Friday, November 12, 2010

COPY OF CADRE RESTRUCTURING PROPOSALS

Posted by Secretary General on 10:16 PM with 65 comments
Even though it was difficult to scan the large volume of Cadre Restructuring Proposals and send the copy through mail, in the interest of all the members the AICEIA office bearers have taken lot of pain to scan the same and send it to all the Branches as well as Members through mail. All the Branches /Members are requested to study the same and give their valuable suggestions as early as possible.

Comradely yours
Kousik Roy

65 comments:

VP(North),AICEIA said...

Copy of Cadre Restructuring Proposals are also available in PDF form at AICEIA Rajasthan's blog and it is easy to print or download.
Blog address

www.aiceiarajasthan.blogspot.com

direct link
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B9wswpWRlr8OZTY2OGE0NjgtMDA1Zi00YmViLTlhNTEtYjFkYzk4YTBiMzRm&hl=en

regards
Lekhraj Meena,
Vice President(North)
AICEIA

P.Vigneshwar Raju General Secretary said...

Dear Comrade
The AICEIA is really started emerging as a leader in the entire CBEC. The efforts made by the top delegates of AICEIA are commendable.This is an example of power of joint movement. I hope all the other recognised Associations will join the Joint Action Committee so that the CBEC does not take us granted for all the purposes.

rajaguru said...

Dear leaders of AICEIA and Raju,
Is it fair on your part to publish the illegible scanned copy? Can't you present a readable and clear version? It is unfortunate to see this type of attitude. You want subscription from the members. You derive powers from the ordinary members, You expect that people should choose you instead of KP Rao. But you will not provide even a legible copy of the report. I honestly feel that KP Rao would have happily taken efforts to publish a clear copy of the report.

Manoj said...

None of the proposal of the AICEIA like Senior Time Scale or creation of 3000 AC/DC posts etc. accepted by the Board. Instead from the very beginning an impression has been created that the restructuring was basically meant for IRS officers and they have included Inspectors as if they are doing a big favour to them.When will these officers shed their attitude of Feudal Lord and we as cadre shed our attitude of subject. The department cann't exist without Inspectors/ Superintendents.And we are the most harassed.Rather we have taken this thing into our stride that we are not the citizens of free India and we are still ruled by these IRS officers. Please do something to change this attitude.Rest will follow.

P.Vigneshwar Raju General Secretary said...

Dear Rajaguru
It is true that the uploaded version of proposals may not be that clear. It is not fair on your part to criticise straitaway without knowing the fact how much struggle the leadership has made to obtain the copy. Is it not your responsibility at least to inform the same in a humble manner. If you want a better copy please give me your email I will mail a better copy in pdf format. Same way all those who are interested in getting a copy through mail kindly send your mail address to me to following mail.

hyd.cus@gmail.com

balu said...

Dear Mr. Rajaguru,

While I appreciate your curiosity and anxiety to know the proposals, please understand that the scanned copy has been provided on huge and unprecedented demand from all quarters across the country. If the hard copy provided by the DGHRD is not clear, how can you expect the scanned copy to be clearer than that.

Secondly, you feel that Mr.KP Rao is a better leader than your present leader, then you are looking for the information at the wrong place. While You have failed to appreciate the efforts and achievements of your leader, you are still trying to belittle him by comparing and criticising these very leaders.


I can agree that it is with the support of all the ordinary members that an association can fuction, but the leaders can do only as much that is possible and you cannot expect some magic from them everytime.

Please understand, that it is easy for someone to crticise, but it is very very difficult to create or do something fruitful without any concrete effort. If you can do it better, then do come forward and take the challenge of leading an association and take part in the activities instead of simply commenting as you wish.

Thanks and regards
Balu, Bangalore.

rajaguru said...

Dear Shri. Raju and Balu,
The intention is not to hurt anybody. I have got the highest regars, repeat highest regards, for Vigneshwar Raju. The expectation is that a synopsis should be published. That may not be very difficult.

I fail to understand, why the entire text cannot be typed for a charge of about Rs. 1000/- and published as a word document?

Karnail said...

All the supporters of KP Rao may see his sight. The man who can not write a sentence correctly and can not make a connection between the sentences is aspiring for formation of a National Association. When you are writing on a site which expected to be watched by the people around the world, at least you are expected to see the spellings are correct. I do not know that the so called supporters of icestea.com does know this fact.

BL Meena said...

Dear friends
I think it is not proper time to comment on office bearers or colleauges on the issue of copy of restructuring proposals.

I request all the colleauges to:- (i) study/analysis the proposals in depth, (ii) think respect & betterment of cadre, (iii)submit creative suggestions/proposals alongwith remedial action in common interest to remove the disparity & stagnation in promotions.

On the other hand I also request Mr Roy, SG to do his best efforts to compile all suggestions judiciously for justice to members of the AICEIA while replying to the HRD.
HE IS ALSO REQUESTED TO PUBLISH CONSOLIDATED REPLY ON BLOG BEFORE SUBMISSION TO THE AUTHORITIES.

Suggestions follows soon....
With regards

B L Meena, Jaipur

rajaguru said...

When reading of the text itself is not possible, how to offer comments? Unfortunately, AICEIA has not come forward to spend around Rs. 1500/- to get the entire matter typed. The attitude of AICEIA is mysterious. Is it a difficult task for Raju, who is undoubtedly a dynamic and efficient person? What is the real problem? Why we cannot publish a legible copy in the site itself?

balu said...

Dear Rajaguru,

I fail to understand this one demand of yours which you are insisting which is that a typed copy should be published. 24 hours have since passed after the proposal had been put online. However, you still keep complaining about the manner in which it is put and crying foul that something more needs to be done. It seems you will not be satisfied even if a very good hard copy is given to you, as you expect someone to come to you and explain or at least tell as to what is there in the proposal. You do not have the patience to go through the proposal that is why you keep complaining. Even Mr.Meena, who had requested for a typed copy has now appreciated the efforts of the leaders and requested everyone to send their comments.

However, you take the pleasure of still saying that the copy is not legible, some one should type and put up a synopsis.. really surprising indeed.

Balu, Bangalore

P.Vigneshwar Raju General Secretary said...

Dear Rajaguru
I have requested you to send your email so that I will send a legible copy of proposals. So far two people have requested including BL Meena and I have sent them a legible copy. It is not the question of Rs.1500 or any thing else.Probably your intention seems to be something else.If you are really interested definitely you will find a way to understand.

