7th Pay Commission Report: Headquarters Organisations in Government of India and Office Staff in Field Offices (CSS Cadre – UDC, SO, NFU, Stenographer CSSS Cadre)
Headquarters Services
Headquarters Services
Introduction
7.1.1 The headquarters organisation comprises the Secretariats of
the ministries and departments of the Government of India. Most of the
middle level posts are held by the officers of Central Secretariat
Service as also a few administrative posts at the senior level. In the
Ministry of Railways, similar positions are held by the Railway Board
Secretariat Service, in the Ministry of Defence they are held by the
Armed Forces Headquarter Service and in the Ministry of External Affairs
the same are held by the Indian Foreign Service (B) officers.
7.1.2 The organisational hierarchy of all the headquarter services
by and large includes the following levels with corresponding GP:
| Level | Grade Pay |
| Selection Grade | 10000 |
| Director | 8700 |
| Dy. Secretary | 7600 |
| Under Secretary | 6600 |
| Section Officer | 4800 [after four years GP 5400 (PB-3)] |
| Assistant | 4600 |
7.1.3 The headquarter services provide a permanent bureaucratic set
up which assists in establishment and administration, policy
formulation and monitoring and review of the implementation of
policies/schemes of various ministries and departments.
Demands
7.1.4 The pay related demands of various headquarter services are as follows:-
a) At least five financial upgradations/promotions in the
promotional hierarchy, at regular intervals have been demanded: time
bound promotions at 5, 9, 13 years of service to CSS officers after they
reach Group ‘A,’ on the same pattern as that given to Officers of the
Group `A’ services and in case promotional posts are not available,
non-functioning pay upgradation to the next promotional grade. These
demands have been made on the grounds that it will attract a talented
pool in the CSS at the entry level as well as create motivation for the
serving officers.
Analysis and Recommendations
The Commission notes that the MACP scheme by its very
nomenclature is intended to provide assured career progression so that
government employees do not stagnate. The Commission is recommending
continuance of the existing MACP Scheme. As regards the grant of time
bound promotions at 5, 9, 13, 17 years to CSS officers on the analogy of
Group `A’ Services, this cannot be accepted as the entry level
induction of CSS is in Group `B’ and therefore it cannot be compared
with Group `A’ Services.
b) Demand has been made for entry Grade Pay of Rs.5400 (PB-3) for
Section Officers on the ground that there must be one pay for one post
in a cadre and that the minimum residency period of eight years in the
grade is very long. Similar demands have been received from the
Stenographers cadres too.
Analysis and Recommendations
The post of Section officer (SO) is a promotion post for Assistant
(GP 4600). Initially, on promotion, the SO is at GP 4800 and after four
years is entitled to a non-functional upgrade to GP 5400 (PB-3),
effectively two levels higher. Hence the stipulated residency period of
eight years at the level of SO is distributed in two parts, four years
in GP 4800 and the balance four in GP 5400 (PB-3). The current position
is that the average time spent at the higher level is around 5-6 years.
The Commission observes that the current progression from GP
4600 to GP 4800 on promotion as Section Officer is an appropriate
upgrade and does not find any justification for placing the entry level
to SO at a higher level. In so far as the non-functional upgrade is
concerned, in the newly restructured pay matrix the earlier situation of
a common grade pay i.e., 5400 prevailing in PB2 and PB3 has now been
rationalised. Accordingly, the non-functional upgrade will henceforth be
from level 8 to level 9.In the case of all such cadres/services where
nonfunctional upgradation is presently available across two levels, for
example, from GP 4800 to GP 5400 (PB-3) the same will now be available
across only one level for example, from GP 4800 to GP 5400 (PB-2) or in
the new matrix from level 8 to level 9.
c) Various headquarter/stenographer services have demanded
placement of GP 7600 in PB-4 for the post of Deputy Secretary or
alternatively, grant of GP 8000 in PB-4 as in the case of Lt Colonel in
the Indian Army. This demand is based on the ground that in the existing
dispensation, there is a considerable gap in pay in between PB-3 and
PB-4. Since the Deputy Secretary resides in PB-3 and the Director in
PB-4, and the hierarchy does not require Deputy Secretary to report to
the Director, this demand has been made.
Analysis and Recommendations
In the newly proposed rationalised pay matrix recommended by
this Commission the skewed spacing between pay bands has been moderated
and pay levels have been equitably placed. Therefore, there is no need
for any other measure in this regard.
d) Demand has been received from various headquarter services for
allowing the post of Director be made NFSG as against promotional post.
The CSS has argued that the cadre review Committee in the CSS
recommended that the residency period for promotion to Director Grade be
set at ten years combined approved service as Under Secretary and
Deputy Secretary with minimum three years’ regular service as Deputy
Secretary. The existing residency period for promotion from Under
Secretary to Deputy Secretary is five years and from Deputy Secretary to
Director is also five years.
