While discussions during the second meeting of the National Anomaly Committee held on 27th March 2010 and decided to constitute a Joint Committee to examine the anomalies pertaining to the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS). The Joint Committee yesterday met the Chairmanship of Joint Secretary Establishment of DOPT. General Secretary of Confederation of Central Government Employees and Workers Mr.K.K.N.Kutty has written in his blog regarding the discussions points with DOPT Chairman. We reproduce the full text of content under here…
MACP JOINT COMMITTEE MEETING ON ANOMALIES
Joint Committee on MACP met today under the chairmanship of Joint Secretary Establishment of DOPT. Following issues were discussed:
1. Item No:1:Provide Grade Pay of the next promotional post under MACP.
Staff Side pressed for placement in the Grade Pay of the Promotional Post instead of next higher Grade Pay in the hierarchy of revised Pay Band and Grade Pay. It was insisted because the career progression only means the promotion in the hierarchy and not to a Grade Pay which is not present in the hierarchy of the respective department.
The Staff Side also gave an alternative that first two MACPs after 10 and 20 years should be to the next promotional post as per the hierarchy of respective department as under the erstwhile ACP scheme and thereafter the third MACP in the next Grade Pay of the Revised Pay Band and Grade Pay.
2. Item No:2:Date of Effect.
It was demanded that MACP scheme may be introduced with effect from 1.1.2006. A scheme which has been recommended by the 6th CPC will be not available to those employees who have opted for revised pay scales w.e.f. 1.1.2006 but had retired or died before 1.9.2008, which is very anomalous.
3. Item No:3:Option for earlier ACP Scheme.
Staff Side pointed out that the benefit which employees were getting through two ACPs after 12 and 24 years of service is much higher than the benefit that they will get under MACP after three financial upgradations. It was therefore urged that the service conditions which were available to the existing employees cannot be adversely revised and if that happens then an option to retain the old scheme is inherent. And if the present MACP is not converted to hierarchical pattern, then at least an option may be given to retain the erstwhile scheme of ACP.
4. Item No:7:Grant of financial upgradation between 1.1.2006 and 31.8.2008.
In Para 9 of the DOPT OM dated 19.5.2009, it had been provided that earlier ACP scheme will continue to operate for the period from 1.1.2006 to 31.8.2008. However, this is not being allowed to officials who have opted for revised Pay Band and Grade Pay with effect from 1.1.2006. In some offices, it is being insisted that financial upgradation under the earlier ACP would be granted only in the pre-revised pay scales and they will have to opt for the revised pay scales only from the date they are granted the financial upgradation under earlier ACP. It was demanded that earlier ACP benefit may be given also to those officials who have come over to the Revised Pay Band and Grade Pay with effect from 1.1.2006.
5. Item No:8:Anomaly on introduction of MACP Scheme.
By an illustration in respect of Junior Engineer of CPWD, it has been pointed out that under earlier ACP they will go up to the revised Pay Band 3 with Grade Pay of 6600/- on completion of 24 years of service, whereas under the MACP Scheme, even after 30 years of service and getting third MACP they will get the Grade Pay of 5400/- only in PB-2. This is obviously less advantageous and therefore the demand for option to retain the old ACP scheme has been insisted.
The Official Side indicated that they will consider all these demands and in the next meeting they will indicate how far they can go.
6. Item No:4: Applicability of MACP Scheme to Group D employees who have been placed in the Grade Pay of 1800/-.
The DOPT had already stated that all promotions and upgradations granted under ACP Scheme of 1999 in the post of four pay scales S-1, S-2, S-3 and S-4 shall be ignored for the purpose of MACP. In other words all the three MACP will be available to all the Group D employees who have since been placed in the grade pay of 1800/-. If an employee has completed 10 years of service he should be granted the GP of 1900/-; if completed 20 years of service he should be granted the GP of 2000/-; and if he has completed 30 years of service he should be placed in the GP of 2400/-. In some departments these MACP has not been granted to the Group D employees. The staff side therefore insisted an enabling clarificatory instructions may be issued. The Official Side agreed to issue such clarificatory instructions.
7. Item No:5: Counting 50% of service rendered by Temporary Status CLs for reckoning 10,20, and 30 years of service under MACP scheme.
It was pointed out that the Railways have already issued orders for counting 50% of service rendered by Temporary Status Casual labourers for reckoning 12 and 24 years of service under the old ACP scheme. It was also pointed out that Courts have also ordered that total service rendered as TS CLs may be counted for the purpose of ACP. The Official Side were of the opinion that 50% of service rendered by TS CLs has been counted only for the purpose of pension. The Staff Side pointed out that the TS CLs have been granted all the facilities admissible to a Temporary Employee in respect of leave, increment, pay scale etc and therefore this may be deemed as a regular service for the purpose of MACP also as has been done by the Railways. The Official Side wanted the order of the Railway Department regarding ACP and the Orders of the Courts for their examination.
8. Item No:6: Supervised staff placed in higher Grade Pay than that of the supervisor.
The Staff Side suggested that this item may be transferred to National Anomaly Committee item and discussed there. This has been agreed to.
There are 23 more items which have been suggested by the Staff Side leaders of Railways. It was pointed out that leaders of other departments may also suggest many other anomalies related to MACP. The Staff Side stated that as and when these additional items are received they may be included in the Agenda for discussion in the subsequent meetings. The Official Side agreed to.
Faujdar Ojha says
I was enrolled in Army (Corps of Signals) as a Sepoy on 21 Dec 1982 and got retired on 01 Jan 2007. After completion of 24 years of distinguished service (12 years served as Havildar)
3. At present I am in receipt of pay and pension benefit as per 6th CPC recommendation which is made effective wef 01 Jan 2006.
4. As per GoI, MoD vide letter no14(1)/99-D (AG) dt 30 May 2011, MACP to JCOs/OR has been granted wef 01 Sep 2008.
5. In view of the above, you may please clarify the reason to deny the ACP for the persons who ware retired in between 01 Jan 2006 till 31 Aug 2008
6. Therefore, I am requesting your kind honour to take appropriate necessary action to bring all the pensioners who ware retired on and after 01 Jan 2006 at par for the purpose of IIIrd ACP (Nb Sub).
BHASKAR SAHA says
The comments of Sri U D Rao, CPWD placed on May 26, 2010 is 100% correct. It is an example of gross anomaly towards Head Clerk & OS-II in CPWD. According to the RTI replies of CPWD, there is no supervisory category of Assistants in CPWD, BUT more than 300 Head clerks in CPWD are functioning as Supervisor. But Surprisingly, grade pay of Assistant is 4600 and Head clerk & OS-II is 4200. Is there any other anomaly greater than this? Supervisory category are drawing lesser grade pay than that of Subordinate cadre though CSS. It is nothing but to intentional step motherly attitude of CPWD Authorities towards its ministerial cadre.
All Departmets are changing the designation & scale of her employees to attractive nature except CPWD Ministerial cadre. Such type of example of depriving in CPWD is not new but to a continuous process towards CPWD ministerial Cadre.
Another example: In CPWD Division Offices, there is three brances viz. Correspondence branch headed by Head Clerk, Planning branch headed by AE(P), Accounts Branch headed by AAO. Surprisingly, Supervisor of Accounts branch & Planning branch are gazetted and holding higher grade pay but Supervisor of Correspondence branch is non-gazetted and lower grade pay even lower to CSS Assistants. That means importance of Correspondence branch is considered as lesser important than that of other two branches.
In CPWD, grade pay of UDC’s is 2400 instead of 2800 like other departments.
However, Thanks to CPWD Authority for continuation of depriving policy towards her ministerail cadre.