Ref. No. AICEIA/CBEC/2010/10 10.02.2010
To
Sri V.Sridhar,
Chairman, C.B.E.C,
North Block,
Sir,
Sub: MACP to Inspectors appointed on promotion from lower grade – Clarification – Reg
Please refer to Board’s F. No. A- 26017/76/2009 – Ad II A dated 29.09.2009 wherein certain clarification regarding MACP scheme were issued to the Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur. The said letter was subsequently circulated to all formations.
Vide point no. 3 of the letter it was clarified, with regard to an officer who joined as a UDC and subsequently promoted as Tax Assistant (pre-restructured) and Inspector and spending more than 10 years in that grade, that the 3rd financial up-gradation would be granted after completion of 30 years or whenever the person has spent 10 years continuously in the same grade pay, whichever is later.
It is submitted that the phrase ‘whichever is later’ in the said clarification is incorrect and against the principles enunciated in the MACP scheme. Paragraph 1 of the Annexure to MACP OM dated 19.05.2009 provides that ‘there shall be three financial up gradations under the MACPS, counted from the direct entry grade on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service respectively. Financial up-gradation under the scheme will be admissible whenever a person has spent 10 years continuously in the same grade pay’. Obviously, the latter part of paragraph 1 of the Annexure to MACP OM is intended to provide solace to a person who has stagnated in a post for 10 years or more despite the fact that the person has already received not more than 2 promotions. If the clarification issued by the Board is accepted, the very purpose of the injunction contained in the latter part of paragraph 1 of the Annexure to MACP OM would be rendered meaning less as the person would even without that provision be entitled to the up-gradation in the 30th year. It is therefore requested to amend the clarification issued vide the letter under reference by substituting the phrase ‘ whichever is later’ appearing under column ‘clarification’ against point no. 3 by the phrase ‘whichever is earlier’
We would also like to point out that while issuing the afore said clarification under reference, the Board has treated Tax Assistant (pre-restructured) as a promotional grade for UDCs for the purpose of MACP and has virtually denied one financial up-gradation to the persons who were promoted as Inspector from the Ministerial cadres.
In this regard it is submitted that movement from UDC to Tax Assistant (pre-restructured) cannot be considered as a promotion for the following reasons.
i) Prior to the 2001-02 cadre restructuring, appointment to the post of Inspectors were done according to the Central Excise & Customs Group C posts Recruitment Rules, 1979 and in it Tax Assistant do not form part of the feeder cadre for promotion. From the ministerial stream only UDCs were provided as a feeder cadre. Promotion of Tax Assistants as Inspectors was done in terms of Board F. No. A-26011/10/86 – Ad. II A dated 05.08.1988 and 30.01.1989.
i) Board vide F. No. 32011/32/2003 – Ad III A dated 06.08.2004 (addressed to Commissioner, Bhubaneswar) in consultation with DOP&T has clarified that the Tax Assistant retain their basic seniority in the grade of UDC and the grade of Tax Assistant can not be treated as promotional grade in the normal hierarchy of UDC. Hence under ACP scheme UDC including Tax Assistant are to be allowed financial up-gradation in the normal hierarchical grade viz. DOSL – II, DOS L-I.
It is evident that the pre-restructured TA was always been treated as a UDC only, whether for the purpose of promotion or up-gradation under ACPS and the same analogy has to be taken for the purpose of financial up-gradation under MACPS also.
It is therefore requested to issue instructions to the field formations to ignore the placement of UDC as pre-restructured Tax Assistant for the purpose of counting 1st. 2nd and 3rd promotion for the purpose of MACPS.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully
(Kousik Roy)
Secretary General
19 comments:
Will our All India Association also take up the burning issue of fixation pay as Rs. 7450*1.86= 13860 as on 1.1.2006 remembering the hot discussion & decision during CEC Jaipur?
If taken up in right sense, please publish the latest position on blog.
What about minutes of CEC Jaipur?
BL Meena, Inspector, JAIPUR
Thanks. Finally, there is an attempt to address to the grave injustice being meted out to those promoted to the cadre of Inspectors. It needs to be emphasized here that as rightly pointed out, referring to Board's letter dt. 06.08.2004, the post of TAX ASSISTANT (Pre-structured) was not in regular hierchy and all such posts were created on temporary basis. Another vital aspect is that feeder cadre for promotion to the grade of Inspector comprised of Tax Assistants, UDCs and Stenographer grade-III. The only difference in the posts of Tax Assistant & UDCs was that the senior most UDCs were re-designated as Tax Assistants, though, both continued to form the feeder cadre for promotion to the post of INSPECTOR as well as DOS Level-II. An unwanted offshot of the present mis-interpretation regarding MACP is that those securing higher ranks in the recruitment test for UDCs were promoted (if conceded so)to the post of Tax Assistant and thereafter to the post of Inspector after a year or so. On the other hand, those securing lower rank in the Direct recruitment, could not get promoted to the post of Tax Assistant and instead were directly promoted to the grade of Inspector. While, two promotion are being treated in respect of former category, only one promotion is being considered (and rightly so) for the latter. Consequently, the former are being deprived of 2nd MACP benefit after completion of total 21 years which includes 17 years continous service in the grade of Inspector. Simiarly, the former lot is being discriminated vis-a-vis directly recruited Steno grade-III,(in identical grade-pay scale at the same existed at material time), who after being promoted to the grade of Inspector, have already been granted the benefit of 2nd MACP after completion of total 20 years' service, though, being quite junior to and having little service in comparison to former lot of directly recruited UDCs. It needs to be appreciated that such aggrieved lot of officers has already suffered a lot of humility in the wake of upgraded scales to their junior directly recruited colleagues in the grade of INSPECTOR ever since, 2001 in view of erstwhile, ACP scheme. It is therefore, earnestly requested that all efforts should be made to mount pressure on the concerned authorities to rectify the anomaly at the earliest.
