From The Desk of
Secretary General, AIACEGEO
To,
Sh. Arjun Ram Meghwal,
Hon’ble Minister of State,
Department of Expenditure,
Mini9stry of Finance,
North Block, New Delhi.
Sub: Retrospective
implementation of pay scale of Central Excise Superintendents at par with NCB
Superintendents who were the part & parcel of one & the same RRs having
a common seniority list for being promoted to the common post of Asstt.
Commissioner.
Sir,
Kindly refer to the
submissions made to your goodself in person on 02.05.17 vide Ref. No.
110/AIB/P/17 Dt. 02.05.17 of the Association. You were pleased to say that the
matter would be reviewed after one month.
2. Accordingly, it is again submitted with due regards that the pay scale of
the Superintendents of Narcotics Control Bureau was revised to Rs. 7500-12000/-
from Rs. 6500-10500/- w.e.f. 01.01.96 with all consequential benefitsvide
U.O. No. 169/1/2005-IC dt. 11.04.05 of the Department of Expenditure leading to
the issuance of Order F. No. II/2(38)/2004-Estt. dt. 20.04.05 by the Narcotics
Control Bureau whereas the pay scale of the Superintendents of Central Excise
was revised to Rs. 7500-12000/- from Rs. 6500-10500/- prospectively w.e.f.
21.04.04, i.e., from the date of issuance of the order vide O.M. No. 6/37/98-IC
dt. 21.04.04.
3. It is worth to submit that the Superintendents of Narcotics Control Bureau
were granted the retrospective benefit despite of the fact that their pay
scale was revised even after the revision of pay scale of Superintendents of
Central Excise based on the parity and precedent of Central Excise
Superintendents. The Association has been continuously raising the
demand for implementing the revised pay scale with retrospective effect instead
of 21.04.2004 since very beginning but nothing has been done till date. It
is further submitted that the Superintendents in Narcotics
Control Bureau were also granted the non-functional time scale on completion of
4 years of service based on the parity and precedent of the Superintendents of
Central Excise.
4. Further, there
exists an established parity and relativity between the Superintendents of NCB
(Narcotics Control Bureau) and Superintendents of Central Excise as the nature
of duties, mode of recruitment, functions and responsibilities of these posts
are the same. The Superintendents of Central Excise are also working as
Superintendents in NCB since the creation of NCB. NCB was also a part of CBEC
under the Department of Revenue and remained its part till 18.02.03. The
Superintendents of NCB were sharing common seniority with the Superintendents
of Central Excise for promotion to the Group ‘A’ post of Asstt. Commissioner
till 18.02.03. The Allocation of Business
Rules, 1961 were amended vide Notification No. I/22/1/2003-CAB dt. 18.02.03
[S.O. 193(E)] to include the NCB in the Ministry of Home Affairs. Even after
that, NCB is being monitored by the CBEC/Department of Revenue and the
Superintendents of Central Excise are till now performing their duties as
Superintendents of NCB.
5. The mode of
recruitment of the Inspectors in CBEC and Intelligence Officers in NCB is also
common. The posts of Superintendents in CBEC and NCB are also filled-up through
promotion from the Inspectors and Intelligence Officers. The High Power
Committee formed by the then Finance Minister also accepted that the Superintendents
of Central Excise and the Superintendents of NCB are at par. Further, the Sixth
Pay Commission had categorically observed
vide Para 7.15.20 of its report that
the duties & responsibilities attached to these
posts whether in Central Excise or in the Narcotics Control Bureau are similar.
6.
Thus, the non-grant of retrospective revision of pay scale to the Central
Excise Superintendents is not justified as the grave anomaly has arisen on
account of the different dates of revision prescribed by the Department of
Expenditure for different categories of employees. If the pay scale of the
Superintendents of NCB was revised w.e.f. 01.01.96 by the Department of
Expenditure, the prospective revision of pay scale from 21.04.04 for the
Superintendents of Central Excise is gross injustice to them.