BL Meena said...

At this crucial period the administrtor may now allow any comments on the blog. except suggestions on the proposals for betterment & justice for cadre.

Dear Rajguru : Plz be patient & go through the proposals. The time is to understand mentality of IRS lobby and not for ''mai to wohi khilona loonga... ... ..''
We will raise our voice against in-justice on proper time & stage if our suggestions/genuine demands are not accepted.

Plz now analysis proposals & suggestions on the issues.
With regards
B L Meena, Jaipur

rajaguru said...

As against 1550 posts of AC/DC, 5146 posts of AC/DC would be created, which includes 250 reserve posts of AC. The increase would be 3596 posts.These posts are to be shared amongst the feeder cadres viz. Supdts of CE/Customs and Appraisers.

4245 Group B officers will be elevated to the grade of AC. Half of the officers promoted as Superintendents in 1997 (DR Inspectors during 1980-81), some of the officers promoted as Supdt of Customs in 2001(1986 batch Preventive officer) and all the Appraisers who had completed the qualifying service of 3 years would become AC.

As against 13948 posts of Supdts of CE/Customs and Appraisers, 21585 posts would be created, resulting in increase of 7637 posts.These posts are to be shared amongst the feeder cadres viz. Inspectors of CE/Customs and Examiners. The vacuum of 4245 created due to the promotion of Supdts of CE/Customs and Appraisers and the additional posts of 7637 (Total: 11882 posts) would be available for Insprs of CE/Customs and Examiners.

As against 20163 posts of Insprs of CE/Customs and Examiners, 31104 posts would be created, resulting in increase of 10941 posts.These posts are to be shared amongst the feeder cadres by Central Excise and Customs ministerial officers.

rajaguru said...

18 IRS officers of 1975 batch will become Principal Chief Commissioners (new post carrying pay band of Rs. 80,000/). Is there any justification for the creation of these posts with a vast empire?

As against 47 posts of CC, 77 posts would be created (1979 batch will be benefited). As against 295 posts of Commissioner, 465 posts would be created (1993 batch will be benefited). As against 80 posts of JC , 1026 JC+ADC posts would be created.

Financial implication for the 3346+250 additional posts of AC, has been shown as Rs. 1,51,21,89,567/- Plus Rs. 10,43,07,750/- (Total: Rs.1,61,64,97,317/- ie: Rs. 161.65 Crores). Similarly, Financial implication for the 7637 additional posts of Supdts, has been shown as Rs. 3,14,18,54,163/- ie: Rs. 314.19 Crores). Total amount involved is Rs 476 Crores.

Considering the fact that a majority of the Inspectors due to get elevated as Supdts and all the supdts due to get elevated as ACs had already earned MACPS, there will not be any financial implication. The financial implication can arise only in the case of Examiners and Appraisers moving to the next levels.

Instead of segregating the cadres of Central Excise and customs, the proposal attempts bring the three feeder streams under one roof to create an impression that the benefit is enjoyed uniformly by all the stakeholders. It is not correct.

While the case for revision of ratio for promotion to AC amongst the three feeder cadres is pending in the Supreme court, the Board attempts to push the proposal based on the old formula, which is contrary to its own assurance given to the Apex court.

rajaguru said...

Please see the earlier write up in www.cengokerala.org as follows: "We are going to get around 4250 promotional psts of AC/DC for us which includes cascading ones also.
They are also considering the possibility of change in promotion quota prescribed for three different feeder grades at JTS level of IRS (C&CE), combined length of service of Inspector + Superintendent grade for promotion to IRS (C&CE), enhancement of promotion quota from existing 50% to 75%, promotion of Group ‘B’ Executive grades directly to Senior Time Scale in IRS (if accepted by the Government, they would give benefit of 4-5 years to the Superintendent grade officers for service rendered in Group ‘B’ Executive grade.), promotion of all the Superintendent level officers completing one & half times of qualifying service to the grade of Assistant Commissioner in IRS (C&CE)". How the Board had created an impression that they are going to help the cadres, but shown the real face while making the proposal.

We cannot expect justice from IRS. We should demand that the cadre restructuring proposal should be dealt by IAS officers.

rajaguru said...

The following demands of the Federations are either rejected or delinked from cadre restructuring exercise:
1.Board has not accepted the suggestion that the Divisions should be manned by JC/ADC.
2.Board has delinked the suggestion for reduction of Direct recruit IRS to 25% from the existing 50%
3.Board has rejected the suggestion for creation of a separate adjudication set up at Commissionerate and Divisional level.
4.Board has delinked the suggestion for heading of Audit teams by AC/DC.
5.Board rejected the suggestion for enhancement of quota for ministerial grades for promotion to Appraisers to 10%.
6.Board has rejected the suggestion of enhancement of promotion quota in the Inspr cadre
7.Board has delinked the demand for promotion of Supdts who had completed one and half years of qualifying service to the post of
AC
8. Board has rejected the demand for creation of more than 3000 posts of AC/DC on the grounds that the study groups had recommended creation of only 1671 posts.
9.Recommendations of the High Powered committee delinked.
10.Demand for removal of regional imbalance in promotional prospects of insprs of CE not considered.
11.Revision of 6:1:2 formula for promotion to the grade of AC not considered.
12.Delayering of functional distinction between Inspector&Supdt not considered.
13.Demand for placing of supdts on promotion to IRS in the senior Time scale not considered.
14.Representation of cases before Commissioner (A) by AC/DC not considered.

Biju K. Jacob said...

The Association may urgently explore the feasibility to file a rejoinder before Supreme Court, for re-fixation of the ratio of promotion to AC before the implementation of cadre restructuring.

das said...

The remedy for removing the growing disparity faced in promotion prospects among Customs cadres vis-a-vis Central Excise cadres lies in making the date of initial joining in the feeder cadre as criteria for promotion to the next cadre. This will meet the ends of justice and help to remove the disparity once for all. Our collective endevour should be to convince the Hon.ble FM.

E.Krishnadas

rajaguru said...

SHOULD THE INSPECTORS OF CENTRAL EXCISE WORK AS SUBORDINATE OFFICERS TO THE JUNIOR MOST PREVENTIVE OFFICERS OF CUSTOMS AND EXAMINERS OF CUSTOMS???? It is already happening. It will be in higher magnitude, after the cadre restructuring in its present form. Cadres and Association leaders should wake up now.

