IRS (INDIRECT TAXES) OFFICERS’ ASSOCIATION.
Secretary
General: Address for
communication: President.
Lokanath
Mishra C.R.Building
, Bhubaneswar-751007 A.K. Sharma
Mob. 09437314941
mail
Id:jailoknathjee@gmail.com Mob-09815300006
Ref. No.
IRSPOA/2015/
To,
The Chairman,
Central Board of Excise and Customs,
North Block, New Delhi-110001.
Sir,
Sub: Draft amendments in the IRS(C&CE) Gr-A Rules
2012-
Submission of Comments/Objections- Regarding.
Kindly
refer to the CBEC F.No. A12018/3/2014-AD-II, dated 08.12.2014, on the
above subject.
In this regard, it is to submit that we have gone through the draft amendments in
the IRS( C&CE) Gr-A Rules, 2012 circulated by CBEC vide above said letter
and found that many clauses of these Rules are not framed/drafted as per
Govt. /DOPT guidelines. We have also found that many clauses in these draft
rules are detrimental to the carriers prospective of our members. We
highlighted all such issue in the Annexure (enclosed), with a request to
consider the same and make suitable lawful changes while finalizing the draft
rules by CBEC. Further we would like to state that the said proposed draft
amendment is anti-staff and appears to be drafted and proposed only to safe
guard the interest of elite class. The role of Gr-B Executive , though referred
repeatedly as important, the attempt in RRs amendments is demoralizing and
appears with an intent to destroy the fabric of cordiality, and inflict hatred
and indiscipline in the Group B feeder cadre against the Group A.
The very purpose in framing the Human
Resource Management policy through RRs, has violated the Article 309; by not
maintaining fairness and equity in recruitment/placement/promotions and other
service related matters for Gr-B Executives. Parity is the basic concept of
Indian Constitution, hence it is required to frame the Gr-A
Recruitment Rules to maintain parity in promotions amongst the three base
cadres ( I.e. Inspector, CE, Inspector ,PO and Inspector, Examiner)
It is also
requested that the representatives of our Association may also be
given an opportunity to present our
case in person before the Board. Your honour may like to convey a Board meeting
there after to consider our grievance points as stated in the Annexure . We
also reserve our right to add, amend or delete any submission made herein
in the interest of our members.
Thanking
you,
Yours faithfully,
Enclo- As above.
(LOKANATH
MISHRA),
Secretary
General.
ANNEXURE
Suggestions by the joint forum of the Associations to
amend Indian Revenue Service (Customs and Central
Excise) Group A Recruitment Rules 2014 as circulated by CBEC
1.Suggested amendment for sub-Rule 4(1)
For
the words, 'The authorised permanent strength in all grades of service and
temporary strength in the grade IX of the service', the words, ‘The authorised strength in all grades of
service’ shall be substituted.
Reason
Under
Rule 2(g) of the RRs, the ‘Post’ includes permanent as well as temporary
strength in all grades. Accordingly, authorised
strength constitutes appointment made to any post under Indian Revenue Service
(Customs and Central Excise) Group A as defined under Rule 2(g). Besides, the
temporary posts are authorised posts created by virtue of cadre restructuring,
for functional necessity. So use of the words ‘temporary’ or ‘permanent’ is
superfluous.
As far as the proposed ‘Grade IX’ is concerned, it may be pointed out
that creation of a separate Grade (grade IX) for the Assistant Commissioner
(Junior Time Scale) Customs and Central Excise, appointed against temporary
posts, lower than the Grade (VIII) of Assistant Commissioner of Customs and
Central Excise (Junior Time Scale), is against the basic tenets of devising any
RRs. This arbitrary gradation is a result of misconception in understanding the
distinction between the term ‘posts’ and expression ‘an officer
appointed in a grade to such posts’. Appointment in a grade may take place
through different modes of selection (i.e. by direct recruitment or by
promotion) and through different nature of posts (i.e., permanent or
temporary). The grade, however, does not change because of such variations in
manner of selection and nature of posts and remains same. Therefore, an officer
shall be treated to have been appointed in a single grade, say Assistant
Commissioner, grade, irrespective of nature of Post or nature of selection.
