Apparently, a delightful situation has come almost after 20-25 years when staff side has had to come to the negotiable table for PS Group "B" cadre review. The essence of two meetings is that we have to accept merger of ASPs to IPs by surrendering gazetted status, ASPs presently enjoying. In turn approximately 500 posts of ASP will be upgraded into PS Group "B" cadre and GP of Rs.4600/- shall be allowed to Inspectors to make them comparable with Inspectors in CBDT/ CBEC after merger of remaining posts of ASP with the posts of IP. This is what the official side wants in writing to move the file to MOF for approval, implementation of orders on GP. Frankly speaking, there is every apprehension that they may quote the hierarchy problem in GP issue file also in case negotiation fails. It is therefore, a high time to accept the above proposal arising out of the negotiations held between Union side and Staff side, provided it is implemented simultaneously. The IP cadre will be benefited in the following way:
Ø GP of Rs.4600/- at entry stage.
Ø First MACP in GP of Rs. 4800/-(direct recruits) & 2nd for promotee after 10 years service in IP cadre
Ø Next promotion in PS Group “B’” in GP of Rs 4800/- after 17-18 years but without financial benefit.
Ø 2nd MACP in the GP of Rs.5400/- after 20 years in IP cadre. Thus, the IP having total 26 years of service can get 5400/- which today we are not getting even after 34 years of service even if inducted to IP cadre after rendering 6 years service in PA cadre.
Ø 3rd MACP in GP of Rs.5400/- in PB-3(direct recruits).
The next meeting now will only be held once we accept the merger and give it in writing, otherwise there will not be any subsequent meeting to chalk out the modalities for utilization of upgraded post in the chain of command. I, therefore, request all of you to allow GS to give this workable proposal to Directorate in writing without loosing time. There seems to be no logic to wait for circle conference or CWC. CS Punjab has already given his nod for the same to GS in the meeting itself.
One more important contention coming to my mind is that the Recruitment Rules to PS Group B 1987 should be amended restricting the entry of General line to 52 posts because Inspector cadre is shelling out for the cadre restructuring and not the General line. Thus, the benefit should not be shifted to General line official at the cost of IP Cadre.
Another significant question is the Defective Rules of Postmaster Cadre 2010, where IP having six years are entitled to appear in Sr Posmaster Exam whereas, the IP having five years service are eligible to appear in PS Group “B” Exam. What is the analogy? Not only this, ASP officials (IP Cadre) have been deprived of their legitimate right to appear in Sr Postmaster Exam. All the major circles have maximum number of ASP over IP. Hence, a small number of eligible candidates are there and try their luck, thanks to the defective rules enacted by persons without applying their mind. There is every likelihood that there may be a litigation on this count as Postmaster recruitment rules are running contrary to the earlier recruitment rules having many limitations.
9 comments:
Dear sir,
At the outset, I wish to extend my sincre thanks to CS, Punjab for his foresight and initiating action in this regard. When Punjab circle is ready for this proposal, why not other circles? There is no need to pull the issue for another three months. The proposal should be submitted immediately as it is beneficial to both IPOs and ASPOs as illustrated by our respectable CS, Punjab. I once again thank CS, Punjab and request firm action to put pressure on CHQ to submit immediate proposal.
IP, Karnataka
Dear CS
we should go ahead with the merger and should loose ant time to submit the acceptance proposal to the department but the merger and sanctioning of 500 posts of Gp *B* should go simultaneously
Sunil Kumar
ASP
Dear Harimohanji!
What about the fate of CAT judgement in the above scenario, where the CAT clearly pronounced that IP should get GP 4600 and ASP to be alleviated to get GP 4800 and it has not proposed any merger to get IP GP 4600.
It is an unnecessary mingling of GP issue with cadre restructuring by the representatives of staff side including you. I think you people have not uttered a single word regarding implementation of CAT judgment in its true spirit in the committee meeting.
Rajan, ASP
Sir,
I agree with ASP Rajan . CHQ /Staff side is dilliuting the matter. Staff side is singing different song.CAT has given different decision and CHQ/Staff side are moving in different tracks. I am sure there is some plan in the minds of staff side so tyhat there isw least benifit to IPOs i.e. to deny GP of 4600 & Pay fixation benifit wef 1.1.2006.Harimohanji U have always supported /fought for IPOs GP of 4600. Now it seems that you are silent in the issue. We should fight for implementation of CAT decision . We should not change tracks.