Analysis and Recommendations
The Commission notes that the post of Director in the
headquarter services is a promotional one with a higher grade pay. The
headquarter services are not comparable with All India Group `A’ service
and hence the demand for NFSG for the post of Director is not
supported. The Commission recommends no change in the present
dispensation.
e) It has been demanded that persons appointed to a particular post
either on direct recruitment or on promotion should have their pay
fixed at the same level. This has been sought on the ground that no
junior should draw more pay than his senior in a cadre. As against this,
presently newly recruited Assistants of CSS are getting higher pay than
Assistants promoted after implementation of the VI CPC.
Analysis and Recommendations
In so far as one fixation of pay for one post is concerned, it may
be mentioned that the VI CPC recommended exclusive pay bands for direct
entry into posts with different grade pays attached to them and hence
there was a difference of total pay in respect of a direct recruit in
comparison to a person promoted to that grade.
In the new pay matrix proposed by this Commission, it has been
recommended that the first cell in each level in the matrix would be the
entry pay for fresh/ direct recruits. The pay of a person who moves
from a lower grade to higher grade is to be fixed with respect to the
pay being drawn by him/her at the time of promotion. The details of
fixation of pay on promotion has been dealt with in detail in the
Chapter 5.1. The proposed system is expected to eliminate the existing
anomaly.
f) The AFHQS (LDCE) officers have demanded re-introduction of the
scheme of Limited Departmental Competitive Examination in the Section
Officer grade. It has been stated that as per the AFHQ Civil Service
Rule 2001, the posts of Section Officers used to be filled 20 percent by
direct recruitment, 40 percent by seniority and 40 percent through
LDCE. The LDCE was introduced in AFHQ Civil Service Rule 2001 on the
recommendation of the V CPC, following a similar LDCE pattern in CSS
since 1962. Subsequently, a committee of senior officers on cadre
review/restructuring recommended abolition of LDCE at the level of
Section Officer and stoppage of direct recruitment in the Assistant
Grade. This was in view of the fact that the existing 40 percent quota
of LDCE which was meant to provide accelerated promotion to direct
recruits Assistants was to be abolished and hence there would be no
direct recruitment at Assistant level. The above recommendations of the
Committee were implemented. Recruitment of Section Officer thereafter
has been 50 percent by direct recruitment and 50 percent by promotion,
with complete scrapping of the element of LDCE. However, 50 percent
direct recruitment quota in the Assistant Grade was retained. It has
been demanded that the element of direct recruitment in the Section
Officer grade be removed and consequently 50 percent vacancies in the
grade be filled up by promotion on seniority and remaining 50 percent
through LDCE among the Assistants/Personal Assistants serving in AFHQ.
Analysis and Recommendations
Given the overall parity of posts between the CSS and AFHQS at
the level of Assistant and SO, the demand for restoration of the LDCE
scheme on the same pattern as available in the CSS seems justified.
However, the Commission feels that the issue raised is essentially
administrative in nature and hence no specific recommendations can be
made in this regard.
g) Demand has been raised regarding extension of Non Functional
Upgradation (NFU) to AFHQS officers. It has been stated that although
DoPT has clarified that the benefit of NFU will be available to Group
`B’ officers inducted into Organised Group `A’ Service, the same has not
been extended to AFHQS officers.
Analysis and Recommendations
The Commission feels since the orders on NFU have already been spelt out, no further recommendations on the issue are required.
h) AFHQS has demanded that their officers should be allowed to
serve in Ministry of Defence either by earmarking certain percentage of
posts up to the grade of Deputy Secretary/Director or by cross posting
of CSS officers to posts belonging to Integrated Headquarters of MoD
which are currently occupied by AFHQS officers.
Analysis and Recommendations
The issue has been discussed for several years at various fora and
as part of the V CPC recommendations. The V CPC did not recommend
participation of AFHQS officers in the Central Staffing Scheme however
earmarked few posts at the level of Under Secretary and Section Officer
in Ministry of Defence for members of this service. Even after several
iterations, the recommendations could not be implemented.
Owing to the fact that various headquarter services are
performing similar functions in various secretariats, the Commission is
of the view that such a vast resource pool of officers should be allowed
to move laterally and occupy posts in other secretariats on deputation
basis. This will not only enrich the service officers but also bring
about harmonisation among services. Later if found feasible these
services may also be merged.
i) There has been demand from all headquarter services to extend all recommendations made in respect of CSS to them as well.
