No Change in Retirement Age

The Cabinet Secretary K. M. Chandrasekhar today informed that there is no plan to revise the retirement age for Central Government employees. After the sixth pay commission implementation, employees were hoping for the rise in pension age, as doing so can reduce the burden of the additional payment to some extent. However the government decided other stopping all the rumours associated. Shri. K. M. Chandrasekhar clarified that the government has no intentions in changing the retirement age and the current system will be followed. “I tried to find out. But there is no file in (Department of) Expenditure, no file in DOPT (Department of Personnel and Training). There is nothing. It is more of a wishful thinking,” he said in an interview. At present the retirement age for the Central Government employees is 60. He also added that there is no plan to unify the retirement age of the state government staff across the states. “The states will decide their own retirement age,” he said. All states have their own retirement age - starting from 55 years (Kerala) to 60 years (Uttar Pradesh, Assam etc). The Madhya Pradesh government teachers retire at the age of 62 years.

Source: Economic Times

P.S.S.Group B Nomination

21 IP line officers were promoted to PS Group B grade. It is for the vacancy for the year 2009

1. SREEKANTA KAR ORISSA                                  WEST BENGAL

2. ABHIJIT BHATTACHRYA  WEST BENGAL        WEST BENGAL

3. DEBYENDU ROY  WEST BENGAL                      WEST BENGAL

4. ARUN KUMAR JHA  BIHAR                                 BIHAR

5. G.MOHANA PRASAD  KERALA                         KERALA

6. R.R.ALI MAHARASHTRA                                    MAHARSHTRA

7. K.M.KUMTHEKAR  MAHARSHTRA                  MAHARSHTRA

8. NIRODE CHANDRA BHOWMIK ASSAM          ASSAM

9. BINOD BIHARI MANDAL WEST BENGAL       WEST BENGAL

10. P.K.HARIDAS  KERALA                                   KERALA

11. ASIT BARAN SAHOO   WEST BENGAL        WEST BENGAL

12. B.D.KULKARNI  MAHARASHTRA               MAHARASHTRA

13. MD.ABDUL JALIL SARKAR  ASSAM           ASSAM

14. J.M.RATHWA (ST)  GUJARAT                       GUJARAT

15. K.SOORAPPAN (ST) TAMILNADU              DELHI

16. JASKARAM SINGH (SC) PUNJAB                PUNJAB

17. HIRA LAL BITHA(SC)     BIHAR                   BIHAR

18. NARSI RAM REGAR(SC) RAJASTHAN      DELHI

19. JIRAMAN DEEP(SC) ORISSA                     WEST BENGAL
20. HARI SINGH (SC) UTTARA PRADESH     UTTARAPRADESH

21. AJAY Kr. KALSA (SC) WEST BENGAL     WEST BENGA

Best wishes.

Provision of Broadband Connection to SDIs


Directorate has ordered to Provide Broad band connection to 1914 sub divisional Inspectors. The cost of the connection should be not more than Rs 2500 and should be exhausted on or before 31.08.2010.

One of our major demand was met. You may be aware that the Department provided Laptop to all Sub Divisional Inspectors. At that time our association requested the D.G. Madam to provide net connection ( Data card so that they can communicate all the correspondence to the Divisional heads and further Divisions also send orders direct to SDI without any loss of time and this will save the papers also.

We thankful to the Secretary for considering our request.

Training to Surplus candidates.

76 Surplus IPOs were ordered to undergo induction Training at PTC, Vododara w.e.f 06.09.2010

No request for Revaluation of Answer Papers

Government of India

Ministry of Communications & I Technology

Department of Posts

(DE Section)

Dak Bhawan Sansad Marg

New Delhi-110116

No.A-24018/10/2010-DE                                                                               Dated: 02 08.2010
To

