ALL INDIA ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL EXCISE
GAZETTED EXECUTIVE
OFFICERS
President:
Address for communication:
Secretary General:
A.
Venkatesh
240, Razapur, Ghaziabad-201001 (U.P.)
Ravi Malik
Mob.7780255361
mail Id:ravimalik_sweet@yahoo.com,
Site: cengoindia.blogspot.in Mob.9868816290
Vice Presidents: Apurba
Roy, P. C. Jha (East); A. K. Meena, Somnath Chakrabarty (west); Ashish
Vajpayee, Ravi Joshi (North); B. Pavan K. Reddy (South); K.V. Sriniwas, T. J.
Manojuman (Central) Joint Secretaries: Ajay Kumar, R. N. Mahapatra
(East); B. S. Meena, Sanjeev Sahai (West); Harpal Singh, Sanjay Srivastava
(North); M. Nagraju, P. Sravan Kumar (South); Anand Kishore, Ashutosh Nivsarkar
(Central)
Office Secretary: C.
S. Sharma Treasuer: N.
R. Manda Organising Secretary: Soumen Bhattachariya
(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. 90/AIB/P/18 Dt. 31.03.18
To,
Ms. Vanaja
N. Sarna,
Chairperson,
CBEC,
North
Block, New Delhi.
Sub: Revival of in-situ
promotion scheme as approved in Board meeting of 18.02.11.
Madam,
Your kind attention is invited to
the point No. 3. under the heading of Presentation No. 02 by ADG (HRM) on the
issue of In-situ Promotion Scheme for Group ‘B’ Executive Cadres (Gazetted and
Non-Gazetted) of the minutes of the Board meeting of 18.02.11 (enclosed
herewith).
2. As your goodself knows, it is to
submit with due regards that not only the most of our officers are retiring
with single promotion in the career after joining as Inspector but there are
also disparities in promotions from zone to zone. No need to say that the
temporary posts of Asstt. Commissioner with the clause of no further promotion
are unable to do the required good to the problem. On pursuance by the
Association, one in-situ promotion scheme was approved by the Board in the
meeting of 18.02.11. Basic features of
the scheme were as under:
i) In situ promotion to the Inspector with 10 years of regular
service as Superintendent (in situ).
ii) In situ promotion
to the Superintendents with 20 years of combined regular or in situ service as Inspector+Superintendent (in situ), with three years
service as Superintendent (regular or in situ) as Assistant Commissioner (in situ).
iii) In situ
promotion as Deputy Commissioner (in situ) to Assistant Commissioner (in situ) after five years of service.
3. However, the Association suggested service of total 24
years of service for the post of Deputy Commissioner without any clause of five
years of service as Assistant Commissioner (in situ).
4. In view of above, it is requested
to kindly implement the said scheme (as already approved by the Board) as an
instant measure to cope up the problem of the acute stagnation being faced by
our officers for decades. It is also requested to implement the said scheme
w.e.f. its approval, i.e., 18.02.11 and some other scheme may also kindly be
formulated to enable our officers entering Level-13 and above like the
counterparts of CBDT, CSS etc.
Thanking you.
Yours
faithfully,
Encl:
As above.
(RAVI
MALIK),
Secretary
General.
Minutes of the Board Meeting held on
February 18, 2011
The Board in its Meeting chaired by Shri S.
Dutt Majumder, deliberated on the issues detailed herein. The following officers were present.
Shri
Y.G. Parande, Member (Budget & Comp.)
Shri S.K. Goel, Member (Customs, RI&I,
Exports & Safeguards)
Ms
Vijai Lakshmi Sharma, Member (ST)
Ms
Lalitha John, Member (P&V)
Shri
Rajesh Dhingra, Member (L&J)
Ms
Sandhya Baliga, DG (HRD)
Shri
M.S. Arora, ADG(HRM)
Shri
Ajay Jain, Commissioner (CX)
Ms
Neeta Lall Butalia, Commissioner (DPPR)
Shri
Lok Ranjan, JS (Admn)
Shri
Neerav Kumar Mallick, Addl. Director (HRD)
Shri
Alok Jha, Addl. Commissioner (DPPR)
Shri
Samanjasa Das, OSD (CX.9)
2. Presentation
No.01 by ADG(HRM).
