Grant of Grade Pay Rs.6600/PB-3 to Nursing personnel i.e. staff Nurses/Nursing Sister/Matron/Chief Matron under 3rd MACP

Grant of Grade Pay Rs.6600/PB-3 to Nursing personnel i.e. staff Nurses/Nursing Sister/Matron/Chief Matron under 3rd MACP

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
(RAILWAY BOARD)

RBE No.87/2018

New Delhi, dated 14-6-2018

S.No.PC-VII/106
PC-V/2009/ACP/2
The General Managers
All Inidan Railways & PUs
(As per mailing list)

Sub: Grant of Grade Pay Rs.6600/PB-3 to Nursing personnel i.e. staff Nurses/Nursing Sister/Matron/Chief Matron under 3rd MACP.

The staff side (NFIR and AIRF) had demanded for grant of 3rd financial upgradation in the Grade Pay of Rs.6600/PB-3 to Nursing personnel under MACPS on the basis of OM dated 09-09-2016 issued by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. The matter was examined in consultation with the Deptt. of personnel and Training and it has now been decided as under.

a) Those Staff Nurse/Nursing Sister/Matron/Chief Matron who have been awarded 1st and 2nd financial upgradation under ACP Scheme in the hierarchy pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500 upto 31-08-2008 may be granted a replacement Grade Pay of Rs.4800/-PB-2 and Rs.5400/PB-3. Therefore, the 3rd financial upgradation under MACP Scheme, if granted to these categories of officials, may be revised to Rs.6600/PB-3 from Rs.5400 in PB-3.

b) Those Staff Nurse/Nursing Sister/Chief Matron who have been granted 1st ACP in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 upto 31-08-2008 may be placed in the replacement Grade Pay of Rs.4800/PB-2. They will be entitled for grant of 2nd and 3rd financial upgradation under MACP Scheme in the Grade Pay of Rs.5400/PB-2 and Rs.5400/PB-3 only.

c) All the remaining Staff Nurse/Nursing Sister/Matron/Chief Matron who are to be granted 1st, 2nd and 3rd financial upgradation under MACP Scheme may be granted next higher Grade Pay.

2. This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Directorate of the Ministry of Railways.

3. Hindi version is enclosed.

S/d,
(subhankar Dutta)
Deputy Director Pay commission-V
Railway Board.

Source: NFIR

NC JCM Staff Side has demanded Grant of ACP to Draftsmen Cadre of Central Government Departments

NC JCM Staff Side has demanded Grant of ACP to Draftsmen Cadre of Central Government Departments

Shiva Gopal Mishra
Secretary

Ph.: 23382286
National Council (Staff Side)
Joint Consultative Machinery
for Central Government Employees
13-C, Ferozshah Road, New Delhi - 110001
E Mail: nc.jcm.np@gmail.com

No. NC-JCM-2014/ACP

July 14, 2014

The Secretary,
Department of Personnel & Training,
North Block, New Delhi

The Secretary,
Department of Defence
Production & Supplies,
D.G.Q.A., D.H.Q, New Delhi

Sub:- Grant of ACP to Draftsmen.

Dear Sir,
I may draw your kind attention to the following judgments of Tribunal / High Court and the Supreme Court:

1. CAT Bombay Bench order dated 28.2.2005 in O.A. No.124/2004 Shri K.M. Khopkar & others Vs UoI.
2. Bombay High Court order dated 11.12.2006 in writ petition No. 5269/2005 Union of India & others Vs K.M.Khopkar
3. Supreme Court order dated 10.7.2007 in Petition for SLP (C) CC5027/2007 Union of India & others Vs K.M. Khopkar.

The Hon’ble CAT Bombay has ruled that the placement irregular scale on the basis of Ministry of Defence letter dated 15.9. 1995 granted to Draftsmen of other Departments in pursuance of CPWD Arbitration award cannot be treated as regular promotion and ACP benefit rightly granted to the applicants cannot be withdrawn.

