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. 152/M/15
Dt. 15.12.15
To,
Sh. Saniv Kumar,
Joint Secretary
(Admn.), CBEC,
North Block, New Delhi.
Sub: Recommendations of 7th CPC
vs. Central Excise Superintendents.
Sir,
Kindly
refer to Ref. No. 150/M/15 Dt. 10.12.15 of the Association, letter F. No.
A-26017/154/2015-Ad.IIA Dt. 11.12.15 of CBEC and the meeting held on 14.12.15
on the issue.
2.
It is submitted with due regards that the due submissions were sent to the CBEC
vide Ref. No. 152/CPC/14 Dt. 30.07.14 alongwith other communications of the
Association in r/o 7th CPC. The submissions of the Association were
also duly recommended/forwarded to the CPC by the CBEC but very unfortunately,
the CPC paid no heed to the same. Somewhere CPC said that the issue was not
agreed by the earlier pay commission/s, somewhere said that the issue was not
recommended by the department and somewhere said that the issue was refused by
the department. Such type of observations made by the CPC show that they were
totally non-considerate & pre-determined not to give any benefit to our
officers despite of the impression given by them during the discussions/meetings
that they were going to give something extra to the Defence as well as Revenue
personnel. Thus, this pay commission may be termed "the worst pay
commission with totally negative approach" in the history. If things were
to be refused on the pretext of not being recommended by the earlier pay
commission/s or department, there was no need to set up this commission as they
didn’t try to apply their mind on any of the issues.
3.
However, it is also worth to submit that the govt. is very well empowered to
give any benefit to its employees on the recommendations of the concerned
department even without the recommendations by the CPC as done in the case of
CBI, Enforcement Directorate etc. The officials of CBI, Enforcement Directorate
(in our own Department of Revenue) etc. were granted higher pay scales and even
extra monthly salary without any recommendations from any CPC. The
recommendations of the CPC are only of the recommendary nature and govt. is not
bound to except the same. These may be totally rejected or partially accepted
by the govt. as being done on every occasion. So, it is very much expected that
our issues would be considered seriously with the positive frame of mind to
give due benefits to us.
4.
The CPC has also recorded the factual position wrongly at many places like
mentioning of the grade pay of CBI Inspector as 4800/- etc. The incorrect
recording of the facts by CPC is also very well evident as under-
Central Excise Inspectors
11.18.58 Their hierarchy is as under:
Name of the Post Grade Pay
Superintendent of Central Excise/Superintendent of
Customs (Preventive) /Appraiser 4800 and 5400 (PB-2) after four years
Inspector (Central Excise)/ Preventive Officer/ Examiner 4600
Executive Assistant 4200
Tax Assistant 2400
LDC 1900
MTS/ Havildar/Head
Havildar 1800
11.18.59 It has been demanded that the post
of Central Excise Inspectors may be upgraded from GP 4600 to GP 4800 on the
pattern of Inspectors of CBI/IB.
Analysis and Recommendations
11.18.60 The Commission notes that similar demand had been
made before earlier Pay Commissions as well. The V CPC did not consider the two
categories comparable. The VI CPC recommended GP 4200 and GP 4600 for
Inspectors of Central Excise/Customs/Income Tax and Inspectors of CBI,
respectively. Subsequently, the government, in separate orders, upgraded these
pay scales to GP 4600 and GP 4800 for Inspectors of Central
Excise/Customs/Income Tax and Inspectors of CBI, respectively. It is clear,
therefore, that even after this upgradation, the Grade Pay of Inspectors of CBI
remained higher than that of Inspectors of Central Excise/Customs/Income
Tax. The Commission, therefore, recommends only replacement scales to
Inspectors of Central Excise.
Superintendent of Central Excise, Customs
and Appraisers
11.18.61 It has been demanded that the post of
Superintendents and Appraisers may be upgraded from GP 4800 to GP 5400 (PB-3)
on the grounds of historical parity between the gazetted executive officers of
CBI, IB, Central Police Organisations, Enforcement Directorate, Customs, Income
Tax and Central Excise.
Analysis and Recommendations
11.18.62 As reflected earlier, the V CPC had specifically
noted that no relativity could be established between executive posts in Income
Tax and Customs vis-à-vis those existing in CBI/IB. The VI CPC had concurred
with the view of the V CPC and stated that although this particular observation
was made with reference to the post of Inspector, the same cannot but hold true
for the next higher posts in the hierarchies of these organisations.
