Paramilitary forces to get "organised services" status

With the 'One Rank, One Pension' (OROP) scheme formilitary veterans set to be notified soon, officials of central paramilitary forces, too, may be in for good news soon as the government is likely to take a final decision on granting of "organised services" status to them.

Through grant of such status, as ordered by Delhi High Court in September this year, the officials of forces like Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Border Security Force (BSF), Indo Tibetan Border Police (ITBP), Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) and Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) will get fasterpromotions, hike in emoluments and other service-related benefits from a period dating back to 2006.
In a significant order by a division bench of Justices Kailash Gambhir and Najmi Waziri on September 3, Delhi High Court had asked the Centre to consider these forces as "organisedservices" and ensure non-functional financial upgradation (NFU) from 2006 in terms of the 6th Pay Commission.

"Home Ministry, the cadre-controlling authority of these officers, will soon take a final call in this regard as the court had given it eight weeks' time to issue orders. That deadline will expire in the first week of November," sources in the security establishment said.

They said the chiefs of these forces have also submitted their respective reports in this regard to the Home Ministry and have indicated that such upgradation should be granted to these personnel.

"Some officials of these forces, retired and serving, have also met Home Minister Rajnath Singh in this regard recently. He has assured them that the government will come out with itsfinal decision soon," they said.

Sources added that the government may take the final call on the issue post the declaration of Bihar poll results on November 8 as the model code of conduct is in place till then.

Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar had yesterday said that the notification for the implementation of the OROP scheme for military veterans will be made "within days" of the Bihar poll process coming to an end.

"The government also has the option of filing a Special Leave Petition in Supreme Court for challenging the Delhi HC order. But the forces have requested the Ministry not to take this step and instead implement the HC order, as that would be a morale booster," they said.
Source : NDTV

35 percent salary hike, increasing the minimum pay to Rs.21,000, 4 MACP promotions,

7th Pay Commission likely to recommend work-from-home options for physically handicapped, women employees

7th Pay Commission likely to recommend work-from-home options for physically handicapped, women employees

“The 7th Pay Commission is finding out if there are possibilities for differently-abled and women employees of the Central Government to work from home.”

According to sources, the 7th Pay Commission has sought for the opinion of the Department of Information and Technology regarding this option. The 7th Pay Commission has asked to study the possibilities of differently-abled and women workers to perform simple and specialized tasks from home and stay connected via the internet and other telecommunication tools.

The 7th Pay Commission has asked the Department of Information and Technology to identify such jobs for the less than 10,000 differently-abled workers who are currently employed by the Central Government.

Sources also say that Flexi-time Working Hours options are being considered for the more than 3.5 lakh women who are employed by the Central Government.

Since it is impossible for both these segments of workers to work during night shifts, the 7th Pay Commission is looking for options to employ them in specialized monetary and supervisory works which could be performed from home. It is being said that the step will be of tremendous relief for employees who have to travel long distance to reach their offices, and for the employees who work in congested offices.

It can be inferred that the 7th Pay Commission is particular about giving priority to women and differently-abled workers. Sources say that the 7th Pay Commission believes that greater productivity could be expected from them.

It is a well-known fact that telecommuting and work-from-hope options have become very popular in the private sectors and highly specialized tasks are sometimes performed this way. The 7th Pay Commission wants to bring in this work culture to the Central Government jobs too.

Meanwhile, news and updates about the 7th Pay Commission continue to flow into the news media. The Commission is very likely to submit its report to the Government by the end of December. Sources say that the final stage of preparing the report is now on.

Speculations about 35 percent salary hike, increasing the minimum pay to Rs.21,000, 4 MACP promotions, modernizing the CGHS medical facilities, and most importantly, about the retirement age, continue to surface. Readers are requested to not believe in any of them because all of them are mere figments of the writers’ imagination.

30 years of service or at the age of 55 years

Recently the news about retirement age is blown out of proportion in Social Media. In Social Media it has been signaled casually that the retirement age will be brought down to 58 years. Initially it was said that 7th pay commission going to recommend the criteria for retirement age as either 33 years of Service or 60 Years of age whichever comes first.

And gradually it is reduced to 58years of age or 33 years of service and finally ends up with 30 years of service or at the age of 55 years.

                                                7th pay commission Vs Retirement Age

Does it worth to believe the news circulated in social media about 7th pay commission recommendation and retirement age..? We asked the Federation sources about this and they want to maintain anonymity told that it depends upon the individuals to decide whether it is true or not. We should not blame the media for everything. We should be able to know the difference between the news and rumors.