SUDHIR said...

I agree with Mr. Das. Length of service should be the criteria for promotion as insisted upon by the Superintendents Association. The IRS Association feels that there is stagnation in their cadre as they become commissioner after 21 years whereas it is 17 years for other central services. When they are considering comparison with other services for themselves, why they are not accepting the same for us.

rajaguru said...

Why there is minimal reaction from the members on Cadre review report when there is a gross injustice meted out to the Officers of Central Excise?

srinivasan said...

Never accept this proposal of restructing without deciding the ratio of promotions between appraisers, superintedent preventive and superintendent central excise inspectors. Further there are inspectors of central excise of 1992-93 batch yet to be promoted as superintedent. whereas the same batch superintendents of 1992-93 are going tobe promoted as assistant commissioner. ask the board to deveise a policy for those inspectors of central excise of atleast 1992-93 batch who get promotion as superintendent in this restructruing proposal gets promotion of ac immediately after completing the 3 years service. The vacancies may be kept pending till they complete their services. So that we will have parity among our own brothers of different cadre controlling comissionerate.

Srinivasan
Inspector central excise 1994 batch.

P.Vigneshwar Raju General Secretary said...

This is the fate of Shillong Inspectors. What a pity.

Year No. Service
1986 23 24
1987 18 23
1988 21 22
1989 46 21
1990 24 20
1991 22 19
1992 24 18
1993 17 17
1994 55 16
1995 29 15
1996 28 14
1997 25 13
1998 NIL NIL
1999 01 11
2000 38 10

rajaguru said...

After the cadre restructuring, 1982 batch Inspectors (now Supdts) will have to salute 2000 batch Examiners as they will become ACs. They were not even born when we joined the Department. Can you see anywhere in the world senior officer saluting junior most officers by two decades?

srinivasan said...

If somthing is not done at this point of time, then we have to wait for our next promotion for another restructuring proposals.

harizon said...

very fun as agony that they,the customs peoples are adjusted/posted in central excise while they are getting promotion .we should boycot this restructuring to demand 3 to 4 promotion within 20 years service like direct IRS as well as ministrial staff .

Bhagwan Singh said...

Nothing except some direct action can ensure justice to inspector cadre. So the Zones where stagnation is much more should take the lead. Better the AICEIA chalks out a concrete programme and intimates the CBEC and FM about the resentment in our cadre.

God save us from the blind and selfish administrators.

Jai Hind.

sanjay said...

After going through the cadre restructuring proposal, we see that the IRS cadre, an interested party, has again played its tricks by lamenting for themselves. Therefore, cadre review excercise must be done by an independent third party such as by IIM or IAS officer.

SUDHIR said...

Chapter 16 – Restructuring of Cadres

The present proposal would lead to major restructuring of all the officers and staff cadres in the Department. However, following three major beneficiary cadres of the proposal are:
(i) Indian Revenue Service (C&CE)
(ii) Stenographers Grade
(iii) Official Language Posts under CBEC

Taking into account the acute stagnation in the cadre of Inspector, Central Excise, which led to the formation of High Power Committee, it should have been included in the list of major beneficiary cadres.

Further, from the chart illustrating the impact of cadre restructuring on career advancement in various grades, it appears that all the eligible officers will be promoted to the next grade except the following:
i. Superintendent, Central Excise
ii. Superintendent Customs(P)
iii. Inspector, Central Excise
iv. Preventive Officer

The Inspector, Central Excise, already a beleaguered lot, is left out to face further all India disparity in promotion within the cadre, leave alone the promotion at par with other central services.

rajaguru said...

We should understand that our problem is not stagnation. The real problem which requires solution is that we are forced to be subordinate officers to the junior most officers belonging to Customs as they have all the powers to influence the CBEC for their prospects.

Bhagwan Singh said...

Our cadre is the worst sufferer on account of stagnation, we have suffered for 18 to 20 years. We should have patience, the babus in the CBEC cannot work in the field instead of inspectors, the govt can not afford to stagnate the cadre of inspectors more if they are serious to implement the GST. Hence, we should reject the restructuring ....(....dee...structuring as far as our cadre is oncerned) proposal. The only solution which is practical, logical, justicious, and efficacious is the promotion based on all india seniority on the basis of length of service, giving benefit of some sort to the senior inspectors, and keeping the zonal transferability. However, this appears to not on the agenda of CBEC people, who want to keep our cadre divided to fulfill their nefarious designs as ever.

Bhagwan Singh said...

Moreover, what about the LTHRP of the CBEC for which proposal has been sent by AICEIA also, does it have any meaning or effect on the CR exercise, or will it remain merely an exercise to be show-cased and remain un-enforced.

BL Meena said...

Dear Comrades

After analysis of the proposals of CR-2010 it has observed that:-

(i)If present proposals are accepted as it, total 11882 (7637+4245) posts will be available for promotion to the next grade among three cadres of Examiner, PO & CE Inspector. The maxmium posts will be filled up by Examiners, POs and CE Inspectors of Delhi, Maharasthra, Gujarat etc. It appears that Inspectors upto batch of 1993 will only be promoted in Rajasthan.

(ii)Maximum CE Inspector had already earned ACP/MACP therefore, the 96% financial implication will apply in case of promotion of Examiners.

(iii)If the present proposals are accepted as it, regional disparity will also increase in CE Inspectors whereas in Delhi Commissionerates Inspectors will request to the CBEC for relaxation in qualifying service of 8 yrs becoz Inspectors with qualifying service will not be available to fill up the post of Superintendent. Whereas in the other Zones/States Inspectors of 15yrs will have no option except to wait for promotion upto the next Cadre Review-2020.
No effort/proposal (except sympathy)seen to remove regional disparity in promotion of CE Inspectors and even recommendations of the High Powered Committee have not been considered in proposals.

(iv)The present proposals will further increase anomalies in promotion of Customs V/s. CE cadres becoz CE Inspr of 1982 (now Supdt) will have to salute Examiner of 2000 batch. What a pity condition of CE Inspectors ? The almighty can only save us from the blind, deaf & selfish IRS Administrators.

(v) The representative of AICEIA Rajasthan Circle remained lazy that is why the HRD has ignored bifurcation of Jodhpur Customs (P) Commissionerate. The bifurcation of Amritsar Cus (P) Comm'te is a good example and the representatives of AICEIA Chandigarh Circle are really deserves for congratulations for their activeness. If sincere efforts were made, one ST Comm'te will also be proposed in Rajasthan looking growth of ST sector.

