" IRS OFFICERS PROMOTED FROM THE GRADE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE ARE ALSO MEMBERS OF AIACEGEO. THIS IS THE ONLY ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERINTENDENTS OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND IRS OFFICERS PROMOTED FROM THE GRADE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE THROUGH OUT THE COUNTRY . President Mr. A. Venkatesh and SG Mr. Ravi Malik.

Friday, 2 October 2015

With reference to the posting made in this blog spot on the matter of Review DPC letter dt. 29.09.15 of HRD, the response of Kolkata Unit and Karnataka Unit and reply of Secretary General are posted below for information of all our members.


On Thursday, 1 October 2015 1:27 PM, Amitava Chatterjee <ceamitava@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Friend,We have received your communication on the latest status of DPC vide your letter to all units. In this regard our concerns are as below -
1.Whether our AIB accepts the stance of the Parliamentary Committee in the light of extant rules. If their contention is right then who is responsible for this fiasco. After all Board cannot play with the life of officers at the stage of retirement.Such negligence cannot go unpunished.
2. How the number of 595 officers to be reverted has been derived. Which DPCs are being reviewed. During the Oct'2014 promotion at the most 2000 CEX Supdt have been promoted, and thus at the most the figure can be 450.
3.Most pertinently why there should be reversion when there are at least 1500 vacancies. Further till date at 250 retirements from the promotedl ist has taken place.
We are deeply concerned about these developments and would like to know what course of action is being thought of by our AIB. Why cant we agitate on aggresive basis.
with love,
Amitava Chatterjee.
Kolkata.

On Friday, 2 October 2015 9:22 AM, SURESH KUMAR <vaidyamsuresh@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

I completely agree with Kolkatta unit views.
No body against constitutional rights of any individulal. In the mean time no body should be humiliated.
what is the action taken by AIB in this regard. When Board wants to conduct review DPC for the year 2013-14, what about the earlier Adhoc DPC conducted and regualarisation. If at all situation comes AIB should ask Board to conduct the DPC for the existing vacancies along with review DPC, so damage can be controlled.
What is the actual legal position in this regard. It seems a case is pending in "Supreme court on the OM issued in 2002 regarding this issue.
What is the actual number and how it is arrived is not known.
Better AIB views and action should be intimated to members
regards
suresh kumar v.

On Friday, 2 October 2015 9:31 AM, Ravi Malik <ravimalik_sweet@yahoo.com> wrote:



Dear Amitavji,
namaste.
1.Whether our AIB accepts the stance of the Parliamentary Committee in the light of extant rules. If their contention is right then who is responsible for this fiasco. After all Board cannot play with the life of officers at the stage of retirement.Such negligence cannot go unpunished-This can only be decided in the open house of the AIB because reserved and general category both officers are the members of the Association.
2. How the number of 595 officers to be reverted has been derived. Which DPCs are being reviewed. During the Oct'2014 promotion at the most 2000 CEX Supdt have been promoted, and thus at the most the figure can be 450-Figure has been procured from the concerned section by one of our officers. The efforts are, however, being made to minimise it making due submissions/arguments at concerned platforms. Review DPC will be conducted for the year 2013-14.
3.Most pertinently why there should be reversion when there are at least 1500 vacancies. Further till date at 250 retirements from the promotedl ist has taken place-They will first do the review DPC for the year 2013-14 only as per the information gathered. Reverted officers can get promotion in next DPCs (2014-15 and 2015-16) only as per the news.
We are deeply concerned about these developments and would like to know what course of action is being thought of by our AIB. Why cant we agitate on aggresive basis-This can only be decided in the open house of the AIB because reserved and general category both officers are the members of the Association.
with love,
Ravi