I All Heads of Circles
2. Add. D G APS, West Block III, Wing No.5, RK Puram New Delhi-110067
3. BD and PLI Directorate
4 ).Director s, Postal Staff College India, Ghaziabad and PTCs
Sub; Revaluation of answer papers Judgment pronounced by Hon1ble Supreme Court in the Civil Appeal No (s) 897 of 2006 and 907 of 2006 between Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission (Appellant) and Mukesh Thakur & Anr. (Respondents)
Sir/Madam
I am directed to enclose copy of the subject cited judgment of Hon. Supreme Court of India.
2 Consequent on introduction of RTI Act 2005 and the directions of the CIC to supply photocopies of answer papers to the candidates, filing of Court cases in the Tribunals has increased enormously. Various CAT Benches are also directing the Department to get the answer papers revaluated .On filing writ petitions in the High Courts against the orders of the CAT Benches, the High Court are also disposing off the cases saying that they don't want to interfere in the matter. It is stated that Rule 15-Appendix-37 of Postal Manual Volume-IV clearly stipulates "Revaluation of answer scrip is not permissible in any case or under any circumstances". Thus it is not permissible to consider requests of candidates for revaluation after declaration of results as it will not only cause great inconvenience to the examination process and also cause hindrance to the administration in the absence of vacancies of particular category viz, OC, SC,ST etc under departmental quota but also be against the sprit of ibid Rule.
3 .It may be seen that representations requesting for revaluation of answer papers are being received in this office specifically pointing out the following grievances:
(i) Particular answer(s) were not evaluated.

(ii) Excess attempted answer (s) was not evaluated.

(iii) For the some answer (s), the examiner awarded marks to one candidate and to another candidate no marks were assigned or the answer struck off as wrong.

(iv) All the answers were evaluated but justified marks were not awarded by the examiner.

4. The issues indicated at (i) to (iii) above are justified and need to be examined by the competent authority to find out the facts and if the calm of the candidate appears to be genuine, revaluation may be got done by an independent examiners in such cases and further necessary action may be taken. In so far as the issue indicated at (iv) above, there is no need to consider such requests and merits rejection of the initial stage itself.
5. In the similar situation in the Civil Appeal No(s) 897 of 2006 and 907 of 2006 between Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission (Appellant) and Mukesh Thakur & Anr (Respondents), Hon. Supreme Court of India has upheld the plea of the Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission rejecting the request of a candidate for revaluation .In the light of the judgment of Hon. Supreme Court , it is requested to review all pending court cases filed in various CAT Benches/High Courts by the candidates of various departmental examinations seeking directions for revaluation and declaring them as successful on the pretext that the evaluation was not done properly by the examiners and file suitable interim replies in the courts producing the copy of the Supreme Court judgment seeking dismissal of the cases . All pending representations received from the applicants seeking revaluation of answer papers covered item (iv) of para 3 above may also be disposed off at the Divisional/Regional/Circle level as the case may be without forwarding the same to this office.
6. This issues with the approval of Member (P).

7. The receipt of the latter may please be acknowledged.

Yours faithfully,

Sdxxx

(L Mohan Rao)

Assistant Director General (DE)

Demand of CHQ seeking clarifications on Hostel Subsidy & Reimbursement under Children Education Assistance now issued.

33-4/2010-PAP
Government of India

Ministry of Communications & IT

Department of Posts

(Establishment Division)

Dak Bhawan, Parliament Street

New Delhi – 110001

Dated 21.07.2010

All Chief Postmasters General

All Postmasters General

All Directors of Accounts (Postal)

                           Subject : Sub: – Grant of Hostel subsidy and Children Education Assistance

Sir/Madam

Representations have been received from the staff side that:

(i) In many circles, the Hostel Subsidy has not been sanctioned to the officials as per the OM No 12011/03/2008-Estt (Allowance) dt. 2.9.2008

(ii) that the officials are entitled for reimbursement of all fee paid for children like imparting music or any other subject fee for the use of any aid or appliance extra-curricular activities, besides reimbursement of one set of text-books and notebooks, 2 sets of uniform and one set of school shoes, etc. However, the reimbursement has not been made for the above item for want of separate orders from the Directorate about the modalities. He requested the Directorate for issue of clarifications to circles.

2. The issues raised by the staff side have been examined and in consultation with the Department of Personnel and Training. The Department of Personnel and Training vide their U.O. No. 12011/05/2010-Estt (Allowance) dt. 05.07.2010 intimated that, it has been clarified vide OM NO. 12011/03/2008-Estt (Allowance) dt. 11-11-2008 that “hostel subsidy means expenses incurred by the Government servant if he has to keep his children in the hostel of a residential school away from the station at which he is posted or is residing. There are no further conditions attached to it. Further the OM no. 12011/03/2008-Estt (Allowance) dt. 2-9-2008 has been issued in supersession of the earlier orders. Therefore for payment of Hostel subsidy, the condition required to be fulfilled is keeping his children in the hostel of a residential school away from the station at which he is posted or is residing and it is not linked to transfer of Government servant as clarified by the Nodal Ministry. Further, as per OM No. 12011/03/2008-Estt. (Allowance) dated 02.09.2008, both Hostel Subsidy and Children Education Assistance cannot be availed concurrently.

3. In regard to point no. 2 raised by the Staff side, attention of the circles is invited to OM no. 12011/03/2008-Estt (Allowance) dt. 02.09.2008 wherein reimbursement items that can be claimed were detailed as:

“Tuition fee, admission fee, laboratory fee, special fee charged for agriculture, Electronics, music or any other subject, fee charged for practical work under programme of work experience, fee paid for the use of any aid or appliance by the child, library fee, games/sports fee and fee for extra-curricular activities This also includes reimbursement for purchase of one set of text books and note books, two sets of uniforms and one set of school shoes can be claimed for a child in a year”.

However, all these items are within the Annual Ceiling of Rs.12000 subject to production of cash receipts and other conditions prescribed by the Nodal Ministry in the said OM.

4. It is requested to bring these instructions to the notice of all concerned for scrupulous observance and strict compliance.

Sd/-

(K. Rameshwara Rao)

Assistant Director General (Estt)

Full text of the Supreme Court Judgment is furnished below.

(Signed Order is placed on the file)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7773 OF 2009

UNION OF INDIA & ANR.                                                                                    ...APPELLANTS

                                                                  VERSUS

M. NALLAVAN ...                                                                                                      RESONDENT

We have heard learned counsel for the parties. During the course of hearing of this batch of appeals, the appellants represented by the Director (Staff), Ministry of Communication & I.T., Department of Posts filed an additional affidavit which may put an end to the controversy between the parties. In fact, the said additional affidavit has been filed pursuant to certain observations made by this Court while hearing the appeals.

It is evident from the affidavit that the entire matter was reconsidered by the Department and upon such reexamination based on humanitarian considerations, found that out of 204 respondents in all 202 respondents working in the Department against short term/leave vacancies can be accommodated against compassionate appointment vacancies for the years 2000-01 to 2009 as per the departmental guidelines. However, in the case of Postal Assistants (PA) and Sorting Assistants (SA) cadre, according to the Ministry, the number of vacancies is not enough to accommodate all of them in the cadre. It is stated that the number of vacancies earmarked for this period is only 113 whereas the number of respondents claiming the relief is 152. However, it is stated that as a one time measure, the Department is willing to accommodate them against residual vacancies of the Department. The statement made in the affidavit is made part of the record directing the respondents to act upon the same.

In the circumstances, the appellants are directed to regularize the services of all the 202 respondents who are working in the Department against short term/leave vacancies with effect from their date of appointment.

However, the respondents shall not be entitled for payment of any arrears on account of such regularization. But their pay and pensionary benefits are protected.

In view of this order, it is made clear that the findings recorded by the Tribunal and as well as the High Court with regard to the interpretation of office memorandums and circulars of the Department are set aside and those findings and observations shall not be treated as precedent for the purpose of any other case or cases that may be pending.

The questions of law, if any, are left open.

The appeals are accordingly disposed of without any order as to costs. The interlocutory applications are accordingly allowed.

........................................................J.

(B. SUDERSHAN REDDY)
NEW DELHI, ..........................................................J.

July 30, 2010 (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR)

IPO Grade pay Case.


CAT case bearing number 381/2010 has been posted to 01.09.2010 (Monday). The petitioner will file a rejoinder before the date mentioned above.

we may get the fruits/ results in the month of october 2010
Thanks to Permanand

PROMOTION FROM UDC TO IPO WILL GET BENEFIT OF MACP

TBOP/BCR Scheme was extended to the circle office staff by re-designating the exixting LDCs and UDC as Postal Assistant . As such as on date consideration of MACPS ie 01.09.2008, there is no exixtance of the cadres of LDCs and UDCsand therefore promtions earned by the officials from  from PA to UDC or LDCs to UDCs prior to re designation is to be ignored.

Authority: Department of Post letter no 4-7 MACP/2009- pcc DATED 19.07.2010.

Reduction of staff under TBOP/BCR schemes stands withdrawn w.e.f 01.09.2008 consequent upon implementation of MACP.


(Copy of letter No. 25-5/2010-PE.I dated 19.07.2010 of Department of Posts)

The undersigned is directed clarify the position in respect of reduction of staff under TBOP/BCR schemes w.e.f 01.09.2008 during periodical Establishment Reviews consequent upon implementation of MACP and withdrawal of TBOP/BCR Schemes as under:

“Consequent on implementation of time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) Scheme and Biennial Cadre Review (BCR) Scheme, Department of Posts had imposed cuts of 5% in operative staff and 15% in supervisory staff w.e.f 30.11.1983 under TBOP Scheme and later on, additional cuts of 1% in operative staff and 5% in supervisory staff were introduced w.e.f. 01.10.1991 under BCR Scheme. These cuts were introduced as measure of matching savings to offset the financial implications on account of grant of financial upgradations to staff and for obtaining additional productivity. The number of posts reduced under this matching savings/productivity provisions were kept in view at the time of periodical reviews or establishment of augmentation proposals.The said TBOP and BCR Schemes have now been withdrawn w.e.f 01.09.20087 consequent upon implementation of Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACP). Consequently, the number of operative/supervisory posts existing as on 01.09.2008 will be taken into consideration for the purpose of periodical reviews or augmentation proposals of Post Offices establishment. Thus, provisions relating to reduction of staff under TBOP/BCR Schemes stand also withdrawn w.e.f 01.09.2008.”

This issues with the approval of Secretary (P)

Sd/-

(Raj Kumar)
Director (Estt. & DE)

Reply statement has been filed by the CPMG, Kerala Circle (3rd respondent) on behalf of the respondents, on 28.07.2010. A co

 The Department as usual  has opposed the OA and stated that the IPs are not eligible to get GP of Rs.4600/-.

The reply statement filed is not at all acceptable. The Dept. has made mainly two points :

1. Inspector of Posts were not in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 as on 01.01.2006.

This can not be accepted as pay scale of Inspector post were upgraded in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 as on 01.01.2006. The second point is that, how the Assistants in CSS are given GP of Rs.4600, eventhough they were at pre-revised Pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 as on 01.01.2006 and were upgraded in Rs.6500-10500 only in Sept'2006. More over Assistants in AFHQ were in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.5500-9000 and even though they got GP of Rs.4600 vide MOF OM dated 16.11.2009.

2. There is hiearchical problem because of ASPOs.

In the Reply, it is stated that there is no intermediate post between Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC and their Suerindents(GP Rs.4800) and also between Assistant grade and section officers(GP Rs.4800)

It is to mention that there are many posts, which are promotional and are in the same grade pay in the same pay band, then why the Inspector Posts and ASPOs cannot be at the same grade pay.

In Defence Accounts Dept.

Sr. Accounts officer and ACDA (Asst. controller of Defence Accounts) - GP Rs.5400 in PB-3

Min. of Defence (Civilian):

Asst. foreman and Foreman - GP Rs.4600 in PB-2,

Assistant and Office Superintendent - GP Rs.4200 in PB-2

There may be some other posts also in the same grade pay, which will be checked before filing the rejoinder.

Even after all going through all these facts, if the Department is not agreed for the same grade pay for IPOs and ASPOs, the merger may be done, as the consent letter already given by the Association. But if the merger is done, it should be given effect from 01.01.2006 only and all the benefits already given to Inspectors in CBDT/CBEC should be allowed to Postal Inspectors also.

Your valuable suggestions are required in this case and send to permanand kumar 09349049801