The High Court Bombay has upheld the above ruling of the CAT Bombay.

The Supreme Court had dismissed the appeal observing that they do not find any merit to interfere in this case.

2. The question is whether all draftsmen of other departments would be granted the benefit of this judgment. They are similarly placed employees and there are several directions of the apex court that in the case of similarly placed employees, a decision given by Courts should be treated as judgment in rem and Government should extend such benefits to all similarly placed employees so that there is no multiplication of litigation in a matter which has already been adjudicated.

3. I, therefore, request you kindly to consider and extend the benefit of above ruling which has already attained finality to all the draftsmen not only working in Department of Defence Production & Supplies but also in all other Central Government Departments.

4. Action Taken on this matter may kindly advice to us.

Thanking you,

Yours faithfully,
sd/-
(Shiva Gopal Mishra)
Secretary

Source: www.ncjcmstaffside.com
[http://ncjcmstaffside.com/2014/nc-jcm-staff-side-has-demanded-grant-of-acp-to-draftsmen-cadre-of-central-governement/]

Implementation of 2nd & 3rd upgradation under MACP Scheme in Railways – AIRF

Implementation of 2nd & 3rd upgradation under MACP Scheme in Railways – AIRF

AIRF urged to Railway Board to stop recoveries from the employees, due to messy implementation of 2nd & 3rd upgradation under MACP Scheme…

AIRF writes to Railway Board regarding to deny to eligible employees granting of 2nd & 3rd upgradation under MACP Scheme in Railways with appropriate orders and illustrations.

He said in the letter, “The Board are therefore, requested to further look into the matter in totality, as this would undo the provision already made vide Railway Board’s letter dated 10/6/2009 & 29/12/2011, resulting in a lot of recoveries from the staff in case of whom the MACPS has been implemented in terms of Railway Board’s letter under reference at S.No-1.

This issue may be discussed with AIRF threadbare, so that there is no contradiction creating confusion in implementation of MACPS prevailed over Indian Railways and recoveries, if any being initiated on this account in any Zonal Railway, may be stopped till finalization of this issue.

Source : AIRF LETTER

INDWF writes to DGOF and Chairman of OFB to grant third MACP to MCM in Ordnance Establishments

INDWF writes to DGOF and Chairman of OFB to grant third MACP to MCM in Ordnance Establishments

Framing of Recruitment Rules for the post of Master Craftsman (MCM) and Chargeman both in the same GP of Rs.4200/-

INDWF/RRs/MCM/2014

Date 18.03.2014

To
DGOF & Chairman
Ordnance Factory Board,
Ayudh Bhawan,
10A, S.K.Bose Road,
Kolkatta 700 001.
                                              
Kind Attention to Director/IR
          
Sub: Restructuring of Cadre of Artisan Staff in Defence Establishments in modification of recommendation of 6th CPC- framing of Recruitment Rules for the post of Master Craftsman (MCM) and Chargeman both in the same GP of Rs.4200/-
          
Ref: (i) MOD ID No.11 (5)/2009-D (Civ-I) Dated 23rd January, 2014.
(ii) OFB Letter No.NGO/Cadre Review/A/GB/10 Dated 03.03.2014

Sir,        
We are in receipt of the copy of OFB letter cited under reference (ii) above alongwith M of D letter dt 23.01.2014 regarding framing of Recruitment Rules for the post of Master Craftsman (MCM) and Chargeman both in the same Grade Pay of Rs.4200/-.
          
Since Defence Finance and DOP&T have not agreed to grant 3rd MACP to MCM on completion of 30 years of regular service on the reasons that the feeder grade and promotion grade stands remain in the identical Grade Pay.  Further, it was also not agreed to grant one increment on their re-designation from MCM to Chargeman (T).  Based on this refusal, DOP&T suggested to M of D to create separate channel for promotion to MCM and Chargeman (T) and accordingly a model proposal was suggested by M of D and circulated to all Directorates and Federations asking views and comments for further action.
          
