DOP not allowed to take GDS issues by Federations and recognized unions
To view DOP memo No. 16-09/2014-SR dated 5th March 2014, please CLICK HERE.
| |
Tuesday, March 11, 2014
DOP not allowed to take GDS issues by Federations and recognized unions
Granting of Transport Allowance to Central Government Employees working in Faridabad, Ghaziabad Gurgaon, and Noida - Finmin Orders on 7.3.2014
Granting of Transport Allowance to Central Government Employees working in Faridabad, Ghaziabad Gurgaon, and Noida - Finmin Orders on 7.3.2014
Finance Ministry Orders : Payment of Transport Allowance to Central Government Employees posted in offices located at Faridabad, Ghaziabad Gurgaon, and Noida —Order of Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No. 2080/2012 of ML Rustagi v/s Union of India & Others and 22 OAs (clubbed together) – Matter regarding.
No. 211812010-EII (B)
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Expenditure
North Block, New Delhi
Dated: 7th March, 2014.
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject:- Payment of Transport Allowance to Central Government Employees posted in offices located at Faridabad, Ghaziabad Gurgaon, and Noida - Order of Hon’ble Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No. 2080/2012 of ML Rustagi v/s Union of India & Others and 22 OAs (clubbed together) – Matter regarding.
The undersigned is directed to refer to Order dated 4th October, 2013 of Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A. No. 2080/2012 of ML Rustagi v/s Union of India & Others and 22 similar OAs (clubbed together) wherein Hon’ble CAT has directed the Ministry of Finance to re-examine the whole issue of payment of Transport Allowance to Central Government Employees posted in offices located at Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon and Noida holistically taking into consideration its history starting from the issue of O.M. No.21(1)/97-E-II(B) dated 3.10.1997, the various directions given by the Tribunal from time to time, the arguments advanced by the Applicants in all the OAs for grant of special dispensation to satellite towns with further direction that the decision taken is to be communicated to Ministries/Departments by means of a reasoned order.
2. Accordingly, as directed by Hon’ble CAT, the entire matter has been re-examined ab-initioo in this Ministry. It is stated thatCentral Government Employees posted in offices located at Faridabad, Gurgaon, Ghaziabad and Noida are eligible for Transport Allowance rates applicable to "Other Places" specified in Ministry of Finance O.M. No. 21(2)I2008-E-II (B) dated 29.08.2008 andNOT at ‘A-1/A’ class cities rates for the following reasons/grounds:-
(a) The ‘special dispensation’ to certain localities, including Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon, and Noida, in the matter of grant of House Rent Allowance (HRA) and City Compensatory Allowance (CCA) were allowed, as special cases. by means of separate orders issued during 1974 to 1990. The ‘special dispensation’ allowed grant of HRA & CCA at Delhi rates to employees posted in offices located in Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon, and Noida. However, the ‘special dispensation’ was neither based on classification of Faridabad., Ghaziabad, Gurgaon. or Noida as ‘A-I/A’ Class cities nor inclusion of any of these areas into Delhi (UA) for the purpose of HRA and CCA.
(b) The special dispensation in the matter of grant of HRA & CCA at rates applicable to ‘A-1/A’ Class cities to certain localities including Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon, and Noida has been continued till date in respect of HRA and till 31.08.2008 in the respect of CCA, by making explicit provisions in the order issued by the Ministry of Finance since 1993.
(c) The concept of Transport Allowance was introduced by the Fifth Central Pay Commission (5th CPC) to defray the cost of commuting between residence and office. The 5th CPC recommended grant of Transport Allowance @ Rs.800, Rs.400 and Rs.100 p.m. for ‘A1/A class cities and Rs.400. Rs.200 and Rs.75 p.m. for remaining cities/towns to be classified as ‘Other Places’. The 5th CPC had not specified / recommended as to what should be the basis for classification of cities/towns as ‘A-1/A’ class cities or Other Places for the purpose of Transport Allowance. On accepting the recommendation of 5th CPC, order for grant of Transport Allowance was issued vide Ministry of Finance O.M. No, 21(1)197-E-II(B)dated 3.10.1997. Though it was decided that the cities classified as ‘A-1’ and ‘A’ for the purpose of CCA shall be the same for grant of Transport Allowance also, however, it was not decided to extend the ‘special dispensation’ granted to CCA, in respect of certain localities including Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon, and Noida, for Transport Allowance.
