Central Information Commission
Mr. Kamal Dey vs Ugc-Dae Consortium For Scientific ... on 4 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/2009/003238/6688
Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2009/003238
Appellant : Mr. Kamal Dey
(Tech - G),
UGC-DAE CSR, Kolkata Centre,
Sector-3, Block-LB-8, Bidhan Nagar,
Kolkata - 700098,
West Bengal
Respondent : Mr. M.K.Chakravaorty
Public Information Officer &
Administrative officer-I (P),
UGC-DAE Consortium for Scientific
Research,
An autonomous institution of UGC,
University Campus, Khandwa Road,
Indore, Madhya Pradesh
RTI application filed on : 09/10/2009
PIO replied : 06/11/2009
First Appeal filed on : 19/11/2009
First Appellate Authority order : 02/12/2009
Second Appeal filed on : 22/12/2009
Notice of Hearing Sent on : 05/01/2010
Hearing Held on : 04/02/2010
Information sought:
Appellant wanted information regarding the modified statement of fixation of pay, promotion benefits has not been considered in the modified statement as follows:
1 On what grounds appellant's promotional effect is being withdrawn? Provide the copy of, the relevant office order & the minutes of the meeting wherein the said decision was taken.
2 On the basis of which rule of the 6th pay commission, previous statement of fixation has been modified?
3 Does this merger affect the appellant's seniority? 4 What is appellant's designation/grade in view of the above developments/modifications?
PIO's reply:
Using Section 1 of part-A of the first Schedule of the CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 & note 2B merger takes place. The office memorandum no. 35034/3/2008-Estt (D) dated 19-may-2009 of DoPT, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pension, Govt. of India clarified that the promotion of the pre-revised scales will be ignored on account of merger of pre-revised scale. The Rule 13 of the CCS (RP) Rules says about fixation of pay on promotion on or after 01/01/2006. The Rule 5 says about the drawl of pay in the revised pay structure. The Note 7 given below the Rule 7 mention about the pay of the employee if he/she gets pay fixed at a stage lower than that of his junior. So far there is no order as to change of the designation.
Grounds for First Appeal:
For provide the copy of relevant documents such as office order, minutes of the meeting. Order of the First Appellate Authority:
1) Appellant opted for implementation of 6th CPC from 01-01-2006. Appellant did not exercise the option of staying with earlier pay scales until appellant's promotion & opting for CPC scales from later date accordingly appellants pay was fixed in the revised merged grade from 01-Jan.-2006
2) All subsequent events like increment, promotion etc. has to be reworked for appellant from 01-Jan-2006. In this, "promotion" did not result in re-fixation of salary.
Grounds for Second Appeal:
Information has not been made available regarding query no.1 Relevant Facts emerging during Hearing:
The following were present:
Appellant: Mr. Kamal Dey;
Respondent: Mr. M.C.Gupta, AO-II; Mr. M.K.Chakravaorty, PIO & AO-I;
The PIO has given the information as sought and the appellant is seeking reasons for his pay getting revised downwards. The Respondent has stated that this was because earlier increases had been done wrongly. This has been mentioned in a letter no. VIPC/291 Dated 10/06/2009. The PIO is directed to give a copy of this to the appellant.
Decision:
The appeal is allowed.
The PIO is directed to give the information mentioned above to the Appellant before 20 February 2010.
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 04 February 2010 (In any correspondence on this decision, mention the complete decision number.) (SR)