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:
(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 23rd 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 23rd 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.
**********************
