04-08-2009 Author: V.Unnikrishnan, Superintendent Article:ACP & Modified ACP Matters Modified ACP is effective from 30.08.08. Prior to that during the period 01.01.06 to 30.08.08 old orders relating to ACP were operative. In 2nd financial up gradation in ACP the scale of asst.commissioner was allowed since 1999. Thus the scale applicable to asst.commissioner ie 5400 in pb-3 was required to be awarded to such 2nd ACP holders.but as a nfsg scale has been awarded to superintendents who have completed 4 years (ie the GP 5400 in pb2) & there is no difference between 5400 in pb-2 and 5400 in pb-3. Like central secret ariate service holders, the GP 6600 is required to be awarded to such 2 nd financial awardees with effect from 01.01.06.if this will be decided then automatically in 3rd financial up gradation in modified ACP the GP 7600 can be awarded. In this respect board should issue a clear cut instruction.
\r\nFor separate service now board has decided to recommend 1440 senior supdt. Posts having JTS and STS scales and in case of vacancy in ac/dc posts these senior superintendents can be utilised.supdts of central excise and supdts of customs preventive are feeders for these posts.
06-12-2008 Author: V.Unnikrishnan, Superintendent Article:Weightage in seniority at Group B &A level cadres in the CBEC The Apex Court has held that: Para13. The principle of granting seniority on the basis of weightage of past service and lower service to the category of promoting ( sic promoted ) officers is well known and well recognized in the service jurisprudence. Source: Para 25 of judgment dt.27-8-1997 in H.S.Grewal Vs. UOIandOrs. 1997 11 SCC 758 as extracted from A K Nigams case.
The recent judgment dt.16-5-08 by the Supreme Court dismissing the SLPs filed by the promote Appraisers must be made use as a chance to settle the various cadre management policies of the CBEC. It should be possible to resolve all the major issues by circulating a white paper incorporating the new approach o the various issues. The Assns can ask the CBEC to call for a meeting of all concerned , get their views and finalise a draft policy which could be circulated to call for objections/comments from the field officers. Of course, it should not be like the notorious ‘Road map’ drafted by DOPM for ‘Merger of cadres’. If need be a core committee with members from DOPT, UPSC and CBEC can be entrusted this task so that overall perspective will be in line with other Central Govt. cadres. Mainly the disputes have been lingering for want of sufficient promotional posts to the Group B and A cadres. In addition to, there is wide range disparity in the career prospects among the three feeder cadres at Group B andC levels. The following background of events would justify the claim on weightage for Group B service on promotion as ACs : (I)-The recommendation by SRP Review Committeedt.30-6-1974 Para 16.15 in Vol.II-3-Recommendations (Extract) reads-‘On promotion to Class I, Supdt. Of CEx should be directly in Senior Class I scale’. (ii)-The Resolution no.105 dt.1-5-1974 of MF (DE) published in Gazette PartI, Section I dt.1-5-74 communicated the Govt. decision of accepting in principle Para 10 of Chapter 13-Recommendation of the Third CPC which reads-‘Some weightage should be accorded for service rendered in Class I, at last in Class I services where promotion from Class II is for all practical purposes I to Senior scale of Class I. The extent of weightage and conditions under which it is to be given is to be decided by individual Depts.’-Chapter13-para 10. But the CBEC as per F.No.C-18011/1/85 Ad II dt.23-1-87 communicated the decision :- “ not to grant any weightage in seniority to Group B officers on their promotion to Group A service having regard to the cadre structure of ICandCE and various other factors”. It can thus be seen that the expert body’s recommendation was discarded in a routine manner by the CBEC without proper evaluation of facts and figures and hence even now this aspect can be examined afresh. It would be worth mentioning that the Ministry of Telecom, Railways etc. took policy decisions to grant weightage to the Group b cadres on promotion to Group A cadre.
For eligibility for promotion to STS ie.DC, for promotee ACs there need be no minimum length of service (as 4 years now existing) .Instead, it could be on the lines of R.27(b) of TES Rules which reads-‘Posts in STS may be filled up as a purely temporary measure in an officiating capacity to hold charge by promotion of permanent TES Class II who are on approved list of promotion to JTS’. The Rule 27(b) of TES Rules quoted above allowed the STS without any minimum service as against 4 years for ICandCE RRs, 1987. Again, the Indian Railways adopted policy vide letter dt.30-11-1976 for all Indian railways Service Class I Rules, applicable to various Group A services allowed maximum weightage up to 5 years on promotion from group B cadres. See Para 24 and 25 of Supreme Court decision in HS Grewal Vs. UOI-1997 (11) SCC 758 and AK Nigam’s case 1992 2 SCC 241:1992 20 ATC 226. There is yet another decision of Supreme Courtdt.6-9-2000 in CA.No.1027 of 1987 filed by BT Gurasahaney Vs. UOI and others reported at 2002 10 SCC 271 on the seniority of ACs cadre where the promotions made are in excess of quota as per RRs. The concept of weightage for longer service in feeder cadre was in vogue in the Income tax Dept also—3 years weightage was given to Gr.B officers on promotion to Gr. A till 1973 when promotion quota was only 33 1/3 %, but discontinued when quota was raised to 50%. The case law Hudraj kanyalal Sajnani etc. Vs. UOI 1990 AIR 1166:1990 SCC Supp.577 has discussed these aspects . But for us,in the 50% quota for promotion, the quota within the three cadres was 80% till RRs,1987 and got reduced to 67% i.e. 6:1:2 thereafter.So our claim for weightage will be better justified on these lines, especially because of the disparity in promotion prospects of feeder cadres both at Group C and B levels. Again, even now, 4 years weightage is given for first 12 years of state service with additional weightage of one year for every two years subject to max. of 5 years in the IAS cadre.1987 Rules made operative from 3rd Feb, 1989 by amendment to IAS (Regulation of seniority) Rules, 1954. From the above, we could claim for a scheme similar to the already existing in the TES Gr.A services, and thus if there are vacancies, a promotee can be posted in STS straightaway on the same day of promotion as AC .