11.18.63 This Commission agrees with the views of VI CPC on
the matter of parity. It also notes that the post of Assistant Commissioner,
Customs and Central Excise, which is in the GP 5400 (PB-3) is a promotional
post of Superintendent of CBEC. Placing the posts of Superintendent of Customs
and Central Excise in GP 5400 (PB-3) will disturb the existing hierarchical
structure. The Commission, therefore, recommends only normal
replacement pay level for Superintendents of Central Excise/Customs and Appraisers
of CBEC.
The
above recordings are not correct on the following grounds:-
i) The 5th Central Pay Commission though considered the
decision of the CAT, Jabalpur Bench and also considered the stand of the
Government that according to the pay scale of Rs.2000-3200/- to the Inspectors
of Police Organisations and CBI/IB was in view of the performance of arduous
and hazardous duties by them, it observed that Inspectors in Central Excise and
Customs are not comparable with the Inspectors of Police Organisations but as
far as CBI and IB are concerned having noted the anomaly in their
recommendations at Para 66.119 placed the Inspectors of CBI/IB in the
replacement scale corresponding to Rs.1640-2900/- removing the anomaly at par
with Inspectors of Customs and Excise. In this view of the matter the 5th CPC
had found the Inspectors of Central Excise and Customs and of CBI and IB be
meted them similar treatment.
ii) As regards the recommendation of the 5th CPC in Para 66.118 &
66.119(Vol.III), the Hon’ble CAT, Jabalpur Bench vide OA NO. 45 of 2000 had
observed the following:
“ The contention of the respondents by referring to the recommendations in Para
66.119 is that the applicants have not been found comparable with that of Inspectors
of Police Organisations, we find that the same does not inter-alia, include the
CBI and IB and what has been referred is the Delhi Police and the CBI and IB do
not come within the purview of the Police Organisation and cannot be treated as
such.
iii) The Department of Expenditure
while disposing of an application under RTI had inter-alia clarified the
following:
5. The recommendation of 5th CPC that the duties of the posts of Inspectors of
Income Tax, Excise and Customs did not have any linkage or parity with the
Inspectors of Police however has to be viewed with reference to their
recommendation in Para 70.64, which states that the “ existing parity between
the scales of pay of Inspectors of IB, CBI and Delhi Police is misplaced and has
no logical basis. Delhi Police is like any other Police force and has hardly
anything in common with IB and CBI or with the Central Police Organisation”.
This observation has to be seen in conjunction with the fact that 5th CPC while
recommending the lower scale of Rs.1640-2900/-(Revised to 5500-9000) for the
Inspectors of CBI and IB upgraded the Inspectors of Delhi Police from the
existing scale of Rs. 2000-3200/- to that of Rs. 2000-3500/-.
6. The aforesaid discussion may show
that 5th CPC observation that the posts of Inspectors of Income Tax, Excise and
Customs did not have any parity with the Inspectors of Police was made with
reference to the Inspectors of Delhi Police and not with reference to
Inspectors of CBI and IB who were also recommended only the replacement scale
of Rs. 1640-2900/-. This is further exemplified by the recommendation made by
5th CPC in Para 66.119 which deals with the issue of parity in pay scales
between Inspectors of CBI/IB/Income Tax/Customs and Central Excise and
inter-alia mentions that in the context of the recommendation that the
Inspectors of CBI and IB should be placed only in the replacement scale
corresponding to Rs. 1640-2900/-, the analogy no longer holds good. It may
therefore, be seen that 5th CPC established the following clear principles:
(i) The earlier parity in pay scales
between the Inspectors of Income Tax, Central Excise and Customs and Inspectors
of CBI also endorsed by the 4th CPC had to be maintained.
(ii) The Inspectors of Police in
Delhi were not comparable with the Inspectors of Income Tax, Central Excise and
Customs or with the Inspectors of CBI and IB.
7. The decision of the Government to
place Inspectors of CBI and IB in the higher scale of Rs.2000-3200/-
corresponding to the revised pay scale of Rs.6500-10500/- and to continue them
in the said higher pay scale was therefore not in accordance with the
recommendation of 3rd, 4th and 5th Central Pay Commission. This is all the more
relevant as the 5th CPC had specifically recorded that the Inspector of CBI and
IB are not comparable with the Inspectors of Delhi and Andaman & Nicobar
Police Organisation and recommended downgradation of pay scale of Inspectors of
CBI and IB to RS.1640-2900/- corresponding to the revised pay scale of
Rs.5500-9000/- on par with Inspectors working under CBDT and CBEC. The
situation may also need to be viewed in light of other developments subsequent
to the recommendations of the 5th CPC whereby parity on par with the pay scales obtaining in
Delhi Police was extended in the central Police
Organisations even though the 5th CPC had specifically observed that like CBI
and IB, even central Police organisation could not be stated to be comparable
with Delhi Police. The demand of higher pay Scales of Income Tax, Central
Excise, Customs on par with the Inspectors of CBI, IB as well as the Central
Police Organisations may therefore need to be viewed in light of the aforesaid
facts.
