Finmin Orders – CG Staff News

7th CPC Bunching of Pay – Point of doubts and Clarification

Sony — Thu, 14 Feb 2019 07:59:30 +0000

7th CPC Bunching of Pay – Point of doubts and Clarification

7th CPC Bunching of Pay – Point of doubts and Clarification – Finmin Orders issued on 7.2.2019

Points of doubt raised and clarifications thereon

SL. NO POINT OF DOUBT CLARIFICATION

1. Whether one increment of 3%
constitute one stage or a difference of 3% among the pay of two officers As explained in this Ministry’s earlier OM dated 3.8.2017, the stages of every pay scale were well defined in the pay structure under 5th CPC regime and the stages were not well defined in the 6th CPC structure.

Since there were no defined stages in the 6th CPC structure and as pay in the running Pay Band in the 6th CPC structure could be of any amount in the multiple of Rs. 10, as specific to an employee, it has been very clearly brought out therein, drawing upon the illustration given by the 7th Pay Commission in para 5.1.37 of its Report that a difference of at least 3%, the rate of annual increment in the 6th CPC structure, was essential for counting of two stages.

Therefore, for the purpose of considering bunching, two Pays drawn in a Pay Band with a particular Grade Pay, which are separated by 3% of the lower pay; are to be taken into account, as explained in the illustration given in para 9(i) of this order.

2. Whether the pay at Cell 1 of any Level may be taken as first stage.

Bunching is to be considered with reference to the consecutive stages of pay drawn in the pay structure obtaining prior to 1.1.2016, as explained in these orders and as such a reference to Cell 1. which is in the revised pay structure, is not relevant.

3. Whether all .pay stages lower than the entry pay in the 6th CPC pay structure the purpose of bunching. This point has been amply clarified in the aforesaid OM dated 3.8.2017. As mentioned in para 8(iv) thereof , all pay stages lower than the Entry Pay in the 6th CPC pay structure as indicated in the Pay Matrix contained in 7th CPC Report are not to be taken into account for determining the extent of bunching.

4. Whether benefit of bunching should be given only where previous and current pay stages of the officers (specific to each employee) are getting bunched and placed at the same Level in the 7th CPC matrix without any comparison to any other officer’s pay as per para 5 and 8(iii) of this Department’s OM dated 3.8.2017 which stipulates that a difference of 3% to be reckoned for determination of consecutive pay stages, specific to each employee. The position clarified in these orders covers this poi nt. As explained in the illustration. the pre-revised pay of Rs.46,100 and Rs.47,490 are considered two stages of pay, as these are separated by 3% and these could be drawn by any two officers.

5. Whether benefit of bunching is to
be given to a senior officer with reference to the pay of his junior officer
who is drawing less pay with the difference of 3% to the senior officer and
now his pay got fixed in the same Level as that of the senior officer. The issue of bunching is not a
matter of pay drawn by a Senior Officer vis-a-vis a Junior Officer. As
explained in these orders, bunching happens as in the illustration given in
these orders and as such this is not related to the issue of seniority.

6. Whether the benefit of bunching is
also required to be given to a senior officer where his junior’s pay has got
fixed in the same Cell as that of the senior due to the benefit of bunching
of pay given to the junior

7. Whether the benefit of bunching may
be extended on account of bunching of two stages of pre-revised pay of a
Government servant alone. It is not clear how two stages
drawn by a single Government servant are relevant for pay fixation on
1.1.2016, as only the pay drawn on 31.12.2015 is to be taken into account for
pay fixation on 1.1.2016

8. Whether the benefit of bunching may
be extended only on direct pay fixation where the pay of two officers in the
pre-revised pay with a difference of 3% get fixed at the same stage in the
revised pay structure (7th CPC) or also on further bunching with next higher pay stage due to grant of additional increment to an officer for bunching on initial/direct pay fixation. As explained in the illustration contained in para 9(ii) of these orders, no such benefit is admissible in

