Search Associate   Editor's Desk
 
Latest News

7th Pay Commission Representation Suggestions invited

New Executive council elected.....
» election notice for AIGDMO Associaiton.....
» Election for AIGDMO Association.....
   
  read more
 
 
Views & Comments
 
 
Comments Details
Topic : Rectification in 6pc pay fixation of Medical Officers
Posted by : Dr.A.K.N.Tarwani
Posted On : September 11, 2010
Comments : I hereby reproduce a letter sent by me to 6pc anamoly committeeand request to all Associations of Doctors from various cities to represent for this genuine cause. CHSOA/ CGHS/ NGP/ 30 11th Sept, 2010 To: Mr. Pawan Kumar, The Under Secretary to Govt of India, CHS Division, Ministry of Health and Family welfare, Dept. of Health, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi. Subject: Rectification of anomalies on account of implementation of the accepted 6th CPC recommendations in respect to various cadres of the Medical Officers, reg. Sir, With reference to the letter No. DOPT V. O. No. 18/ 2/ 2009- Pay- 1 dtd. 16. 02. 2009 received by us regarding our representation on anomalies in pay fixation of Medical Officers, I would again like to bring to your notice the anomaly in the implementation of 6th CPC recommendations in respect to the cadres of Medical Officers, Senior Medical Officers and Chief Medical Officers. The Ministry of Finance has issued the Sixth CPC Notification and Revised CCS Pay Rules, 2008 on August 29, 2008. The anomaly has been noticed in the Illustration II provided by the Ministry in the Gazette of India / Extraordinary (Part II) – Sec. 3 (i) for pay fixation of Medical Officers. These calculations are causing great injustice and loss to the concerned officers, not only in terms of loss of pay and arrears, but will have a cascading effect on future pay, increments and retirement benefits also. It is represented herewith for rectification and imparting necessary corrective measures. In the sixth CPC, a general Fitment factor of 1.86 was arrived at for fixing pay for all the officers which has been derived as follows. Factor 1.86: Basic (Factor 1) (A) 50% Dearness Pay (DP): (Factor 0.50) (B) 24% DA on (Basic + DP) (Factor 0.36) (C) Sum of factors (A+B+C): 1.86 (D) Here we have to consider the fact that Medical officers working with Central Health Services and other allied services have had an additional DP component formed by virtue of NPA, which they were receiving. This factor is ignored while calculating the Fitment Factor. It may be noticed that an additional component of 24% DA on NPA was added while fixing the pay for medical officers, same was not considered for DP. In case of the medical officers, the following formula should have been adopted to calculate the Fitment factor, based on actual pay drawn by Medical Officers. Factor 2.113: Basic: (Factor 1) (A) 50% DP (on Basic Pay+ 25% NPA on the Basic Pay): (Factor 0.625) (B) NPA (on Basic+DP): (Factor 0.40625 – This is not to be counted but to be used only for arriving at 24% DA) 24% DA (on Basic+NPA+DP): (Factor 0.4875) (C) Sum of factors: A+B+C: 2.1125 (Rounded to 2.113) (D) Thus, for medical officers, a factor of 2.113 shall be applied while fixing the pay instead of the recommended 1.86 as is clear from the above Illustration. Here the rationale for taking DP of 0.625 into consideration is: (a) As indicated in the Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules 2008, pay in the pay band shall be arrived at by adding the basic pay, dearness pay applicable as on the date, and pre-revised dearness allowance based on rates as on 1-1-2006. (b) Dearness pay is always counted as pay for all purposes; hence dearness pay already being drawn cannot be ignored for any future calculations. A calculation showing the difference between applying a factor of 1.86 and 2.113 is shown in the table below: Sl. No. Parameter Factor 1.86 Factor 2.113 (Based on actual pay drawn) 1 Basic 10000 10000 2 DP 5000 6250 3 24% DA Basic + DP 3600 3900 4 24% DA on NPA 975 975 5 New Basic 19575 21125 6 Basic Rounded off to 19580 (A) 21130 (B) 7 Difference (A) – (B) (- 1550) As can be seen from the table, factoring at 1.86 for a medical officer results in a net loss of Rs. 1550 on a pre-revised basic of Rs. 10000/-, which is a 15.5% difference on the basic. The loss not only reflects in pay fixation and arrears, but also in revised NPA, increments, and future promotion benefits, retirement benefits (since the pay scale now is a running pay band), thus leaving a profound cascading effects. It may not be incongruous here to mention a similar mistake that happened when DP was declared in April 2004, where medical officers were paid 50% at par with other group A officers, but this was immediately rectified in OM F. No. 105/1/2004-I C dated 8/10/2004 (superseding the earlier OMs dated 07/03/2004 and 07/06/2004), wherein instructions were provided as to the manner in which the pay of doctors should be regulated. For the above reasons: (a) The anomaly of 1.86 factor against 2.113 may please be rectified immediately. (b) Pay due should be re-calculated as per 2.113 w.e.f. January 1, 2006. (c) Anomalies should be rectified on the basis of this new fixation based on actual pay and justice be done to all the ranks of the medical officers. I am representing this matter on behalf of all Medical officers, Senior Medical Officers and Chief Medical Officers working at CGHS, Nagpur.It is requested that necessary action may please be taken in the interest of justice to doctors . It is also requested that , if possible ,appointment for the meeting may be given for the same at your earliest. Thanking you in anticipation Place : Nagpur. Date : 11.09.2010 Yours faithfully, Dr AKN Tarwani General Secretary C.H.S.Officers Association Nagpur Enclosures: (1) Letter received from DOPT as a reply to our representation (2) Copy of Illustration II provided by the Ministry in the Gazette of India / Extraordinary (Part II) – Sec. 3 (i)
 
