MACP CAT Chandigarh: Ignore the promotion received for MACP purposes by the post bearing the same Grade Pay

MACP CAT Chandigarh

Ignore the promotion received for MACP purposes by the post bearing the same Grade Pay

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
CHANDIGARH BENCH

OA. 063/00687/2018
MA No. 063/00460/2019

Reserved on : 24.09.2019
Pronounced on: 14.11.2019

HON’BLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER(J)
HON’BLE MR. A.K. BISHNOI , MEMBER(A)

1. Shalini Naagi wife of Sh. Suraj Prakash, aged 49 years r/o H. No. 261, Gurdev Nagar, Zirkpur, Distt. Mohali (Pb) Office Superintendent, (Group ‘B’ Non Gazetted), Office of Additional Surveyor General, Northern Zone, Survey of India, Chandigarh.
2. Satbir Singh son of Sh. Surjan Singh, aged 59 years, r/o H. No. 565, Sector 32-A, Chandigarh, Office Superintendent, (Group „B‟ Non-Gazetted) Office of Director HP GDC, Survey of India, Chandigarh.
3. Habib Ahmad Siddiqui son of Late Sh. N.M. Siddiqui, aged 59 years r/o H. No. 603/B, Sector 32- A, Chandigarh, Office Superintendent, (Group „B‟ Non Gazetted) Office of Director Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh GDC, Survey of India, Chandigarh.

…APPLICANTS
(Through Shri R.C. Sharma, Advocate)

VERSUS

1. Union of India, through Secretary to Government of India,Ministry of Science and Technology, New Mehrauli Road, Block C, Admin, New Delhi-110 016.
2. The Surveyor General of India, Hathibarkala Estate, Dehradun, Uttrakhand.
3. The Additional Surveyor General, Northern Zone, Survey of India, Sector 32-A, Chandigarh.
4. Director, Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh GDC, Survey of India, Sector 32-A, Chandigarh.
5. Director, Himachal Pradesh GDC, Survey of India, Sector 32-A, Chandigarh.

…….RESPONDENTS

(Through Shri K.K. Thakur, Advocate)

ORDER

MR. A.K. BISHNOI, MEMBER (A):

The applicants have filed the present Original Application seeking the following reliefs:
“It is respectfully prayed that in view of the submissions made above this Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the impugned letters/ orders impugned communications/letters dated 22.05.2017 of the Respondent No.1 (Annexure A-6) and impugned letters dated 09.06.2017 and 01.12.2017 of the respondent number 2 (Annexure A-7 and A-8) effecting reversal and cancellation of the benefit of MACP granted to the applicants.”

Also check: IMPLEMENTATION OF HONARABLE SUPREME COURT ORDER ON MACP SCHEME

2. Briefly, the facts of the case are as follows:

2.1 On implementation of Sixth Central Pay Commission (CPC) with effect from 01.01.2006, both the posts of Assistant and Office Superintendent (OS) were merged and assigned the same pay band and grade pay i.e. Pay Band of Rs. 9300-34800 (PB 2) with Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/-. On 15.06.2009, MACP Scheme was notified requiring financial upgradation on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years of service or 10 years of service in same grade pay.

2.2 The applicants were granted third MACP with effect from 30.07.2014, 27.09.2013 and 16.12.2012 vide letters dated 28.07.2014, 03.03.2014 and 03.01.2013 respectively on completion of 30 years of service and on remaining in the same grade pay for ten years. Some persons junior to the applicants who had not been promoted, were granted the benefit of third MACP with Grade Pay of Rs.4600/-. The applicants continued to receive pay and allowances on the basis of pay fixed after grant of MACP. However, through communication dated 22.05.2017, it was informed by respondent no.1 to respondent no.2 that MACP was not admissible to the applicants as the promotion from the post of Assistant to OS cannot be ignored for this purpose.

2.3 Subsequently, vide orders dated 09.06.2017 and 01.12.2017 (Annexures A-7 and A-8), the grant of MACP to the applicants was reversed. The applicants thereafter submitted representations to reconsider the decision of reducing the grade pay (Annexures A-9, A-10 and A-11) but no relief was granted by the respondents. Applicants have relied on the judgment rendered by the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in Government of NCT of Delhi & Anr. Vs. S.K. Saraswat & Ors. decided on 09.05.2016 to fortify their stand.

3. The respondents in their counter reply have submitted that the applicants were promoted to the post of Office Superintendent from the post of Assistants on the dates as given above and were performing higher duties, but, in view of the merger of pay scales of Assistant and Office Superintendent as per Sixth CPC, the applicants were not granted any financial benefit on promotion from Assistant to the post of Superintendent at that stage. But, later on, as per the clarification dated 07.01.2013 received from Ministry of Finance, the applicants were granted the benefit of pay fixation by giving 3% increment and on completion of 30 years of regular service, they were granted third MACP with Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- in PB-3 of Rs. 9300-34800. However, later on in view of some query raised, vide letter dated 22.05.2017, it was informed as follows:-

• Assistants who have already received MACP in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4600/- are not eligible for any financial benefit on regular promotion to the post of Office Superintendent.
• No MACP is eligible to Office Superintendent by ignoring his promotion from the post of Assistant to Office Superintendent.

3.1. In view of the above instructions, the third MACP benefits granted to the applicants were cancelled and the fixation of pay in respect of the concerned officers was carried out as per SGO‟s letter dated 09.06.2017 (Annexure A-7).

