Thursday, August 28, 2014

Confederation writes to Finance Ministry regarding Transport Allowance

Confederation writes to Finance Ministry regarding Transport Allowance to regulate to Faridabad Gurgaon, Ghaziabad and Nodia cities at par with Delhi rates

CONFEDERATION OF CENTRAL GOVT. EMPLOYEES & WORKERS
1st Floor, North Avenue PO Building, New Delhi – 110001
Website: WWW. Confederationhq.blogspot.com
Email: Confederationhq@yahoo.co.in

PatronS.K.Vyas
09868244035
President
K.K.N.Kutty
09811048303
Secretary General
M.Krishnan
09447068125
Ref: Conf/Genl/2014
Dated – 26.08.2014
To
The Secretary
Ministry of Finance
Department of Expenditure
New Delhi – 110001

Sub: Regulation of Transport Allowance at Faridabad Gurgaon, Ghaziabad and Nodia at par with Delhi rates.

Sir,
Your kind attention is invited to the OM No. 21(8)2010-E-II (B) dated 01.08.2012 of Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure regarding regulation of Transport Allowance at Faridabad, Gurgaon, Ghziabad and Noida wherein instructions have been issued to regulate the Transport Allowance at the rates applicable to ‘Other Cities’ i.e other than 13 classified cities as per the condition laid down in OM no. 21(2)12008-E-II (B) dated 29.08.2008. Issuance of the OM has created panics among the employees posted at these cities. Immediate action is required to be taken to avoid implementation of the OM.
In this connection following points are brought to your kind notice —

1. Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure had issued OM 2(4)-E.II (B)/65 dated 05.11.1974 vide which special dispensation was given to Faridabad at Delhi rates in respect of CCA & H RA.

2. 5th Central Pay Commission had made recommendations to grant of transport allowance to Central
Government employees to compensate the cost incurred on commuting between the place of residence and the place of duty. Transport allowance was implemented vide 0M No. — 1(13)97-E-Il (B) dated 03.10.1997, according to which, transport allowance was to be regulated on the basis of classification of cities for the purpose of CCA. Para 3.1 of said order Is reproduced below-
The cities referred to as ‘A’ and ‘A-1’ in these orders shall be the same as those classified as such for the purpose of Compensatory (City) Allowance (CCA) in terms of the orders issued separately regulating grant of CCA to the Central Government employees.

3. Vide para 4.2 8, 6 CPC had recommended abolition of CCA and increased the rates of transport allowance subsuming the element of CCA. The abolition of CCA was compensated by increasing the rates of transport allowance.

4. Faridabad has been given the status of A-1 city (as being part of the Urban Agglomerate of Delhiat par with NOIDA, Ghazia bad and Gurgan etc.) since 1974 for the purposes of HRA & CCA and since August, 1997 for the purpose of transport allowance as given above. These facilities are being extended to the Central Government employees/officers posted at Faridabad accordingly.

5. It may further be noted that, Ministry of Finance, vide No. 21 (2)/2008-E.ll dated 29.08.2008 has classified 13 cities as A-I/A which, inter-alia, includes Delhi (UA). Delhi (Urban Agglomerate) includes Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Noida & Gurgaon As such, the rates of Transport Allowance admissible for the City of Delhi, automatically stands extended to the other constituents of the Urban Agglomerate.

6. If rate of the transport allowance is reduced the rate payable to other cities, employees posted at Faridabad, Ghaziabad, Noida & Gurgaon will be deceived from the benefit given by the 6th CPC by subsuming the element of CCA in transport allowance as they were being paid CCA at Delhi rates.

7. In view of the above, it reveals that the transport allowance was being regulated on the basis of classification of cities for the purpose of CCA and payment of transport allowance at Delhi rates, to the employees posted at Faridabad is fully justified. This stands already concluded by the orders and judgments of the Hon’ble CAT Principal Bench, New Delhi (copy enclosed for ready reference) as given below-
1) OA No. 483/2005, Judgment dated 16.09.2005.

2) OA No. 2441/2005, Judgment dated 02.08,2006

3) RA No. 296/2010, Judgment dated 14.01.2011.

4) OA No. 368/2011, Judgment dated 21.07.2011.

5) OA no. 459/2011, Judgment dated 05.08.2011.

6) CP No. 302/2011, Judgment dated 30.03.2011.

