DAMOCLES' SWORD...

बंद कर दिया सांपों को सपेरे ने यह कहकर,

अब इंसान ही इंसान को डसने के काम आएगा !

गिद्ध भी कहीं चले गए, लगता है उन्होंने देख लिया,

कि इंसान हमसे अच्छा नोंचता है !

कुत्ते कोमा में चले गए, ये देखकर,

क्या मस्त तलवे चाटता है इंसान !

कोई टोपी तो कोई अपनी पगड़ी बेच देता है,

मिले अगर भाव अच्छा, अफ़सर भी कुर्सी बेच देता है !

"वक्त" और "दौलत" के बीच का सबसे बड़ा अंतर...

आपको हर "वक्त" पता होता है कि आपके पास कितनी "दौलत" है,

लेकिन आप यह बिल्कुल भी नही जानते कि आपके पास कितना ''वक्त" है .....!!!

********

Across the country, since last two months, a fear psychosis has been created in the name of Rule 56 (j). In several meetings with the association members, it has been brought to our notice that it is being used as a threat and as a means to brow-beat the subordinate officers.

In our zone too, a Review Committee meeting was held to cull out the names of officers, from Grp ‘B’ & ‘C’ cadre, for consideration under Rule 56 (j). It appears that some names have been identified and the same have been taken up for further processing. It is learnt that in the Mumbai Cadre Controlling zone, the names of 3 Superintendents, 1 Inspector, 1 AO, 2 Sepoys and 1 Driver have been identified and are being issued notices for compulsory retirement under Rule 56 (j) within 3 months from the date of receipt of notice.

Rule 56 (j) can be invoked against an employee only on doubtful integrity and not merely on ineffectiveness. But in certain cases where public interest is adversely affected due to rendering of ineffective service, this may invite action under the said Rule.

After receiving the notice, officer has the right to know the ground of the invocation of said Rule and whether principles of natural justice have been followed. It has been brought to our notice that different controlling authorities have issued the Notices under Rule 56 (j) which are not uniform in nature.  The officer has an opportunity to represent to the Representation Committee, as per OM dated 01.03.2016 which is annexed herein.  However, the names of officers constituting the Representation Committee has not yet been finalised.

The compulsory retirement order will be effective after completion of three months from the date of service of the Notice and not from the date of disposal of the officer’s representation by the Representation Committee. Further, this process of identification of officers to be considered for compulsory retirement under Rule 56 (j) will be repeated every three months in a financial year. In several other places across the country similar exercise is on and it is to be found out as to whether there is uniformity in approach or there are infirmities. CESA-Mumbai hopes that the said Rule is not used as a tool for vendetta. The spirit i.e. integrity, non-discrimination should be kept uppermost while deciding the names for compulsory retirement.

As far as identifying names of officers in Group ‘A’ for consideration under Rule 56 (j) is concerned, it is learnt that data relating to them is still only in compilation mode.  

The details of Rule 56 (j) is as under :-

Instructions regarding premature retirement of Central Government servants:

I.          Rule Position

(1) In accordance with the provisions of Fundamental Rule 56 (j) the appropriate authority has the absolute right to retire, if it is necessary to do so in public interest, any Government employee as follows:-

(i)         If he is group ‘A’ or ‘B’  service or post and has entered Government service before attaining the age of 35 years, after he has attained the age of 50 years;

(ii)        In any other case, after he has attained the age of 55 years, provided that in the case of a Group ‘D’ official, such action can be taken if he entered service after 23^rd July, 1966.

In other words, a Government servant belonging to Groups ‘A’, and ‘B’ who has entered Government service after attaining the age of 35 years, and officers belonging to Groups ‘C’ and ‘D’ can be prematurely retired after they have attained the age of 55 years with the exception of Group ‘D’ officials, who entered service on or before 23^rd July, 1966.

(2)       In addition, a Government servant in Group ‘C’ service or post who is not governed by any pension rules, can also be retired after he has completed thirty years’ service under FR 56 (l)

(3)       Identical provisions exist in Article 459 of the Civil Service Regulations.

(4)       Provisions also exist in Rule 48 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, for the retirement of a Government employee by giving him three months’ notice, if it is necessary to do so in public interest, after he has completed 30 years of qualifying service for pension. In other words, a Government employee may belong to Groups ‘A’, ‘B’, ‘C’, and ‘D’ can be prematurely retired, irrespective of the age at the appropriate time, after he has completed 30 years of qualifying service.

(5) Provisions exist in the relevant rues which confer reciprocal right on Government employee to seek voluntary retirement after he has attained the age of 50/55 years or has completed 30 years of qualifying service / service, as the case may be. 

 II. Criteria, Procedures and Guidelines

In order to ensure that the powers vested in the appropriate authority are exercised fairly and impartially and not arbitrarily, it has been decided to lay down the procedures and guidelines for reviewing the cases of Government employees covered under the various aforesaid rules as mentioned below –

(1)  The cases of Government Servant covered by FR 56 (j) or Rule 48 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 or CSR 459 (h) should be reviewed six months before they attain the age of 50/55 years or complete 30 years of services / 30 years of qualifying service, whichever occurs earlier.

(2)  Committees shall be constituted in each Ministry / Department / Office as shown in Annexure-I to which all such cases shall be referred for recommendation as to whether the officer concerned should be retired from service in the public interest or whether he should be retained in service.  

Constitution of Screening Committee –

For preparing a comprehensive brief on each officer, for being placed before Review Committee, each Ministry / Department may consider the setting up of an internal Screening Committee to assist the Reviewing Committee, consisting to the extent possible of those senior officers who have had occasion to know about the work and conduct of the officer proposed to be re-reviewed. Such Screening Committee may be constituted for each different rank or each different functional area, as may be necessary or convenient. These may be set up as standing arrangement and a Screening Committee is not to be constituted as a separate ad hoc measure, only at the time when the case of a particular officer is taken up for consideration of premature retirement.  

(3)  The criteria to be following by the Committee in making their recommendations would be as follows:-

(a)  Government employees whose integrity is doubtful, will be retired.

(b)   Government employees who are found to be ineffective will also be retired. The basic consideration on identifying such employee should be the fitness / competence of the employee to continue in the post which he is holding.

(c)  While the entire service record of an Officer should be considered at the time of review, no employee should ordinarily be retired on the grounds of ineffectiveness if his service during the preceding 5 years or where he has been promoted to a higher post during that 5 year period, his service in the highest post has been found satisfactory.

(d)  Consideration has ordinarily to be confined to the preceding years or to the period in the higher post, in case of promotion within the period of 5 years, only when retirement is sought to be made on grounds of ineffectiveness. There is no such stipulation, however, where the employee is to be retired on grounds of doubtful integrity.

(e)  No employee should ordinarily be retired on grounds of ineffectiveness, if, in any event, he would be retiring on superannuation within a period of one year from the date of consideration of his case.

 

Ordinarily, no employee should be retired on grounds of ineffectiveness if he is retiring on superannuation within a period of one year from the date of consideration of the case, on compassionate grounds. While this will continue to be applicable, it is clarified that in a case where there is a sudden and steep fall in the competence, efficiency or effectiveness of an officer, it would be open to review his case for premature retirement in accordance with the orders.

 

 

 

Further details are available in Establishment and Administration Manual, Swamy's Publication.

 

**********************