Creation of separate grade by way of linking it to the nature of posts
(permanent or temporary) or mode of selection (either direct recruitment or by
promotion) is grossly anomalous and is unfair with regard to framing RRs.
Besides,
the Central Excise Act, 1944 or Customs Act 1962 or Finance Act 1994 makes no
distinction between temporary and regular posts of Assistant Commissioner with
regards to functions and powers.
Furthermore, there is no precedence of creating different grades
in the same ranks with the same grade pay. So such a sub-division in the grade
of Assistant Commissioner is untenable. It is to be kept in mind that the
officers working as Assistant commissioner in the temporary posts are already
permanent /regular employees of Govt. of India with even more than 30 years of
service behind them.
So, any reference to ‘Grade IX’, wherever it appears in RRs, needs
to be omitted.
2. Suggested
Amendment for sub-Rule 4(2)
The
words ' permanent and temporary ' in this sub-Rule
should be deleted.
Reason
That in terms of definition under Rule 2(g) of the RRs, the
authorised strength itself indicates and includes permanent as well as
temporary posts. Accordingly, the words ‘permanent and temporary ' are
superfluous.
3.Suggested Amendment
for sub-Rule 4(3)(i)
This
sub-Rule shall be substituted in the following manner:
‘The
continuation of the posts in temporary strength, as specified in
Schedule-I, beyond the period, for which
these are initially created, shall be reviewed by the Govt based on the factors
like workload, stagnation etc. However, as long as an
officer after appointment in the grade of Assistant commissioner against such
posts in temporary strength remains in that grade, such posts in temporary
strength against which the said officer is appointed shall not be declared as abolished.’
Reasons:
The first line is superfluous as it is already mentioned in
sub-Rules 4(1) and 4(2) of this Recruitment Rules that any post, be it permanent or temporary
shall be specified in Schedule-I. It is also not necessary to mention the trifling
details like date on which any post has been created or likely to be
terminated, be it permanent or temporary. The Recruitment Rules should be confined to recruitment modalities
and not details of creation of posts.
The first part of the second line regarding continuation of
the posts in temporary strength is contrary to the provision of the sub-Rule
4(2) of this RRs itself where it is provided that the continuation of the
posts, be it temporary and permanent, shall be determined by the Govt. from
time to time depending on the workload. Accordingly, the provision regarding
continuity of the posts in temporary posts should be in conformity with the
said provision in the manner as proposed. This will also ensure the functional
justification of creation of any post.
The second part of the
second line is based on complete misunderstanding between the term ‘post’
and the expression ‘an officer appointed in a grade through such post’ either
by way of promotion or direct recruitment or through permanent post or temporary
post. Once the officer is appointed in a particular grade, he or she will be
regarded as belonging to the service under which the posts exist and in this
respect, no distinction can be made between officers appointed either to a
permanent post or a temporary post, by direct recruitment or by way of
promotion. The continuation of the service of that officer in that grade is in
no way dependent on the fate or tenure of the post. So the incorporation made
above to this effect linking the tenure of post and continuation of service is
outrageous and beyond the purview of law. As long as an officer, after
appointment in a particular grade against a post (permanent or temporary),
remains in that grade in conformity with the service conditions, the post
(permanent or temporary) against which the said officer is appointed cannot be
declared as abolished.
Moreover, the 2nd line is also contrary to the
Cabinet approval under CBEC F.No.
A. 11019/08/2013- Ad.IV, dated 18.12.2013, para 7 of which states
that " wherever the posts recommended for abolition are filled up
at present, such abolition will be effective on such posts being relinquished
by the existing incumbents by way of promotion, transfer, retirement,
resignation etc".
Similar amendment regarding continuation of temporary posts has
also been suggested through insertion of ‘Note’ in Schedule-I of the RRs.
