Test Footer

Welcome to AIPEU, Group-C,Secunderabad Division,Telangana Circle.Make A Grand Success,March to Parliament on December 15th For more news visit http://aipeugroupctelangana.blogspot.in

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

Railway authorities allow change in the name of passenger holding confirmed reservation

Railway authorities allow change in the name of passenger holding confirmed reservation
The below information was given by the Minister of State for Railways, Shri Bharatsinh Solanki in written reply to a question in Rajya Sabha on 17.8.2012 regarding the subject of change in the name of passengers in reservation tickets…
Railway authorities allow change in the name of passenger holding confirmed reservation
Passengers (Change of Names) Rules, 1990 restrict the facility of change of name by any passenger having a berth/seat reserved in his/her name to five conditions i.e. Government servant proceeding on duty, family member, students of a recognized Government institution, cadet of National Cadet Corps(NCC) & marriage party.
With a view to prevent the misuse of this facility, detailed procedure has been advised to all Zonal Railways which, inter- alia, stipulates for granting of this permission generally by a gazetted officer on production of the specified supporting documents, maintaining of record of such permission and inspection of this record periodically.
Change of name facility is not permitted on Tatkal scheme.
No complaint regarding misuse of this facility has been reported in 2012-13.
There is no proposal at present to review this scheme.

Prescribed Time Limits for filing Appeal/Petition/Complaint  etc., under different Acts/Rules:
Under CCS [CCA] Rules
Time Limits
For submission of written statement of his defence to the charge sheet
Within 10 days of the receipt of Memorandum [Charge Sheet]
Period of limitation of Appeal
Appeal has to be preferred within a period of 45 days from the date on which a copy of the order appealed against is delivered to the applicant.  However, the Appellate Authority may entertain the appeal after the expiry of that period, if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal in time.
Time limit for disposal of Appeal
Not prescribed, however quicker disposal is insisted by the rules.
Exercising of Revisionary Power by the Appellate Authority
Within six months of the date of the order proposed to be revised. In case, however more than six months have elapsed from the date of the order to be reviewed, the question of recommending a revision by the P&T Board, should be taken up through the respective Heads of Circle and Administrative Officers.
Review of Punishment
Powers vested with the President, can be carried out at any time.
Submission of Revision Petition
An employee may prefer a revision petition to the Revising Authority without submitting an appeal.  If the Revising Authority to whom the revision petition has been preferred is the Appellate Authority, the revision petition should be submitted well before six months of the date of the order sought to be revised.  In so far as a petition for revision to the P&T Board/President is concerned, though CCS [CCA] Rules 1965 do not lay down any time limit, it would be advisable to prefer such petitions within six months of the date of the order sought to be revised.
Review of Suspension
Suspension shall not be valid after 90 days unless it is extended after review before the expiry of 90 days.
Under Consumer Protection Act, 1986:
Time Limits
For Filing  Complaint in Consumer Forum
The District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within 2 years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.  However, a complaint may be entertained after the period specified above if the complainant satisfies that the District Forum, The State Commission of the National Commission, as the case may be , that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period.
Enforcement of the orders of Forum
When the order is not implemented, District Forum, State Commission or National Commission may order the attachment of the property of the person not complying. However, no attachment shall remain in force for more than three months at the end of which, if the non compliance continues, the property attached may be sold and out of the proceeds thereof, the District Forum of the State Commission or the National Commission may award such damages as it things fit to the complainant and shall pay the balance if any to the party entitled thereto.
Under Central Administrative Tribunal Act:
Time Limits
Time limit for filing an application before CAT
An application has to be filed within 1 year from the date on which the initial final order has been made.  Where an appeal/representation has been submitted in the matter and the authority competent to pass final order has not passed the said order, application has to be filed after the expiry of a period of six months from the submission such application/representation and within one year from the date of expiry of the said period of six months. Tribunal has power to admit an application in relaxation of the above limitation, if sufficient cause is shown, supported by an affidavit, for not making the application within the stipulated period.
Action Judgment
The order of the Tribunal is final and binding on both the parties.  It should be compiled with within the time-limit prescribed in the order or within six months of the receipt of the order, if no time-limit is prescribed.  Failure to implement the order in time may give rise to cause of action for initiating contempt proceedings.
Review Provision
If the applicant and/or the respondent are not satisfied with the judgment, it is open to them to seek review of the judgment by filing a petition within 30 days of the communication of the order.  Review petition would lie only when there is a glaring omission, paten mistake or grave error.  Once the review petition is dismissed, there is no provision for further review.  The matter has to be agitated before Hon.Supreme Court, through Special Leave Petition.
Jurisdiction of District Consumer Forum, State Commission and National Commission:
District Forum
Where the value of goods or services and compensation does not exceed Rs.20 Lakh.
State Commission
Where the value of goods or services and compensation is above Rs.20 Lakh, but below Rs.1 Core.
National Commission
Where the value of goods or services and compensation is above Rs.1 Core

