" 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.T.Dass and SG Mr. Harpal Singh.

Friday 25 November 2016

HRD meeting

Dear friends,
namaste.
As already circulated, a meeting was held in HRD today on 25.11.16 under the Chair of the DG, HRD. Submissions made during the meeting are as below-
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
Mob. 08939955463 mail Id:ravimalik_sweet@yahoo.com, Site: cengoindia.blogspot.in    Mob. 09868816290
Vice Presidents: P. Parwani, L. L. Singhvi (Central); Anurag Chaudhary, Ravi Joshi (North); N. Raman, G. Srinath (South); B. K. Sinha, Ashwini Majhi (East); Rajesh Chaher, J. D. Patil (West) Joint Secretaries: Anand Kishore, J. S. Iyer (Central); R. K. Solanki, Ashish Vajpeyi (North); M. Nagaraju, Ajithkumar P. C. (South); P. K. Sen, S. Bhattachariya (East); Jasram Meena, M. K. Mishra (West) Office Secretary: C. S. SharmaTreasurer: N. R. Manda Liaison Secretary: A. S. Kundu Coordinator 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. 202/AIB/P/16                                                                          Dt. 25.11.16
To,
The DG, HRD,
CBEC, New Delhi.
Sub: Solution to various bottlenecks in timely promotions.
Sir,
            Kindly refer to your office OM issued vide F.no.8/B/291/HRD(HRM)DPC/HAG+/2016 Dt. 15.11.16.
            2. It is submitted with due regards that only way to affect timely DPCs is to follow the schedule prescribed by the DOPT in strict manner without any deviation. No need to say that DPC for a financial year should strictly be conducted in advance latest by the month of January preceding the relevant financial year.
3. Further, no need to say that CBEC has regularly been failing to conduct the timely DPCs particularly for the post of Asstt. Commissioner despite of repeated reiterations by the DOPT to adhere with the prescribed schedule. The latest DOPT OM issued vide No. 22011/1/2011-Estt(D) Dt. 27.10.16 is very much relevant in this regard asking for strict compliance of the instructions regarding timely convening of the DPCs. It is further submitted that the DPCs are being terribly delayed in CBEC despite of the DOPT instructions to fix the responsibility of the concerned officer for the lapse in adherence to the prescribed time frame in holding of DPCs under the DOPT OM No. 22011/9/98-Estt. (D) Dt. 14.12.2000. Non-serious attitude of the concerned section is very well evident by the following figures showing tremendous delay in the matter -
     Year of DPC                    Due in                      Conducted in                         Delay
        2010-11                      January, 10                      June, 12                              2½ years
        2011-12                      January, 11                      June, 12                              1½ years
        2012-13                      January, 12                      March, 14                           2¼ years
        2013-14                      January, 13                      October, 14                         1¾ years
        2014-15                      January, 14                     still awaited           already around 2¾+  years
        2015-16                      January, 15                     still awaited           already around 1¾+ years
        2016-17                      January, 16                     still awaited           already around ¾+ year
4. Moreover, promotions for the post of Asstt. Commissioner are being affected on ad-hoc basis in the CBEC. As per para 3(i) of DOPT OM 28036/8/87-ESTT. (D) Dt. 30.03.88, these ad-hoc promotions may be affected even in the case of any legal stay/injunction. No need also to submit that shortage of the officers at the level of Asstt. Commissioner would certainly have the adverse effect on the implementation of GST. So, all of the vacant posts of Asstt. Commissioner may kindly be filled up immediately as per the above referred OM Dt. 30.03.88 of DOPT at least on ad-hoc basis.
5. As far as bottlenecks in r/o number of posts are concerned, the only way is to create sufficient number of posts to grant functional promotions to the officers. It is worth to mention that our counterparts of CBDT, CSS, Customs etc. in our Department of Revenue itself are already reaching the level of Commissioner/Addl. Commissioner and Director/Joint Secretary after getting 5/6 promotions. In our own CBEC, the Examiner of Customs of the year 1984 belonging to the same cadre of Inspector has already become the Addl. Commissioner years ago whereas the Central Excise Inspector of 1983 is still to become Asstt. Commissioner. If CBEC is unable to create sufficient number of posts, the next way is to promote our officers to the next post on completion of 1½ times of residency period/qualifying service based on the precedent of Section Officers of CSS who were promoted to the post of Undersecretary (STS post) on completion of1½ times of residency period in 1999 on in-situ basis. It may also be noted that the officers of CSS are being promoted upto the level of Joint Secretary on in-situ basis for the want of functional posts.