View Order
Click to read detailed order issued by Finance Ministry on 7.2.2019 regarding the 7th CPC Pay Fixation on Bunching

Similar Posts:

Clarification on 7th CPC Special Compensatory Allowance

Sony — Mon, 04 Feb 2019 05:05:49 +0000

Clarification on 7th CPC Special Compensatory Allowance

Implementation of the recommendations of 7th Central Pay Commission – Grant of Special Compensatory Allowances subsumed under Tough Location Allowance
No.3/1/2017-E.II(B)
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Expenditure

New Delhi, the 17th January, 2019

CORRIGENDUM

Subject: Implementation of the recommendations of 7th Central Pay Commission – Grant of Special Compensatory Allowances subsumed under Tough Location Allowance.

The undersigned is directed to refer to this Department’s O.M. of even number dated 19th July, 2017 regarding grant of Special Compensatory Allowances subsumed under Tough Location Allowance consequent upon acceptance of the recommendations of the 7th Central Pay Commission. In this regard, in Annexure-I to the O.M., where places/areas have been mentioned. Part ‘A’ Sl.No.4 — Jammu and Kashmir – “Illaqas of Padder and Niabat Nowgam in Kashmir Tehsil’ under Doda District may be read as “Illaqas af Padder and Niabat Nowgam in Kishtwar Tehsil”.

sd/-

(Nimala Dev)
Dy. Secretary to the Government of India

View order

Similar Posts:

Regulation of Ad-Hoc and Non-PLB Bonus – Finmin Clarification

Sony — Tue, 09 Oct 2018 09:13:48 +0000

Regulation of Ad-Hoc and Non-PLB Bonus – Finmin Clarification

Various points regarding regulation of Ad-hoc and Non PLB Bonus are given below…

Point No.1: Whether the employees in the following categories are eligible for the benefit of ad-hoc bonus for an accounting year

Clarification: Subject to completion of minimum six months continuous service and being in service as on 31st March, 2018.

Point No.2: Employees appointed on purely temporary ad-hoc basis.

Clarification: Yes, if there is no break in service.

Point No.3: Employees who resigned, retired from service or expired before 31st March, 2018.

Clarification: As a special case only those persons who superannuated or retired on invalidation on medical grounds or died before 31st′ March, 2018 but after completing at least six months regular service during the year will be eligible for the ad-hoc bonus on pro rata basis in terms of nearest number of months of service.

Point No.4: Employees on deputation/foreign service terms to state governments, U.T.Governments, Public Sector Undertakings, etc., on 31st March, 2018.

Clarification: Such employees are not eligible for the ad-hoc bonus to be paid by the lending departments. In such cases the liability to pay ad-hoc bonus lies with the borrowing organization depending upon the ad-hoc bonus/PLB/ex-gratiafincentive payment scheme, if any, in force in the borrowing organization.

Point No.5: Employees who reverted during accounting year from deputation on foreign service with the organizations indicated in ‘C’ above.

Clarification: The total amount of bonusiex-gratia received for the accounting year from foreign employer and the ad-hoc bonus, if any, due from a central government office for the period after reversion will be restricted to the amount due under ad-hoc bonus as per these orders.

Point No.6: Employees from state Government/U.T. Admn./Public Sector Undertakings on reverse deputation with the Central Government.

Clarification: Yes, they are eligible for ad-hoc bonus to be paid by the borrowing departments in terms of these orders provided no additional incentive as part of terms of deputation, other than Deputation Allowance, is paid and the lending authorities have no objection.

Point No.7: Superannuated employees who were re-employed.

Clarification: Re-employment being fresh employment eligibility period is to be worked out separately for re-employment period; the total amount admissible, if any. for prior to superannuation and that for re-employment period being restricted to the maximum admissible under ad-hoc bonus under these orders.

Point No.8: Employees on half-Pay leave/E.O.L/Leave not due/study leave at any time during the accounting year.