At least the issue of Rs.5400/- GP to ACP Inspectors after 4 years has to be taken on priority by the Association. Justice delayed is nothing but justice denied. There is no justification on part of Board to keep the Inspectors cadre in acute stagnation for 18-20 years wheres ACs are being elvated to DCs within 4 years. Cadres have to be mobilised for agitation to achieve these just demands as in the case of Rs.4600/- basic issue.
Dear CAAP,
Have some patience. promotees are also our cadre, our members, our brothern we cannot ignore their grievances for that matter grievances of the last inspector. Though we have unending grievances We can't be pressing the Admin/Board/Govt.with all the thousands at a time. We are committed to take it up step by step. so have some patience and give your constructive suggestions rather than deflating the enthusiasm.
Please communicate the date on which DPC is supposed to be communicated by the Cadre Controlling Authority, Chennai Zone.
why all these? just consider one financial upgradation in a cadre who completes 10 years of service in a particular cadre, whether the candidate is direct recruit or promotee. As you know, there is too much stagnation in the cadre of Inspr. All over India, there are so many promotee Insprs. who have completed more than 10 years but started their service from LDC/UDC.Because they have got 2 or 3 promotions in the Department, the denial of financial upgradation to them is not correct. They have to see their counterparts (Direct Recruites)are drawing more pay even their service is more in the department. Please consider this point.
Is Inspector cadre keep four distingtive identities like appointded directly, promoted from tax Asst., Promoted directly from UDC/Steno, Promoted after joining as LDC? If so, what is the exact dignity of an inspector? Whether one Promoted as Inspector after joining as LDC was given less responsibility and less hazardous nature of duty? Whether more responsibilities and less hazardous duties were given to those promoted after joining as UDCs/promoted from Tax Assistants respecstively as per the above criteria? Are the dignities attained as UDC, Tax Assistant by promotee Inspectors sufficient to remain as inspectors for more than 20years? Whenever the feel of de javu is equal for non-promotion, even after 20years remaining in the same cadre, for all those directly recruited and promoted, distingtion amoung same cadre is inhuman if there is no violation of article 14 of the constitution. Vith CPC has pronouced to avoid this kind heart burns and suggested for ACP to those who stagnated continiously for 10/20/30 years and that is why the Scheme was called modified ACP. When the OM came out
modification lmited to the years only? How much could have saved by the for this kind of denial to a small number of Staff? Let's hope justice will prevail.
Any progress on the implementation / follow up to CAT Cuttack judgement on CBI wef 01.01.1996.
Thanks! At least an attempt has been made to address the grave injustice being meted out to those promoted to the cadre of Inspectors. The logic behind this kind of denial to a small group who have already suffered a lot of humiliation in the wake of upgraded scales to their junior directly recruited colleagues in the grade of INSPECTOR ever since, 2001 in view of erstwhile, ACP scheme .Let's hope justice will prevail.
Long time no update.
Whether Association will take up this burning issue among promoted Inspectors from LDC/UDC who are still serving in the cadre of Inspectors even after 15 or more years of stagnation. Please take up this issue for granting one financial upgradation to these prmoted catagory. Shall I expect any reply from the Association?
Dear SG Sir,
Very callous approach of the Board. Have they responded. The DPC has been stopped at Bhopal Zone.
1. Supreme Court verdict on Ganda Ram case of pay parity after ACP has been overlooked.
2. MACP has been implemented, if there is no modification i.e. to clear Grade stagnation, then ACP would have sufficied. Why have MACP.
3. CAT Chandigarh on 18.2.2010 has again given verdict for pay parity inspite of pay scales.
Do we require another decade or some HC, DOPT, SC to decide our issue- when the officers joined through SSC there was no ACP scheme so why to penalise them. Many did not join better jobs. Today a direct Inspector or a direct TA knows he will have three ACP or three promotions, so he is prepared to join the services on taking stock of his talent and abilities.
Why to have a retrospective bearing on a few...