8. ------
9. ------
10. It may also be mentioned that
simultaneously the issue had also been agitated by All India Federation of
Central Excise Executive Officers before Jabalpur Bench of CAT vide OA No. 45
of 2000, where in grant of Pay Scales at par with CBI and IB had been demanded.
The Tribunal in concluding Para of their judgement dated 22.03.2002 had
observed as under:
“In the result, we find the action of the Government to deny the applicants pay
Scale at par with those of Inspectors of CBI/IB as violative of Article-14 and
16 of the constitution of India. However we refrain from ordering accord of any
scale to the applicants and in this view of the matter the OA is disposed of
with the direction to the respondents to reconsider the claim of the applicants
for being accorded the pay scale at par with the Inspectors of CBI and IB
having regard to the observations made above by us and to take a final decision
by passing a detailed and speaking order within a period of three months from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No cost.
11. This judgement of CAT was sent to Ministry of Law regarding feasibility of
filing an appeal. Department of legal Affairs vide their advice on page
43-44/n-ante while observing that no infirmity existed in the aforesaid
judgement had also stated. “It is a recorded fact that similarity of the pay
scale was recommended by the HPC committee also. But the same could not find
favour for consideration by the Government, reasons best known to it. When the
fact is admitted that the nature of duties of the Inspectors of Excise are arduous
comparatively with those of CBI and IB, there appears no reason as to why they
should not be provided the same scale and it appears that it may invoke
Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution.” (Article 14 and 16 of the constitution
deal with Equality before law and Equal opportunity in matters of public
employment). No appeal was filed against this order------.
iv)
As regards nature of duties & discharge of liability, educational
qualifications and mode of recruitment, the Hon’ble Tribunal Jabalpur found
from the record that the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue by their
letter dated 27.10.1995 wrote to the 5th CPC that the duties and
responsibilities performed by the applicants are more arduous and hazardous
than the Inspector of Delhi Police and CBI and recommended parity in the pay
scale. The 5th CPC recommended for placing the Inspectors of CBI/IB in the
replacement scale of Rs.1640-2900/- at par with Inspector of Central Excise
with an intention to remove the pay anomaly which was created since 1986. The
Hon’ble CAT observed that the Inspectors of Customs and Central Excise
have been found at par with the Inspectors of CBI and IB in eligibility,
educational qualification, nature of duties and responsibilities as well as professional
skills.
v) The High power committee had
also recommended that since there has been no alteration in the duties of the
Inspectors falling in two categories, it is reasonable to expect that the
Inspectors of CBEC/CBDT should be given a replacement scale of Rs.2000-3500/-
at par with the Inspectors of CBI/IB whose duties and responsibilities are
comparable.
vi) The department of Expenditure vide
letter No. 1148/Dir(A)/2008 dated 08.12.2008 while disposing one RTI
application had inter alia stated the following:
“(i) Point No.1. Based on
the recommendations of the committee set-up by the Department of
Revenue, the pay scale of the Inspectors and Superintendents of Central
Excise in the Central Board of Excise and Customs under Department of Revenue
were upgraded with a view to maintain their relativity with
corresponding posts in CBI/IB.”
5.
As regards
stagnation issue in the cadre of Superintendent of Central Excise, the 7th CPC
has interalia recorded the following:
Promotions to Superintendents
11.18.67 It has been demanded that Superintendents of Central Excise
should be allowed a minimum of five functional promotions after joining the
post of Inspectors (the post of Inspector is the feeder grade for the post of
Superintendent). If five functional promotions are not possible, they should be
granted at least five in-situ promotions in the hierarchy of functional
promotion. The alternative demand is for dynamic/flexible promotion scheme to
be devised so as to grant at least five upgradations in the promotional
hierarchy. The Association has requested the Commission to recommend creation
of unorganised Group `A’ post as it exists in the provincial services of the
states as well as the Central Police Organisations so that officers in the department
get some relief from acute stagnation.
Analysis and
Recommendations
11.18.68 The Commission notes that a
study team has been constituted by the CBEC to do exhaustive examination of the
stagnation in Group B executive grades and suggest measures. It further notes
that as part of the cadre re-structuring exercise of 2013, 2118 temporary posts
of Assistant Commissioners in GP 5400 (PB-3) have been created, which are to be
filled up 100 percent by promotion of Superintendents of Customs
(Preventive)/Central Excise/Appraisers. The
Commission observes that this move would provide adequate career progression for these feeder cadres viz.,
Superintendents and Inspectors of Customs and Central Excise.
