Supreme Court Judgement - Reservations to SC and ST in promotions

Supreme Court Judgement - Reservations to SC and ST in promotions

Non-Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Civil Appeal No. 1226 of 2020
[Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 23701 of 2019]

Mukesh Kumar & Anr.

…. Appellant(s)

Versus

The State of Uttarakhand & Ors.

…. Resondent(s)

WITH

JUDGMENT

L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.

1. The Controversy in the above Appeals pertains to the reservations to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in promotions in the posts of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in Public Works Department, Government of Uttarakhand.
2. The Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994 (for short “the 1994 Act”) provided for reservation in public services and posts in favour of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes of citizens. Section 3(1) of the said Act stipulated reservation at the stage of direct recruitment. According to Section 3(7) of the 1994 Act, the Government Orders providing reservation for appointment to public posts filled up by promotion which were existing on the date of commencement of the 1994 Act shall continue till they are modified or revoked. After the formation of the State of Uttarakhand in 2001, the Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribe and Other Backward Caste Reservation) Act, 1994 was made applicable to the State of Uttaranchal by a Notification dated 30.08.2001 with a modification in the percentage of reservations. 21% reservation for Scheduled Castes was modified to 19% and 2% for Scheduled Tribes was increased to 4%. Likewise, 21% reservation provided in the 1994 Act for Other Backward Classes was altered to 14%.
   
