Hello friends Zonebusinnesupdate, on this occasion the admin wants to share an article entitled Option for switching over to revised pay structure consequent on 7th CPC-A discussion., we have made good, quality and useful articles for you to read and take information in. hopefully the post content is about
Articles,
Pay Commission - 7th,
Pay Fixation, which we write you can understand. Alright, happy reading.
if any comments in this regard, please mail to sapost2@gmail.com
That's the article: Option for switching over to revised pay structure consequent on 7th CPC-A discussion.
You are now reading the article Option for switching over to revised pay structure consequent on 7th CPC-A discussion. with link address https://zonebusinnesupdate.blogspot.com/2019/12/option-for-switching-over-to-revised.html
Option for switching over to revised pay structure consequent on 7th CPC-A discussion.
Respected SAPOST viewers,
This is regarding the options for switching over to the 7th CPC scales from dates subsequent to 1.1.2016.
The recommendations of the 7thCPC had been implemented from 1.1.2016. It is usual that the employees are given options for switching over to the revised pay structures from the date subsequent to the date of implementation. This is regarding these options consequent on the implementation of the 7th CPC.
These options are given to the employees in order to utilize this to get the maximum benefits. This is the intention of the orders. This can be seen from the following.
Note 2 below Rule 6 (4) of CCS (RP) Rules 2016
Persons who have died on or after the 1st day of January 2016 and could not exercise the option within prescribed time-limit are deemed to have opted for the revised pay structure on and from the 1st day of January 2016 or such later date as is most beneficial to their dependants if the revised pay structure is more favorable and in such cases, necessary action for payment of arrears shall be taken by the Head of Office.
As per CCS (RP) Rules, the following options are available.
1. All employees can opt to switch over to the new structure w.e.f. 1.1.2016. This is the default option.
2. All officials can opt to switch over to the new structure w.e.f. the DNI (date of next increment 1.7.2016) or from any subsequent increments i.e. 1.7.2017, 1.7.2018 etc. (proviso 1 to Rule 5 of CCS (RP) Rules 2016.)
3. Special case:
An official who has been placed in a higher grade pay or scale between 1stday of January, 2016 and the date of notification of these rules on account of promotion or up-gradation, the government servant may elect to switch over to the revised pay structure from the date of such promotion or up-gradation, as the case may be. Since the date of notification is 25.7.2016, this option is available ONLY for those officials who have got promotion or up-gradation between 1.1.2016 and 25.7.2016. (Proviso 2 to Rule 5 of CCS (RP) Rules 2016.
The following are the Conditions for exercising the above options.
1. For option 1 above, there is no condition at all. Any official can switch over on 1.1.2016. This is default option. If no option is exercised, this will be taken as the option exercised by the official.
2. For option 2, there are two conditions. The first one is that the post held by the official on 1.1.2016 and the date of switching over i.e. 1.7.2016, 1.7.2017 etc. must be the same. The second one is that the pay band and grade pay as on 1.1.2016 and the date of stitching over i.e. 1.7.2016, 1.7.2017 etc. must be the same. (Explanation 1 below Rule 5 of CCS (RP) Rules 2016.).
3. For option 3, the promotion or up-gradation should be between 1.1.2016 and 25.7.2016.
First of all, those officials who are given promotion or up-gradation under MACP after 25.7.2016 are not eligible for switching over to the new structure from their date of promotion, as per option 3 above.
Before I proceed further, I wish to clarify some important points.
Promotion and up-gradation under MACP are entirely different things. Promotions to different posts are governed by different sets of recruitment rules, and they are called regular promotions. Promotion involves functional change, higher duties and responsibilities comparing to the feeder post. The following may cited as examples. PA to LSG, LSG to HSG II, PA to IP, ASP to SP etc.
The date of promotion and the date of fixation of pay are different. They are for different purposes. For example, consider one PA who is promoted to IP through LDCE on 1.3.2017. This is his date of promotion and this date will be taken for his further promotions to ASP etc. If in the above case, if the official opts for pay fixation on the date of promotion itself, then his pay will be fixed on 1.3.2017 with DNI 1.1.2018. In this case, the date of promotion and date of fixation are the same. On the other hand, if the official opts for pay fixation on his DNI on 1.7.2017, his date of promotion is 1.3.2017 and it will be taken for his further promotions. But his pay will be fixed on 1.7.2017 with DNI 1.1.2018. Even though his pay is fixed for his promotion on 1.7.2017, the official’s date of promotion is 1.3.2017. That is to say, the post of the official is changed from PA to IP on 1.3.2017.
