BY
SPEED POST
S Y Savur 141,
Jal Vayu Towers,
Cell: +91 9449676278 NGEF
Layout,
+91 9688782227 Indira
Nagar (PO),
Email: sysavur@gmail.com Bangalore-560038
SYS/RTI/MoF/DoE/E.IIIA/2013 25
Oct 2013
To,
Shri
S Murali Krishnan, IDAS,
Sr
ACGDA & CPIO,
O/o
CGDA,
Ulan
Batar Road, Palam,
New
Delhi – 110 010
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION: RANK PAY
CASE
1. Please refer to the Opinion of the
Attorney General of India letter No. MLJ No. AG 16/2013-ADV ‘C’ dated 14.8.2013
and AG DY No. 325/AG/OPIN dated 14.8.2013 on the subject of Implementation of
Supreme Court order dated 4.9.2012 – Rank Pay Case (Major A. K. Dhanapalan Retd
- reg and CGDA Note No. AT/I/1483/RB/X(PC)/V dated 23.5.2013 and agreement of
MoF mentioned therein.
2. At
Para 37 of the ibid Opinion of the Ld Attorney General, in reply to Query
(III) “Whether the Basic Pay ceiling
of integrated Scale in IV CPC for officers up to Brig/equivalent, which is Rs
5100/- also needs to be modified to give effect to the Court orders?” The
Ld Attorney General states, quoting note No. AT/1/1483/RB/X (PC)/V dated
23.5.2013 and agreement of MoF thereon, the following: -
CGDA’s views. CGDA has pointed out that in order to benefit such
officers an element of personal pay was projected in the instant case to MoF.
But it was not agreed to by Ministry of Finance. In view of para 6 (o) of SAI
1/S/87 (Annexure XX) which states as under: -
‘If the amount so computed as at sub-para a
(ii) above is more than the maximum of the revised scale, the pay will be fixed
at the maximum of the revised scale.’
The relevant Service Instructions provide
for maximum three stagnation increments upto the rank of Brig, after completion
of every two years qualifying service once the officer reaches the maximum of
the scale. However, it is ensured that Basic Pay plus Dearness Allowance plus
stagnation increments do not exceed the maximum of Basic Pay plus rank pay of
the next higher rank i.e. Major General – Rs 5900-200-6700.
Further, there is no court order directing
changing of the integrated pay scale. In case the demand is met, the pay scale
of next senior officers will get burst, disturbing the horizontal and vertical
relativity pay scales on Services side, paramilitary forces and civilian side
also.
MoF views. This Ministry agrees with the view of the
office of CGDA on this issue as contained in their note No. AT/1/1483/RB/X
(PC)/V dated 23.5.2013 (Annexure XVII).
However, it has been mentioned in the said
Note of the CGDA that in cases where emoluments (revised pay) computed without
deducting rank pay crosses the maximum of the revised integrated scale, the
Ministry of Defence has proposed that the difference by which the revised pay
of the integrated pay scale may be protected by way of Personal Pay to be
absorbed in stagnation increments or pay on promotion, but the same was not
agreed to by the Ministry of Finance. The Ministry of Finance did not agree to
the same for the following reasons: -
(i) At
the outset, this issue was neither prayed for by Major Dhanapalan in his
petition nor was it considered by the Hon’ble Kerala High Court nor is it
covered in the order passed by the Hon’ble Court dt 5.10.1998.
(ii) Para
6 (o) of Section II of the Special Army Instructions dated 26.5.1987 (Annexure
XX) already provided that if the amount so computed as at pata 6 (a) (ii) is
more than the maximum of the revised scale, the pay shall be fixed at the
maximum of the revised scale. In other words, if the initial pay fixed in the
revised integrated scale exceeds the maximum thereof, pay cannot be more than
the said maximum. Thus now that the …. Pertaining to deduction of rank pay part
at para 6 (a) (ii) from existing emoluments (or revised emoluments) as on
1.1.1986 has been removed, the amount computed without deduction for the
fixation of initial pay/fitment in the revised pay scale as on 1.1.1986 also
cannot exceed the maximum of the revised integrated scale effective from
1.1.1986 as the principle laid down in said para 6 (c) is not part of judicial
pronouncement based on which the order of 27.12.2102 has been issued.