Analysis and Recommendations
The Commission recommends parity between comparable posts in the
CSS and other headquarter services in the matter of pay structure. The
replacement pay available at all levels to CSS officers will be
applicable mutatis mutandis to their counterparts in the AFHQS, RBSS, IFS (B) as well those organisations who maintain pay parity with CSS.
j) Issue of parity of field functionaries with the Assistants of the CSS:
It has been demanded that CSS be allowed to retain an ‘edge’ over other
services or posts which have claimed parity with CSS. It has been
argued by the CSS that parity among various posts and services is to be
considered on long established principles of classification of posts,
duties and responsibilities, their hierarchical structure, historical
parity, mode of recruitment as well as minimum qualification for
recruitment at entry level as well as level. Historically, various
services in the Secretariat have had an edge over analogous posts in the
field offices. The CSS has, in its memorandum, demanded that this edge
over other services be retained. This has been justified on various
grounds, key amongst which is that office staff in the Secretariat
perform complex duties and are involved in analysing issues with policy
implications whereas their counter parts in field offices perform
routine work relating to matters concerning personnel and general
administration, and so on. Apart from retention of the edge, the CSS
memorandum also seeks a change in the mode of recruitment. It has been
argued that up until 1987, directly recruited Assistants of the CSS were
selected through an examination conducted by the UPSCand other
categories of employees falling under Group `C’were recruited through
the Staff Selection Commission [SSC]. In 1987, recruitment of Assistants
to the CSS was also brought under the SSC and is now carried out
through a common examination called the Combined Graduate Level Exam
(CGLE) and an All India Merit List.
Analysis and Recommendations
The VI CPC had gone into this issue in considerable detail. It had
noted that while at an earlier point in time it may well have been the
case that those in the Secretariat ended up performing more complex
duties relating to policy formulation, but over a period of time things
had changed. It had noted that there was an increasing emphasis on
strengthening the delivery lines and with growing decentralization, the
importance of delivery points in the field cannot be understated.
Therefore, in its view, the time had come to grant parity
between similarly placed personnel employed in field offices and in the
Secretariatand that this parity would need to be absolute till the grade
of Assistant. The VI CPC had noted that beyond this, it would not
be possible or even justified to grant complete parity because the
hierarchy and career progression would need to be different. Although
the recommendation of the VI CPC was accepted in the first instance, a
year down the line the Grade Pay of Assistants was increased from
Rs.4200 to Rs.4600, thereby squarely going back to the original position
in which the Assistants in the Headquarters resided at one level higher
than those in the field. In fact this latest modification follows a
consistent pattern seen over the decades. This is elucidated in the
table below:
| Table 1: Upgradation of Pay of Assistant over Successive Pay Commissions | ||||
Post: Assistant
|
Pay Scale as Initially Recommended
|
Pay Scale as Revised by Government | ||
| Date | Scale |
Dates (when issued and when effective)
|
Scale | |
| IV CPC | 1.1.1986 | 1400-2660 | 31.7.90, but effective from 1.1.86 | 1640-2900 |
| V CPC | 1.1.1996 | 5500-9000 | 25.9.2006, effective from 15.9.2006 | 6500-10500 |
| VI CPC | 1.1.2006 | GP 4200 | August 2008, but effective from 1.1.2006 | GP 4600 |
It may be seen from the above table that the recommendations of
successive Pay Commissions with regard to pay of Assistants, even if
initially implemented, has invariably been modified at a later point and
they have been placed at one higher level. As a corollary to this, the
level of Section Officers also is at one level higher than that of SOs
in the field.
While notifying the most recent upgrade in August 2008, the order
states that the Assistants in Headquarters are required to be at a
higher level since “there is an element of direct recruitment in their case and that too, through an all-India Competitive Examination.”
The Commission notes that certain inherent contradictions prevail.
The first relates to the Common Grade Level Examination (CGLE) through
which selections are carried out by the SSC for a range of positions, at
varying levels of grade pay. No doubt the examination process is a
graded one, with applicants for certain positions having to undergo two
written examinations as well as an interview and for certain other
positions only two written examinations. But in the case of Assistants
for CSS and Assistants for certain other organisations, the examination
process is common although the grade pay for the two sets are different.
This then brings about a situation where those with lower grade pay
continuously demand parity with the others while those with higher grade
pay seek to set themselves apart. The categorical observations of the
VI CPC that the time had come to grant parity between similarly placed
personnel employed in the field offices and in the Secretariat are
echoed by this Commission, which sees merit in placing all Assistants
recruited through the CGLE, whether working in the field offices or in
headquarters, at the same level.
The Commission accordingly strongly recommends parity in pay
between the field staff and headquarter staff up to the rank of
Assistants on two grounds- firstly the field staff are recruited through
the same examination and they follow the same rigour as the Assistants
of CSS and secondly there is no difference in the nature of functions
discharged by both. Therefore to bring in parity as envisaged by the VI
CPC, this Commission recommends bringing the level of Assistants of CSS
at par with those in the field offices who are presently drawing GP
4200. Accordingly, in the new pay matrix the Assistants of both
Headquarters as well as field will come to lie in Level 6 in the pay
matrix corresponding to pre revised GP 4200 and pay fixed accordingly.