Percentage
of Direct Recruitment in post of Assistant Commissioner
11.18.69 It has been demanded that
the Direct Recruitment Quota in the post of Assistant
Commissioner may be reduced from 50 percent to 10 percent.
Commissioner may be reduced from 50 percent to 10 percent.
Analysis and
Recommendations
11.18.70 The Commission notes that
one of the attributes of an Organised Group A Service is that direct
recruitment cannot be less than 50 percent. Reduction in the percentage direct
recruitment below 50 percent will adversely affect the status of IRS (C&CE)
as an Organised Group A Service. In this
backdrop, the Commission would not recommend reduction in the Direct
Recruitment Quota as demanded by the Association.
The
recording/observations made by the CPC don’t hold good on the following
grounds:
i) At present the sanction strength
of Group B Non Gazetted is 25203 and Group B Gazetted is 19108 in CBEC. The
sanction strength of Asst. Commissioner (promotional post for Group B Gazetted)
is 1249 (though 50% of such regular promotions are reserved for promotees,
however only less than 40% is going to promotees as promotion is granted on
vacancy basis). The temporary Asstt. Commissioner posts will be abolished
during 2018 as per Cabinet approval. Even if these temporary posts are taken
into account, the total Asstt. Commissioner posts for promotees come around
2700 against the sanction strength of feeder posts as 19108. Thus, 2700
promotional posts can no way solve the stagnation problem. Therefore, it can be
construed to mean that 7th CPC has not made the analysis properly.
ii) Further, service rendered in
these temporary posts will not be counted for further promotions. Moreover,
these posts have not been included in IRS Rules. The officers working against
these posts will be reverted back to feeder post as soon as five years are
completed as per the draft rules circulated by CBEC. Hence, creation of these
temporary posts of Assistant Commissioner can at best be termed as a ‘Stop-gap’
arrangement only to meet partially the aspirations of a large number of
officers already on the verge of superannuation in a short time after putting
in service of 30 or more years and getting only one promotion in the career.
Thus, the assumption of the CPC that creation of 2118 temporary posts of AC
would provide adequate career progression is totally misplaced. This is the
only reason that the cabinet/CRC/Cabinet Secretary approved to bring some
specific scheme for group B Central Excise Executive officers independent of
cadre restructuring.
iii) The version of CPC doesn’t seem
correct. There is already a quota of only 25% for direct recruitment of group
‘A’ officers in Indian Postal Service. Not only it, the reduction in the direct
recruitment quota will have positive effect on the status of IRS (C&CE) as
an organized Group ‘A’ Service instead of any adverse effect. If the direct
quota is not reduced, the stature of group A service be distorted and a day
will come when the Chairman of the CBEC and Asstt. Commissioner will belong to
one and same batch. Thus, reduction of direct quota in group A is not only
required to improve the career prospects of group ‘B’ officers but also
required to protect the character & stature of the group A service.
6. The
basis for arriving at fitment factor
is ambiguous and lacks clarity. Given
the fact that only the allowances were revised on the DA proportion reaching
100% belatedly without granting the benefit of merger of DA with pay resulting
in denying appropriate benefit to the employees, it is essential and requested
that the fitment factor is revised by enhancing at least to 2.8. It is also
requested that the actual benefit of increase of around 24% (or more) in salary
itself as claimed by the press after the submission of the report may kindly be
granted to the employees.
7. HRA
should kindly be maintained at 10%, 20% & 30% particularly keeping in view
the high rise in the market rate of accommodation.
8. Travelling
Allowance should kindly be linked to DA.
9.
As per the new pay matrix, none of the officers is going to get an increase
more than one increment on promotion/upgradation. For upgradation from Level 8
to 9, the increase will be one increment plus Rs.1100 or 1200 which is less
than the earlier one (GP difference Rs. 600 multiplied by 2.25=Rs.1350).
Therefore, there should kindly be granted at least two increments on
upgradation/promotion or the entry pay and pay matrix be revised
accordingly. The period of minimum 6
months should also not be mandatory for granting annual increment in July.
10. Status quo should kindly be
maintained in the bench mark for MACPupgradation.
Number of upgradations should also be increased to five, say after every 6
years in the promotional hierarchy without offset with the time scale and also
with the benefit of stepping up. Promotional hierarchy is also required to be
made uniform for all group B officers. The point of removal of MACP anomalies was also appreciated
by the Hon’ble Commission in Mumbai hearing and promised to undo the same.
11. Transfer Allowance should kindly not be reduced.
12. Diet Allowances should kindly not be abolished saying it meager. Instead, it should be enhanced toRs. 6500/- per month at least linking with DA.