   Also check: MACP ON PROMOTIONAL HIERARCHY – MACP Supreme Court Order – Heard & Reserved – Order dated 23 Jan 2020
3. A Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Mukund Kumar Shrivastava v. State of U.P.1 upheld the validity of Rule 8-A of the Uttar Pradesh Servants Government Seniority Rules, 1991 (for short “the Seniority Rules”) which dealt with consequential seniority of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. Later, in Prem Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.2, another Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench held that the judgment in Mukund Kumar Shrivastava (supra) is per incuriam and not a binding precedent. In Prem Kumar Singh’s case (supra), the High Court declared Section 3(7) of the 1994 Act and Rule 8-A of the Seniority Rules unconstitutional. While declaring the correctness of the judgments of the High Court, this Court by its judgment in Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation v. Rajesh Kumar3 held that Section 3(7) of the 1994 Act is unconstitutional insofar as it is contrary to the dictum in M. Nagaraj & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.4
4. The challenge to Section 3(7) of the 1994 Act, as extended to the State of Uttarakhand, was upheld by the High Court of Uttarakhand in Vinod Prakash Nautiyal & Others v. State of Uttarakhand & Others5. Relying upon the judgment of this Court in U.P. Power Corporation (supra), the High Court of Uttarakhand declared Section 3(7) of the 1994 Act unconstitutional and directed that no promotion can be given by the State by taking recourse to Section 3(7) of the 1994 Act. The application filed for review of the judgment in Vinod Prakash Nautiyal (supra) was dismissed. By way of implementation of the judgment of the High Court dated 06.07.2011 in Vinod Prakash Nautiyal (supra), a committee was constituted by the Government of Uttarakhand for collection of quantifiable data relating to the backwardness of the reserved communities in the State of Uttarakhand and the inadequacy of their representation in public posts.
5. On 05.09.2012, the State Government decided that all posts in public services in the State shall be filled up without providing any reservations to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. All Government Orders to the contrary were superseded by the proceeding dated 05.09.2012. Mr. Gyan Chand who was working as Assistant Commissioner (Civil), State Tax and belonging to Scheduled Caste Community filed a Writ Petition for quashing the proceeding dated 05.09.2012. The High Court by its judgment dated 01.04.2019 struck down the proceeding dated 05.09.2012 as being contrary to the law declared by this Court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India & Ors.6 and Jarnail Singh & Ors. v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta & Ors.7 While referring to the judgments of this Court in M. Nagaraj (supra) and Jarnail Singh (supra), the High Court held that Article 16 (4) of the Constitution in an enabling provision. The High Court observed that it is not necessary for the State Government to collect quantifiable data regarding representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in State services or regarding their backwardness before providing reservation in their favour in promotion posts. The High Court was of the opinion that the judgment in Vinod Prakash Nautiyal (supra) related to the constitutional validity of Section 3(7) of the 1994 Act alone and the Notifications pertaining to reservation in promotion in favour of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes were not set aside. The Appeals arising out of Civil Appeal @ S.L.P.(Civil) No.25508 of 2019 and Civil Appeal @S.L.P. (Civil) @ Diary No.39572 of 2019 have been filed assailing the judgment of the High Court dated 01.04.2019.
6. Vinod Kumar and three others belonging to the Scheduled Castes working in the Public Works Department, Government of Uttarakhand filed a Writ Petition in the High Court of Uttarakhand seeking a direction to the Respondent therein to prepare a separate list of eligible candidates as per Rule 5 of the Uttarakhand Promotion by Selection (on posts outside the purview of Public Service Commission) Eligibility Rules, 2003 and to prepare a separate list for each category of eligible candidates of General, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in Public Works Department. A further direction to the State Government was sought to hold a departmental promotion committee for promotion to the posts of Assistant Engineers after providing reservation to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in accordance with the Government Orders dated 30.08.2001, 31.08.2001 and 17.02.2004 by which reservation was provided in promotion. The Writ Petition was disposed of by the High Court on 15.07.2019 with a direction to the State Government to implement reservations in promotion by promoting only members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in future vacancies to maintain the quota earmarked for the said categories. Civil Appeals @ S.L.P.(Civil) No. 23701 of 2019 and Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No.22640 of 2019 are challenging the judgment dated 15.07.2019.
7. In the meanwhile, the Respondents in Writ Petition (Civil) No.117 of 2019 i.e. the State of Uttarakhand filed an application for review of the judgment dated 01.04.2019. The High Court realized that it committed an apparent error in its judgment dated 01.04.2019, while deciding the Writ Petition by referring to the judgment of this Court in Jarnail Singh (supra). The High Court clarified that the State Government is obligated to collect quantifiable data regarding inadequacy of representation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in state services before providing reservation in promotion. The High Court clarified that it is not necessary for the State Government to collect data regarding backwardness of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the light of the direction of this Court in Jarnail Singh (supra). The High Court also observed that the State is not obligated to provide reservation in promotions to members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as Article 16(4-A) of the Constitution is an enabling provision. However, reservation can be provided by the State Government only after collecting data regarding inadequacy of representation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in state services. As such, the High Court directed the State Government to collect quantifiable data regarding inadequacy of the representation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Government services which would enable the State Government to take a considered decision on providing or not providing reservation. The State Government was directed to take a decision whether to provide reservation or not only after considering the data relating to the adequacy or inadequacy of representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the services of the State within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the judgment. Aggrieved by the order dated 15.11.2019 passed in Review Petition in W. P. (S/B) No.117 of 2019, the Civil Appeal @ S.L.P.(Civil) No.27715 of 2019, Civil Appeal @ S.L.P.(Civil) No.28039 of 2019, Civil Appeal @ S.L.P. (Civil) No.27735 of 2019 and Civil Appeal @ S.L.P.(Civil) No. 28947 of 2019 have been filed.
8. Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Appellants in SLP (C) No. 25508 of 2019, Mr. Mukul Rohtagi and Mr. P.S. Narsimha, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the State of Uttarakhand contended that there is no fundamental right to claim reservation in appointments or promotions to public posts. There is no constitutional duty on the part of the State Government to provide reservations. Article 16 (4) and 16 (4-A) are merely enabling provisions. On 15.09.2012, the State of Uttarakhand, after due consideration, decided that there shall be no reservation in promotions. They relied upon the judgment of the High Court of Uttarakhand in Vinod Prakash Nautiyal (supra) by which Section 3 (7) of the 1994 Act was declared unconstitutional. It was submitted by them that the State Government has not brought any law in terms of the judgment of this Court in M. Nagaraj & Ors. (supra). It was urged by the learned Senior Counsel that there is no necessity for collection of any quantifiable data after the Government has taken a decision not to provide reservations. The collection of data, according to them, is required only to justify a decision to provide reservation. It was also submitted by them that according to a judgment of this Court in Suresh Chand Gautam v. State of U.P.8 no direction can be given by the Court to the State Government to collect quantifiable data on the basis of which a decision to provide reservation should be taken. They placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in M. Nagaraj & Ors. (supra) to argue that the State is not bound to make reservations.
9. On the other hand, Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Dushyant Dave and Mr. Colin Gonsalves, learned Senior Counsel and Dr. K.S. Chauhan, learned counsel, appearing for the reserved category employees submitted that the State cannot refuse to collect quantifiable data regarding the adequacy or inadequacy of representation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in public services. They submitted that there is an obligation on the State to provide reservations in promotions for upliftment of the members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes as mandated by Article 16 (4) and 16 (4-A) of the Constitution of India. The right to equality of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes cannot be defeated by the State Government by not discharging its constitutional obligation of implementing Article 16 (4) and 16 (4- A) of the Constitution. They urged before this Court that according to the law laid down by this Court, the State has a duty to decide not to provide reservations only after the State is satisfied that the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are adequately represented in public posts on the basis of quantifiable data. According to them, Suresh Chand Gautam (supra) was not correctly decided and needs reconsideration. It was also submitted on behalf of the reserved category candidates that a Committee was constituted by the Government of Uttarakhand to collect quantifiable data regarding the adequacy of representation of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes in public posts in accordance with the judgment of this Court in M. Nagaraj (supra). According to the report submitted by the Committee, there is inadequate representation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in government services in the State of Uttarakhand. The said report was approved by the State Cabinet. It was contended by the learned counsel that the State Government was duty bound to provide reservations on the basis of the data that was collected by the Committee.
10. The central point that arises for our consideration in these appeals is whether the State Government is bound to make reservations in public posts and whether the decision by the State Government not to provide reservations can be only on the basis of quantifiable data relating to adequacy of representation of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
11. Article 16 (4) and 16 (4-A) do not confer fundamental right to claim reservations in promotion9. By relying upon earlier judgments of this Court, it was held in Ajit Singh (II) (supra) that Article 16 (4) and 16 (4-A) are in the nature of enabling provisions, vesting a discretion on the State Government to consider providing reservations, if the circumstances so warrant. It is settled law that the State Government cannot be directed to provide reservations for appointment in public posts10. Similarly, the State is not bound to make reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in matters of promotions. However, if they wish to exercise their discretion and make such provision, the State has to collect quantifiable data showing inadequacy of representation of that class in public services. If the decision of the State Government to provide reservations in promotion is challenged, the State concerned shall have to place before the Court the requisite quantifiable data and satisfy the Court that such reservations became necessary on account of inadequacy of representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in a particular class or classes of posts without affecting general efficiency of administration as mandated by Article 335 of the Constitution11.
12. Article 16 (4) and 16 (4-A) empower the State to make reservation in matters of appointment and promotion in favour of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes ‘if in the opinion of the State they are not adequately represented in the services of the State’. It is for the State Government to decide whether reservations are required in the matter of appointment and promotions to public posts. The language in clauses (4) and (4-A) of Article 16 is clear, according to which, the inadequacy of representation is a matter within the subjective satisfaction of the State. The State can form its own opinion on the basis of the material it has in its possession already or it may gather such material through a Commission/Committee, person or authority. All that is required is that there must be some material on the basis of which the opinion is formed. The Court should show due deference to the opinion of the State which does not, however, mean that the opinion formed is beyond judicial scrutiny altogether. The scope and reach of judicial scrutiny in matters within the subjective satisfaction of the executive are extensively stated in Barium Chemicals v. Company Law Board12, which need not be reiterated13.
13. On the basis of the settled law of this Court pertaining to the scope of Article 16 (4) and 16 (4-A) of the Constitution, we proceed to determine the correctness of the judgments of the High Court. As noted above, the judgment of the High Court in Writ Petition No.117 of 2019 is to the effect that the proceeding dated 05.09.2012 issued by the Government of Uttarakhand by which it was decided to fill up the promotional posts or vacancies without providing reservations to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes was struck down. It was held by the High Court that the notifications that were issued by the Government of Uttarakhand, providing for reservations, continued to operate. A direction was issued by the High Court that reservation in promotion in favour of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes can be made by the State Government without having quantifiable data regarding the backwardness of the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes or the adequacy of their representation in the Government services.
14. The application filed for review of the judgment in Writ Petition No.117 of 2019 was decided by a judgment dated 08.11.2019 by the High Court. Realising the error committed in its judgment dated 01.04.2019, the High Court modified the judgment by holding that according to the decision of this Court in Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta14, the State was obligated to collect quantifiable data regarding the inadequacy of representation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in public services. The High Court observed that Article 16 (4) and 16 (4-A) of the Constitution are enabling provisions, and the State Government is not obligated to provide reservations in promotion in favour of members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The High Court expressed its opinion that reservation in promotion to public posts can be provided by the State Government only after collecting data regarding the inadequacy of their representation in service. In light of the above, the High Court directed the State Government to collect quantifiable data regarding the adequacy or inadequacy of representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in state services which would enable the State Government to take a considered decision as to whether or not reservation in promotion should be provided in favour of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The collection of quantifiable data was directed to be completed within four months from the date of receipt of the judgment.
15. The High Court committed an error by striking down the proceeding dated 05.09.2012 by which a decision was taken not to provide reservation in promotions without giving any reasons, except stating that the said decision is contrary to the judgments of this Court in Jarnail Singh and Indra Sawhney (supra). A perusal of the proceeding dated 05.09.2012 would show that the decision taken by the State Government was by way of implementation of the judgment of the High Court of Uttarakhand in Vinod Prakash Nautiyal (supra) by which Section 3(7) of the 1994 Act, relating to the provision of reservation in promotion, was struck down. By its judgment dated 10.07.2012 in Vinod Prakash Nautiyal (supra), the High Court declared Section 3 (7) of the 1994 Act as contrary to the law laid down by this Court in M. Nagaraj (supra). There was a further declaration that no promotion can be given by the State of Uttarakhand by taking recourse to Section 3 (7) of the 1994 Act. However, the State Government was given liberty to bring out another legislation in accordance with the mandate of the Constitution of India, by following the judgment in M. Nagaraj (supra). This Court dismissed the SLP filed against the said judgment. At this juncture, it is relevant to mention that certain notifications were issued after the formation of the State of Uttarakhand by which reservation in promotion to public posts as provided in the State of Uttar Pradesh was adapted with certain modifications. As stated above, the Government of Uttarakhand appointed a Committee for collection of quantifiable data pertaining to the adequacy or inadequacy of representation of the members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in public services in the State. The Committee submitted its report, according to which the representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is inadequate. The State Cabinet approved the recommendation of the Committee on 12.04.2012. Ultimately, the State Government by a proceeding dated 05.09.2012 decided to set aside all previous Government orders relating to reservation in promotions to Government services in the State. As the Government is not bound to provide reservation in promotions, we are of the opinion that there is no justifiable reason for the High Court to have declared the proceeding dated 05.09.2012 as illegal.
16. The direction that was issued to the State Government to collect quantifiable data pertaining to the adequacy or inadequacy of representation of persons belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Government services is the subject matter of challenge in some appeals before us. In view of the law laid down by this Court, there is no doubt that the State Government is not bound to make reservations. There is no fundamental right which inheres in an individual to claim reservation in promotions. No mandamus can be issued by the Court directing the State Government to provide reservations. It is abundantly clear from the judgments of this Court in Indra Sawhney, Ajit Singh (II), M. Nagaraj and Jarnail Singh (supra) that Article 16 (4) and 16 (4-A) are enabling provisions and the collection of quantifiable data showing inadequacy of representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in public service is a sine qua non for providing reservations in promotions. The data to be collected by the State Government is only to justify reservation to be made in the matter of appointment or promotion to public posts, according to Article 16 (4) and 16 (4- A) of the Constitution. As such, collection of data regarding the inadequate representation of members of the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes, as noted above, is a pre requisite for providing reservations, and is not required when the State Government decided not to provide reservations. Not being bound to provide reservations in promotions, the State is not required to justify its decision on the basis of quantifiable data, showing that there is adequate representation of members of the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes in State services. Even if the under-representation of Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes in public services is brought to the notice of this Court no mandamus can be issued by this Court to the State Government to provide reservation in light of the law laid down by this Court in C.A. Rajendran (supra) and Suresh Chand Gautam (supra). Therefore, the direction given by the High Court that the State Government should first collect data regarding the adequacy or inadequacy of representation of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in Government services on the basis of which the State Government should take a decision whether or not to provide reservation in promotion is contrary to the law laid down by this Court and is accordingly set aside. Yet another direction given by the High Court in its judgment dated 15.07.2019, directing that ll future vacancies that are to be filled up by promotion in the posts of Assistant Engineer, should only be from the members of Scheduled Castes and Scheuled Tribes, is wholly unjustifiable and is hence set aside.
17. The submission made on behalf of the reserved category candidates that the judgment of this Court in Suresh Chand Gautam (supra) needs reconsideration is without substance in view of the findings recorded above. We are in agreement with the decision of this Court in Suresh Chand Gautam (supra) in which it was held that no mandamus can be issued by the Court to the State to collect quantifiable data relating to adequacy of representation of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in public services.
18. The High Court was not informed about the appointment of a Committee for collection of quantifiable data and the completion of such exercise by the Committee, which was approved by the State Cabinet. However, the State Government took a conscious decision not to provide reservation in promotions. The direction given by the High Court to collect quantifiable data, therefore, is wholly unnecessary as the State is already in possession of the said data.
19. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned judgments of the High Court in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 351 of 2019, Writ Petition (S/B) No. 117 of 2019 and Review Application No. 389 of 2019 in Writ Petition (S/B) No. 117 of 2019 are set aside.
20. The Appeals are disposed of accordingly.