Apart from the above, the proposal of the
Ministry of Defence for Personal Pay, in such a case is not justified on merits
also as brought out below: -
(i) A
person drawing pay in a particular scale of pay attached to the post held by
him, cannot draw pay in excess of the maximum of the connected scale of pay.
This is the concept of a Specific pay scale. Of course since the rank pay is a
separate element, the total pay (Pay in the integrated scale + rank pay) can
very well exceed the maximum of the integrated pay scale and that is exactly
what is happening here. It is being …. that Rank Pay is a separate element in
addition in the pay in the integrated scale and as such Pay + rank pay is not
restricted to the maximum of the integrated scale. It is only the pay in the
integrated scale that is not to exceed the maximum thereof.
(ii) A
similar provision exists in proviso (b) to Rule 7 (1) (A) of the CCS (RP) Rules
1986 relating to fixation/fitment of initial pay of civilian Government
servants in the revised pay scales as on 1.1.1986. A copy of the relevant
extract from the said Rules is at Annexure XXII. Therefore, no special
dispensation can be allowed in this case now that the pay to be fixed in the
integrated pay scale as on and w.e.f 1.1.1986 exceeds the maximum of the
integrated scale.
3. Maj Dhanapalan could not have prayed
for an increase in the maximum/ceiling nor could the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala
consider the matter because (i) he was a Major and nowhere near the ceiling of
the integrated scale, (b) he retired on 01 Sep 97, [No: Tech/321/4CPC/Court
case, Office of the PCDA (O) Golibar Maidan, Pune 411001 Date: 21 Nov 2012
refers] (c) the 5th CPC report was approved by MoF on 30 Sep 97, (d)
the SAI No. 2/S/98 quoted extensively by O/o CGDA was issued on 19 Dec 97, (e)
the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala’s Single Judge’s judgment was on 5 Oct 98 and
(f) MoD in its Writ Petitions never mentioned this fact to the Hon’ble High
Court to consider (Annexure A). O/o
CGDA is aware that any Hon’ble Court can only consider facts presented to it.
3. Rule 7 (1) clearly states “……shall, unless in any case the President by special
order otherwise directs….” Such a
direction of the President is contained in Govt of India, Ministry of
Personnel, Public Grievances & Pension, Department of Personnel, New Delhi,
Office Memorandum No. 1/1/86-Estt. (Pay-I) dated 10 Apr 1987 (Annexure ‘B’). SAI No. 1/S/87 was
issued on 26 May 1987.
4. A table of the relevant contents of
Rule 7 (1) (A) of the CCS (RP) Rules 1986 and OM No. 1/1/86.Estt (Pay-I) dated
10th April 1987 is given below: -
|
Rule 7 (1) (A) of the CCS (RP)
Rules 1968
|
Govt of India, Ministry of
Personnel, Public Grievances & Pension, Department of Personnel, New
Delhi, Office Memorandum No. 1/1/86-Estt. (Pay-I) dated 10th April
1987
|
|
7.
Fixation of initial pay in the revised scale: -
(1)
The initial pay of a Government servant who elects, or is deemed to have elected
under sub-rule (3) of Rule 6 to be governed by the revised scale on and from
the 1st day of January 1986, shall unless in any case the
President by special order otherwise directs, be fixed separately in respect
of his substantive pay in the permanent post on which he holds a lien or
would have held a lien if it had not been suspended, and in respect of his
pay in the officiating post held by him…….…..
|
The undersigned is
directed to refer to the recommendations of the Fourth Central Pay
Commission, as contained in paras 23.15 and 9.25 of their Report, relating to
fixation of pay of Central Government employees on promotion/appointment from
one post to another. After careful consideration, the Government have decided
to accept the recommendation contained in para 23.15 subject to the
modification that there shall be no minimum benefit. The Government have not
accepted the recommendation contained in para 9.25 and decided that in case
of promotion of Central Secretariat Service Officers from Under Secretary
level to Deputy Secretary level also pay should be fixed under FR. 22-C as in
all other promotions.
2.