13. Family Planning Allowance should kindly not be abolished. In fact,
it has to be increased and also linked with DA.
14. Special
allowance as available to CBI, IB, Police, ED etc. should also kindly be
granted at least @25% of salary per month to our executive officers especially
in the wake of introduction of GST, implementation of which is expected to
throw up many a challenge in whole functioning of CBEC.
Our officers should also be paid 13 months salary in the year like the
counterparts of CBI, IB etc.
15. No advance may kindly be abolished.
16. Pay commissions always worked to
merge the pay scale. The creation of Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB2 and PB3 was
illogical, unjustified and gross mistake. This led to discrimination,
resentment and consequential litigations. It was expected that this CPC would
remove this disparity by merging of this bifurcation of single grade pay but,
very unfortunately, the CPC has retained these as Level 9 and Level 10. It is
requested that the same may kindly be
merged at Level 10.
17. Children Educational Allowance should also kindly be granted for
higher studies at graduate and post graduate levels.
18. A life time foreign
LTC may also kindly be allowed to the govt. employees.
19. As regards pension,
it has been recommended by 7th CPC
for 32% hike in the basic pension (2.57 factor) with one more option for
ensuring equal pension for equal number of years of service. In the 2nd option, the increments earned in the
post occupied immediate before the retirement by the pensioners will be taken
into account. In this connection, it is to state that the pensioners either got
more pay or same pay of the post occupied by them at the time of retirement due
to introduction of ACP/MACP. Therefore, it is required to provide one more
option to the effect that for fixation of pension on 2nd option as recommended by 7th CPC the pensioners can choose either
pay of the post fixed by promotion as well as upgradation under ACP/MACP or
higher pay as fixed under ACP/MACP which provides more benefit to them with a
condition to change the option subsequently.
20. In view of the above, it is requested that all of
the points submitted by the Association vide its Ref. No. 152/CPC/14 Dt. 30.07.14 and current
submissions may kindly be duly considered
favourably. Certain points are also hereby supplemented as under for due
consideration for the sake of justice to the Central Excise Superintendents-the
most poorly placed cadre in the pay matters and also the most stagnated cadre
of the Govt. of India in comparison to the analogous counterparts-
(1)
PAY SCALE FOR CENTRAL EXCISE SUPERINTENDENT: Central Excise
Superintendent is not only engaged in investigations & intelligence work
but also performing quasi-judicial duties (unlike Police/CBI/IB). Govt.
enhanced pay scale of DSP of CBI, analogous post to Central Excise
Superintendent, during 1996 to Rs. 2200-4000/- (Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3) without recommendations of CPC
retrospectively w.e.f. 01.01.86 without any increase
in their duties & responsibilities. DCIO of IB, another
analogous post, was also placed in the same pay scale since 1996 again
without any increase in their duties & responsibilities. New higher responsibilities of
quasi-judicial nature have been conferred uponCentral Excise Superintendents vide Circular
No. 922/12/ 2010-CXissued vide F. No. 208/2/2009-CX-6 Dt.
18.05.10 and130/12/2010–STissued
vide F. No. 137/68/2010-CX. 4 Dt. 20.05.10by making due amendments in relevant Act
very well after implementation of 6th CPC report.They have also been
conferred with new higher technical/scientific responsibilities of ACES since
2010 very well after the implementation of 6th CPC report.The claim of Superintendents becomes even
stronger on account of recording statements like a Magistrate
under Section 14 of Central Excise Act & Section 108 of Customs Act having
validity even before Supreme Court. No
such responsibilities have been conferred upon any counterpart of them.
Not only it, the Adjudication Orders are also being prepared by them for the
Commissioner level officers{C.No.
II-3(3)Estt/T&P/Supdt/D-II/2015/4324 Dt 10.08.15}. Not
only it, they are conferred with the new additional responsibilities every year
in the Finance Bill (Budget).
A pay scale of Rs. 2500-4000/-
(replaced to Rs. 7500-12000/-) against Rs. 2200-4000/- of DSP of CBI/DCIO of IB
(replaced to Rs. 8000-13500/-) was recommended by HPC for Central Excise
Superintendent. Thus, a pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000/- was approved by
Expenditure Department and finally granted to Central Excise Superintendent
instead of Rs. 8000-13500/- or higher than it. Under RTI, Expenditure
Department admitted that the pay scale of Central Excise Superintendent was
enhanced to grant them parity with DSP of CBI/DCIO of IB. But despite of
admission under RTI, Central Excise Superintendent was not given the said
parity and was granted merely a lower pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000/- instead of Rs.
