NFIR - Exemption of Railways from New Pension Scheme (NPS)No. IV/NPS/PFRDA BILL / Part I Dated : 11/12/2017 Shri Piyush Goyal, Hon’ble Minister of Railways, Rail Bhavan, New Delhi Respected Sir, Sub : Exemption of Railways from New Pension Scheme (NPS) – reg. Ref (i) Hon’ble MR’s D.O. No. 2012/F(E)III/1/4-Pt dated 29th March 2014 to Hon’ble Finance Minister, Government of India. (ii) Hon’ble MR’s D.O. No. 2012/F(E)III/1/1/4-Pt dated 20th Nov 2015 to the Hon’ble Finance Minister Shri Arun Jaitely. (iii) NFIR’s letter No. IV/NPS/PFRDA BILL Part I dated 13th Feb.2017 & 26th Oct. 2017. ******* While enclosing copy of NFIR’s letter sent to you vide dated 26th Oct, 2017, I request you to kindly make special efforts at the level of the Government as well by reaching Hon’ble Prime Minister for the purpose of exempting Railways from the National Pension System (NPS). I also desire to bring to your kind notice that your predecessors Shri Mallikarjun Kharge and Shri Suresh Prabhu have already sent proposals to the Government of India (Ministry of Finance) highlighting the uniqueness of Railways working and the necessity to exempt Railways from the NPS. I trust that you would do the needful for obtaining favourable decision which would motivate all sections of Railway employees to work with grater determination and commitment for providing efficient services. With regards, Yours sincerely, S/d, (Dr.M.Raghavaiah) General Secretary No.IV/NPS/PFRDA BILL/Part 1 Dated : 26 Oct,2017 Shri Piyush Goyal, Ho'ble Minister of Railways, Rail Bhavan, New Delhi Respected Sir, Sub: Exemption of Railways from New Pension Scheme (NPS) — reg. Ref: (i) Hon'ble MR's D.O. No. 2012/F(E)111/1/4-Pt dated 29th March 2014 to Hon'ble Finance Minister, Government of India. (ii) Hon'ble MR's D.O. No. 2012/F(E)111/1/1/4-Pt dated 20th Nov 2015 to the Hon'ble Finance Minister Shri Arun Jaitely. (iii) NF1R's letter No. IV/NPSIPFRDA BILL/Part I dated 13th Feb, 2017. *********** Federation invites kind attention of the Hon'ble AIR relating to exemption of Railways from New Pension Scheme (NPS), which was agreed upon by the Railway Ministry, consequently the Railway Minister Shri Suresh Prabhu bad sent proposal to the Hon'ble Finance Minister vide letter No. 2012/F(E)III/1/1/4-Pt dated 20th November, 2015, seeking Government's approval to exempt Railways from New Pension Scheme (NPS) now called "National Pension System". Shri Mallikarjun Kharge then Railway Minister had also urged upon the Government to exempt Railways from New Pension Scheme (letter No. 2012/F(E)III/1/4-Pt dated 29th March 2014). In this connection, NFIR desires to reiterate that 'Pension is very sensitive issue so far as Railways is concerned, due to the reason that the Railway employees have been working at remote places, stations located in jungle areas and have been facing all odds foregoing basic necessities of life, similar to the Defence Forces Personnel, safeguarding the Nation's Borders, and are involved fully in ensuring uninterrupted flow of Railway Traffic. The Railway employees in their day-to-day working face war like situations to ensure that movement of trains is not adversely affected under any circumstances and in the process they get killed on duty as confirmed by the High Level Safety Review Committee (BLSRC) headed by Shri Anil Kakodkar (Chapter 11-2.3). NFIR, therefore urges upon you to kindly reach the Hon'ble Prime Minister and apprise the Railways unique nature of working as already highlighted by previous Railway Ministers and impress the need for granting exemption of Railways from the New Pension Scheme to enable those Railway employees appointed from January, 2004 get covered by the Liberalized Pension Scheme for receiving guaranteed Pension. Federation strongly believes that your kind intervention and Ell&WS-fivi: with the Hon'ble Prime Minister would result positive decision for exempting Railways from New Pension Scheme soon. With regards, Yours sincerely,/ S/d, (Dr. M. Raghavaiah) General Secretary Source : NFIR … Continue Reading…
