendment for sub-Rule 4(1)
For the words, 'The authorised permanent strength in all
grades of service and temporary strength in the grade IX of the service', the
words, ‘The authorised strength in all
grades of service’ shall be substituted.
Reason
Under Rule 2(g) of the RRs, the
‘Post’ includes permanent as well as temporary strength in all grades.
Accordingly, authorised strength constitutes
appointment made to any post under Indian Revenue Service (Customs and Central
Excise) Group A as defined under Rule 2(g). Besides, the temporary posts are
authorised posts created by virtue of cadre restructuring, for functional
necessity. So use of the words ‘temporary’ or ‘permanent’ is superfluous.
As far as the proposed
‘Grade IX’ is concerned, it may be pointed out that creation of a separate
Grade (grade IX) for the Assistant Commissioner (Junior Time Scale) Customs and
Central Excise, appointed against temporary posts, lower than the Grade (VIII)
of Assistant Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Junior Time Scale), is
against the basic tenets of devising any RRs. This arbitrary gradation is a
result of misconception in understanding the distinction between the term ‘posts’
and expression ‘an officer appointed in a grade to such posts’.
Appointment in a grade may take place through different modes of selection
(i.e. by direct recruitment or by promotion) and through different nature of
posts (i.e., permanent or temporary). The grade, however, does not change
because of such variations in manner of selection and nature of posts and
remains same. Therefore, an officer shall be treated to have been appointed in
a single grade, say Assistant Commissioner, grade, irrespective of nature of
Post or nature of selection. Creation of separate grade by way of linking it to
the nature of posts (permanent or temporary) or mode of selection (either
direct recruitment or by promotion) is grossly anomalous and is unfair with
regard to framing RRs. Besides,
the Central Excise Act, 1944 or Customs Act 1962 or Finance Act 1994 makes no
distinction between temporary and regular posts of Assistant Commissioner with
regards to functions and powers.
Furthermore, there is no
precedence of creating different grades in the same ranks with the same grade
pay. So such a sub-division in the grade of Assistant Commissioner is
untenable. It is to be kept in mind that the officers working as Assistant
commissioner in the temporary posts are already permanent /regular employees of
Govt. of India with even more than 30 years of service behind them.
So, any reference to
‘Grade IX’, wherever it appears in RRs, needs to be omitted.
2. Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 4(2)
The words ' permanent and
temporary ' in this sub-Rule should be deleted.
Reason
That in terms of definition under Rule 2(g)
of the RRs, the authorised strength itself indicates and includes permanent as
well as temporary posts. Accordingly, the words ‘permanent and temporary ' are
superfluous.
3.Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 4(3)(i)
This sub-Rule shall be substituted in the
following manner:
‘The continuation of the posts in temporary strength, as
specified in Schedule-I, beyond the
period, for which these are initially created, shall be reviewed by the Govt
based on the factors like workload, stagnation etc.
However, as long as an officer after appointment in the grade of Assistant
commissioner against such posts in temporary strength remains in that grade,
such posts in temporary strength against which the said officer is appointed
shall not be declared as abolished.’
Reasons:
The first line is
superfluous as it is already mentioned in sub-Rules 4(1) and 4(2) of this
Recruitment Rules that any post, be it
permanent or temporary shall be specified in Schedule-I. It is also not
necessary to mention the trifling details like date on which any post has been
created or likely to be terminated, be it permanent or temporary. The
Recruitment Rules should be confined to
recruitment modalities and not details of creation of posts.
The first part of the
second line regarding continuation of the posts in temporary strength is
contrary to the provision of the sub-Rule 4(2) of this RRs itself where it is
provided that the continuation of the posts, be it temporary and permanent,
shall be determined by the Govt. from time to time depending on the workload.
Accordingly, the provision regarding continuity of the posts in temporary posts
should be in conformity with the said provision in the manner as proposed. This
will also ensure the functional justification of creation of any post.
