ALL INDIA ASSOCIATION OF CENTRAL
EXCISE
GAZETTED
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
Patron
Chief Patron
Patron
A.
Venkatesh Ravi Malik
C. S. Sharma
Mob. 7780255361 Mob. 9868816290 Mob.
9313885411
President: Address
for communication: Secretary
General:
T. Dass Flat No. 6,
SE 11, Shastri Nagar, Ghaziabad Harpal Singh
Mob.9848088928 mail
Id:aiacegeo2019@gmail.com
Site:cengoindia.blogspot.in Mob.9717510598
Vice Presidents: B L Meena, K V
Sriniwas (Central) Chinmoy Ghosh,
Rajashish Dutta (East) Ashish Vajpayee, Amadul Islam (North) B Pavan K Reddy, M
Jegannathan (South) Sanjeev Sahai, U D Meena (West) Joint Secretaries: S
P Pandey, T A Manojuman (Central) Apurba Roy, Siddharth Tewari (East) A K
Meena, S K Shrimali (West) Anand Narayan, Prabhakar Sharma (North) H Sadanand, M
Nagaraju (South); All India Coordinator: B L Meena Office Secretary: B
C Gupta Treasuer: Manoj Kumar Organising Secretary: Soumen
Bhattachariya Liaisoning Secretary: Bhoopendra Singh
(Recognised by G.O.I., Min. of Fin. vide
letter F.No. B. 12017/10/2006-Ad.IV A Dt.21.01.08)
Office address: 206, B wing, CGO Complex
II, Kamla Nehru Nagar, Ghaziabad
Ref. No. 186/AIB/G/20
Dt. 04.11.20
To,
Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman,
Hon’ble Minister of Finance,
North Block, New Delhi.
Sub: Request
for appointment.
Madam,
Kindly refer to the Ref. No. 184/AIB/TA20 Dt.
03.11.20 of the Association on the above subject.
2. It is to submit with due regards
that the following points were submitted for your kind consideration vide above
reference. The points are elaborated a bit as below-
A. DPC
for the post of Asstt. Commissioner: No DPC held after May, 18 despite of thousands of
vacancies being in hand. It is understood that the
promotions are not being affected due to pending litigations. The latest case
in the matter is being understood the SLP (C) No. 30621/2011 in which the
Hon’ble Supreme Court has ordered to maintain “status quo” on 15.04.19. As far
as status quo regarding any case is concerned, it is to submit that it is meant
to maintain the position of law as on the date of the order of status quo.
Except this status quo, no stay order on promotion has been given by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court. In relation of above mentioned SLP (C) No. 30621/2011,
the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already given very specific order in SLP (C) No. 21288/2017 on 05.06.18 that it is made clear that the Union of India is not debarred from
making promotions in accordance with law, subject to further orders, pending
further consideration of the matter. Your kind
attention is also again invited to DOPT OM issued vide No. 28036/8/87-ESTT.(D)
dated 30.03.1988 which categorically provides for promotion to the vacant posts
on ad-hoc basis subject to the outcome of the court cases in case of court
injunction or any seniority dispute. For other legal/contempt cases, either the
benefit may be given to the petitioners or appeal may be filed in the higher
court to counter the contempt or vacate stay, if any. It is also worth to submit
that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has ordered recently on 15.10.20 in MA No.
1577/2020 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1375-1376 that any court stay would
automatically end on expiry of six months. It is, therefore, requested to
kindly direct CBIC to conduct the DPC and issue promotion orders at an early
date.
B.
Transfer orders of the promotee Asstt./Deputy Commissioners: Transfer/posting policy not followed by
CBIC to post at least
those officers to their requested places who have already attained the age of
57 or more years despite of the vacancies being existed at every place. Around ninety
Asstt. Commissioners/Deputy Commissioners have been
transferred recently by the CBIC. Out of these, around only
fifteen Asstt. Commissioners/Deputy Commissioners belong to
the promotee category. The majority of the
promotee officers of the rank of Assistant
Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner have already attained the
age of 57 years or more. Majority
of them are also suffering from old age
related chronic diseases/health
problems. They are forced to
stay away of their families
to discharge their official duties in this un-precedent pandemic time. All of
them are susceptible to COVID-19
on account of old age and suffering from comorbidities. They
are also facing a lot of problems due to the
prevailing situation particularly to cope up with health
while staying away from their families. No
family member is available to them for their care in the case of
emergencies. On being asked by the CBIC, these officers
submitted their representations under great hopes for transfer to
desired place but very unfortunately, their
representations have been
given no cognizance/consideration. It is, therefore, requested to kindly adjust the promtee Asstt./Deputy
Commissioners to the requested places as the vacancies are already existing at
every place as on date by duly considering their old age and other
compassionate grounds.