One of our Sources told that revising the retirement age will not fall under the purview of Pay commission. It should be decided by central government only. No Pay commission has recommended anything about Retirement age so far.
Federation Leaders were asked about this retirement age issue, when it became sensational in Print and e-Media, why don’t they come forward to clear the doubts on this sensational issue?. They told that they didn’t want do give importance to the rumors and hear says.

They said, “We need to clarify the doubts of our cadres across the country whenever it was rumored in social media about their service related sensational issues. But when sensational becomes routine, it’s not our business to respond to such hearsays on daily basis”

“As far as retirement age is concerned we know that 7th pay commission cannot recommend revising the retirement age of central government employees, since it does not fall under the purview of 7th Pay Commission. Even we won’t accept it if the central government tries to reduce the retirement age,” the sources added.

Housing satisfaction level in the CISF, CRPF and ITBP is only 12.06 percent

Construction of residential houses of Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP)

Construction of Houses and barracks at various establishments of CISF, CRPF and ITBP

The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs chaired by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, today has given its approval for construction of 13072 houses and 113 barracks of various types at 68 locations of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF), Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and Indo-Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) during 12th Five Year Plan (2012-2017). This will be at an estimated cost of Rs.3090.98 crore. The main components include construction of 13072 residential houses (Type-ll, III, IV, V & VI) and 113 barracks (Type- Men Barrack-120, 150,180, 240, 252, 264, 360) at 68 locations of CISF, CRPF and ITBP.

The existing housing satisfaction level in the CISF, CRPF and ITBP is about 12.06 percent, and after the completion of the proposed project, the satisfaction level will reach to 15.13 percent. This project will meet the urgent need to improve the efficiency of the Forces with increasing housing satisfaction level. The improved housing satisfaction level will boost the morale of CAPF, improving the efficiency to deal with law and order, Counter Insurgency (Operation), Anti-Naxal Operations and guarding India’s international border.

Seventh Pay Commission Should Think About Better Pay To Root Out Corruption

Corruption is rampant in many of the central government’s offices, despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s warning on August 15, that corruption was eating away at India “like a termite”.

Seventh Central Pay Commission Chairman Justice Ashok Kumar Mathur

Accordingly, the Seventh Pay Commission should consider to root out corruption in the Indian bureaucracy and the government official system.

50 lakh central government employees and 56 lakh pensioners including dependents will receive increases in basic salaries and pensions of between 30% to 40% in the next fiscal.

It is agreed with the Seventh Pay Commission that a salary and pension increase are warranted, but think it is long overdue to start taking a more systematic approach to revising pay and pension rates for central government employees and pensioners.

The central government constitutes the Pay Commission almost every 10 years to revise the pay scale and pension of its employees and often states also implement the Pay Commission’s recommendations after some modifications.

Hence, 10 years Pay Commission awards create uncertainty and bring inflation risks, it only belatedly acknowledges large rises in the cost of living and the benefits to staff of this increase, will soon start eroding.

It is in the interests of both the tax-payer and government employees, for the central government to take a more systematic approach to revision of the pay of central government employees in periodical intervals.

A better policy would be for the commission to review salary rates at least every two years and to adopt a formula linking salary increases to changes in inflation and to improvements in productivity and revenue gains.

A rational evidence-based approach would also bring the benefit of providing certainty and improving planning for future budgets.

In the longer term, it will also make it easier for the government to move towards a system that enables government officials to be paid wages which are at least comparable to, if not competitive with, the top private sectors.

Such a move would help to start countering the criminally extortionate mind-set which embeds corruption in many government posts as a way of mitigating low wages. Better-paid staff are more motivated in performing their jobs well and in working to root out corruption.

Implementing such an approach to government employees salaries has been shown to work very well in countries such as Singapore. If we are to emulate this here, the government also needs to take a more rational approach to managing is resources.

This would allow the government to pay, recruit, and retain higher quality government officials and begin to root out corruption and poor quality in public services, once and for all.

Full pension for pre-2006 pensioners having more than 20 years of service

In view of the fact that review Petition filed by UOI RP (C) NO. 2565/2015 in SLP (C) No. 6567/2015 UOI Vs M.O. Inasu dismissed by HSC on  28.8.2015,  and Following file notings of DOPW (obtained under RTI)let us hope DOP&PW will now issue necessary instructions extending benefit of full min. pension to all pre 2006 pensioners irrespective of Q.S. rendered.

The extract from the File Noting obtained from DOP&PW under RTI ACT, on pro rata pension matter.