        Health & Family Welfare Minister Shri.Ghulam Nabi Azad replied in Lok Sabha on 17.8.2012 to the question of 'what action taken by the Government, whether complaints have been received about the dissatisfaction of a large number of Central Government Employees with the services provided by the Government under the Central Government Health Scheme'.
        While CGHS endeavors to provide best possible health care facilities to the large number of beneficiaries consulting / visiting CGHS Wellness Centres (approx. 1.2 Crore during the last one year), some complaints are received about unsatisfactory services. 
        The dissatisfaction relates to shortage of doctors and other manpower resulting in waiting period before consulting doctors, issue of medicines, delay in settlement of medical claims of pensioners, issue of medicines of specific brand, reimbursement at CGHS rates for the treatment taken from unrecognized hospitals, overcharging by empanelled hospitals, opening of new dispensaries, etc. 
        Government has been receiving increased budgetary support over the last few years to take care of CGHS beneficiaries. 
        Government has undertaken several steps to improve the functioning of CGHS. These include: 
·     Computerization to improve better inventory management and availability of medicines at CGHS Wellness Centres. Based on computer data, 272 commonly indented medicines are procured from manufacturers at discounted rates and make them available at Wellness Centres. 
·      Portability of CGHS cards at any dispensary all over the country. 
·     Issue of medicines for three months in cases of chronic illnesses. 
·     Appointment of Medical officers on contract basis as an interim measure to tide over shortage of doctors. 
·    Receipt of medical claims of pensioners at Dispensary level and proper verification of documents by CMO i/c to ensure that all required documents are submitted. 
·    Enhancement of financial powers of Addl. Directors upto Rs.5 Lakhs for speedy settlement of medical claims of pensioners. 
·    Regular meetings undertaken by Addl. Directors with CMOs i/c to ensure smooth functioning of Wellness Centres for better delivery of services. 
·    Reimbursement from two sources – i.e., from CGHS as well as medical insurance in respect of beneficiaries holding mediclaim policies. 
·    Formation of Standing Technical Committees for examination of requests for full reimbursement. 
·     Settlement of hospital bills of empanelled hospitals and diagnostic centres through UTI-ITSL for early settlement of claims to ensure that the empanelled hospitals provide credit facility to pensioners , etc., 
·     Pensioner CGHS beneficiaries residing in non-CGHS areas are permitted to avail IPD and follow up treatment from CS (MA)/ ECHS empanelled hospitals with prior permission from CGHS.

           As on date, 24,969 Departmental Post Offices have been computerised. Out of 24,969 computerised Departmental Post Offices 22,177 Post offices are having internet connectivity.
          In Rajasthan Circle, 1320 Departmental Post Offices have been computerized and out of these 1320 computerized Post offices 1299 have internet facility.
         The Government has approved IT Modernization Project of Department of Posts. It involves computerization and networking of all Post Offices through network integrator of the project including Branch Post Offices in the rural area. The roll out of the Project is expected in the year 2013-14 subject to finalization of the Request for Proposal (RFP) for Rural Hardware, timely implementation of the project and availability of funds.
         This was stated by Shri Sachin Pilot, the Minister of State in the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology in response to a written question in Rajya Sabha today.