C. Implementation of the legal verdicts: Legal
verdicts in service matters are not being implemented by the CBIC/govt. despite
of being settled by the Hon’ble courts. These are being
implemented in person instead of in rem, if any. Your
kind attention is invited to the verdict given by the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP
No. 77457/2017 saying that once the
question, in principle, has been settled, it is only appropriate on the part of
the Government of India to issue a circular so that it will save the time of
the court and the Administrative Departments apart from avoiding unnecessary
and avoidable expenditure. The Hon’ble Court further
directed the Government of India to immediately look into the matter and
issue appropriate orders so that people need not unnecessarily travel either to
the Tribunal or the High Court or the Supreme Court. Non-implementation of court verdicts is forcing thousands of officers
to approach the court throughout the country flooding the unwarranted
litigations. Hon’ble Prime Minister also emphasized on
reduction of litigations in the Rajasva Gyan Sangam as evident from the letter
DO.No.26/CH/(EC)/2017 Dt. 08.09.17 of the Chairman of Central Board of Indirect
Tax & Customs (CBIC). Also despite of the CBIC letters
F.No.A-60011/24/2015-Ad.IIB Dt. 21.06.16 and F.No.C-18012/6/2013-Ad.IIB
Dt.09.05.16 to minimise the court cases in service matters, the officers are
forced to file court cases and contempt petitions on various issues due to
non-implementation/non-resolution/non-redressal of
the issues which are already settled vide various
court verdicts. It is also very unfortunate that the field formations are being
asked to defend the court cases vide CBIC letter F. No. A-23011/93/2018-Ad.IIA
Dt. 15.01.19 etc. quoting CAT
judgements and ignoring the judgements of higher courts including the Apex
court and even ignoring the accepted orders of the courts. The appeals are being filed against the
orders of CAT/High Court to suffer the officers endlessly even in the issues
already settled by the Apex court. The issues settled at the level of the Apex
Court are also not being implemented in rem. The officers are forced to go to
the CAT/High Court even in the same matters which have already been
finalized/settled by the Hon’ble Higher Courts/Apex Court. The verdicts, in
which no appeal has been made, are also not being implemented. The employees
are forced to go to the legal courts even in the matters which can be settled
administratively very easily. There are so many verdicts of the various legal
courts which are unimplemented in rem by the govt. including CBIC despite of being settled finally. A few
burning examples are as below-
i) Order given on 24.02.95 in OA No.
541/1994 by the Hon’ble CAT of Jabalpur
regarding payment of arrears of pay. The issue is already a settled one because
no appeal was made against this order. But the order is still unimplemented in
CBIC despite of the repeated requests of the Association.
ii) Order given on 06.09.10 in WP No. 13225/2010 by the Hon’ble High
Court of Madras in Subramanium case against which not only the SLP(C) No.
029382/2011 filed by the CBIC was dismissed on 10.10.17 but the review petition
has also been dismissed on 23.08.18. The order is being implemented in
persona instead in rem despite of being a settled issue by the Hon’ble
Supreme Court.
iii) Order given WP 11535/2014 in Madras
High Court in which the SLP of the Department of Revenue has also been dismissed in the
Hon’ble Supreme Court By it, para 8.1 of MACP Scheme amounts to be scrapped and time scale/NFG is also not to be considered as MACP upgradation. The Hon’ble Madras High Court gave
the verdict by upholding that the
Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB-2 & PB-3 is one and the same thing as there
is no difference between the Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB2 and PB3. It is also worth to submit that the next
Grade Pay after Rs. 5400/- is Rs. 6600/-.
iv) Order given on 01.03.17 in OA No.
2323/2012 by the Hon’ble CAT of Delhi regarding
parity in promotions to our officers with intra-organisational
counterparts. No appeal has been made in this case by the CBIC but the
order is still unimplemented and CBIC has mislead the
Hon’ble CAT in its execution case that it has been implemnted.
v) Special Leave to Appeal
(Civil) No.7278 of 2011 filed
by the CBIC was also dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 02.05.11 in Ashok Kumar
case involving the issue of stepping-up of pay, if juniors are getting
more pay than seniors on account of ACP/MACP upgradation. In rem implementation of this issue is also awaited
even after being settled at the level of Apex Court.
vi) Regarding the offsetting of time scale
with the MACP upgradation, the verdict given by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi
on 20.12.17 in the W.P.(C) No. 9357/2016 upholds that non-functional financial upgradation/NFG (time scale)
is not MACP upgradation on account of being integral part of the pay. Thus, it
can no way be treated as MACP upgradation. The order of the Hon’ble High Court
has already been implemented vide office order No. 190/E-IV/Estt/DHC Dt.