7. It is also worth to submit with due regards that the matter has
already been recommended to the Department of Expenditure by the CBEC through
due clearance from IFU vide F. No. A-26017/65/2003-Ad-II(A) of CBEC.
8. In view of the
above, it is requested to give the retrospective effect to the enhanced pay
scale of the Central Excise Superintendents at par with the Superintendents of
NCB.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(RAVI MALIK),
Secretary General.
*****************
Ref. No.
32/AIB/MACP/17
Dt.
10.07.17
To,
Sh. Arjun Ram Meghwal,
Hon’ble Minister of State,
Department of Expenditure,
Mini9stry of Finance,
North Block, New Delhi.
Sub: Undoing of MACP
irregularities (para 8.1, upgradation in promotional hierarchy and offsetting
of MACP upgradation with time scale) as our officers were able to get the grade
pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB3 after 24 years of service under ACPS while now getting
the same after 30 years of service under MACPS.
Sir,
Kindly refer
to the submissions made to your goodself in person on 02.05.17 vide Ref. No.
112/AIB/P/17 Dt. 02.05.17 of the Association. You were pleased to say that the
matter would be reviewed after one month.
2. Accordingly, it is again submitted with due regards that the main objective
of introducing ACP scheme was to grant financial compensation to the govt.
servants in lieu of the lack of functional promotions. Before the introduction
of ACP scheme in 1999, the most of the Superintendents of Central Excise
retired from service without getting IInd promotion of the career to
the JTS post of Asstt. Commissioner. Upon introduction of ACP
scheme, direct recruit Inspectors of Central Excise were granted
two financial upgradations on the completion of 12 years (if not got Ist
promotion) and 24 years (if not got IInd promotion) of regular service.
3. According to the
ACP Scheme, the central government employees were to be granted next higher pay
scale in their promotional hierarchy. So, the pay equivalent to the promotional
post was ensured under ACP scheme. Many Inspectors of Central Excise were
benefited a bit at least financially by this scheme as no promotional avenues
were available for them. The Sixth CPC recommendations and government decision
on ACP scheme gave surprise and shock to all Central government employees. The
Sixth Central Pay Commission recommended Modified Assured Career Progression
Scheme (MACPS) in Para 6.1.15of its report.
4. As per the
recommendations, financial upgradation would be available in the next higher
grade pay on completion of 12 years of continuous service in the same grade not
providing more than two financial upgradations in the entire career as was
provided in the previous ACP Scheme. The Scheme was also made available to all
posts belonging to Group ‘A’ whether isolated or not. However, organised Group
‘A’ services were not covered under the Scheme. The Government considered the
recommendations of the 6th CPC for introduction of MACPS
and accepted the same with further modifications by granting three financial
upgradations at the intervals of 10, 20 and 30 years of continuous regular
service.
5. The government
decision for modifying the ACP scheme to grant three financial upgradations
under MACPS in the hierarchy of Grade Pay instead of promotional hierarchy was
surprise & shock for employees. The MACP Scheme envisages placement merely
in the immediate next higher Grade Pay in the hierarchy of the recommended
revised Pay Bands and Grade Pay. For example, if a govt servant appointed as
LDC in the grade pay of Rs.1900/-, he will be granted Rs. 2000/- Grade Pay as
first MACP upgradation after completing 10 years of regular service though this
Grade Pay is not in the promotional hierarchy of the officer concerned. Whereas
the first financial upgradation to be granted under ACP Scheme was a pay scale
equivalent to Grade Pay of Rs. 2400/- in
promotional hierarchy on completion of 12
years of regular service. Not only it, one MACP upgradation
was off set with the non-functional time scale granted to various categories of
Group B gazetted officers after completion of 4 years of service. Very
shockingly, single grade pay of Rs. 5400/- was also bifurcated into two
categories, i.e., Rs. 5400/- in PB2 and Rs. 5400/- in PB3 without the
difference of a single rupee under para 8.1 of MACPS.