Q.1. What is Information?
Information is any material in any form. It includes records, documents, memos, e-mails, opinions, advices, press releases, circulars, orders, logbooks, contracts, reports, papers, samples, models, data material held in any electronic form. It also includes information relating to any private body which can be accessed by the public authority under any law for the time being in force.
Q.2 What is a Public Authority?
A “public authority” is any authority or body or institution of self government established or constituted by or under the Constitution; or by any other law made by the Parliament or a State Legislature; or by notification issued or order made by the Central Government or a State Government. The bodies owned, controlled or substantially financed by the Central Government or a State Government and non-Government organisations substantially financed by the Central Government or a State Government also fall within the definition of public authority. The financing of the body or the NGO by the Government may be direct or indirect.
Q.3 What is a Public Information Officer?
Public authorities have designated some of its officers as Public Information Officer. They are responsible to give information to a person who seeks information under the RTI Act.
Q.4 What is an Assistant Public Information Officer?
These are the officers at sub-divisional level to whom a person can give his RTI application or appeal. These officers send the application or appeal to the Public Information Officer of the public authority or the concerned appellate authority. An Assistant Public Information Officer is not responsible to supply the information. The Assistant Public Information Officers appointed by the Department of Posts in various post offices are working as Assistant Public 2 Information Officers for all the public authorities under the Government of India.
Q.5. What is the Fee for Seeking Information from Central Government Public Authorities?
A person who desires to seek some information from a Central Government Public Authority is required to send, along with the application, a demand draft or a banker’s cheque or an Indian Postal Order of Rs.10/- (Rupees ten), payable to the Accounts Officer of the public authority as fee prescribed for seeking information. The payment of fee can also be made by way of cash to the Accounts Officer of the public authority or to the Assistant Public Information Officer against proper receipt. However, the RTI Fee and the mode of payment may vary as under Section 27 and Section 28, of the RTI Act, 2005 the appropriate Government and the competent authority, respectively, by notification in the Official Gazette, make rules to carry out the provisions of this Act.
Q.6. What is the Fee for the BPL applicant for Seeking Information?
If the applicant belongs to below poverty line (BPL) category, he is not required to pay any fee. However, he should submit a proof in support of his claim to belong to the below poverty line.
Q.7. Is there any specific Format of Application?
There is no prescribed format of application for seeking information. The application can be made on plain paper. The application should, however, have the name and complete postal address of the applicant.
Q.8. Is it required to give any reason for seeking information?
The information seeker is not required to give reasons for seeking information.
Q.9. Is there any provision for exemption from Disclosure of Information?
Sub-section (1) of section 8 and section 9 of the Act enumerate the types of information which is exempt from disclosure. Sub-section (2) of section 8, however, provides that information exempted under sub-section 3 (1) or exempted under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 can be disclosed if public interest in disclosure overweighs the harm to the protected interest.
Q.10. Is there any assistance available to the Applicant for filing RTI application?
If a person is unable to make a request in writing, he may seek the help of the Public Information Officer to write his application and the Public Information Officer should render him reasonable assistance. Where a decision is taken to give access to a sensorily disabled person to any document, the Public Information Officer, shall provide such assistance to the person as may be appropriate for inspection.
Q.11. What is the Time Period for Supply of Information?
In normal course, information to an applicant shall be supplied within 30 days from the receipt of application by the public authority. If information sought concerns the life or liberty of a person, it shall be supplied within 48 hours. In case the application is sent through the Assistant Public Information Officer or it is sent to a wrong public authority, five days shall be added to the period of thirty days or 48 hours, as the case may be.
Q.12. Is there any provision of Appeal under the RTI Act?
If an applicant is not supplied information within the prescribed time of thirty days or 48 hours, as the case may be, or is not satisfied with the information furnished to him, he may prefer an appeal to the first appellate authority who is an officer senior in rank to the Public Information Officer. Such an appeal, should be filed within a period of thirty days from the date on which the limit of 30 days of supply of information is expired or from the date on which the information or decision of the Public Information Officer is received. The appellate authority of the public authority shall dispose of the appeal within a period of thirty days or in exceptional cases within 45 days of the receipt of the appeal.
Q.13. Is there any scope for second appeal under the RTI Act?
If the first appellate authority fails to pass an order on the appeal within the prescribed period or if the appellant is not satisfied with the order of the first appellate authority, he may prefer a second appeal with the Central Information Commission within ninety days from the date on which the decision should have been made by the first appellate authority or was actually received by the appellant.
Q.14. Whether Complaints can be made under this Act? If yes, under what conditions?
If any person is unable to submit a request to a Public Information Officer either by reason that such an officer has not been appointed by the concerned public authority; or the Assistant Public Information Officer has refused to accept his or her application or appeal for forwarding the same to the Public Information Officer or the appellate authority, as the case may be; or he has been refused access to any information requested by him under the RTI Act; or he has not been given a response to a request for information within the time limit specified in the Act; or he has been required to pay an amount of fee which he considers unreasonable; or he believes that he has been given incomplete, misleading or false information, he can make a complaint to the Information Commission.
Q.15. What is Third Party Information?
Third party in relation to the Act means a person other than the citizen who has made request for information. The definition of third party includes a public authority other than the public authority to whom the request has been made.
Q.16. What is the Method of Seeking Information?
A citizen who desires to obtain any information under the Act, should make an application to the Public Information Officer of the concerned public authority in writing in English or Hindi or in the official language of the area in which the application is made. The application should be precise and specific. He should make payment of application fee at the time of submitting the application as prescribed in the Fee Rules.
Q.17. Is there any organization(s) exempt from providing information under RTI Act?
Yes, certain intelligence and security organisations specified in the Second Schedule, are exempted from providing information excepting the information pertaining to the allegations of corruption and human rights violations.
Source : DOPT