SUGGESTIONS:-

1.The remedy to remove the growing disparity in promotion among cadres of Examiner, PO & CE Inspector lies only in making the date of joining in feeder cadre as criteria for promotion to the next grade. This only can meet the ends of justice and help to remove the disparity once for all.

2.For implementation of the above suggestion, Inter Zone transfer policy can be made on promotion to the grade of Superintendent in adjoining Zones with provision to return in the parental Zone on
FIFO method.

3.Sincere & continuous efforts should be made considering the following facts/grounds for creation an integrated Customs Commissionerate at Jaipur:-

(due to space problem remaining material may plz see on next comments)

B.L. Meena,
Inspector, JAIPUR

BL Meena said...

contd... from my last page

3.Sincere & continuous efforts should be made considering the following facts/grounds for creation an integrated Customs Commissionerate at Jaipur:-

The HRD has proposed re-organization of Delhi Customs (P) Zone by bifurcating Amritsar Customs (P) Commissionerate to create a Customs Commissionerate at Ludhiana on the ground that apart from attending to the Customs Preventive functions, Amritsar Commissionerate also handle assessment functions as well as clearance of passenger at railhead of Attari.

It is a good proposal in light of strengthening of the Human Resources of the department in order to handle the workload increase as well as challenge to use IT, but the HRD has ignored situation of Jodhpur Customs (P) Commissionerate on the similar line of action.

Grounds for bifurcation of Jodhpur Customs (P) Commissionerate and to create an integrated Customs Commissionerate at Jaipur:-

1.The state of Rajasthan having the largest typical area of 3,42,239 square km in India alongwith vast & highly vulnerable Indo-Pak Border of 1077 km. therefore, Jodhpur Customs (P) Commissionerate was created under Delhi Customs (P) Zone.

2.Jodhpur Customs (P) Commissionerate was initially created for preventive functions, but the workload of this Commissionerate has significantly increased and the same is being handled by workforce on the basis of old sanctioned strength.

3.Apart from attending to the Customs Preventive functions, present Jodhpur Customs (P) Commissionerate also handling work of examination & assessment of 9 ICDs, 1 Air Cargo, 1 Foreign Post Office and, 1 Jems & Jewelry Exchange as well as clearance of passenger at railhead of Munnabao (Barmer) and at International Airport, Jaipur.

4.It is also pertinent to mention here that additional workforce was not sanctioned at the time of opening International Airport, Jaipur and Land Customs Station, Munnabao (Barmer).

5.Jodhpur Customd (P) Commissionerate has collected Customs duty amounting to Rs. 116.41 Crores, handled 79379 (65847+13532) S/Bs & B/Es, cleared incoming & outgoing 37,666(19734+17932) passengers at Land Customs Station, Munnabao (Barmer) and 2,50,400(128648+124752) passengers at International Airport, Jaipur during the year 2009-10.
Apart from the above executive workforce of Jodhpur Customs (P) Commissionerate has handled examination & assessment work of ????? (data are being collected) factory stuffed containers for export of the goods.

6.Jaipur is a nearest city to the national capital Delhi and IGI Airport, New Delhi that is why that International Airport, Jaipur is also functioning as an alternative International Airport of IGI, New Delhi due to- (i) weather & others problems in Delhi and, (ii) centre place of historical Rajasthan Truism. Thus landing of International flights at International Airport, jaipur are being increased day by day, which is resulting in increase the workload of erstwhile Jodhpur Customs (P) Commissionerate.

7.As admitted by the HRD in CR 2010 proposals that re-organization of Customs (P) formation can not be done on the basis of quantifiable parameters and the same has to be done keeping in view the vulnerability of geographical regions over which the formation exercise jurisdiction. Further Customs (P) Commissionerate should be organized that their main focus remains customs preventive related functions.

In view of above there is an immediate requirement to bifurcate Jodhpur Customs (P) Commissionerate creating an integrated Customs Commissionerate at Jaipur with jurisdiction over all revenue generating Customs formation of Rajasthan. This act of HRD will also fulfill the very main purpose of Jodhpur Customs (P) Commissionerate because presently most of the sanctioned workforce of this Commissionerate has been diluted in revenue collection related functions.

With regards & fond hope of immediate action for justice.

B.L. Meena, Inspector, JAIPUR.

P.Vigneshwar Raju General Secretary said...

I fully agree with Com.B.L.Meena. Really you have taken lot of pain to collect the data and project your problem. The proposal made by you in regard to removal of stagnation is welcome. Once the promotions are issued on the basis of length of service, the regional imbalances can be removed by adjusting the posts with adjoining Zones and can be brought back on the basis FIFO. This is a good proposal. If this is not done leave alone the Customs people, we may have to salute to our own juniors who will be posted as AC from the area of quick promotions like Delhi. I request the AICEIA leaders to look into the proposals made by Com. B.L.Meena above.

pavan kumar reddy said...

Dear Comrades,

Like the previous cadre restructuring, the present cadre restructuring is also by the IRS,for the IRS and of the IRS.
1. 1993 Batch IRS officer will become Commissioner(Grade-I) or CC, whereas 1993 batch Inspector may still have to await for his first promotion in some areas even after the present exercise.
2. Where is the necessity to have Pr.CC and Commissioner Grade-I and II posts.

