Reply by CGDA to RTI
dated 13.3.13 Received on 22.4.2013
*****
Office of the CGDA, Ulan Batar Road, Palam, Delhi Cantt- 10
No. CPIO/AT/HQ/2013/1/1063 Dated:
15/04/2013
To
Shri S Y Savur
141, Jal Vayu Towers,
Beniganahalli,
Indira Nagar (PO),
Bangalore – 560038
Subject: Seeking Information under RTI Act, 2005
Reference: Your application dated 13th March
2013
*****
Please refer to your application
dated 13/03/2013 quoted under reference. The information requested in your ibid
application has been ascertained from the concerned section being custodian of
the requested information. It has been intimated that the requested information
is scattered in different files and widespread in large volumes. Therefore, it
is difficult to identify/locate the particular documents which you want to
have. As such, it is advised that you may visit this office with prior
appointments and inspect the desired file and have copies of the documents
subject to the applicable fee prescribed under RTI (Regulation of Fee and Cost)
Rules, 2005. Incidentally, it may also be mentioned that under the provisions
of the RTI Act only such information can be supplied which already exists in
material form. In this regard DOP&T letter No. 1/18/2011-IR dated 16th
September, 2011 refers. However, the reply/information received in this regard
vide UO No. AT/I/1483-Army/X (PC) IV dated 15/04/2013 is forwarded herewith as
desired.
Encls: (Eight pages) Sd/-----------------------
(S.
Murali Krishnan)
Sr
ACGDA/CPIO
*****
Office of the CGDA, Ulan Batar Road, Palam, Delhi Cantt – 110010
Audit-I Section
Subject: Seeking Information under RTI Act, 2005: Shri S Y
Savur
Reference: RTI Cell (AT) UO Note bearing No.
CGDA/CPIO/AT/2012/HQ/III/1063 dated 25/03/2013.
*****
With
reference to the application dated 13th March, 2013, in r/o Shri S Y
Savur received vide RTI Cell U quoted above, this Section is of the view that
the applicant is demanding an explanation from this office on certain
points/assumptions which the applicant has. There is no provision in the RTI
Act to provide explanation to the information seeker. However, para-wise
available information/reply is furnished as under: -
|
My Request
|
Audit I Section
|
|
(a)
Please provide information on the basis of which CGDA’s advice to GoI/MoD to
determined payment only to those in the ranks of Captain to Brigadiers and
equivalents with “as on 1.1.1986” as
the cut-off date whereas the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order dated 8.3.2010
stated “with retrospective effect from
1.1.1986.” CPIO may wish to note that the phrase “as on 1.1.1986” has
been inserted in the GoI/MoD letter dated 27.12.2012 i.e. more than 2 years
after preparations of CGDA UO No. AT/I/1483-Army/X dated 6.4.2010
|
It is mentioned that the
information sought is scattered in different files and widespread in large
volumes. Exactly the photocopies of which documents are required cannot be
assessed by this office on behalf of you. Accordingly the cost of the
photocopies cannot be assessed as desired in para 5 of the application. Therefore,
if you are interested, you may visit this HQrs office with prior appointment
to inspect relevant files and demand specific information on payment of
requisite charges as prescribed in the relevant Rules
|
|
(b)
Please provide information on the Competent Authority with a copy
(i) of the authorisation the directions based on
which CGDA modified the orders the date of effect directed in the Hon’ble
Supreme Court were changed, and/or
(ii) Under what authority the CGDA re-interpreted
the said order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
|
Hon’ble Supreme Court order
dated 04/09/2012 has been implemented by the competent authority i.e. by MoD
vide letter No. 34 (6)2012 – D (Pay/Services) dated 27th December,
2013, (copy enclosed) with concurrence of MoD (Fin) and MoF.
|
|
(c)
Please provide information on basis/Instructions on which CGDA confined its
calculations of payments to those
holding the ranks of Captain to Brigadier as on 1.1.1986 and not to
others who may have attained those ranks on or after 2.1.1986?
