Ref.No.AICEIA/GS/61/2016 Dated: 02.12.2016
To
The Chief Commissioner of Central Excise,
Kochi Zone.
Respected Sir,
Sub: Posting of Inspectors in Administrative section – Reg
*****
Please refer to our letters AICEIA/GS/41/2016 dated 07.6.2016, AICEIA/GS/60/2015 dated 26.11.2015, AICEIA/GS/56/2015 dated 02.11.2015 and AICEIA/GS/41/2015 dated 16.06.2015 related to the above subject and also the minutes of the JCM/GRM held at Kochi on 08.10.2015. Copies of the said letters enclosed for your kind consideration
The Association has recently received a copy of the representation made by the Administrative Officer (Estt) Headquarters, Kochi on the alleged misbehavior by the Superintendent (Admin) and an Inspector presently working in Establishment section of the Headquarters office. At the outset itself we want to submit before you that on this specific alleged incident an independent enquiry may be initiated to examine the issues involved and we offer our wholehearted support in the fact-finding exercise, as the possibility of the complaint being made as a part of power struggle in the administration could not be ruled out.However, the complaint also involves a bigger question of posting of Executive Officers in the administration section, which we had raised consistently but has hitherto been largely unaddressed by the administration.
The All India Central Excise Inspectors’ Association, Kerala Circle had vide the above referred correspondences and in the JCM/GRMs repeatedly opposed the posting of Inspectors in administration. The reasons for our objections though detailed in the enclosed correspondences are once again summarized below:
Posting of Executive Officers to do ministerial work is administrative impropriety: The Inspector of Central Excise and Superintendent of Central Excise are classified as ‘Executive’ cadre post by the DoPT. There is no sanctioned strength of ‘Executive’ officer in Group B cadre in Headquarters Establishment/ Accounts sections. Posting of the Executive officers to administrative work dilutes the executive nature of the post. The posting of Executive officers to Ministerial work is also thus against the DoPT guidelines on classification of the posts. It is also violating the rights of the cadre of Inspectors by posting the officers to do the ministerial cadre work when it is essentially work of the Tax Assistants. The ministerial work is also defined in Fundamental Rules 9(17). Thus such posting also violates the Fundamental Rules.
Loss of money to the exchequer: The Superintendent and Inspector who is posted to the administration essentially carry out the responsibilities of an Administrative Officer and Tax Assistant respectively. The promotion is given by the government as an employer, with consequential salary benefits, so that they carry out the functions attached to the post. If an officer is posted to do a work which is essentially work of a lower cadre officer, the government need not have made such a promotion and is unnecessarily creating burden on the exchequer which could have otherwise been used for productive purpose. The loss of public money due to posting of Executive officers in the administration is being worked out as follows.
Salary of a Superintendent as per new pay matrix at Level 9 : 53,100/- (B.P), 1,062 (D.A), 7,200/- (T.A), 6,300/- (HRA)= 68,000/- (approx)
Salary of Administrative Officer as per new pay matrix at Level 7: 44,900/- (B.P), 898/- (D.A), 3,600/- (T.A), 5,100/- (HRA) = 55,000/- (approx)
Salary of Inspector as per new pay matrix at Level 7 : 44,900/- (B.P), 898/- (D.A), 3,600/- (T.A), 5,100/- (HRA) = 55,000/- (approx)
Salary of Tax Assistant as per new pay matrix at Level 4: 25,500/- (B.P), 510/- (D.A), 1,350/- ( T.A), 2,280/- (HRA) = 29,640/- (approx)
Thus amount of nearly 13,000/- is lost from the government exchequer every month by posting a Superintendent to carry out functions of an Administrative Officer. The government also loses an amount of Rs 25,360/- every month by posting an Inspector to carry out function of a Tax Assistant. As a service Association it is also our responsibility to ensure that the government money is not wasted which otherwise could have been utilized for empowerment of weaker sections or development of the nation.
Argument that executive officers are posted to do Ministerial work due to shortage of ministerial staff: This oft repeated argument ignores the fact that there is already vacancy in the Inspector cadre and various functions which are required to be carried out by Inspectors are not executed due to this unnecessary staff diversion. The detailed scrutiny of returns in Range formations, follow up on third party information provided by Income Tax department, etc could be executed in an efficient manner if the Inspectors are allowed to perform the task assigned to his/her job. As pointed out earlier, in a taxation department an officer is promoted to the executive cadre so that he can contribute to the nation by identifying tax evasion. With action plan and target laid down by CBEC in various sections like Adjudication, Review, Legal section etc the incumbent officers are burdened due to shortage of staff. Hence staff shortage is not just an issue in the Ministerial cadre and excess burden of our cadre officers are not addressed by diversion from higher/other cadres. Thus the argument that diversion is necessitated due to staff shortage of ministerial staff is without any basis. In Cochin Headquarters Preventive, with 7 Inspectors and 3 Superintendents, a total of 56 evasion cases were identified corresponding to tax evasion of Rs 36.19 Crore during the F.Y 2015-16. Thus an Inspector would beinvolved in identifying 8 evasion cases corresponding to Rs 5.17 Crore and a Superintendent would be involved in identifying 19 evasion cases corresponding to Rs 12.06 Crore. This shows how much of tax evasion was failed to be stopped due to this unnecessary diversion of the Executive cadre officers.
Violation of the Service Conditions: Many officers have joined the department as Inspectors after resigning from other lucrative posts in private sectors as the post is Executive in nature. Thus posting such Executive officers to do the Ministerial work is also violation of the service conditions and against the career aspirations.
Hence we once again submit that the Executive Officers may not be posted for carrying out such Ministerial cadre work and such officers may kindly be posted to sections with defined role for Inspectors so that government money is not unnecessarily spent and tax evasion could be better identified and stopped.
Assuring fullest co-operation,
Yours faithfully,
(C.JAYADEEP)
GENERAL SECRETARY