In supersession of all the various existing orders, the President is pleased
to decide that where a Government servant is promoted or appointed to another
post carrying duties and responsibilities of greater importance than those
attached to the post held by him, the provisions contained in FR. 22-C shall
apply without pay limits.
|
5. It is a fact and on record that Lt
Colonels are promoted to Colonels, and Colonels are promoted to Brigadiers to
carry out higher duties and hold higher responsibilities. Therefore a special
dispensation is available. Further, the Ld Solicitor General in his opinion of
17 Oct 12 has clearly stated that MoD (referred to as The Querist) needs to
take decisions abut the scale of the next higher rank officers getting burst.
6. In view of the above, please provide
information, as per Section 2(f) of the RTI Act 2005 on the under-mentioned
aspects: -
(i) O/o
CGDA’s advice on the non-applicability of provisions Para 2 of ibid OM dated 10th April
1987 vis-à-vis Rule 7 (1) (A) of CCS (RP) Rules 1986, to officers who are
promoted or appointed to another post carrying duties and responsibilities of
greater importance as Colonels and Brigadiers and equivalent, and who will
exceed the maximum of the integrated scale consequent to striking down of the
deduction of Rank Pay for re-fixation as ordered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
on 04 Sep 2012,
(ii) On O/o CGDA,
with its expertise on accounts and audits, advice to MoD on different options for
complying with the Hon’ble Supreme Court order striking down deduction of Rank
Pay in the matter of ceiling burst of increasing the ceiling/maximum of the
integrated scale.
7. Indian
Postal Order No. 19F 707665 for Rs 10/- payable to CGDA at New Delhi is
enclosed as application fee. It is requested that the undersigned may not be
requested to visit the offices of CGDA to search for the information for
reasons stated in earlier applications for information.
Yours truly,
(S Y Savur)
Enclosures: as stated above
* * * * *
ANNEXURE ‘A’
By Speed Post
F. No. 35(1) 2013 – D
(Pay/Services)
Government of India
Ministry of Defence
New Delhi, the 26th
April, 2013
To
Shri S. Y.
Savur
141, Jal Vayu Towers
NGEF Layout,
Indira Nagar (PO),
Bangalore – 560038
Subject: Your letter No.
SYS/RTI/MoD/2013 dt. 15.04.2013
Sir,
This is
with reference to your request for information No. SYS/RTI/MoD/2013 dt.
15.4.2013 received in this office on 18.4.2013.
2.
The parawise information as sought by you is as
under: -
(i) The information sought does not exist in D (Pay/Services)
records.
(ii) The information sought does not exist in
D (Pay/Services) records.
(iii) The reasons which are not available on record have been sought
and as such they cannot be supplied.
(iv) Not applicable in view of (i) above.
(v) The information sought does not exist in D (Pay/Services)
records.
(vi) Not applicable in view of (v) above.
(vii) The information sought does not exist in D
(Pay/Services) records.
(viii) The information sought does not exist in D
(Pay/Services) records.
(ix) No reference was made to SAI/SNI/SAFI No.
2/S/1998 of 19th December 1997 in Memorandum of Writ Appeal and
Additional Affidavit filed therein. Copies of these documents are enclosed
herewith. Information on the background of the decision not to inform the High
Court cannot be given as it is not available on records of D (Pay/Services).
(x) No other information apart from what has
already been provided to you exists in this matter.
The Service HQ also submit their demands to the Pay
Commissions. You may also like to take up the matter with them to seek relevant
information from their side/records.
3. In case you
are not satisfied with the reply you may appeal to Shri Praveen Kumar, Director
(AG-I), Ministry of Defence, Room No. 103, Sena Bhawan, New Delhi within 30
days of receipt of this letter…….
Sd/-------------------
/////TRUE
TYPED COPY/////
ANNEXURE ‘B’
MOST IMMEDIATE
No.1
/2/86-Estt.( Pay-I)
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES & PENSIONS
(DEPARTMENT OF
PERSONNEL &
TRAINING)
New
Delhi, the 10th April, 1987
OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Subject: Recommendation of the Fourth Central
Pay Commission - Decisions relating to fixation of pay on promotion/appointment
from one post to another carrying duties and responsibilities of greater
importance.