(d) Clarification in this regard was issued at point No.9 of Ministry of Finance O.M. No.21(1)/97-E-II(B) dated 22.02.2002 that the ‘special dispensation’ to some cities was extended in the case of HRA/CCA only, and that it was not applicable for Transport
Allowance.
(e) The issue of grant of Transport Allowance at higher rates to employees posted in offices located in Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon and Noida were raised in various OAs filed in CAT, in particular OA No. 1270/2005 which was disposed by Order dated 18.11.2005. OA No. 483/2005 along with OA No. 1292/2005 disposed by Order dated 16.09.2005 and OA No.2263/2005 disposed by Order dated 03.01.2006. The Order of CAT dated 16.09.2005 in OA No.483/2005 was challenged in the Delhi High Court and the matter was admitted as WP (C)No. 2600/2006 of ESIC & Others v/s Joint Action Council Speciality and Doctors wherein the Union of India is being represented through Secretary, Ministry of Labour and Employment. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi is yet to decide the matter. Hence, the order of CAT allowing grant of Transport Allowance at ‘A-1/A’ class cities to empIoyees posted in offices located at Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon and Noida is, therefore, sub-judice.
(f) The 6th CPC while recommending CCA to be subsumed in Transport Allowance, did not recommend any special dispensation to be given to any locality in the matter of grant of Transport Allowance. Orders on implementation of the recommendations of the 6th CPC were issued vide Ministry of Finance O.M. No. 21(2)12008-EII (B) dated 29.08.2008 (effective from 01.09.2008) wherein higher rates of Transport Allowance were allowed to ‘A-1/A’ class cities and lower rates to ‘Other Places”. The names of those 13 cities, to which higher rates of Transport Allowance is admissible, have been explicitly mentioned therein, which do not include Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon or Noida. All cities/towns/places other than those 13
specified cities, comes under the classification of ‘Other places’ for the purpose of admissibility of Transport Allowance. Moreover, Delhi (UA) classified as ‘A-1’ class city for CCA purpose does not include the areas of Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon and Noida.
3. Therefore, Transport Allowance to Central Government Employees posted in offices located at Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Gurgaon and Noida should be regulated as per the rates applicable to ‘Other Places’ in terms of Ministry of Finance O.0M. No. 21(2)12008-E.II (B) dated 29.8.2008.
sd/-
(Subhash Chand)
Deputy Secretary to the Government of India
Source: www.finmin.nic.in
| |
7th CPC- Ratio between Minimum & maximum of Salary / Pension
7th CPC- Ratio between Minimum & maximum of Salary / Pension
4th CPC had determined the ratio between minimum & maximum of salary to be 10.7(Chapter 41 & 43) Vth cpc maintained it to be 10.97 (Appendix ‘I’ summary of recommendations para19) in their recommendations which while implementation was raised to 1:11.76 by the Bureaucrats for their own advantage.
Shredding the basic fiber of the Constitution of Indian Socialistic State, after implementation of 6th CPC this ratio stand raised to 1: 12.85. Both for salaried employees & Pensioners. Which is much more than even the capitalist countries like America & Britain. This negative and socially regressive effects of the 6th Central Pay Commission has had the effect of worsening wealth and income inequality not only between pre-and post-2006 retirees, but even within pre-2006 retirees where in higher-ups got full parity in Pension.
BHARAT PENSIONERS SAMAJ demands that the ratio between the lowest and highest scale be immediately brought down to at least 1:10 and full parity between pre-and post retirees to all pensioners be granted.
Source: www.scm-bps.blogspot.in
| |
POSITION AFTER 8 YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF 7TH CPC
POSITION AFTER 8 YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF 7TH CPC
ALL INDIA ASSOCIATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF (NG)
MINISTRY OF STATISTICS & PROGRAMME IMPLEMENTATION
Web site: aiamshq.blogspot.in
e-mail: aiams08@gmail.com
Hall No. 201 & 205, Vijay Stumbh,
Zone I, MaharanaPratap Nagar,
No. Assn/1/2014/GS
Dated 10/03/2014
To
The Secretary,
Ministry of Statistics & Programme Implementation,
New Delhi-110001
Sub: 1. Non implementation of cadre restructuring of Administrative Staff in NSSO Offices after long five years since start.
2. Large number of posts of Assistant is lying vacant in NSSO Offices due to not taking up the merger of the posts of Office Superintendents & Assistants after a lapse of long 8 years since 6th CPC.