|
The Supreme Court order dated
04/09/2012 in IA No. 9 of 2010 in TP (C) 56 of 2007 has been implemented by
MoD letter dated 27th December 2012 mentioned above. Payments are
being made under the authority of ibid orders.
|
|
(d) Please provide information on how the CGDA
fulfilled its charter (quoted at para 2 above) and informed MoD/Def(Fin)/MoF that a Captain as on 1.1.1986 will
draw Basic Pay of Rs 3000 + Rs 200 as Rank Pay but an officer of the same
batch promoted on 2.1.1986 to Captain will be placed at Basic Pay of Rs
2800 + Rs 200 as Rank Pay.
|
Applicant is asking comments on
fulfilment of charter of duties by this HQrs office, no comments are offered.
|
|
(e) Please provide information on whether an Under
Secretary as on 1.1.1986 will be placed at a higher Basic Pay than one who is
promoted to Under Secretary on
2.1.1986 would be paid a lesser Basic Pay. Relevant sections of the GoI Rules
may please be quoted.
|
The post of Under Secretary is
not held in the hierarchy of this department, hence no comments can be
offered.
|
|
(f) Please provide information whether and how CGDA has
advised the MoD or Secretary (Def/Fin) or MoF of the above and that it would
create anomalies by the use of the “as on 1.1.1986” criteria?
|
CGDA has not advised MoD or
Secretary (Defence/Finance). As and when sought by MoD, comments were
rendered. Information can be provided as per para 2 (a) above.
|
|
(e)
Please provide information if the CGDA is aware of the order of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court dated January 17, 2013 in several Civil Appeals tagged with
Civil Appeal Nos. 8848-8849 of 2012. The Hon’ble Court’s orders vide para 34
of is reproduced below for ready reference: -
“34. The instant appeals are accordingly allowed. The impugned order
dated 17.12.2007 passed by the High Court is hereby set aside. The impugned
Government Order dated 9.8.1989, to the extent that it extends to employees
who retire on or after 1.6.1988, a lower component of ‘dearness pay’, as
against those who had retired prior to 1.6.1988, is set aside, being
violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
|
The court order relating to
Defence services are implemented by MoD in consultation with CGSC/Min of Law
etc. This HQrs Office has taken action on the sanction issued by MoD in this
regard.
|
|
(f)
Please provide information if CGDA has examined the above Order of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the light of its discriminatory stand in the
GoI/MoD letter dated 27.12.2012 is also violative of Articles 14 and 16 of
the Constitution of India, and its likely effect on the Rank Pay issue.
|
The court order relating to
Defence services are implemented by MoD in consultation with CGSC/Min of Law
etc. This HQrs Office has taken action on the sanction issued by MoD in this
regard.
|
|
(g)
Please provide details of CGDA’s advice to the MoD and Defence/Finance on the
applicability or otherwise in the Rank Pay matter.
|
Same as para 2 (f) above
|
|
(h)
If CGDA has not advised MoD, Def (Fin) or MoF please provide information on what
basis that order of the Supreme Court does not apply to the Rank Pay issue.
|
Same as para 2 (f) above
|
|
(j) Please provide information whether
CGDA’s advised the MoD that any changes to the integrated pay scale of Rs
2300-5100 are necessary and that in the absence of changes, it will result in
certain officers of the ranks of Colonels and Brigadiers being rendered
financially deprived of the Rank pay.
|
Same as para 2 (f) above
|
|
(k)
Please provide information if CGDA has not offered this advice, why it was
not considered necessary to amend the integrated pay scales in the light of
the Supreme Court upholding that deduction of Rank Pay was erroneous.
|
Same as para 2 (f) above
|
|
(l)
Please provide information if CGDA was aware/unaware that Cabinet Committee
vide GoI Resolution 9E dated 18. 3.1987 approving the Report of the Fourth
Central Pay Commission.
|
Yes
|
|
(m)
Please provide information if CGDA was aware/unaware that Resolution 9 E of
the Cabinet Committee did not approve of a different methodology for pay
re-fixation for the Armed Forces officers i.e. arriving at revised Basic Pay
and then deducting Rank Pay and adding Rank Pay to the reduced Basic Pay, as
was done vide impugned para 6 (a) (ii) of
the SAI 1/S/1987?