While forwarding the model proposal by OFB vide your letter Dt 03.03.2014 to all Ordnance Factories, you have mentioned in para (3) giving your views about the changes and its functional implications and impacts on the career prospects of other categories.
          
Giving your proposals and impacts on the changes on model proposal it appears that OFB is having prejudice on the matter which shows that OFB itself is not interested in agreeing to the views of M o D.
         
We therefore, are totally oppose to the comments of OFB mentioned in your letter, whereas INDWF is firmly support to the proposed model of M of D which will be benefited to the organisation as well as to the individuals.

  

a)    MCM till they become JWM will continue to work as workman by which we shall be getting their services of workmen (MCM) to work.
 b)    Chargeman (T) all will be with the background of having Diploma both through DR & LDCE.
 c)    The prospects of promotion of Chargeman will not affect at any cost to others.
 d)    The MCM can become only after 25 to 30 years of service only at the end of their long service.

Therefore, the model proposal may please be accepted and a favourable decision may please be forwarded to M of D so that MCM can be considered for 3rd MACP.

Yours Sincerely,
(R.SRINIVASAN)
General Secretary.

Source: INDWF

ACP OR MACP-REGARDING ALLOWING INDIVIDUAL OPTION

ACP OR MACP-REGARDING ALLOWING INDIVIDUAL OPTION

 

ALLOWING INDIVIDUAL OPTION TO CHOOSE EITHER ACPS OR MACPS BY THE EMPLOYEES-REGARDING

 

A copy of the D.O. letter written by the Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development to the Secretary, DOPT for allowing individual option to choose either earlier ACPS or MACPS by the employees is given hereunder.  Shri Moloy Panja of Kolkota has forwarded this letter to this Association.

 

We reproduced the letters and given below for your information...

 

Sudhir Krishna

Ministry of Urban Develepment

Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi-1101

 

Secretary to the Government of India

D.O. No. 55/4/2-13-S&D

Dated 13-08-13

 

Dear Dr.Sayamal,

Issue of redressal of anomalous and disadvantageous provisions of MACPS for the Subordinate Engineering cadre and similarly placed cadres of CPWD has been taken up with DoPT through several proposals since Me very inception of the scheme but none of the proposals has found favour. This has resulted in great discontent to the Subordinate Engineering cadre of CPWD.

 

Above issue was also discussed with you informally on 1.8.2013. It was apprised that individual option to choose either earlier ACPS or MACPS by the employee is the only solution to cater to the concerns of all individuals. A proposal of this Ministry in this regard under consideration in DoPT.

 

As the matter concerns above 6000 subordinate Engineers of CPWD, I would request that they may be allowed to exercise their individual option to choose either earlier ACPS or MACPS. This will not only alleviate the discontent in the cadre but also avoid cropping up of the court cases.

 

With regards

 

Yours sincerely

sd/-

(Sudhir Krishna)

 

Dr. Syamal Kumar Sarkar

Secretary(Personnel)

Department of Personnel & Training

M/o Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions

North Block.

New Delhi

 

 

Sudhir Krishna

Ministry of Urban Develepment

Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi-1101

 Secretary to the Government of India

D.O. No. 55/4/2-13-S&D/8

Dated 01 Oct 2013

Dear Dr. Sarkar,

 

Kindly refer to my DO letter of even No dt. 13.8.2013 in connect:on with redressal of disadvantageous provisions of MACPS for the Subordinate Engineering cadre and similarly placed cadres CPWD.

 

The proposal sent by this Ministry in Jul'2013 for allowing individual option to choose either earlier ACPS or MACPS by the employee is a balanced and just one and caters to the concerns of all individuals.  DoPT must not have any reservation in accepting the same since change of the scheme by the Government should not be to the disadvantage of the individual employee.  