Weightage in the Common Seniority of Group B seniority list:- This is a new concept which should be adopted for the seniority of Supdts. The Apex court as quoted above has upheld the principles of weightage in AK Nigam’s case.(SCC pp.247-48 ) in Para 13 of judgment as reproduced in Para 25 of HSGrewal’s case decided on 27-8-1997..1997 11 SCC 758 .In an earlier judgment in State of A.P Vs. KS Muralidhar -1992 2 SCC 241 also the weightage formula was accepted.The crucial aspect that the eligibility for promotion to Group B is different for Examiners(only 3 years) and POs /Inspectors ( 8 years) and other factors like the actual promotions for POs/Inspectors will be after 15 to 25 years( varying in different Commissionerates) because only 6366 Supdts for 21399 Inspectors in 1997(now 12766 Supdts.for 18,053 Inspectors) whereas Examiners get it just on completion of 3 years because there are 809 Appraisers for 443 Examiners as on 1-1-1997. In Para 83 of Chapter 27 of 3rd CPC observed that more than 25% of Inspectors have reached the maximum of the pay scale , etc.would definitely justify weightage for Inspectors on promotion as Supdts as well as for Supdts in ACs cadre.
It is also well known that Gr.C to B promotions are based on Commissionerate level seniority and vacancies and thus will vary from Comissionerate to Commissionerate .Even after the SSC started recruitment at All India level, the Group C cadre continued to be at Commissionerate level. Considering the wide disparity in promotion prospects from Group C to Group B cadres in the various Commissionerates, from 8 years to 20 to 24 years, it would only be proper to adopt the weightage concept in the All India seniority list of . Half the total no. of years above 8 years in Group C subject to a maximum of 5 years weightage will be perfectly justified. In view of the above mentioned judgment of Supreme Court,the principle weightage proposed to be applied will be unassailable.
Another important aspect is the anomaly in the fixation of seniority of the three feeder cadres of Customs Appraisers, Supdt. Of Customs and Supdts. Of Cex adopted by the CBEC.For Supdts of CEx and Supdts of Customs it is done w.r.to date of joining, whereas for Appraisers w.r.to date of DPC/select panel. The seniority of Superintendents from 1990 onwards has not been finalized and the promotions are being ordered as per the Provisional list circulated. As per CBEC’s letter F.No.A-32012/9/89 AdIIB dt.26-6-1990, all DPCs are to be held in the month of June and promotions ordered on the last working day of June every year. This in effect would mean that the seniority was to be fixed w.r.to the promotion panel and the date of DPC .ie.30th June or 1st July every year. Incidentally, such a policy has been applied for fixing seniority of Appraisers in the list circulated on 28-4-2005 in terms of CAT, Mumbai/Chennai Bench judgment on the subject. (Related judgment dt.8-5-2006 in WP no.26975 of 2002 etc filed by SK Rath and others.-citation: 2006-HRIOL-04-HC-Mad-service).—This decision upheld with the dismissal of SLP no.17493-17494 of 2006 on 16-5-2008 by the SC). We can therefore now make a claim that the common seniority be finalised as per Board’s orders dt 26-6-1990. Even for this, there will be justifying reasons to claim weightage in the Group B cadre as well considering the different eligibility-3years for promotion as Appraisers as against 8 years for Inspectors/POs, disparity among the different Commissionerates/Customs Houses etc. Weightage of one year for every TWO years in excess of 8 years as Inspector would be well justified;eventhough above 3 years prescribed for Examiners would be perfectly legal. During the cadre restructuring started in 1999 and finally implemented in Dec,2002 the different cadres had repeatedly presented their grievances for redressal but of no avail. The Dept was asked to review and revise the RRs of various cadres-but nothing was done. There after the CBEC had appointed different Study Committees during 2003-2004 for (i) Removal of stagnation of Supt. Of Cex (ii)-Merger of Customs and CEx cadres at Group BandC level and All India Seniority (iii)-Service tax administration and the reports given are still idling in the CBEC.Later, from Jan,2004 the All India Assn of Supt. Of CEx. have been demanding a common seniority list w.r.to date of continuous officiation as Group B and till date no remedial action has been taken by the CBEC. It is reliably learnt that the Member(PandA) had suggested in Jan,2008 to adopt the common seniority based on length of continuous officiation;but the matter is still pending and the Member also retired on 31st Jan2008. It would therefore be quite appropriate to request the CBEC to initiate action to finalise the fresh proposal as stated supra to sort out the dispute once for all. Let us recapitulate the earnest wish expressed by the Apex Court in the judgment dt.16-10-1998 in the case of Keshav Deo andanr. Vs.State of UP JT 1998 (5) SC 627 . Hon’ble Judges J.Srinivasan and Sujata.V.Manohar concluded the last para:- “ It is high time the Government realized that if the employees are made to live through endless litigations, administration cannot be carried on properly.”
AEC Meeting is schedulted to be held on 23rd and 24th September'10. The venue will be intimated accordingly by Chennai Unit
visitor no.151812 