6. Under the latest cadre restructuring, the cabinet recommended to take extra measures to remove stagnation of group ‘B’ Central Excise executive officers independent of cadre restructuring. But very unfortunately, no measures have been taken till date in this direction. Accordingly, the other way is the creation of a separate service for these officers on the lines of CSS for solution of bottlenecks in promotions in r/o number of posts. It may kindly be taken care of that only 3% posts (maximum) may be utilized for direct recruitment as per the latest DOPT guidelines and rest of the posts (after adding sufficient number of more posts)  be utilized for promotee officers by creating a separate service for them. It will not only open the career opportunities for promotee officers but will also protect the stature of direct entry IRS officers.
7. One more way is to formulate supplementary flexible/dynamic promotions scheme for promotee officers as was done in the case of Scientists and Drivers by the Govt. of India. One more effective way is to grant at least in-situ promotions to Central Excise executive officers on completion of the standard residency period as prescribed by the DOPT. As another option, these officers may kindly be granted NFU on completion of standard residency period as prescribed by the DOPT for promotion to next grades. A scheme to grant NFU to give financial parity on batch to batch basis with the best placed counterparts of CSS etc. may also be formulated on the lines of granting financial parity to other group ‘A’ officers of the organized services with the counterparts of IAS. Such scheme was also recommended to DOPT and then to pay commission by the CBEC but, very unfortunately, the CPC kept mum on the issue.
8. As far as the ratio system is concerned, this has not been mandated by the DOPT (para 1.1.1 of seniority instructions) in case of the number of promotional posts being too less as in our case where promotional posts are no way more than 4% for the entry into group ‘A’. No need to say that the number of promotional posts are always considered too less, if less than 33% of the feeder posts.  In such case, the promotions are to be affected based on the length of service in consonance of DOPT provisions. So, the 13:2:1 ratio system should be replaced by the length of service, i.e., senior in terms of length of service should be promoted first. No need to say that Supreme Court in order of 03.08.11 directed the CBEC to frame the RRs for just & fair representation of each category and abide the same to all ad hoc promotions but, unfortunately, the same has not been done till date. Supreme Court, thus, clearly founded that the existing RRs based on ratio system were faulty. Accordingly, all the promotions made since 1980 should have been reviewed as per the new RRs framed for just & fair representation based on the length of service as mandated by DOPT under above referred para 1.1.1. No need to say that no just & fair representation was attained based on new RRs framed by CBEC unilaterally.
9. It is also worth to submit that 2118 posts of temporary Asstt. Commissioner were created purely to remove the stagnation of stagnated officers. No need to say that the Central Excise officers are the most stagnated among all of three streams. Therefore, the benefit of these posts should first be given to the officers of Central Excise stream and then to Customs Preventive stream until all of three streams come at par in the matter of promotions till the ratio formula is being forced on us.
10. As far as the process of regularization is concerned, the following things have not been taken care of-
i) The direct recruit and promotee IRS officers of same year have not been placed together. Suppose 20 direct recruit and 80 promotee officers were there in a particular year, only 20 promotee officers have been adjusted against 20 direct recruit officers and rest of the promotee officers have been sent to lower positions of next years instead of placing them in the same relevant year. Contrary to it, junior direct recruit IRS of next year/s have been placed above them. Accordingly, senior promotee officers (promoted before the direct IRS officers of a particular year) should have been placed above junior direct IRS officers (recruited in later year/s). The officers yet to take birth can no way be placed above the already existing officers. Accordingly, all promotee officers of 2002 should also be placed above the direct recruit officers of 2003 as there was no direct recruitment in 2002.

ii) It is not confirmed whether one & the same formula has been adopted for the regularization of promotee officers of Appraiser stream and Central Excise stream. Association came to know that the names of retired officers of Appraiser stream have not been included for regularization whereas names of retired officers of Central Excise stream have been included placing these officers at gross loss. Accordingly, same formula should kindly be adopted for all of three categories.
11. One more point is to be taken care of. The service rendered as ad-hoc/temporary Asstt. Commissioner is to be counted for further promotions because the RRs of IRS very clearly include regular as well as temporary posts under the definition of ‘post’.
12. In view of the above, it is very much requested to give the due consideration to all of the above submissions accordingly.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,



(RAVI MALIK),
Secretary General.
Copy with the request for necessary action to:
1) The Member (P&V), CBEC, North Block, New Delhi.
2) The Chairman, CBEC, North Block, New Delhi.
3) The Revenue Secretary, North Block, New Delhi.



(RAVI MALIK)
Love,
Ravi Malik.