Similarly the corresponding posts in the Stenographers cadre will also
follow similar pay parity between field and headquarter staff. The pay
of those Assistants/Stenographer who have in the past, been given higher
Grade pay would be protected.
Recently, through a government order similar ‘edge in pay’ has
also been extended to the Upper Division Clerks belonging to CSS in the
Secretariat by way of grant of non-functional selection grade to GP 4200
(available to 30 percent of UDCs). It is expected to lead to further
resentment at the level of UDCs in the field as well as with other
non-secretariat posts with which they had parity before. Since as per
the recommendation of this Commission, Assistants have now come to lie
in Level 6 of the pay matrix which corresponds to pre revised GP 4200,
this Commission recommends withdrawal of non-functional selection grade
to GP 4200 in respect of Upper Division Clerks belonging to CSS.
Stenographers Services
The Central Secretariat Stenographer Service (CSSS)/ Armed Forces Headquarters Stenographers Service (AFHQSS)
7.1.5 The CSSS/AFHQSS consists of the following grades:
| Level | Grade Pay |
| Principal Staff Officer | 8700 |
| Sr. PPS | 7600 |
| PPS | 6600 |
| PS | 4800 |
| Stenographer Grade-C | 4600 |
| Stenographer Grade-D | 2400 |
7.1.6 The demands of CSSS and AFHQ Stenographers Service are:
a) Merger of headquarters services with their counterparts in the
Stenographer cadre with full parity and uniform designation and
introduction of Executive Assistant Scheme. In the justification for
merger, the recommendation of the VI CPC vide paras 3.1.10 to 3.1.12
have been referred to, where the Commission observed inter-alia, that
there is no justification for maintaining a distinct Stenographer cadre
in any government office. Instead, emphasis should be on recruiting
multi skilled personnel at Assistant level to be designated as Executive
Assistants who will discharge the functions of present day Assistant
besides performing all the Stenographic functions. The VI CPC had
justified the need for a unified cadre and common recruitment on the
basis of assumption that secretariat functioning would become more IT
oriented in future reducing reliance on personal staff. The CSSS and
AFHQSS officers’ Associations have raised demands relating to merger of
present incumbents of CSS/AFHQCS and CSSS/AFHQSS with full parity and
uniform designation.
The DoPT has referred to propose EA scheme to this Commission.
Analysis and Recommendations
The issue has been deliberated in DoPT several times. Reports of
the discussions indicate that although the CSS Associations are strongly
opposed to such merger between CSS and CSSS, they are not averse to
introduction of the Executive Assistant Scheme. The DoPT itself appears
to have not found it feasible in view of the nature of work, duties and
responsibilities of the members of CSS and CSSS being different.
In view of the fact that several detailed deliberations have
already taken place in DoPT as well as in the meeting of the COS on 1
March, 2013 wherein various aspects of the scheme have been examined
threadbare in presence of all the stakeholders, the issue of merger of
CSS and CSSS cadre remains an administrative reform issue to be dealt
with by the administrative Ministry. The Commission is making no
recommendation in this regard.
b) A demand has been received regarding provision of promotional
channel to the grade of Joint Secretary in CSSS stating that such
creation is essential to bring full parity (in grade) between CSS and
CSSS. It has also been argued that this would ensure career progression
for PSOs, who have no promotional avenues even after completing five or
more years of approved service in the grade.
Analysis and Recommendations
As regards demand for in-situ promotion of PSO to the rank of Joint
Secretary and demand for creation of the post of JS for removal of
stagnation and career progression of CSSS Cadre beyond the level of PSO
is concerned, it is stated that these issues are purely administrative
in nature and can be dealt with through the process of cadre review.
Hence, the Commission is making no recommendation in this regard.
c) A demand for creation of additional posts in the grade of Sr.
PPS (GP 7600) and PPS (GP 6600) has been received on the ground that
these additional creations will facilitate smooth merger of present
incumbents of CSSS and CSS.
Analysis and Recommendations
The demand for creation of additional posts in the grade of Sr.
PPS and PPS is linked to the demand of cadre merger, hence it is for the
cadre controlling authority i.e., the DoPT to decide the issue in its
entirety.
d) The AFHQSS has demanded grant of two increments at par with
CSS/CSSS at the time of promotion from GP 6600 to GP 7600 for parity.
Analysis and Recommendations
The Commission finds no merit in continuation of two increments for CSS/CSSS and hence recommends abolition of the same.
0 comments:
Post a Comment