|
O/o CGDA is aware of MoD
Resolution No. 9-E dated 18th March 1987 and SAI 1/S/87 being
implementing authority.
|
|
(n)
Please provide information so what advice CGDA provided to MoD or
Defence/Finance in the periodic/annual audit of payments to affected officers
in light of para 6 (a) (ii) being introduced without specific approval of the
Cabinet Committee that approved the report of the 4th CPC?
|
The SAI 1/S/87 has been issued
by the competent authority and O/o the CGDA is implementing authority.
|
|
(o)
Please provide information on any audit objections/observations raised
pointing out the mis-interpretation of the Cabinet Committee’s decision to
pay Armed Forces officers a separate element of Rank Pay over and above the
re-fixed pay without deducting Rank Pay?
|
The SAI 1/S/87 was issued by
the competent authority. Therefore the question of any audit
observations/objections thereon from this office does not arise being the
implementing authority.
|
|
(p)
If not, please provide information on why para 6 (a) (ii) was included as
such a decision would over-rule the approval of the Cabinet to the Report of
the 4th CPC.
|
Under the provisions of the RTI
Act, 2005, PIO is not obliged to furnish reply to the question like “why.”
However, it is stated that the SAI 1/S/87 was issued by MoD.
|
|
(q)
Please provide information whether CGDA provided advice to 5th Pay
Commission or any Public Authority to effect a deduction of Rank Pay as was
done in Para 148.2 by quoting the impugned precedent in the 4th
CPC. If so, please provide information on the basis for such information. If
no advice was provided, information of such a fact may be provided.
|
As already mentioned by the
applicant, this item was a part of recommendations of the fifth CPC itself.
Therefore, the question of any advice from this office does not arise. It is
reiterated that this HQrs office is the implementing authority and not
rule/policy making authority.
|
|
(r) Please provide
information what CGDA advised MoD, Def/Fin, MoF, consequent to the Hon’ble
Supreme Court’s dismissal of the SLP (CC) 5908 of 2005 in the Maj A.K.
Dhanapalan case.
|
No information is available on
records
|
|
(s)
Please provide information on the advice rendered by CGDA that since no
revision of pay scales in the 4th or 5th or 6th
CPC has been considered necessary, as evidenced from the calculation sheets
attached with the ibid UO (Annexure sheets B2, B3, B4) and no changes in
SAI/SNI/SAFI of 1/S/1987, 2/S/1997 or 2/S/2008, how CGDA provided advice to
the HPC that pay, allowances, pensions
etc would have to be revised on 1.1.1996 and 1.1.2006 (as stated in the
“Difficulties anticipated in implementation of Hon’ble SC Judgment” part of
the information provided by ibid UO dated 06.04-2010) and would involve a
gargantuan effort as deliberated over by the HPC and included in the
Additional Affidavit in IA No.9 of 2010 in TP (C) 56 of 2007.
|
Information could be provided
as per para 2 (a) above
|
|
(t)
Please provide information on CGDA not informing MoD that there could be a
serious error in ignoring that sworn
statement on oath by US (Pay/Services) MoD on behalf of UoI and Others,
especially in para 30, and by confining changes only to “as on 1.1.1986” in
its advice for formulation of the GoI/MoD letter dated 27.12.2012.
|
O/o the CGDA is not party to
the stated document. However, information in this regard can be provided as
per para 2 (a) above.
|
|
(u) Please provide
information on CGDA’s advice to MoD that Special Army/Navy/Air Force
Instructions 2/S/1996 and 2/S/2006 need not be changed.
|
Information can be provided as
per para 2 (a) above.
|
Sd/--------------------
ACGDA (AT-I)
RTI Cell (AT) Local
UO No. AT/I/1483-Army/X/PC/IV dated 15/04/2013
*****
Note: a reply dated 25th April 2013 has been sent to CPIO. O/o CGDA
No comments:
Post a Comment