The second part of the second line is
based on complete misunderstanding between the term ‘post’ and the expression
‘an officer appointed in a grade through such post’ either by way of promotion
or direct recruitment or through permanent post or temporary post. Once the
officer is appointed in a particular grade, he or she will be regarded as
belonging to the service under which the posts exist and in this respect, no
distinction can be made between officers appointed either to a permanent post
or a temporary post, by direct recruitment or by way of promotion. The
continuation of the service of that officer in that grade is in no way
dependent on the fate or tenure of the post. So the incorporation made above to
this effect linking the tenure of post and continuation of service is
outrageous and beyond the purview of law. As long as an officer, after
appointment in a particular grade against a post (permanent or temporary),
remains in that grade in conformity with the service conditions, the post
(permanent or temporary) against which the said officer is appointed cannot be
declared as abolished.
Moreover, the 2nd
line is also contrary to the Cabinet approval under CBEC F.No. A. 11019/08/2013- Ad.IV, dated 18.12.2013, para 7 of which states
that " wherever the posts recommended for abolition are filled up
at present, such abolition will be effective on such posts being relinquished
by the existing incumbents by way of promotion, transfer, retirement,
resignation etc".
Similar amendment
regarding continuation of temporary posts has also been suggested through
insertion of ‘Note’ in Schedule-I of the RRs.
4. Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 4(3)(ii)
This sub-Rule shall be substituted in the
following manner:
‘As and when the vacancies arise against
posts in temporary strength, as specified in sl. No. 8 of Schedule-I, the same
shall be filled up by promotion only in accordance with the procedure
prescribed in sub-Rule 5(3)(b) read with relevant entries of Schedule-III(sl.
No. 8) and Schedule-IV(sl. No. 8)
Reasons:
The amendments proposed are in conformity
with the amendments proposed in sub-Rule 4(1), Schedule-I, III and IV of the
RRs opposing arbitrary, discriminatory and unfair creation of separate grade IX
for Assistant Commissioners promoted in temporary strength of posts defined and
accordingly proposing deletion of sl. No.9 of all the Schedules mentioned.
5. Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 5(2)
1)
The sub-Rule 5(2) shall be renumbered as sub-Rule
5(2)((i) and The words ‘fifty percent’ shall
be substituted by ‘ not more than ten per cent’.
2)
A new sub-Rule 5(2)(ii) shall be inserted after sub-Rule 5(2)(i)
in the following manner:
‘A post-based roster
shall be maintained earmarking the posts meant for direct recruits and the
posts meant for promotion in the ratio mentioned in sub-Rule 5(2) (i) and
sub-Rule 5(3)(a) respectively of the RR.’
Reasons for amendment (1)
In view of the highly adverse
ratio (1: 15 approx) existing between the consolidated Gr B Executive officers
and their immediate promotion grade of Assistant Commissioner, even after
restructuring, whatever has been done in the Cadre restructuring shall be
diluted and the stagnation is bound to return in short span of 1 or 2 years
until and unless, immediate other measures like promotion to STS, granting
'weightage' and parity with counterparts are taken. Otherwise, the next
lot will continue to stagnate. Therefore, as an important measure, the ratio of
50:50 between the posts meant for direct recruit Assistant Commissioner and that of the promotee Assistant
Commissioner should be changed to 10 (maximum) :90 (minimum). Besides promotee
Assistant Commissioners can immediately be put to functional utility as theyare
adequately trained with long real-time experience.
Reasons for amendment (2)
The provision of maintenance of post-based
roster should be incorporated here without which there will always be a possibility
of erosion in promotion quota or direct recruit quota at any point of time. The
provision of maintenance of post-based roster should be incorporated as there
will always be an erosion in promotion / direct recruit quota at any point of
time. To give an example -
The IC&CE Gr-A Recruitment Rules
2012 (earlier of 1987, 1998), stipulates the entry-level Group-A post of
AC(also termed as JTS -Junior Time Scale) in the ratio of 50% DR(UPSC) & 50% by Promotion(amongst 3 feeder categories).
The then sanctioned strength of JTS
post(Assistant Commissioner) is '949', while that of STS(Deputy Commissioner)
is '601'. The promotions are given to the JTS level 50% posts i.e. against
'475'.