……………
[L. NAGESWARA RAO]

……………
[HEMANT GUPTA]

New Delhi,
February 07, 2020

Reassessment of CVO positions in CPSEs and the pay, incentives, allowances etc. related issues

Reassessment of CVO positions in CPSEs and the pay, incentives, allowances etc. related issues.

No.325/10/2015-AVD-III
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
*****

North Block, New Delhi
Dated the 7th July, 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Reassessment of CVO positions in CPSEs and the pay, incentives, allowances etc. related issues.

The undersigned is directed to refer to the minutes of the meeting of the Selection Committee held on 24 th June, 2015 and to say that a Committee has been formed under the chairmanship of Additional Secretary(S&V) to consider the issues related to reassessment of CVO positions in CPSEs and review of the extra pay, incentives, pay structure and allowances etc. of CVOs in CPSEs.

2. All Ministries/Departments are requested to furnish the following information about the CPSEs under their control within 15 days of receipt of this O.M.:-

i. Whether full time CVO is required in particular organization.
ii. Whether the post of CVOs of two or more organizations can be clubbed together.
iii. Whether the post of CVOs is required to continue with the current

posts or wishes to upgrade/downgrade or to abolish the posts in view of the workload and requirement of vigilance related matters.

iv. Staff strength and volume of vigilance work involved in the CPSEs, turnover of organizations in last 5 years etc.

(M. M. Maurya)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Tel. No. 23094541

To
All Ministries/Departments of Government of India.
Copy to:-
1. The Secretary, Central Vigilance Commission, Satarkata Bhawan, GPO
Com , INA, New Delhi-110023.
2. NIC Section with the request to upload on public domain/Guard file.

Click to check the original order

Important Official Websites for Central Government Employees

Important Official Websites for Central Government Employees

1. DOPT’S Recent Orders
2. Financial Orders
3. Air Travel Orders
4. Allowances Orders
5. APAR Orders
6. Advances Orders
7. CGEGIS Orders
8. HRA/ HAA Orders
9. Leave Orders
10. LTC Orders
11. MACP Orders
12. Miscellaneous Orders
13. Pay Orders
14. Pension Orders
15. TA Orders
16. Transport Allowance Orders

Source: Central Government News

Reintroduction of direct recruitment in LDC in Central Secretariat

Reintroduction of direct recruitment in LDC in Central Secretariat – meeting to discuss to elicit views regarding

PRIORITY

No. 19/2/2014-CS.I (P)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions
Department of Personnel and Training
CS.I Division

Dated the 19th February 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject:: Reintroduction of direct recruitment in LDC in Central Secretariat – meeting to discuss to elicit views regarding

The undersigned is directed to say that on the recommendations of the Committee on the Cadre Restructuring of CSS (3rd ), a proposal is under consideration of this Department for re-introduction of direct recruitment in the grade of LDC in the Central Secretariat.