3. The financial outgo in real terms will be only in case of promotions of IRS, whereas for Group-B, it is only notional as we already enjoying whatever benefits.
4. Out of around four thousand AC DC posts available, after reserving 50% for DR quota, the balance have to be shared by Supdt, Appraisers and Supdts (Customs). What a pity.
5. It is incongrous and incompatible that we i.e. Examiners, Inspectors-CE and POs are recruited by same agency, with same syllabus and are governmed by same Board, why to have seperate track of promotions benefitting a neglligible but powerful lot and discriminating but hapless majority.
6. What is sacrosanct about these Customs cadres as not to merge these cadre with CE and make a single, viable and unified Group-B cadre in CBEC. What has happened to the Resolution of the Board in 1999 or 1998 about such merger.
7. Let us demand for such merger instead of cribbling about change of ratio of 6:2:1.
8.Let us demand for reserving of all the 4000 or so posts of AC/DCs to the promotee quota as a one time measure.
9. Board's decision to create service tax commissionerate for Rs. 3000 crores of ST revenue and/or assesses base of 17500 or more will entitle Hyderabad Zone to have one more ST Commissionerate instead of one as the ST assesses base of Hyderabad Zone is more than 36000.Clearly Hydeabad is discriminated again,as usual.
10. One Customs Commissionerate for Airport and ACC is proposed in Hyderabad. But Board in it's proposals in one page says that it will be attached to Vizag Customs Zone and in another page it says that it will be attached to any one of the two zones of Hyderabad. It should be attached to any one of the two Hyderabad Zones for administrative and geographical convenience and all the posts of Superintendents and Inspectors should be allotted to Central Exicse only since this is only land customs and all along it is being managed by Central Officers only.
11. Board is silent about posts allotted to SEZs. Whether the posts alloted to SEZs as on date will be absorbed into the present sanctioned strength of each cadre.
12. Why not all Directorates like DRI, DGCEI, DG-Inspections, NACEN, and Commissioner(Appeals), Pr.CC office, CC office, Commissioner -Adjudication have their own sanctioned posts of Group-B instead of drawing from executive Commoissionerates. Whereas, all thesse Directorates and other formations have the sanctioned strength for IRS Officers, why not the same yardstick is applied in case of Group-B.
13. 65 CE Zones are proposed. AS per the proposals every CE or ST Zone will have one Audit Commisisonerate. Whereas Board proposes only 45 Audit Commissionerates for 65 Zones, what about the balance 20 audit Commissionerates.
President and SG may take note of these points while replying to the Board.
B.P.K.Reddy, Hyderabad

Nair said...

Once again I reiterate. We are not going to get any justice from these IRS (I Remain Safe)groups. Reject all those restructuring proposals and demand a new proposal to be formulated by a group of IAS Officers. Also strongly demand a CBEC Comprising of IAS Officers only. Take the help of IAS lobby, which is a long standing demand of IAS that all the 'Boards' to be headed by IAS Offices. It may be recalled that the Board was reluctant to give a copy of the proposal for restructuring to the Association lest the interference of the Revenue Secretary. They were befooling us with some proposals as published in Cengo kerala. Be careful and beware of these mad dogs

balu said...

Dear Mr.Pavan Kumar Reddy and Nair,

I am in full agreement with both your comments. As regards the query of Mr.PK Reddy, why only 45 audit commissionerates are proposed in place of 65 zones, it is clarified that only Central Excise and SErvice Tax zones will have Audit Commissionerates, which work to 45. The remaining 20 are Customs zones, which do not have audit commissionerates.

As regards your suggestion on a separate cadre strength for directorates is concerned, they have recommended a separate strength in the end after the copy of the minutes of the BOard meeting, on the ground that there cannot be any standard staffing norms for these directorates.

Another point to be noted is that though they have sanctioned 3 posts of CC for LTU and 5 posts of Commisioner for that, there is no staff allocation proposed for such a set up. It is not clear as to whether this will be diverted from the existing zones itself.. If that is the case, then there are going to be serious problems, as is the case with SEZ posts..

Thirdly it is really surprising that after making a standard staff norms are proposed and the totals arrived at after which abolishing of 6906 posts is being made, which leads to the conclusion, that the standard staffing norms is only for name sake and the staff allocation will be according to their wishes only.

The only way to solve the regional disparity would only be to amend the recruitment rules to have the date of entry into service relevant for promotion to the grade of AC..

These are my personal views..

regards
Balu, Bangalore

Nair said...

All Direct Recruit Inspectors possess the same qualification as that of an IRS.
Unluckily these fools got IRS and we did not and they got more administrative experience because of their post (Where we lack). We were made to toil as executive pigs with one promotion through out the tenure of 30-35 years of service. The present day IRS live by sucking the blood of poor Inspectors and Superintendents. Still being not happy, they want to become commissioner after seventeen years of service (Four Jumps). I propose-1-Reject the present restructuring proposal. 2-Serve notice to all relevant Authorities regarding the proposed action and injustice meted out to these qualified pigs (Inspectors & Supdts.). 3-Give wide coverage in the media. 4- Educate the public regarding wastage of public money in paying these unproductive IRS with unwanted decorative posts. 5-Show the public about the heirachy of state service where sale tax is administered. 5- Discontinue or minimise the direct Civil Service IRs to 25%. 6- Tell the public that an order-in original (OIO)passed (Signed and issued)by a commissioner having unlimited value (Crores of Rupees)is prepared by an Inspector/Superintendent and hence these qualified and experienced lots need to be given benefits (promoted). 7- Stop the leader's internal fighting and unite together to achieve the goal. 8- Finally we need a Board of IAS Officers only.

Shiwalik said...

Before going to this Harakiri i e cadre review, the suicidal note must contain these issues.
(a) An independent agency/committee was to be appointed for the exercise of cadre review in the name & style of launching of GST and should be headed by either an IAS or IIM faculty.
(b) Terms & conditions should be prepared with the consultation of all staff and should be made public before a debate on it.
(c) If you accepted the fact that ‘beggars are not choosers’ then please beg before a person who is having heart but not before a tyrant.
(d) Neither court cases nor associations brought any path breaking results but it is an appropriate time for turning the peanuts into pearls as the launching of GST is going to be supervised by IAS only. Stakes are very high and time is right for approach of Karo yaa Maro (do or die).
P.S. : - Aage kuan peeche khaai (remember IAS in front and IRS in back)

pavan kumar reddy said...

Com Balu,

I agree with you that only 45 CE/ST Zones are proposed and remaining 20 zones are exclusive Customs Zones which do not have audit commissionerates. This error has crept in inadvertently. I have not included this point in my suggestions
in the Forum for Suggestions on cadre restructuring proposals. Regarding staffing norms, though it is there in the Board's Minutes, I am afraid, it is not included in the main Restructuring Proposals.

Nair said...

See the above comments. Why all are silent. Come out and support or object and give the strength to our Association. Are we still ready to accept the peanuts proposed in the restructuring proposal. Unite and fight peacefully.Let our sound heard in the corridoors of authority.

RAM said...

In our department only sepoys who joined prior to 80s are all IRS offiocers are getting 7 promotions intheir life span of service. the inspectors are NOT got having any IQ than IRS officers

Sri Malay said...

what are prospects of the Inspectors of West Bengal/ Andaman/ Sikkim zone in this proposed restructuring ? Could some one throw some light on this!

vengat said...