4. Suggested Amendment
for sub-Rule 4(3)(ii)
This
sub-Rule shall be substituted in the following manner:
‘As and when the vacancies arise against posts in temporary
strength, as specified in sl. No. 8 of Schedule-I, the same shall be filled up
by promotion only in accordance with the procedure prescribed in sub-Rule
5(3)(b) read with relevant entries of Schedule-III(sl. No. 8) and
Schedule-IV(sl. No. 8)
Reasons:
The amendments proposed are in conformity with the amendments
proposed in sub-Rule 4(1), Schedule-I, III and IV of the RRs opposing
arbitrary, discriminatory and unfair creation of separate grade IX for
Assistant Commissioners promoted in temporary strength of posts defined and
accordingly proposing deletion of sl. No.9 of all the Schedules mentioned.
5. Suggested Amendment
for sub-Rule 5(2)
1) The sub-Rule 5(2) shall
be renumbered as sub-Rule 5(2)((i)
and The words ‘fifty percent’ shall be substituted by ‘ not more
than ten per cent’.
2)
A new sub-Rule 5(2)(ii) shall be inserted
after sub-Rule 5(2)(i) in the following manner:
‘A post-based roster shall be maintained earmarking the posts meant
for direct recruits and the posts meant for promotion in the ratio mentioned in
sub-Rule 5(2) (i) and sub-Rule 5(3)(a) respectively of the RR.’
Reasons for amendment (1)
In view of the highly adverse ratio (1: 15 approx) existing between the
consolidated Gr B Executive officers and their immediate promotion grade of
Assistant Commissioner, even after restructuring, whatever has been done in the
Cadre restructuring shall be diluted and the stagnation is bound to return in
short span of 1 or 2 years until and unless, immediate other measures like
promotion to STS, granting 'weightage' and parity with counterparts are
taken. Otherwise, the next lot will continue to stagnate. Therefore, as an
important measure, the ratio of 50:50 between the posts meant for direct
recruit Assistant Commissioner and that
of the promotee Assistant Commissioner should be changed to 10 (maximum) :90 (minimum). Besides promotee
Assistant Commissioners can immediately be put to functional utility as they are adequately trained with long real-time experience.
Reasons for amendment (2)
The provision of maintenance of post-based roster should be
incorporated here without which there will always be a possibility of erosion
in promotion quota or direct recruit quota at any point of time. The provision
of maintenance of post-based roster should be incorporated as there will always
be an erosion in promotion / direct recruit quota at any point of time. To give
an example -
The IC&CE Gr-A Recruitment Rules
2012 (earlier of 1987, 1998), stipulates the entry-level Group-A post of
AC(also termed as JTS -Junior Time Scale) in the ratio of 50% DR(UPSC) & 50% by Promotion(amongst 3 feeder
categories).
The then sanctioned strength of JTS
post(Assistant Commissioner) is '949', while that of STS(Deputy Commissioner)
is '601'. The promotions are given to the JTS level 50% posts i.e. against
'475'.
The Civil List published by CBEC on official
website "http :// www.
cbec.gov.in/deptt_offcr/civil-list2014-part2.pdf", for 01.01.2014, gives
in Part-2, the list of Gr-A officers in the grade of AC/DC. This list consists
of total '1284' Names['950' Direct-UPSC(DC:291+AC:439+AC-Probationer:220), and
'334' Promotees(Cust Appraiser:198+Supdt Cus-P:18+Supdt CX: 118 )].
This indicates that against the '949' JTS
strength(even leaving aside the DR officers who have been promoted by now,
strength of whom is also required to be added); the DR are 'more than
659(439+220+higher group A)', while promotees are just '334'. This
is unjustified. The DR should not be more than '475'.
6. Suggested Amendment
for sub-Rule 5(3)(a)
1) The sub-Rule 5(3)(a) shall be renumbered as sub-Rule
5(3)(a)(i) and
the words ‘fifty percent’ shall be substituted by ‘ninety per cent
or more’.
