pls go through the grievance

pls go through the grievance

aggrieved direct officer
aggrieved direct officer

November 21st, 2014, 5:25 am #1

Group A Officers of all the 8 Organised services of Indian Railways are aggrieved from various unreasonable decisions taken by Ministry of Railways under influence from Indian Railway Promotee Officers’ Federation. These include artificially inflating Cadre Strength and consequently vacancies to be reported for Recruitment so as to induct more Promotee officers in Organised Group A services and placing them above Direct Recruits of Same Recruitment year by wilful misuse of Weightage Rule thereby adversely affecting the career prospects of direct officers.
This report has analysed the gross irregularities meted out to Group A officers of IRSME.
Junior Scale Cadre strength in IRSME was notionally fixed to 108 posts and divided between Direct and Promotee in 75:25 (i.e. DR 81 Posts & PQ 27 Posts). But to meet unreasonable demands of IRPOF, Ministry of Railways has exceeded its jurisdiction to enhance the Junior Scale cadre strength from 108 to 337 posts. As a result recruitments from 2010 onwards are being done at highly exaggerated rate of around 20% of total service strength every year (Without taking cognizance of actual vacancies in higher grades). Historical average annual recruitment to IRSME has been around 35-40. But Annual recruitment from 2010 onwards has been done at a rate of 168 per year.Only beneficiary are Group B officers who are getting promoted to Group A in large numbersdue to retrospective nature of weightage rule available to Promotee officer.
The paradox created by Ministry of Railways has led to a situation where, against 695 Permanent Senior Duty posts (Sr Time Scale & Above) in IRSME there are 1400 plus officers already recruited and working. In addition 191 SCRA officers are undergoing training. Not only this, recruitment of another 126 IRSME officers is in process. In addition percentage of Promotee officers w.r.t. to total permanent posts in IRSME has exceeded 65%. Seniority position reveals that between 2002 to 2009 a total of 610 Promotee officers have been placed against 109 direct officers despite Promotee quota is only 25% of JS Cadre strength.
Moreover all these changes have been done in complete secrecy. No public notification or Circular has been issued in this regard by Ministry of Railways. Any alteration in cadre strength of Group A services is within the jurisdiction of cabinet only. Despite this all these proposals have been given sanction without referring it to cabinet and without taking mandatory consultation from UPSC.

It is well settled principle that seniority cannot be assigned from a date an officer is not even eligible for promotion to a cadre. But in present case there are so many Promotee officers who have been assigned seniority of a date prior to the date one becomes eligible for promotion. In recent panel of 145 IRSME officers (2010-11 & 2011-12), there are at least 19 such officers.

As per the policy on optimization of direct recruitment to civilian posts Direct Recruitment was to be curtailed to 1/3rd of the vacancies arising for direct recruitment quota and rest 2/3rd posts were to be abolished each year. Purpose was reducing strength of all government departments by 2% every year. It was specifically mentioned in the policy circular that the remaining 2/3rd of the posts will be abolished and will not be filled through promotion. But Ministry of Railways again implemented this policy only to the extant it benefited the Promotee officers. Against 872 vacancies that arose during 2002-2009 only 207 recruitments have been done. As per the provisions of the policy remaining 665 posts (872-207) should have been abolished. But these posts were kept vacant and the vacuum generated by these vacancies which subsequently moved to higher grades i.e. Senior Scale and Junior Administrative Grade etc. have been utilized for accommodating larger batches of Promotee officers in future years due to weightage rule. Instead of achieving the desired objective of reduction in cadre strength it has only achieved enhancement of Promotee recruitment at the cost of direct recruitment.On one hand Ministry of Railways has suppressed direct recruitment in the name of rightsizing the organization and on the other hand annual recruitment has been increased to benefit promoted officers.

While assigning DITS to Promotee officers 2-3 Batches of Promotee officers have been clubbed together and placed between two batches of direct officers. This is in gross violation of policy laid down by DOPT.Promotee quota in Junior Scale Cadre of IRSME is 84. This implies that at any point of time total vacancies in the Junior Scale under Promotee quota cannot exceed 84. Contrary to this various panels e.g. panel years 2010-11 & 2011-12 have been merged and 145 Promotee officers have been recruited in IRSME against 84 posts.

For the reasons stated above it is requested that Competent Authority may please appoint a Committee at appropriate level to enquire into all these wrongdoings and take measures to correct the anomalies pertaining to Recruitment, fixation of DITS & Inter se seniority of Promotee officers recruited for Panel years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 wrt available direct officers.

Quote
Share

anonymous
anonymous

November 25th, 2014, 6:55 am #2

The contention that the JA grade may be after 12 yrs for DRs on account of excessive intake of Group ‘B’ officers, is not based on facts but it is a statement to arouse the sentiments of DRs against the recruitment of Group ‘B’ officers. All officers – of all departments are being promoted within periods of their due eligibility (except Group ‘B’ off-course). The fact is that there being no eligible officer available (8 yrs + officers) for promotion, as many as 484 posts of JA grade (27%) are filled on adhoc basis. It is also a fact, due to acute shortage of JA grade eligible officers the eligibility of JA grade (adhoc) promotions period was reduced to 5 yrs from 6 yrs – on the express demand of DRs, and an impressive number of officers have been promoted to JA grade (ad-hoc) after just 5 yrs which means after their promotion to Sr.scale in 4 + yrs they are being promoted to JA grade within one year experience in Sr.Scale. This is applicable for DRs only because Group ‘B’ officer can only be promoted to JA grade after they get DPC induction which is normally 9-10 yrs. (even 17 yrs for Accounts & 15 yrs for Engg).
Quote
Share

aggrieved direct officer
aggrieved direct officer

December 5th, 2014, 11:34 am #3

dear ANONYMOUS I THINK you have very little or no knowledge of rules. if you have time (not more than 20 minutes) pls go through the details i am producing. if you want any clarification i ll provide point by point. pls go through it .
Applicant is aggrieved from various decisions taken by Ministry of Railways under influence from Indian Railway Promotee Officers’ Federation. These include artificially inflating Cadre Strength and consequently vacancies to be reported for Recruitment so as to induct more Promotee officers in Organised Group A services and placing them above Direct Recruits of Same Recruitment year by wilful misuse of Weightage Rule.

It is respectfully stated that IRSME is an organized Group A service of Government of India under Ministry Of Railways. Presently the sanctioned strength of IRSME (All Grades from JS to HAG+) includes 695 Regular Senior Duty Posts and 143 Reserve Posts. Table-I shows the composition of service within different grades. In addition there are few IRSME posts in Junior Time Scale also but there is no clarity on the exact number of such posts since these posts are manned by both Group A Junior scale officers as well as Group B officers of Mechanical Department. Recruitment in IRSME is done in Junior Time Scale posts through primarily two modes, one through direct requirement (Engineering Services Exam & Special Class Apprenticeship Exam) and other by way of promotions from amongst eligible Group B officers.



Table-I (IRSME)

IRSME Service Composition

Grade No Of Posts Total

Permanent Work Charged


80000 Fixed 1 0 1

75500-80000 2 0 2

67000-79000 25 8 33

SAG 128 33 161

JAG+SG 300 198 498

Sr Scale 239 150 389

Reserves 143 0 143

Total 838 389 1227




Page 1 of 11

With the implementation of post based reservation system, it was required to fix the Junior Scale Cadre Strength and divide it amongst Direct and Promotee quota, So that future recruitments could be based on these posts. Accordingly a core group comprising EDE(GC), EDT&MPP, ED(E&R), EDPC-I & JS(G) was formed by Ministry of Railways to determine the ideal size of annual DR and PQ indents keeping in view the cadre strength , Length of service in Group “A” and need to reduce the incident of ad-hoc promotion in Sr. Scale. The core group worked out the annual requirement for DR and PQ in accordance with recruitment rules. Accordingly Junior Scale Cadre strength was notionally fixed to 108 posts and divided between Direct and Promotee in 75:25 (i.e. DR 81 Posts & PQ 27 Posts). This cadre fixation was done for the purpose of recruitment and maintenance of reservation rosters only.

Any change in cadre strength as well as the PQ: DR ratio is within the jurisdiction of cabinet (Not Ministry of Railways) with mandatory consultation from UPSC. Despite this the cadre strength has been arbitrarily enhanced from 108 to 337 posts primarily to fulfil demands of IRPOF (Without taking opinion of UPSC and referring the matter to cabinet for approval). As on date out of 337 Junior Scale Group A posts, 253 posts belong to Direct Recruits and 84 posts belong to Promotee quota.

Relative seniority between Direct and Promotees is determined based on Date of Increment into Time Scale (DITS) of each member as per relevant provisions of Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM Vol. I - CHAPTER III - Para 327-341). For direct officers DITS is their date of appointment to IRSME, whereas for Promotee officers DITS is determined from a previous date after assigning weightage of up to five years to their date of appointment. Any change to seniority rules also requires mandatory consultation from UPSC.

Table-II gives a rough idea of the situation applicant is aggrieved from. Despite the recruitment rules providing for 75:25 division of Direct and Promotee officers, the latest seniority position consists of 610 Promotee officers against 109 direct officers between the years 2002 to 2009. The above situation is a combined outcome of various decisions and acts of Ministry of railways like Unreasonable increase in recruitment, Incorrect fixation of Seniority etc. with a clear intention of giving undue benefit to Promotee officers under pressure from Indian Railway Promotee Officers’ Federation.



Table-II (Seniority List)

Position as evident from IRSME seniority list

DITS Between Promotee Direct

01-01-2002 to 31-12-2002 0 11

01-01-2003 to 31-12-2003 71 16

01-01-2004 to 31-12-2004 158 7
01-01-2005 to 31-12-2005 0 10
01-01-2006 to 31-12-2006 80 15
01-01-2007 to 31-12-2007 145 11
01-01-2008 to 31-12-2008 0 19
01-01-2009 to 31-12-2009 156 20

Total 610 109

Page 2 of 11

The paradox created by Ministry of Railways has led to a situation where, against 695 Permanent Senior Duty posts (Sr Time Scale & Above) in IRSME there are 1400 plus officers already recruited and working. In addition 191 SCRA officers are undergoing training. Not only this, recruitment of another 126 IRSME officers is in process. In addition percentage of Promotee officers wrt to total permanent posts in IRSME has exceeded 65%. Moreover this has happened during the period when there was 2/3rd ban on direct recruitment which exactly verifies the fact that excess recruitment was done after utilizing direct quota which was supposed to be surrendered as per DOPT policy on optimization of direct recruitment.

The applicant is primarily aggrieved from

Anomalies Pertaining to Recruitment

1. Unreasonable Increase in Junior Scale Cadre Strength

2. Promotee Recruitment in excess of quota

3. Incorrect Implementation of Policy on optimization of Direct Recruitment.

Anomalies Pertaining to Fixation of Seniority

4. Assigning benefit of weightage even to excess Promotees

5. Clubbing multiple batches of promoted officers.

6. Seniority of a date prior to one becomes eligible for promotion to Group A

7. Applicability of Connoted Pay Rule

1. Unreasonable Increase in JS Cadre Strength

With the system of giving weightage of up to five years to Promotee officers while assigning seniority, whenever there is an increase in recruitment, larger batches of Promotee officers come above smaller batches of direct officers in seniority list retrospectively which severely affects the career progression of direct recruits. Sudden increase in recruitment directly benefits Promotee officers and adversely affects direct recruits. Therefore any decision regarding increase in cadre strength has to be reasonable and should be based on genuine consideration of requirement of service only. Moreover it is against natural justice if direct recruits selected in previous years get affected due to increase in cadre strength in future years.