In this regard i wish to point out two things.
i feel they have not included the revenue of ltu for arriving at zonal revenue. if the separate staff strength is not sanctioned. then the revenue of the LTU should be included in the zonal revenue for arriving at the commissionerate numbers for that zone.

In states, sales tax setup is headed by IAS. they may not like to have IRS as their equals or their bosses. Hence, through that lobby we should sort them out.

Balaji said...

Since Audit Commissionerates are exclusively meant for Excise and ST Commissionerates, Appraisers and Customs Superintendets should not have any share in the 1800 posts of Assistant Commissioners to be posted in Audit Commssionerates. Appraisers and Supdt(Cus) should not be considered for promotion against these newly created posts and that these posts should be reserved for Central Excise cadre only. I am forced to write these comments because the Board is adamant in not revising the ratio 6:1:2 and not in favour of merger also. If we do not demand this we will have to loose 900 posts of AC. In the recent years there is no direct recruitment in the cadre of Appraisers, i.e. all the appraisers are only promotee officers promoted from PO or EO. In such a situation what makes the Board to consider the appraisers SUPERIOR TO Central Excise Officers and to accord them a special status depriving the promotions to Central Excise Officers?

balu said...

Dear Balaji,

I too agree with your suggestion.. It is really worth taking this argument to the logical conclusion. Hope the association is taking note of this crucial point as well.

regards
Balu, Bangalore

rajaguru said...

I am very happy to see the spirit of the officers in every comment displayed above. I am very confident that we will certainly win our case, IF THE ASSOCIATION LEADERSHIP ALSO HAS GOT THE SAME SPIRIT. As usual, members are boiling, but association leadership remains cool.

The lukewarm response of AICEIA is evident from the fact that it had bluntly refused to publish a readable format of the cadre restructuring proposal, whereas ministerial officers had taken pains to publish the relevant contents in readable word format.

Unfortunately, AICEIA is not interested in reacting to a situation as the members do. Even the efficient Mr. Vigneshwar Raju gets hurt when we point out the lukewarm approach and adamant attitude of AICEIA. What to do???

Manoj said...

I fully agree with the comments of Sh. Nair. Rather I want to add that it is not only the IRS breed which is spoiling our chances for further promotion but even a few of our learned colleagues who write the adjudication orders or draft other letters feel proud of the fact that they are being recognized by this breed. If we start working to rule, you people will find that no adjudication order has been passed by the Adjudicating Authorityy or no Appellate Order has been passed by the Commissioner (Appeal). We wish the IRS breed to see the reason and further our cause but we forget that unless we resist them why should they give us any benefit.First of all we should request our brothers in the department that they should not write the Adjudication / Appellate Orders.Then only we can publicise it . I also propose that to show this IRS breed their place we should stop calling "SIR" to them instead we call them as Mr........( By using Sirname). If budget time can be changed from 4:45 pm to 10:00am why can not we do it. Think and then please do react.

insp said...

In its report, the Standing Committee on Finance for 2005-06 has observed that in CBEC, the posts of Chief Commissioner have been increased by 123.80% and at the level of Inspector, there has been a decrease of 14.32%. This exercise, in the Committee's view, has made the top slots heavy, and negligible or even negative growth in the number of posts at the cutting edge levels like that of Inspectors, Income Tax Officers, Superintendents and Custom Appraisers. This, the Committee feel, may further worsen the much-felt shortage of work force at these levels leading to serious problems in the overall functioning of the two departments. The Committee note that the Government have now started taking measures to fill up these gaps. Nevertheless, the Committee are led to the conclusion that the restructuring proposal was done in a manner, that chose to ignore the requirements at the middle and lower level of the functionaries, resulting in continuation of shortage of manpower. The Committee, therefore, recommend the Government to again assess the present structure of the department under both the Boards carefully and set right the anomalies that have creeped up as a result of restructuring.

insp said...

On the previous restructuring,i.e in 2002the Standing Committee on Finance for 2005-06 has has collected the details regarding increase/ decrease in the number of posts at all the levels (from the level of Inspector to Chief Commissioner) due to restructuring of the Department were furnished as follows:—
Chief Commissioner- 123.80%
Commissioner- 97.94%
Additional Commissioner 54.63%
Joint Commissioner 187.50%
Deputy Commissioner 25.62%
Assistant Commissioner 74.39%
Superintendent of CE 70.75%
Superintendent Cus Prev 41.23%
Appraiser 12.05%
Inspector of CE -14.32%
Examiner -17.54%
Preventive Officer -19.31%
CAO -278.05%
AO/ACAO/EA 66.43%
Sr. PS 123.81%
PS 181.55%

For complete information on this subject please visit AICEIA, Vizag website: www.inspvizag.org
R. PRABHAKAR, G.S AICEIA, VIZAG

vengat said...

The creation of audit commissionerate is also for auditing of customs also.hence, we should not say that it is for excise and serivce tax. However, it will be in the zones of excise and service tax.

Bhagwan Singh said...

DRAWBACKS OF THE RESTRUCTURING PROPOSAL:

1. AMBIGUITY REGARDING PROMOTION OF GROUP B OFFICERS ( EXECUTIVE) TO AC GRADE : 4225 OFFICERS TO BE PROMOTED “PROVIDED ALL THE POSTS ARE FILLED BY WAY OF PROMOTION ?
2. Point No.1 read with chart showing the impact of restructuring on the various cadres : Supdts of CE Qualification service 3 years, 1992-93 Batches likely to be promoted. And the fact that the demand of the Supdts Association for reduction of direct recruitment quota in Group A entry level from 50% to 25% has been delinked from the CR and their demand for promoting all the Supdts with one and half times qualifying service as AC has not been accepted and delinked from restructuring exercise. Hence, the assertion in the proposal that Supdts upto 1997 may be promoted as a result of restructuring is devoid of any merit, baseless and misleading. The study conducted by the HRD and its Groups does not appear to be comprehensive and proper.
3. Even assuming that 2112 posts out of 4225 will be promoted from Supdt cadres, the Supdts likely to be promoted will retire within 2-3 years and hence, the resultant vacancies will go to direct recruits to the extent of 50%. Thus, within next 3 years, only 1006 posts will be available. Again if these 1006 posts are filled by pronotions, the same will be result after another 2-3 years, leading to negligible promotional posts after 8-9 years. On the contrary, the numbers of Group B Gazetted officers will increase ( likely to be doubled in the GST regime and will also unduly tax the cadres for unproportionate increase in the workload as the assessee base is likely to increase by 10-15 times). Hence, the decreasing number of vacancies in the Group A for increasing number of Group B Gazetted officers will worsen the position rather than ameliorating the situation. The stagnation in the Group B gazetted cadres will be perpetuated.
...continued....

