TIME FOR ANALYTICAL ASSESSMENT -- WHAT'S WRONG, WHERE WRONG

Kudos and congrats to Sh. Vilas Ingale, GS IPASP Association for his achievements while heading the Association and giving a yeomen’s service. Initially it was being murmured if we are giving weak GS to the Association but this proved wrong. Members of the association should not tweet merely for personal interest and their decision should not be based on what others think. Just because others are doing something does not mean it shall also be the best choice for them. Our GS is a man of caliber so listen to his guts. By writing a letter on repatriation he has done a remarkable job. Asking for regular JTS DPC is not the prerogative of IPASP Association when Group B officers have their separate association and their GS is sitting in Directorate. It is his duty to watch the interest of PS Group B officers. IPASP GS has correctly said that a large number of JTS/STS posts are lying vacant and PS Group B officers are officiating without any benefit. Working on ad-hoc arrangement is not in the interest of employee when their service is not to be reckoned for regular promotion. It is well settled principle that promotion, including ad-hoc promotions, is to be given only on prospective effect. Hence, no ad-hoc promotion is to be given retrospective date. Besides, no weightage for the purpose of seniority/promotion/MACP is to be given for the service rendered by the employee on ad-hoc basis. (OM no. 28036/1/20001-Estt dated 23.07.2001 refer). Moreover, in many circles like Punjab, Haryana, Gujarat etc even ad-hoc arrangements are not resorted to being non availability of eligible Group B officers, rather combined charge of two divisions is given to manage the work. Why group B officers association is not taking case with Secretary Post for regular and timely JTS DPC for 2012 and 2013 by calculating correct vacancies so that no imbalance is caused in Group B and ASP cadre and every one may get timely promotion? IPASP Association correctly gave its views to delegate powers to Circle to downgrade Group A post to Group B temporarily till eligible Group B officers are not made available for ad-hoc arrangement. Else officers association should ask for regular Class-I DPC so that no resultant vacancy may arise and ad-hoc arrangement is only made in the event of retirement etc only. What an irony! We ought not to demand pay parity, No matter if we are forbidden from regular DPC/Supplementary DPC, increment for higher responsibility etc is not our right. Neither should we ask for repatriation nor for anything else may be legitimate. For what we have the right to ask and do --- I think to do work what our superior wants and act as a puppet for them because there is no dearth of PAPPUS in the cadre (Read EK THA PAPPU)

Please think of the ASPs who are sitting in other Circle at the fag end of their service without getting benefit of single pie. This may not be applicable to young officers coming through LDCE because they may dreaming of GP of 7600/- but some veterans are retiring in GP of 4800/- without even getting one higher responsibility increment. Otherwise these old officers are more dexterous in their job owing to their experience than the young lucky new incumbents. The main reasons for the refusal to promotion in response to AD comments are:

• No increment of higher responsibility is allowed despite having clear instructions to fix pay on promotion to the post carrying higher duties and responsibility even if carrying the same grade pay. This is not being done
• Non-grant of GP of Rs. 5400/-after four years of working in the GP of Rs. 4800/-(MACP). In this case functional scale of regular Group B is taken into consideration that promotees cannot complete owing to defective policy of department due to non-convening of timely DPC. Here double standard is adopted. On one side, department is considering GP of Rs. 4800/- granted under MACP as final grant on regular promotion and on the other side they are considering only promotional date for grant of Non-functional GP of Rs.5400. Is it not injustice being double standard?
• Before elevation to Group B 99% ASPs (except those come through LDCE) are placed in the GP of Rs.4800/- which they get by virtue of length of service and on promotion higher responsibilities are forced without extra remunerations. Why should we own such responsibility when pay is not to be fixed in view of schedule III. I am referring this because prior to 1986 when scale of LSG and IPO was same the pay of LSG official on promotion to IPO was fixed under FR-22C. Why nobody is fighting on same analogy.
• My request to all the readers and effected persons is to make representations to Department for fixing seniority for all purposes notionally or otherwise from the date of grant of GP of Rs.4800/- and place senior to all those who received GP of Rs.4800/-thereafter.
• In the Group B list issued by directorate promoting ASPs to PS Group B, fixation of some officers has been done under FR22 (I) a (1) though their fixation is after receiving three promotions/ financial upgradation whereas this rule has not been applied to other similar situated persons despite the fact that they are receiving same promotion and equal number as others. This is illegal, arbitrary and against the principal of natural justice. If the Department does not come for the amicable solution, legal recourse is the only remedy left with the comrades.