2. In this regard, it has been desired to elicit views of the stakeholders in the matter. Accordingly, all  Ministries/Departments, Service Associations and individual officers are requested to submit their views on the issue urgently, latest by 10 March 2015. The views may be furnished via e-mail at uscs1-dopt@nic.in

3. A brief on the issue is attached.

(V. Srinivasaragavan)
Under Secretary to the Government of India
Tele.: 24629412

To
All Ministries/Departments
Service Associations and individual officers

REINTRODUCTION OF DIRECT RECRUITMENT IN THE GRADE OF LDC

As a part of first cadre review of CSS in the year 2003, direct recruitment to the Lower Division Grade (LDC) of CSCS was stopped. Eighty Five percent of the posts of LDCs were then filled up through direct recruitment quota and accordingly, after implementation of the first cadre review, 85% of the posts of
LDCs falling vacant every year are being abolished. The remaining posts are filled up by promotion from the erstwhile Group D employees (now MTS). Over the years, strength of LDCs in the Ministries/ Departments has come down substantially from the original level of about 5300.

2. The Second Administrative Reforms Commission endorsed the
decision of phasing out of direct recruitment in LDCs. The Core Group on Administrative Reforms (CGAR) also agreed with the recommendations of ARC. However, the Group of Ministers did not agree phasing out of LDCs and directed that the matter be reconsidered.

3. As the issue of reintroduction of direct recruitment in the LDC has multifarious dimensions / implications like change in work culture in the Govt. of India, E-governance, impact on Multi-Tasking Staff, UDC, Assistant cadre etc. it was referred to the 3rd cadre restructuring committee of CSS.

4. The pros and cons of reintroduction of direct recruitment in LDCs may be as under:

Pros

(i) More availability of manpower in the Sections. Presently, Central Secretariat is heavily top loaded with only 6700 Assistants feeding to 3200 SOs, 1600 USs and 1200 DS/Dirs;

(ii) Salary of a LDC is much less comparing that of an Assistant;

(iii) More continuity and institutional memory as compared to outsourced staff;

(iv) If manpower is to be increased at lower level it could be either at Assistant level or at LDC level. Direct recruitment at LDC level with Promotion to UDC and Assistant would create less problem of stagnation than increased direct recruitment at Assistant level;

(v) Quality of direct recruit LDCs is reasonable.

Cons:

(i) We would be going back from the principles of officer oriented system in the Central Secretariat;

(ii) In the era of e-governance, paperless office and multi skilling, maintaining a large cadre of LDCs to carry out routing office jobs manually may be regressive;

(iii) The savings shown in the first cadre restructuring of CSS would disappear;

(iv) LDCs in terms of salary, pension contribution and other benefits would cost much more than outsourced staff;

(iv) There could be conflict of promotional opportunities between direct recruit LDCs and Assistants

5. However, in the absence of LDCs, a number of Ministries/Departments have resorted to engaging out-sourced staff to manage basic activities like diary/dispatch, movement of files/papers, typing etc. and there is a functional need to strengthen the institutional memory and level of commitment cannot be expected from outsourced staff.

6. The 3rd CRC has recommended re-introduction DR in LDC in limited manner with simultaneous reduction in DR in Assistant grade.

7. However, in view of increased use of information technology tools and progressively more officer oriented system there is a much less requirement of ministerial staff than previously and therefore if direct recruitment in LDC is reintroduced it should be limited in number they should mostly be utilised in regulatory ministries where the volume of correspondence/ dak/ diarizing work is higher.

8. In the changed IT environment, the intake of 200-250 may be adequate  to arrive at the sustainable number of about 2000 LDCs and equal number of UDCs over the years with the combined strength of 4000.

9. To provide adequate promotional avenues to the newly recruited LDCs, the percentage of intake of DR Assistant may be reduced to 60% (from the existing 75%) leaving 40% of the vacancies in the Assistant grade to be filled up by seniority/LDCE quota from the UDC grade. Reduction in direct recruitment in Assistant would in the long run reduce stagnation in senior grades of CSS.

Original Order

Meetings held by 7th CPC as on 10.02.2015

Meetings held by 7th CPC (as on 10.02.2015)

 

