Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Mr. Ajay Kumar Rathore vs Ugc-Dae Consortium For Scientific ... on 8 February, 2010

                CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
                 Club Building, Opposite Ber Sarai Market,
                   Old JNU Campus, New Delhi - 110067.
                           Tel: +91-11-26161796

                                       Decision No.CIC/SG/A/2009/003256,3259/6745
                                             Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/003256,3259

Appellant                                   :      Mr. Ajay Kumar Rathore,
                                                   Scientific Assistant-C,
                                                   UGC-DAE CSR, Kolkata Centre,
                                                   Sector-3 Block-LB-8, Bidhan
                                                   Nagar, Kolkata-700098,

Respondent                                  :      Public Information Officer
                                                   Administrative Officer-I (Personnel)
                                                   UGC-DAE Consortium for
                                                   Scientific Research, Block-LB,
                                                   Plot-8, Sector- II, Bidhan Nagar,
                                                   Kolkata-700 098, West Bengal

RTI application filed on                    :      09/10/2009
PIO replied                                 :      06/11/2009
First Appeal filed on                       :      19/11/2009
First Appellate Authority order             :      Not mentioned.
Second Appeal Received on                   :      24/12/2009

Notice of Hearing Sent on                   :      09/01/2010
Hearing Held on                             :      08/02/2010

Information sought

:

Mentioning pay scale and its increments, Appellant sought following information:
1. Grounds on which his promotional effect was being withdrawn. Provide a copy of relevant office order and Minutes of the meeting wherein the said decision was taken.
2. Rules on which basis of the 6th pay commission, previous statement of fixation had been modified.
3. Whether this merger affects his seniority?
4. Present designation/grade of the Appellant in view of the above developments/ modifications.

PIO's Reply:

That from the Section I of Part A of the Fist Schedule of the CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 and Note 2B given below the Rule 7 of the said Rules, it is evident that the pre-revised pay scales of Rs. 50000-800, Rs. 5500-9000 and Rs. 65000-10500 have been merged and for these pay scales Pay Band of Rs. 930-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4200 has been provided. The Office Memorandum dated 19/05/2009 of DoPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Govt. of India clarifies. That the promotions to the pre- revised scales of Rs. 5500-900 and Rs. 6500-10600 will be ignored on account of merger of the pre-revised scale of Rs. 50000- 8000, Rs. 550-9000 and Rs. 65000-10500. The Rule 13 of the said CCS (RP) Rules 208 says about fixation of pay on promotion on or after 01/01/2006. The Rule of 5 of the sad CCS (RP) Rules 208 says about the drawl of pay in the revised pay structure. The Note 7 given below the Rule 7 of the said CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 mentions about the pay of an employee if he/she gets pay fixed at a stage lower than that of his junior. So fart there is no order as to change of the designation.
Grounds for First Appeal:
Relevant documents in response of point no. 1 not provided. Order of the First Appellate Authority:
Not enclosed.
Information provided After First Appeal:
1. Appellant opted for implementation of 6th CPC from 01/01/2006. Appellant did not exercise the option of staying with earlier pa scales until his promotion and opting of 6th CPC scales from later date. Accordingly, his pay was fixed in the revised merged grade from 01/01/2006.
2. All subsequent events like increment, promotions etc. have to be reworked for him from 01/01/2006. in this , "promotion" did not result in re-fixation of salary.

Grounds for Second Appeal:

Relevant information not provided w.r.t query no. 1., Office Order, minutes of the meeting not provided.
Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present Appellant: Absent Respondent:
Both parties were given an opportunity to appear before the Commission. Neither party appeared on the scheduled date.
A perusal of the papers shows that the information had been provided by the Appellant. The Appellant has a grievance which cannot be resolved by RTI.
Decision:
The appeal is dismissed. The information has been provided.
This decision is announced in open chamber. Notice of this decision be given free of cost to the parties. Any information in compliance with this Order will be provided free of cost as per Section 7(6) of RTI Act.
Shailesh Gandhi Information Commissioner 8 February 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.)Rnj