3.2. Respondents have further submitted that they always have a right to rectify the mistake and in this regard, they have cited the judgments in Jagdish Prajapati Vs. the State of Rajasthan and Ors., 1998 (2) ATJ, P-286, Anand Prakash Vs. State of Punjab, 2005 (4) RSJ 749 and Raj Kumar Batra Vs. State of Haryana, 1992 (1) SCT 129.

4. Shri R.C. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants vehemently contended that the action of the respondents in withdrawing the MACP benefits was contrary to the spirit of the Scheme and in this regard specifically referred to para 5 of the MACP Scheme according to which where two posts have been merged and after merger carry the same grade pay, then the effect of promotion from one of these posts to the other shall be ignored for the purpose of granting upgradation under the MACP.

5. Shri K.K. Thakur, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, argued that in terms of para 8 of the MACP Scheme, promotions earned in the post carrying same grade pay in the promotional hierarchy, shall be counted for the purpose of MACP.

6. We have carefully gone through the pleadings on record and also the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for both sides. We have also considered the judgments cited by the two sides.
7. For clarity of understanding some parts of the MACP Scheme are extracted below:

“2. The MACPS envisages merely placement in the immediate next higher grade pay in the hierarchy of the recommended revised pay bands and grade pay as given in Section1, Part-A of the first schedule of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. Thus, the grade pay at the time of financial upgradation under the MACPS can, in certain cases where regular promotion is not between two successive grades, be different than what is available at the time of regular promotion. In such cases, the higher grade pay attached to the next promotion post in the hierarchy of the concerned cadre/ organization will be given only at the time of regular promotion.

xxxx xxxx xxxx

5. Promotions earned / upgradations granted under the ACP Scheme in the past to those grades which now carry the same grade pay due to merger of pay scales / upgradations of posts recommended by the Sixth Pay Commission shall be ignored for the purpose of granting upgradations under Modified ACPs.

Illustration - 1

The pre-revised hierarchy (in ascending order) in a particular organization was as under:-
Rs. 5000-8000, Rs. 5500-9000 & Rs. 6500-10500.

(a) A Government servant who was recruited in the hierarchy in the pre-revised pay scale Rs. 5000- 8000 and who did not get a promotion even after 25 years of service prior to 1.1.2006, in his case as on 1.1.2006 he would have got two financial upgradations under ACP to the next grades in the hierarchy of his organization, i.e., to the pre-revised scales of Rs. 5500-9000 and Rs. 6500-10500.

(b) Another Government servant recruited in the same hierarchy in the pre-revised scale of Rs. 5000- 8000 has also completed about 25 years of service, but he got two promotions to the next higher grades of Rs. 5500-9000 & Rs. 6500-10500 during this period.


In the case of both (a) and (b) above, the promotions/financial upgradations granted under ACP to the pre-revised scales of Rs. 5500-9000 and Rs. 6500-10500 prior to 1.1.2006 will be ignored on account of merger of the pre-revised scales of Rs. 50008000, Rs. 5500-9000 and Rs. 6500-10500 recommended by the Sixth CPC. As per CCS (RP) Rules, both of them will be granted grade pay of Rs. 4200 in the pay band PB-2. After the implementation of MACPS, two financial upgradations will be granted both in the case of (a) and (b) above to the next higher grade pays of Rs. 4600 and Rs. 4800 in the pay band PB-2.”

8. Para 8 of the Scheme is reproduced as follows:

“8. Promotions earned in the post carrying same grade pay in the promotional hierarchy as per Recruitment Rules shall be counted for the purpose of MACPS.

8.1 Consequent upon the implementation of Sixth CPC’s recommendations, Grade pay of Rs. 5400 is now in two pay bands viz., PB-2 and PB-3. The grade pay of Rs. 5400 in PB-2 and Rs.5400 in PB-3 shall be treated as separate grade pays for the purpose of grant of upgradations under MACP Scheme.”

9. This issue relating to the effect of merger of pay scales has been examined in extensive and minute detail by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in S.K. Saraswat (supra), the relevant portions of the judgment are extracted below:

“4. In order to appreciate and understand the controversy, we would like to refer to the basic facts. The respondents, 55 in number are direct appointees to the post of Principal. Their pay- scale as in the case of Education Officer and Assistant Director of Education prior to the implementation of the Sixth Pay Commission was Rs.10,000 – 15,200. The pre-revised pay scale in the promotional post of Deputy Director of Education was Rs.12,000 – 16,500. On the recommendation of the Sixth Pay Commission, the pay scales of Principal, Education Officer and Assistant Director of Education were enhanced and merged with the pay scale of Deputy Director of Education, i.e. Rs.12,000 – 16,500. Accordingly, employees holding the post of Principal, Education Officer, Assistant Director of Education or Deputy Director of Education became entitled to an equal/identical pay-scale of Rs.12,000 – 16,500, and revised pay scale of Grade Pay of Rs.7600 in Pay Band -3 [Rs.15,600 – 39100]. It is in this factual matrix that the issue arises whether the Tribunal was justified in accepting the plea and contention of the respondents that they would be entitled to first financial upgradation in the Grade Pay of Rs.8700, second financial upgradation in the Grade Pay of Rs.8900 and third financial upgradation in the Grade Pay of Rs.10000.