Date	Meeting with
05.02.2015	At Port Blair: Central Government Employees Welfare Coordination Committee; Federation of Pharmacist Association (FIPO); Pensioners Association (JN Chander); Central Islands Agricultural Research Institute; Specialist Doctors Association; Light House and Light Ships Staff Association; Andaman and Nicobar Group “D” Medical Employees Association; Andaman and Nicobar Island Doctors Health Service Association; Andaman and Nicobar Teachers’ Association
04.02.2015	At Port Blair: Tech. Staff Association Andaman Lakshadweep Harbour Works; Andaman and Nicobar Forest Executive Staff Association; All India Forest Range Officers Federation; A&N Islands State Forest Service  Association; Employees of Agriculture Department; The Non Gazetted Government Officers’ Association; Andaman Technical Agriculture Employees Association; Government Employees Federation; Botanical Survey of India Employees Association; Andaman & Nicobar Islands Cooperative Department Executive Employees Association; Sub Committee on IT Non Gazetted Government Officers’ Association; Akhil Bharatiya Rashtriya Shaishhik Mahasangh
14.01.2015	At Kolkata: All India Railway Accounts Staff Association, SER Chapter; Technical Assistants’ Association of IIEST; All India Postal Stenographers’ Association; Eastern Railwaymen’s Congress (ERMC); All India Data Processing Officers’ Association; National Institute for the Orthopedically Handicapped Staff Association; Commercial Intelligence Union; Commercial Intelligence and Statistics Employees Association; Employees’ Association, CAT-III, Office of AG, WB; All India Customs Ministerial Officers’ Association; All India Customs Ministerial Employees Federation; National Library Employees Association; East Coast Railway Engineers’ Association; The Company Law Administrative Employees Association; Joint Council of Action of Income Tax Associations, WB; MTP Railwaymen’s Union
13.01.2015	At Kolkata: All India P&T SC/ST Employees’ Welfare Association, WB Postal Circle; All India (Postal) Administrative Offices Employees Union; Postal Engineers’ Association; National Atlas & Thematic Mapping Organization Employees’ Association; IAS Officers’ Association; Indian Forest Service (IFS) Officers’ Association; IPS Officers’ Association; GSI Scientific Officers’ Association (GSISOA); GSI Employees Association; BARC Officers’ Association; All India Postal Administrative Offices’ Association; National Library Staff Association; National Defence Non-Gazetted Staff Association; National Defence Group ‘B’ Gazetted Officers’ Association; OFB Retired Employees’ Association; All India Ordnance Factories Teaching Staff Association; Indian Railway Medical Laboratory Technologists Association; Indian Ordnance Factory Gazetted Officers Association; National Federation of Printing, Stationery and Publication Employees
15.12.2014	At Jodhpur: Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti; All Staff & Welfare Inspectors of North Western Railway; Retired ICAR Employees Welfare Society (RICAREWES); National Union of Postal Employees (Group-C); All India Train Controllers Association; KVS; All India Ex Para Military Association; Legal Men’s Association (Railways); BRO; Rajasthan Radiographer Association
12.12.2014	At Jodhpur: Laboratory Technician Union, Rajasthan; Aids Control Employees Infection Diseases Centre; Coordinating Committee Central Government Pensioners Organisation, Rajasthan State; All India Pensioners’ Forum for Retired Officers of Central Ex. Customs & Service Tax Deptt.; Defence Laboratories Employees Union; All India Association of Clerical Employees of Ordnance Factories (AIACEOF); Rashtriya Raksha Ayudh Karamchari Sangh; North West Railway Engineers Association; Association of Railway Nurses of India; Indian Railways Technical Supervisors Association; All India Loco Running Staff Association; Public Prosecutors RPF
29.11.2014	Registrar (Administration), Supreme Court of India
27.11.2014	Indian Defence Service Engineers
19.11.2014	At Hyderabad: South Central Railways Employees Sangh; SVP NPA Employees’ Association; Nuclear Fuel Complex, IWU, NUFCOSSA and NFCSAA; Rail Mazdoor Union; All India MES Civilian Engineers’ Association; NIMS Paramedicals Employees Union & Society of Indian Radiographers; All India Central Government Deaf Employees; Scientific Workers Association; All India Retired Railmen’s Federation; All India MES Civilian Engineers’ Association (AIMCEA); ISRO Retired Employees’ Forum; Postal Officers Pension Association; Accountant General Office Pensioners Association; Naval Armament Inspectors Organization; National Defence Group “B” Gazetted Officers’ Association (NDGBGOA); Ordnance Factory Mazdoor Sangh; Government Employees National Confederation (GENC); South Central Railway Engineers Association (SCREA)
12.11.2014	At Shimla: HP State Coordination Committee of Central Govt. Employees and Workers; SAS (Accounts) Association; Central Research Institute Employees’ Association; All India NIC S&T Officers’ Association; All India Postal Administrative Officers’ Employees Union Group “C” and “D” NFPE; All India Association of Inspectors and Assistants Superintendents, Posts; All India Postal Employees Union Group “C”; IAS Officers’ Association
09.11.2014	At Mumbai: IPS Association, Maharashtra; Assistant Audit Officers’ Association; Competent Authority – SAFEMA/NDPSA; Indian Revenue Service Promotee Officers’ Association; Indian Revenue Service Association, Mumbai; Films Division Cameramen; Indian Naval Armament Service Association; Directorate of Marketing and Inspection Employees’ Association, Forest Survey of India
08.11.2014	At Mumbai: All India Defence Pharmacist Association; Orthotics and Prosthetics Association of India; All India CGHS Employees’ Association; All India Association of Statistical Investigators; National Railway Mazdoor Union; All India Naval Technical Supervisory Staff Association; Ordnance Factories Group B Gazetted Officers; National Defence Non-Gazetted Staff Association; All India Association of Non-Gazetted Officers; The Naval Employees’ Union, National Defence Group ‘B’ Gazetted Officers Association
07.11.2014	At Mumbai: ISRO Pensioners’ Association; Directorate of Purchase and Stores Employees’ Association; Atomic Energy Workers and Staff Union; National Federation of Atomic Energy Employees; Atomic Energy Workers and Staff Union; BARC Employees’ Association, Tarapur; All India Association of Inspectors and Assistant Superintendents; All India Savings Bank Control Employees’ Union; All India Central Labour Welfare Organization Staff Association; Central Government Pensioners’ Welfare Association
06.11.2014	At Mumbai: Central Railway Promotee Officers’ Association; Central Railway Mazdoor Sangh; All India Train Controllers’ Association; Central Railway Engineers’ Association; Bhartiya Pratiraksha Mazdoor Sangh; All India Loco Running Staff Association; Western Railway Motormen’s Association; Indian Railways Radiographers’ Association; All India Loco Inspectors’ Welfare Association; Rashtriya Bhartiya Khani Vibhag Karmchari Sangh; Indian Bureau of Mines Employees’ Association; Central Water and Power Research Station; Indian Forest Service Association, Maharashtra
30.10.2014	S30 Retired Pensioners’ Association; PFRDA
29.10.2014	Director General and Other officers of Defence Estate
13.10.2014	At Leh: Personnel of Indian Army, Indian Air Force, Defence Institute of High Altitude Research, DRDO, BRO, ITBP, MES, All Ladakh Central Government Employees Association
09.10.2014	At Dehradun: Non-Gazetted Officers’ Association, LBSNAA; National Institute for the Visually Handicapped Employees’ Union; Ministerial Staff Association, Survey of India; Topographical Staff Association, Survey of India; Class III Service Association, Survey of India; Central Government Library Association; Faculty, Indira Gandhi National Forest Academy; Indira Gandhi National Forest Academy Staff Association; Faculty, Indian Council of Forestry Research and Education
08.10.2014	At Dehradun: National Defence Medical Laboratory Technical Staff Association; All India Association of Clerical Employees of Ordnance Factories; Employees Union Ordnance Factory, Dehradun; All India Association of Non-Gazetted Officers of Ordnance & Equipment Factories and Quality Assurance Organization; Staff Association, Rashtriya Indian Military College; All India DGQA Engineers Association; Wildlife Institute of India
24.09.2014	Indian Ex-servicemen Movement
23.09.2014	CRPF Officers
22.09.2014	BSF Officers; Forum of retired CAPF officers
17.09.2014	Aviation Research Centre
16.09.2014	RPF Group ‘A’ Officers, IIM Bangalore
15.09.2014	Disabled War Veterans (DISWAVE) Association, DG Bureau of Police Research and Development
26.08.2014	At Bangalore: IAS Officers’ Association, IPS Officers’ Association, IFS Officers’ Association
25.08.2014	At Bangalore: IIM Bangalore, ISRO
24.08.2014	At Bangalore: Army Base Workshop (EME) Diploma Holders Association, Bangalore, Air Force Store Keepers Association, All India NCC Defence Civilian Employees Association, Confederation of Central Government Employees and Workers – Karnataka State, Atomic Energy Employees Federation, All India Central Excise Inspectors Association, The Indian Hospital Pharmacist Association, Indian Railway Loco Runningmen Organisation, South Western Railways Engineers Association, Railway Wheel Factory, South Western Railway Employees Sangh, All India DRDO Personal Staff Association, DoS Pensioners Forum, Central Government Pensioners Association, Indian Institute of Horticulture Research Employees’ Association, NIMHANS, Veterans Association, All India Loco Running Staff Association
21.08.2014	Physiotherapy Forum; Indian Ordnance Factories Group’B’ Gazetted Officers Association
20.08.2014	Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan; Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Sangathan
24.07.2014	Confederation of Central Government Gazetted Officers Association; National Ex-Servicemen Co-ordination Committee; Indian Ex-Services League
23.07.2014	Bharat Central Pensioners Federation; Bharat Pensioners Samaj; Group ‘B’ Indian Information Service Association; Indian Postal Service Officers Association; DANICS Officers Association; Group ‘B’ Indian Ordnance Gazetted Officers Association
22.07.2014	Police Commissioner, Delhi; DG Coast Guard; IOFS Officers Association
21.07.2014	Director, IB; Director, CBI; Director, RAW
19.06.2014	Indian Economic Service Officers Association; Indian Statistical Service Officers Association; IFS Officers Association; DGs of CAPFs (BSF+ITBP+Assam Rifles+Sashastra Seema Suraksha Bal); DGs of CAPFs (CISF+CRPF+NSC)
18.06.2014	IFS Officers Association; PFRDA; Officers of Department of Financial Services, MOF; Officers of Department of Pension & Pensioners Welfare; P&T Finance Accounts Gr.A Officers Association; IRAS Officers Association; Central Health Service Association
17.06.2014	IAS Officers’ Association; Central Engineering Services Officers’ Association (Water+Power+Architecture); Central Engineering Services Officers’ Association (Civil+Electrical+Mechanical+Road Transport+Telecom); Income Tax Officers’ Association; Custom Officers Association; Central Excise Officers Association
16.06.2014	IPS Officers’ Association; Representative of Pay Commission cells of Army, Navy and Airforce; Indian Audit and Accounts Service Association; Cost Accounts Association; Civil Accounts Association; Federation of Railway Officers