Lastly, proviso 2 to Rule 5 is an extension of proviso 1 and this proviso 2 is applicable in certain cases only. FR 22(I) (a) (1) assures for the option for pay fixation on the DNI, if so opted by the employee.
In the light of the above, an employee can opt for proviso 1 with the option under FR 22(I)(a)(1).
The fixation of employees has been done under the instructions cited above, in almost all units. I came to understand there are audit objections for fixation of pay in certain cases. Recovery of over payment has also been ordered. The following are the cases in which audit had objected the fixation.
Case 1.
An official is awarded MACP II between 1.1.2016 to 30.6.2016. The official opted for his pay fixation for MACP II on his DNI i.e. 1.7.2016 and to switch over to revised pay structure from 1.7.2016.The official is in receipt of pay 13950 and GP 2800 in PB I.
Audit has objected this case. The reason stated by the audit is that “The option to retain the existing pay structure under the provisos to this rule, shall be admissible only in respect of one existing Pay Band and Grade Pay or scale. (Explanation 1 below Rule 5 of CCS (RP) Rules.) It is stated that “If the date of next or any subsequent increment (1.7.2016 or any subsequent increment for the post/pay band or Grade pay held on 1.1.2016 has no relevance for option, as this post/pay band or Grade pay on 1.1.2016 is no longer held on the date of next/any subsequent date of increment.”
The contention of the audit is not correct. This objection is absolutely right in case of regular promotions, just like the example cited above. When one PA is promoted as IP on 1.3.2016, there is change in post even he opts for pay fixation on his DNI 1.7.2016. In this case he cannot opt for switching over to revised pay structure on 1.7.2016, since the post held by him on 1.1.2016 was PA and on 1.3.2016 it is changed to IP which has no relevance to the post held on 1.1.2016. Since the official did not held the same PA post on 1.1.2016 and 1.7.2016, he cannot exercise option to switch over to revised pay structure on 1.7.2016. The audit objection is absolutely right. This official can switch over to revised pay structure on 1.1.2016 and can opt for his pay fixation for promotion as IP either on the date of promotion or on his DNI 1.7.2016. He cannot opt for switching over on 1.7.2016. It is important here to note that the official opted for his pay fixation on his DNI 1.7.2016, he continues is PB I with GP attached to PA only from 1.1.2016 to 30.6.2016. For the period from 1.3.2016 to 30.6.2016, the official will be given the difference in GP only as per FR 22(I)(a)(1). His substantive pay is in PB I with GP 2400. Even though his PB and GP are the same on 1.1.2016 and 1.7.2016, he cannot switch over to revised pay structure on 1.7.2016, as there is a change of post on 1.3.2016. This is the criterion for regular promotions.
In case of up-gradation under MACP, the position is entirely different. The official opted for his pay fixation on his DNI 1.7.2016 as per the provisions of FR 22(I)(a)(1). From 1.1.2016 the official continues in PB I with pay 13950 and GP 2800 upto 1.7.2016, the date of switching over to revised pay structure. The pay band and GP on 1.1.2016 and 1.7.2016 are exactly the same. There is no change of post is involved, as the orders on MACP clearly says that the up-gradation under MACP does not involve any change of post, responsibilities etc. As such, on 1.7.2016, the official continues in the same post which he held on 1.1.2016 and in the same PB I and in the same GP 2800. The benefit of difference in GP between 1.3.2016 to 30.6.2016 is consequent on FR 22(I)(a)(1). His GP should not be taken as 4200. It may be noted that, on 1.7.2016, his GP will brought to the level of Rs. 13950+2800 and based on that only the increments are worked out. Hence, the switching over after his fixation on 1.7.2016 is perfectly in order. It is to be noted, for all purposes the official will be deemed to be in PB I and with GP 2800, till his fixation is done on 1.7.2016. Audit has erroneously applied the criteria for regular promotions to the MACP also, which is not correct. On any account, MACP cannot be equated to a regular promotion.