 

Already many court cases for review of the MACPS have cropped in. In this regard, would like to quote a Court Case (OA No. 275/2013) by some Assistant Engineers of CPWD for review of MACPS, draft counter reply to which quoting anomalous end disadvantageous provisions of MACPS was sent to DoPT for vetting. DoPT has not agreed to the reply and intimated that reply should be modified by the administrative ministry mentioning that operation of the both the schemes in the same cadre is against the provisions of MACPS other words individual option to employees to opt for either ACPS or MACPS is not permissible.

 

In this context, I would also bring to the notes that CAT, Chandigarh in OA No. 1038/2010 has allowed grant of financial upgradations under MACP in the promotional hierarchy, which has been upheld by Hon'ble High Court of Chandigarh in CWP 1938712011. Although the the case has not achieved fatality as the SLP had by the Government the in the Hon`ble Supreme Court was dismissed though not on merits but on account of non condonation of delay. Thus by allowing individual option. Government shall be saved of many expected court cases and possible grant of financial upgradations in the promotional hierarchy under MACPS.

 

Discontent in tno cadres is affecting the efficient functioning of the Department.  The problem shall further aggravate, if above proposal of this ministry does not find favour or DoPT in the circumstances would once again request to consider the proposal favourably, for allowing option to choose either ACP or MACPS by the individual.

 

With regards

 

Yours sincerely,

sd/-

(Sudhir Krishna)

 Dr. Syamal Kumar Sarkar

Secretary (Personnel)

Department of Personnel & Training

M/o Persornnel Public Grievances and Pensions

North Block, New Delhi.

 

Source: www.aiamshq.blogspot.in

[http://aiamshq.blogspot.in/2013/11/acp-or-macp-regarding-allowing.html]

Implementation of the judgment of the Hon’able Supreme Court in respect of 3rd MACP to accounts staff-AIRF to Railway Board

Implementation of the judgment of the Hon’able Supreme Court in respect of 3rd MACP to accounts staff-AIRF to Railway Board

Implement the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in respect of 3rd MACP to accounts staff-AIRF to Railway Board
All India Railwaymen’s Fedaration

No.AIRF/227(213)

Dated: October 30, 2013

The Secretary(E),
Railway Board,
New Delhi

Dear Sir,

Sub: Implementation of the judgment of the Hon’able Supreme Court

Ref: (i) AIRF’s letter No.AIRF/227(213) dated 26.08.2013
(ii) Board’s letter No.PC-V/2011/M/3/AIRF dated 07.10.2013

Apropos above, the reply of the Railway Board, contained in their letter under reference, is highly disappointing and unacceptable to us. Mere reiteration of Board’s earlier letter cannot justify the stand of the administration, as the Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by the administration. The apex court held in the said judgment that, if any restructuring of posts takes place, it does not amount to promotion. Accordingly, the office of the FA&CAO/S&W/PER/SR vide Memorandum P.535/S&W/PER/ADMN/FIX/MACP dated 17.09.2012 accorded financial upgradation of Grade Pay of Rs.5400 to Shri V. Venkataraman, Accounts Assistant/FA&CAO/S&VV/ PER/SR. This clearly indicates that the upgradation from Jr. Accounts Asstt. to Accounts Asstt. in terms of restructuring of the posts in the ratio of 20:80 does not amount to promotion.

According to Article 141 of the Constitution of India, policy decision, delivered on the particular subject by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, is binding upon the Government of India.

The Board are, therefore, again urged to re-examine the issue In the light of the facts appraised above and grant the benefit of the 3rd MACP(GP Rs.5400) to all the eligible Supervisory Staff whose initial appointment was CG-II/Accounts Clerk.

An early action in the matter shall be highly appreciated.

Yours faithfully,
sd/-
(Shiva Gopal Mishra)
General Secretary

Source: AIRF
[http://www.airfindia.com/AIRF%202013/Implementation%20of%20judgment%20of%20Hon'ble%20SC%20-%20Accounts%20Staff.pdf]