Issue in brief : Revised “Cadre
Restructuring” Proposal.
2.1 Chairman,
CBEC, apprised the Board Members that the previous cadre restructuring proposal
was shared with the staff associations/
federations and their suggestions have been received. These have been taken
into account and a revised cadre restructuring proposal has been prepared.
Thereafter, a presentation was made by ADG(HRM) to the Board on the revised
cadre restructuring proposal.
2.2 The
Board was informed that since the year 2002-03 when the last cadre
restructuring took place the total revenue collection has trebled. Chairman, at
this juncture, intimated that total revenue collection during the current
fiscal is likely to cross the budgetary estimates of Rs. 3.15 lakh crore and
the revised estimate is Rs. 3.34 lakh crore. The workload in terms of
assessee-base, number of Customs documents handled, number of international
passengers etc. has also increased significantly. The revenue collection and
the workload are likely to increase further by the year 2014-15.
2.3 The
Board was informed that the officers of IRS (C&CE) lag behind their
counterparts in other Central Services in terms of promotional avenues, and
consequently the officers with 22 years of service, as against required 17
years as per DOP&T norms, still await promotion to Senior Administrative
Grade. Similarly, officers with 33 years of service have not yet received
promotion to the HAG. In some of the
Central Services, the officers with 25 years of service have reached HAG level.
Further, there are no encadred posts at HAG+ and above levels in the CBEC,
while other analogous services have. In Group ‘B’ also, there is alarming
situation of stagnation as the executive officers normally get only one
functional promotion during average service span of 35 years. The problems faced
by other staff cadres in career
progression were also highlighted.
2.4 The
Board was apprised that on the basis of the workload and revenue collection of
existing Central Excise Zones during the year 2009-10 and projections for
2010-11, the cadre restructuring proposal envisaged reorganization of existing
23 Central Excise Zones and 93 CE & 7 ST Commissionerates into 39 Central
Excise & 6 Service Tax Zones and 119 Central Excise & 22 Service Tax
Commissionerates. Similarly, on Customs side existing 11 Customs Zones and 35
Customs & Customs (P) Commissionerates were proposed to be reorganized into
20 Customs & Customs (P) Zones and 60
Customs & Customs (P) Commissionerates. The Board was also apprised
about the proposal for strengthening the existing Directorates and creation of new Directorates of Tax Arrears Recovery and
International Customs.
2.5 The
key changes that have been
made in the cadre restructuring proposal which include the demands /
suggestions of the officers and staff associations are given below.
• Increase in the proposed strength at Apex Scale,
HAG+ & HAG
• Increase in proposed strength at CAO /AO grades
• No abolition of DOS/ STA posts
• Merger of Assistant Programmers (erstwhile DEO
Grade-D) with Ministerial grades
• Enhancement of promotional avenues for Sepoys /
Havaldars
The Board was informed that the demand of the
Associations / federations regarding filling up of all the cadre restructuring
vacancies by promotions only can be accepted
for all the grades barring the grade of Inspector, in which such
vacancies would be much more than the present total working strength of the
feeder grades. The Board was also informed that the grades of Programmer and
Assistant Programmer which are lying vacant were also proposed to be abolished. The following changes in the strength at
various levels were proposed to be made in the Cadre restructuring Proposal
2010:
|
IRS (C&CE)
|
||||
|
Sl. No.