Sir,
I do not know why there is still disparity between the grade pay issue as every one is going to get benefit out of restructing and as you rightly said that its been 20-25 years we have been struggling. Now its high time to make decisions implemented as soon as possible till any further objection rises on the positive CAT case judgement. My personal request to you to make the decision implemented as it is for everyone's benefit.
Rajesh, IP Patiala
Dear all
Here one has to think the following issues before taking decision :-
1) The upgradation of GP to 4600 to IPs is different issue which should not be clubbed with cadre restructuring. Here the issue of upgradation of 500 posts to PS Gp B cadre comes under "Cadre restructuring" and giving Rs.4600 GP to IPs are due to the verdict of CAT Ernakulam branch. We should not bother about the cadre restructuring now and let the department to oblige the CAT Ernakulam verdict first.
2) I seen the department's clever move to dismantle the unity amongst us by clubbing both the issues.
3) Nowhere the department can go without implementing the CAT verdict which include the GP of Rs.4600 to IP and simultaneously upgraded GP to ASPs. But if we agree the proposal of the department (Upgradation of 500 posts as PS Gp B), we would lose the golden opportunity of putting our other genuine demands (like formation of separate BD/Inspection team), simplyfying the work of SDH etc)that will benefit our cadre in the cadre restructuring committee.
4) It is to be noted that the so called 500 posts to be upgraded will be like a teaspoon of salt dissolved in a ocean as it will not really benefit the ASPs (whether he is 1992 batch or 2003 batch)as only 150 ASPs(1987/88 batch) are considered for this year PS Gp B DPC and if we go by this way (375 Posts for DPC and rest for LCD Exam) it will take some 12 years atleast to accomadate these 3800 ASPs (upto 2004 batch) ASPs. Till then they these ASPs should be suffer in the hands of Supdt due their demotion as IP.
5) Hence my humble suggestion is not to club these two issues and try to put pressure on the dept to accept the CAT verdict initially. Later on submit the proposal for Cadre restructuring which may include several issues like early promotion, separate team for BD/Inspection/creation of new SDN etc).
6) It is the department's headache to find the ways and means to implement the CAT verdict which includes GP of 4600 to IPs and upgraded GP to ASPs.
Note : All the IPs who are now urging the merger of IP/ASP will stagnate as IP only even after 20 years service in the cadre without any promotion(not the pay benefit) and after 20 years, no one would like to become an SP as they were already crossed that Grade pay(by virtue of 2 MACP) and it will really pose threat to the department/us for finding a person to head the Division rather not the Sub Division.
ASP from Tamilnadu
Dear Sh. Harimohan Ji,
It’s a very good proposal and we (VIKAS SHARMA & HARJIT SINGH) both are of the opinion that up gradation of 500 posts of ASPOs to PSS Gr.B and grant of GP 4600 to IP will be benefited to this cadre. We strengthen your hands to submit this proposal in writing to DG (P) to get our justified status.
Besides it we want to show our resentment upon the existing recruitment rules of PSS Gr. B examination for which a LSG (NB) official having GP 2800/- with 5 year service is treated at par with and Inspector Posts having GP of 4200-/- with 5 year service to appear in PSS Gr. B exam which is great injustice with seating IPs. Sir, please take up this matter with DG that LSG (NB) persons should either be kept outside from this PSS Gr. B exam or Inspector Posts eligibility should be reduced to 2 or 3 year service.
VIKAS SHARMA SDI(South) Jalandhar
Harjit Singh SDI(North) Jalandhar
Sir,
Every bodys proposal is good. Isn't it a plan to sidetracking the main issue i.e. GP of 4600 to IPOs wef 1.1.2006?.When there is no point of of upgradation of 500 ASPOs into SPOs then why this point is being brought in picture instead of taking efforts for implementation of CAT decision.Some thing is wrong in the minds of Staff side and Association.
Rajan , ASP has correctly pointed out the problematic issue raised by Association
Thanks sir,
ASP Patil
Post a Comment