5. As noted above, the petitioners herein had earlier issued letter dated 22nd October, 2009 accepting the said position, but have later on changed their stand and stance and have positioned that the respondents would be entitled to financial upgradation only in the Grade Pay of Rs.7600 in Pay Band-3. In other words, there would not be any increase in grade pay of Rs 7600, but respondents would be entitled to benefit in the form of increments under Fundamental Rule 22(1)(a)(i).
xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

7. xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx


The MACPS envisages merely placement in the immediate next higher grade pay in the hierarchy of the recommended revised pay bands and grade pay as given in Section1, Part-A of the first schedule of the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008. Thus, the grade pay at the time of financial upgradation under the MACPS can, in certain cases where regular promotion is not between two successive grades, be different than what is available at the time of regular promotion. In such cases, the higher grade pay attached to the next promotion post in the hierarchy of the concerned cadre/organization will be given only at the time of regular promotion.

xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

12. Paragraph 5 of the MACP Scheme refers to both- upgradations granted under the erstwhile ACP Scheme and promotions earned in the past to grades which have merged as a result of merger of pay-scales or upgradation of posts. These have to be ignored, and the reason is illuminate. Merger of pay scales nullifies and negates the very objective and purpose of the Scheme. Thus, promotions earned or upgradations granted under the ACP Scheme when they have merged, either as a result of merger of posts or pay scales, have to be ignored for the purpose of granting upgradations under the MACP Scheme. Mandate of Rule 4 is clarified by way of an illustration, which is instructive. A government servant, recruited in the hierarchy in the pre-revised pay-scale of Rs.5000-8000 and granted financial upgradations in the pre-revised pay-scale of Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500, on merger of the aforesaid three pay-scales would be entitled to financial upgradations in the Grade Pay of Rs.4600 and Rs.4800 in Pay Band-2. Such government servant would not be paid the Grade Pay of Rs.4200 in Pay Band-2, which is the grade pay corresponding to pre-revised pay-scales. The reason is that pay scales of Rs.5000-8000, Rs.5500-9000 and Rs.6500-10500, have been merged into one pay-scale.

xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

17. Paragraph 8 also deals with computation for the purpose of MACP Scheme. In the beginning itself, we would say and accept that paragraph 8 is ambiguous and confusing. It is not happily worded. One way of reading the said paragraph, which consists of one sentence, is in the manner suggested by the petitioners i.e. promotions in the hierarchy which have the same grade pay shall be counted for the purpose of MACP Scheme. In other words, if the promotional post carries the same grade pay, the promotion will still be counted or treated as financial upgradation for the purpose of the MACP Scheme. However, this interpretation would be counter to and is in conflict with the precept and foundation of the MACP Scheme, which, as noticed above, refers to the immediate next higher grade pay in the hierarchy given in Section 1, Part-A of the first schedule of the Rules. The difficulty in accepting this interpretation is that it will over-turn the basis and edifice of the said Scheme and would be contrary to paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6.2. We have already noticed these paragraphs, including paragraph 2 and interpreted the same. Paragraph 2 states that financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme cannot be understood and applied with reference to promotional pay-scales, for the same can be different. This is clear from the second sentence of paragraph 2. The third and the last sentence of paragraph 2 by way of an illustration accepts that the higher grade pay attached to the next promotional post in the hierarchy will be given at the time of regular promotion. We would observe that use of word “higher” in the last sentence is for the purpose of demonstration to rule out confusion and ambiguity. It is possible that the next higher promotional post may well have pay-scale of the lower post. It is in this context that the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission in paragraph 6.1.15 are relevant. If the legislature i.e. the Government, which had issued the Scheme, wanted to restrict financial upgradation and not collate it to the next higher grade pay in the hierarchy, it would have stipulated as such in Section 1, Part-A of the Rules. The said stipulation, would have been properly clarified and so stated in paragraph 2 itself. The second sentence of paragraph 2 expressly and clearly states that the grade pay at the time of financial upgradation under the MACP Scheme can in some cases be different from the pay-scale/grade pay applicable on regular promotion. The second sentence does not refer only to the situation where the grade pay is higher in the promotional post. The third sentence in paragraph 2 is also by way of an illustration. Consequence of the interpretation, as suggested by the petitioners would be an absurdity, contradiction and cause hardship. We would hesitate to observe that this was the legislative intent. Such interpretation would frustrate the core foundation of the Scheme.

xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

18. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we do not find any merit in the present writ petition and the same is dismissed. In the facts of the present case, there will be no order as to costs.”

10. It can clearly be seen that the present case is squarely covered by the judgement of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in S.K. Saraswat (supra).

11. From a reading of Para 5 of the MACP Scheme, it is abundantly clear that the case of the applicants is fully governed by the said provision. Further, from the illustration given with Para 5 of the MACP Scheme, there is no doubt left whatsoever. Para 8 of the Scheme is of a general nature, in a different context and cannot be said to have overriding effect on Para 5 of the Scheme, which is very specific.

12. As for the case law cited by the respondents, in the facts and circumstances of the case they lend no support to the arguments advanced by the respondents.

13. In view of the above, the OA is allowed and the impugned orders are set aside. The applicants shall be granted all consequential benefits within a period of sixty days of the receipt of a certified copy of this order. No order as to costs.

(A.K. Bishnoi), Member (A)
(Sanjeev Kaushik), Member (J)

Source: CAT Chandigarh

6th Central Pay Commission - Pension of Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) discharged from service on or after 01.01.2006.

6th Central Pay Commission - Pension of Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) discharged from service on or after 01.01.2006.

No.1(15)/2012/D(Pen/Pol)
Government of India/Bharat Sarkar
Ministry of Defence
Department of Ex-Servicemen Welfare
D(Pension/Policy)

Dated 6th February 2019

To
The Chief of the Army Staff
The Chief of the Navil Staff
The Chief of the Air Staff

Subject: Implementation of the Government decision on the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission - Pension of Personnel Below Officer Rank (PBOR) discharged from service on or after 01.01.2006.

The undersigned is directed to refer to the provisions contained in this Ministry's letter No.17(4)/08(2)/D(Pen/Policy) dated 18.08.2010 as amended vide this Ministry’s letter No.17(4)/2008/D(Pen/Policy) dated 20.09.2012 under which a note below Para 3(v) of the ibid MoD letter dated 18.08.2010 was inserted regarding non-applicability of provisions of letter dated 18.08.2010 to JCOs granted Honorary Commission as Leiutenant and Captain.

2. Further, in supersession of the provision contained in this Ministry’s letter No.17(4)/2008(2)/D(Pen/Policy) dated 20.09.2012, letter No.1(15)/2012/D(Pen/Policy) dated 17.01.2013 was issued under which it was decided that the provisions of MoD letter dated 18.08.2010 are also applicable to post 01.01.2006 JCOs/Ors granted Honorary Commission as Lieutenant and Captain with effect from 24.09.2012.

3. The President is now pleased to decide that provisions of this Ministry’s letter dated 18.08.2010 shall also be applicable to post 01.01.2006 JCOs/ORs granted Honorary Commission as Lieutenant and Captain. The notional pay in the revised pay structure for these ranks shall be worked out by adding pay in the revised pay band corresponding to the Fixed pay of Fifth CPC (in terms of Para 9(a) (i) of SAI 1/S/2008 as amended and equivalent instructions for Navy & Air Force)” plus the Grade pay and Military Service Pay introduced under Sixth CPC revised pay structure.

4. In view of the above, the note below Para 3(v) of this Ministry’s letter No. 17(4)/08(2)/D(Pen/Policy) dated 18.08.2010 inserted vide this Ministry's letter No. 17(4)/2008(2)/D(Pen/Policy) dated 20.09.2012 may be considered as deleted.

5. The financial benefit in past cases shall be granted from 01.01.2006 or date of discharge/invalidment, whichever is later. In this regard, concerned PSA's would suo-moto issue Corr PPO based on the data of post 2006 retired Hony Commissioned Officers held with them.

6. All other terms and conditions shall remain unchanged.

7. This issue with the concurrence of the Finance Division of this Minister vide their ID No.10(15)/2015/FIN/PEN dated 02.01.2019

8. Hindi version will follow.

sd/-
(Manoj Sinha)
Deputy Secretary to the Govt. Of India

Fixation of Pay with An Extra Increment under Rule 13 RP Rules - RBE 175/2008

Fixation of Pay with An Extra Increment under Rule 13 RP Rules - RBE 175/2008
"Ministry of Finance and DoP&T and it is clarified that the benefit of fixation of pay in terms of Rule 13 of RS (RP) Rules, 2008 would be admissible in such situations of placement in higher Grade Pay on non-functional basis"

Fixation of pay/ admissibility of increment under Rule 13 of Revised Pay Rules, 2008 in the situation of placement on non-functional basis in higher Pay Band/ Grade Pay

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
(RAILWAY BOARD)

S.No. PC-VI/ 391
RBE No. 175/2018
No. PC-VI/2009/I/6/6 Pt.

New Delhi, dated: 12.11.2018

The GMs/ CAOs (R),
All Zonal Railways & Production Units
(As per mailing list)

Sub: Fixation of pay/ admissibility of increment under Rule 13 of Revised Pay Rules, 2008 in the situation of placement on non-functional basis in higher Pay Band/ Grade Pay.

Prior to implementation of recommendations of Sixth Central Pay Commission, fixation of pay of Railway employees on appointment from one post to another was governed by Rule 1313 {FR22(1)(a)(1)} and 1313 {FR22(1)(a)(2)} R-II depending upon whether situation involved assumption of duties and responsibilities of greater importance or otherwise. Rule 13 of Railway Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 governing fixation of pay on promotion on or after 1.1.2006, however, envisage grant of one increment equal to 3% of sum of the pay in the pay band and existing grade pay (to be rounded off to next multiple of 10) in the case of promotion from one grade pay to another in the revised pay structure. Further clarification were issued vide Board's letter No. PC-VI/2008/I/RSRP/1 dated 11.02.2009 (RBE No. 28/2009).

2. References have been received from some of the Railways/PUs and both staff Federations regarding admissibility of fixation with extra increment in terms of Rule 13 of RS(RP) Rules, 2008 in the situation of placement of Pharmacist (GP Rs. 2800) in GP Rs. 4200 on completion of two years regular service and placement of Private Secretaries Grade I (GP Rs. 4800) in GP Rs. 5400 (PB 2) on completion of 4 years regular service on non-functional basis. The matter has been examined in consultation with Ministry of Finance and DoP&T and it is clarified that the benefit of fixation of pay in terms of Rule 13 of RS (RP) Rules, 2008 would be admissible in such situations of placement in higher Grade Pay on non-functional basis.