Select List 2003 (extended) UDC Grade of CSCS-reg.

Select list 2003 (extended) of UDC Grade of CSCS-reg.

No.12/1/2011-CS-11 (8)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel and Training
(CS.II Division)

3rd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan,
Khan Market, New Delhi – 110 003.
Dated,09/02/2015.

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Select list 2003 (extended) of UDC Grade of CSCS-reg.

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department’s O.M of even number dated 27.01.2015 along with a list of 1552 officials. A further list containing 380 officials is circulated herewith. The cadre units are requested to conduct the DPC in respect of these officials for inclusion in the Select List 2003 (extended) and subject to fitness promote them as such. The orders of promotion with regard to officials who have already retired need not be issued since they are not physically available to avail of the promotion. The cadre units are also requested to furnish a compliance report by 16.02.2015 in the enclosed proforma.

2. Nodal officers may also ensure that the requisite details are updated in the web management system which is hoisted at cscms.nic.in without fail.

(K. Suresh Kumar)
Under Secretary to the Govt. of India
Tel# 24654020

All cadre units of CSCS
Annexure to O.M. No. 121/2011-CS-II(B) dated 9th February, 2015

S.No	Name of official	Whether found fit for promotion as UDC for the select year 2003	Whether clear from vigilance angle	Remarks, if any	Select List year of LDC

Source: original Order

Annual Medical Examination for the Group ‘A’ officers of CCS / posts of age 40 years and above: DoPT Order

Annual Medical Examination for the Group ‘A’ officers of Central Civil Services/posts of age 40 years and above.

 

No. 21011/1/2009-Estt (A)- Part.
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions
(Department of Personnel and Training)

North Block, New Delhi, 15th January, 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Sub:- Annual Medical Examination for the Group ‘A’ officers of Central Civil Services/posts of age 40 years and above.

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department’s OM of even number dated 1st February, 2012 and 20th March, 2013 on the above subject whereby the scheme of Annual Medical Examination in respect of Group ‘A’ officers of Central Civil Services/posts of age 40 years and above had been circulated in consultation with Ministry of Health & Family Welfare. In this OM, the regime of medical tests to be conducted, the package rates applicable and the list of 26 Hospitals which had agreed to conduct the Annual Medical Examination under the Scheme were prescribed. Subsequently, vide OM of even number dated 20th March, 2013, full address of the 26 Hospitals in Delhi/NCR circulated with OM dated 1s t February, 2012, was notified. ( Available and downloadable from the website of this Department – http://persmin. nic.in => OMs & Orders => Establishment).

2. In OM No.21011/1/2009-Estt (A) Part dated 2e March, 2013, the list of empanelled Hospitals in the areas other than Delhi NCR as provided by the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare vide their OM No.A.17020/1/2010-MS dated 28th December, 2012, was attached.

3. The matter regarding empanelment of hospitals for the required Medical Examination was again taken up by this Department with Ministry of Health & Family Welfare.

4. Ministry of Health & Family Welfare vide O.M No.S.11045/36/2012-CGHS(HEC) dated 1st October, 2014 have conyed the details of fresh empanelment of private Health Care Organisations (HCO) and revision of package rates applicable under CGHS Delhi & NCR which are valid for two years. This OM dated 1st October, 2014 can be downloaded from their website www.mohfw.nic.in\eghsnew\index.asp. With this OM dated 1st October, 2014, a list of approved Private Health Care Organisation (HC0s), which are empanelled under CGHS in Delhi/NCR area, has also been enclosed.

5. In accordance with Para 3(M) of the agreement entered into by the Ministry of Health & FW with these Hospitals (copy enclosed with their above mentioned O.M No.S.11045/36/2012- CGHS(HEC) dated 1st October, 2014), it has been made obligatory for these Hospitals to conduct Annual Medical Examination as per the prescribed format and approved rates .The agreement has provided that these empanelled Hospitals shall agree for conducting all investigations/diagnostic tests/consultation etc. of the Central Civil Service Group “A” officer of above 40 years of age and other categories of CGHS beneficiaries as specified by Government from time to time as per the prescribed protocol, subject to the condition that the hospital shall not charge more than Rs.2000/- for conducting the prescribed medical examination of the male officers and Rs.2200/- for female officers of Central Government who come to the hospital/institution with the requisite permission letter from their Department/Ministry/ Competent Authority. Accordingly, Group “A” officers of Central Civil Services/Posts of age of 40 years and above can have the required Annual Medical Examination conducted by the Hospitals listed with the Ministry of Health & Family Welfare’s above referred No.S.11045/36/2012-CGHS(HEC) dated 1sst October, 2014 referred in para 4 above.

6. In non-CGHS areas, the number of hospitals empanelled under CS (MA) Rules, 1944 being relatively lower ,the different departments/offices may identify one or more hospital locally and refer their Group ‘A’ officers to such hospital for annual medical examination as per the prescribed schedule and rate i.e. Rs. 2000/- for men and Rs. 2200/- for women officers. State Government hospitals or semi-Govt./Public Sector Undertaking’s(PSU) hospitals may also be contacted for the purpose accordingly.

(Prem Chand)
Under Secretary to the Government of India

Source/View/Download: www.persmin.nic.in

Finmin Orders Jan 2015 – Foreign tours, Direct Benefit Transfer of LPG and Sukanya Samridhhi Account

Finmin Orders Jan 2015 – Foreign tours, Direct Benefit Transfer of LPG and Sukanya Samridhhi Account

The Finance Ministry has issued some important orders today on its portal, the same is reproduced and given below for your kind information…

1. Foreign tours/travels as part of Training Programmes — approval of Screening Committee of Secretaries (SCOS).

2. Direct Benefit Transfer / Direct Benefit Transfer of LPG (DBTL) — payment of Commission to Banks.

3. Launch of scheme for Girl Child named “Sukanya Samridhhi Account’ by Hon’ble Prime Minister

No. 7(1)IE.Coord/2014
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Expenditure

North Block, New Delhi
25th November 2014

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Foreign tours/travels as part of Training Programmes — approval of Screening Committee of Secretaries (SCOS).