8. These judgments squarely covers this issue wherein the Hon’ble CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi had upheld the payment of Transport Allowance at par with Delhi (UA) and the said judgments were accepted by the Government and duly implemented. It appears that the Department of Expenditure has not noticed the above judicial pronouncement and issued the clarification vide OM dated 1” August, 2012, which seem to be in contravention of the directions of the Hon’ble CAT.

It is therefore, requested to kindly take cognizance of the facts and particularly the binding judgments of the Hon’bel CAT, New Delhi as mentioned above to withdraw the latest instructions issued vide ID No. 21 (8)12010-E-Il (B) dated 01.08.2012 for reducing the Transport Allowance on par with “Other Cities”.

An early action ¡n this regard is highly solicited.

DA: as above
Yours faithfully,

sd/-
(M. Krishnan)

Secretary General
Copy to: -
Corn, N. Somaiah, Vice President, Confederation of Central Government Employees & Workers c/o
Takshasila Vidyapeetham, Dasaigudam Road Shantinagar, Suryapet Dist. Nalgonda (A.P).

Source: http://confederationhq.blogspot.in/2014/08/confederation-writes-to-ministry-of.html

List of cases filed on grant of MACP on Promotional Hierarchy

List of cases filed on grant of MACP on Promotional Hierarchy

GRANT OF MACP ON PROMOTIONAL HIERARCHY:

LIST OF CASES FILED

The list of cases filed on the subject is given below for your reference.

SL
O.A.No., CWP.No. SLP Civil (CC) No
Parties
Date of Order
Name of court
Remarks
RAJPAL Vs UoI & Others
1OA No.1038/CH/2010 (Advocate : Mr. V.K.Verma)Raj Pal s/o Tilak Ram, CAT, Chandigarh31.5.2011CAT, Chandigarh.OA is allowed for grant of MACP in the hierarchy of Promotional post.
2CWP No.19387 of (O&M)(Advocate : D.K.Bhisnoi)Union of India represented by DoP&T and others Vs. Raj Pal and another.19.10.2011High Court of Punjab and Haryana at  ChandigarhOrder dated 31-5-2011 of Hon’ble CAT, Chandigarh is upheld. CWP filed by Respondents dismissed.
3SLP No.cc-7467 of 2013 against order dated 19-10-2011 of the Hon’ble High CourtUnion of India represented by DoP&T and others Vs. Raj Pal and another.15.4.2013Supreme Court of IndiaSLP filed by the Union of India is dismissed
 