Clarification: Except in the case of leave without pay the period of leave of other kinds will be included for the purpose of working out eligibility period. The period of E.O.L./dies non will be excluded from eligibility period but will not count as break in service for the purpose of ad-hoc bonus.

Point No.9: Contract employees.
Clarification: Yes. if the employees are eligible for benefits like dearness allowance and interim relief. Categories not eligible for these benefits would be considered at par with casual labor in terms of ad-hoc bonus orders.

Point No.10: Employees under suspension at any time during the accounting year.

Clarification: Subsistence allowance given to an employee under suspension for a period in the accounting year cannot be treated as emoluments, Such an employee becomes eligible for the benefit of ad-hoc bonus if and when reinstated with benefit of emoluments for the period of suspension, and in other cases such period will be excluded for the purpose of eligibility as in the case of employees on leave without pay.

Point No.11: Employees transferred from one Ministry./Department/Office covered by ad-hoc bonus orders to another within the Government of India or a Union Territory Government covered by ad-hoc bonus orders and vice versa.

Clarification: Employees who are transferred from any of the Ministry/Department/Office covered by ad-hoc bonus orders to another such office without break in service will be eligible on the basis of combined period of service in the different organizations. Those who are nominated on the basis of a limited departmental or open competitive exam from one organization to a different organization will also be eligible for the ad-hoc bonus. The payment will be made only by the organization where he was employed as on 31st March,2018 and no adjustments with the previous employer will be necessary.

Point No.12: Employees who are transferred from a Government Department/Organization covered by ad-hoc bonus orders to a Government Department/Organisation covered by productivity — Linked Bonus scheme or vice versa.

Clarification: They may be paid what would have been paid on the basis of emoluments in ad-hoc bonus covered department for the entire year less the amount due as productivity-linked bonus. The amount so calculated may be paid by Department where he was working on 31s’ March, 2018 and/or at the time of payment.

Point No.13: Part-time employees engaged on nominal fixed payment

Clarification: Not eligible.

Point No.14: Whether ad-hoc bonus is payable to casual labour for an accounting year in the following cases:-

(a) Those who have put in specified number of days of work in different offices during each of the three years ending with the said accounting year.

Clarification: The eligibility is to be worked out for three years from the said accounting year backwards. The period of 240 days of work in each of these years may be arrived at by combining the number of days worked in more than one offices of the government of India, for which bonus. ex-gratia or incentive payment has not been earned and received.

(b) Casual labour who were not in work on 31st March, 2018 .

Clarification: The condition of being in on 31st March, 2018 employment as laid down in these orders is applicable to regular Government Employees and not to casual labour.

(c) Those who have put in at least specified number of days of work in each of two years preceding the accounting year but are short of this limit due to regularization in employment in the said accounting year.

Clarification: If a casual labour, who has been regularized in the accounting year does not fulfill the minimum continuous service of six months as on 31st March, 2018 and therefore, cannot be granted benefit as a regular employee, he may be allowed the benefit as for a casual labour provided the period of regular service in the said year if added to the period of work as casual labour works out to at least specified number of days in that accounting year.

Source: https://www.doe.gov.in

Click to view Original Order Issued by Finance Ministry (Department of Expenditure)

Bonus 2018: Important Clarifications – Regulations

More details about Bonus Scheme

Similar Posts:

Grant of Ad-Hoc Bonus for 2017-18 | Finmin Orders

Sony — Tue, 09 Oct 2018 09:12:06 +0000

Grant of Ad-Hoc Bonus for 2017-18 | Finmin Orders

Grant of Non-Productivity Linked Bonus (Ad-hoc Bonus) to Central Government Employees for the year 2017-18

The Department of Expenditure has published the order for granting Non-Productivity Linked Bonus (Ad-hoc Bonus) to all Central Government Employees for the year 2017-18.

Ad-hoc Bonus (Non-Productivity Linked Bonus) eligible for all employees in Group ‘C’ and all Non-Gazetted employees in Group ‘B’, who are not covered by any PLB Scheme.