Extract from File Noting of DOP&PW OM 30.7.2015 obtained under RTIA:

12. It may be mentioned that in its order dated 22.1.2013 and 16.8.2013 in OA No. 715/2012 and OA No. 1015/2012 respectively, Hon’ CAT Ernakulam Bench directed that the revised pension fixed in terms of para 4.2 of OM dt. 1.9.2008 would not be reduced pro rata in cases where the qualifying service of a pre 2006 pensioner was less than 33 yrs. This order of Hon CAT was challenged by D/o Revenue  in the H.C. of Kerala in OP(CAT) No. 4/2012 and No. 8/2012. Hon’ H.C. of Kerala  dismissed the Op(CAT) No. 4/2012 and No. 8/2012 vide order dt. 7.1.2014. The SLP filed by the Dept. of Revenue against the order dt. 7.1.2014 has also been dismissed by Hon’ S/C. in its order dated 20.2.2015. Learned ASG, Sjri P.S.Narsimha has advised to file a Review Petition. The concerned file is presently with MOL(CA Section) and Ms. Rekha Pandey, Adv. is drafting the RP.

13. As already mentioned above, in the order dt. 29.4.2013 of Hon HC of Delhi in WP No. 1535/2012, it was observed that the only issue which survived was, with ref. to para 9 of OM dt. 28.1.2013 which makes it applicable from 24.9.2012 instead of 1.1.2006. In view of this observation of the Hon H.C. of Delhi, we may issue orders for giving effect to the OM dated 28.1.2013 w.e.f. 1.1.2006 instead of 24.9.2012. The question whether or not the revised pension in terms of OM 28.1.2013  would be  reduced proportionally would be examined once the order of the Hon S.C. in the RP to be filed against dismissal of SLP 21044/2014 is available  ( para 12 above)

( emphasis added)

                                                                         Sd. S.K. Makkar  US

                                                                                17.4.2015

  Noting of Secy(P)

6. Thus the court ruling has become law of the land

7. Given the fact the review/curative petition in the same matter has once been dismissed by Hon. Apex Court, as also the fact that Civil Appeal of Ministry of Defence with which the SLPs in question got tagged, has also failed, there is no chance  that a review petition may yield a different result. On the other hand this will not only engage the govt. machinery in uncessary litigation but will also result in attendant avoidable expenditure. ( emphasis added)

                                                               Sd. Alok Rawat Secy/ Pension

                                                                          22.4.2015

Hon MOS(PP)         Sd. 7.5.2015  

-Periodical review under FR 56(J) and Rule 48 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972

No.25013/01/2013-Estt.A-IV

Government of India

Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions

Department of Personnel and Training

Establishment A-IV Desk

North Block, New Delhi

Dated 11th September, 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Strengthening of administration-Periodical review under FR 56(J) and Rule 48 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972


The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department’s OM No. 25013/1/2013-Estt(A) dated 21/03/2014 on the periodical review under Fundamental Rule 56 or Rule 48 of CCS (Pension) Rules.

2. Various instructions issued on the subject deal with compulsory retirement under the above mentioned provisions. The Supreme Court has observed in State of Gujarat Vs. Umedbhai M. Patel. 2001 (3) SCC 3l4 as follows:

(i) Whenever the services of a public servant are no longer useful to the general administration, the officer can be compulsorily retired for the sake of public interest.

(ii) Ordinarily, the order of compulsory retirement is not to be treated as a punishment coming under Article 31 l of the Constitution.

(iii) “For better administration, it is necessary to chop off dead wood, but the order of compulsory retirement can be passed after having due regard to the entire service record of the officer.”

(iv) Any adverse entries made in the confidential record shall be taken note of and be given due weightage in passing such order.

(v) Even un-communicated entries in the confidential record can also be taken into consideration.

(vi) The order of compulsory retirement shall not be passed as a short cut to avoid Departmental enquiry when such course is more desirable.

(vii) if the officer was given a promotion despite adverse entries made in the confidential record, that is a fact in favour of the officer.

(viii) Compulsory retirement shall not be imposed as a punitive measure.

3. , In every review, the entire service records should be considered. The expression ‘service record’ will take in all relevant records and hence the review should not be confined to the consideration of the ACR / APAR dossier. The personal file of the officer may contain valuable material. Similarly, the work and performance of the officer could also be assessed by looking into files dealt with by him or in any papers or reports prepared and submitted by him. it would be useful if the Ministry/Department puts together all the data available about the officers and prepares a comprehensive brief for consideration by the Review Committee. Even uncommunicated remarks in the ACRs/APARS may be taken into consideration.

4. in the case of those officers who have been promoted during the last five years, the previous entries in the ACRs may be taken into account if the officer was promoted on the basis of seniority cum fitness, and not on the basis of merit.