Railway - Admissibility of House Rent Allowance during Study Leave GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS (RAILWAY BOARD) No. E(P&A)II-2017/HRA-4 New Delhi, dated 05.12.2017. The General Manager (P), Eastern Railway, Kolkata Sub .:- Admissibility of House Rent Allowance during Study Leave. Ref:- Eastern Railway’s letter No.E.77/o/Vol.VIII, dated 06.03.2017. With reference to Eastern Railway’s letter under reference, it is stated that the matter has been considered in Board’s office and it has been observed that on the identical issue a clarification already stands issued to Southern Railway vide Board’s letter No. E(P&A)II-2002/HRA-2 dt. 19.02.2002 (copy enclosed) clarifying that the period of 120 days mentioned in Board’s letter no. E(P&A)II-82/HRA-2 dated 04.02.1982 had been revised to 180 days in terms of the amendment carried out to Rule 1707 of IREC-II vide Board’s letter no. E(P&A)II/89/HRA-48 dt. 07.08.1992. It was further stated in the letter dt. 19.02.2002 that the employees proceeding on study leave are entitled to House Rent Allowance and Compensatory (City) Allowance for first 180 days of the study leave and continuation of these allowances beyond 180 days is subject to the production of certificates prescribed in Para 1707(iii) of Indian Railway Establishment Code, Volume-II, 1987 Edition. It may however, be noted that CCA has already been abolished vide Board’s letter no. E(P&A)II-2008/HRA-10 dt. 12.09.2008 (RBE No.110/2008). 2. Thus, necessary action on the above lines may be ensured. DA: As above. S/d, (Salim Md. Ahmed) Deputy Director / E(P&A)II, Railway Board Signed Copy … Continue Reading…
Important Supreme court Judgement – MACP should be given effect from 01.01.2016 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL DIARY NO.3744 OF 2016 Union of India and Ors. —– Appellant(s) Vs. Balbir Singh Turn & Anr. —–Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL DIARY NO.5183 OF 2017 CIVIL APPEAL DIARY NO.5184 OF 2017 CIVIL APPEAL DIARY NO.6249 OF 2017 CIVIL APPEAL DIARY NO.7888 OF 2017 CIVIL APPEAL DIARY NO.18265 OF 2016 CIVIL APPEAL NO.244 OF 2017 CIVIL APPEAL DIARY NO.31768 OF 2016 CIVIL APPEAL DIARY NO.38019 OF 2016 CIVIL APPEAL DIARY NO.42810 OF 2016 CIVIL APPEAL DIARY NO.42879 OF 2016 DIARY NO.4546 OF 2017 DIARY NO.11491 OF 2017 DIARY NO.11871 OF 2017 DIARY NO.13664 OF 2017 DIARY NO.13665 OF 2017 DIARY NO.13666 OF 2017 DIARY NO.18186 OF 2017 DIARY NO.18048 OF 2017 DIARY NO.18045 OF 2017 DIARY NO.18185 OF 2017 DIARY NO.22593 OF 2017 DIARY NO.30116 OF 2017 DIARY NO.23164 OF 2017 DIARY NO.11493 OF 2017 DIARY NO.28798 OF 2017JUDGMENT Deepak Gupta, J. 1. Applications for condonation of delay in filing and refiling the appeals are allowed. 2. This bunch of appeals is being disposed of by a common judgment since similar questions of law are involved. 3. The 6th Central Pay Commission was set up by the Government of India to make recommendations in matters relating to emoluments, allowances and conditions of service amongst other things. The Pay Commission also made recommendation with regard to armed forces personnel. On 30th August,2008, the Central Government resolved by a resolution of that date to accept the recommendation of the 6th Central Pay Commission (CPC for short) with regard to the personnel Below officer Rank (PBOR) subject to certain modifications clause (i) of the Resolution reads as follows:- “(i) Implementation of the revised pay structure of pay bands and grade pay, as well as pension, with effect from 01.01.2006 and revised rates of allowances (except Dearness Allowance/Relief) with effect from 01.09.2008”. clause 9 of the Resolution reads as follows:- “(ix) Grant of 3 ACP up-gradation after 8,16 and 24 years of service of PBORs;” 4. Under the recommendations made by the 5th CPC there was a provision for Assured Career Progression (ACP). Vide this scheme, if an employee was not promoted he was entitled to get the next higher scale of pay after completion of 12/24 years of service. The 6th CPC recommended the grant of benefit of ACP after 10 and 20 years of service. The Union of India, however decided to grant 3 ACP upgradations, after 8, 16 and 24 years of service to PBORs, as per Clause (ix) extracted above. However, it would be pertinent to mention that the 6th CPC did away with the concept of pay scales and reduced the large number of pay scales into 4 pay bands and within the pay bands there was a separate grade pay attached to a post. 5. For the purpose of this judgment we are dealing with the facts of civil appeal diary No.3744 of 2016. It would be pertinent to mention that all the petitioners before the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT for short) who are respondents before us are persons below officer rank. The respondents in this case retired after 01.01.2006 but prior to 31.08.2008. They claim that the benefit of the Modified Assured Career progression (MACP for short) was denied to them on the ground that the MACP was made applicable only with effect from 01.09.2008. The respondents approached the AFT praying that they are entitled to the benefit of MACP w.e.f 01.01.2006, i.e., the date from which the recommendation of the 6th CPC with regard to pay and benefits were made applicable. The stand of the Union of India was that the MACP was applicable only w.e.f. 01.09.2008 and, therefore, the respondents who had retired prior to the said date were not entitled to the benefit of the MACP. The AFT vide the impugned order dated 21.05.2014 held that the benefit of ACP granted to an employee is part of the pay structure which not only affects his pay but also his pension and, therefore, held that the ACP is not an allowance but a part of pay and, therefore, in terms of Clause (i) of the Government Resolution the MACP was payable w.e.f. 01.01.2006. 