8000-13500/- (pay scale of DSP of CBI/DCIO of IB, now grade pay of Rs. 5400/-
in PB3). Not only it, DSP of CBI etc. are also paid 25% per month extra salary
and also 13 months salary in the year.
Govt. enhanced pay scale of DSP of
CBI considering them as Police Organisation while Hon’ble CAT as well as Vth
CPC didn’t agree to consider CBI as Police Organisation. However, Special Police Establishment (Executive Staff) Recruitment Rules and CBI Recruitment
Rules, 1987 consider department of
Central Excise as a Police Organisation. Section 21 of Central Excise Act and Section 53 of NDPS
Act confer powers of Officer-in-Charge
of Police Station on Central Excise officers.
Not only it, the Central Excise personnel are also deployed on borders,
International Airports and International Sea Ports. These personnel have
suffered heavy casualties while dealing with trans-border criminals and
countering with dreaded smugglers. In fact in J & K, North Eastern states
and other border areas of India, Central Excise personnel are deployed side by
side with Army, BSF, CRPF and ITBP on the same location. The Govt. declared before the Vth CPC that
Executive Officers of Central Excise are uniform bearing officers and are
performing more arduous & hazardous duties than executive officers of CBI
& IB etc. Raja Chellia Committee also recommended higher pay scales for
executive officers of taxation department. Revenue officers throughout world
are also better placed than others in r/o pay matters & career prospects.
Despite of the fact that service conditions of Central Excise personnel are
akin to Police Organisations, CBI/IB and Defence Armed Force personnel, they
are not compensated with any additional incentives or allowances as in the case
of CBI, IB, Police, Army etc. Also as
per the OM issued vide F. No. 8/B/90/HRD (HRM)/2011 (Part-I)/4853 Dt. 21.10.14
and No.C.30013/11/2011-Ad.IV.A Dt.02.08.13 of the Govt. of India, the Central
Excise Superintendents perform their duties in the nature and style of
‘Military’ and ‘Navy’.
For a pay increase of mere Rs. 200/-, Central
Excise Inspector has to wait for 18 years on an average (even upto 25 years in
stagnated zones) before being promoted to post of Superintendent with GP of Rs.
4800/- in PB2. Whereas in case of CBI/IB, analogous Inspectors are being
promoted to post of DSP/DCIO with GP of Rs. 5400/- in PB3.
The Inspectors (feeder posts) of Central Excise and CBI/IB
have already been placed at par in a grade pay of Rs. 4600/- but promotional
posts, i.e., Central Excise Superintendent (GP-Rs. 4800/-) and Deputy
Superintendent of CBI/DCIO of IB (GP-Rs. 5400/- in PB3) have not been placed at
par. Hence, both promotional posts (Central Excise Superintendent & DSP of CBI/DCIO of
IB), being analogous, may also kindly be
placed under equal pay scale to undo the
disparity by placing Central Excise
Superintendent in a pay scale equivalent to a grade pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3. It
is also worth to submit that the Expenditure Department had already agreed to
grant a grade pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB2 to our Superintendent in consonance of
the para 7.15.24 of the report of 6th CPC.
Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- (PB2) was granted to
Superintendents of Posts and Revenue by the Govt. as non-functional time scale
after 4 years of service. They were placed at par by the 6th CPC.
The Superintendents of Posts have now been recommended to be placed in
replacement scale of Rs. 5400/- in PB2.
However, the benefit of enhanced Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB2/PB3 in
replacement has been denied to the Superintendents of Central Excise. By doing so, similarly placed posts as per
the 6th CPC are now proposed to be placed at two different levels in the revised
pay matrix. This anomaly is also
required to be removed.
Plea by
group B gazetted officers for grant of GP of Rs. 5400\- in PB3 has been turned
down stating that it is group ‘A’ entry scale. That being the case, how could
group ‘C’ post of Inspector of CBI be upgraded to GP of Rs. 4800/- while
several group ‘B’ gazettted cadres are still in GP of Rs. 4600/-. Moreover once
upon a time, the feeder post of Assistant and promotional post of Section
Officer were placed in the same pay scale in CSS. Likewise, feeder and
promotional posts were being placed in the same pay scale in Audit and Accounts
services. Accordingly, there should not be any problem to place the
Superintendent and Asstt. Commissioner in the same pay scale.This problem may, however, be solved in
more amicable manner by promoting the Superintendent directly to STS post like
many of other counterparts or even making the group ‘A’ entry at Level 11
(equivalent to GP of Rs. 6600/-).
It is also a fact that, pay of any Assistant Commissioner (direct)
will always be less than that of a Superintendent irrespective of their grade
pays (4800/- or 5400/-) on account of acute stagnation at Inspector and
Superintendent level.