SANJAY KUMAR & Ors Vs UoI & Ors
4OA No.904/2012 (Mr. M.K.Bhardwaj)Sanjay Kumar, UDC and 18 others Vs. UOI nted byMinistry of Defense and others.26.11.2012CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi.OA is allowed for grant of MACP in next promotional post i.e. Assistant in PB-2+Grade PayRs.4200.
5W.P.(C) 4552/2013 [PENDING] (Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj)UNION OF INDIA Vs. SANJAY KUMAR & ORS. Delhi High CourtHearing Date Court No. 5 Next Date: 04/09/2014
M V Mahanan Nair Vs UoI & Ors
6OA No.816/12M.V.Mohanan Nair, S/o M.R.Vishwanathan Nair, Photocopier CAT, Ernakulam Bench & others Vs Union of India29.1.2013CAT, PrincipalBench Ernakulam BenchOA is allowed for consideration of MACP in the hierarchy of promotional post.
7OP(CAT). NO.2000 OF 2013 (Z)UOI &  ORS. .Vs. M.V.  MOHANAN NAIR24.06.2013High court of Kerala at ErnakulamIn the result, this original petition is dismissed in limine
8Special Leave Petition (Civil) 21803 OF 2014UOI & ORS. .Vs. M.V. MOHANAN NAIR Supreme Court of IndiaPENDING
9OA No.1798 of 2014 Advocate : Shri Yogesh SharmaMahendra Kumar Dubey, S/o Sh. R.D. Dubey, Working as Programme Executive, In Doordarsan Kendra, Delhi VS UOI through the Secretary, Ministry of lnformation & Broadcastin22.05.2014Cat DelhiOA is allowed for consideration of MACP in the hierarchy of promotional post within a period of one month
KISHAN SWARUP SHARMA Vs SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE
10OA No.2548/2014 MA No.2167/2014 (Advocate : Shri M.K.BhardwajKishan Swarup Sharma, working as PPO(E), Meerut & 28 others V/S Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture,31.07.2014CAT, New DelhiOA is allowed For consider the case of the applicants in the light of the aforesaid orders
PRADEEP KUMAR Vs SECRETARY MIN. OF INFORMATION & BROADCASTING
11OA No.988 of 2014 MA No.872 of 2014 (Advocate : Shri M.K. BhardwajPradeep Kumar. AE (C) Rohini, Delhi & 20 others VS Secretary, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Shastri Bhawan. New Delhi22.03.2014CAT. New Delhiin view of the above position. we dispose of this OA at the admission stage itself with the direction to the respondents to consider the representations of the applicants in the light of the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.19387/2011 (supra) as upheld by the Apex Court in SLP (CC) No.7467/2013(supra) and decide their cases under intimation to them. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
12O.A. No. 1834/2014 Advocate: Shri Yogesh Sharma.Mohd Hamid  Hussain, Working as APRO (Defence), Sr.Grade Group B Officer In the office of: DPR, Ministry of Defence New Delhi- & 34 others VS UOI through the Secretary, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting,23.05.2014Central Administrative Tribunal PrincipalBench New DelhiIn view of the aforesaid submission made by the applicants and the documents available on record. we dispose of this OA at the admission stage itself with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the applicants in terms of the aforesaid orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. if the applicants are similarly placed, they shall also be treated alike
OM PRAKASH Vs SECRETARY, NCERT
13OA 864/2014 Advocate: Shri M.K. Bhardwaj)Shri Om Prakash NCERT, New Delhi  VS Secretary (NCERT)  New Delhi12.3.2014Central Administrative Tribunal PrincipalBench, New DelhiIn view of the above position. we dispose of this OA at the admission stage itself with the direction to the respondents to consider the representations of the applicants in the light of the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.19387/2011 (supra) as upheld by the Apex Court in SLP (CC) No.7467/2013(supra) and decide their cases under intimation to them. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a cop of this order.
14W.P.(C) 3608/2014NCERT,New Delhi VS Shri Om Prakash & others14.07.2014High court of Delhi  at New DelhiCWP filed by Respondents dismissed.
BABU RAM VS UoI
15O.A. 1281/CH/2012 ADVOCATE: SHRI ROHIT SETHSh. Babu Ram, working as Upper Division Clerk, working in the Central Administrative Tribunal, opposite Shivalik View Hotel, Sector 17, Chandigarh VS UOI09.05.2013CAT CHNDIGARH BENCH  allow this OA in terms of the view obtained in terms of the view obtained in the OA. 1038/CH/11and the judgments (Annexures A-11 to A-13). The compliance of the order must ideally come about within two months from the date a copy of this order is presented in the office of the competent authority.
16CWP No. 24279 of 2013U.O.I. .Vs. BABU RAM & ORS.07.11.2013HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANAsee order of even date passed in CWP No.24278 of 2013 (UOI and another versus Smt.Reeta Devi and another
17Special Leave to Petition (Civil)10435 OF 2014U.O.I. .Vs. BABU RAM & ORS Supreme Court of IndiaPending
DHIRENDER SINGH & Ors Vs UoI
18Civil Writ Petition No.24253 of 2013 Date of Decision:U,O.I. .Vs. DHIRENDER SINGH & ORS.07.11.2013High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At ChandigarhFor orders, see order of even date passed in CWP No.24278 of 2013 (Union of India and another versus Smt. Reeta Devi and another).
19Special Leave to Petition(Civil)…. 10436 OF 2014U.O.I. .Vs. DHIRENDER SINGH & ORS. Supreme Court of IndiaPending
20O.A. 12/CH/2013 By Advocate: Mr.Madan MohanSmt. Reeta Devi, Senior Library Attendant, CAT Bench.  Chandigarh. Versus Union of India22.05.2013Cat Chandigarh BenchAfter going through the judgment passed in the case of Raj Pal (supra), we are in full agreement with the  learned counsel for the parties. Accordingly, the present original application is allowed in same term as of Raj Pal (supra).  Consequently, we quash the orders at Annexures A-1 & A-2. The respondents are further directed to grant the benefit of 2nd MACP in the pay band of Rs.9300-34800 with grade pay of Rs.4600/- from 1.3.2009 (which is the pay scale of next post in the hierarchy).  The respondents are directed to comply with the judgment within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
21CWP No. 24278 of 2013Union of India VS Smt. Reeta Devi, & and others07.11.2014High Court Of Punjab &HaryanaCWP filed by Respondents dismissed
22Special Leave Petition(Civil) 22181 OF 2014U.O.I. & ORS. Vs. REETA DEVI Supreme Court of Indiapending
NARAYAN KALITA Vs UoI
23O.A. No. 040/00052/2014Narayan Kalita CPWD Guwahati VS UOI Represented by Secretary GOI, Ministry of Urban and DevelomentDate of  order 25.06.2014 Date of Delivery of Order 7.8.2014CAT Guwahati BenchOA is allowed. for grant of MACP in the hierarchy of Promotional post.  Respondent is directed to grant scale of pay (PB-3) of Rs. 15600-39100 + Grade pay 6600/-
24OA( 1727/2014)  was filed by CPWD Engineers‘ Association in regarding MACP as per promotional hierarchy on 19.5.2014  CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi onnext date of its hearing has been fixed by CAT on 24/09/2014
25case filed by the Junior Clerks of  Railway -OA No. 1509 of 2013  CAT Kolkatanext date of its hearing has been fixed by CAT on 8th Dec. 2014