2) A new sub-Rule 5(3)(a)(ii) shall be inserted after sub-Rule
5(3)(a)(i) in the following manner:
‘A post-based roster shall be maintained earmarking the posts
meant for direct recruits and the posts meant for promotion in the ratio
mentioned in sub-Rule 5(2)(i) and sub-Rule 5(3)(a)(i) respectively of the RR.’
Reasons for amendment (1) & (2)
Same as given against sub-rule 5(2) above.
7. Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 5(3) (b)
The
entire sub-rule shall be substituted in the following manner:
‘One
hundred percent of the vacancies in Grade VIII (Junior Time Scale) of the
service specified in sl. No. 8 of the Schedule-I i.e., Assistant Commissioner
of Customs and Central Excise in the temporary strength shall be filled by
promotion from amongst the officers mentioned in the sub-rule 5(3)(a)(i)
above’.
Reasons
The amendments proposed are in conformity with the amendments
proposed in sub-Rule 4(1), Schedule-I, III and IV of the RRs opposing
arbitrary, discriminatory and unfair creation of separate grade IX for Assistant
Commissioners, promoted in temporary strength of posts defined and accordingly
proposing deletion of sl. No.9 of all the Schedules mentioned.
8. Suggested Amendment for the ‘Note’ appended to after
sub-Rule 5(3)
(b) and the sub-Rule 5(4)
Both the ‘Note’ appended to after sub-Rule 5(3) (b) and the sub-Rule 5(4) shall be substituted by one new sub-Rule 5(4)
in the following manner:
‘The promotion to the vacancies in Grade VIII (Junior Time Scale),
i.e., Assistant Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise from amongst the all
categories of officers, mentioned in the sub-Rule 5(3) (a) (i), on the basis of
a combined eligibility list of all those categories of officers shall be
prepared to maintain parity in promotions
to Gr-A amongst all three base level Executive grades ( i.e Inspector of
Central Excise/Preventive Officer of Customs /Examiner of Customs)’. Before
preparing this list, all of the base level executive grades belonging to same
year shall be brought at par in the matter of promotions as also promised by
the CBEC during the presentation on cadre restructuring made on 18.01.12.
Reasons
(A)
The disparity in promotional opportunity
amongst the 3 feeder streams of Supdt.
Central Excise, Supdt. Customs Preventive and Appraiser as well as basis feeder
(feeder to feeder) streams (i.e., Inspector of Central Excise, Preventive
Officer and Examiner of Customs) is well known and has been categorically
acknowledged by the Board in the Minutes of the meeting dated 11.02.2011. In
the said Minutes, it was also pointed out that promotion on the basis of ratio
(even after revision) is not enough to redress the disparity and that the promotion to JTS level on the basis of
base cadre parity is a much better redress under the present dispensation. Considering the acute stagnation in
the grade of Superintendent of Central Excise, relaxation of Recruitment Rules
can be resorted to in respect of a class or category of persons as per
provision of Para 4.3, of PART IV on AMENDMENTS
AND RELAXATIONS,
of 'the Guidelines on Framing/Amendment/Relaxation of RRs' issued by DoP&T
in 2010. This is also in conformity with
the Article 309 of the Constitution of India which is primarily designed
to obtain fairness and equity in recruitment, promotions and other service
related matters. As the Superintendents of Central Excise are getting just
one promotion unlike the officers of other Department, RRs should be framed
accordingly to bring justice, fairness and parity.
(B)The separate provision for ‘Note’
after sub-Rule 5(3) (b) is not necessary as a
combined eligibility list for all categories of Group B officers after
bringing them year wise at par in the matter of promotion, mentioned in the
sub-Rule 5(3)
(a) (i), have been proposed to be prepared in the amended consolidated sub-Rule
5(4) which includes the categories mentioned in the said ‘Note’.