6. The question that arises for decision is whether the benefit of MACP is applicable from 01.01.2006 or from 01.09.2008. 7. The answer to this question will lie in the interpretation given to the Government Resolution, relevant portion of which has been quoted hereinabove. A bare perusal of Clause(i) of the Resolution clearly indicates that the Central Government decided to implement the revised pay structure of pay bands and grade pay, as well as pension with effect from 01.01.2006. The second part of the Clause lays down that all allowances except the Dearness Allowance/relief will be effective from 01.09.2008. The AFT held, and in our opinion rightly so, that the benefit of MACP is part of the pay structure and will affect the grade pay of the employees and, therefore, it cannot be said that it is a part of allowances. The benefit of MACP if given to the respondents would affect their pension also. 8. We may also point out that along with this Resolution there is Annexure-I. Part-A of Annexure-I deals with the pay structure, grade pay, pay bands etc., and Item 10 reads as follows :-10Assured Career Progression Scheme for PBORs. The Commission recommends that the time bound promotion scheme in case of PBORs shall allow two financial upgradations on completion of 10 and 20 years of service as at present. The financial upgradations under the scheme shall allow benefit of pay fixation equal to one increment along with the higher grade pay. As regards the other suggestions relating to residency period for promotion of PBORs Ministry of Defence may set up an Inter-Services Committee to consider the matter after the revised scheme of running bands isimplemented (Para 2.3.34)Three ACP upgradation after 8, 16 and 24 years of service has been approved. The upgradation will take place only in the hierarchy of Grade Pays, which need not necessarily be the hierarchy in that particular cadre.Part-B of Annexure-I deals with allowances, concessions & benefits and Conditions of Service of Defence Forces Personnel. It is apparent that the Government itself by placing MACP in Part-A of Annexure-I was considering it to be the part of the pay structure. 9.The MACP Scheme was initially notified vide Special Army Instructions dated 11.10.2008. The Scheme was called the Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme for Personnel Below Officer Rank in the Indian Army. After the Resolution was passed by the Central Government on 30.08.2008 Special Army Instructions were issued on 11.10.2008 dealing with revision of pay structure. As far as ACP is concerned Para 15 of the said letter reads as follows:- “15. Assured Career Progression. In pursuance with the Government Resolution of Assured Career Progression (ACP), a directly recruited PBOR as a Sepoy, Havildar or JCO will be entitled to minimum three financial upgradations after 8, 16 and 24 years of service. At the time of each financial upgradation under ACP, the PBOR would get an additional increment and next higher grade pay in hierarchy. xx xx xx” Thereafter, another letter was issued by the Adjutant General Branch on 03.08.2009. Relevant portion of which reads as follows:- “…….The new ACP (3 ACP at 8, 16 and 24 years of service) should be applicable w.e.f. 1 Jan 2006, and the old provns (operative w.e.f. the Vth Pay Commission) would be applicable till 31 Dec. 05. Regular service for the purpose of ACP shall commence from the date of joining of a post in direct entry grade. xx xx xx” Finally, on 30.05.2011 another letter was issued by the Ministry of Defence, relevant portion of which reads as follows:- “5. The Scheme would be operational w.e.f. 1st Sep. 2008. In other words, financial up-gradations as per the provisions of the, earlier ACP scheme (of August 2003) would be granted till 31.08.2008.” Therefore, even as per the understanding of the Army and other authorities up till the issuance of the letter dated 30.05.2011 the benefit of MACP was available from 01.01.2006. 