Fixation of pay of State Government Employees on their appointment in Central Government – Dopt order

Fixation of pay of State Government Employees on their appointment in Central Government, subsequent to implementation of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008.

No.12/1/2009-Estt (Pay-I)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training

New Delhi the 28th August, 2014
OFFICE MEMORANDUM




Subject: Fixation of pay of State Government Employees on their appointment in Central Government, subsequent to implementation of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008.

The undersigned is directed to say that the method of fixation of pay of State Government employees on their appointment under the Central Government has been spelt out in this Department’s OM No.12/1/94-Estt(Pay-I) dated 24 March, 1994, 3rd January, 1996 and OM NO.13/2/99-Estt (Pay-I) dated 18.6.2001.

2. The question of fixation of pay in cases of appointment from State Govt. to Centrat Govt. consequent upon revision of pay scales on acceptance of the recommendations of the VI Central Pay Commission in the revised pay structure has been considered in consultation with the Department of Expenditure and the President is pleased to decide that in cases of appointment of State Government employees in Central Government on or after 1.1.2006, pay will be fixed in the following manner:-

(a) Where the State Government has revised the Pay scales of their employees on the pattern of VI Central pay Commission at the base index of 115.76 as per AICPI (IW) 2001 series w.e.f. 1.1.2006 the pay of these State Government employees on their appointment under the Central Government would be fixed as follows:

(i) When the appointment is to a post carrying higher Grade Pay, one increment equaI to 3% of the sum of the pay in the existing grade pay will be computed and rounded off to the next multiple of 10. This will then be added to the existing pay in the pay band. The grade pay corresponding to the higher post will thereafter be granted in addition to this pay in the pay band. In cases where the appointment involves change in pay band also, the same methodology will be followed. However. if the pay in the pay band after adding the increment is less than the minimum of the higher pay band to which the appointment is takihg place, pay in the pay band will be stepped up to such minimum.

(ii) Where the appointment is to a post involving identical Grade Pay, the individual shall continue to draw the same pay.

(b) Where the State Government have revised the pay scales of their employees after 1.1.2006 beyond the base index of 115.76 as per AICPI (IW) 2001 series, basic pay of the employees is to be determined first in the Central Scale by reducing the element of DA, ADA, IR etc. granted by the State Government after 1.1.2006 (beyond the base index of 115.76 as per AICPI (IW) 2001 series) and thereafter the pay would be fixed as provided in the clause (i) &(ii) under sub para (a) above.
(c) Where the state Government have either not revised or revised the pay scale of their employees on or after 1.1.2006 below the base index of 115.76 as per AlCPl (IW) 2001 series, basic pay of these employees shall be determined first in the Central scale, by adding the element of D.A. ADA upto base index of 115.76 as per AICPI (IW) 2001 series granted by the State Government and thereafter their pay would be fixed as provided in the clause (i) &(ii) under sub-para (a) above.


3. These orders are applicable to employees of the State Government and local bodies under the State including Emergency Divisional Accountants/Divisional Accountants / local bodies under the State Government appointed under Central Government on or after 1.1.2006.

4. In so far as the employees serving in the Indian Audit and Accounts Department are concerned, these orders issue after consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

5. Hindi version will follow.
sd/-
(Mukesh Chaturvedi)
Director (Pay)
Source: www.persmin.gov.in
[http://ccis.nic.in/WriteReadData/CircularPortal/D2/D02est/12_1_2009-Estt-Pay-1.pdf]

Finance Minister launches New Website of PFRDA on 26th August, 2014.