Posted by : Dr Subir Banerjee
Posted On : September 13, 2010
Comments : Dr A K N Tarwani, thanx for your justification about proposed pay fixation of doctors which seems logical.Can you please give us an illustration regarding both current method and proposed method of calculation(on any payband +GP) bringing out the difference in the gross pay.It will be easier to understand.Great effort.
 
Posted by : Dr.A.K.N.Tarwani
Posted On : September 18, 2010
Comments : Dear Doctor--Actually this blog pattern doesn't recognise table forms,though I had posted the compatative table in my above blog. Ok in short , I clearify for all ---- In pay fixation of 6pc of Medical officers ,as per Illustration II provided by the Ministry in the Gazette of India / Extraordinary (Part II) – Sec. 3 (i), which mentions DP (Dearness Pay) as 50% of Basic for calculation of pay fixation though our DP was not 50 % but 62.50%(by virtue of NPA),so it makes a difference of Rs.1550per month say for a Medical officer whose Basic in old scale was Rs. 10000 on 01.01.06.-----as tabulation is not possible here,so try to read accordingly.. Actual pay drawn on 01.01.06 for a doctor having Basic Rs 10000 is---- 10000(Basic)+6250(DP)+3900(24% DA on Basic+ DP)+975(24% DA on NPA )=Rs. 21125 but they have fixed our Pay on DP OF Rs 5000(50% Basic)i.e.10000(Basic)+5000(DP)+3600(24%DA on Basic & DP)+975(24%DA on NPA)=19580.------Injustice of Rs 1545 for each month with cascading effect . If anybody wants my representation for onward transmission ,kindly contact me on my email {ashok@tarwani.net) or Mob no (09822922260 )or on this blog. ---Dr.A.K.N.Tarwani--General Secretary ,C.H.S.Officers Association ,Nagpur.---- Every Association of Central Govt Doctors must represent to get the justice.
 
Posted by : Dr. T.K.Bhattacharyya
Posted On : October 9, 2010
Comments : This appears to be one of the most genuine grievances of the CHS Officers. Dr. Tarwani, would you please let us know, whether you received any reply from the Ministry so far on your representation.
 