23.02.18 in Delhi High Court without preferring any appeal in it. Thus, the
matter being already finalized is yet to be implemented by the govt. in rem including the CBIC.
vii) In Subramanium
case {SLP(C) No. 029382/2011} also, it has been established that 4 years
time-scale/NFSG and ACP/MACP upgradation are altogether different. By the
finalization of the issue at the level of the Apex Court, the time scale can
never be treated as one MACP upgradation but the same is still unimplemented in rem by govt. including CBIC.
viii) The verdict
given in CWP 13702/2014 by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana ordering not to limit
the unused Earned Leaves of govt. employees which are being credited to the
limit of 300 only which is the limit of encashment also. This order has been
finalized as no appeal was made against it but yet to be implemented by the
govt. in rem.
Your kind attention is also invited to the orders of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in P.K. & Ors. V. K. Kapoor & Anr. JT 2007 (12) 439, Inderpal
Singh Yadav & Ors., State of Maharashtra Vs. Tukaram Trymbak Choudhary
dated 20.02.2007, Dt. 17.10.14 in the Civil Appeal No. 9849 of 2014 in the
matter of State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors Vs. Arvind Kumar Srivastava &
Ors etc. mandating
to give the benefit of court verdict to all equally placed persons. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment Dt. 17.10.14 in the
Civil Appeal No. 9849 of 2014 in the matter of State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors
Vs. Arvind Kumar Srivastava & Ors held as under:
“Normal rule is that when a particular set of employees is given
relief by the Court, all other identically situated persons need to be treated
alike by extending that benefit. Not doing so would amount to discrimination
and would be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. This
principle needs to be applied in service matters more emphatically as the
service jurisprudence evolved by this Court from time to time postulates that
all similarly situated persons should be treated similarly. Therefore, the
normal rule would be that merely because other similarly situated persons did
not approach the Court earlier, they are not to be treated differently.”
It is, therefore,
requested that all court orders may kindly be
implemented in true spirit in rem.
D.
Upgradation/redesignation under GST like State Governments: Posts have already been
upgraded/redesignated by one step in State GST. Not only the counterparts of our Superintendents (CTOs) in the
State GST have been re-designated/upgradaed as Asstt. Commissioner but
they have also been placed in a pay scale equivalent to Level-10 by the
state Governments under GST. Even more, Asstt. CTO has
been upgraded to CTO, CTO to Asstt. Commissioner, Asstt. Commissioner to Deputy
Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner to Joint Commissioner, Joint Commissioner to
Addl. Commissioner and so on in the state governments under GST. This has put our officers under a very insulting, demoralizing and
humiliating position particularly in dealing with the trade which results into
weak indirect tax administration at Centre in comparison to the States. Two
different sets of hierarchies have been created for collecting GST, one manned
by erstwhile Central Excise and Service Tax officials and the other manned by
the erstwhile state VAT officials. Pertinently, the CGST and SGST Acts are
identical (except for some state specific details) and even the provisions for
cross empowerment have been enshrined in the respective Acts. Ideally, one
expects that the nomenclature of the posts in both the hierarchies would be the
same and a particular designation would define the same ranking authorities/officers
in both. Despite of
the functional parity with the Asstt./Deputy Commissioners of SGST,
our Superintendents are perceived by the public and trade as officers junior to
their counterparts in SGST. Even the SGST officials of equal rank (Asstt.
Commissioners) treat them as inferior. Thus, the scenario is highly
demoralizing and humiliating for the officers of the rank of Superintendent and also above who are bearing a
significant load of CGST and IGST
implementation and furtherance. It is, therefore,
requested that our Superintendents may kindly be
upgraded/redesignted as Asstt. Commissioner and their pay scale may also be
enhanced to Level-10 to bring them at par with the counterparts of State GST,
i.e. CTOs, to save them from the humiliation and insult being faced in public.