(2) DIRECT PROMOTION TO STS POST: The
most of group ‘B’ gazetted officers in 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, CVC, UPSC, MEA, MPA, RajyaSabha Secretariat, Enforcement
Directorate in Revenue Department
itself, Forest services, Police services, Foreign Services, Engineering
services, State services etc., whereas 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. Central Excise Superintendents may also kindly be
promoted directly to a STS post. They may
further be promoted to the post having the grade pay of Rs. 8700/- (like CPWD
where group ‘A’ direct entry is also in a grade pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 like
us) from STS post keeping in view their extraordinarily acute stagnation. This point of promotion to STS was
also appreciated and agreed by the Hon’ble Commission in Mumbai hearing.
If promotion
to STS is not possible due to any reason, weightage
of service rendered in group ‘B’ may kindly be given to Central Excise
Superintendents by granting seniority at least of 1 year for every 3 years at
the time of entry into group ‘A’. This weightage of group ‘B’ service was also recommended
by IIIrd CPC and already exists for group ‘B’ officers entering into All India
Services. Group ‘B’ officers in Sates and Group ‘A’ All India Service Officers
are recruited in the same grade pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 and get next promotion
to same post in grade pay of Rs. 6600/- like in CPWD where group ‘B’ officers
(GP-Rs. 4600/-) and direct entry group ‘A’ officers (GP of Rs. 5400/- in PB3)
both are promoted to same post in the grade pay of Rs. 6600/-.
(3)
UNIFORM PROMOTIONAL HIERARCHY: Promotional hierarchy is varying department to
department in the Central Govt. as under-
i) Somewhere Group ‘B’ Gazetted
Officers are promoted to a Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3(CBEC, CBDT, Postal
Department etc.) whereas they are being promoted to a Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/-
at other places (CSS, Railway Board, CSSS, CPWD, AFHQ, CVC, UPSC, MEA, MPA,
RajyaSabha Secretariat etc.).
ii) Somewhere Group ‘B’ Non-Gazetted
Officers are promoted to a Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 whereas they are
being promoted to a Grade Pay of Rs. 4800/- or Rs. 4600/- at other places.
iii) Somewhere promotional hierarchy
is 4600à6600à8700 (CPWD etc.).
iv) Somewhere promotional hierarchy
is 4600à4800à6600à7600à8700 (CSS, Railway Board, CSSS, AFHQ,
CVC, UPSC, MEA, MPA, RajyaSabha Secretariat etc.).
v) Somewhere promotional hierarchy is
4600à5400à6600à7600à8700 (CBI, IB, Hindi departments
etc.).
vi) Somewhere promotional hierarchy
is 4600à4800à5400à6600à7600à8700
(CBEC, CBDT, Postal Department etc.).
So, promotional hierarchy after entry
into group ‘B’ may kindly be made uniform for sake of justice to all. Posts under grade pays of Rs. 5400/- &
6600/- and also Rs. 7600/- & 8700/- being functionally same, ideal promotional hierarchy for all after
entry into Group ‘B’ may only kindly be “4600à6600à8700à10000” on the pattern of CPWD. Officer may kindly be
promoted, functionally or non-functionally, after the completion of residency period as prescribed by DOPT vide OM
No. AB. 14017/61/2008-Estt. (RR) Dt. 24.03.09. It is 7 years for 4600/- to
6600/- and 10 years for 6600/- to 8700/- and further 3 years for 8700/- to
10000/- and so on.
This point
of uniform promotional hierarchy was also appreciated and agreed by the Hon’ble
Commission in Mumbai hearing.
(4)
INTRODUCTION OF FLEXIBLE / DYNAMIC PROMOTION / COMPLEMENTING SCHEME: This scheme was introduced by the IVth CPC for the
Scientists in the Department of Science & Technology to remove their
stagnation. Benefit of this scheme has also been given to Drivers. Central
Excise Superintendents are retiring with single promotion on a PB2 post in
career of 35-40 years whereas their common entry counterparts of Customs, CBDT,
CSS etc. are easily entering into PB4 with 5-6 promotions. Central Excise
Superintendents are also forced to work
under their extreme juniors of Customs (Examiners) belonging to one & same
cadre of Inspector and recruited through one & same process under one &
same organization of CBEC in one & same department of Revenue of one &
same Ministry of Finance with one & same administrative hierarchy. Examiner of 1984 has already become Addl.