Instructions have been issued by this Department from time to time on the need to curtail expenditure on foreign travel. In recent months it has been observed that Ministries/Departments have been proposing Foreign Study Tours (FSTs) of large delegations of officers as a part of training programmes. In keeping with the Government’s drive on economy and rationalization of expenditure and to have an objective assessment of such FSTs, it has been decided that prior approval of the Screening Committee of Secretaries would be required for all FSTs of delegations exceeding 5 members (irrespective of level/rank of officers), where Government of India is funding such tours and which are part of career training programme(s)
or stand alone tours or otherwise.

2. This has the approval of Cabinet Secretary.

sd/-
(N. Radhakrishnan)
Director(E.Coord)

Direct Benefit Transfer / Direct Benefit Transfer of LPG (DBTL) — payment of Commission to Banks

F.No.32 (07)/PF-II/2011(VoI.II)
Ministry of Finance
Department of Expenditure
(PF-II Division)

North Block, New Delhi
Dated: the 16th of January, 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Direct Benefit Transfer / Direct Benefit Transfer of LPG (DBTL) — payment of Commission to Banks.

The issues relating to the payment of appropriate commission with respect to payments made under the Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT)/Direct Benefit Transfer in LPG (DBTL) schemes of the Government have been under active consideration of the Government for some time. The matter has been examined in detail, and in supersession of earlier OMs issued in this regard, it has been decided that:

(i) For urban based DBT schemes like DBTL, the transaction cost may be paid at the NEFT rate as per the extant RBI circular or the APB rate as per the extant NPCI circular (as applicable). The ‘on us and “off-us distinction, wherever it exists, should be maintained on the basis of actuals.

(ii) For rural based DBT schemes like pensions, NREGA, pre-matric scholarship, maternity benefits etc. where a large number of transactions are likely to be through the Banking Correspondents, the transaction charges may be paid @ 1% subject to an upper limit of Rs.10 per transaction, in addition to what is required to be paid vide (I) above.

(iii) The transaction cost may be paid at the time of credit of benefit transfer into the accounts of beneficiaries from the same budget line from which the respective scheme funds / benefits are being transferred.

(iv) This OM will come into immediate effect and may be reviewed from time to time.

2. This issues with the approval of the Finance Minister.

sd/-
(Chittaranj Dash)
Director (PF. II)

Launch of scheme for Girl Child named “Sukanya Samridhhi Account’ by Hon’ble Prime Minister — rate of interest reg.

IMMEDIATE

F. No.2/3/2014.NS-II
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Departnìent of Economic Affairs

236, North Block, New Delhi-110001
Dated the 20th January, 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Launch of scheme for Girl Child named “Sukanya Samridhhi Account’ by Hon’ble Prime Minister — rate of interest reg.

In compliance of announcement by Finance Minister in his Budget Speech 2014-15 the Government of India has introduced a new scheme named “Sukanya Samriddhi Account” vide Notification No.GSR No.863 (E) dated 2nd December, 2014. It has been decided to allow 9.1% rate of interest on investments in the scheme during the financial year 2014-15.

This has the approval of Union Finance Minister.

sd/-

Under Secretary to the Govt of India

Source document from www.finmin.nic.in

Dopt issued guidelines on prescribing Educational Qualifications and experience for recruitment of various post

Dopt issued guidelines on prescribing Educational Qualifications and experience for recruitment of various post

Guidelines on prescribing Educational Qualifications and requisite experience in respect of various posts, Pay Band & Grade Pay/ Pay Scale for appointment by Direct Recruitment

No.AB.14017/ 27/20 14-Estt.(RR)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel P.G.& Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training

North Block, New Delhi
Dated: 20.1.2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: – Guidelines for Educational Qualifications and experience for framing/amendment of Recruitment Rules.

Department of Personnel & Training vide 0M. No. AB. 14017/48/2010- Estt (RR) dated 31st December, 2010 have issued Guidelines on framing/amendment/relaxation of Recruitment Rules and Service Rules.

2. In continuation to the above, the following Guidelines on prescribing Educational Qualifications and requisite experience in respect of various posts, Pay Band & Grade Pay/ Pay Scale for appointment by Direct Recruitment or deputation depending upon the nature of functions and duties are being issued. These Guidelines may be adopted by the Ministries/ Departments as guide while framing Recruitment Rules for various posts. A draft OM to this effect is annexed herewith.

3. Ministries/ Departments are, therefore, requested to offer their comments on the proposed O.M positively by 20.2.2015

Sd/-
(Mukta Goel)

Director (E-I)

Source document from : www.persmin.gov.in

All India Defence employees Federation opposes corporatisation of Ordnance Factories

All India Defence employees Federation opposes corporatisation of Ordnance Factories

ALL INDIA DEFENCE EMPLOYEES FEDERATION
Survey No.81, Or.Babasahab Ambedkar Road. Khadki, Pune — 411003.
Tele Fax (020) 25818761 Ernail defempfed@gmail.com

PRESS RELEASE

FOR FAVOUR OF PUBLICATION

All India Defence employees Federation opposes corporatisation of Ordnance Factories

AIDEF convey it, Stand to the Defence Minister Shri.Manohar Parrikar

It is seen from the media report that the Government is considering the proposal to corporatised the Ordnance Factories. The 4 lakhs Defence Civilian Employees and their trade Unions have opposed any move of the Govt in the past to corporatised the Ordnance Factories, which is not in the interest of National Security of the country. Moreover the experien. with various Public Sector Units and corporation reveal that ultimately it will result in Privatisation. The Ordnance Factories are captive industry established for manufacturing Military Equipments including Tanks, Arms, Ammunitions, Vehicles and other troop comforts, strategic uniforms etc. Therefore the Defence Production Ordnance Factories should be under the control of Government. In this regard there are written agreement with the Federations of the Defence Civilian Employees by the then Defence Ministers, including the then Defence Minister, now Hon’ble President of India Shri.Pranab Mukherjee, that Ordnance Factories would not be corporatised. A delegation of AIDEF met Defence Minister Shri.Manohar Parrikar on 1.1/2015 and conveyed the views of the employees that Ordnance Factories should not be privatised. The Ordnance Factories should not be privatised in view of the agreernent with the recognised Federations. The Defence Minister has assured that he will call a meeting of the 3 Federations after 15. of Feb. 2015 to discuss the entire issues until such time no decision would taken in this regard.