Accordingly, the post of Asstt. Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, Joint
Commissioner and Additional Commissioner may also kindly be
upgraded/redesignated as Deputy Commissioner, Joint Commissioner, Additional
Commissioner and Special Commissioner respectively on the lines of State GST to
bring parity with State GST counterparts.
E. Bringing of Flexible
Complementary/Dynamic Assured Career Progression Scheme to remove stagnation of
our officers: Schemes already
operative in the Department of Science as well as Health to remove the
stagnation of the employees. The most of our officers are retiring with single
promotion on a PB2 post (Level-8) in a career of 35-40 years after joining the
job as Inspector (Level-7) whereas our counterparts including Customs (intra-organisational
counterparts), Income Tax (intra-departmental
counterparts), CSS (inter-departmental
counterparts) etc. are getting 5 to 6 promotions upto the
Level-14. It is also reiterated that the Cabinet approved
to take extra measures to remove stagnation of group ‘B’ Central Excise
executive officers independent of cadre restructuring in 2013.
But very unfortunately, no measures have been taken till date even after 7
years to remove the stagnation of group ‘B’ executive officers in
CBIC despite of the approval of the
Cabinet. An organization specific
scheme is, therefore, required to be implemented
enabling Central Excise/CGST
Superintendents and Inspectors also attain Level-13 and above like the common
entry counterparts of CBDT, CSS, Customs etc. on account of getting salary even
less than the pension of their counterparts. This can be done by introduction
of flexible/dynamic promotion/complementing scheme.
This scheme was introduced in the Department of Science & Technology for
their employees to remove their stagnation. Such type of scheme was also
adopted by the Ministry of Health to remove the stagnation of employees.
Central Excise/CGST Superintendents are also forced to work under their extreme
juniors of Customs belonging to one & same cadre of Inspector and recruited
through one & same process under one & same organization
of CBIC 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 (Level-13) after getting 5 promotions whereas
the Central Excise Inspector of 1984 is yet to get IInd promotion to JTS post
of Asstt. Commissioner (Level-10). Thus, the problem of acute
stagnation existing in the cadre of Central Excise/CGST
Superintendent and Inspector can be solved, if a flexible complementary
promotional scheme (FCS) or dynamic assured career progression (DACP) scheme is
introduced for them. The DOPT vide Notification No. 2/41/97-Plc Dt. 09.11.98
made the regulation of in-situ promotions under Flexible Promotional Scheme for
Department of Science and Technology. It has been further reviewed by the
DOPT and modified Flexible Complementing Scheme guidelines were issued vide OM
No. AB/4017/37/2008-Esst(R) Dt. 10.09.10. It is also worth to submit that FCS
and MACPS both are also applicable simultaneously in the case of these
officers. Particularly keeping in view the extraordinarily acute
stagnation of Central Excise/CGST executive officers, it is
requested that the Central Excise/CGST
Superintendents & Inspectors may kindly
be granted (if 5
functional promotions are not possible)-
(a) At least 5 in-situ promotions in uniform promotional hierarchy (promotional hierarchy also varies from department/ministry to department/ministry) of functional promotions across all Ministries/departments of Govt. of
India under flexible/dynamic promotion/complementing scheme or
(b)
In-situ promotions/non-functional upgradation on completion of residency
periods as prescribed by DOPT under OM No. AB.14017/61/2008-Estt. (RR) Dt.
24.03.09 w.e.f. the joining as Inspector.
None
of the above measures would require any functional post to be created as in-situ
promotion requires merely to place in higher pay scale/s with higher
designation but working at lower post.
F. Implementation of
in-situ promotion scheme as approved in CBIC Board meeting of 18.02.11: Scheme has not been implemented by the CBIC despite of being
finalized more than 9½ years ago despite of repeated requests of the
Association. It is to submit 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. The
temporary posts of Asstt. Commissioner with the clause of no further promotion
are unable to do the required good to the problem and these
posts will lapse on 17.12.21. 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.
However,
the Association suggested service of total 24 years for the post of Deputy
Commissioner without any clause of five years of service as Assistant
Commissioner (in situ).
It
is requested to kindly implement the said scheme w.e.f.
date of its approval, i.e., 18.02.11 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 bring some other
scheme also to enable our officers entering Level-13 and above like the
counterparts of CBDT, CSS etc. Implementation of this scheme will
also remove a bit the regional intra and inter cadre disparities.
3. It is requested to give kind
consideration to the above points for due redressal for the sake of justice to
Central GST officers.
Thanking
you,
Yours
sincerely,
(HARPAL
SINGH),
Secretary
General.