9. Suggested Amendment for Rule 5(4)
It should be substituted as below:
The vacancies to be filled by promotion shall be filled from the
categories mentioned in 5 3 (a) (i) after bringing them year wise at par in the matter of
promotion.
Suggested Amendment by way of insertion of of ‘Note’ after the amended sub-Rule 5(4)
The following ‘Note’ shall be inserted after the sub-Rule
5(4) in the following manner:
“Note : It must be ensured that at all
points of time, the parity in promotion in respect all the 3 feeder cadres to
Grade VIII, i.e., amongst the cadres of Supdt.
Central Excise, Supdt. Customs Preventive and Appraiser as well as basis
feeder (feeder to feeder) streams (i.e., Inspector of Central Excise,
Preventive Officer and Examiner of Customs), is maintained with
reference to such eligibility list (to maintain
base cadre parity in promotions to Gr-A.) .
Reasons
10. Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 5(5) (i)
The
entire sub-Rule shall be substituted in the following manner:
‘Appointments
in the grade VII of Deputy Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Senior
Time Scale) shall be made by promotion from amongst the officers in the lower
grades in the following manner:
i)
Officers who have either completed 4 years of regular
service in the grade VIII or grade pay of Rs.5400/-,
or
ii)
Officers who have completed 6 years of combined regular
service in the feeder grade to Grade VIII and feeder grade to feeder grade of
Grade VIII, taken together,
whichever
is earlier, shall be eligible for promotion in the Grade of Deputy
Commissioner(Senior time Scale) in Grade VII.
Reason
(A)
The Deputy Commissioner of Customs and Central
excise (Senior Time Scale) in Grade VII is not a distinct functional grade with
any higher level of responsibilities or any change of command than those
associated with the grade of Assistant Commissioner of Customs and Central
Excise (Junior Time Scale) in Grade VIII. The creation of such grade is
essentially mitigatory and intended to alleviate the stagnation. It is akin to
grant of the scale of pay in the mode of prevalent non-functional selection
grade (NFSG).
(B)
Most of the Group ‘B’ gazetted officers in the Central as
well as State governments are being promoted directly to a Senior Time
Scale (STS) posts with Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- in PB-3 including CSS,
CPWD, Railway Board, CSSS, AFHQ, Rajya Sabha Secretariat, Forest services, Police
services, Foreign Services, Engineering services, State services etc., whereas
the Group ‘B’ gazetted officers of CBEC are being
promoted merely to a Junior Time Scale (JTS) post with Grade
Pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB-3. These Gr-A
officers should also be granted promotion directly to a Senior Time Scale post
with Grade Pay of Rs. 6600/- in PB-3 to maintain parity with similarly placed
employees of CSS & other Central Ministries/Departments.
Apart from the promotion directly to
STS post, the counterparts of Gazetted Gr-B officers of CBEC are
also given benefit of seniority in group ‘A’ at many places in lieu of the
service rendered by them in group ‘B’ in various services in Railways,
Administrative Services, Police Services, State Services etc., these group ‘B’ gazetted
officers are also allowed the weightage of minimum of four years at the time of
entry into group ‘A’, giving them the due benefit of seniority in lieu of the
service rendered by them in the group ‘B’.
The
position in CPWD is even more encouraging where an officer with a grade pay of
Rs. 4600/- is being directly promoted to a post with a grade pay of Rs. 6600/-
(STS) and further directly to a post with the grade pay of Rs. 8700/- . Thus,
they don’t need to serve on a post with a grade pay of Rs. 4800/-, 5400/- and
7600/- for promotion to the post with a grade pay of 8700/- after entry into a
post with grade pay of Rs. 4200/-. Whereas in CBEC the Inspector Central Excise
who is recruited at Grade Pay of Rs.4600/- is not allowed to move beyond the Rs.5400/-
grade pay.
It is known fact that, the Group-B
non Gazetted officers of CBEC and Assistants of the Central Secretariat
Services (CSS), being analogous posts, are recruited through a common entrance
examination conducted by the Staff Selection Commission, with common scale of
pay.