Bhagwan Singh said...

4. There are no chances of Supdts getting promotion particularly in the Zones where the stagnation is more pronounced. The worst affected will be CE Executive Officers, especially Superintendent cadre, who are already suffers of acute stagnation in some zones as the officers of the zones ahead in promotion and much junior in age will be their seniors and there will be no vacancies on account of retirement in Group A.
5. The expenditure of 394 crores on the Group B gazetted officer is misleading in as much as all the inspectors likely to be promoted as already drawing salary of Superintendent. Only expenditure on the Grup B gazetted officers is likely to be on account of promotion of Examiners, whose qualifying service is only 3 years. Acknowledging that the strength of the Executive officers Group B have been worked out consider the workload, the CBEC still proposes to reduce their number by 3200+ posts in order to appease the Expenditure/Govt of India to reduce the expenditure by 116 crores per annum out of the total expenditure to be incurred on account of upgradation/promotions/additional vacancies in senior Group A grades.
6. The demand of AICEIA for promotion based on the length of service has not been accepted.
7. The Bhardwaj committee on the merger of analogous cadres not considered. The motives of the CBEC is not implementing the said report, which even does not find a mention in the CR proposal are evidently clear. In the era of falling morals and high corruption, they do not want to displease their blue eyed cadres of Customs. Hence, the report is gathering dust.

8. The reduction of 3200 posts of Inpsectors not justified in view of the expanding assessee base/revenue/workload, especially in view of the fact that the ACES has not resulted in lowring the workload as admitted in the CR proposal. The proposal is only to reduce the expenditure on account of increase in the higher posts of Commissioners/Chief Commissioners/Principal chief Commissioners, which are not administratively justified. The only workforce in the Department is Group B Execujive cadres and junior Group A posts. The senior officers are just parasites. Except a few, none of the senior Group A Officer is working themselves on their ACES modules. The number of supervisory posts of Group A is already much more than desired.
9. IRS people want parity with the other Group A Services. They are not satisfied even 5 promotions : Ac to DC to JC to ADC to Commr in 20 years. What about the legitimate demand of our cadres who get only one promotion in 35 years service span. Having same qualfications, same SSC exam, same ministry of finance, our counter-parts in the CBDT are retiring as Additional Commissioners/Commisioners. Does our demand for parity with those officers is not much more justified? Or Are these administrators not too selfish and lack sensitivity.
....continued.....

Bhagwan Singh said...

4. There are no chances of Supdts getting promotion particularly in the Zones where the stagnation is more pronounced. The worst affected will be CE Executive Officers, especially Superintendent cadre, who are already suffers of acute stagnation in some zones as the officers of the zones ahead in promotion and much junior in age will be their seniors and there will be no vacancies on account of retirement in Group A.
5. The expenditure of 394 crores on the Group B gazetted officer is misleading in as much as all the inspectors likely to be promoted as already drawing salary of Superintendent. Only expenditure on the Grup B gazetted officers is likely to be on account of promotion of Examiners, whose qualifying service is only 3 years. Acknowledging that the strength of the Executive officers Group B have been worked out consider the workload, the CBEC still proposes to reduce their number by 3200+ posts in order to appease the Expenditure/Govt of India to reduce the expenditure by 116 crores per annum out of the total expenditure to be incurred on account of upgradation/promotions/additional vacancies in senior Group A grades.
6. The demand of AICEIA for promotion based on the length of service has not been accepted.
7. The Bhardwaj committee on the merger of analogous cadres not considered. The motives of the CBEC is not implementing the said report, which even does not find a mention in the CR proposal are evidently clear. In the era of falling morals and high corruption, they do not want to displease their blue eyed cadres of Customs. Hence, the report is gathering dust.
....continued....

Bhagwan Singh said...

8. The reduction of 3200 posts of Inpsectors not justified in view of the expanding assessee base/revenue/workload, especially in view of the fact that the ACES has not resulted in lowring the workload as admitted in the CR proposal. The proposal is only to reduce the expenditure on account of increase in the higher posts of Commissioners/Chief Commissioners/Principal chief Commissioners, which are not administratively justified. The only workforce in the Department is Group B Execujive cadres and junior Group A posts. The senior officers are just parasites. Except a few, none of the senior Group A Officer is working themselves on their ACES modules. The number of supervisory posts of Group A is already much more than desired.
9. IRS people want parity with the other Group A Services. They are not satisfied even 5 promotions : Ac to DC to JC to ADC to Commr in 20 years. What about the legitimate demand of our cadres who get only one promotion in 35 years service span. Having same qualfications, same SSC exam, same ministry of finance, our counter-parts in the CBDT are retiring as Additional Commissioners/Commisioners. Does our demand for parity with those officers is not much more justified? Or Are these administrators not too selfish and lack sensitivity.
....continued....

Bhagwan Singh said...

What we should demand : -

1. 50% of the posts in all the grades up to the rank of Commissioner should be reserved for feeder cadres;
2. All the analogous cadres should be merged with retrospective effect;
3. The promotion on the basis of length of service should be ordered;
4. The study should be conducted afresh by the teams consisting of eminent persons from IIMs and staff representatives should be included in the study..
5. There should be no reduction in the strength of Group B Executive officers.
6. All the posts in group A should be filled in by promotion only as onetime measure
7. The quota of direct and promotees in the Group A should be re-fixed as 25:75.
8. Separate organized service on the pattern of CSS and DANICs/DANIPs be introduced.
9. The Inpectors who have completed more than 11 years of service ( 8 years to qualify for 1st promotion to supdt and 3 years from Supdt to AC) should be given some sort of relief. This is justified especially as the IRS officers are not satisfied with the four promotions upto the level of commissioner in less than 20 years.
Recourse to legal remedy to stay the CR exercise if the legitimate aspirations of our cadres are not accepted, may be explored.

Direct action should be taken to get our genuine demands redressed.
....continued....

Bhagwan Singh said...

