Some of the viewers of the blog had requested me to upload the above O.M. on this blog.I have been able to get the verbatim of the said O.M. (prepared by a Central Govt. employee) from the internet. The same is reproduced below. I am trying to get the copy of the origianl O.M. and once I get it , it will be uploaded on this blog as well.
G.I. M.F. OM No: 169/2/2000 dated 24.11.2000. (copy of OM NO:)
Clarification regarding upward revision of pay scales as result of feeder and promotion posts being placed in an identical revised payscale.
The fifth central pay commission had, as a measure of rationalization, merged some of the pre-revised pay scales and had recommended single replacement pay scales in such cases. These recommendations had been accepted by the Govt. and have been duly notified. This has necessitated the placement of feeder and promotion posts in certain ministries and departments in an identical revised pay scale notwithstanding the fact that such posts were in separate and distinct pay scales eafier.
2 This Department has been receiving a number of proposals from various ministries and departments requesting appropriate up-ward revision of the pay scales of the promotion posts concerned so as to restore the earlier relativities. It is clarified in this context that the mere fact that the feeder and promotion posts in certain ministries and departments have been placed in an identical revised pay scale cannot by itself be adequate justification for placing the promotion posts in the hierarchy in a higher pay scale. Upward revision of the pay scale of posts on this consideration alone is not being accepted as a general policy unless these are other extenuating circumstances that might justify the adoption of such a course of action. What is envisaged in such a situation is that, the affected cadres themselves should be appropriately restructured and the relevant recru itment rules amended so as to reduce the number of levels in the hierachy. This is also the spirit underlying the 5th CPC recommendations relating to the merger of different pay scales.
3 Therefore, ministries/departments should, in the first instance, examine in depth the feasibility of appropriately restructuring the cadres in question. Only in cases where this is not found to be feasible on functional,operational and administrative considerations, only extension of the benefit of fixation of pay under FR 22(i)(a) (i) could be considered on the merits of each case and provided that all the conditions precedent for the grant of this benefit are fully satisfied and promotion to the posts in question actually involve the assumption of higher responsibilities.. Al the cases for exitension of the pay fixation benefit in such cases should be referred to the Department of Expenditure sfor prior approval.
G.I. M.F. OM No: 169/2/2000 dated 24.11.2000. (copy of OM NO:)
Clarification regarding upward revision of pay scales as result of feeder and promotion posts being placed in an identical revised payscale.
The fifth central pay commission had, as a measure of rationalization, merged some of the pre-revised pay scales and had recommended single replacement pay scales in such cases. These recommendations had been accepted by the Govt. and have been duly notified. This has necessitated the placement of feeder and promotion posts in certain ministries and departments in an identical revised pay scale notwithstanding the fact that such posts were in separate and distinct pay scales eafier.
2 This Department has been receiving a number of proposals from various ministries and departments requesting appropriate up-ward revision of the pay scales of the promotion posts concerned so as to restore the earlier relativities. It is clarified in this context that the mere fact that the feeder and promotion posts in certain ministries and departments have been placed in an identical revised pay scale cannot by itself be adequate justification for placing the promotion posts in the hierarchy in a higher pay scale. Upward revision of the pay scale of posts on this consideration alone is not being accepted as a general policy unless these are other extenuating circumstances that might justify the adoption of such a course of action. What is envisaged in such a situation is that, the affected cadres themselves should be appropriately restructured and the relevant recru itment rules amended so as to reduce the number of levels in the hierachy. This is also the spirit underlying the 5th CPC recommendations relating to the merger of different pay scales.
3 Therefore, ministries/departments should, in the first instance, examine in depth the feasibility of appropriately restructuring the cadres in question. Only in cases where this is not found to be feasible on functional,operational and administrative considerations, only extension of the benefit of fixation of pay under FR 22(i)(a) (i) could be considered on the merits of each case and provided that all the conditions precedent for the grant of this benefit are fully satisfied and promotion to the posts in question actually involve the assumption of higher responsibilities.. Al the cases for exitension of the pay fixation benefit in such cases should be referred to the Department of Expenditure sfor prior approval.
Thank u very much sir for copy of the order.
ReplyDeleteI was searching for this copy since issue of order for 3% increment.
Ramnath
www.onlyparity.blogspot.com