The Civil List published by CBEC on official
website "http :// www. cbec.gov.in/deptt_offcr/civil-list2014-part2.pdf",
for 01.01.2014, gives in Part-2, the list of Gr-A officers in the grade of
AC/DC. This list consists of total '1284' Names['950'
Direct-UPSC(DC:291+AC:439+AC-Probationer:220), and '334' Promotees(Cust Appraiser:198+Supdt
Cus-P:18+Supdt CX: 118 )].
This indicates that against the '949' JTS
strength(even leaving aside the DR officers who have been promoted by now,
strength of whom is also required to be added); the DR are 'more than
659(439+220+higher group A)', while promotees are just '334'. This
is unjustified. The DR should not be more than '475'.
6. Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 5(3)(a)
1) The sub-Rule 5(3)(a) shall be renumbered
as sub-Rule 5(3)(a)(i) and
the words ‘fifty percent’ shall be
substituted by ‘ninety per cent or more’.
2) A new sub-Rule 5(3)(a)(ii) shall be
inserted after sub-Rule 5(3)(a)(i) in the following manner:
‘A post-based roster
shall be maintained earmarking the posts meant for direct recruits and the
posts meant for promotion in the ratio mentioned in sub-Rule 5(2)(i) and
sub-Rule 5(3)(a)(i) respectively of the RR.’
Reasons for amendment (1) & (2)
Same as given against sub-rule 5(2) above.
7. Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 5(3) (b)
The entire sub-rule shall be substituted in the
following manner:
‘One hundred percent of the vacancies in Grade VIII
(Junior Time Scale) of the service specified in sl. No. 8 of the Schedule-I
i.e., Assistant Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise in the temporary
strength shall be filled by promotion from amongst the officers mentioned in
the sub-rule 5(3)(a)(i) above’.
Reasons
The amendments proposed are in conformity
with the amendments proposed in sub-Rule 4(1), Schedule-I, III and IV of the
RRs opposing arbitrary, discriminatory and unfair creation of separate grade IX
for Assistant Commissioners, promoted in temporary strength of posts defined
and accordingly proposing deletion of sl. No.9 of all the Schedules mentioned.
8. Suggested Amendment for the ‘Note’
appended to after sub-Rule 5(3) (b) and the sub-Rule 5(4)
Both the ‘Note’ appended to after sub-Rule 5(3) (b) and the sub-Rule 5(4) shall be substituted by one new sub-Rule 5(4)
in the following manner:
‘The promotion to the vacancies in Grade VIII
(Junior Time Scale), i.e., Assistant Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise
from amongst the all categories of officers, mentioned in the sub-Rule 5(3) (a)
(i), on the basis of a combined eligibility list of all those categories of
officers shall be prepared to maintain parity
in promotions to Gr-A amongst all three base level Executive grades (
i.e Inspector of Central Excise/Preventive Officer of Customs /Examiner of
Customs)’. Before preparing this list, all of the base level executive
grades belonging to same year shall be brought at par in the matter of
promotions as also promised by the CBEC during the presentation on cadre
restructuring made on 18.01.12.
Reasons
(A)
The disparity in promotional opportunity amongst the 3 feeder
streams of Supdt. Central Excise, Supdt.
Customs Preventive and Appraiser as well as basis feeder (feeder to feeder)
streams (i.e., Inspector of Central Excise, Preventive Officer and Examiner of
Customs) is well known and has been categorically acknowledged by the Board
in the Minutes of the meeting dated 11.02.2011. In the said Minutes, it was
also pointed out that promotion on the basis of ratio (even after revision) is
not enough to redress the disparity and that
the promotion to JTS level on the basis of base cadre parity is a much
better redress under the present dispensation. Considering the acute stagnation in the grade of
Superintendent of Central Excise, relaxation of Recruitment Rules can be
resorted to in respect of a class or category of persons as per provision of
Para 4.3, of PART IV on AMENDMENTS
AND RELAXATIONS,
of 'the Guidelines on Framing/Amendment/Relaxation of RRs' issued by DoP&T
in 2010. This is also in conformity with
the Article 309 of the Constitution of India which is primarily designed
to obtain fairness and equity in recruitment, promotions and other service
related matters. As the Superintendents of Central Excise are getting just
one promotion unlike the officers of other Department, RRs should be framed
accordingly to bring justice, fairness and parity.
