Wednesday, February 27, 2013

The Continuing Debate Over The IV CPC Pay-Scale

Calculations of arrears of pay on account of the IV CPC rank-pay issue have been, mostly, completed by the organisations responsible for disbursement of pay. The arrears have started trickling into the bank accounts of veterans. But questions and doubts remain about the correctness of the calculations done and the manner in which the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court was interpreted by the government.
The queries heard most often are:
  • How will the judgement affect those who were not in service as on 01 Jan 86 and joined later?
  • Will the judgement have any bearing on pensions of those who retired before 01 Jan 86?
  • How will the basic pay be affected in the case of those Officers who got promoted to the rank of Captain after 01 Jan 86?
There is a common basis for such queries to have arisen. Paras 6, 7 and 8 of the Govt. of India letter dated 27th December 2012 form the very foundation of  these issues. The letter mentions only SAI 1/s/87 and is about refixation, and only refixation, of basic pay on 01 Jan 86, based on an outline, as included in the letter, of  the interpretation by the Govt of the judgement.
Serving officers and veterans need to look beyond the SAI and pose questions about the running pay scale introduced at the time of IV CPC. It is a classic chicken and egg question. Was the payscale, with its rank stages, based on the manner of calculation of emoluments or were the calculated emoluments fixed into the running pay-scale, the latter having come into existence by the decree of some higher power that governs our universe?
The detailed report of IV CPC would record how the running pay-scale was established. A couple of direct queries could begin to offer some clarity:
  • How is it that as per the calculation done for a Maj {as cited in the PCDA(O) example}, the revised emoluments came to 3555/- but the starting stage for the rank of Maj was fixed at 3400/- in the pay-scale?
  • What was the basis for defining the pay-scale and determing the rank stages? Which part, chapter and para of the IV CPC report records the basis of formulation of this pay-scale?
  • Does the IV CPC report specify exactly how the revised emoluments were to be calculated as on 01 Jan 86? If so, in which part of the report?
  • Did the litigation on the matter involve specific arguements for a change in the running pay-scale or did the judgement imply the running pay-scale would have to be altered for "giving" rank pay, retrospectively?
In case pensions of pre 01 Jan 86 retirees, basic pay of those commissioned, or promoted to Capt, post 01 Jan 86 are to be revised upwards, there would appear to be a need for a revision of the running pay-scale itself.
If commonality of principles is a consideration, the same treatment needs to be applied to the pay-scales at the time of V CPC as well. But more important than the issue of pay-scales at the time of V CPC would be a re-look at how a deduction of RP can ever be justified at the time of V CPC when it's deduction at the time of IV CPC has just been reversed by the Govt? But that's a different topic and can be looked at separately.
This follows from a previous blog post.    

1 comment:

  1. Wishing you the best of luck for all your blogging efforts.This is my first opportunity to chat this website I found some interesting things and I will apply to the development of my blog.