|
Grade
|
Pre-revised Proposal
|
Revised Proposal
|
Difference
|
|
1
|
Apex Scale
|
18
|
23
|
5
|
|
2
|
HAG+
|
77
|
72
|
-5
|
|
3
|
HAG
|
100
|
125
|
25
|
|
4
|
SAG
|
365
|
340
|
-25
|
|
Stenographers Grades
|
||||
|
5
|
Sr. PS Grade-I
|
18
|
23
|
5
|
|
6
|
Sr. P.S. Grade-II
|
77
|
72
|
-5
|
|
7
|
PS Grade-I
|
100
|
125
|
25
|
|
8
|
PS Grade-II
|
365
|
340
|
-25
|
|
Ministerial Grades
|
||||
|
9
|
CAO
|
221
|
349
|
128
|
|
10
|
AO
|
1564
|
2070
|
506
|
|
11
|
STA
|
4077
|
4850
|
773
|
|
Sepoy / Havaldar / Head Havldar Cadre
|
||||
|
12
|
ASI Grade-I
|
0
|
1198
|
1198
|
|
13
|
ASI Grade-II
|
0
|
2396
|
2396
|
|
14
|
Head Havaldar
|
3173
|
4117
|
944
|
|
15
|
Havaldar
|
14375
|
8690
|
-5685
|
|
Total
|
|
17548
|
16401
|
-1147
|
2.6 The
Board was informed that after making the aforesaid changes, the total staff
strength envisaged in the cadre restructuring proposal was 95168.
2.7 During
the discussion, the shortage of working strength in Stenographer cadre was
highlighted and it was suggested that in case of supply constraints, it may be
examined independent of cadre restructuring if the employees of other grades
having computer skills can also be deployed
in these posts.
2.8 As
regards entry level of IRS (C&CE), it was suggested that the direct
recruitment to JTS should be limited to the extent that there was no stagnation in the cadre as well
as no shortage of officers for promotion to the higher grades in later years.
Since majority of the promotee ssistant Commissioners would superannuate in next 2-3 years, a large
number vacancies at JTS were likely to
be created , and filling up of 50% of those vacancies by direct recruitment, as
provided in the recruitment rules, would
cause stagnation at a later stage. At this stage, the Board was informed about
the recent DOP&T circular removing the limit of per annum direct
recruitment of minimum 3% of cadre
strength in Group ‘A’ services.
2.9 It
was suggested that the proposed Commissioners (Cadre Control) should be given
more powers. It was also suggested that there should not be any increase in the
strength of Drivers, as the Government is not permitting purchase of new
vehicles. However, the Board directed that there should not be any abolition of
the posts of Driver from DGRI and DGCEI.
2.10 The
Board expressed concern that the Guwahati
CE Commissionerate had not been provided the staff strength at the time
of creation. The Board was informed that the staffing requirements of the
Guwahati Commissionerate have been taken into account in the Cadre
Restructuring Proposal.
2.11 The
Board approved in principle the proposed changes in the cadre restructuring
proposal, 2010, and directed DGHRD to submit the revised proposal by 1st
March, 2011.
[Action:
DG (HRD)]
3. Presentation No.02 by ADG (HRM)
Issue in brief : In-situ Promotion Scheme for
Group ‘B’ Executive Cadres (Gazetted and Non-Gazetted)
3.1 The
Chairman, CBEC, gave a brief overview of the acute stagnation being faced by
the executive cadres, particularly Central Excise and Customs Preventive
streams, and highlighted the urgency to address the issue. In his presentation,
ADG (HRM) briefly highlighted the problem of stagnation being faced by two of
the three executive cadres (viz. Central Excise and Customs Preventive
streams). It was stated that Group ‘B’ Executive grades (Inspector &
Superintendent grade officers) constitute 47% of total Staff Strength, of which
CE stream constitutes 85.5% and Customs Preventive stream 10.6%,while
Appraising cadre only 3.76%. However, majority of the Inspectors of Central
Excise & Customs Preventive Officers get only one functional
promotion during average service span of 35 years, while Examiners are much
better placed and reach up to the level of Additional Commissioner. It was
informed that 1992 batch Examiner and 1975 batch Inspector CE & Preventive
Officer have been promoted as Assistant Commissioner at the same time in
October, 2010.
3.2 The
reasons for stagnation include limited number of promotion quota posts at
Assistant Commissioner (currently around 200 per annum), fragmentation of Group ‘B’ Executive Cadres into three
streams, further fragmentation of these cadres into Zonal /
Commissionerate-based cadres, no co-relation of the existing ratio for
promotion to Group ‘A’ (6 CE : 1 Cus. Prev. :
2 Appraising) with the sanctioned strength of the three Executive Cadres
etc. For addressing the said problem of stagnation, following three initiatives
were identified:
–
Revision of
ratio for promotion on the basis of cadre strength of the three feeder streams
–
Grant of in
situ promotions to the officers of
the stagnated cadres
–
Promotion to
JTS on the basis of the base-cadre seniority.