(B)The
separate provision for ‘Note’ after sub-Rule 5(3)
(b) is not necessary as a combined eligibility list for all categories of Group
B officers after bringing them year wise at par in the matter of promotion,
mentioned in the sub-Rule 5(3) (a) (i), have been proposed to be prepared in the
amended consolidated sub-Rule 5(4) which includes the categories mentioned in the
said ‘Note’.
9. Suggested Amendment for Rule 5(4)
It should be substituted as below:
The vacancies to be filled by promotion shall
be filled from the categories mentioned in 5 3 (a) (i) after bringing them year wise at
par in the matter of promotion.
Suggested Amendment by way of insertion
of of ‘Note’ after the amended sub-Rule
5(4)
The following ‘Note’
shall be inserted after the sub-Rule 5(4) in the following manner:
“Note : It must be ensured that at all
points of time, the parity in promotion in respect all the 3 feeder cadres to
Grade VIII, i.e., amongst the cadres of Supdt.
Central Excise, Supdt. Customs Preventive and Appraiser as well as basis
feeder (feeder to feeder) streams (i.e., Inspector of Central Excise,
Preventive Officer and Examiner of Customs), is maintained with
reference to such eligibility list (to maintain
base cadre parity in promotions to Gr-A.) .
Reasons
10. Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 5(5) (i)
The entire sub-Rule shall be substituted in the
following manner:
‘Appointments in the grade VII of Deputy Commissioner of
Customs and Central Excise (Senior Time Scale) shall be made by promotion from
amongst the officers in the lower grades in the following manner:
i)
Officers
who have either completed 4 years of regular service in the grade VIII or grade
pay of Rs.5400/-,
or
ii)
Officers
who have completed 6 years of combined regular service in the feeder grade to
Grade VIII and feeder grade to feeder grade of Grade VIII, taken together,
whichever is earlier, shall be eligible
for promotion in the Grade of Deputy Commissioner(Senior time Scale) in Grade
VII.
Reason
(A)
The Deputy Commissioner of Customs and Central excise (Senior Time
Scale) in Grade VII is not a distinct functional grade with any higher level of
responsibilities or any change of command than those associated with the grade
of Assistant Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Junior Time Scale) in
Grade VIII. The creation of such grade is essentially mitigatory and intended
to alleviate the stagnation. It is akin to grant of the scale of pay in the
mode of prevalent non-functional selection grade (NFSG).
(B)
Most
of the Group ‘B’ gazetted officers in the Central as well as State governments
are being promoted directly to a Senior Time Scale (STS) posts with Grade
Pay of Rs. 6600/- in PB-3 including CSS, CPWD, Railway Board, CSSS, AFHQ,
RajyaSabha Secretariat, Forest services, Police services, Foreign Services,
Engineering services, State services etc., whereas the Group ‘B’ gazetted
officers of CBEC are being promoted merely to a Junior
Time Scale (JTS) post with Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB-3. These Gr-A officers should also be
granted promotion directly to a Senior Time Scale post with Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/-
in PB-3 to maintain parity with similarly placed employees of CSS &
other Central Ministries/Departments.
Apart from the promotion directly to
STS post, the counterparts of Gazetted Gr-B officers of CBEC are
also given benefit of seniority in group ‘A’ at many places in lieu of the
service rendered by them in group ‘B’ in various services in Railways,
Administrative Services, Police Services, State Services etc., these group ‘B’
gazetted officers are also allowed the weightage of minimum of four years at
the time of entry into group ‘A’, giving them the due benefit of seniority in
lieu of the service rendered by them in the group ‘B’.
The
position in CPWD is even more encouraging where an officer with a grade pay of
Rs. 4600/- is being directly promoted to a post with a grade pay of Rs. 6600/-
(STS) and further directly to a post with the grade pay of Rs. 8700/- . Thus,
they don’t need to serve on a post with a grade pay of Rs. 4800/-, 5400/- and
7600/- for promotion to the post with a grade pay of 8700/- after entry into a
post with grade pay of Rs. 4200/-. Whereas in CBEC the Inspector Central Excise
who is recruited at Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- is not allowed to move beyond the
Rs.5400/- grade pay.