All establishments of the Government of India are implementing the policy of reservation in services in all Groups including Group ‘B’ and ‘C’.
Number of Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), Other Backward Class (OBC) and General category candidates appointed by direct recruitment in Group ‘B’ and ‘C’ posts during the years 2008, 2009 and 2010 is given in the following table:

Group B
Group C

This was stated by Shri V. Narayanasamy, Minister of State of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension and Prime Minister Office in written reply to a question by Sh. Shadi Lal Batra in the Rajya Sabha on 23.08.2012
Source: Press Information Bureau

Friday, August 24, 2012

IPO Examination 2012 rescheduled to 15th&16th September 2012

         The government today said around Rs 752 crore is lying as unclaimed deposits in more than 2.49 crore inactive savings accounts in post offices.
        "Rs 752,44,57,414.03 is the amount lying in all inactive (silent) accounts as on March 31, 2011 in 2,49,59,446 accounts," Telecom Minister Kapil Sibal said in a written reply to Lok Sabha.
        West Bengal led the tally of unclaimed deposits with over Rs 107 crore lying in 20.16 lakh accounts, followed by Tamil Nadu (Rs 105.87 crore in 62.72 lakh accounts) and Uttar Pradesh (Rs 68.61 crore in 21.74 lakh accounts).
        "The depositor of such account can activate the account at any time by transaction. Notices are issued every year to the account holder of such accounts who are not maintaining minimum balance. Special drives are launched to re-activate such accounts by issuing notices and giving information through electronic media," Sibal said.
       Responding to another query, Sibal said 79,604 complaints for non-delivery of Registered Letters, 41,794 for Speed Post and 8,257 related to Parcels were received in the April-June, 2012 period.
       "Of these, 73,077 complaints for registered post, 38,154 for Speed Post and 6,147 for Parcels were addressed. As on June 30, 2012, 6,527 complaint cases of Registered Letters, 3,640 cases of Speed Post and 2,110 cases of Parcels are pending," Sibal said.
       The major reason for the pendency are involvement of more than one postal circle/state in processing the complaints, time taken in making detailed inquiry or investigation and non-submission of the required details by the complainant in some cases, he added.
       The Minister added that during 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12, departmental action has been initiated in 1,287 cases against postal employees and penalties have been imposed in 1,157 cases for non-delivery and loss of articles etc.
       In a separate reply, Minister of State for Communications and IT Sachin Pilot said the Department of Posts' (DoP) volume as well as revenue from speed post has continuously increased over the years.
        "The volume of Speed Post has increased from 21.14 crore in 2008-09 to 24.08 crore in 2009-10, 27.45 crore in 2010-11 to 39.19 crore in 2011-12," Pilot said.
        Revenues from speed posts have also grown from Rs 515 crore in 2008-09 to Rs 614 crore in 2009-10, Rs 749 crore in 2010-11 and Rs 900 crore in 2011-12, he added.
Source : The Economic Times, August 22, 2012