3. This issues with the concurrence of the Finance Directorate of the Ministry of Railways.
Hindi version will follow.

(S. Balachandra Iyer)
Executive Director, Pay Commission-II
Railway Board

Resolution of Anomalies in the 6th CPC Report

Resolution of Anomalies in the 6th CPC Report

Recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission (CPC) and several improvements made thereon by the Government have been largely well received by the armed forces personnel including ex-servicemen. Some issues regarding service conditions, pay, pension and allowances, including demand for non-functional upgradation, were subsequently received, which were examined by the Government on case to case basis.
Some of the pay concerns of armed forces personnel were also examined by a committee constituted under the chairmanship of Shri Pranab Mukherjee, the then Minister of External Affairs. The committee's recommendation on placement of Lt Cols / equiv in Pay Band IV was accepted and implemented by the Government.

Thereafter, a committee was constituted under the chairmanship of the Cabinet Secretary in 2012, to examine certain pay and pension issues of armed forces personnel. All the recommendations of Cabinet Secretary Committee related to ex-servicemen were implemented. The Committee's recommendations on pay related issues were referred to the 7th CPC.

The improvement of service conditions, pay, allowances and retirement benefits of armed forces personnel is a continuous process, which is examined in consultation with various stakeholders, and on case to case basis.
This information was given by Minister of State for Defence Dr. Subhash Bhamre in a written reply to Shri Rajeev Chandra Sekhar in Rajya Sabha today.

PIB

Gazette Notification for implementation of 7th CPC

Gazette Notification for implementation of 7th CPC

Comrades,
There are lot of discussions about the date of Gazette Notification for implementation of 7th CPC & Office Memorandum, It usually takes about 15 to 20 days after cabinet approval of the pay commission report .Let us examine the 6th CPC dates.

The union cabinet gave its approval for implementation of the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission on 14th August 2008.

Gazette Notification for implementation of 6th CPC was issued on 29th August 2008 & Office Memorandum was issued on 30th August 2008, after 16 days after cabinet approval

The 7th CPC

The union cabinet gave its approval for implementation of the recommendations of the Seventh Central Pay Commission on 29th June 2016.

Hence the Gazette Notification for implementation of 7th CPC & Office Memorandum is likely issued in next week.

Comradely yours

(P.S.Prasad)
General Secretary

Source : http://karnatakacoc.blogspot.in/

Grant of House Rent Allowance to Railway Employees - Re-classification of cities/towns on the basis of 2011 Census

Grant of House Rent Allowance to Railway Employees - Re-classification of cities/towns on the basis of 2011 Census

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS

(RAILWAY BOARD)

RBE No.116/2015

No. E(P&A) II-2015/HRA-7

New Delhi, dated 24-09-2015

The General Managers/CAOs,
All Indian Railways & Prod. Units etc.

Sub: Re-classification of cities/towns on the basis of 2011 Census grant of House Rent Allowance to Railway Employees.

******

Attention is invited to Board’s letter No. E(P&A)II-2008/HRA-10 dated 12-09-2008 relating to grant of House Rent Allowance (HRA) to Railway employees on the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission whereby a list of cities/towns classified as ‘X’, ‘Y’ and ‘Z’ for the purpose of grant of HRA was enclosed as Annexure. The matter relating to re-classification of cities/towns on the basis of Census-2011 for the purpose of grant of HRA to Central Government employees has been considered by the Government.

 

2. The President is pleased to decide that in supersession of all the existing orders relating to classification of cities/towns for the purposes of grant of HRA to Railway employees, cities/towns shall now be re-classified as ‘X’, ‘Y’ and ‘Z’ for the purpose of HRA as enumerated in the Annexure to these orders

 

3. Consequent upon implementation of the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission, certain cities/towns were placed in a lower classification as compared to their existing classification for CCA/HRA purpose, vide Board’s letter No.PC-V/97/I/7/13 dated 16.10.1997. However, these cities/towns were allowed to retain their existing higher classification, vide para 3 thereof; and further extended vide Board’s letter No.E(P&A)II-2004/HRA-16 dated 17.05.2005 & Board’s letter No. E(P&A)II-2008/HRA-10 dated 20.03.2009. As other cities/towns to which protection of retaining earlier higher classification was allowed, got upgraded during the intervening period, as on date only two cities i.e. Ajmer in Rajasthan and Durgapur in West Bengal were retaining such protection. Consequent upon upgradation of these two cities also on the basis of their population as per Census-2011, provisions contained in Para 3, of vide Board’s letter No. PC-V/97/I/7/13 dated 16.10.1997 which were allowed to further continue vide Board’s letter No. E(P&A)II-2004/HRA-16 dated 17.05.2005 & Board’s letter No. E(P&A)II-2008/HRA-10 dated 20.03.2009 stand withdrawn/ discontinued

 

4. Special orders allowing continuance of HRA (a) at Delhi (“X” class city) rates to Railway employees posted at Faridabad, Ghaziabad, NOIDA, Gurgaon and (b) at Jalandhar (“Y” class city) rates to Jalandhar Cantt. and (c) at “Y” class city rates to Shillong, Goa, Port Blair vide Board’s letter No.E(P&A)Il-2008/HRA-10 dated 12.09.2008 and (d) continuance of HRA at par with Chandigarh (“Y” class city) to Panchkula vide Board’s letter No.E(P&A)II-2008/HRA-10 dated 16.05.2011, shall continue to be applicable till the recommendations of 7th CPC are considered by the Government

 

5. These orders shall be effective from 01.04.2015

 

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

( Salim Md. Ahmad )

Deputy Director/E(P&A)II,

Railway Board.