It is known fact that, the Group-B
non Gazetted officers of CBEC and Assistants of the Central Secretariat Services
(CSS), being analogous posts, are recruited through a common entrance
examination conducted by the Staff Selection Commission, with common scale of
pay.
(C) The condition, given in
the last line of the sub-Rule 5(5)(i) of the draft circulated by the Board,
that “the service rendered by the officers in temporary post in Junior Time
scale shall not be counted as ‘regular service’ for the purpose of promotion to
higher grade(s)” is in conflict with the definition of ‘regular service’
given in sub-rule 2(h) ibid. It flows from complete misunderstanding between
the term ‘post’ and the expression ‘an officer appointed in a grade through
such post’ either by way of promotion or direct recruitment or through
permanent post or temporary post. Once the officer is appointed in a particular
grade, he or she will be regarded as belonging to the service under which the
posts exist and in this respect, no difference can be made between officers
appointed either through permanent post or through temporary post, by direct
recruit or by way of promotion. The continuation or counting of the regular
service of that officer in that grade is in no way dependent on the fate or
tenure of the post. So the service rendered by an officer in the grade of
Assistant Commissioner (junior time scale) has to be regarded as ‘regular
service’ irrespective of appointment by way of promotion or direct recruitment
or to a permanent post or temporary post. Therefore, the above provision which
seeks to preclude any further elevation of the Assistant Commissioners promoted
against temporary posts is wholly arbitrary and legally untenable.
11. Suggested Amendment for
sub-rule 5(5)(iii)
The entire sub-rule 5(5)(iii) shall be deleted.
Reason
The Rule is clearly violative of Article 14
of the Constitution of India. It has emanated from the complete
misunderstanding and misconception of creating separate grade for Assistant
commissioner appointed through temporary strength. The fact, that the same is
completely anomalous and unjust, has already been elaborated in the ‘reasons’
given under the proposed amendment of sub-Rule 4(1) of the draft RR circulated
by the Board. The contention that the service rendered by the Assistant
Commissioners appointed through temporary strength cannot be treated as regular
service is also equally unjust and bad in law for the reasons elaborated in the
‘reasons’ (B) given under sub-Rule 5(5)(i) above. Accordingly, this sub-Rule
5(5)(iii) deserves to be deleted in its entirety. The manner of appointment in
the grade of Deputy
Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Senior Time Scale) (Grade VII) is
already incorporated exhaustively in the sub-Rule 5(5)(i) of the proposed
amendment.
12. Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 6
The words ‘by promotion in Junior scale’ shall be deleted.
Reason
This clause is essentially meant for new entrants. The
officers on promotion after more than 25 years of service and endowed with
vast experience should be given due
weightage and be exempted from such probation/confirmation.
13. Suggested Amendment for
Schedule-I to the RR
The following amendments shall be made in respect
of Schedule- I:
(A) Sl. No. 8 The
entries in Col. (3) showing ‘Number of Posts’, shall be substituted in
the following manner:
(a) Permanent strength- 1249
(b) Temporary strength- 2118*
(B) Sl. No. 9 To be deleted entirely
(C) The
existing ‘Note’ at the end of Schedule_I shall remain as ‘Note 1’
and a ‘Note 2’ shall be inserted after the
‘Note 1’ in the following manner:
Note 2: The
continuation of the temporary post beyond the period for which these are
created shall be reviewed by the Govt based on the factors of workload,
stagnation etc. However, as long as an officer, after
appointment in a particular grade against a post (permanent or temporary),
remains in that grade in conformity with the service conditions, the post
(permanent or temporary) against which the said officer is appointed shall not
be declared as abolished.
Reason
(A) & (B): The creation of separate grade for Assistant commissioner
appointed through temporary strength is a result of complete misunderstanding
and misconception. The fact, that the same is completely anomalous and unjust,
has already been elaborated in the ‘reasons’ given under the proposed amendment
of sub-Rule 4(1) of the draft RRs circulated by the Board. So, there can be
only single grade of Assistant Commissioner irrespective of the nature of post
(temporary or permanent) and irrespective of nature of selection (Direct
recruitment or promotion). So, the clause ‘Grade IX’, wherever it appears,
needs to be omitted.