10. As already held by us above, there can be no dispute that grant of ACP is part of the pay structure. It affects the pay of the employee and he gets a higher grade pay even though it may be in the same pay band. It has been strenuously urged by Col. R. Balasubramanian, learned counsel for the UOI that the Government took the decision to make the Scheme applicable from 01.09.2008 because many employees would have lost out in case the MACP was made applicable from 01.01.2006 and they would have had to refund the excess amount, if any, paid to them. His argument is that under the old Scheme if somebody got the benefit of the ACP he was put in the higher scale of pay. After merger of pay scales into pay bands an employee is only entitled to higher grade pay which may be lower than the next pay band. Therefore, there may be many employees who may suffer. 11. We are only concerned with the interpretation of the Resolution of the Government which clearly states that the recommendations of 6th CPC as modified and accepted by the Central Government in so far as they relate to pay structure, pay scales, grade pay etc. will apply from 01.01.2006. There may be some gainers and some losers but the intention of the Government was clear that this Scheme which is part of the pay structure would apply from 01.01.2006. We may also point out that the Resolution dated 30.08.2008 whereby the recommendation of the Pay Commission has been accepted with … Continue Reading…
NFIR - Revision of Over Time Allowance to Railway employees consequent upon revision of pay scales and allowancesNo.I/8/Part II Dated:11-12-2017 The Secretary (E) Railway Board New Delhi Dear Sir, Sub: Revision of Over Time Allowance to Railway employees consequent upon revision of pay scales and allowances – reg. Ref: (i) Railway Board’s letter No.PC-V/2008/A/O/3 (OTA) dated 17-02-2010 (ii) Railway Board’s Letter No.PC-V/2008/A/O/3 (OTA) dated 20-05-2011 (iii) NFIR’s letter No.IV/NFIR/7 CPC (Imp)/2016/Allowance/Part I dated 27-09-2017 (iv) Railway Board’s letter No.Pc-V/2017/A/OTA/1 dated 28-11-2017 Pursuant to acceptance of 7th CPC recommendation by the Government for revision of Over Time Allowance rates. NFIR vide its letter dated 27-09-2017 requested the Railway Board to issue instructions for revising the rates of Over Time Allowance for Railway Employees. In the said communication, the Federation had highlighted that Railways being operational system wherein the staff are duty bound to work beyond rostered/statutory limits when ordered in exigency of service, as their duty hours are governed by statutory acts and they are eligible for Over Time Allowance as part of wages. In the Federation’s communication dated 27-09-2017, Railway Board’s attention was also invited to Board’s decision vide No.PC-V/2008/A/O/3 (OTA) dated 20-05-2011 for granting payment of Over Time Allowance to the Railway Employees at the revised rates w.e.f 01-01-2006 (as a result of agreement with the Federations on DC/JCM Item No.24/2010). Federation is surprised to note that in Board’s instructions vide RBE No.175/2017 dated 28-11-2017, the revision of Over Time Allowance rates has been given effect from 01-07-2017 instead from 01-01-2016 ignoring the following:- The Over Time Allowance is part of wages, which needs to be revised w.e.f 01-01-2016 in terms of statutory provisions. The Board’s decision dated 28-11-2017 is breach of agreement with the Federations The Railway Board has unfortunately failed to take into account the fact mentioned in NFIR’s letter dated 27-09-2017. NFIR, therefore urges upon the Railway Board to review the case for giving effect to the payment of Over Time Allowance at revised rates w.e.f 01-01-2016 to Railway Employees and issue instructions accordingly to GMs. Yours faithfully, Sd/- (Dr.M.Raghavaiah) General Secretary Source : NFIR … Continue Reading…
DOPT trying best to clear backlog of promotions: Dr Jitendra Singh Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions 11-December, 2017 19:53 IST DOPT trying best to clear backlog of promotions: Dr Jitendra Singh The Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) of the Ministry of Development of North Eastern Region (DoNER), MoS PMO, Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Atomic Energy and Space, Dr. Jitendra Singh said that the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT) is trying its best to clear the backlog of promotions which had accumulated for several years. He said, while the Government led by the Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi follows a policy of zero tolerance towards corrupt and non-performing officers, at the same time it is also supportive towards performing officers of integrity. Dr Jitendra Singh was responding to a delegation of Central Secretariat employees who called on him here today and sought his intervention for timely promotion of lower grade staff members. They also submitted a memorandum on behalf the Central Secretariat MTS Association, wherein it was submitted that many of the lowermost working professionals in the Government of India get deprived of even single promotion during their entire service tenure. Dr Jitendra Singh said, in order to bring in the ease of governance as well as objectivity in empanelments, the government has, in the last three years, improvised upon the procedures so as to ensure that there are no subjective preferences involved in carrying out the promotions. The procedures have been made more hi-tech using sophisticated technology tools to minimize the human interface, he added. He said that in the past, every government took credit for bringing in a new legislation or rule while this government has done away with nearly 1500 rules which were either obsolete or had become irrelevant with the passage of time. All this is meant not only to ensure effective and timely delivery of outcomes for the public, but also to enable the employees to perform to the best of their ability, he added. Dr Jitendra Singh said, he himself personally feels disturbed to come across cases where some of the employees working in the lowest rung of administration spend their entire service tenure of 30 to 35 years without securing a single promotion. He said, he has discussed the issue with all the senior officers in the Ministry and several innovative means are being evolved to avoid stagnation at middle and lower rungs of administration. Dr Jitendra Singh also regretted that in a large number of cases, stagnation in promotions was the result of litigation amongst the employees themselves and even though the DoPT tries its best to put forward its view in the court of law, the delay becomes inevitable. Source : PIB … Continue Reading…
Night Duty Allowance in sixth pay commission – CAT Mumbai Order
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BOMBAY BENCH, MUMBAI
ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO:- 2017/2014 DATED THIS Friday THE 17th DAY OF January, 2014.
CORAM:-HON’BLE SMT. CHAMELI MAJUMDAR, MEMBER (J)
All Employees of Ordnance Factory Ambajhari, Nagpur 440 021
(1598 Applicants name list attached )
. … Applicants
(By Advocate Shri Shaikh Ayyub)
1.Union of India, Through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence, D(Fy.II), Sena Bhawan, New Delhi 110 001.2.The Secretary,
Ministry of Personnel & Public Grievances, Department of Personnel & Training, New Delhi 110 001.
3.The D.G.O.F./Chairman, Ordnance Factory Board, 10-A, Shaheed Khudiram Bose Road, Kolkata 700 001.
4.The Sr. General Manager, Ordnance Factory Ambajhari Nagpur 440 021. …
(By Advocate Shri R. G. Agarwal)
Per: Smt. Chameli Majumdar, Member (J).
There are 1598 applicants in this O.A. who have joined this Original Application with a common grievance and praying for common relief. However, the title sheet of the O.A. indicates that there are 1603 applicants (Sl.Nos. 135, 845, 987, 1212 and 1322 being left out while numbering). M.A. No. 2009/2014 filed by the applicants for joint petition is allowed.
2. The Applicant No. 1 is the Union of the Ordnance Factory, Ambajhari, Nagpur. The grievance of the applicants is that although other employees of some Units of Defence establishment are being paid Night Duty Allowance as per Fifth and Sixth Central Pay Commission, the same is denied to the workmen of the factory of the Ordnance Factory Board at Ambhajari.
3. Heard Shri Shaikh Ayyub, Learned Counsel for the applicants and Shri R. G. Agarwal, Learned Counsel for the Respondents.
4. The Learned Counsel for the applicants has drawn my attention to the judgment passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, in O.A. No. 1391/2010 decided on 08.08.2012. In the said judgment, the Tribunal at Madras Bench relied on the judgment passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench. Relevant portion of the judgment is set out herein below :
“this is a fit case to direct the respondents to calculate and pay night duty allowance payable to industrial employees working in the 4th respondent factory on the basis of the revised basic pay and allowances drawn by them with effect from 01.01.1996 and 01.01.2006 as per the 5th and 6th Pay Commission’s recommendations respectively along with arrears with effect from 1.1.1996. The respondents are further directed to complete the entire exercise within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the result, the O.A. is allowed. No order as to costs.”
5. In view of the above, the competent authority is directed to consider the said representations of the applicants in the light of the judgment passed by Jodhpur as well as Madras Bench within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.
6. The O.A. stands disposed of in terms of above direction at the admission stage itself.
(Smt. Chameli Majumdar)
Source : Central Administrative Tribunal