Junior scale cadre strength of IRSME was fixed to 108 posts in 1998, duly taking the annual recruitment level into account. But subsequently it has been arbitrarily increased in quick succession from 108 to 191 (March 2005), 191 to 194 (May 2006) & 194 to 337 (Feb 2007). Accordingly Promotee quota in Junior scale posts of IRSME has been increased in quick succession from 27 to 38 (March 2005), 38 to 48 (May 2006) & 48 to 84 (Feb 2007). This decision has been taken only fulfill persistent demand from Indian Railway Promotee Officers’ Federation (IRPOF). Decision of increasing quota from 108 to 337 is totally arbitrary, illegal and based on unreasonable considerations.


Page 3 of 11

Moreover this increase in quota from 108 to 337 posts has been done in complete secrecy. No public notification or Circular has been issued in this regard by Ministry of Railways. Any alteration in cadre strength of Group A services is within the jurisdiction of cabinet only. Despite this all these proposals have been given sanction without referring it to cabinet and without taking mandatory consultation from UPSC.

The decision regarding increasing Junior Scale Cadre Strength from 194 to 337 has been taken based on assumption that 143 reserve posts (Deputation, Leave etc.) form a part of Junior Time Scale only. Not only this, it has also been assumed that these 143 posts are vacant (Despite so many IRSME officers on deputation holding lien against these posts) and available for recruitment. Interestingly since 2007 recruitment against these 143 reserve posts is being done every year, despite that these posts are still vacant and once again offered for recruitment.

Historical average annual recruitment to IRSME has been around 35-40. But Annual recruitment from 2010 onwards has been done at a rate of 168 per year.

2. Promotee Recruitment in excess of quota

Table-III presents the case of over utilization of recruitment quota for Promotee recruitment as compared to direct recruitment. Quota Utilized for Promotee Recruitment is more Than for Direct Recruitment in the years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10.


Table-III (Recruitment)

Year Direct Recruitment Promotee Recruitment

Quota Available Vacancies Recruitment Quota Available Vacancies Recruitment


2002-03 81 59 22 5 27 0* 27 27

2003-04 81 56 25 11 27 0* 27 27

2004-05 81 56 25 4 27 0* 27 22

2005-06 153 44 109 26 38 0* 38 31

2006-07 143 48 95 14 48 0* 48 40

2007-08 253 43 210 42 84 0* 84 76

2008-09 253 55 198 27 84 0* 84 82

2009-10 253 65 188 78 84 0* 84 80

2010-11 253 88 165 86 84 0* 84 71

2011-12 253 119 134 88 84 0* 84 74

2012-13 253 171 82 92 84 0* 84 76

2013-14 253 194 59 98 84 0* 84 80

1312 571 755 686


Total 571 Direct officers have been recruited against 1312 vacancies during 2002-2013. Whereas 686 Promotee officers have been recruited against 755 vacancies during same period. These numbers are much higher keeping in mind there are only 695 senior duty posts in IRSME.

* It has been assumed that Promotee officers get promoted to Sr Scale Immediately after their induction to Group A due to weightage rule and vacate Junior Scale post; hence Promotee quota posts remain vacant even after recruitment.



Page 4 of 11

As evident from actual recruitment numbers, Direct recruitment to IRSME for panel years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 has been done based on pre-revised Cadre Strength of 108 posts, whereas Promotee recruitment has been done based on revised cadre strength of 191 posts for 2006-07 & 337 posts for 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. In addition direct recruitment has been suppressed by under reporting vacancies and against 872 vacancies that arose during 2002-2009 only 207 Direct recruitments have been done during 2002-2009. All this is contrary to provisions of Recruitment Rules.

DOPT on 07/02/1986 vide No. 35014/2/80-Estt. has issued an Office memorandum in respect of consolidated instructions on seniority. Wherein under point 5 it has been said,


“With a view to curbing any tendency of under-reporting/suppressing the vacancies to be notified to the concerned authorities for direct recruitment, it is clarified that Promotees will be treated as regular only to the extent to which direct recruitment vacancies are reported to the recruiting authorities on the basis of the quotas prescribed in the relevant recruitment rules. Excess Promotees, if any, exceeding the share falling to the promotion quota based on the corresponding figure, notified for direct recruitment would be treated only as ad-hoc Promotees.”

Direct officers has been suffering from double whammy, one their vacancy was restricted to 1/3rd during 2002-2009 and on other side railway ministry has enhanced the Cadre strength from 108 to 337 in quick succession during this period which would give only 1/3rd benefit to direct officer during the ban period, so this increase in quota during ban period is tantamount to tendency of under-reporting/suppressing the vacancies or in other words suppression of direct recruitment and hence in this case validity of recruitments shall be dealt in accordance with this clause. Therefore legitimately only 207 Promotees should have been recruited during 8 year period of 2002-2009. But contrary to this a total of 385 Promotee officers have been recruited during this period. Promotees recruited in excess of 207 should be treated as ad-hoc and should be regularized against vacancies of future years.

Quota utilized in 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 for Promotee recruitment is more than Direct recruitment wiz not permissible as per rules and inconsistent with view taken by Hon’ble supreme court as referred above. Therefore recruitment in excess of quota is invalid recruitment.

Here is another instance of over utilisation of quota. 80 officers have been recruited against panel year 2009-10 and given DITS w.e.f. 24-06-2006. Group A officers are required to serve for a minimum four years in Junior scale before they can get promoted to Sr Scale and vacate Junior Scale posts. This implies that all


Page 5 of 11

these Junior Scale posts under Promotee quota will remain occupied from 24-06-2006 to 24-06-2010. Consequently Promotee officers from panel year 2010-11 onwards cannot be given DITS prior to 24-06-2010. But all the 145 officers of 2010-11 & 2011-12 have been given DITS of 31-12-2007.



Exact scenario has been reiterated By Hon’ble Supreme Court in Keshav Chandra Joshi v. Union of India [1992 Supp (1) SCC 272]


“When promotion is outside the quota, seniority would be reckoned from the date of the vacancy within the quota rendering the previous service fortuitous. The previous promotion would be regular only from the date of the vacancy within the quota and seniority shall be counted from that date and not from the date of his earlier promotion or subsequent confirmation. In order to do justice to the Promotees, it would not be proper to do injustice to the direct recruits”

Therefore recruitment of Promotee officers outside their quota is invalid recruitment and need to be adjusted against vacancies of future years.




3. Incorrect Implementation of Policy on optimization of Direct Recruitment

DOPT on 16/05/2001 vide No.2/8/2001-PIC issued a policy for “Optimization of direct recruitment to civilian posts". As per this policy Direct Recruitment was to be curtailed to 1/3rd of the vacancies arising for direct recruitment quota and rest 2/3rd posts were to be abolished each year. Purpose was reducing strength of all government departments by 2% every year. This policy remained in force till 2009.

Accordingly recruitments through UPSC civil services and engineering service

exams between the period 2002 to 2009 were based on 1/3rd vacancies. It was specifically mentioned in the policy circular that the remaining 2/3rd of the posts will be abolished and will not be filled through promotion.

But Ministry of Railways again implemented this policy only to the extant it benefited the Promotee officers. As shown in Table-IV against 872 vacancies that arose during 2002-2009 only 207 recruitments have been done. As per the provisions of the policy remaining 665 posts (872-207) should have been abolished. But these posts were kept vacant and the vacuum generated by these vacancies which subsequently moved to higher grades i.e. Senior Scale and Junior Administrative Grade etc. have been utilized for accommodating larger batches of Promotee officers in future years due to weightage rule.





Page 6 of 11

Table-IV (DR Recruitment 2002-2009)

Year Direct Recruitment

Quota Available Vacancies Recruitment


2002-03 81 59 22 5

2003-04 81 56 25 11

2004-05 81 56 25 4

2005-06 153 44 109 26

2006-07 143 48 95 14

2007-08 253 43 210 42

2008-09 253 55 198 27

2009-10 253 65 188 78

872 207



This restriction on direct recruitment remained in effect from year 2002 to 2009. However, Ministry of Railway during the same period has increased JS Cadre strength in IRSME, in quick succession from 108 to 337 which is against the interest of Direct officers who are availing only 1/3rd advantage of the increased quota whereas Promotee are reaping full advantage that too retrospectively under guise of 5 years weightage. On one hand Ministry of Railways has suppressed Direct recruitment in the name of rightsizing the organization and on the other hand annual recruitment has been increased to benefit promoted officers.


Also this policy has been violated in letter and spirit. Ministry of Railway has implemented it in such a fashion that the number of officers working in IRSME has gone beyond the sanctioned strength of IRSME in all grades, instead of achieving desired objective of reduction in cadre strength. It has only achieved enhancement of Promotee recruitment at the cost of direct recruitment.



4. Weightage even to excess Promotees

As shown in table-V below 610 Promotees have been placed in seniority during the period 2002-2009. Whereas during the same period only 109 direct officers have been recruited and placed in seniority list. In addition Direct officers of 2003 batch onwards are made to suffer only because JS Cadre Strength has been increased from 2008 onwards and keeping the weightage rule in place, large batches of Promotee officers recruited for the years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 have come above smaller Direct recruitment batch officers.

It is against natural justice to place large batches of Promotee Officers above smaller batches of Direct recruits that too when increase in recruitment has no reasonable ground. Therefore benefit of weightage in seniority should be available only to extent of available quota of recruitment for that year.





Page 7 of 11

Table-V (Seniority Fixation 2002-2009)

DITS Recruitment Mode Number Recruitment Year Date Of Appointment
(Senior most Officer) (Direct/Promotee) (Senior most Officer)


09-02-2002 Direct (IES) 11 2001-02 09-02-2002

09-04-2003 Direct (IES) 4 2002-03 09-04-2003

10-06-2003 Promotee 71 2005-06 & 2006-07 10-06-2008

15-07-2003 Direct (SCRA) 12 1998-99 15-07-2003

20-03-2004 Promotee 158 2007-08 & 2008-09 20-03-2009

09-06-2004 Direct (IES) 1 2003-04 09-06-2004

26-06-2004 Direct (SCRA) 6 1999-00 26-06-2004

29-06-2005 Direct (SCRA) 7 2000-01 29-06-2005

19-09-2005 Direct (IES) 3 2004-05 19-09-2005

24-06-2006 Promotee 80 2009-10 24-06-2011

17-07-2006 Direct (SCRA) 6 2001-02 17-07-2006

12-11-2006 Direct (IES) 9 2005-06 12-11-2006

12-10-2007 Direct (IES) 11 2006-07 12-10-2007

31-12-2007 Promotee 145 2010-11 & 2011-12 31-12-2012

30-06-2008 Direct (SCRA) 7 2003-04 30-06-2008

15-12-2008 Direct (IES) 12 2007-08 15-12-2008

26-08-2009 Promotee 156 2012-13 & 2013-14 26-08-2014

14-12-2009 Direct (IES) 20 2008-09 14-12-2009


Looking at DITS Between 2002 to 2009 Total 610 promotee officers have been placed in seniority list against 109 Direct Officers (71 IES & 38 SCRA) in the same period.