In view of the foregoing, the audit objection is wrong. The legitimate right of the employee is denied by the audit under wrong interpretation of the rules. The rule for promotion cannot be applied for MACP.
Case 2.:
An official is awarded MACP II after 25.7.2016 say on 1.3.2017. The official opted to continue in the pre revised pay upto 30.6.2017 (proviso 1 to Rule 5 of CS (RP) Rules 2016). The official opts for pay fixation for MACP II on his DNI i.e. 1.7.2017 (FR 22 (I)(a)(1)) and to switch over to revised pay structure from 1.7.2017 (proviso 1, 2 under Rule 5 read with Explanation 1 below Rule 5 of CCS (RP) Rules ).The official is in receipt of pay 13950 and GP 2800 in PB I as on 1.1.2016.
As discussed in the earlier case, this official continues in PB I with GP 2800 upto his date of fixation on 1.7.2017. His increments on 1.7.2017 are calculated only with reference to his pay in PB I and GP 2800 and the GP 4200 and PB II do not find a place upto this stage. After fixation, the switching over to the revised pay structure is absolutely permissible, as per rules on the subject. This had also been objected by the audit.
In both the above cases, the crux of the case is that MACP is treated as regular promotion and this is the cause for these objections. As already stated promotion and MACP are entirely different things. A regular promotion and MACP cannot be equated just because the benefits extended are the same. In fact, the benefits for MACP are not decided separately but adopted from that are available for a regular promotion, as could be seen from the orders of MACP.
GM (Finance), PAO, AP Circle, Hyderabad issued clarifications on this subject vide no 180/IFA/VII CPC/clarifications dated 22.5.2019. I wish to submit the following on this order.
The reply to point of doubt 1 is absolutely right. Those officials who are awarded promotion/up-gradations after 25.7.2016 cannot switch over to revised pay structure on their date of promotion.
The reply to point of doubt 2 is wrong, in the light of the above discussions. As already said, MACP is an entirely different thing from a regular promotion. In MACP, the official continues in the same PB, same grade pay and the same post. There will be no change in the post, as per the orders on MACP. There will definitely be a change in the PB or GP or both, only after the fixation is done for the MACP, and not before that. Thus, the options exercised by the officials are in accordance with the rules and in conformity with the conditions prescribed in the CCS (RP) Rules 2016. Those officials are entitled for this benefit. The rule for a regular promotion is not applicable in this case as regular promotion and MACP stand on entirely different platforms.
The reply to point of doubt 3, is not correct. Switching over to the revised pay structure should be done, only after all the fixation etc. is done in the pre revised scale. This had been done during each pay commissions. To cite an example, during the implementation of 6th CPC, those officials who drew their increments between Feb 2005 to June 2005 are given one increment in the pre revised pay scales only and then only they were allowed to switch over to the revised pay structure. Also, those who were drawing their increments in January prior to 2006, were allowed to draw their increment on 1.1.2006 in the pre revised pay scales only and then their pay was fixed in revised pay structure. Hence, this clarification is against the spirit of the rules. This clarification is nothing but forcing all the officials to switch over to the revised pay structure on 1.1.2016 itself and thereby denying the legitimate entitlements.
So many options are given while implementing the pay commissions in order to assure the maximum possible benefits to the employees. That is the intention of the rules. But the clarifications are just in the opposite direction, affecting the interest of the officials. The officials are put into a great loss which is perennial and also affecting their terminal benefits.
I sincerely request each and everybody to take sincere steps towards the implementation of these orders in true spirit so that the officials get their legitimate benefits and to render justice.
Thanking you.
Article by:
Sri. R.Hariharakrishnan
Manager,
Postal Stores Depot,
Tirunelveli 627002
05.12.2019
That's the article: Option for switching over to revised pay structure consequent on 7th CPC-A discussion.
Thank you for visiting my blog, hopefully it can be useful for all of you. Don't forget to share this article with your friends so they also know the interesting info, see you in other article posts.
You are now reading the article Option for switching over to revised pay structure consequent on 7th CPC-A discussion. with link address https://zonebusinnesupdate.blogspot.com/2019/12/option-for-switching-over-to-revised.html
Post a Comment