3. Posts of Administrative Officers are lying vacant very long for want of recruitment rules for the post.
This Association had written a letter to your office vide letter No. Assn/2/2012/GS Dated 23/07/2012 to apprise the inordinate delay in implementation of cadre restructuring of Administrative Staff in NSSO Offices thereby bringing you the disappointment of the Staff shouldering heavy responsibilities of Administrative Officers in the NSSO Offices retiring on the post of UDC/Assistants without getting any pay parity (copy enclosed). Thereafter, I have contacted the concerned authorities in the Ministry several times and explained the miseries of the Administrative Staff of the NSSO Offices carrying higher responsibilities without getting a matching pay scale. But despite of a lapse of 1 year and 9 months after the submission of the aforesaid letter no significant development in the implementation of the Cadre restructuring has been taken place.
It is worth mentioning here that this is the only cadre restructuring for Administrative Staff which has been initiated by the Ministry since the very inception of the NSSO. But unfortunately the maiden Cadre restructuring itself has not reached anywhere even after 5 years from its initiation.
2. Non filling of vacancies of Assistant.
Large number of posts of Assistant is lying vacant in FOD Offices where UDCs are discharging duties of Assistant in addition to their own duties as UDC without any additional remuneration and forced to retire on the post itself. FOD has informed that vacant post of Assistant is not being filled up due to the pending merger of the posts of Office Superintendent and Assistant. In the Regional Offices of FOD Office Superintendent with Gazetted status were functioning as Section Officer and DDO and on the ground a request for upgradation of the OS post to the Section Officer was made by this Association immediately after implementation of the 6th Pay Commission. But the same was not considered by the Ministry. And yet, merging of these two posts has not taken place even after 8 years of implementation of 6th CPC. This has largely affected career of the UDC and LDCs of the FOD.
3. Non filling of vacancies of Administrative Officer.
Majority of the posts of Administrative Officer, sanctioned in the FOD Offices has been lying vacant for the reason that the recruitment rule for the post of Administrative Officer has not been finalized. The initiation for change of recruitment rule for the post would have been started immediately after the implementation of the Pay Commission. But it pains to note that after 8 years of implementation of the Pay Commission the recruitment rule for the post has not been modified and due to this only reason, the person qualified to get promoted to the post of AO are suffering.
It is requested to please take a favorable action on the matter immediately.
Yours faithfully
(TKR Pillai)
General Secretary
Source: http://aiamshq.blogspot.in/
| |
Railway Board Orders : Appointment on Compassionate grounds of dependent of medically unfit staff on the Railways.
Railway Board Orders : Appointment on Compassionate grounds of dependent of medically unfit staff on the Railways.
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
(RAILWAY BOARD)
RBE No.22/2014
No. E(NG)II/2012/RC-1/GenI./15
New Delhi, dated 04.03.2014
The General Manager (P)
All Zonal Railways/Production Units etc.
Sub: Appointment on Compassionate grounds of dependent of medically unfit staff on the Railways.
Attention is invited to this Ministry letter No. E(NG)II-84/RCI/105 dated 16.11.1984, stipulating therein, that in cases of medically decategorised / incapacitated Railway employees, a wife is eligible for compassionate ground appointment subject to certain conditions.
Pursuant to the issue raised in PNM/AIRF meeting (Item No. 53/2012), the matter has been reviewed and in supersession of Board’s letter ibid, it has been decided by the Board that in case of medically decategorised / incapacitated employees where compassionate appointment is otherwise permissible, it will be the discretion of the concerned medically decategorised / incapacitated Railway employee to request for a job to either spouse or ward as per his/her choice. Further, in the event of death of the medically unfit employee without making clear his wishes, the first preference for appointment on compassionate ground appointment should be that of spouse as done in case of death.
Please acknowledge receipt.
(Harsha Dass)
Director Estt. (N)II
Railway Board
Source : www.indianrailways.gov.in
| |
Tuesday, February 18, 2014
'BJP vision panel may propose no income tax on salaried class'
'BJP vision panel may propose no income tax on salaried class'
Senior BJP leader Subramanian Swamy today said his party's vision committee might propose either "no income tax" on the service class or give full tax exemption on their net savings.
"The party's vision committee headed by Nitin Gadkari plans to propose either abolition of income tax on the service class or give full exemption of IT on their net savings," Swamy told reporters after delivering a lecture on "Indian Economy: Present Crisis and Way Forward" here.