For example for year 2002 recruitment quota for Promotee was 27. Therefore only senior most 27 Promotee officers out of 131 should have been given seniority with 2002 batch and the remaining officers should be adjusted with junior batches. This implies out of 610 Promotee offices shown in table only 216 (27x8) officers can be given seniority between 2002-2009 batch and remaining officers need to be brought down in seniority list.


5. Clubbing multiple batches of promoted officers

As evident from Table-V while assigning DITS to Promotee officers 2-3 Batches of Promotee officers have been clubbed together and placed between Two batches of direct officers. This is in gross violation of policy laid down by DOPT. Vide O.M. No. 9/11/55-RPS dated 29.12.1959. Part of that is produced below


“The relative seniority of direct recruits and of Promotees shall be determined according to the rotation of vacancies between direct recruits and Promotees, which shall be based on the quotas of vacancies reserved for direct recruitment and promotion respectively, in the Recruitment Rules”

This implies that there can be only one batch of Promotee officers between two batches of direct officers and vice versa.




Page 8 of 11

Promotee quota in Junior Scale Cadre of IRSME is 84. This implies that at any point of time total vacancies in the Junior Scale under Promotee quota cannot exceed 84. Contrary to this various panels e.g. panel years 2010-11 & 2011-12 have been merged and 145 Promotee officers have been recruited in IRSME against 84 posts.

By clubbing together two batches Ministry of Railways has perhaps tried to compensate for the delay caused in recruitment through DPC route. But it is to be kept in mind that weightage of up to 5 years is given only to account for such reasons.


6. DITS of a date prior to one becomes eligible for promotion

It is well settled principle that seniority cannot be assigned from a date an officer is not even eligible for promotion to a cadre. But in present case there are so many Promotee officers who have been assigned seniority of a date prior to the date one becomes eligible for promotion. In recent panel of 145 IRSME officers (2010-11 & 2011-12) there are at least 19 such officers.

Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1712-1713 OF 2002 has stated


“This Court has consistently held that no retrospective promotion can be granted nor any seniority can be given on retrospective basis from a date when an employee has not even borne in the cadre particularly when this would adversely affect the direct recruits who have been appointed validly in the meantime.”

As per the provisions of Indian Railway Service of Mechanical Engineers Recruitment Rules, 1968 (Part III-Recruitment by Promotion, 21(1))


“Appointments to the posts in Junior Scale shall be made by selection on merit from amongst eligible Class II Officers (Including officiating Class II Officers) of the Mechanical Engineering and Transportation (Power) Department and of the Personnel Branch with not less than 3 year service in the grade.”

This implies that a Group B officer becomes eligible for promotion to IRSME only on completion of three years of service in Group B. Therefore no promoted officer can be assigned DITS of a date prior to when he completes 3 years of service in Group B.


Let us take example of one promoted officer Sh Madan Marandi. He is promoted to IRSME through vacancy of panel year 2010-11. His date of appointment is 31-12-2012. Subsequently he has been assigned DITS of 31-12-2007.

Page 9 of 11


His date of appointment in Group B was 06-08-2006. Accordingly he becomes eligible for promotion to Group A on 06-08-2009. Therefore his correct DITS should be 31-12-2009. Consequentially all promoted officers recruited for panel year 2011-12 has to be placed below Sh Madan Marandi. Due to this all Promotee officers of 2011-12 who are presently placed below 2006 batch direct officers will move down and will get their place below 2008 batch direct officer.



7. Applicability of Connoted Pay Rule

Relative seniority between Direct and Promotees is determined based on Date of Increment into Time Scale (DITS) of each member as per provisions of Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM Vol. I - CHAPTER III - Para 327-341). For Promotee officers DITS is determined from a previous date after assigning weightage of up to five years to their date of appointment. Para 334 (2) (ii) governs weightage which says

The DITS of the above officers shall be determined by giving weightage based on:

a) the year of service connoted by the initial pay on permanent promotion to Group 'A' service; or

b) half the total number of years of continuous service in Group 'B', both officiating, and permanent;

Whichever is more, subject to a maximum of 5 years; provided that the weightage so assigned does not exceed the total non-fortuitous service rendered by the officer in Group 'B'

Most of the officers recruited through panel year 2012-13 & 2013-14 have rendered less than 10 year service in Group B. Despite this all of them have been given full weightage of five years by application of connoted pay rule. Validity of this rule needs to be understood before its application. Substantive pay of Group B officer which is used for comparison with Group A service while applying connoted pay rule is a consolidation of various increments earned by him throughout his service and not during the Group B service alone. This way service rendered in Non-Gazetted group C service also gets counted while assigning weightage which is not at all justified. With most of the Group C employees earning more pay than Group A direct officers due to very small difference in their starting pay these days, this connoted pay rule has become arbitrary. Therefore before its application its constitutional validity has to be looked into and it needs to be looked through a wider frame keeping the overall picture in mind.






Page 10 of 11

Quote
Share

aggrieved direct officer
aggrieved direct officer

December 5th, 2014, 11:35 am #4

if you want any documentary evidence i ll provide. first brush up your knowledge about rules.
Quote
Share

ANONYMOUS
ANONYMOUS

December 16th, 2014, 11:28 am #5

dear ANONYMOUS I THINK you have very little or no knowledge of rules. if you have time (not more than 20 minutes) pls go through the details i am producing. if you want any clarification i ll provide point by point. pls go through it .
Applicant is aggrieved from various decisions taken by Ministry of Railways under influence from Indian Railway Promotee Officers’ Federation. These include artificially inflating Cadre Strength and consequently vacancies to be reported for Recruitment so as to induct more Promotee officers in Organised Group A services and placing them above Direct Recruits of Same Recruitment year by wilful misuse of Weightage Rule.

It is respectfully stated that IRSME is an organized Group A service of Government of India under Ministry Of Railways. Presently the sanctioned strength of IRSME (All Grades from JS to HAG+) includes 695 Regular Senior Duty Posts and 143 Reserve Posts. Table-I shows the composition of service within different grades. In addition there are few IRSME posts in Junior Time Scale also but there is no clarity on the exact number of such posts since these posts are manned by both Group A Junior scale officers as well as Group B officers of Mechanical Department. Recruitment in IRSME is done in Junior Time Scale posts through primarily two modes, one through direct requirement (Engineering Services Exam & Special Class Apprenticeship Exam) and other by way of promotions from amongst eligible Group B officers.



Table-I (IRSME)

IRSME Service Composition

Grade No Of Posts Total

Permanent Work Charged


80000 Fixed 1 0 1

75500-80000 2 0 2

67000-79000 25 8 33

SAG 128 33 161

JAG+SG 300 198 498

Sr Scale 239 150 389

Reserves 143 0 143

Total 838 389 1227




Page 1 of 11

With the implementation of post based reservation system, it was required to fix the Junior Scale Cadre Strength and divide it amongst Direct and Promotee quota, So that future recruitments could be based on these posts. Accordingly a core group comprising EDE(GC), EDT&MPP, ED(E&R), EDPC-I & JS(G) was formed by Ministry of Railways to determine the ideal size of annual DR and PQ indents keeping in view the cadre strength , Length of service in Group “A” and need to reduce the incident of ad-hoc promotion in Sr. Scale. The core group worked out the annual requirement for DR and PQ in accordance with recruitment rules. Accordingly Junior Scale Cadre strength was notionally fixed to 108 posts and divided between Direct and Promotee in 75:25 (i.e. DR 81 Posts & PQ 27 Posts). This cadre fixation was done for the purpose of recruitment and maintenance of reservation rosters only.

Any change in cadre strength as well as the PQ: DR ratio is within the jurisdiction of cabinet (Not Ministry of Railways) with mandatory consultation from UPSC. Despite this the cadre strength has been arbitrarily enhanced from 108 to 337 posts primarily to fulfil demands of IRPOF (Without taking opinion of UPSC and referring the matter to cabinet for approval). As on date out of 337 Junior Scale Group A posts, 253 posts belong to Direct Recruits and 84 posts belong to Promotee quota.

Relative seniority between Direct and Promotees is determined based on Date of Increment into Time Scale (DITS) of each member as per relevant provisions of Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM Vol. I - CHAPTER III - Para 327-341). For direct officers DITS is their date of appointment to IRSME, whereas for Promotee officers DITS is determined from a previous date after assigning weightage of up to five years to their date of appointment. Any change to seniority rules also requires mandatory consultation from UPSC.

Table-II gives a rough idea of the situation applicant is aggrieved from. Despite the recruitment rules providing for 75:25 division of Direct and Promotee officers, the latest seniority position consists of 610 Promotee officers against 109 direct officers between the years 2002 to 2009. The above situation is a combined outcome of various decisions and acts of Ministry of railways like Unreasonable increase in recruitment, Incorrect fixation of Seniority etc. with a clear intention of giving undue benefit to Promotee officers under pressure from Indian Railway Promotee Officers’ Federation.



Table-II (Seniority List)

Position as evident from IRSME seniority list

DITS Between Promotee Direct

01-01-2002 to 31-12-2002 0 11

01-01-2003 to 31-12-2003 71 16

01-01-2004 to 31-12-2004 158 7
01-01-2005 to 31-12-2005 0 10
01-01-2006 to 31-12-2006 80 15
01-01-2007 to 31-12-2007 145 11
01-01-2008 to 31-12-2008 0 19
01-01-2009 to 31-12-2009 156 20

Total 610 109

Page 2 of 11

The paradox created by Ministry of Railways has led to a situation where, against 695 Permanent Senior Duty posts (Sr Time Scale & Above) in IRSME there are 1400 plus officers already recruited and working. In addition 191 SCRA officers are undergoing training. Not only this, recruitment of another 126 IRSME officers is in process. In addition percentage of Promotee officers wrt to total permanent posts in IRSME has exceeded 65%. Moreover this has happened during the period when there was 2/3rd ban on direct recruitment which exactly verifies the fact that excess recruitment was done after utilizing direct quota which was supposed to be surrendered as per DOPT policy on optimization of direct recruitment.

The applicant is primarily aggrieved from

Anomalies Pertaining to Recruitment

1. Unreasonable Increase in Junior Scale Cadre Strength

2. Promotee Recruitment in excess of quota

3. Incorrect Implementation of Policy on optimization of Direct Recruitment.

Anomalies Pertaining to Fixation of Seniority

4. Assigning benefit of weightage even to excess Promotees

5. Clubbing multiple batches of promoted officers.

6. Seniority of a date prior to one becomes eligible for promotion to Group A

7. Applicability of Connoted Pay Rule

1. Unreasonable Increase in JS Cadre Strength

With the system of giving weightage of up to five years to Promotee officers while assigning seniority, whenever there is an increase in recruitment, larger batches of Promotee officers come above smaller batches of direct officers in seniority list retrospectively which severely affects the career progression of direct recruits. Sudden increase in recruitment directly benefits Promotee officers and adversely affects direct recruits. Therefore any decision regarding increase in cadre strength has to be reasonable and should be based on genuine consideration of requirement of service only. Moreover it is against natural justice if direct recruits selected in previous years get affected due to increase in cadre strength in future years.

Junior scale cadre strength of IRSME was fixed to 108 posts in 1998, duly taking the annual recruitment level into account. But subsequently it has been arbitrarily increased in quick succession from 108 to 191 (March 2005), 191 to 194 (May 2006) & 194 to 337 (Feb 2007). Accordingly Promotee quota in Junior scale posts of IRSME has been increased in quick succession from 27 to 38 (March 2005), 38 to 48 (May 2006) & 48 to 84 (Feb 2007). This decision has been taken only fulfill persistent demand from Indian Railway Promotee Officers’ Federation (IRPOF). Decision of increasing quota from 108 to 337 is totally arbitrary, illegal and based on unreasonable considerations.


Page 3 of 11

Moreover this increase in quota from 108 to 337 posts has been done in complete secrecy. No public notification or Circular has been issued in this regard by Ministry of Railways. Any alteration in cadre strength of Group A services is within the jurisdiction of cabinet only. Despite this all these proposals have been given sanction without referring it to cabinet and without taking mandatory consultation from UPSC.

The decision regarding increasing Junior Scale Cadre Strength from 194 to 337 has been taken based on assumption that 143 reserve posts (Deputation, Leave etc.) form a part of Junior Time Scale only. Not only this, it has also been assumed that these 143 posts are vacant (Despite so many IRSME officers on deputation holding lien against these posts) and available for recruitment. Interestingly since 2007 recruitment against these 143 reserve posts is being done every year, despite that these posts are still vacant and once again offered for recruitment.

Historical average annual recruitment to IRSME has been around 35-40. But Annual recruitment from 2010 onwards has been done at a rate of 168 per year.

2. Promotee Recruitment in excess of quota

Table-III presents the case of over utilization of recruitment quota for Promotee recruitment as compared to direct recruitment. Quota Utilized for Promotee Recruitment is more Than for Direct Recruitment in the years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10.


Table-III (Recruitment)

Year Direct Recruitment Promotee Recruitment

Quota Available Vacancies Recruitment Quota Available Vacancies Recruitment


2002-03 81 59 22 5 27 0* 27 27

2003-04 81 56 25 11 27 0* 27 27

2004-05 81 56 25 4 27 0* 27 22

2005-06 153 44 109 26 38 0* 38 31

2006-07 143 48 95 14 48 0* 48 40

2007-08 253 43 210 42 84 0* 84 76

2008-09 253 55 198 27 84 0* 84 82

2009-10 253 65 188 78 84 0* 84 80

2010-11 253 88 165 86 84 0* 84 71

2011-12 253 119 134 88 84 0* 84 74

2012-13 253 171 82 92 84 0* 84 76

2013-14 253 194 59 98 84 0* 84 80

1312 571 755 686


Total 571 Direct officers have been recruited against 1312 vacancies during 2002-2013. Whereas 686 Promotee officers have been recruited against 755 vacancies during same period. These numbers are much higher keeping in mind there are only 695 senior duty posts in IRSME.

* It has been assumed that Promotee officers get promoted to Sr Scale Immediately after their induction to Group A due to weightage rule and vacate Junior Scale post; hence Promotee quota posts remain vacant even after recruitment.



Page 4 of 11

As evident from actual recruitment numbers, Direct recruitment to IRSME for panel years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 has been done based on pre-revised Cadre Strength of 108 posts, whereas Promotee recruitment has been done based on revised cadre strength of 191 posts for 2006-07 & 337 posts for 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10. In addition direct recruitment has been suppressed by under reporting vacancies and against 872 vacancies that arose during 2002-2009 only 207 Direct recruitments have been done during 2002-2009. All this is contrary to provisions of Recruitment Rules.

DOPT on 07/02/1986 vide No. 35014/2/80-Estt. has issued an Office memorandum in respect of consolidated instructions on seniority. Wherein under point 5 it has been said,


“With a view to curbing any tendency of under-reporting/suppressing the vacancies to be notified to the concerned authorities for direct recruitment, it is clarified that Promotees will be treated as regular only to the extent to which direct recruitment vacancies are reported to the recruiting authorities on the basis of the quotas prescribed in the relevant recruitment rules. Excess Promotees, if any, exceeding the share falling to the promotion quota based on the corresponding figure, notified for direct recruitment would be treated only as ad-hoc Promotees.”

Direct officers has been suffering from double whammy, one their vacancy was restricted to 1/3rd during 2002-2009 and on other side railway ministry has enhanced the Cadre strength from 108 to 337 in quick succession during this period which would give only 1/3rd benefit to direct officer during the ban period, so this increase in quota during ban period is tantamount to tendency of under-reporting/suppressing the vacancies or in other words suppression of direct recruitment and hence in this case validity of recruitments shall be dealt in accordance with this clause. Therefore legitimately only 207 Promotees should have been recruited during 8 year period of 2002-2009. But contrary to this a total of 385 Promotee officers have been recruited during this period. Promotees recruited in excess of 207 should be treated as ad-hoc and should be regularized against vacancies of future years.

Quota utilized in 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 & 2009-10 for Promotee recruitment is more than Direct recruitment wiz not permissible as per rules and inconsistent with view taken by Hon’ble supreme court as referred above. Therefore recruitment in excess of quota is invalid recruitment.

Here is another instance of over utilisation of quota. 80 officers have been recruited against panel year 2009-10 and given DITS w.e.f. 24-06-2006. Group A officers are required to serve for a minimum four years in Junior scale before they can get promoted to Sr Scale and vacate Junior Scale posts. This implies that all


Page 5 of 11

these Junior Scale posts under Promotee quota will remain occupied from 24-06-2006 to 24-06-2010. Consequently Promotee officers from panel year 2010-11 onwards cannot be given DITS prior to 24-06-2010. But all the 145 officers of 2010-11 & 2011-12 have been given DITS of 31-12-2007.



Exact scenario has been reiterated By Hon’ble Supreme Court in Keshav Chandra Joshi v. Union of India [1992 Supp (1) SCC 272]


“When promotion is outside the quota, seniority would be reckoned from the date of the vacancy within the quota rendering the previous service fortuitous. The previous promotion would be regular only from the date of the vacancy within the quota and seniority shall be counted from that date and not from the date of his earlier promotion or subsequent confirmation. In order to do justice to the Promotees, it would not be proper to do injustice to the direct recruits”

Therefore recruitment of Promotee officers outside their quota is invalid recruitment and need to be adjusted against vacancies of future years.




3. Incorrect Implementation of Policy on optimization of Direct Recruitment

DOPT on 16/05/2001 vide No.2/8/2001-PIC issued a policy for “Optimization of direct recruitment to civilian posts". As per this policy Direct Recruitment was to be curtailed to 1/3rd of the vacancies arising for direct recruitment quota and rest 2/3rd posts were to be abolished each year. Purpose was reducing strength of all government departments by 2% every year. This policy remained in force till 2009.

Accordingly recruitments through UPSC civil services and engineering service

exams between the period 2002 to 2009 were based on 1/3rd vacancies. It was specifically mentioned in the policy circular that the remaining 2/3rd of the posts will be abolished and will not be filled through promotion.

But Ministry of Railways again implemented this policy only to the extant it benefited the Promotee officers. As shown in Table-IV against 872 vacancies that arose during 2002-2009 only 207 recruitments have been done. As per the provisions of the policy remaining 665 posts (872-207) should have been abolished. But these posts were kept vacant and the vacuum generated by these vacancies which subsequently moved to higher grades i.e. Senior Scale and Junior Administrative Grade etc. have been utilized for accommodating larger batches of Promotee officers in future years due to weightage rule.





Page 6 of 11

Table-IV (DR Recruitment 2002-2009)

Year Direct Recruitment

Quota Available Vacancies Recruitment


2002-03 81 59 22 5

2003-04 81 56 25 11

2004-05 81 56 25 4

2005-06 153 44 109 26

2006-07 143 48 95 14

2007-08 253 43 210 42

2008-09 253 55 198 27

2009-10 253 65 188 78

872 207



This restriction on direct recruitment remained in effect from year 2002 to 2009. However, Ministry of Railway during the same period has increased JS Cadre strength in IRSME, in quick succession from 108 to 337 which is against the interest of Direct officers who are availing only 1/3rd advantage of the increased quota whereas Promotee are reaping full advantage that too retrospectively under guise of 5 years weightage. On one hand Ministry of Railways has suppressed Direct recruitment in the name of rightsizing the organization and on the other hand annual recruitment has been increased to benefit promoted officers.


Also this policy has been violated in letter and spirit. Ministry of Railway has implemented it in such a fashion that the number of officers working in IRSME has gone beyond the sanctioned strength of IRSME in all grades, instead of achieving desired objective of reduction in cadre strength. It has only achieved enhancement of Promotee recruitment at the cost of direct recruitment.



4. Weightage even to excess Promotees

As shown in table-V below 610 Promotees have been placed in seniority during the period 2002-2009. Whereas during the same period only 109 direct officers have been recruited and placed in seniority list. In addition Direct officers of 2003 batch onwards are made to suffer only because JS Cadre Strength has been increased from 2008 onwards and keeping the weightage rule in place, large batches of Promotee officers recruited for the years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 have come above smaller Direct recruitment batch officers.

It is against natural justice to place large batches of Promotee Officers above smaller batches of Direct recruits that too when increase in recruitment has no reasonable ground. Therefore benefit of weightage in seniority should be available only to extent of available quota of recruitment for that year.





Page 7 of 11

Table-V (Seniority Fixation 2002-2009)

DITS Recruitment Mode Number Recruitment Year Date Of Appointment
(Senior most Officer) (Direct/Promotee) (Senior most Officer)


09-02-2002 Direct (IES) 11 2001-02 09-02-2002

09-04-2003 Direct (IES) 4 2002-03 09-04-2003

10-06-2003 Promotee 71 2005-06 & 2006-07 10-06-2008

15-07-2003 Direct (SCRA) 12 1998-99 15-07-2003

20-03-2004 Promotee 158 2007-08 & 2008-09 20-03-2009

09-06-2004 Direct (IES) 1 2003-04 09-06-2004

26-06-2004 Direct (SCRA) 6 1999-00 26-06-2004

29-06-2005 Direct (SCRA) 7 2000-01 29-06-2005

19-09-2005 Direct (IES) 3 2004-05 19-09-2005

24-06-2006 Promotee 80 2009-10 24-06-2011

17-07-2006 Direct (SCRA) 6 2001-02 17-07-2006

12-11-2006 Direct (IES) 9 2005-06 12-11-2006

12-10-2007 Direct (IES) 11 2006-07 12-10-2007

31-12-2007 Promotee 145 2010-11 & 2011-12 31-12-2012

30-06-2008 Direct (SCRA) 7 2003-04 30-06-2008

15-12-2008 Direct (IES) 12 2007-08 15-12-2008

26-08-2009 Promotee 156 2012-13 & 2013-14 26-08-2014

14-12-2009 Direct (IES) 20 2008-09 14-12-2009


Looking at DITS Between 2002 to 2009 Total 610 promotee officers have been placed in seniority list against 109 Direct Officers (71 IES & 38 SCRA) in the same period.



For example for year 2002 recruitment quota for Promotee was 27. Therefore only senior most 27 Promotee officers out of 131 should have been given seniority with 2002 batch and the remaining officers should be adjusted with junior batches. This implies out of 610 Promotee offices shown in table only 216 (27x8) officers can be given seniority between 2002-2009 batch and remaining officers need to be brought down in seniority list.


5. Clubbing multiple batches of promoted officers

As evident from Table-V while assigning DITS to Promotee officers 2-3 Batches of Promotee officers have been clubbed together and placed between Two batches of direct officers. This is in gross violation of policy laid down by DOPT. Vide O.M. No. 9/11/55-RPS dated 29.12.1959. Part of that is produced below


“The relative seniority of direct recruits and of Promotees shall be determined according to the rotation of vacancies between direct recruits and Promotees, which shall be based on the quotas of vacancies reserved for direct recruitment and promotion respectively, in the Recruitment Rules”

This implies that there can be only one batch of Promotee officers between two batches of direct officers and vice versa.




Page 8 of 11

Promotee quota in Junior Scale Cadre of IRSME is 84. This implies that at any point of time total vacancies in the Junior Scale under Promotee quota cannot exceed 84. Contrary to this various panels e.g. panel years 2010-11 & 2011-12 have been merged and 145 Promotee officers have been recruited in IRSME against 84 posts.

By clubbing together two batches Ministry of Railways has perhaps tried to compensate for the delay caused in recruitment through DPC route. But it is to be kept in mind that weightage of up to 5 years is given only to account for such reasons.


6. DITS of a date prior to one becomes eligible for promotion

It is well settled principle that seniority cannot be assigned from a date an officer is not even eligible for promotion to a cadre. But in present case there are so many Promotee officers who have been assigned seniority of a date prior to the date one becomes eligible for promotion. In recent panel of 145 IRSME officers (2010-11 & 2011-12) there are at least 19 such officers.

Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1712-1713 OF 2002 has stated


“This Court has consistently held that no retrospective promotion can be granted nor any seniority can be given on retrospective basis from a date when an employee has not even borne in the cadre particularly when this would adversely affect the direct recruits who have been appointed validly in the meantime.”

As per the provisions of Indian Railway Service of Mechanical Engineers Recruitment Rules, 1968 (Part III-Recruitment by Promotion, 21(1))


“Appointments to the posts in Junior Scale shall be made by selection on merit from amongst eligible Class II Officers (Including officiating Class II Officers) of the Mechanical Engineering and Transportation (Power) Department and of the Personnel Branch with not less than 3 year service in the grade.”

This implies that a Group B officer becomes eligible for promotion to IRSME only on completion of three years of service in Group B. Therefore no promoted officer can be assigned DITS of a date prior to when he completes 3 years of service in Group B.


Let us take example of one promoted officer Sh Madan Marandi. He is promoted to IRSME through vacancy of panel year 2010-11. His date of appointment is 31-12-2012. Subsequently he has been assigned DITS of 31-12-2007.

Page 9 of 11


His date of appointment in Group B was 06-08-2006. Accordingly he becomes eligible for promotion to Group A on 06-08-2009. Therefore his correct DITS should be 31-12-2009. Consequentially all promoted officers recruited for panel year 2011-12 has to be placed below Sh Madan Marandi. Due to this all Promotee officers of 2011-12 who are presently placed below 2006 batch direct officers will move down and will get their place below 2008 batch direct officer.



7. Applicability of Connoted Pay Rule

Relative seniority between Direct and Promotees is determined based on Date of Increment into Time Scale (DITS) of each member as per provisions of Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM Vol. I - CHAPTER III - Para 327-341). For Promotee officers DITS is determined from a previous date after assigning weightage of up to five years to their date of appointment. Para 334 (2) (ii) governs weightage which says

The DITS of the above officers shall be determined by giving weightage based on:

a) the year of service connoted by the initial pay on permanent promotion to Group 'A' service; or

b) half the total number of years of continuous service in Group 'B', both officiating, and permanent;

Whichever is more, subject to a maximum of 5 years; provided that the weightage so assigned does not exceed the total non-fortuitous service rendered by the officer in Group 'B'

Most of the officers recruited through panel year 2012-13 & 2013-14 have rendered less than 10 year service in Group B. Despite this all of them have been given full weightage of five years by application of connoted pay rule. Validity of this rule needs to be understood before its application. Substantive pay of Group B officer which is used for comparison with Group A service while applying connoted pay rule is a consolidation of various increments earned by him throughout his service and not during the Group B service alone. This way service rendered in Non-Gazetted group C service also gets counted while assigning weightage which is not at all justified. With most of the Group C employees earning more pay than Group A direct officers due to very small difference in their starting pay these days, this connoted pay rule has become arbitrary. Therefore before its application its constitutional validity has to be looked into and it needs to be looked through a wider frame keeping the overall picture in mind.






Page 10 of 11
Based on one in-depth study made during 2000 – where in stalwarts like Sh. Neeraj Kumar and Sh. J. N. PANT etc. were involved, with large facts, figures and detailed analysis - the total requirement for satisfactory promotions with little or no stagnations, the recruitment of not more than 168 DRs was envisaged (at that time 250/per year were being recruited). The department wise calculation of recruitment was as under:

Civil -43, Mech. -26, Elect -22, S&T -16 , Store -13 , Traffic –22, Accounts -16 and Personnel -10, Total -168.

According to this report of High officials - none of these was a promotee - any increase in recruitment to this number shall be detrimental to the interest of DRs. In fact the experience show that even this number was on higher side.
Quote
Share

Sushil Kumar Bansal
Sushil Kumar Bansal

December 17th, 2014, 12:00 pm #6

Aspire higher – not at others cost
Sushil Kumar Bansal*
Very recently, I have come across a comment/article by a retired General Manager of Indian railways on Face book regarding the recruitment in Railways in Officer’s Cadre, and also stating what and how much a person should aspire for a promotion/status. Strangely, the author of this article - is not fixing the aspiration limits of his own cadre but its emphesis is more to lay down the limits of other cadre’s aspirations. In my view he is a bit late in fixing the limits of one’s aspirations, otherwise one Tea sellor could not have become the Prime Minister of India. It is stated therein that a Group ’B’ officer; who enters Group ‘C’ cadre, if he gets the highest status in Supervisor cadre itself. It is just like a dream coming true and if he becomes Gp ’B’, at the most Sr. scale officer on adhoc - it must be taken as bonus, and not a matter of right. On the other hand, a direct recruit should have limitless aspirations according to him. In my opinion it is beyond one’s thinking to say something on aspirations of others. It is now a well known fact that a large number of Group ‘C’ & Group ‘B‘ officer have at least equal qualifications – if not more - in the cadre of Accounts, Traffic & Personnel Deptts. – which is a graduation only. In other departments, Engg. & Stores – many Group ’B’ & ‘C’ have equivalents – Engg. degree – qualification. Even a diploma holder, with five years service is considered to be equivalent to degree holder.
Apart from the degree, the other qualities viz. intelligence, dedication, labour, sincerity etc. etc. cannot be preserve of any cadre belonging to one source of recruitment only. Therefore, any person, having a right on the basis of his birth in the service cannot claim all credits to him. Our constitution is based on equality of all kind based on his merit. Thinking that all Direct recruits are more intelligent and all promotees are not, can only be thinking of a perverse mind.
Secondly, a person who has retired from such a high post – General Manager, there are only 27 posts of this rank on Indian Railways - out of 13.5 lakh employees working there, should not have such narrow thinking. I am aghast to think that with such a mind, how many promottee officers fate must have been damaged during his regime/working. Though otherwise, I have myself heard many – say all the higher ups – Members, Addl. Members, PHODs, General Managers including himself and ministers even Prime Minister (Shri V.P. Singh). Complimenting Gp B officers’ intelligence, sincerity, labour and dedication and saying that this category of officers is actually the back bone of the Railway administration. In this way, direct recruits after entering a Junior officer’s cadre becomes a promottee when he is promoted to Sr.Scale and therefore the posts of JA grade, SAG grade, atleast PHOD/GM level should always be filled by direct recruitment only. This person was himself a promottee General Manager, having reached to this status through 6-7 promotion only - in between.
On going through the complete write up I feel that I may not say that he lacked the knowledge of rules but at least I can definitely say that he is misinformed vastly.
All his statements that the reduced intake of DRs, increased intake of Group ’B’ officers, system of calculation of vacancies, promotions to Sr.Scale posts, and quota for recruitment and effect on DRs promotional prospects etc. as given by him are wrong and misplaced. All this is very strange because he was not only GM but he was a top office bearer also for a long period of FROA, who are considered to be fountain of knowledge, especially, in respect with recruitment and Promotions etc. I am particularly he himself was the author. I think before writing this piece of information, he should have consulted the known stalwarts of FROA S/Sh. Neeraj Kumar, (the then ED/MPP), J. C. Pant, (GM/RWF.Retd), J. Verghose, Krishnamurthi, K. Balakrishna (both Retd.MS and S. C. Manchanda, Addl. Member Staff (Retd.). All of whom contributed immensely in many decisions regarding cadre management and vacancy calculations/statistics. (I am most lucky to have close touch with all these knowledgeable, analytical and logical officers).
Since I was also an important office bearers of IRPOF when the Hon’ble General Manager retd. (writer of the comments) was also the General Secretary of FROA) – important fact is - but for the intervention of RPF Association and of IRPOF, he would not have been PHOD/GM even, I feel it my duty to put the facts straight before extending the discussions further. For that the following facts are mentioned for the information of all.
The quota for Group “A” & Group “B” w.e.f. 01.01.97 (and not 60 : 40 as mentioned by him. (25% before 1953, increased to 33.3% by Sh. Lal Bahadur.
The quota is in posts – not in vacancies – as per DoPT rules and High level Administrative Reform committee, and 5th Pay Commission and Govt. of India decision and notification.
The intake of Group 'B' in Group 'A' is not linked to Group 'A's intake/recruitment. This is independent. Vacancy calculation System is such that neither the intake vacancies for Group 'B' can be inflated, nor for DRs.
The statement that excess recruitment of Group 'B' is affecting promotional prospects of DRs wherein the promotions to JA grade may be 12 years or more, is just wrong and a statement to mislead DRs and for agitating their minds.
The Railway Board have not been following the ratio laid down for recruitment of DRs for the last years, and also not following the DOPT rules, is not based on facts and is totally false.
That the call to GMs for creating _enough opportunities for ensuring the promotion of DRs after 3 years on adhoc basis is nothing but mischivious and contrary to all existing rules (Now It can be understood, that why ECoR is worst in promoting the Group “B” officers, to Sr.Scale (adhoc) and many officers with 8-10 years or service are still waiting for promotion and there are bare minimum Group ‘B’ officers are working in sr.scale (adhoc).
IMPORTANT FACTS to KNOW:
Despite the claim of author regarding inflated intake of Group ‘B’ officers beyond their quota – the Total quota occupied by Group ‘B’ in Group ‘A’ as on 01.06.2014 is 21.6% of the total sanction posts of Group ‘A’ or 27.1% quota laid down as on 01.06.2014 in cadre. The status of officers working is as under:-
Total Wkg. Promotees Sanctioned
HAG 272 nil 191
SAG 1831 13 1211
SG 1433 244 3528
JAG 1221 +484(ad-hoc) 851 + 313(adhoc)
SS 1180 747 3404)
JS 1313 7 (1875 (as per Rly.Bd.1647 only)
As already stated above that the quota is in posts and not in vacancies, therefore there should have been 50% promottee officers right from HAG to SS or even in JS cadre.
The claim that the JA grade may be after 12 years is proved in correct, in view of the above mentioned statement because - as many as 797 officers are working in JA (ad-hoc) for want of eligible officers.
At present the achieving of the laid down eligibility periods for promotions is as under:-
(i) HAG/SAG 18 yrs Attained with non-function___ .
(ii) SG 14 yrs No eligible officer is overdue or stagnating
(iii) JA 8+ yrs -do-
(iv) SS 4+ yrs -do-
(as many as 2000+ Group ’B’ officers are
Working on adhoc basis due to non
availability of eligible Group ‘A’ officers..
On the other hand the status for Group ‘B’ is as under:
(i) Group ‘A’ induction 3yrs regular service Not a single officer is
inducted in GP’ A in 3+ yrs.
Average length of service is 9 yrs+
(Accout-17 yrs+Personnel-16 yrs+
Civil–15 yrs+) are still waiting for
Group ‘A’ induction.
(ii) Sr.Scale(adhoc) 3yrs regular service Average 8-9 yrs.
More than 3000 officers with 6 yrs
or more are waiting
Recruitments at JS level :-
Before 1996, the vacancy calculations used to be every year w.e.f. 1997, system of calculations of vacancies every year has been dispensed away with. Now the same was/is as under:-
Gp.B DRs
1997-2000 250/yr 250/yr
2001-2002 180/yr 180/yr
2003-2005 318/yr 318/yr
2006-todate 411/yr 412/yr
Since the vacancy calculations is not every year, separately and the vacancies are based on a set system, there cannot be any inflation in the number of vacancies for promotes or DRs. (However the vacancies for DRs are in fact are being inflated every year in the sense that on account of a ban by the government of India only 1/3rd of the vacancies can be filled in DR quota which are being filled to full in Railways through a wrong declaration).
The figure of 411 is based on the total Junior scale sanctioned cadre, wherein only 50% of the cadre strength are filled every year. 25% of JS cadre from Direct Recruits & 25% from Promottees.
(The total cadre strength in JS is 1273 regular Posts+602 LR posts=1875)
However Railway Board is taking 1647 JS posts (and not 1875) and filling 50% of this 823 (411 from Group ‘B’ and 412 from Direct Recruitment every year). Every year is asked to fill 412 posts from DR quota. Therefore no chance of increase in quota whereas for promottees, the number is reduced by 15% as the persons selected gets retired before declaration of result, with 2-3 years delay in DPC. And further above 10% are also retired within one year – a reduction of above 20-25% in annual intake. The fixed number department wise is as under :
Civil Mech Tfc Elect S&T Acts Per Store
74 84 66 55 48 29 28 27 = 411
The system of calculation given in the article by respected GM that it should be 40% (actually 50%) of the total Group ‘A’ officers minus the officers leaving the service, is just not logical & practical. In that way the vacancies for Group ‘B’ shall be calculated after the intake of DRs i.e. after 1-1/2 yrs, of vacancy year and then taking 2-3 yrs for DPC means 3-4 yrs after the direct recruit. Moreover why the intake of Group ‘B’ officers should be on the basis of Group ‘A’ intake. Both are independent and not dependent on DR intake. Otherwise Promottees can demand that it should be based on the intake of Group ‘B’ officers i.e. on the number of Group ‘B’ officers inducted in Group ‘A’ officers after DPC (with 2-3 yrs delay) and then as much DR should be recruited i.e. for the vacancy year 2014. The number of DR be decided after DPC of Group ‘B’ which may be in 2016-17 and then 1 yr for recruitment of DR means the recruitment of DR for the yr 2014 shall be in 2017-18 only. I feel the DR shall not/cannot have any grudge for this.
The contention of respected author that the promotional prospects of DRs are being affected adversely on account of excessive recruitment of Group ‘B’ officers, which in view of him is not required, as promottees should only be satisfied with their promotions up to the higher level of supervisor or at the maximum upto Group ‘B’ officr. He is very kind to agree that since there are sufficient number of posts left after promoting the DRs after 3 yrs service (on adhoc basis only), hence the bacha-kucha may be given to Group ‘B’ officers as a matter of kindness on his part, forgetting that promotion of Group ‘B’ officers to Sr.Scale (adhoc) is not the kindness but it is their compulsion, as it is just not possible to run the railway administration with effective sr.scale officers. It is very important to point out that as on 01.06.2014 there are 2773 (86.5%) promottee officers against a total of 3306 (working) officers i.e. 2026 (adhoc) and 747 in Group ‘A’, where as DRs are only 433 (13.3%) only.
Similarly in JA grade also against 1705 officers wkg (1221 regular + 484 ad-hoc) there are 1174 (851 reg + 323 adhoc) i.e. 68.6% promottee officers. It is known at all level that Sr.scale & JA grade are the only grades on which the efficiency of railway operations depends.
The contention that the JA grade may be after 12 yrs for DRs on account of excessive intake of Group ‘B’ officers, therefore is not based on facts but it is a statement to arouse the sentiments of DRs against the recruitment of Group ‘B’ officers. A few paragraphs earlier it has been shown that at present, all officers – of all departments are being promoted within periods of their due eligibility (except Group ‘B’ off-course). The fact is that there being no eligible officer available (8 yrs + officers) for promotion, as many as 484 posts of JA grade (27%) are filled on adhoc basis. It is also a fact, due to acute shortage of JA grade eligible officers the eligibility of JA grade (adhoc) promotions period was reduced to 5 yrs from 6 yrs – on the express demand of DRs, and an impressive number of officers have been promoted to JA grade (ad-hoc) after just 5 yrs which means after their promotion to Sr.scale in 4 + yrs they are being promoted to JA grade within one year experience in Sr.Scale. This is applicable for DRs only because Group ‘B’ officer can only be promoted to JA grade after they get DPC induction which is normally 9-10 yrs. (even 17 yrs for Accounts & 15 yrs for Engg).
As per the author, the only reason of delayed promotions to DRs is excessive recruitments of promottees and should be opposed even to the extent of inviting the PHODs/GMs to see that DRs are promoted to Sr.scale –even on adhoc basis after 3 years i.e. 1-1/2 yrs only service experience after their training/probation period. Everybody knows the extent of the intensive training being undertaken for probationers. As per this author, the 25-30 year experience of working in Group ‘C’ and then 8-9 years in Asstt. Officer’s cadre is not comparable to 1-1/2 year working experience on easy posts of DRs and that these officers should first be promoted. What is balance may be given to promottes as a matter of kindness.
Therefore, it has been contended – by the author – if the promottes are being given more, it is on account of conspiracy of RBSS staff and less knowledge / no interest of higher ups of railways i.e. his own counterparts in PHOD/GM/Member post. For one thing, I am thankful to him that he at least has agreed that people like him and others his seniors working on higher posts, do not have adequate knowledge regarding cadre and establishment. Everybody knows that RBSS staff is up to JA grade. There is no RBSS officer at PHOD/GM/members level and these officers cannot ask the RBSS staff to behave as per them.
Very important – information :
I wish to say emphatically, the whole cruxe of the author’s discussion - that main reason of inadequate or delayed promotions to DRs is excessive induction of Group ‘B’ officers in Group ‘A’ which is being done by RBSS staff by violating the rules laid down by DOPT on the subject, and excess recruitments of Group ‘B’ officers is being managed by mis-manipulating the rules for that and so on. The only remedy lies in filing the court case against this, and making the panels of many years of past controversial by making FROA & IRPOF as opposite parties to it.
I know that I am a very small fry in this context and do not stand any where in front of very large number of higher officials belonging to DRs (or even promottees) in respect with status, intelligence, resourceness, but still I dare to say, if you want to make - one drawn line shorter and you do it by erasing only, You are making yourself bigger but that means you have not progressed rather you are still there where you were. Wise shall be - which will be beneficial also - is to make yourself big by achieving more, by improving upon and by performing better.
It has been suggested that to snach from promottee officers, what they got as per rules, court cases be filled saying that the excess recruitment in Group ‘B’ is affecting adversely the chances of promotions of Direct Recruits and that Board has not being following 60:40 ratio for induction into Group ‘A’ for many years and that on this basis the panels of many years behind say 10-15 years be revised and finally asking for direction to Railway Board not to deviate from DOPTs instructions on the subject.
In this respect I would like to emphasis that if the statistics of recruitment for the last 20-25 yrs say 1985 to 2014 are scrutenised I am sure it will show that only Group ‘B’ officers are at the receiving end not the direct recruits (emphatically so because I am one of the few person including Railway Board having such information) and that implementation of 60:40 (actually 50:50) rule has been implemented against the promottees only. Further, it is very important to say that as per the existing law, promotional chances are not the part of fundamental rights as per the constitution.
Revealing - one information
I wish to reveal one information to you all with which I myself is a previe is that FROA and some very important and prominent stalwarts of Direct Recruits - I can even name them i.e. Neeraj Kumar (the then ED/MPP), J. C. Pant, (the then Adv) be it known to everybody that the more recruitment for Direct recruits and less induction for Group ‘B’ officers is detrimental to the promotional prospects of both and create acute stagnation. That the recruitment level for Direct recruits should be reduced was the demand of these gentlemen and they proved with plethora of statistics.
Though this demand of these high level bosses was opposed by IRPOF (because it means lowering the intake of Group ‘B’ officers too). But basically it is true. The issue is clear by the fact that excessive recruitment in the year 85, 86, 87 created acute stagnation in early 2000-01 whereas lesser recruitment in 2002-05 has enabled the officers to improve their promotion prospects.
Wef 01.01.1997, we were successful in getting a decision from Board of 250 induction/year upto 2001. Naturally to do justice - as per the sentiments of people like present ex.GM - Direct recruits, 250 officers were also to be recruited from DRs. Seeing the adverse effect of excessive recruitments, these wise gentlemen started a complain against this larger recruitment for DRs. As per the papers submitted by them any recruitment beyond 168 (for all department) shall create stagnation in the cadre of DRs. They were therefore successful in reducing the intake from 250/year to 180/year despite our opposition to this (The calculation/papers are available with us). Had the intake would have continued the JA grade definitely would have been in 12 years. In fact the intake between 2002-05 was much less (between 60-70) which saved the day for today’s direct recruits. The logic of this calculations is very simple that the vacancies created after 18 years due to superannuation and or new creation should be the level of intake today so that by the time the present lot reaches in 18th year, there may not be any person who may not get promotion for want of vacancies.
Conclusion :
It has been made amply clear that the ills of direct recruits are not on account of Promotee Officers. You are now required to analyse all these aspects and find out what are the other basic reasons of your problems and how these can be solved.
As per my view, I can say emphatically that there is one most important reason for the problem of the officers in Railways (not DR – Promotee) is that in Railways there is no forum/organisation existing in this organization to look after the management of the Cadres. No analyses are made in the problems of the officers cadre. Therefore, there can not be any solution. In all departments or as per the instructions on the subject – cadre restructuring should be done every 3-5 years. How much it has been done in Railways ( Officers Cadre) it is known to everybody.
I would like to share one thing with all of you - based on my experience – is that when I was a Train Examiner – who were in all respects being treated as second class supervisors – started their campaign to get justice, we started as direct recruits and promotee TXRs. We did not get any success despite symapathy being shown by everyone in the higher echelons. The day we took up the challenge unitedly – as C&W department – both Promotee & Directs – I was then DR- together in 1971 – there was no looking back and got all we wanted by 1980. Similarly, the fight within various departments – Mechanical versus Electrical or Civil versus Traffic or one department versus the other cannot help the cause of officers for getting satisfactory level of promotions / facilities.
Appeal :
I wish to make an earnest appeal to all DRs and even Group ‘B’ officers for not creating bad blood amongst them by spreading wrong and misleading information, and advise as this will not only create problem for both the cadres but also for Railways. Infighting among higher-ups to achieve one-up man-ship over the other fellow officers and excessive departmentalism has led us to a stage where everybody is asking to put other outsiders at the helm of affairs of Railways. Please note the might of Group ‘B’ Officers and their contribution in the well being of the Railways cannot be sidelined by spreading wrong and ill- advice.
The total number of Group B / Promotee officres today is 8274 (59%) against only 5850 Direct Recruits. This may also be borne in mind that GMs, PHODs, SAGs & SGs and JAGs who are getting promotions in time or who have already got promotions will not support any idea of bifurcating the cadre between Direct and Promotees. All whatever is suggested – the larger intake or court cases – not to be decided in near future – and will help only the people who are in colleges now and not the persons who are in service today. We have already lost much due infighting amongst ourselves and among various departments. Do no escalate this further as it will put total future of the Railway Officers at stake.The loss more is of direct recruits and not of Promotees, as, as per the respected GM, we the promottees have already achieved more than their dream.
*The Author is Former President of Indian Railway Promottee Officers Federation (IRPOF)
B-3/4, Jeewan Jyoti Appartments, Pitampura, Near Sandesh Vihar, Delhi - 110034.
Contact No. : 09810777602.

Quote
Share

NamelessFaceless
NamelessFaceless

February 28th, 2015, 5:29 am #7

Shri Bansal is right.

It is time to totally stop direct recruitment of Group A Officers in technical departments through UPSC.

RRB should recruit Graduate engineers who can appear in a centralised exam conducted by UPSC each year to become Railway Officer.

This will also end departmentalism in IR.
Quote
Share

Promotee ka dushman
Promotee ka dushman

March 1st, 2018, 1:15 pm #8

Aspire higher – not at others cost
Sushil Kumar Bansal*
Very recently, I have come across a comment/article by a retired General Manager of Indian railways on Face book regarding the recruitment in Railways in Officer’s Cadre, and also stating what and how much a person should aspire for a promotion/status. Strangely, the author of this article - is not fixing the aspiration limits of his own cadre but its emphesis is more to lay down the limits of other cadre’s aspirations. In my view he is a bit late in fixing the limits of one’s aspirations, otherwise one Tea sellor could not have become the Prime Minister of India. It is stated therein that a Group ’B’ officer; who enters Group ‘C’ cadre, if he gets the highest status in Supervisor cadre itself. It is just like a dream coming true and if he becomes Gp ’B’, at the most Sr. scale officer on adhoc - it must be taken as bonus, and not a matter of right. On the other hand, a direct recruit should have limitless aspirations according to him. In my opinion it is beyond one’s thinking to say something on aspirations of others. It is now a well known fact that a large number of Group ‘C’ & Group ‘B‘ officer have at least equal qualifications – if not more - in the cadre of Accounts, Traffic & Personnel Deptts. – which is a graduation only. In other departments, Engg. & Stores – many Group ’B’ & ‘C’ have equivalents – Engg. degree – qualification. Even a diploma holder, with five years service is considered to be equivalent to degree holder.
Apart from the degree, the other qualities viz. intelligence, dedication, labour, sincerity etc. etc. cannot be preserve of any cadre belonging to one source of recruitment only. Therefore, any person, having a right on the basis of his birth in the service cannot claim all credits to him. Our constitution is based on equality of all kind based on his merit. Thinking that all Direct recruits are more intelligent and all promotees are not, can only be thinking of a perverse mind.
Secondly, a person who has retired from such a high post – General Manager, there are only 27 posts of this rank on Indian Railways - out of 13.5 lakh employees working there, should not have such narrow thinking. I am aghast to think that with such a mind, how many promottee officers fate must have been damaged during his regime/working. Though otherwise, I have myself heard many – say all the higher ups – Members, Addl. Members, PHODs, General Managers including himself and ministers even Prime Minister (Shri V.P. Singh). Complimenting Gp B officers’ intelligence, sincerity, labour and dedication and saying that this category of officers is actually the back bone of the Railway administration. In this way, direct recruits after entering a Junior officer’s cadre becomes a promottee when he is promoted to Sr.Scale and therefore the posts of JA grade, SAG grade, atleast PHOD/GM level should always be filled by direct recruitment only. This person was himself a promottee General Manager, having reached to this status through 6-7 promotion only - in between.
On going through the complete write up I feel that I may not say that he lacked the knowledge of rules but at least I can definitely say that he is misinformed vastly.
All his statements that the reduced intake of DRs, increased intake of Group ’B’ officers, system of calculation of vacancies, promotions to Sr.Scale posts, and quota for recruitment and effect on DRs promotional prospects etc. as given by him are wrong and misplaced. All this is very strange because he was not only GM but he was a top office bearer also for a long period of FROA, who are considered to be fountain of knowledge, especially, in respect with recruitment and Promotions etc. I am particularly he himself was the author. I think before writing this piece of information, he should have consulted the known stalwarts of FROA S/Sh. Neeraj Kumar, (the then ED/MPP), J. C. Pant, (GM/RWF.Retd), J. Verghose, Krishnamurthi, K. Balakrishna (both Retd.MS and S. C. Manchanda, Addl. Member Staff (Retd.). All of whom contributed immensely in many decisions regarding cadre management and vacancy calculations/statistics. (I am most lucky to have close touch with all these knowledgeable, analytical and logical officers).
Since I was also an important office bearers of IRPOF when the Hon’ble General Manager retd. (writer of the comments) was also the General Secretary of FROA) – important fact is - but for the intervention of RPF Association and of IRPOF, he would not have been PHOD/GM even, I feel it my duty to put the facts straight before extending the discussions further. For that the following facts are mentioned for the information of all.
The quota for Group “A” & Group “B” w.e.f. 01.01.97 (and not 60 : 40 as mentioned by him. (25% before 1953, increased to 33.3% by Sh. Lal Bahadur.
The quota is in posts – not in vacancies – as per DoPT rules and High level Administrative Reform committee, and 5th Pay Commission and Govt. of India decision and notification.
The intake of Group 'B' in Group 'A' is not linked to Group 'A's intake/recruitment. This is independent. Vacancy calculation System is such that neither the intake vacancies for Group 'B' can be inflated, nor for DRs.
The statement that excess recruitment of Group 'B' is affecting promotional prospects of DRs wherein the promotions to JA grade may be 12 years or more, is just wrong and a statement to mislead DRs and for agitating their minds.
The Railway Board have not been following the ratio laid down for recruitment of DRs for the last years, and also not following the DOPT rules, is not based on facts and is totally false.
That the call to GMs for creating _enough opportunities for ensuring the promotion of DRs after 3 years on adhoc basis is nothing but mischivious and contrary to all existing rules (Now It can be understood, that why ECoR is worst in promoting the Group “B” officers, to Sr.Scale (adhoc) and many officers with 8-10 years or service are still waiting for promotion and there are bare minimum Group ‘B’ officers are working in sr.scale (adhoc).
IMPORTANT FACTS to KNOW:
Despite the claim of author regarding inflated intake of Group ‘B’ officers beyond their quota – the Total quota occupied by Group ‘B’ in Group ‘A’ as on 01.06.2014 is 21.6% of the total sanction posts of Group ‘A’ or 27.1% quota laid down as on 01.06.2014 in cadre. The status of officers working is as under:-
Total Wkg. Promotees Sanctioned
HAG 272 nil 191
SAG 1831 13 1211
SG 1433 244 3528
JAG 1221 +484(ad-hoc) 851 + 313(adhoc)
SS 1180 747 3404)
JS 1313 7 (1875 (as per Rly.Bd.1647 only)
As already stated above that the quota is in posts and not in vacancies, therefore there should have been 50% promottee officers right from HAG to SS or even in JS cadre.
The claim that the JA grade may be after 12 years is proved in correct, in view of the above mentioned statement because - as many as 797 officers are working in JA (ad-hoc) for want of eligible officers.
At present the achieving of the laid down eligibility periods for promotions is as under:-
(i) HAG/SAG 18 yrs Attained with non-function___ .
(ii) SG 14 yrs No eligible officer is overdue or stagnating
(iii) JA 8+ yrs -do-
(iv) SS 4+ yrs -do-
(as many as 2000+ Group ’B’ officers are
Working on adhoc basis due to non
availability of eligible Group ‘A’ officers..
On the other hand the status for Group ‘B’ is as under:
(i) Group ‘A’ induction 3yrs regular service Not a single officer is
inducted in GP’ A in 3+ yrs.
Average length of service is 9 yrs+
(Accout-17 yrs+Personnel-16 yrs+
Civil–15 yrs+) are still waiting for
Group ‘A’ induction.
(ii) Sr.Scale(adhoc) 3yrs regular service Average 8-9 yrs.
More than 3000 officers with 6 yrs
or more are waiting
Recruitments at JS level :-
Before 1996, the vacancy calculations used to be every year w.e.f. 1997, system of calculations of vacancies every year has been dispensed away with. Now the same was/is as under:-
Gp.B DRs
1997-2000 250/yr 250/yr
2001-2002 180/yr 180/yr
2003-2005 318/yr 318/yr
2006-todate 411/yr 412/yr
Since the vacancy calculations is not every year, separately and the vacancies are based on a set system, there cannot be any inflation in the number of vacancies for promotes or DRs. (However the vacancies for DRs are in fact are being inflated every year in the sense that on account of a ban by the government of India only 1/3rd of the vacancies can be filled in DR quota which are being filled to full in Railways through a wrong declaration).
The figure of 411 is based on the total Junior scale sanctioned cadre, wherein only 50% of the cadre strength are filled every year. 25% of JS cadre from Direct Recruits & 25% from Promottees.
(The total cadre strength in JS is 1273 regular Posts+602 LR posts=1875)
However Railway Board is taking 1647 JS posts (and not 1875) and filling 50% of this 823 (411 from Group ‘B’ and 412 from Direct Recruitment every year). Every year is asked to fill 412 posts from DR quota. Therefore no chance of increase in quota whereas for promottees, the number is reduced by 15% as the persons selected gets retired before declaration of result, with 2-3 years delay in DPC. And further above 10% are also retired within one year – a reduction of above 20-25% in annual intake. The fixed number department wise is as under :
Civil Mech Tfc Elect S&T Acts Per Store
74 84 66 55 48 29 28 27 = 411
The system of calculation given in the article by respected GM that it should be 40% (actually 50%) of the total Group ‘A’ officers minus the officers leaving the service, is just not logical & practical. In that way the vacancies for Group ‘B’ shall be calculated after the intake of DRs i.e. after 1-1/2 yrs, of vacancy year and then taking 2-3 yrs for DPC means 3-4 yrs after the direct recruit. Moreover why the intake of Group ‘B’ officers should be on the basis of Group ‘A’ intake. Both are independent and not dependent on DR intake. Otherwise Promottees can demand that it should be based on the intake of Group ‘B’ officers i.e. on the number of Group ‘B’ officers inducted in Group ‘A’ officers after DPC (with 2-3 yrs delay) and then as much DR should be recruited i.e. for the vacancy year 2014. The number of DR be decided after DPC of Group ‘B’ which may be in 2016-17 and then 1 yr for recruitment of DR means the recruitment of DR for the yr 2014 shall be in 2017-18 only. I feel the DR shall not/cannot have any grudge for this.
The contention of respected author that the promotional prospects of DRs are being affected adversely on account of excessive recruitment of Group ‘B’ officers, which in view of him is not required, as promottees should only be satisfied with their promotions up to the higher level of supervisor or at the maximum upto Group ‘B’ officr. He is very kind to agree that since there are sufficient number of posts left after promoting the DRs after 3 yrs service (on adhoc basis only), hence the bacha-kucha may be given to Group ‘B’ officers as a matter of kindness on his part, forgetting that promotion of Group ‘B’ officers to Sr.Scale (adhoc) is not the kindness but it is their compulsion, as it is just not possible to run the railway administration with effective sr.scale officers. It is very important to point out that as on 01.06.2014 there are 2773 (86.5%) promottee officers against a total of 3306 (working) officers i.e. 2026 (adhoc) and 747 in Group ‘A’, where as DRs are only 433 (13.3%) only.
Similarly in JA grade also against 1705 officers wkg (1221 regular + 484 ad-hoc) there are 1174 (851 reg + 323 adhoc) i.e. 68.6% promottee officers. It is known at all level that Sr.scale & JA grade are the only grades on which the efficiency of railway operations depends.
The contention that the JA grade may be after 12 yrs for DRs on account of excessive intake of Group ‘B’ officers, therefore is not based on facts but it is a statement to arouse the sentiments of DRs against the recruitment of Group ‘B’ officers. A few paragraphs earlier it has been shown that at present, all officers – of all departments are being promoted within periods of their due eligibility (except Group ‘B’ off-course). The fact is that there being no eligible officer available (8 yrs + officers) for promotion, as many as 484 posts of JA grade (27%) are filled on adhoc basis. It is also a fact, due to acute shortage of JA grade eligible officers the eligibility of JA grade (adhoc) promotions period was reduced to 5 yrs from 6 yrs – on the express demand of DRs, and an impressive number of officers have been promoted to JA grade (ad-hoc) after just 5 yrs which means after their promotion to Sr.scale in 4 + yrs they are being promoted to JA grade within one year experience in Sr.Scale. This is applicable for DRs only because Group ‘B’ officer can only be promoted to JA grade after they get DPC induction which is normally 9-10 yrs. (even 17 yrs for Accounts & 15 yrs for Engg).
As per the author, the only reason of delayed promotions to DRs is excessive recruitments of promottees and should be opposed even to the extent of inviting the PHODs/GMs to see that DRs are promoted to Sr.scale –even on adhoc basis after 3 years i.e. 1-1/2 yrs only service experience after their training/probation period. Everybody knows the extent of the intensive training being undertaken for probationers. As per this author, the 25-30 year experience of working in Group ‘C’ and then 8-9 years in Asstt. Officer’s cadre is not comparable to 1-1/2 year working experience on easy posts of DRs and that these officers should first be promoted. What is balance may be given to promottes as a matter of kindness.
Therefore, it has been contended – by the author – if the promottes are being given more, it is on account of conspiracy of RBSS staff and less knowledge / no interest of higher ups of railways i.e. his own counterparts in PHOD/GM/Member post. For one thing, I am thankful to him that he at least has agreed that people like him and others his seniors working on higher posts, do not have adequate knowledge regarding cadre and establishment. Everybody knows that RBSS staff is up to JA grade. There is no RBSS officer at PHOD/GM/members level and these officers cannot ask the RBSS staff to behave as per them.
Very important – information :
I wish to say emphatically, the whole cruxe of the author’s discussion - that main reason of inadequate or delayed promotions to DRs is excessive induction of Group ‘B’ officers in Group ‘A’ which is being done by RBSS staff by violating the rules laid down by DOPT on the subject, and excess recruitments of Group ‘B’ officers is being managed by mis-manipulating the rules for that and so on. The only remedy lies in filing the court case against this, and making the panels of many years of past controversial by making FROA & IRPOF as opposite parties to it.
I know that I am a very small fry in this context and do not stand any where in front of very large number of higher officials belonging to DRs (or even promottees) in respect with status, intelligence, resourceness, but still I dare to say, if you want to make - one drawn line shorter and you do it by erasing only, You are making yourself bigger but that means you have not progressed rather you are still there where you were. Wise shall be - which will be beneficial also - is to make yourself big by achieving more, by improving upon and by performing better.
It has been suggested that to snach from promottee officers, what they got as per rules, court cases be filled saying that the excess recruitment in Group ‘B’ is affecting adversely the chances of promotions of Direct Recruits and that Board has not being following 60:40 ratio for induction into Group ‘A’ for many years and that on this basis the panels of many years behind say 10-15 years be revised and finally asking for direction to Railway Board not to deviate from DOPTs instructions on the subject.
In this respect I would like to emphasis that if the statistics of recruitment for the last 20-25 yrs say 1985 to 2014 are scrutenised I am sure it will show that only Group ‘B’ officers are at the receiving end not the direct recruits (emphatically so because I am one of the few person including Railway Board having such information) and that implementation of 60:40 (actually 50:50) rule has been implemented against the promottees only. Further, it is very important to say that as per the existing law, promotional chances are not the part of fundamental rights as per the constitution.
Revealing - one information
I wish to reveal one information to you all with which I myself is a previe is that FROA and some very important and prominent stalwarts of Direct Recruits - I can even name them i.e. Neeraj Kumar (the then ED/MPP), J. C. Pant, (the then Adv) be it known to everybody that the more recruitment for Direct recruits and less induction for Group ‘B’ officers is detrimental to the promotional prospects of both and create acute stagnation. That the recruitment level for Direct recruits should be reduced was the demand of these gentlemen and they proved with plethora of statistics.
Though this demand of these high level bosses was opposed by IRPOF (because it means lowering the intake of Group ‘B’ officers too). But basically it is true. The issue is clear by the fact that excessive recruitment in the year 85, 86, 87 created acute stagnation in early 2000-01 whereas lesser recruitment in 2002-05 has enabled the officers to improve their promotion prospects.
Wef 01.01.1997, we were successful in getting a decision from Board of 250 induction/year upto 2001. Naturally to do justice - as per the sentiments of people like present ex.GM - Direct recruits, 250 officers were also to be recruited from DRs. Seeing the adverse effect of excessive recruitments, these wise gentlemen started a complain against this larger recruitment for DRs. As per the papers submitted by them any recruitment beyond 168 (for all department) shall create stagnation in the cadre of DRs. They were therefore successful in reducing the intake from 250/year to 180/year despite our opposition to this (The calculation/papers are available with us). Had the intake would have continued the JA grade definitely would have been in 12 years. In fact the intake between 2002-05 was much less (between 60-70) which saved the day for today’s direct recruits. The logic of this calculations is very simple that the vacancies created after 18 years due to superannuation and or new creation should be the level of intake today so that by the time the present lot reaches in 18th year, there may not be any person who may not get promotion for want of vacancies.
Conclusion :
It has been made amply clear that the ills of direct recruits are not on account of Promotee Officers. You are now required to analyse all these aspects and find out what are the other basic reasons of your problems and how these can be solved.
As per my view, I can say emphatically that there is one most important reason for the problem of the officers in Railways (not DR – Promotee) is that in Railways there is no forum/organisation existing in this organization to look after the management of the Cadres. No analyses are made in the problems of the officers cadre. Therefore, there can not be any solution. In all departments or as per the instructions on the subject – cadre restructuring should be done every 3-5 years. How much it has been done in Railways ( Officers Cadre) it is known to everybody.
I would like to share one thing with all of you - based on my experience – is that when I was a Train Examiner – who were in all respects being treated as second class supervisors – started their campaign to get justice, we started as direct recruits and promotee TXRs. We did not get any success despite symapathy being shown by everyone in the higher echelons. The day we took up the challenge unitedly – as C&W department – both Promotee & Directs – I was then DR- together in 1971 – there was no looking back and got all we wanted by 1980. Similarly, the fight within various departments – Mechanical versus Electrical or Civil versus Traffic or one department versus the other cannot help the cause of officers for getting satisfactory level of promotions / facilities.
Appeal :
I wish to make an earnest appeal to all DRs and even Group ‘B’ officers for not creating bad blood amongst them by spreading wrong and misleading information, and advise as this will not only create problem for both the cadres but also for Railways. Infighting among higher-ups to achieve one-up man-ship over the other fellow officers and excessive departmentalism has led us to a stage where everybody is asking to put other outsiders at the helm of affairs of Railways. Please note the might of Group ‘B’ Officers and their contribution in the well being of the Railways cannot be sidelined by spreading wrong and ill- advice.
The total number of Group B / Promotee officres today is 8274 (59%) against only 5850 Direct Recruits. This may also be borne in mind that GMs, PHODs, SAGs & SGs and JAGs who are getting promotions in time or who have already got promotions will not support any idea of bifurcating the cadre between Direct and Promotees. All whatever is suggested – the larger intake or court cases – not to be decided in near future – and will help only the people who are in colleges now and not the persons who are in service today. We have already lost much due infighting amongst ourselves and among various departments. Do no escalate this further as it will put total future of the Railway Officers at stake.The loss more is of direct recruits and not of Promotees, as, as per the respected GM, we the promottees have already achieved more than their dream.
*The Author is Former President of Indian Railway Promottee Officers Federation (IRPOF)
B-3/4, Jeewan Jyoti Appartments, Pitampura, Near Sandesh Vihar, Delhi - 110034.
Contact No. : 09810777602.
Bhai tu to CRSE se retire kia... 7th CPC WALON ko kyun nahi samjha paaya..
Quote
Share