6. As a result, the
Modified ACP Scheme has not served the purpose that it was supposed to. The ACP
scheme has been de-modified by it instead of being modified as anything is to
be modified to be beneficial instead of harmful. So, the so called Modified
Assured Career Progression Scheme needs to be modified again. The financial
upgradation has to be granted on the basis of promotional (functional)
hierarchy of posts instead of hierarchy of Grade Pay. The Staff Side of
National Anomaly Committee also reiterated their demand in the meeting of the
Joint Committee of MACP Scheme on 15.03.2011 under the Chairpersonship of the
Joint Secretary (Estt) of DOPT that the financial up-gradations under the MACP
Scheme should be granted in the promotional hierarchy of posts instead of the
Grade Pay hierarchy. The Staff Side stated that the erstwhile ACP Scheme was
implemented on the recommendations of the 5th CPC and, as such, has become a
part of the service conditions of the employees. The Staff Side, therefore,
contended that the Government cannot impose the MACP Scheme thereby altering
the service conditions to the detriment of the employees.
7. In this regard,
the Judgment of the Chandigarh Central Administrative Tribunal has been upheld
by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The appeal filed by the Government
against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has also been
dismissed by the Supreme Court. In a separate case filed in Principal Bench of
CAT at New Delhi, the CAT gave its judgment in favour of the applicants to
grant MACP upgradation in promotional hierarchy. We have demanded the Central
Government to issue the necessary instructions for granting financial
upgradation under MACP scheme in promotional hierarchy as per the Court Order
but nothing has been done till date.
8. We have also
demanded to scrap the para 8.1 of the MACP instructions based on the above
judgements and also to undo the offsetting of MACP upgradation with
non-functional time scale but again nothing done. At the cost of the
repetition, it is to submit that the upgradations under MACP Scheme are
being given in the hierarchy of Grade Pays instead of promotional
hierarchy. There were no such provisions in the original ACP Scheme from
which MACP Scheme has been derived by modification of earlier. A lot of
confusion was created after the introduction of the Grade Pay structure
establishing two distinct hierarchies- promotional and grade paywise.
9. Promotional
hierarchy is also varying from department to department which is required to be
made uniform for all for the sake of justice and undo discrimination &
disparities. Somewhere Group ‘B’ Gazetted officers are promoted merely to a
post at Level-10 (CBEC etc.) whereas they are being promoted to a post at
Level-11 (CSS, Rajyasabha Secretariat, MEA, DANICS, DANIPS, CSSS, AFHQ, Railway
Board, Foreign Services, Administrative services, Forest services, Police services,
DANICS, DANIPS, State services etc.) at other places. Like it, somewhere Group
‘B’ Non-Gazetted Officers are promoted to a post at Level-10 (CBI, IB, Hindi
wing of CBEC etc.) whereas they are being promoted to a post at Level-8 (CBEC
etc.) or Level-7 (CPWD etc.) at other places. Somewhere Group ‘B’ Gazetted
Officers are placed in Level-7 (CPWD etc.) whereas Level-8 (CBEC etc.) and also
Level-9 (Postal department, Audit & Accounts services etc.) at other
places. Somewhere promotional hierarchy is Level-7àLevel-11àLevel-13,
somewhere Level-7àLevel-8àLevel-11àLevel-12àLevel-13, somewhere Level-7àLevel-9àLevel-10àLevel-11àLevel-12àLevel-13
and somewhere it is Level-7àLevel-8àLevel-10àLevel-11àLevel-12àLevel-13. Some
Group ‘B’ Gazetted Officers have been granted the time scale in PB2 and others
in PB3. Due to varying promotional hierarchies, some officers got a Grade
Pay of Rs. 7600/- and some Rs. 6600/- on IIIrd MACP upgradation. The worst
hit category is the Central Excise Superintendents who are now able to get only
a grade pay of Rs. 5400/- after 30 years or more service which they were able
to get only after 24 years of service under ACPS.
10. So, the
promotional hierarchy after entry into group ‘B’ is required to be made uniform
for the sake of justice to all. The posts under the grade pays of Rs.