The undersigned is
directed to refer to the recommendations of the Fourth Central Pay Commission,
as contained in paras 23.15 and 9.25 of their Report, relating to fixation of
pay of Central Government employees on promotion/appointment from one post to
another. After careful consideration, the Government have decided to accept the
recommendation contained in para 23.15 subject to the modification that there
shall be no minimum benefit. The Government have not accepted the
recommendation contained in para 9.25 and decided that in case of promotion of
Central Secretariat Service Officers from Under Secretary level to Deputy
Secretary level also pay should be fixed under FR. 22-C as in all other
promotions.
2. In supersession of
all the various existing orders, the President is pleased to decide that where
a Government servant is promoted or appointed to another post carrying duties
and responsibilities of greater importance than those attached to the post held
by him, the provisions contained in FR. 22-C shall apply without pay limits.
3. Action is being taken separately to amend the
rule.
4. In so far as the
persons serving in the Indian Audit and Accounts Department are concerned,
these orders are being issued after consultation with the Comptroller and
Auditor General of India.
Sd/------------------------
(SeethepalIi S.Rao)
Director
Tel. No. 3015272
All Ministries/Departments of Government of India
etc. etc.
No.1/2/86-Estt.(Pay
- I) dated the 10th April, 1987
Copies also forwarded to:-
1. The
Comptroller &
Auditor General of India and all
States under his control
2. Controller
General of Accounts/Controller of Accounts, Ministry of Finance
3. Secretaries
to Union Public Service Commission/Supreme Court of India/Election
Commission/Lok Sabha Secretariat/Rajya Sabha Secretariat/Cabinet
Secretariat/Central Vigilance Commission/President’s Secretariat/Vice
President's Secretariat/Prime Minister's Office/Planning Commission/Fourth
Central Pay Commission.
4. Department
of Personnel &
Training (AIS Division)/JCM Admn.
Section.
5. Additional
Secretary (Union Territories), Ministry of Home Affairs.
6. All
State Governments and Union Territories.
7. Governors
of all States/Lt. Governors of Union Territories.
8. Secretary,
National Council (Staff Side), 13-C, Feroze Shah Road, New Delhi.
9. All
Members of the Staff Side of the National Council of JCM/Departmental Council.
10. All
Officers/Sections of the Department of Personnel and Training/Department of
Administrative Reforms and Public Grievances/Department of Pension and
Pensioners Welfare.
11. Ministry
of Finance, Department of Expenditure.
12. 3000
Spare Sets.
/////TYPED
TRUE COPY/////
* * * * *
Office of the CGDA, Ulam Batar Road,
Palam, Delhi Cantt-10
No.
CPIO/AT/HQ/2013/II/1250 Dated:
26/11/2013
To
Shri S Y Savur
141 Jal Vayu Towers,
NGEF
Layout,
Indira
Nagar (PO),
Bangalore
– 560038
Subject:
Seeking Information under RTI Act 2005
Reference:
Your application dated 25/10/2013
*****
The information requested in your above quoted
application dated 25/10/2013 have been ascertained from the dealing Section
being custodian of information on the subject matter and the reply/information
received in this regard vide UO Note No. AT/I/1483-Army/X(PC)/V dated
26/10/2013 is forwarded herewith as desired.
Encls.
(One page as above) Sd/--------------------
(S.
Murali Krishnan)
Sr
ACGDA/CPIO
Office of the CGDA, Ulam Batar Road,
Palam, Delhi Cantt-10
Subject: Seeking Information under RTI Act
2005
Reference:
Your application dated 25/10/2013 in r/o Shri S Y Savur
The parawise information/reply with reference to
Para 6 of the above quoted RTI application dated 25/10/2013 in r/o Shri S Y
Savur is furnished as under:
Para 6 (i): No advice on the
non-applicability or otherwise of provisions of Para 2 of DOP&T OM dated 10th
April 1987 (quoted in the application) vis-à-vis Rule 7 (1) (A) of CCS (RP)
Rules 1986 is found to have been rendered by this office in this case.
Para 6 (ii): Neither any advice on
‘different options’ on this issue is found to have been sought by MoD nor given
by this office in this case.
Sd/-----------------
Sr
AO (AT-I)
RTI
Cell (AT) (Local)
Uo
Note No. AT/I/1483-Army/X (PC)/V dated 26/11/2013
* * * * *
No comments:
Post a Comment