Commissioner (GP-Rs. 8700/- in PB4) after getting 5 promotions whereas the
Central Excise Inspector of 1984 is yet to get IInd promotion to JTS post of
Asstt. Commissioner (GP-Rs. 5400/- in PB3). So, Central Excise
Superintendents may kindly be granted at least 5 in-situ promotions in
standard hierarchy (as mentioned under the preceding point) of functional
promotions under flexible/dynamic promotion/complementing scheme or in-situ
promotions/non-functional upgradation on completion of residency periods as
prescribed by DOPT under OM dated 24.03.2009 after joining as Inspector
particularly keeping in view their
extraordinarily acute stagnation.
Formulation
of a scheme enabling these officers also entered into PB4 levels (at least a GP
of Rs. 8700/-) like their common entry counterparts of CBDT, CSS, Customs etc.
is the demand of the time asCentral Excise Superintendents are getting salary
less than even the pension of their counterparts.
(5) BATCH TO BATCH NON FUNCTIONAL FINANCIAL
UPGRADATION TO CENTRAL EXCISE EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AT PAR WITH THE BEST PLACED
COUNTERPARTS AFTER ENTRY INTO GROUP ‘B’ NON-GAZETTED OR EQUIVALENT GRADE: All organised group ‘A’
officers recruited with IAS, best placed
group ‘A’ service, recruited in same pay scale through common entry have been
granted financial parity with
counterparts of IAS in the form of non-functional financial
up-gradation vide DOPT OM No. AB.14017/64/2008-Estt.(RR) dt.24.04.09 to
compensate lack of promotions as compared to IAS. This scheme was introduced by
the VIth CPC for group ‘A’ officers to compensate financial loss in comparison
to counterparts of IAS. Particularly keeping in view the extraordinarily acute
stagnation, Central Excise Superintendents may also kindly be granted
non-functional financial up-gradation at
par with their best placed common entry counterparts like CSS etc. (recruited
in same pay scale through common entry examination)after entry into Group ‘B’
or equivalent grade.
This was
also recommended to the Hon’ble Commission by the CBEC vide F. No. 8/B/70/HRD
(HRM)/2014 Dt. 16.01.14. It is reiterated that a scheme is required to be
formulated to enable our officers also entered into PB4 levels (at least a
grade pay of Rs. 8700/-) like the common entry counterparts of CBDT, CSS,
Customs etc. as we are getting salary even less than the pension of our
counterparts.
(6) TIME SCALE (after 4
years of service) in PB3:Time
scale has been granted in PB3 to other counterparts including CSS, CSSS,
Railways, DANICS, DANIPS etc. since 1996 while it is merely in PB2 for Central
Excise Superintendents since 2006. Central Excise
Superintendents were placed in pay scale of Rs.7500-12000 w.e.f. 21.04.04 while
officers of CSS & CSSS etc. were placed in equivalent scale w.e.f. 01.01.06
justifying stronger claim for Superintendents for time scale in PB3 w.e.f.
date of grant of same to officers of CSS & CSSS. Claim of Superintendents
becomes even stronger on account of quasi-judicial responsibilities conferred
upon them to adjudicate relevant cases and recording statements like a
Magistrate under Central Excise Act & also Customs Act having validity even
before Supreme Court. Not only it, Adjudication Orders are also being prepared
by them for Commissioner level officers. No such responsibilities have been
conferred upon any other counterpart. They are also conferred with technical
& scientific responsibilities under ACES. It is also worth to submit that the
pay scale of the Assistants & Section Officers etc. of CSS was enhanced to
grant them parity with Inspectors & Superintendents of Central Excise
{F.No. 61(128)/E.III(B)/2012 Dt. 08.08.13}. Now, it is discriminating not to
grant the time scale in PB3 to the Central Excise Superintendents at least at
par with the Section Officers of CSS, CSSS etc. w.e.f. 01.01.96. It is
requested to undo the said discrimination by granting a time scale of Rs.
5400/- or 6600/- in PB3 to the Superintendents.
21. Positive consideration of our
submissions is very much requested to create the feeling of job-satisfaction
among our officers particularly when they are always collecting the govt.
revenue above the set targets on regular basis. Parawise comments on the report
of Pay Commission are also enclosed on some of the issues relating to
Superintendent cadre/Revenue department.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
Encl: As above.
(RAVI MALIK),
Secretary General.
Copy with the request for necessary
action to:
1) Cabinet Secretary, President
House, New Delhi.
2) The Revenue Secretary, North
Block, New Delhi.
3) The Chairman, CBEC,
North Block, New Delhi.
4) The Member (P&V), CBEC, North
Block, New Delhi.
5) The DG, HRD, CBEC, New Delhi.
6) The ADG, HRD (HRM), CBEC, New Delhi.
7) The Joint Secretary,
Implementation Cell, Deptt. Of Expenditure, New Delhi.
(RAVI MALIK)