In the meantime the recognised Federations and Associations of Defence Civilian Employees are meeting on the 27, of Jan. 2015 to consider the development and the proposal of the Defence Ministry and to take further course of action to fight against any move of the Government to corporatise the most Stratigical Defence Industry, the 41 Ordnance Factories.

C. SRIKUMAR
General Secretary
Mob. NO.09444080885

Review of Model RRs for the Store Keeping staff category of posts

Review of Model RRs for the Store Keeping staff category of posts

No. AB-14017/11/2014-Est(RR)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, PG and Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training

New Delhi
Dated the 16th January, 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject:- Review of Model RRs for the Store Keeping staff category of posts.

The Model RRs for the Store Keeping staff category of posts issued in this Department OM No. AB-14017/41/87-Estt. (RR) dated 23.3.1987 have been reviewed in the light of 6% CPC recommendations on revision of pay scales, instructions issued by this Department, etc. Accordingly, the revised Model Recruitment Rules for the same are enclosed as Annexure to this Office Memorandum.

2. Ministries / Departments may review the existing recruitment rules and notify the revised rules conforming to the Model Recruitment Rules. These may also be forwarded to all autonomous/ statutory bodies for adoption. The Ministry of Home Affairs is also requested to forward these Model RRs to the UT Administrations for appropriate action.

3. Hindi version will follow,

(Mukta Goel)
Director (E-I)
Tel: 2309 2479

DOWNLOAD MODEL RECRUITMENT RULES FOR THE POST OF STORE KEEPER GRADE-II

CCS (Conduct) Rules – Filing of annual Immovable Property Returns – Dopt Orders 2015

CCS (Conduct) Rules – Filing of annual Immovable Property Returns – Dopt Orders 2015

IMMEDIATE

F. No. 11013/3/2014-Estt.(A)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training
Establishment Division

North Block, New Delhi — 110001
Dated January 16 , 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 — Filing of annual Immovable Property Returns – regarding

The undersigned is directed to state that as per various notifications issued by this Department, relating to the Public Servants (Furnishing of Information and Annual Returns of Assets and Liabilities and the Limits for Exemption of Assets in Filing Returns) under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, the public servant who has filed declaration, information and annual returns of property under the provision of the rules applicable to such public servant, should file the declaration, information and return indicating his/her assets and liabilities, as on 01.08.2014, to the competent authority on or before, 30.04.2015. The notifications are available on the Department’s website at http://persmin.gov.in/Lokpal HomePage From CCIS.asp.

2. The Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964, are being amended to align them with the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013. Presently, as per the Rule 18(1)(ii) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964, every Government servant belonging to any service or holding any post included in Group ‘A’ and Group ‘B’ is required to submit an annual return regarding the immovable property inherited/owned/ acquired/ held on lease or mortgage either in his own name or in the name of any family member or in the name of any other person.

3. It has, inter-alia, been clarified by this Department vide Office Memorandum No. 407/12/2014-AVD-IV(B) dated 13.01.2015 that the requirement of filing returns regarding assets and liabilities under the Lokpal Act is in addition to, and not in supersession of the requirement of filing similar returns under the existing Conduct Rules. In view of this, all Government Servants may be directed as follows:

(i) The annual Immovable Property Return, as on 31.12.2014, under the existing CCS(Conduct) Rules, 1964 is required to be filed on or before 31.01.2015;
(ii) The first return under the Lokpal Act (as on 01.08.2014) should be filed on or before 30.04.2015; and
(iii) The next annual return under the Lokpal Act, for the year ending 31.03.2015 should be filed on or before 31.07.2015.

4. It is, therefore, requested that all concerned may be suitably advised to file the Immovable Property Returns (IPRs) and the return under the Lokpal Act as per the dates indicated above, Further, in accordance with the instruction contained in this Department’s Office Memorandum No. 11013/3/2011-Estt.A dated 11.04.2011, IPRs (to be submitted by 31 st January of each year) shall be placed in public domain by 31 st March of that year. A compliance report in respect of the IPRs filed by Group ‘A’ Officers of the Central Civil Services, as on 31.01.2015, may please be furnished to this Department by 30.04.2015.

5. Similar action may kindly be taken by the authorities controlling services not covered by the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964.

6. Hindi version will follow.

sd/-
(J.A. Vaidyanathan)
Director (Establishment)
Telefax: 2309 3179

Source: www.persmin.gov.in

Uniform for the female employees of Non-Statutory Departmental Canteens/ Tiffin Rooms: DoPT Order

Uniform for the employees of Non-Statutory Departmental Canteens/ Tiffin Rooms functioning in Central Government Offices- Issue of Petticoat and Dupatta to Female Canteen Employees – regarding

No-18/2/2013-Dir.(C)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel PG Ex Pensions
Department of Personnel Ex Training

Lok Nayak Bhawan, Khan Market
New Delhi, dated 09 January, 2015

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Uniform for the employees of Non-Statutory Departmental Canteens/ Tiffin Rooms functioning in Central Government Offices- Issue of Petticoat and Dupatta to Female Canteen Employees – regarding

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department’s OM. No.12/4/2001-Dir(C) 21.1.2002 and OM. No.12/8/2002-Dir(C) dated 8.7.2003 wherein scale of articles of Uniforms authorized for canteen employees was circulated.

2. The matter regarding issue of Uniforms to entitled female canteen employees has been reviewed and it has been decided to authorize issue of Petticoat to entitled female canteen employees who wear Saree and Dupatta to those who wear Salwar Kameez in addition to already authorized articles of Uniform. The scale of Uniform authorized vide OM. No.12/4/2001~Dir(C) dated 21.1.2002 will remain same.

3. instructions on procurement of Uniforms circulated vide OM. No-18/1/2009-Dir(C) dated 27.8.2010 are to be followed while procuring uniforms for canteen employees.

4. This issue with the concurrence of Home(Finance) vide their ID. Note No.3108505, dated 10.9.2014 and Ministry of Finance(Department of Expenditure) vide their I.D. Note 5(2)/E.II(A)/2014 dated 25.11.2014.

5. Hindi version will follow.

(Pratima Tyagi)
Director(Canteens)

Source: www.persmin.nic.in
[http://ccis.nic.in/WriteReadData/CircularPortal/D2/D02adm/UNI0001.pdf]

Transfer Guidelines for LDC posted in Regional Offices

Transfer Guidelines for LDC posted in Regional Offices

Transfer Guidelines for Lower Divisional Clerks posted in Regional Offices under the administrative control of Directorate of Estates.

Directorate of Estates issued orders to frame transfer guidelines for LDCs from one regional office to another regional office. Directorate of Estates under the Ministry of Urban Development has eight regional offices located in different places all over in Inida. The eight regional offices are Kolkata, Shimla, Chandigarh, Faridabad, Ghazidabad, Mumbai, Nagpur and Chennai.

Normally LDCs are not transferred from one to another office, however requests from LDCs for transfer on different gournds. So far there is no guidelines in the regard. The matter has been considered by the Ministry and decided to frame transfer guidelines for LDCs as under…

Directorate of Estates Transfer Orders Dec 2014