Posted by : Dr.A.K.N.Tarwani
Posted On : October 17, 2010
Comments : Dear Doctor T.K.Bhattacharya. Thanx for showing interest in the grievance. (Where r u Dr Subir Banerjee ?) which is all time beneficial to everyone, but surprisingly nobody is representing it from their available forum(s). Are we doctors so poor in mathematics.? I would like to inform you that , the case was represented to DOPT’s Anamoly committee on 08.12.2008 and me got a reply from DOPT that ,they have forwarded my representation to MOH&FW and asked them to examine the matter and then if find suitable , it may be forwarded to back to DOPT as per the rules. I forwarded another representation to 16.07.2009 but of no vain. This time I contacted Shri Pawan Kumar , Under secretary who i looks after these matters initially. I sent a representation on 08.09.2010 by fax to him and I have received a letter in reply to my this recent that ,my representation has already been forwarded by him to Pay commission cell of MOH&FW on 24.08.2009.(Already two yrs r passed and nothing is coming out . I haven’t received any reply from Pay commission cell of our ministrywhether my proposal is under consideration or not ?) Dr.A.K.N.Tarwani General Secretary C.H.S.Officers Association C.G.H.S, Nagpur.
 
Posted by : Dr Vijoy Kumar
Posted On : October 22, 2010
Comments : The calculation of Dr Tarwani appears to be wrong. DP was given as an interim arrangement to offset delay of 6PC. What ever was granted as DP got adjusted in arrears on final pay fixation as per 6PC. The element of NPA has already been taken care of in new pay fixation. But if we get anything extra, that would be a bonus!
 
Posted by : Dr.A.K.N.Tarwani
Posted On : October 29, 2010
Comments : Dear Doctor, Let me clarify on ur comment. It is mentioned that ‘DP was given as an interim arrangement to offset delay of 6PC’. but whatever amount of DP was added, it was added in the Basic Pay. Once it is accepted as the component of Basic Pay, it will be there forever and will be considered for any further calculation (as is done in 6 CPC pay fixation also). Then how can it be designated as an ‘ Interim Arrangement’ only?. It is part and parcel of Fitment factor. The second point is – ‘Whatever was granted as DP got adjusted in arrears on final pay fixation as per 6PC.’ If that is the case, then whatever was granted as DP to the Medical Officers (i.e. 50% of Basic + NPA which equals to 62.5% of Basic) should be completely adjusted in the final Pay Fixation. but actually only 50% of DP has been included in the Fitment factor, which clearly seems to be an anomaly. Hence what I want to point out is “The whole part of DP should be adjusted in final Pay Fixation as per 6 CPC.” So kindly go through these points and try to put forward our point of view . I think it can be put forward in another way also – Suppose, there are two Senior Grade 1 Officers drawing the Basic of Rs. 10000 as on Jan, 2006. But one of them is working as a Medical Officer and another in some other Dept. So naturally their Gross Pay is going to be different due to NPA factor. But after the implementation of 6 CPC, the growth in the salary in terms of percentage, should be more for Medical Officer (as he is going to benefited through NPA also.) But actually the growth in terms of percentage is more for another candidate as his pre– revised Basic + DP component was comparatively less (as demonstrated in the following table). Pay MO (Sr Grade) Non MO (Sr Grade) Pre-revised Pay Basic 10000 10000 DP 6250 50000 NPA 4063 00 Total Basic 20313 15000 Revised Pay Basic 18600 18600 24% DA on NPA 975 00 NPA 4650 00 Total Basic 24225 18600 % Change 19.26 24 So doesn’t it seem to be an anomaly? Thanking you.
 
Posted by : dr arup karmakar
Posted On : November 4, 2010
Comments : it is the genuine calculation which tobe accepted by the govt on time to reduce resentment among the doctors of gen duty med offr cadre of all the organized services.moreover the x group pay is counted for increment in the army but not npa of the med officers.npa is also counted as basic pay of the doctors.thank u for representation
 
Posted by : Dr R K Sharma
Posted On : February 9, 2011
Comments : Dr.A.K.N.Tarwani's contention is perfectly correct.I had also thought on the same line .It is a matter worth pursuing jointly.
 
 
 
Start A New topics Post Your Comments
 
 
  Back
1