The calculation ceiling for payment of Ad-hoc Bonus under these orders shall be monthly emoluments of Rs.7000 as revised from April, 2014.

To illustrate, taking the calculation average emoluments exceed Rs.7000, Ad-hoc Bonus for 30 Days would work out to Rs.7000 x 30 / 30.4 = 6907.89 (rounded off to Rs.6908) – Click to Calculate Your Bonus Amount

Click to view Original Order Issued by Finance Ministry (Department of Expenditure)

Bonus 2018: Important Clarifications – Regulations

More details about Bonus SchemeSimilar Posts:

Entry Pay to DR Appointed on or after 1.1.2006 – Finmin Orders

Sony — Mon, 01 Oct 2018 12:51:35 +0000

Entry Pay to DR Appointed on or after 1.1.2006 and pay fixation in the case of persons other than such direct recruits

CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 – Section II of the Part ‘A’ of the First Schedule – entry pay to DR appointed on or after 1.1.2006 and pay fixation in the case of persons other than such direct recruits

[First Check this information before read this order: Structure of Entry Pay in 6th CPC for Direct Recruits]

No.8-23/2017-E.IIIA
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department Of Expenditure

North Block, New Delhi
28th September, 2018

Office Memorandum

Subject: CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 – Section II of the Part ‘A’ of the First Schedule – entry pay to DR appointed on or after 1.1.2006 and pay fixation in the case of persons other than such direct recruits.

The undersigned is directed to invite the attention to the provisions contained in Section-2 of Part ‘A’ of the First Schedule Of the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 which provides for entry pay in the revised pay Structure (pay structure effective from 1.1.2006 up to 31.12.2015) for direct recruits appointed on or after 1.1.2006 on a post and to say that pay in respect of persons appointed to the same posts before 1.1.2006 is required to be fixed as on 1.1.2006 under Rule 7 (1)(A)(i) and pay in respect persons appointed on the same post on promotion on or after 1.1.2006 is required to be fixed under Rule 13 thereof

2. A number of references were received in Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure, stating that the pay of seniors of a post was fixed at a stage lower than the entry pay applicable to the persons appointed on direct recruitment basis on that post on or after 1.1.2006. In such cases, stepping of pay was allowed to the senior employee at par with the entry pay of direct recruits of those posts, subject to the conditions, inter-alia, that stepping up of pay of seniors is applicable only in those cases which have an element of direct recruitment and where a directly recruited junior is actually drawing more basic pay than the seniors. Thus, the stepping up of pay of senior employees was admissible from the date a junior direct recruit joined on or after 1.1.2006

3. The matter was also considered in the meeting of the National Anomaly Committee (NAC) held on 17.7.2012 based on a demand raised by the Staff Side under the JCM NAC had recommended that in cases where Recruitment Rules provide for direct recruitment, then the Stepping up of pay of senior may be considered, even if no actual direct recruitment takes place or no direct recruit has actually joined. However, it was decided that stepping up of the pay of seniors can be claimed only in the case of those cadres which have an element of direct recruitment and in cases where a directly recruited junior is actually drawing more basic pay than the seniors. Thus, stepping up of pay was dependent upon actual joining of a direct recruit.

4. Trained Graduate Teachers (TGTs) of the Government of National Capital Territories of Delhi (GNCTD) filed OA No. 3217/2014 before the Honble Bench of CAT. The 13 petitioners of the post of Trained Graduate Teachers (TGT) those who were appointed as TGT before 1.1.2006 as also those who were promoted to the post of TGT on or after 1.1.2006. The pay of these 13 employees had been fixed as per the relevant provisions of the CCS(RP) Rules, 2008 and the happened to be lower than the entry pay as applicable to direct recruits of the post of TGT appointed on or after 1.1.2006. These petitioners prayed for re-fixing their pay as applicable to direct recruits appointed on or after 1.1.2006.