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

In 1978, while entering in its Silver Jubilee Year, the NFPTE had organised its P&T Convention at Patna. The demand of “3 Promotions at 10, 20 and 25 years” for P&T employees was coined in that National Convention. This demand was necessitated by the fact that most of the P&T employees were retiring without even getting a single promotion in their long career in those days. The Clerical employees retired without even becoming LSG and the Postmen were retiring without even promoted as Sorting Postman or Head Postman / Mail Overseer Postman, the only hierarchical promotion available at that time. After much negotiations and struggles, ultimately the Government agreed two promotions and introduced TBOP and BCR Promotions on completion of 16 and 26 years. All P&T employees were thereafter ensured of at least two promotions. But the movement had paid some price including major punishments to cadres to win the demand of two promotions.
The introduction of TBOP and BCR promotions caused the hierarchical promotion of Sorting Postman / Mail Overseer Postman etc irrelevant as most of the Postmen staff attained TBOP and BCR promotion before getting the only regular promotion available. The Department also discontinued constituting the DPC to promote Postmen staff. Similar was the case with the Group ‘D’ staff also, in whose case the promotion to Jamedar Group ‘D’ was discontinued. Even though the Department had subsequently declared unilaterally that the TBOP/BCR is not a promotion but only a scheme of financial upgradation like ACP Scheme, the regular hierarchical  promotional ladder was not restored or updated to ensure regular promotion to Postman and Group ‘D’ cadres. However, the TBOP, BCR ensured two automatic upgradations financially.
Discriminatingly during the same time, the Officialdom did not satisfy itself with the available two or three promotions in its career but went ahead with repeated cadre restructuring schemes to ensure at least five promotions for the cadre of Officers! We see that an IPS Officer entering as SSPOs [Junior Time Scale Officer] in the Postal Department is ensured of five promotions at least in his career as Senior Time Scale, DPS, PMG, Chief PMG, Board Member and Director General. In Departments like Income Tax a Class I officer who enters as  Assistant Commissioner as an IRS Officer goes ahead with the promotions like Deputy Commissioner, Joint Commissioner, Additional Commissioner, Commissioner of Income Tax, Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Board Member in CBDT and Chairman of CBDT. This is the case with all departments. The Government never cared for the promotional avenues of Group C and D employees while going on improving the career advancement of top officers.
The 6th Pay Commission also not cared much for ending the discrimination between the employees and officers in the central services. It simply recommended for only improving the periodicity of ACP financial upgradation from 12 and 24 years into 10 and 20 years through MACP. After much discussion in the JCM Standing Committee, the Government made only a marginal improvement by granting the third upgradation on completion of 30 years but created a lot of anomalies including taking away the benefit of parity with hierarchical promotions. The increase in number of up gradations to three necessitated us to switch over from TBOP/BCR system to MACP Scheme though we knew that under MACP the Promotees will not be granted equal number of up gradations like a direct recruitment. We however embraced the MACP for its benefits with the idea to focus the discrimination and set right it through our organisational efforts. Now, with the historic judgment of Jodhpur CAT, we have brighter chances of set righting the anomaly. But even that will not bring parity with the Officers, who are ensured of at least five promotions.
It is in this background that the NFPE raised it in the National Secretariat of the Confederation of CG Employees and the Confederation expanded its Charter of Demands into 15 Points by including the demand of Grant of 5 Promotions to all employees in their career on par with the Officers. This is a very important demand with far reaching implications in advancing the status of the Group C employees including the Postman and MTS.  The demand attains much more importance in the background of our cadre restructuring issue stagnating without any noticeable progress and at the initial level of discussions only. Proper popularisation of this new demand of 5 Promotions among all our membership is absolutely essential to create necessary tempo as we know very well that only when a new idea grips the minds of the employees it becomes a material force. We broke the stalemate in 1980s by strongly agitating for 2 Promotions. Let us now embrace the new demand of 5 Promotions and make it a reality soon. But everything depends on the rank and file organisation, which alone can succeed not only in popularising the new demand but also rousing the employees to agitate for the 15 Points charter of Confederation that focuses on 7th CPC, 50% merger of DA and grant of 5 Promotions etc. Time has come to end the discrimination between top officers and the bottom employees on number of promotions to advance the career prospects.