Due to IT people are stashing away black money abroad to evade tax, he said, adding that the committee would propose the party to put tax on people earning more than Rs 1 lakh per month, and those saving in shares, bank, stock debentures should be given full relief from IT.
If rate of saving increases, the country GDP's will also increase, and it would help generate employment, Swamy said.
Source:BS | |
Government push for passage of bill to increase retirement age of HC judges
Government push for passage of bill to increase retirement age of HC judges
NEW DELHI: In a last push for the passage of a bill which seeks to increase the retirement age of High Court judges from 62 to 65 years, government has asked the Lok Sabha secretariat to bring up the legislation pending since December, 2011 for consideration and passage in this session.
The Winter session of Parliament - the last of the present Lok Sabha - will conclude on February 21. It leaves the government with only six sittings to pass the Constitutional amendment bill.
If the bill fails to be passed in this session, it will lapse with the dissolution of the 15th Lok Sabha.
On February 5, the Law Ministry had sent a notice to the Lok Sabha Secretary General to bring up the bill for consideration and passage.
The Constitution (114th Amendment) Bill, 2010 was taken up for discussion in Lok Sabha on December 28, 2011 amid pandemonium on Telangana issue. However, the discussions remained inconclusive.
On the same day, however, the lower house passed the Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, which seeks to establish a credible and expedient mechanism for investigating individual complaints of misbehaviour or incapacity of a judge of the Supreme Court or of a High Court and to regulate the procedure for such investigation.
If the retirement age of High Court judges is increased to 65, it will match up to the one existing for Supreme Court judges.
The measure will help around 639 judges of the 24 High Courts in the country.
Sources said though the Law Ministry is keen on pushing the legislation, various political parties will have to be taken into confidence as constitutional amendment is needed for the purpose. A constitutional amendment needs support of two-thirds of the members present and voting in both Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.
Source:ET  | |
Proposal for raising Retirement Age to 62 waits for Cabinet Nod
Proposal for raising Retirement Age to 62 waits for Cabinet Nod
We have heard it so many times . Every one of us got tired of hearing this rumour again and again. But this time this news may not fade away just as a rumour.
Because the series of events that had happened until now listed below are telling that it will be come true soon.
1. Though there is no any demand from any corner to raise the retirement age of central government employees to 62 years, a parliamentary panel has recommended a proposal to increase the retirement age of government servants to 65 years. The report of the standing committee of Parliament on social justice and empowerment tabled in the Parliament on 7th of this month. Ample justification also was given for their recommendation to increase the retirement age.
2. A reliable source close to a Cabinet Minister told that, the Cabinet Minister himself, while addressing to the Trade Union Wing of his party told ‘the Central Government would announce some important decisions in respect of central government employees within a week or two. This will be good news for all the central government employees.’
3. A close ally of a Central Minister told that, in a meeting held with the leaders of the state unit of his party day before yesterday, the Minister told the Leaders ‘a proposal of increasing retirement age of central government employees to 62 years has been waiting for Cabinet nod. It is expected that the cabinet will clear this proposal within a week. After it gets the Cabinet Nod, the formal announcement will be made by Central Government before the Election announcement.’
The above information clearly indicates that some Good News for central Government Employees are waiting to be announced within a week or two. All the central government employees know what that good news is!
The expected good news will be either increasing retirement age or Merging 50% DA with Basic Pay or Both!
Source:http://www.gservants.  | |
Suspended employees are entitled to full benefits, says High Court
Suspended employees are entitled to full benefits, says High Court
MUMBAI :In a relief to a motorman of Central railway the Bombay High Court has ruled that suspended employees are entitled to the benefit of the period of suspension to be counted for the purpose of qualifying service for pensionary benefits.
A division bench of Justices V M Kanade and G S Kulkarni pointed out that the Central Administrative Tribunal had already granted benefit of subsistence allowance for the period of suspension. “If this logical consequence is not accepted an incongruous position would necessarily arise, in as much as on one hand benefit of revised pay scale during the suspension period would stand granted and on the other hand such period would not be taken into consideration for the purpose of pensionary benefits. Mere suspension does not sever the relationship of an employer and employee,” observed Justice Kulkarni.
On December 25, 1985, Central Railway’s driver J S Kharat was placed under suspension for being involved in a train collision. Subsequently, disciplinary inquiry into the incident led to Kharat’s expulsion from service on June 4, 1986.