As regards revision of
ratio for promotion to the grade of Assistant Commissioner on the basis of the
cadre strength of the three feeder streams, the Board was informed that the
ratio worked out to 15 for Central Excise, 2 for Customs Preventive and 1 for
Appraising stream. However, even though revision of ratio would make
distribution of promotion quota vacancies at Asst. Commissioner level more
equitable, it would not have much effect on reduction of stagnation in
executive cadres, due to limited number of annual promotion quota vacancies
(currently average 200 per annum) at
Assistant Commissioner level. It was emphasized that despite its limitations,
the ratio needed to be revised.
3.3 Thereafter,
the remaining two proposals, namely, grant of in situ promotions and
promotions on the basis of base-cadre seniority, were presented in
detail.
Basic features of the
proposed in situ promotion scheme
were detailed as under:
•
In situ promotion to the Inspector with 10 years of
regular service as Superintendent (in situ)
•
In situ promotion to the
Superintendents with 20 years of
combined regular or in situ service
as Inspector + Superintendent (in situ), with three years service as
Superintendent (regular or In situ) as Assistant Commissioner (in situ)
•
In
situ promotion as Dy. Commissioner (in
situ) to Assistant Commissioner (in situ) after five years of service.
•
Reserve
category officers continue to enjoy benefits in promotion by special formulation.
3.4 It
was stated that the scheme does not require creation of posts in
Superintendent or Assistant Commissioner grades, as the posts
of Superintendent (in situ), Assistant Commissioner (in situ) and Dy. Commissioner (in situ) are operated against the regular sanctioned
strength in the grades of Inspector and Superintendent respectively. Further,
the Scheme would not have any functional problems since the officers would get in situ promotion in their personal
capacity and continue to perform the duties of the lower grade. However, there
would be a large number of officers with the designation of Assistant
Commissioner and the possibility of demand for regularization of in situ promotions
at a later stage.
3.5 Under
the other proposal, the promotions to Junior Time Scale of Group ‘A’ are
proposed to be granted on the basis
of the date of regular appointment in the grade of Inspector, making the date
of promotion to Superintendent grade irrelevant. In this proposal there would be no need to have quota
for three feeder streams for
promotion to Assistant Commissioner, as
all direct recruit / regular promotee Inspectors in one particular year would be promoted to JTS in Group ‘A’ at the same
time.
3.6 The Board was also apprised the position in the other
departments under the Government of India.
It was informed that the in situ promotions have been granted in many other departments
under Government of India , such as
Central Secretariat Service, Rajya Sabha
Secretariat, Ministry of Health etc.
3.7 It was suggested to the Board that the scheme for grant of in situ promotions was preferable as it would provide immediate
relief to the stagnating grades. In this context, it was brought to the notice
of the Board that the DOP&T had informed that there were no specific
guidelines for granting in situ promotions
and that since MACP scheme was in force,
the in situ promotion scheme could
not be used. The Officers in Rajya Sabha
Secretariat informed that since the in situ promotion scheme was working, MACP scheme was
not used in their department. The Board was apprised that after implementation
of in situ promotion scheme, the MACP
scheme would automatically become redundant .
3.8 The Board approved, in principle, the Scheme for grant of in situ promotions to the Group ‘B’
Executive officers. The Board created a Group comprising the Member (Budget),
Member (P&V), DG (HRD), Joint Secretary (Administration) and ADG (HRM) to
work out the modalities of the In situ
Promotion Scheme. The Group will submit their
recommendation by 31.3.11.
[Action:
JS (Admn) & DG (HRD)].
4. Presentation No.03 by Commissioner (DPPR)
Issue in brief : Rough Cut
of Documentary on Central Excise.
4.1 The
rough-cut of a documentary film on Central Excise was screened by Commissioner (DPPR)
and the Board suggested certain improvements therein.
[Action: Commr (DPPR)]