ANNEXURE

To Board’s letter no.E(P&A)II-2015/HRA-7 dt.24.09.2015

LIST OF CITIES/TOWNS CLASSIFIED FOR GRANT OF

HOUSE RENT ALLOWANCE TO RAILWAY EMPLOYEES

SI.No	STATES/UNION TERRITORIS	CITIES CLASSIFIED AS “X”	CITIES CLASSFIED AS “Y”
1	ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ISLANDS
2	ANDHRA PRADESH/TELANGANA	Hyderabad (UA)	Vijayawada (UV), Warangal (UA), Greater Visakhapatnam (M.Corpn.), Guntur (UA), Nellore (UA)
3	ARUNACHAL PRADESH
4	ASSAM		Guwahati (UA)
5	BIHAR		Patna (UA)
6	CHANDIGARH		Chandigarh (UA)
7	CHATTISGARH		Durg-Bhilai Nagar (UA), Raipur (UA)
8	DADRA & NAGARHAVELI
9	DAMAN & DIU
10	DELHI	Delhi (UA)
11	GOA
12	GUJARAT	Ahmadabad (UA)	Rajkot (UA), Jamnagar (UA), Bhavnagar (UA), Vadodara (UA), Surat (UA)
13	HARYANA		Faridabad* (M.Corpn.) Gurgaon*(UA)
14	HIMACHALPRADESH
15	JAMMU & KASHMIR		Srinagar (UA), Jammu(UA)
16	JHARKHAND		Jamshedpur (UA), Dhanbad (UA), Ranchi (UA), Bokaro Steel City (UA).
17	KARNATAKA	Bangalore/Bengaluru (UA)	Belgaum (UA), Hubli-Dharwad (M.Corpn.),Mangalore (UA), Mysore (UA), Gulbarga (UA)
18	KERALA		Kozhikoda (UA), Kochi (UA), Thiruvanathapuram (UA), Thrissur (UA), Malappuram (UA), Kannur (UA), Kollam (UA)
19	LAKSHADWEEP
20	MADHYAPRADESH		Gwalior (UA), Indore(UA), Bhopal (UA), Jabaipur (UA), Ujjain (M.Corpn).
21	MAHARASHTRA	Greater Mumbai (UA), Pune (UA)	Amravati (M.corpn.), Nagpur (UA), Aurangabad (UA), Nashik (UA), Bhiwandi (UA), Solapur (M.Corpn.) Kolhapur (UA), Vasaivirar city  (M.Corpn.), Malegaon (UA), Nandad-Waghala (M.Corpn.), Sangli (UA).
22	MANIPUR
23	MEGHALAYA
24	MIZORAM
25	NAGALAND
26	ODISH		Cuttack (UA), Bhubaneswar (UA), Raurkela (UA),
27	PUDUCHERRY (PONDICHERRY)		Puducherry/Pondicherry (UA)
28	PUNJAB		Amritsar (UA), Jalandhar (UA), Ludhiana (M.Coprn).
29	RAJASTHAN		Bikaner (M.Corpn.), Jaipur (M.Corpn.) Jodhpur (UA), Kota (M.corpn.), Ajmer (UA)
30	SIKKAM
31	TAMIL NADU	Chennai (UA)	Salem (UA), Tiruppur (UA), Coimbatore (UA), Tiruchirappalli (UA), Madurai (UA), Erode (UA).
32	TRIPURA
33	UTTAR PRADESH		Moradabad (M.corpn.), Meerut (UA), Ghaziabad* (UA), Aligarh (UA), Agra (UA), Barcilly (UA), Lucknow (UA), Kanpur (UA), Allahabad (UA), Gorakhpur (UA), Varanasi (UA), Saharanpur (M.Corpn.), Noida* (CT), Firozabad (NPP), Jhansi (UA),

Source: http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/uploads/directorate/establishment/E(P%26A)/2015/Houserentallow.pdf

Committee for evolving a new formula for productivity Linked Bonus (PLB) on Indian Railways.

Committee for evolving a new formula for productivity Linked Bonus (PLB) on Indian Railways.

Government of India

Ministry Of Railways

Railway Board

No.E(P&A)II-2013/PLB-8

New Delhi, dt.11-02-2015

The General Secretary, AIRF 4, State Entry Road, New Delhi – 110 055.

The General Secretary, NFIR, 3, Chelmsford Road, New Delhi – 110 055

Sub: Committee for evolving a new formula for productivity Linked Bonus (PLB) on Indian Railways.

Sir,

I am directed to state that Ministry of Railways have constituted a Committee of Additional Members vide Board’s Letter No.ERB-I/2014/23/15 dt.21.3.2014 for evolving a new formula for productivity Linked Bonus on Indian Railways Keeping in view the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission and the views of the Ministry of Finance.

The Committee has held a number of meetings and deliberated on the issue and arrived at a proposed formula for calculation of PLB.

The Committee has been mandated by Board to discuss the issue with the Federations before submitting its recommendations for consideration/approval of appropriate authority. Accordingly, the draft report containing the proposed formula arrived at by the committee is sent herewith for furnishing your views within 15 days positively to enable the committee to finalize its recommendations.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-

For Secretary/Railway Board

Recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission – Revision of pension of pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners etc

Recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission – Revision of pension of pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners etc

No.25014/10/2014-A/S-II(Pension)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension
(Department of Personal and Pension)

North Block, New Delhi
Dated: 21/11/2014

To
The Chief Secretary of all State Governments

Subject: Implementation of Government’s decision on the recommendations of the Sixth Central Pay Commission – Revision of pension of pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners etc.

Sir,
I am directed to state that in pursuance of Government’s decision on the recommendations of Sixth Pay Commission, sanction of the President was accorded to the regulations w.e.f. from 1/1/2006 and the Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare vide its O.M. No.38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 1/9/2008 had issued orders for revision of pension/family pension of all the pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners. The said orders were made applicable to all pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners of All India Services who were governed by the All India Services (Death Cum Retirement Benefits), Rules, 1958. Clarification on certain provisions were also issued vide their O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A)(Pt.1) dated 03-10-2008.

2. It may be stated that a large number of representations were received in the Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare in regard to delay payment of revised pension/family pension and arrears to the pre-2006 pensioners/family pensioners. Accordingly, to facilitate early payment of revised pension, family pension, enhanced pension and arrears, the Department of Pension and Pensioners vide its O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A)(Pt.1) dated 14-10-2008 and O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 21-05-2009 have issued guidelines providing the modalities and methodology for release of revised pension, family pension arrears and enhanced pension of pre-2006 pensioners. The cited O.M.s is self explanatory, however the gist of the O.Ms. dated 14-10-2008 and 21-5-2009 are as under:

(i) Disbursement of revised pension/family pension and the arrears in accordance with the ready reckoner and also the additional pension to old pensioners/family pensioners (wherever the date of birth is available in the PPO) within a week

(ii) All the pension disbursing public sector banks were to revise and disburse the enhanced pension (with dearness relief) and arrears within one month from the date of issue of O.M. dated 14-10-2008.

(iii) Suitable entry regarding the revised pension to be recorded by the pension Disbursing Authorities in both halves of the Pension Payment Order and intimate regarding disbursement of revised pension to be sent by the pension disbursing authorities to the Office of the CPAO and Accounts Officer which had issued the PPO in the revised from given at Annexure-III of the said O.M. so that they could verify the pension so revised and update the Pension Payment Order Register, etc.

(iv) In cases where the information in Annexure-III has been received by the Pay and Accounts Officer from the Pension Disbursing Banks etc., he should verify the same and issue a revised authority for payment of pension. In case there is any discrepancy in the revision of pension by the Bank, the bank should be informed by the Pay and Accounts Officer immediately for making necessary adjustment. In cases where the information in Annexure-III has not been received by the Pay and Accounts Officer from the Bank, the Pay and accounts Officer should issue revised authority for payment of pension based on the PPO/available records and send to Bank for making the payment of revised pension accordingly.

(v) It was also provided that in case any information regarding date of birth, scale of pay or the qualifying service, etc was not available with the bank, the bank may obtain the requisite information from the concerned Pay and Accounts Officer/CPAO. It would be the responsibility of the concerned Pay and Accounts Officer/CPAO to provide the information from the available records within two weeks of the receipts of request from the bank.

(vi) Adoption of the methodology/documentation for determination of date of birth for payment of additional pension to old pensioners/family pensioners in cases where the date of birth is not available in the PPO as well as in the office records of CPAO/Pay and Accounts Office.

3. Further, the Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare vide their O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 28.1.2013 have also revised the pension, Family, enhanced pension of the pre-2006 pensioners w.e.f. 24-9-2012 with reference to the fitments tables annexed to the Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure O.M. No. 1/1/2008-IC dated 30th August 2008 which is self explanatory. The said O.M. was extended to All India Services pensioners of pre-2006 by this Department vide letter No. 25014/1/2013-AIS-II dated 19.2.2014.

4. Now, it has been brought to the notice of this Department that a large number of cases relating to All India Services pensioners/family pensioners of pre-2006 have not yet been revised/disbursed their pension/family pension by the State and UT Governments and Accounts Generals of the respective States in adherence to O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A)(Pt. 1) dated 14-10-2008. O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 21-05-2009 and O.M. No. 38/37/08-P&PW(A) dated 28.1.2013 issued by the Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare which are also similarly applicable to All India Services pensioner of pre-2006.

5. Therefore, all the Chief Secretaries, Development Commissioners, Advisers to the Administrator and Accountant Generals of State/UT are requested to look into the matter and instruct the concerned authorities of the States/UTs to take appropriate action immediately in implementing the above orders issued by the Department of Pension and Pensioners’ Welfare.

Yours faithfully,

Sd/-

(Diwakar North Misra)
Director (Services)

Grant of Risk/Hardship based allowances to CAPFs personnel as per the recommendations of Sixth Central Pay Commission—Regarding

Grant of Risk/Hardship based allowances to CAPFs personnel as per the recommendations of Sixth Central Pay Commission—Regarding

No.E-27018/2/2011-Estt.II

Dated: 28 th April 2014

To
The ADG/APS,
The IsG (NS & NES).

Sub: Grant of Risk/Hardship based allowances to CAPFs personnel as per the recommendations of Sixth Central Pay Commission—Regarding

Kindly refer to FHQrs letter No.E-12013/1/10-Estt.11/4490 dated 04/12/2009 and letter of even No.(515) dated 23/02/2011 regarding admissibility for grant of Risk/Hardship allowance for CISF personnel posted in PSUs, Airports in J&K and NE region.