Now, the definition of the term ‘post’ under Rule 2(g) ibid,
includes permanent as well as temporary
post in all grades. Accordingly, the authorised
strength (Number of Posts) of a particular grade should necessarily indicates
and includes appointment in any post, temporary as well as permanent, under
Indian Revenue Service (Customs and Central Excise) Group A Recruitment Rules.
As there can be only one grade of Assistant Commissioner, the mentioning of
both the permanent and the temporary post in the relevant column against the
sl. No. 8 of the Schedule-I (meant for the grade Assistant Commissioner (junior
time scale) in Grade VIII), therefore, is a necessity.
(C) The insertion of the ‘Note’ regarding
continuation of temporary posts is in conformity with the amendment proposed in
sub-Rule 4(3)(i) and the provision under sub-Rule 4(2). The detailed reason
have already been incorporated along with the amendment proposed for sub-Rule
4(3)(i) of the RR.
14. Suggested
Amendment for Schedule-III of RR
The following amendments shall be made in respect
of Schedule III:
(A) Sl. No. 7 The
entries in Col. (4) showing ‘Field of Selection, Grade and the minimum
qualifying service for promotion’, shall be substituted in the following
manner :
‘Appointments in the grade of Deputy
Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Senior Time Scale) (Grade VII)
shall be made by promotion in accordance with sub-Rule 5(5)(i).’
(B) Sl. No. 8 (1) The entries in Col. (3) showing ‘Method
of recruitment’ shall be substituted in the following manner:
(a) For Permanent strength
(i)
Maximum 10% by Direct Recruitment
(ii)
Minimum
90% by Promotion
(b) For Temporary strength
100% by Promotion
(2) In
the entries in Col. (4) showing ‘Field of Selection, Grade and the minimum
qualifying service for promotion’, for the words, ‘Fifty percent of the
vacancies in Grade VIII (Junior Time Scale) shall be filled by promotion in
accordance with Rule 5(3)(a)’, the following words shall be substituted :
‘Minimum Ninety percent of
the vacancies in Grade VIII (Junior Time Scale) shall be filled by promotion in
accordance with sub-Rule 5(3)(a)(i) and sub-Rule 5(4)’
(C) Sl. No. 9 To be deleted entirely.
Reason
(A) : For reasons as already appended to against sub-rule
5(5)(i) above.
(B) & (C): For reasons as already appended to against sub-Rule
5(2)(i), 5(3)(a)(i) and also for reasons appended to against the proposed
amendment of Schedule-I above. As there can be only
one grade of Assistant Commissioner, the mentioning of both the permanent and
the temporary post in the relevant column against the sl. No. 8 of the
Schedule-III (meant for the grade Assistant Commissioner (junior time scale) in
Grade VIII), therefore, is a necessity and that the the sl. No. 9 showing a
different grade of Assistant Commissioner has to be deleted.
15. Suggested
Amendment for Schedule-IV of RR
The following amendments shall be made in
respect of of Schedule-IV of RR:
(A)
Sl. No. 8 The entries in column 3 showing ‘DPC/DSC
for Non-Functional Selection Grade’
shall be substituted in the
following manner.
(B) Sl. No. 9 To be deleted entirely.
Reason
For reasons as already appended to
against Schedule-I and III above and also for the reason that for a single
grade, the constitution of the DPC should be identical. The role of UPSC should
be confined to direct recruitment of officers to Group-A at entry level grade.
It should not be involved for promotion of officers to Group-A level. As there can be only one grade of Assistant Commissioner,
the mentioning of both the permanent and the temporary post in the relevant
column against the sl. No. 8 of the Schedule-IV (meant for the grade Assistant
Commissioner (junior time scale) in Grade VIII), therefore, is a necessity and
that the the sl. No. 9 showing a different grade of Assistant Commissioner has
to be deleted.
(A.K.SHARMA)
PRESIDENT