Let us hope we do not require another decade to resolve this mess.
Regards
The DPC proposed to be conducted at Chennai Zone seems to be postponed indefinetely consequent to the judgement of the Calcutta High Court regarding reservation. Can the assn please throw some light on the judgement. Already Inspectores who have completed 18 years are stagnating in this Zone. Has any action been taken by the assn?
will the association do something for the Inpsectors promoted from the Direct UDC cadre.Or it is taken as their problem.The Inspectors who were promoted as Inspecters from the cadre of UDC and for a short time as TA's are stagnating for nearly 20 years asInspectors are drawing less salary than their collegues who were direct recruits due to denial of ACP as their stagnation of020 years is not taken as stagnation by the department. No Association has come forward to help these "Inspectors" who are promotees and bring the fact taht they are also stagnating for the last twenty years also in a same grade/cadre, but they are deneid the benifit of ACP. Will the assocaition bring it to the notice of higher ups.
Recently some promotee Inspectors from the Direct UDC & Stenos were granted 2nd ACP. So now in the Inspectors cadres there exists three categorees or grades of Inspectors. I st grade consist of direct recruit inspectors who got ACP in their 12th year as per the earlier ACP scheme, and now those Inspectors & stenos who were not made TA's or the next grade as they were junior or were not covered by the vacancies exited, hence they were not promoted. However they were subsequently promoted to the grade of Inpsector as there exited vacancies after the TA were filled up same is the case with the stenos.These Inpsectors who were directly promoted from UDC/Stenos form the Second category. So those direct UDC's who by their misfortune became TA's as they were ranked higher in seniority list now loose the 2 nd ACP as they were promoted to TA.They form the third category. Whereas the junior UDC's /steno who were not promoted to their next hierarchical post and were promoted as Inspectors and are awarded with ACP. This situation is quite a demoralising one for these promotee inspectors who are already aggrieved of denial of ACP's to them .
It is requested that some measures may be taken to remove such gross anomalies in the C.Ex department .It is therefore requested that the concerned officials may be appraised of the need to amend the MACP so that such gross anomalies /injustice does not arise and officers are not grossly discriminated against . It may also be requested that the concerned officials may be appraised of the need to amend the ACP/MACPby inserting the clause"officer stagnating in one cadre.post for more than Ten years " instead of linking it to the promotion in the entire service.
this matter is brought to your notice so that the same issue can be taken up in the next meeting in june 2010
Along with the major issue of promotions issue , kindly take up this issue and end remove the anomaly once for all.Better take some efforts to amemend the MACP so that evey Inpsector be it a promotee from UDC or from UDC-TA- Inspector or a direct Inspector get ACP if they complete 10years in single grade than link with the number of promotion in service.It should be grade wise
It is heartening to know that the AICEIA has now taken up the issue of grant of ACP’s to the Promotee Inspectors. It is suggested since the Association is “ All India Central Excise Inspectors Association” which comprises of all Inspectors i.e. both Direct as well as Promotee and Representing the Inspectors of Central Excise throughout India, the issue of the promotees who are greatly discriminated by way of pay also has to be taken up on a top priority basis. The issue of the senior Inspector who are Promotees and who are drawing much lesser salary than both 1992 batch or 1994 batch of Direct Inspectors is mostly ignored and is not represented at all. Rather it is dealt as their “problem” by almost all the Associations.
It is therefore requested that the All India Central Excise Association urgently take up the issue of the juniors getting more pay than their seniors with the Board, Ministries and any other proper forum on a Top priority.
This should be taken up on the simple logic that the seniors should always draw more salary than their junior irrespective of whether the Inspector is a direct/promotee and uniformly as a cadre.
By demanding for a higher pay than the junior, there is no harm or decrease in the salary of the junior direct recruit inspector.
Since the Association comprises of all Inspectors, the gross injustice done to a few fellow officers should be fought united as an injustice to the cadre as a whole.
These promotee Inspectors who had put in 18-20 years of service is already stagnating for want of promotion; it is much more demoralizing for them to draw a lesser salary than their junior of many years
Since the anomaly in pay commission can be redressed now, this issue should be taken up on a emergency basis. Since the basic pay is the criteria for other benefits in LTC like the class and mode of travel, the Inspectors are at a loss due to denial of ACP scale
It is therefore requested to take up the matter with the appropriate authorities and get the justice for the cadre which will greatly strengthen the unity of the cadre. The matter may be taken up in next meeting in June 2010.
This matter may please be taken up as the senior promotee Inspectors are at a loss with even the junior Inspectors who were directly promoted to Inspectors without being made TA's are also now getting 2nd ACP, while the senor Inspectors who due to their ranking in the seniority were promoted as TA are left out.This is reallly frustruating . Will AICEIA do something to get the ACP scheme amended so that these promotee Inspectors are not denied the benifit of ACP even though they are stagnating in one post for more tahn 20 years without any benifits while their juniors are getting the benifit one way or th other .
Post a Comment