2. The matter was taken up with MHA and MHA has now intimated vide their letter No.11- 27012/25/CF-62360/2010-PF.1 dated 16/04/2014 that proposal for Risk/Hardship allowance for C1SF personnel deployed at PSUs, Airports in J&K and NE region has not been agreed to.

3. In view of the above, it is requested to give instructions to all Unit Commander’s under your jurisdiction to stop giving Risk/Hardship allowance with immediate effect.

4. A consolidate compliance report may be forwarded to FHQr (Estt Branch) by 30th April 2014 positively.

(Shikha Goa)
Dy.inspector General (Pers)

Source: http://www.cisf.gov.in
[http://www.cisf.gov.in/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/1601.pdf]

Pensionary Benefits drawn by Director level officers vis-d-vis lower level officers at the level of DS/US

Pensionary Benefits drawn by Director level officers vis-d-vis lower level officers at the level of DS/US – Question raised in Lok Sabha. Minister’s reply:-

“The Sixth Central Pay Commission in para 2.2.18 of its Report recommended, inter-alia, that pre-revised pay scales ranging from Group `A` entry level to S-27 scale of Rs. 16400-20900 may be placed in the common Pay Band-3. The Commission further recommended Grade Pay of Rs.6100/- for an Under Secretary level officer, Grade Pay of Rs.6600/- for a Deputy Secretary level officer and Grade Pay of Rs.7600/- for a Director level Officer. As part of the modifications made by the Government, while the Grade Pay of Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary level Officers were enhanced to Rs.6600/- and Rs.7600/- respectively, pre-revised Pay Scales from S-24 (applicable to Director level Officers) to S-27 have been placed in Pay Band-4. Both in pre-revised and revised pay structure, the pay scale applicable io a Director level Officer has been higher than that in case of a Deputy Secretary or Under Secretary level Officer and since pension is a function of pay drawn by an Officer at the time of superannuation, pension in case of a DS/US level officer is independent of that in case of a Director level officer. Thus, the question of taking any steps in this regard does not arise.”

Details of Lok Sabha Question:-

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
LOK SABHA

UNSTARRED QUESTION NO 4687

ANSWERED ON 21.02.2014

PENSIONARY BENEFITS

4687 . Muhammed HAMDULLA A. B. SAYEED
Will the Minister of FINANCE be pleased to state:-

(a) whether pay band for Director level officers was clubbed with the pay band of other lower level officers as per the recommendations of Sixth Pay Commission and if so, the details thereof;
(b) whether the Government delinked the pay band of Director level officers from the band attached to lower level officers;
(c) if so, the details thereof and the reasons therefor and its impact on pensionary benefits drawn by Director level officers vis-d-vis lower level officers at the level of DS/US; and
(d) the steps taken by the Government to address the issue?

ANSWER

MINISTER OF STATE IN THE MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(SHRI NAMO NARAIN MEENA)

(a) to (d): The Sixth Central Pay Commission in para 2.2.18 of its Report recommended, inter-alia, that pre-revised pay scales ranging from Group `A` entry level to S-27 scale of Rs. 16400-209C0 may be placed in the common Pay Band-3. The Commission further recommended Grade Pay of Rs.61007- for an Under Secretary level officer, Grade Pay of Rs.6600/- for a Deputy Secretary level officer and Grade Pay of Rs.7600/- for a Director level Officer. As part of the modifications made by the Government, while the Grade Pay of Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary level Officers were enhanced to Rs.6600/- and Rs.7600/- respectively, pre-revised Pay Scales from S-24 (applicable to Director level Officers) to S-27 have been placed in Pay Band-4. Both in pre-revised and revised pay structure, the pay scale applicable io a Director level Officer has been higher than that in case of a Deputy Secretary or Under Secretary level Officer and since pension is a function of pay drawn by an Officer at the time of superannuation, pension in case of a DS/US level officer is independent of that in case of a Director level officer. Thus, the question of taking any steps in this regard does not arise.

Revision of Headquarter Allowance admissible to Group-'A' Officers

 DoPT Order: Revision of Headquarter Allowance admissible to officers of organised Group-A' Services posted in Headquarters Organisations — reg.

F. No. 4/2/2013-Estt(Pay-II)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, P.G. & Pensions
(Department of Personnel & Training)

North Block, New Delhi ,
Dated 17th January, 2014

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

 

Subject: Revision of Headquarter Allowance admissible to officers of organised Group-A' Services posted in Headquarters Organisations — reg.

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department's Office Memorandum No. 2/8/97-Estt. (Pay-11) dated 16th July, 1998, on the above subject and to say that consequent upon the decision taken by the Government on the recommendations made by the Sixth Central Pay Commission, the President is pleased to decide that the existing rates of Headquarter Allowance may be doubled.

2. These orders shall not apply to officers of services the cadres of which consist only of posts at the Headquarters organisations as also to officers of services who are not entitled to any special pay/special allowance while posted as Under Secretary/Deputy Secretary or 'Director in the Central Secretariat.  These orders shall be effective from the first date of the month in which this O.M is
issued.
4. In so far as application of these orders to officers of the Indian Audit & Accounts Department is concerned, these orders are being issue in consultation with the Comptroller & Auditor General of India.

sd/-
(Mukesh Chaturvedi)
Deputy Secretary (Pay)

Source: www.persmin.nic.in
[http://ccis.nic.in/WriteReadData/CircularPortal/D2/D02est/4_2_2013-Estt.Pay-II-17012014.pdf]