BYE BYE

DA ORDER

DA ORDER

Finmin Orders on DA - Payment of Dearness Allowance to Central Government employees - Revised Rates effective from 1.1.2014

No.1/1/2014-F-II (B)

Government of India

Ministry of Finance

Department of Expenditure

North Block, New Delhi

Dated: 27th March. 2014

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: Payment of Dearness Allowance to Central Government employees - Revised Rates effective from 1.1.2014.

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Ministry’s Office Memorandum No.I-8/2013-E-II (B) dated 25th September, 2013 on the subject mentioned above and to say that the President is pleased to decide that the Dearness Allowance payable to Central Government employees shall be enhanced from the existing rate of 90% to 100% with effect from January, 2014.

2. The provisions contained in paras 3, 4 and 5 of this Ministry’s O.M. No.1(3)/2008-E-11(B) dated 29th August, 2008 shall continue to be applicable while regulating Dearness Allowance under these orders.

3. The additional installment of Dearness Allowance payable under these orders shall be paid in cash to all Central Government employees.

4. The payment of arrears of Dearness Allowance shall not he made before the date of disbursement of salary of March. 2014.

5. These orders shall also apply to the civilian employees paid from the Defence Services Estimates and the expenditure will be chargeable to the relevant head of the Defence Services Estimates. In regard to Armed Forces personnel and Railway employees, separate orders will he issued by the Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Railways, respectively.

6. In so far as the employees working in the Indian Audit and Accounts Department are concerned, these orders are issued with the concurrence of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

sd/-

(A.Bhattacharya)

Under Secretary to the Government of India

Source: www.finmin.nic.in

[http://finmin.nic.in/the_ministry/dept_expenditure/notification/da/da01012014.pdf]

STEPPING UP of PAY OF ALL SENIOR ACCOUNTANTS AT PAR WITH THEIR JUNIORS WHO ARE DRAWING HIGHER PAY DUE TO ACP/MACP IN THE SAME CADRE.

VIEWS OF AIPAEA, CUTTACK UNIT WITH REGARD TO STEPPING UP of PAY OF ALL SENIOR ACCOUNTANTS AT PAR WITH THEIR  JUNIORS WHO ARE DRAWING HIGHER PAY DUE TO ACP/MACP IN THE SAME CADRE.

                We are of the view that pay of all the Senior Accountants of postal accounts who are under single gradation list should be stepped up at par with their juniors when a junior is getting higher pay due to availing ACP/MACP or even the both, irrespective of their length of service and mode of entry in feeding cadre (i.e. Junior Accountant,   

With regard to Pay it is to mention that, as per service rules, PAY includes Band Pay and    the Grade Pay (previously known as basic pay) on which DA as well as HRA is admissible and  on which post retirement benefits are being calculated.  However, supposing the clarification issued by the Directorate is accepted  it would create a wide   gap between seniors and juniors and  it would invite more problems than it could solve. If such poor interpretation of pay and ACP/MACP are accepted then the very basic purpose of the case of  stepping up of pay at par with juniors will get defeated.

            Further, if  stepping up of pay is allowed up to the grant of MACP or up to 1^st Sep’2008 by ignoring future stepping up of pay  it would then widen the gap between senior and junior & such poor application by the authority definitely  goes against the principle of natural justice and the judgment of honourable courts.

             Most importantly,  this Unit would like to  submit that injustice has been  done to us since long for which we have gone to the court of law for justice and we won the case, even  in every stage starting from the Pr. CAT, New Delhi to ob’bleHHHHhh  Hon’ble High Court, Delhi and then in the Supreme Court also.  Under such  circumstances, how could PA Wing being a Party to the case  like AIPAEA, issues clarifications to implement the same judgment the way it suits to them. Such vague clarifications, in our opinion, undermine the entire verdict and defies justice  that duly granted to us by the Pr. CAT, New Delhi and rightly upheld by both the High Court and The Supreme Court.  We  fail to comprehend that under what authority the PA wing has issued such clarification and how it could be binding on us.  Similarly, AIPAEA being a Party,  could    dictate terms to the department.   Presumably, it is a deliberate attempt by the administration to create chaos so that we would be deprived of  the justice.