(C)
The condition, given in the last line of
the sub-Rule 5(5)(i) of the draft circulated by the Board, that “the
service rendered by the officers in temporary post in Junior Time scale shall
not be counted as ‘regular service’ for the purpose of promotion to higher
grade(s)” is in conflict with the definition of ‘regular service’ given in
sub-rule 2(h) ibid. It flows from complete misunderstanding between the term
‘post’ and the expression ‘an officer appointed in a grade through such
post’ either by way of promotion or direct recruitment or through permanent
post or temporary post. Once the officer is appointed in a particular grade, he
or she will be regarded as belonging to the service under which the posts exist
and in this respect, no difference can be made between officers appointed
either through permanent post or through temporary post, by direct recruit or
by way of promotion. The continuation or counting of the regular service of
that officer in that grade is in no way dependent on the fate or tenure of the
post. So the service rendered by an officer in the grade of Assistant
Commissioner (junior time scale) has to be regarded as ‘regular service’
irrespective of appointment by way of promotion or direct recruitment or to a
permanent post or temporary post. Therefore, the above provision which seeks to
preclude any further elevation of the Assistant Commissioners promoted against
temporary posts is wholly arbitrary and legally untenable.
11. Suggested Amendment for sub-rule 5(5)(iii)
The entire sub-rule 5(5)(iii) shall be deleted.
Reason
The Rule is clearly violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of
India. It has emanated from the complete misunderstanding and misconception of
creating separate grade for Assistant commissioner appointed through temporary
strength. The fact, that the same is completely anomalous and unjust, has
already been elaborated in the ‘reasons’ given under the proposed amendment of
sub-Rule 4(1) of the draft RR circulated by the Board. The contention that the
service rendered by the Assistant Commissioners appointed through temporary
strength can not be treated as regular service is also equally unjust and bad
in law for the reasons elaborated in the ‘reasons’ (B) given under sub-Rule
5(5)(i) above. Accordingly, this sub-Rule 5(5)(iii) deserves to be deleted in
its entirety. The manner of appointment in the grade of Deputy Commissioner of Customs and
Central Excise (Senior Time Scale) (Grade VII) is already incorporated
exhaustively in the sub-Rule 5(5)(i) of the proposed amendment.
12.
Suggested Amendment for sub-Rule 6
The
words ‘by promotion in Junior scale’ shall be deleted.
Reason
This
clause is essentially meant for new entrants. The officers on promotion after
more than 25 years of service and endowed with vast experience should be given due weightage and
be exempted from such probation/confirmation.
13.
Suggested Amendment for Schedule-I to
the RR
The
following amendments shall be made in respect of Schedule- I:
(A) Sl.
No. 8 The entries in Col. (3)
showing ‘Number of Posts’, shall be substituted in the following manner:
(a) Permanent strength- 1249
(b) Temporary strength- 2118*
(B) Sl. No. 9 To
be deleted entirely
(C) The
existing ‘Note’ at the end of Schedule_I shall remain as ‘Note 1’
and a ‘Note 2’ shall be inserted after the
‘Note 1’ in the following manner:
Note
2: The continuation of the temporary
post beyond the period for which these are created shall be reviewed by the
Govt based on the factors of workload, stagnation etc.
However, as long as an officer, after appointment in a particular grade against
a post (permanent or temporary), remains in that grade in conformity with the
service conditions, the post (permanent or temporary) against which the said
officer is appointed shall not be declared as
abolished.
Reason
(A) & (B): The creation of separate grade for Assistant commissioner
appointed through temporary strength is a result of complete misunderstanding
and misconception. The fact, that the same is completely anomalous and unjust,
has already been elaborated in the ‘reasons’ given under the proposed amendment
of sub-Rule 4(1) of the draft RRs circulated by the Board. So, there can be
only single grade of Assistant Commissioner irrespective of the nature of post
(temporary or permanent) and irrespective of nature of selection (Direct
recruitment or promotion). So, the clause ‘Grade IX’, wherever it appears,
needs to be omitted.