5, As far as integrity is considered, the following observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court may, while upholding compulsory retirement in a case, may be kept in view:

The officer would live by reputation built around him. in an appropriate case, there may not be sufficient evidence to take punitive disciplinary action of removal from service. But his conduct and reputation is such that his continuance in service would be a menace to public service and'injurious to public interest.

S. Ramachandra Raju vs. State of Orissa

[(l 994) 3 SCC 424]

Thus while considering integrity of an employee, actions or decisions taken by the employee which do not appear to be above board, complaints received against him, or suspicious property transactions, for which there may not be sufficient evidence to initiate departmental proceedings, may be taken into account. Judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Shri K. Kandaswamy, I.P.S. (TN:1966) in K. Kandaswamy vs Union Of India & Anr, l996 AIR 277, I995 SCC (6) l62 is relevant here. There were persistent reports of Shri Kandaswamy acquiring large assets and of his getting money from his subordinates. He also indulged in property transactions which gave rise to suspicion about his bonafides. The Hon’ble Supreme Court upheld his compulsory retirement under provisions of the relevant Rules.

6. Similarly, reports of conduct unbecoming of a Government servant may also form basis for compulsory retirement. As per the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of UP. And Others vs Vijay Kumar ‘Jain, Appeal (civil) 2083 of 2002:

If conduct of a government employee becomes unbecoming to the public interest or obstructs the efficiency in public services, the government has an absolute right to compulsorily retire such an employee in public interest.

7. Many changes in the nomenclature and in the areas of responsibility of various departments/Ministries have taken place. In order to simplify and speed up the procedure of review, a need is felt to reconstitute the Review Committees. in partial modification of the OM 25013/15/86-Estt (A) dated 27/06/1986, it has been decided that the Secretaries of the Cadre Controlling Authorities will constitute Review Committees consisting of two Members at appropriate level. The Review Committees in the case of various levels of employees will be as under:

(A) in case of officers holding Group A posts:

(a) In r/o ACC appointees:

Review Committee may be headed by the Secretary of the concerned Ministry/Department as Cadre Controlling Authority.

(b) In r/o Non-ACC appointees:

(i) Where there are Boards viz CBDT, CBBC, Railway Board, Postal Board, Telecom Commission, etc. the Review Committee may be headed by the Chairman of such Board.

(ii) Where no such Boards/Commissions exist, the Review Committee may be headed ’by Secretary of the. Ministry/Department.

(B) in case of Group B (Gazetted) officers:

Additional Secretary/Joint Secretary level officer will head the Review Committee.

(C) In the case of Non-Gazetted employees:

(i) An officer of the level of Joint Secretary will head the Committee. However in case the Appointing Authority is lower in rank than a Joint Secretary, then an officer of the level of Director/Deputy Secretary will be the head.

(ii) in the case of Non-Gazetted employees in other than centralised cadres, Head of Department/Head of the Organisation shall decide the composition of the Review Committee.

8. CVO in the case of gazetted officers, or his representative in the case of non-gazetted officers, will be associated in case of record reflecting adversely on the integrity of any employee.

9. in addition to the above, the Secretary of the Ministry/Department is also empowered to constitute internal committees to assist the Review Committees in reviewing the cases. These Committees will ensure that the service record of the employees being reviewed, alongwith a summary bringing out all relevant information, is submitted to the Cadre Authorities at least three months before the due date of review.

10. The procedure as prescribed from time to time has been consolidated and enclosed as Appendix to the OM issued by this Department on 21/03/2014. As per these instructions the cases of Government servant covered by FR 56(j), FR 56(l), or Rule 48(1) (b) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 should be reviewed six months before he/she attains the age of 50/55 years, in cases covered by FR 56(j) and on completion of 30 years of qualifying service under FR 56(l)/Rule 48 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 as per the following calendar:

Sl No Quarter in which review is to be made Cases of employees who will be attaining the age of 50/55 years or will be completing 30 years of service or 30 years of service qualifying for pension, as the case may be, in the quarter.

1. January to  March July to September of the same year
2. April to June October to December of the same year
3. July to September January to March of the next year
4. October to December April to June of the next year

l1 All Ministries/Departments are requested to follow the above instructions and periodically review the cases of Government servants as required under FR 56(j)/FR56(l)/Rule 48(1)(b) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972.

12. instructions on composition of the Representation Committees will be communicated separately.

sd/- 

(Mukesh Chaturvedi)

Director (Establishment)

Source: www.persmin.nic.in
[http://ccis.nic.in/WriteReadData/CircularPortal/D2/D02est/25013_01_