            Even after winning the last battle in the Highest Court of the Land we are of the view that only a half of the battle is won. We have to overcome many hurdles & the feudalistic mind-set of bureaucracy who are putting the spoke in the wheel by issuing vague clarifications to derail justice bestowed upon us. 

Another example is that when the judgment was pronounced in our favour, it should have been implemented by the department at its own, in toto, that too in true spirit of the judgment. But the administration has called for  options from the eligible officials with an ill intention so that those who are not aware of the development, may be debarred from benefits of stepping up of pay or those who fail to find the colleague with whom  the pay  could be stepped up, will be given less pay than they deserve.

            In our Unit if the judgment is implemented in right spirit, then more than 100 Comrades would have been benefited.  But the Administration by restricting stepping up of pay to ACP   by ignoring Grade Pay  there might be 18 Comrades who would be benefited by the implementation (even those  cases are yet to be finalized) .

            Please submit the above submissions before the Pr. CAT through our learned counsel to reject outright the vague clarifications issued by the department and pray for intervention of hon’ble court .

Another submission may be made before the Honourable court that accountability be fixed on inefficient, incapable and errant Officers who are responsible for such poor interpretation of the Court Verdict and cost of the case for Contempt along with the penal interest  may  be recovered from the salary of  errant Officers so that in future will they  not dare to venture to derail the legal process according to their sweet will.

Thanking you

With tons of warm regards,

     Bibhudutta Senapaty

      Circle Secretary, AIPAEA,

                 CUTTACK

.

"Babus can't use e-mail of external service provider"

New Delhi, Mar 25 (PTI) Government employees will be given e-mail accounts for "mandatory" use in official communications and use of internet services of "external service providers" will be prohibited, the Centre has told the Delhi High Court.

THERE IS SO MUCH CONFUSION GENERATED WHILE IMPLEMENTING THE STEPPING UP OF PAY AS DIRECTED BY THE HON’BLE COURT. THE VIEW POINT OF AIPAEA ON THE COMMON DOUBTS EXPRESSED IS GIVEN UNDER

1	Applicability of the Tribunal judgment	Whether the judgment is applicable to the directly recruited LDCs or to the promotees from Group D cadre.? Stepping up of the pay is to be done by comparing the pay of Senior Sr.Accountant with that of Junior Sr.Accountant(ACP SA) in the same cadre. Entry grade of Senior Sr.Accountant is not relevant.
2	Pay	Whether grade pay is to be taken for the purpose of stepping up? The judgment in Ashok Kumar Vs.UOI, was based on the ACP scheme introduced w.e.f. 9-8-1999 where pre-revised scales existed.  As such, the pay drawn in a pay scale means basic pay only. With the introduction of revised pay scales w.e.f. 1-1-2006, basic pay means the pay drawn in the prescribed pay band plus the applicable grade pay.  Hence stepping up w.e.f 1-1-2006 is to be done by comparing pay and grade pay of a Senior Sr.Accountant  with that of junior Sr.Accountant.
3	Parity on account of MACP	Whether parity is to be maintained consequent on grant of MACP? MACP scheme was introduced with effect   from 1-9-08 modifying and  replacing the existing ACP scheme on the recommendations of 6th CPC.  In the MACP scheme, 3rd financial upgradation is allowed in addition to the earlier 2 financial upgradations under ACP scheme.  This again results in junior SA drawing more basic pay than that of Sr.SA.  The Hon’ble Tribunal directed         “  the pay parity would be compared annually and parity would be maintained in future…” Hence it is imperative to settle the subsequent anomalies that may arise in future due to financial upgradations.
4	Parity with Junior transferred under Rule 38	Whether stepping up can be done with Junior transferred under rule 38? Para 9 of judgment in OA 156 of 2009(Ashok Kumar Vs.UOI)speaks about stepping up of the pay of a senior SA at par with his junior who has been granted benefit under ACP scheme and by virtue of this, is receiving higher pay than his senior.  Transfer under rule 38 is not a relevant factor to decide stepping up of pay. The Sr.SA all along draws equal or more pay than that of the Junior SA who was transferred under rule 38 and consequent on grant of ACP, the junior gets more pay, then the pay of senior SA should be stepped up.

CHQ clarification.

HAPPY HOLI 2014 !!!!

7th CPC Referndum

7th CPC Referndum.

DA Merger - A.jest.