Friday, March 22, 2013


Mis-interpretation of the 6th CPC gazette notification by PAO, AIR, Chennai vide his letter No. PAO/AIR/Chen/Pen/12-13/197 dated 23.1.2013

Dear Friends,

            If you carefully examine and read the 6th CPC report as well as gazette notification, we will know that the PAO, AIR, Chennai has not taken care of the points enumerated below before seeking clarification from Prasar Bharati.

1.         6th CPC recommended upgraded higher replacement pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 in respect of Head Clerk/Assistant/Steno Gr.II & equivalent (Page No. 163, point No. 3.1.14 of the report) and on the basis of this, govt. vide its gazette notification No. 470 dated 29.8.2008 granted the revised upgraded higher pay scale of Rs. 6500-10500 to above categories of post in Part B Section II of Gazette (Page No. 44 & 45 of the gazette).

2.         Note 2A of Gazette (page no. 37) clearly mentions that Illustration 4A will be applicable where post has been upgraded as indicated in Part B or Part C following the clause 7(A)(i) &(ii) of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008.

3.         Clause 7(A)(ii) indicates that “if the minimum of the revised pay scale is more than the amount arrived at as per (i) above, the pay shall be fixed at the minimum of the revised pay scale.” (page no. 35 of the gazette)

4.         Although the PAO, AIR, Chennai presumed that the fixation of upgraded pay scale should be as per Note 2A and clause 7(A)(i)*(ii), but the procedure of pay fixation shown by him is totally wrong and it is based on Illustration 4B instead of 4A.

5.         As per clause 8(A)(ii), the minimum of the revised pay scale of 6500-10500 is 6500/- then the pay as on 1.1.2006 should be fixed at the minimum of Rs. 6500/- if the existed pay in the pre-revised pay scale as on 1.1.2006 is less than 6500/-.

6.         As mentioned by PAO, Chennai that DDO’s have raised the pay to the minimum of the pre-revised upgraded scale of Rs. 6500/- is wrong.  In my opinion it is absolutely correct as done by DDO because this is exactly as per clause 7(A)(ii).

7.         PAO Chennai told that bunching is already been allowed in the fitment table, I want to clarify here (as per procedure laid down in gazette on page no. 35) that until two or more govt. servants being not brought at one stage i.e. minimum of the revised pay scale, benefit of bunching cannot be granted, hence saying of PAO, Chennai that it has been allowed in Fitment Table is wrong.  The benefit of bunching can only be allowed if employees are upgraded and put at one stage of pay.

Recovery of CGEGIS subscription in respect of Group C carrying grade pay of Rs. 4200 & 4600

8.         Vide Gazette notification no. 605 dated 9.4.2009, the govt. has notified GP of Rs. 4200, 4600, 4800 & 5400 as Group B and this has also been circulated by DG:AIR for its implementation.  The CGEGIS of Rs. 60/- implies for Group B, hence deducting of Rs. 60/- against above GP employees is correct.

9.         We can not understand the intention of PAO, AIR, Chennai for seeking clarification from Prasar Bharati with a copy to Member (Personnel) Prasar Bharati, CCA Ministry of I&B instead of asking it from DG:AIR directly as they are the competent authority to issue the orders based on gazette notification.  I think DG:AIR must have issued the orders after thoroughly examine the case by different wings.

I appeal & request to all my colleagues to look into the matter & re-think over it.  Here I wish to add that PAO, AIR, Mumbai has already issued the clarification that the pay fixation based on the DG:AIR is correct. 

Rajeev Kumar, All India Radio, New Delhi

No comments:

Post a Comment