What we should demand : -

1. 50% of the posts in all the grades up to the rank of Commissioner should be reserved for feeder cadres;
2. All the analogous cadres should be merged with retrospective effect;
3. The promotion on the basis of length of service should be ordered;
4. The study should be conducted afresh by the teams consisting of eminent persons from IIMs and staff representatives should be included in the study..
5. There should be no reduction in the strength of Group B Executive officers.
6. All the posts in group A should be filled in by promotion only as onetime measure
7. The quota of direct and promotees in the Group A should be re-fixed as 25:75.
8. Separate organized service on the pattern of CSS and DANICs/DANIPs be introduced.
9. The Inpectors who have completed more than 11 years of service ( 8 years to qualify for 1st promotion to supdt and 3 years from Supdt to AC) should be given some sort of relief. This is justified especially as the IRS officers are not satisfied with the four promotions upto the level of commissioner in less than 20 years.
Recourse to legal remedy to stay the CR exercise if the legitimate aspirations of our cadres are not accepted, may be explored.

Direct action should be taken to get our genuine demands redressed.
....continued....

Bhagwan Singh said...

As a legal recourse, we can go in for writ of mandamus under Art. 226 of the constitution on the following grounds : -

1. The CBEC, who is undertaing the CR exercise, has failed to address the main ground of CR as it has failed to address the issue of stagnation.
2. It has failed to implement the Bhardwaj report on the merger of analogous cadres for the last so many years;
3. The present CR proposal will not solve the regional disparties and the stagnation in some zones will be perpetuated;
4. The persons who entered the Department through the same SSC exam based on the same qualifications have superceded their seniors, which is violative of the right of equality and directive princples enshrined in our constitution.
5. The Study conducted by the HRD and Study Groups is improper.
6. No inclusion of the concerned staff members from the study groups/committees.
7. The CR proposal has been given to the Associations only at this belated stage after the proposal was stated to be rejected preliminarily by the IFU/Govt.
8. The posts of Principal CC and Commissioners Grade I are not functionally justified.
9. The CBEC has so far failed to amend the RRs of the Inspector despite direction of a High Court.
10. The expenditure shown to be incurred on the promotion of Supdts of CE is misleading as they are already drawing salary much more than the ACs.

Bhagwan Singh said...

11. The IRS cannot deny parity to the Executive grades on any legal, moral, technical grounds, with the other cadres similarly placed ( e.g. CBDT/CSS/IB etc.), when they clamour for parity with the other All India services.
12. That it is against all cannons of justice- natural, legal – to deny promotion to the executive cadres, who admittedly are demoralized and demotivated due to acute stagnation as per the CR proposal /HPC report, for a long period of 20-24 years aginst the qualifying service of 8 years only. This makes a mockery of fixing qualifing service period as well as the CR exercise.
13. That the CBEC has failed to ensure justice to our Executive cadres during the previous CR exercise, which promoted only the interest of the IRS and made the Department top heavy.
14. That despite the previous CRs and top heavy administrative machinery, the Department’s working has suffered a lot in terms of efficiency/reputation etc.
15. That our department is the top most earning department, with only less than 1% spent on the revenue generation process, which is supposed to be lowest among all Departments in the country as well as in the world.
16. That if the CR proposal is carried out and the letigimate aspirations of the executive cadres are not met with, the demoralization will further raise and resultantly the morale of these cadres will be further lowered leading to adverse effect on the revenue collection drives.
17. That it is the executive cadres, which constitutes the steel frame of the department. The executive officers are responsible for 95% of the work which includes assessment, reporting, investigation of evasion cases, collection of intelligence, drafting of show cause notices, adjudication orders, review orders, appeals, replies to appeals and what not. The senior officers only put their signatures after tinkerings here and there, that too with some efficient/intelligence/hardworking people. Otherwise, they consider it their right that they should be everything ready, they just sign it.

besdies this, we can start a non-coperation movement by refusing to perform the duties which do not pertain to our cadres.

JAGO BROTHER JAGO

JAI HIND,

Bhagwan Singh said...

Some of the comments have been repeated due to tehcnical reasons.


The inconvenience is regretted.


Jai Hind

surya said...

Dear all,
The comments of Shri Bhagwan Singh are really thought provoking and need to be considered seriously. AS in the past,the Customs Officers have again, like animals ,managed to snatch away the morsels of food from the central excise officers' mouths/plates. Why the Board officials are dancing to the tune of the Customs fraternity and manipulating things in their favour is as clear as day light. First of all the stupid ratio being followed for the promotions to Assistant Commisssioner should be scrapped. The customs officers connving with the Board manipulate things and get into Group A service in relative short span of time and is likely to get 15 to 20 years minimum in the Group A cadre, where as the Central Excise Officer due to the stupid ratio being followed now if at all manage to get promoted will get hardly five years of service in the Group A cadre. No vacany is likely to arise in the near future due to the retirement of the customs officers, where as more than 80% of the retirement vacancy will arise due to the retirement of the central excise officers only. And to add salt to the wound, even these retirement posts will again go to customs officers due tot he stupid ratio/system prevailing now. To put and end to this injustice and also to mitigate the raw deal meted out to the Central Excise faternity in the past, the total length of service in the Group B cadre shouold be treated as the criterion for promotion. Also very senior superintendents should be directly placed in the senior time scale. If the Board is reluctant to oblige, we have to obtain stay of the restructuring process till all our demands are met. We should also press for merger of the customs and excise departments at the lower level also or else completely bifurcate the two departments so that unscrupulous customs officers do not eat away the legitimate rights of the central excise fraternity.

n s dev said...

united we win, divided we fall.

1. upgrade all inspectors having 1.5 times qualifying service as Supdts on insitu basis. (12 years, 1997 batch)

2. upgrade all supdts with 9 years service (6*1.5) as Dy Commnrs by forming a parallel service on lines of CSS, those who have put more than 12 years to be promoted as JC.

these 2 steps should happen prior to restructuring.

ADC/JC should head division with 2 DC/AC for admin/ exe and adjn in each division.

Group B to Group A entry ratio should be 1:3 (around 6600 posts in promotion quota, inside or outside IRS)

then all our problems are solved at one go

Santanu said...

The first line of the AICEIA Objections/Proposals on cadre restructuring has an anomaly :

"Neither the proposal lacks any vision..."

Both Neither and lacks cannot be used. Its double negative. Not that this makes it hard to understand the matter. But still, proposals sent to higher levels should be grammatically correct.