5400/- & 6600/- (Level-10 & 11) and also Rs. 7600/- & 8700/-
(Level-12 & 13) being functionally same, the ideal promotional hierarchy
for all after entry into Group ‘B’ seems only to be 4600 (L-7)à6600 (L-11)à8700
(L-13)à10000 (L-14). The officers should also be granted the MACP upgradation
under this ideal hierarchy of 4600à6600à8700à10000 after joining the job
in a grade pay of Rs. 4600/- without offsetting the MACP upgradation with the
time scale. This will give justice to all without any discrimination or
disparity. The source of MACPS being one and the same, i.e., common recommendations
of the 6th CPC, it is also worth to mention that the State
governments like Uttar Pradesh etc. have not offset the MACP upgradation with
the time scale. There also exist no same Grade Pays under any Band Pay like
para 8.1 of MACPS in the Central Government. They have also granted the IIIrd
MACP upgradation within 26 or less years to their employees without bifurcating
the single grade pay at any level. As a result, their officers are able to get
4 financial upgradations (3 financial upgradations+1 time scale) as a combined
effect of time scale and MACP Scheme. It is also worth to submit that the
offsetting of MACP upgradation with the time scale was also not recommended by
the 6th CPC but, very unfortunately, the Government offset the MACP upgradation
with the time scale against the recommendations of the Commission. In order to
rectify the above said discrepancies in MACPS, a number of employees approached
the legal courts and succeeded. The Hon’ble Supreme Court
has also decided that the MACP upgradation shouldn’t be offset with time scale
and also the MACP upgradation should be granted in promotional hierarchy.
11. The 6th CPC
introduced the MACPS to modify ACPS. No need to say that anything is always
modified to grant more benefit to the stake holders. But MACPS proved to be
harmful for the employees as the upgradations granted under MACPS were not in
accordance to the ‘Promotional Hierarchy’ and one MACP upgradation was offset
with the time scale. On account of following the ‘Grade Pay Hierarchy’, the employees
got the benefit of Rs. 200/- only at the time of upgradation to Rs. 4800/- from
Rs. 4600/- or Rs. 100/- only at the time of upgradation to Rs. 2000/- from Rs.
1900/- or Rs. nil at the time of upgradation to Rs. 5400/- in
PB3 from Rs. 5400/- in PB2. Finally, one could say that MACPS earned the
anomaly of being dragged to the legal courts on the most number of times.
12. The Hon’ble
Supreme Court of India vide SLP No. 7467/2013 filed by the
Government against the judgement of the Hon’ble High Court of Chandigarh
in CWP No. 19387/2011 has already confirmed the order dated 31.05.2011 of
Chandigarh CAT for grant of financial upgradation in the promotional hierarchy
under MACPS. Thus, para 8.1 is not in consonance to the verdict given by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court and is liable to be scrapped w.e.f. its initiation. The
offset of the MACP upgradation is also liable to be scrapped w.e.f. its
initiation as per the verdict given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
the case of Delhi Nurses Union (Regd.) Vs. U.O.I. and also by the Hon’ble
CAT of Ernakulam in the case of Sh. N. K. Gopinatham
Vs. UOI. Thus, the MACPS is totally unable to fulfill the basic
purpose of grant of the financial upgradations to counter stagnation due to the
lack of promotional avenues.
13. Thus, the MACPS
is required to be based on ideal functional and uniform hierarchy of
Level-7àLevel-11àLevel-13àLevel-14 after joining the job Level-7 without
offsetting the MACP upgradation with the time scale to motivate personnel
especially in Central Excise and Customs Department where normal
promotional avenues are extraordinarily bleak. There must also be the
provisions for stepping-up of the pay of seniors at par with the juniors
who are elevated on account of ACPS/MACPS in conformity with the decision of
Hon’ble Apex Court in Ashok Kumar case.