SLP filed in Hon. Supreme Court against Karnataka High Court decision on fixation of pay on promotion to PO & RMS Accountants dismissed

Despite our request not to file any SLP on the High Court Karnataka decision on fixation of pay of PO & RMS accountants on promotion, the Department has filed SLP in the Supreme Court as per the opinion of the Ministry of Finance. Now the supreme court has dismissed the SLP. Now the Department has no option except implement the Karnataka CAT and High Court decision. The Department should come forward to implement the decision to all the similarly situated persons.
Kudos to Karnataka Comrades.
The Supreme Court has fined Rs. 50000/- to Department
A remarkable and marvelous decision.
ITEM NO.9                   COURT NO.5                 SECTION IVA
S U P R E M E   C O U R T   O F    I N D I A
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 CC 10080/2012
(From the judgement and order dated 18/11/2010 in WP No.7593/2003, of The HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE)
CHIEF POST MASTER GEN.KARNATAKA CIR.& ORS                            Petitioner(s)
S. MOHAN KUMAR                                                                                         Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP)
Date: 05/07/2012    This Petition was called on for hearing today.
For Petitioner(s)         Mr.   R.P. Bhatt, Sr. Adv.
                          Mr.   Ashok K. Srivastava, Adv.
                          Ms.   B Sunita Rao, Adv.
                          Mr.   B. Krishna Prasad,Adv.(Not present)
For Respondent(s)
            UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
                                O R D E R
              This petition filed for setting aside order dated 18.11.2010 passed by the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court is accompanied by an application for condonation of 445 days delay.
            We have heard Shri. R. P. Bhatt, learned senior counsel representing the petitioners and carefully perused the averments contained  in the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and are convinced that there is no valid ground to accept the explanation offered by the petitioners for delayed filing of the special leave petition.
         We are further of the view that the Bangalore Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal did not commit any error by quashing the action taken by the petitioners to re-fix the respondent's pay on the recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission and the High Court rightly declined to entertain the petitioners' challenge to the order of the Tribunal.
         Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners could not put forward any tangible argument to support re-fixation of the respondent's pay in the light of the recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission. Therefore, we do not find any valid ground to interfere with the impugned order.
         The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed on the ground of delay and also on merits.
         For filing a frivolous petition like the present one, the petitioners are saddled with costs of rupees fifty thousand which shall be deposited by them with the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee within a period of eight weeks from today. It will be open to the Central Government to recover the amount of costs from the officers responsible for taking wholly arbitrary and unjustified action for re-fixing the respondent's pay.
(Parveen Kr.Chawla)                                                                                    
Court Master                                                                                           

(Phoolan Wati Arora)             
Court Master