5. The Hon’ble Principal Bench of CAT in their order dated 4.4.2016 in OA allowed the application and directed the Government to ensure that of the applicant’s pay is fixed at a stage lower than the which could be drawn by a direct recruit appointed on or after 1.1.2006. The order of Hon’ble CAT dated 4.4.2016 was upheld by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in terms of their order dated 23.3.2017 in WP(C ) No.2634/2017. The Honble Delhi High Court in its order dated 23.3.2017 observed, that the plea of stepping up of pay, as mentioned in para 2 above, means the direct recruits should actually joined before any stepping up of pay be granted and the date of joining would be different as filling up of direct recruit vacancies in the cadre would vacancy position, selection etc. The Honble Delhi High held that this was unacceptable.

6. The arising out of the order of Honble Delhi High Court dated 23.3.2017 was heard by the Hon’ble Supreme Court as part of the SLP and in its order dated 01.09.2017 (by. No. 23663/2017), the Honble Supreme Court has observed that once the question, in principle. has been settled. it is only appropriate on the part Of the Government to issue a Circular. The Honble Supreme Court further observed that the present situation is that the stepping up is available only to those who have approached the Court, but since the issue other-wise became final, the Honble Supreme Court directed Government to immediately look into the matter and issue appropriate orders.

7. Accordingly, the matter has been considered in the light of the above background and in the context of the specific orders of Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 01.09.2017 as arising out of the origiml issue raised by the Trained Graduated Teachers of GNCTD in terms of their OA No. 3217/2014. AS mentioned above, the petitioners in that case were those who were appointed as TGT before 1.1.2006 and also promoted as TGT on or after 1.1.2006, and had occasion for grievance because their in the pay structure in vogue from 1.1.2006 had been fixed lower than the entry pay as prescribed for direct recruits appointed as TGT on or after 1.1.2006. Therefore. the principle of the benefit of pay fixation, as flowing from the aforesaid orders of Hon’ble CAT, Hon’ble Delhi High Court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court, is that the pay of those who were appointed to the post prior to 1.1.2006 and those who were appointed to the post on promotion in the pay structure effective from 1.1.2006 onwards, and where in respect of such posts entry pay for direct recruits appointed on or after 1.1.2006 has been prescribed giving rise to differential pay, may not be lower than the said entry pay. It is the case of differential pay in respect of employees of a post, as caused by the existence of entry pay applicable for direct recruits on that post appointed on or after 1.12006, that has been addressed in the aforesaid case of the post of TGTs. In case entry pay as per Section 11 of Part A of the First Schedule of the CCS(RP) Rules, 2008 is not applicable in case of a post, the same will not give rise to differential pay for holders of the post and, hence, not covered under the ratio of the case of TGT.

8. Accordingly, the President is pleased to decide that in respect of those posts where entry pay for direct recruits appointed on or after 1.1.2006, as per Section 11 of Part A of the First Schedule of CCS(RP) Rules, 2008, becomes applicable by virtue of the provision of the element of direct recruitment in the relevant recruitment rules, the pay of Central government employees who were appointed to such posts prior to 1.1.2006 and whose pay, as fixed in the revised pay structure under Rule 7 thereof as on 1.1.2006 turns out to be lower than the prescribed entry pay for direct recruits of that post, shall not be less than such entry pay w.e.f. 1.1.2006. Likewise, the pay of Central Government employees who were appointed to such posts by way of promotion on or after 1.1.2006 and whose pay. as fixed under Rule 13 of CCS(RP) Rules, 2008, happens to be lower than the said entry pay, shall also not be less than such entry pay from the date of their promotion taking place on or after 1.1.2006.

9.In their application to the employees of office of Indian Audits and Accounts Department. these orders issue after consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor General Of India.

10.Hindi version of these orders is attached

sd/-
(Amar Nath Singh)
Director

view order

Source: https://www.doe.gov.in/

Similar Posts: