tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5208481437606843780.post6907334759663567013..comments2023-11-02T20:40:37.278+05:30Comments on CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE OFFICER'S BLOG: Minutes of meeting dtd.16.11.2011 of All India Central Excise Supdt. Association held at BangaloreUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5208481437606843780.post-72700294700701056292011-11-23T14:37:56.981+05:302011-11-23T14:37:56.981+05:30Good that the stand should be --OTHER THAN PARITY ...Good that the stand should be --OTHER THAN PARITY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE--.But parity at which level is the basic issue.After joining the 3 streams thro'SSC exam(that too only DRs of 66.6%),the cadres are again split up customhouse wise,cex comm'te/zone wise--and all these levels disparity exist--like 1986 shillong Inspr,2002 Insprs elsewhere becoming supdts,Mumbai Pos waiting whereas posts lying vacant at cochin for POs with 8 yrs,Posts of apprs vacant for want of exr with 3 yrs in cochin,5 yrs exr waiting in mumbai etc.While all these inconsistencies exist and is a reality even today--no serious efforts being made to bring parity within excise commts/zones --the slogan of parity with 1992 exr to be made ACs is raised.I feel there may be some POs of 1992 aggrieved that his counter part is made AC,as he did not opt for appraiser and leaders are carried away by this idea given by the 'strong brain'. Will the excise men who became supdts earlier ever concede that the seniority be w.r.to date of joining as Inspr/ssc panel.??If so pl. be informed that there are orders dt.26-6-1990,issued at the instance of the then Inspectors fedn, to the effect that annual dpcs are to be held in june and promotions ordered on last w/dy of june..Read with dopt guidelines on seniority that 'for promotees ,the dpc select panel will decide the seniority',the seniority should have been drawn by merger of the various dpc panels of every year ,the seniormost inspr among the panel being the senior as supdt of that year.Has any assn pursued this?.Even now the seniority of supdt is fixed w.r.to date of joining as supdt--thus an inspr of 1993 joined as supdt on 14th july will be senior to another inspr of 1986 of other commte joined on 15th july.When the parity within same cadre of insprs among various commtes are not being pursued independently,how any body can expect parity with exr of 1992 to be ACs--even if made as AC,what seniority will be followed--ssc rank of inspr/select panel for promotion/date of joining as supdt as figuring in the present seniority list?.The complicated /confused policy in all these matters can not be expected to be sorted out in one fine MORNING slogan of parity.(or late evening!) .Without any bias to any body,pl. read,and think over..ALL THE VERY BEST.unnikrishnanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17257431983330835666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5208481437606843780.post-48440287385105261912011-11-23T14:35:36.950+05:302011-11-23T14:35:36.950+05:30Thanks for minutes circulated.The issue of common ...Thanks for minutes circulated.The issue of common seniority/revival of old RRs,1987 which would ensure parity at least in the group B cadre (gap being 2001 apprs ,cus supdts 1996 and cex supdts 1992) and regularisation of all adhoc fom 1997 on this new RRs was a consensus conclusion.There was also a suggestion that this could be written as a letter to the new Chairman,-referring to minutes of Board meeting on 16-09-2011and the draft RRs given on website of cbec--before filing the petition in the court.As we have seen Court will not go deep into the nuances of RRs,only direct dept to finalise same after examining the representations ,as done on 3/8/2011.REG. WHETHER RATIO OR PARITY WILL BE BETTER,SINCE EVERY BODY HAS THE RIGHT TO HAVE CAREER ASPIRATIONS, POLICY SHOULD BE TO EVOLVE A POLICY WHICH WOULD ENSURE 'JUST,EQUITY AND FAIR CHANCES 'FOR ALL.No doubt,parity to reach group B (even among difft.cex commtes and then customs cadres) and then parity to reach Gr.A will be the IDEAL SITUATION ANY BODY CAN FORE SEE AND PURSUE..ALL THE BEST.unnikrishnan,cochinunnikrishnanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17257431983330835666noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5208481437606843780.post-10565828918846439372011-11-18T18:40:30.298+05:302011-11-18T18:40:30.298+05:30I totally agree that this agreement with 13:2:1 ra...I totally agree that this agreement with 13:2:1 ratio is totally irrational and needs to be thoroughly condemned / contested.shashishekhar sinhahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11354136282971081475noreply@blogger.com