Now, the definition of the term ‘post’ under
Rule 2(g) ibid, includes permanent as well as temporary post in all grades.
Accordingly, the authorised strength (Number of
Posts) of a particular grade should necessarily indicates and includes
appointment in any post, temporary as well as permanent, under Indian Revenue
Service (Customs and Central Excise) Group A Recruitment Rules. As there can be
only one grade of Assistant Commissioner, the mentioning of both the permanent
and the temporary post in the relevant column against the sl. No. 8 of the
Schedule-I (meant for the grade Assistant Commissioner (junior time scale) in
Grade VIII), therefore, is a necessity.
(C) The insertion of the ‘Note’ regarding continuation of
temporary posts is in conformity with the amendment proposed in sub-Rule
4(3)(i) and the provision under sub-Rule 4(2). The detailed reason have already
been incorporated along with the amendment proposed for sub-Rule 4(3)(i) of the
RR.
14. Suggested
Amendment for Schedule-III of RR
The
following amendments shall be made in respect of Schedule III:
(A) Sl.
No. 7 The entries in Col. (4)
showing ‘Field of Selection, Grade and the minimum qualifying service for
promotion’, shall be substituted in the following manner :
‘Appointments
in the grade of Deputy Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Senior Time Scale)
(Grade VII) shall be made by promotion in accordance with sub-Rule 5(5)(i).’
(B) Sl.
No. 8 (1) The entries in Col. (3) showing ‘Method of recruitment’ shall
be substituted in the following manner:
(a) For Permanent strength
(i)
Maximum 10% by Direct Recruitment
(ii)
Minimum
90% by Promotion
(b) For Temporary strength
100%
by Promotion
(2) In the entries in Col. (4) showing ‘Field
of Selection, Grade and the minimum qualifying service for promotion’, for the
words, ‘Fifty percent of the vacancies in Grade VIII (Junior Time Scale) shall
be filled by promotion in accordance with Rule 5(3)(a)’, the following
words shall be substituted :
‘Minimum
Ninety percent of the vacancies in Grade VIII (Junior Time Scale) shall be
filled by promotion in accordance with sub-Rule 5(3)(a)(i) and sub-Rule 5(4)’
(C) Sl. No. 9 To
be deleted entirely.
Reason
(A)
: For reasons as already appended to against sub-rule 5(5)(i) above.
(B) & (C): For reasons as already appended to
against sub-Rule 5(2)(i), 5(3)(a)(i) and also for reasons appended to against
the proposed amendment of Schedule-I above. As there
can be only one grade of Assistant Commissioner, the mentioning of both the
permanent and the temporary post in the relevant column against the sl. No. 8
of the Schedule-III (meant for the grade Assistant Commissioner (junior time
scale) in Grade VIII), therefore, is a necessity and that the the sl. No. 9
showing a different grade of Assistant Commissioner has to be deleted.
15. Suggested
Amendment for Schedule-IV of RR
The following amendments shall be made in respect of of
Schedule-IV of RR:
(A)
Sl.
No. 8 The entries in column 3
showing ‘DPC/DSC for Non-Functional Selection Grade’ shall be substituted
in the following manner.
(B)
Sl. No. 9 To
be deleted entirely.
Reason
For reasons as already appended to
against Schedule-I and III above and also for the reason that for a single
grade, the constitution of the DPC should be identical. The role of UPSC should
be confined to direct recruitment of officers to Group-A at entry level grade.
It should not be involved for promotion of officers to Group-A level. As there can be only one grade of Assistant Commissioner,
the mentioning of both the permanent and the temporary post in the relevant
column against the sl. No. 8 of the Schedule-IV (meant for the grade Assistant
Commissioner (junior time scale) in Grade VIII), therefore, is a necessity and
that the the sl. No. 9 showing a different grade of Assistant Commissioner has
to be deleted.