Finance Minister launches New Website of PFRDA on 26th August, 2014.

PFRDA was established by Government of India on 23rd August, 2003. The Government has, through an executive order dated 10th october 2003, mandated PFRDA to act as a regulator for the pension sector. The mandate of PFRDA is development and regulation of pension sector in India.

The National Pension System reflects Government’s effort to find sustainable solutions to the problem of providing adequate retirement income. As a first step towards instituting pensionary reforms, Government of India moved from a defined benefit pension to a defined contribution based pension system by making it mandatory for its new recruits (except armed forces) with effect from 1st January, 2004. Since 1st April, 2008, the pension contributions of Central Government employees covered by the National Pension System (NPS) are being invested by professional Pension Fund Managers in line with investment guidelines of Government applicable to non-Government Provident Funds.

Wednesday, August 27, 2014

UPGRADATION OF GRADE PAY OF LDC & UDC- A STEP FORWARD

UPGRADATION OF GRADE PAY OF LDC & UDC- A STEP FORWARD

BORDER ROAD ORGANISATION (BRO) SUBMITS THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH THAT “...organisation accepts the position that the Government is considering the same since more than last one year and yet no decision has been taken”.

SHRI ABHIMANYU KUMAR & 58 OTHER LDCS OF BORDER ROAD ORGANISATION FILED A CASE FOR UPGRADATION OF GRADE PAY LDC FROM 1900 TO 2400 IN PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT CHANDIGARH - CWP NO. 14193/2014. COPY OF THE INTRIM ORDER ISSUED BY THE COURT IS GIVEN BELOW:

 CWP 14193/2014                                                                                               108

Abhimanyu Kumar and ors v UOI and others

Present:- Mr.ADS Jatana, Advocate for the petitioner

Petitioners, who are 59 in number, are working on the post of Lower Division Clerks (LDC) with General Reserve Engineering Force (GREF) which is a Border Road Organisation. After the acceptance of the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission they have been kept in Pay Band-I of Rs.5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.1900/-. They are seeking upgradation of their Grade Pay to Rs.2400/- as granted to other cadres in the same Pay Band and pay scale of other Central forces.

By referring to Annexure P-5, it is submitted that the organisation accepts the position that the Government is considering the same since more than last one year and yet no decision has been taken.

Notice of motion for 12.12.2014.

23.07.2014                                                                       (Jaswant Singh)
joshi                                                                                      Judge

-TKR Pillai

Air India Day Offer – Tickets for Rs 100

‘Air India Day’ Offer – Tickets for Rs 100
On ‘Air India Day’, airline’s site crashes over ‘tickets for Rs 100′ offer
NEW DELHI: Air India’s website crashed on Wednesday, on a day the national carrier is celebrating ‘Air India Day’, unable handle the heavy traffic following its ‘tickets for Rs 100′ offer.

Air India is selling tickets for Rs 100 (taxes extra) for five days from today — to commemorate the merger of erstwhile Indian Airlines and Air India on this day in 2007.

Some users who tried to go to the website got a ‘Service unavailable’ message. For others, the page would not load.7.

“On this occasion Air India is launching the Air India Offer for its travellers. Under the scheme tickets will be offered for Rs 100/- apart from all applicable taxes. The sale of these tickets will be made only through the Air India website for five days from August 27 to 31 2014 for travel between August 27 and September 30, 2014, only,” an AI statement said.

This is the first time that the airline will be celebrating the Air India Day. A function will be held to celebrate the day and also to award the meritorious employees of Air India.

Source : TOI

Disclaimer:

All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy of the content on this blog, the same should not be construed as a statement of law or used for any legal purposes. Our blog "Central Government Staff news" accepts no responsibility in relation to the accuracy, completeness, usefulness or otherwise, of the contents. Users are advised to verify/check any information with the relevant department(s) and/or other source(s), and to obtain any appropriate professional advice before acting on the information provided in the blog.

Links to other websites that have been included on this blog are provided for public convenience only.

The blog "Central Government Staff news" is not responsible for the contents or reliability of linked websites and does not necessarily endorse the view expressed within them. We cannot guarantee the availability of such linked pages at all times.

Any suggestions write to us
centralgovernmentnews@gmail.com