14. In view of the
above, it is requested that at least 5 financial upgradations in the ideal
promotional hierarchy, as submitted above, may kindly be granted under the
scheme without any offsetting with the time scale and also without bifurcating
any grade pay.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(RAVI MALIK),
Secretary
General.
*********************
Ref. No.
34/AIB/M/17
Dt.
10.07.17
To,
Sh. Arjun Ram Meghwal,
Hon’ble Minister of State,
Department of Expenditure,
Mini9stry of Finance,
North Block, New Delhi.
Sub: Merger of Level 9 and 10
(already recommended by CBEC to the Deptt. of Revenue vide OM F.
No.A-26017/154//2015-Ad.IIA Dt. 22.02.16).
Sir,
Kindly refer
to the submissions made to your goodself in person on 02.05.17 vide Ref. No.
114/AIB/P/17 Dt. 02.05.17 of the Association. You were pleased to say that the
matter would be reviewed after one month.
2. Accordingly, it
is again submitted with due regards that the Pay Commissions always worked to
merge the pay scales. The creation of Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB2 and PB3 by
6th CPC was illogical, unjustified and a gross mistake. This
led to discrimination, resentment and consequential litigations. It was
expected that 7th CPC would remove this disparity by merger of
this bifurcation of a single grade pay but, very unfortunately, the CPC has
retained the same as Level 9 and Level 10.
3. The same is, therefore, requested to be merged at Level 10.
Merger of Level 9 and 10 has also been recommended by the CBEC to the Revenue
Hqrs vide OM F. No.A-26017/154//2015-Ad.IIA Dt. 22.02.16 after the issuance of
the 7th CPC report. But very unfortunately, the
Department of Revenue paid no heed to the recommendations of CBEC.
Thanking
you,
Yours faithfully,
(RAVI
MALIK),
Secretary General.
****************
Ref. No.
37/AIB/P/17
Dt. 10.07.17
To,
Ms. Vanaja N. Sarna,
Chairperson, CBEC,
North Block, New Delhi.
Sub: Charge of Asstt.
Commissioner to the senior-most Superintendents for the want of the vacancies
at the level of Asstt. Commissioner.
Madam,
It is submitted with due regards that the practice of giving additional charge
to the officer working on the equivalent post is very much prevalent in the
Govt. of India including our CBIC in case the sufficient number of officers are
not available to look after the charge. Likewise, the charge of a higher post
is also given to the senior-most officer working on the just-below post for the
want of the availability of the sufficient number of officers to work on the
said higher post. For example, many of the Principal Commissioners have been
looking the charge of Chief Commissioner in our CBEC/CBIC too.
2. No need to submit that a good number of the posts of the Asstt. Commissioner
are lying vacant in CBIC as on date due to the want of the holding of DPC for
the said post for two consecutive years. The work of the GST may also be affected
adversely due to the said posts being laid vacant. Under such circumstances,
the services of the senior-most Superintendents may be utilized to look after
the charge of the post of Asstt. Commissioner in the concerned
zone/commissionerate.
3. Your kind attention is also invited to the minutes of the meeting held
on 04.03.14 with the Association, minutes for which were issued vide letter F.
No. 8/B/49/HRD(HRM)/2014 Dt. 26.03.14 by the ADG (HRM) and dispatched vide No.
1272 to 1275 Dt. 26.03.14. The point No. 5 discussed in the meeting was
“Promoting all Superintendents completing 1.5 times of qualifying service on
the lines of CSS and regularisation of ad hoc promotions based on the rules
existing on the date of regularisation.” The minuted decision taken on the
point was, “This issue will be taken up after implementation of cadre
restructuring.” Now, this is the proper time to implement the said
decision.
4. In view of the
above, it is requested to kindly give the charge of the post of Asstt.
Commissioner on ad-hoc basis to the senior-most Superintendents at the places
facing the shortage of Asstt. Commissioners at least till the all vacant posts
of Asstt. Commissioner are filled. The decision as mentioned in the para 3
above may also be implemented at an early date.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(RAVI MALIK),
Secretary General.
********************
Ref. No. 40/AIB/T/17
Dt.
10.07.17
To,
Ms. Vanaja N. Sarna,
Chairperson, CBEC,
North Block, New Delhi.
Sub: Transfer/posting of the
recently promoted Asstt. Commissioner.
Madam,
It is submitted with due regards that many of the recently promoted Asstt.
Commissioners have been transferred out of their zone despite of the vacancies
being existed in their zone. The posts of Asstt. Commissioner are also lying
vacant in the Directorate offices/NACEN in their zone.
2. It is further submitted that these officers have been promoted merely on
ad-hoc basis against temporary posts to be in effect only upto December, 2018.
Nobody knows the fate of these officers after December, 2018 whether they would
continue on these posts or not. If they don’t continue, they will again be
asked to work on the parent post in which zone. No need to say that these
officers have been promoted as ad-hoc Asstt. Commissioner at the fag end of the
career without benefit of even a single rupee but these officers are well
determined to successful roll out of the GST.
3. The Association was impressed that officers would not be transferred to
other zones, if vacancies exist in their own zone. If vacancies don’t exist,
the youngest officers will be transferred to nearby zone and will be called
back to the parent zone as soon as vacancies occur. Same procedure/policy was
followed in the earlier transfer orders.
4. It is also worth to submit that compassionate grounds including medical ones
have also been missed at the time of transfer orders in many cases despite of
taking due diligence. A good number of posts are still vacant in the zones as
on date but the officers have been transferred to other zones.
5. In view of the above, it is requested to kindly-
i) Consider the transfer of the officers to their own zone, if the vacancies
exist including Directorate offices/NACEN.
ii) Consider the compassionate grounds including medical ones as represented by
the officers.
Thanking you,
Yours
faithfully,
(RAVI MALIK),
Secretary General.
**********************
Ref. No.
41/AIB/STS/17
Dt. 10.07.17
To,
Ms. Vanaja N. Sarna,
Chairperson, CBEC,
North Block, New Delhi.
Sub: Next promotion of Central
Excise Superintendent to STS like other group ‘B’ gazetted officers.
Madam,
Kindly refer to the various communications made to the administration by the
Association on the above subject.
2. It is submitted
with due regards that the most of the gazetted officers in Central as well as
State governments are being granted next promotion to a STS post (GP-Rs.
6600/-, Level-11) while the Central Excise Superintendents are being promoted
(if any) merely to a JTS post (GP-Rs. 5400/-, Level-10). Their common entry
counterparts in CSS are also being promoted to a STS post under CBEC itself and
reaching the level of Joint Secretary (GP-Rs. 10000/-). Their common entry
counterparts of NCB, Directorate of Enforcement, CSSS, AFHQS, Railway Board,
MEA etc. are also being promoted to a STS post.
3. The Central
Excise Superintendents are retiring merely on a PB2 (Level-8) post after
joining the job as Inspector in PB2 (Level-7) while their common entry counterparts
are retiring on PB4 (Level-13 & above) posts after being entered into the
job also in PB2 (Level-7) itself. Only 1% of the Central Excise executive
officers are able to enter group ‘A’ JTS post (Level-10) at fag end of the
career from a grade pay of Rs. 5400/- (granted on account of MACP upgradation)
to Rs. 5400/- only without benefit even of a single paisa.
4. The Central
Excise Superintendents are the ‘backbone of the government’ on account of being
the major collectors of the revenues for the government in the form of Central
Excise duty, Customs duty, Service Tax and also GST in the present time.
5. The 6th as
well as 7th CPC has already intended to remove the disparities
between the headquarters and field officers but nothing has changed the fate of
the Superintendents of Central Excise in comparison to headquarters officers of
CSS too. They are still totally ignored & discriminated in the matter of
career prospects as well as pay matters in comparison to their counterparts.
6. Not only in CSS
but also in Administrative Services, Police Services, Forest Services, Rajya
Sabha Secretariat, CSSS, AFHQS, Engineering Services, CPWD, CVC, NCB, UPSC,
Railway Board, MEA, Directorate of Enforcement under the Department of Revenue
itself, State Services etc., their counterparts are being promoted to a STS
post. Not only it, their counterparts are also given benefit of seniority in
group ‘A’ at many places in lieu of the service rendered by them in group ‘B’.
At many places like various services in Railways, Administrative Services,
Police Services, State Services etc., the group ‘B’ gazetted officers are
allowed the weightage of minimum of 4 years at the time of entry into group ‘A’
also giving them the due benefit of seniority in lieu of the service rendered
by them in the group ‘B’. For example, the officers of Provincial Services in
Southern States enter into IAS in a grade pay of Rs. 6600/- within 8 years with
4 years of seniority benefit while the Central Excise Superintendents are
unable to enter into IRS in a lower grade pay of Rs. 5400/ even after serving
for 35-40 years. They enter (if any) into IRS in a grade pay of Rs. 5400/- only
and retire at same level without any weightage for seniority in group ‘A’. Even
time scale granted to them after 4 years of service is in PB2 while it is in
PB3 for other group ‘B’ gazetted officers.
7. There also
exists an established parity and relativity between the Superintendents of NCB
and Superintendents of Central Excise as the nature of duties, mode of
recruitment, functions and responsibilities of these posts are the same. The
Superintendents of Central Excise are also working as Superintendents in NCB
since the creation of NCB. NCB was also a part of CBEC under the Department of
Revenue and remained its part till 18.02.03. The Superintendents of NCB were
sharing common seniority with the Superintendents of Central Excise for
promotion to the same post of Group ‘A’ (i.e., Asstt. Commissioner) till
18.02.03. The Allocation of Business
Rules, 1961 were amended vide Notification No. I/22/1/2003-CAB dt. 18.02.03
[S.O. 193(E)] to include the NCB in the Ministry of Home Affairs. Even after
that, NCB is being monitored by the CBEC/Department of Revenue and the
Superintendents of Central Excise are till now performing their duties as
Superintendents of NCB.
8. The mode of
recruitment of the Inspectors in CBEC and Intelligence Officers in NCB is also
common. The posts of Superintendents in CBEC and NCB are also filled-up through
promotion from the Inspectors/Intelligence Officers. The High Power Committee
formed by the then Finance Minister also accepted that the Superintendents of
Central Excise and the Superintendents of NCB are at par. Further, the Sixth
Pay Commission had categorically observed vide Para 7.15.20 of its report that
the duties & responsibilities attached to these posts whether in Central
Excise or in the Narcotics Control Bureau are similar and recommended for
parity of Inspector of the Central Bureau of Narcotics with the Inspector of
Central Excise.
9. It is further
submitted that the Superintendents in Narcotics Control Bureau were also
granted the enhanced pay scale as well as non-functional time scale on
completion of 4 years of service based on the precedent of the grant of the
same to the Superintendents of Central Excise.
10. The rationale
behind such a provision of weightage or direct promotion to STS group ‘A’ is
based on the fact of the promotee officers having gained rich job experience at
the time of working as group ‘B’ officer as compared to direct recruit group
‘A’ officers. But very unfortunately, the Central Excise Superintendents are
not being given the said benefit despite of being served for the longest period
in group ‘B’ as compared to any other category of the group ‘B’ employees of the
Govt. of India. They are not allowed the benefit of their rich experience even
despite of the Adjudication Orders also being prepared by them for the
Commissioner level officers. New
higher responsibilities of judicial nature were conferred upon Central Excise
Superintendents vide Circular No. 922/12/ 2010-CX issued
vide F. No. 208/2/2009-CX-6 Dt. 18.05.10 and 130/12/2010–ST issued
vide F. No. 137/68/2010-CX. 4 Dt. 20.05.10. Their responsibilities have again
been increased 10 times by enhancing the adjudication limit to Rs. 10 lac vide
circular No. 1049/37/2016-CX issued vide F. No. 267/40/2016-CX.8 Dt. 29.09.16
of CBEC. They have also been conferred with new higher
technical/scientific responsibilities of ACES since 2010. The claim of
Superintendents becomes even stronger on account of recording statements like a
Magistrate under Section 14 of Central Excise Act & Section 108 of
Customs Act having validity even before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. No such
responsibilities have been conferred upon any counterpart of them. They are
also being conferred with the new additional responsibilities every year in the
Finance Bill (Budget).
11. Before the
enactment of Indian Customs & Central Excise Service Group ‘A’ Rules, 1987,
the group ‘B’ gazetted executive officers in CBEC were allowed five increments
in their group ‘A’ pay scale on promotion to group ‘A’ since senior time scale
was not available at that point of time. It is also worth to mention that
their common entry counterparts of CSS are not only being promoted directly to
a STS post after Section Officer (analogous to Superintendent) but also
reaching the level of Joint Secretary (GP-Rs. 10000/-, Level-14). The position
in CPWD is even more interesting where an officer with a grade pay of Rs.
4600/- (Level-7) is directly being promoted to a post with a grade pay of Rs.
6600/- (STS, Level-11) and further directly to a post with the grade pay of Rs.
8700/- (Level-13) from a post with a grade pay of Rs. 6600/-. Thus, they don’t
need to serve on a post with a grade pay of Rs. 4800/- (Level-8), 5400/- in PB2
(Level-9), 5400/- in PB3 (Level-10) and 7600/- (Level-12) for promotion to the
post with a grade pay of 8700/- after entry into a post with merely a grade pay
of Rs. 4200/-.
12. Further; the
Central Excise Inspectors, Inspectors of NCB and Assistants of the Central
Secretariat Services (CSS) etc., being analogous posts, are recruited through a
common entrance examination conducted by the Staff Selection Commission and in
a common scale of pay. Once upon a time, the pay scale of the
Assistants was lower than the pay scale of the Central Excise Inspectors but
was upgraded at par later on. Like it, the pay scale of the Section
Officers was also lower than the pay scale of the Central Excise
Superintendents once upon a time but was upgraded at par later on. Eventually,
the Inspectors are promoted to the rank of Superintendent whereas the
Assistants are promoted as Section Officers. The posts of Central Excise
Superintendent and Section officer of CSS are analogous, yet the similarity
ends here. Section Officers are promoted directly to the Senior Time
Scale post with a grade pay of Rs. 6600/- and reach upto the level of Joint
Secretary in the grade pay of Rs. 10000/- whereas the Central Excise Superintendents
are promoted (if at all), to the Junior Time Scale post merely with a grade pay
of Rs. 5400/-.
13. IAS and IPS are
the most elite services in the country and the group ‘B’ officers are provided
weightage even on promotion to these services in lieu of the service rendered
in group ‘B’. But nothing such happens to the Central Excise Superintendents at
the time of entry (if any) to IRS, the same also being one of the elite
services of the Govt. of India.
14. It is also
worth to mention that the Superintendents are not only discharging all
functions relating to assessment, investigation & intelligence, drafting
& issuing of SCN and even adjudication but have also been conferred with
the judicial powers of recording statements of various persons in terms of
Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 or Section 108 of the Customs Act,
1962. However, though the Central Excise Superintendents are performing
more responsible work functions as compared to other group ‘B’ gazetted
counterparts yet they are facing the worst career prospects instead of being
given better treatment. They are being maltreated despite of being the
‘backbone of the government revenue’. In the actual terms, though they are the
‘backbone of the government’ on account of being responsible to earn the
finance for the government, yet are being totally ignored in every matter.
15. In view of the
above, it is requested that the Central Excise Superintendents may also kindly
be promoted directly to a STS post like many other group ‘B’ officers of the
Govt. of India by giving due weightage of the service rendered in group ‘B’.
Thanking you,
Yours faithfully,
(RAVI MALIK),
Secretary General.
*****************
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.