Aggrieved by the ruling, Kharat approached the Central Administrative Tribunal and on the directions of the tribunal an inquiry was conducted by the Central Government through the Divisional Railway Manager, CST.
The inquiry resulted in Kharat facing compulsory retirement on January 18, 1996. Thereafter, Kharat again approached the tribunal seeking subsistence allowance on the basis of the revised pay scales for the suspension period of over 10 years. Kharat was paid Rs 1.6 lakh after a full-bench of the tribunal in an order dated January 13, 2003, ruled in his favour.
He then sought that an appropriate amount be fixed as pension according to IV and V pay commission payscales after considering his period of suspension and that he had compulsorily retired.
The Central Railway, however, rejected his plea stating that he was suspended before he was compulsorily retired. Kharat, therefore, was not eligible for fixation of pay in the Railway Service (Pension) Rules, 1993, said the order dated December 12, 2003. Kharat challenged the order before the tribunal, which partly allowed his application. The Central Railway, consequently, challenged the tribunal’s order before Bombay HC.
Source:http:// | |
Rahul backs one rank, one pension for ex-servicemen
Rahul backs one rank, one pension for ex-servicemen
Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi on Friday lent his support to the long-standing demand of ex-servicemen for “one rank, one pension” (OROP).
“I am on your side. I understand your concerns. You give your life for the country, I will do all that I can to see that your demands are met,” Gandhi told various state delegations of ex-servicemen who met him.
The delegations from Haryana, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh and Punjab met the Congress vice-president on Friday and pressed for implementation of OROP.
There are over two million defence pensioners who receive differential retirement benefits. All pre-2006 pensioners receive lesser pension than those who retired in the same rank later and even than those of junior rank.
A colonel who retired in 2003 gets Rs 26,150 as pension compared to Rs 34,000 drawn by a colonel who retired this year. BJP prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi had also reached out to them when he addressed a huge rally of ex-servicemen in Rewari last year with former Army Chief V K Singh joining him on the dais.
Gandhi assured the ex-servicemen that he would make all efforts to ensure that this long-standing demand is met at the earliest.
Source:http://www.  | |
Representation of SC, ST, OBC, Minorities and the Women on Selection Board / Committees.
Representation of SC, ST, OBC, Minorities and the Women on Selection Board / Committees.
F.No.42011/2/2014-Estt.(Res)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel &Training
New Delhi, dated the 13th February, 2014
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Representation of SC, ST, OBC, Minorities and the Women on Selection Board / Committees.
The undersigned is directed to draw attention of the Ministries/Departments to this Department’s O.M. No.42011/15/1995-Estt(SCT) dated 1lth July, 1995. Para 2 provided as follows:-
” 2. In partial modification of the above instructions it has now been decided that wherever a Selection Committee Board exists or has to be constituted for making recruitment to ten or more vacancies in Group ‘C’ or Group ‘D’ posts or services it shall be mandatory to have one Member belonging to SC/ST/OBC and one Member belonging to Minority Community in such Committees/Boards. Further, one of the Members of the Selection Committees Boards whether from the general category or from the minority community or from SC, ST,OBC should be a lady failing which a lady member should be co opted on the Committee Board. It may please be ensured that where the number of vacancies against which the selection is to be made is less than ten no effort should be spared in finding SC/ST/OBC officer, minority community officer and a lady officer as explained in para (2) for inclusion in such Committees/Boards. “
2. The matter has been reviewed and in partial modification of above instructions, it has now been decided that wherever a Selection Committee/Board exist or has to be constituted for making recruitment to 10 or more vacancies in any level of posts or services, it shall be mandatory to have one Member belonging to SC/ST, one Member belonging to OBC category and one Member belonging to Minority Community in such Committees/Boards. Further, one of the members of the Selection Committees/Board, whether from the general category or from the minority community or from the SC/ST/OBC community should be a lady failing which a lady member should be co-opted on the Committee Board. It may also be ensured that where the number of vacancies against which selection is to be made is less than ten, no effort should be spared in finding the SC/ST, OBC officer and the Minority Committee Officer and a lady officer, for inclusion in such Committees Boards.
3. Similar instructions in Public Sector Undertakings and Financial Institutions including Public Sector Banks will be issued by Department of Public Enterprises and Ministry of Finance respectively.
sd/-
(Sandeep Mukherjee)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Source:www.persmin.nic.in  | |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)