Regulation of pay on imposition of penalty under CCS(CCA) Rules 1965

Regulation of pay on imposition of penalty underCCS(CCA) Rules 1965

Operation of the punishment of reduction to a lower stage in a time scale

Sir,

I wish to share the following on the operation of punishment of reduction to a lower stage in a time scale under Rule 16 of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965.

A kind reference is invited to the following order on the subject. 

No: 6/3/2013-Estt(Pay-I) dt. 6.2.2014 from Min. of Personnel, PG and Pensions

The punishment of reduction to lower stage in a time scale is being awarded under Rule 16 of CCS(CCA) Rules 1965, under minor penalties (Rule 11).

Any such punishment order for reduction to a lower stage in a time scale should essentially contain the following 3 parts. It is to be noted that any punishment of reduction without cumulative effect only can be awarded under Rule 16.

1. The stage to which the official is reduced and the period for which the pay is reduced. . The number of stages or the amount to which he is reduced may be mentioned.
2. Whether the official will or will not earn increments during the period of reduction. If nothing is specified in the order, the official will earn increments during the period of reduction.
3. Whether such reduction will or will not have the effect of postponing the future increments of his pay.

Consequent on the implementation of the 6th CPC, Instructions as to how pay in such cases is to be regulated were issued vide reference cited above.

The operation of the punishments as per this order completely changes the original punishment order as could be seen from the following cases given as examples in this order.

Case 1: Reduction to a lower stage

The penalty:

The penalty ofreduction to a lower stage in the time scale of pay by one stage for a period of one year, without cumulative effect and not adversely affecting his pension is imposed on a govt. servant w.e.f. 13.3.2013. The GS was drawing Rs.15440+GP 4200 in pay band 2 (Rs.9300-34800).

In this case, the punishments is

• The pay is reduced by one stage for one year.
• Since there is no mention about the earning of increments during reduction, the official will earn increments during reduction.
• Without cumulative effect.

In this case, the intention of the punishment is that the official should be paid one stage less than his entitlement during the period of reduction.

The punishment is to be operated as follows:

Pay as on the date of reduction :Rs. 15440+4200
Reduced pay (by one stage: Rs.14870+4200

From	To	Pay due but for punishment	Pay actually to be paid as per punishment	Remarks.
13/03/2013	30/06/2013	15440+4200	14870+4200	Punishment starts. Pay due, less one stage will be paid.
1.7.13	12.3.14	16030+4200	15440+4200	Will earn increment on reduced pay. He draws one stage less than his entitlement.
13.3.14	30.6.14	16030+4200	16030+4200	Without cumulative effect. Punishment ends on 13.3.2014.The pay reduced is restored.

But, as per the operation in the OM, the official has to draw Rs.14870+4200 during the entire period of reduction i.e. from 13.3.13 to 12.3.14 without any increment on 1.7.2013 (since the increment on 1.7.2013 is noted as notional).

As per this operation of pay, the punishment automatically modified as “ he will not earn increments during the reduction” which is against the original punishment order. The official is put into a loss from 1.7.13 to 12.3.14 (Rs. 570+Da per month. 15440-14870. Due Rs. 15440 paid 14870).

Case 2: Reduction to a lower stage

The penalty:

The penalty of reduction to a lower stage in the time scale of pay by two stages for a period of one year is imposed on a govt. servant w.e.f. 13.3.13. It is further directed that the GS would earn increment during the period and the reduction will not have the effect of postponing future increments of pay. The GS was drawing Rs.15440+GP 4200 in pay band 2 (Rs.9300-34800) same as case 1.

In this case, the punishments is

• The pay is reduced by two stages for one year.
• The official will earn increments during reduction.
• Without cumulative effect.

In this case, the intention of the punishment is that the official should be paid two stages less than his entitlement during the period of reduction.

The punishment is to be operated as follows:

Pay as on the date of reduction :Rs. 15440+4200
Reduced pay (by two stages: Rs.14320+4200

From	To	Pay due but for punishment	Pay actually to be paid as per punishment	Remarks.
13.3.2013	30/06/2013	15440+4200	14320+4200	Punishment starts. Pay due, less than 2 stages is paid.
01/07/2014	12/03/2014	16030+4200	14880+4200	Will earn increment on reduced pay.He draws 2 stages less than his entitlement.
13/03/2014	30/06/2014	16030+4200	16030+4200	Without cumulative effect. Punishment ends on 13.3.2014. The pay reduced is restored.

But, as per the operation in the OM, the official has to draw Rs.14320+4200 during the entire period of reduction i.e. from 13.3.13 to 12.3.14 without any increment on 1.7.2013 (since the increment on 1.7.2013 is noted as notional).

As per this operation of pay, the punishment automatically modified as “ he will not earn increments during the reduction” which is against the original punishment order. The official is put into a loss from 1.7.13 to 12.3.14 (Rs. 560+Da per month. 14880-14320. Due Rs. 14880, paid Rs. 14320).

Case 2-A: Reduction to a lower stage

The penalty:

The penalty of reduction to a lower stage in the time scale of pay by two stages for a period of one year is imposed on a GS w.e.f. 13.3.2013. It is further directed that the GS would not earn increment during the period and the reduction will not have the effect of postponing future increments of pay. The GS was drawing Rs.15440+GP 4200 in pay band 2 (Rs.9300-34800) same as case 1.

In this case, the punishments is

• The pay is reduced by two stages for one year.
• The official will not earn increments during reduction.
• Without cumulative effect.

The punishment is to be operated as follows:

Pay as on the date of reduction :Rs. 15440+4200
Reduced pay (by two stages: Rs.14320+4200

From	To	Pay due but for punishment	Pay actually to be paid as per punishment	Remarks.
13/03/2013	30/06/2013	15440+4200	14320+4200	Punishment starts. Pay due less than 2 stages is paid.
01/07/2013	12/03/2014	16030+4200	14320+4200	Will not earn increment on reduced pay.He draws 3 stages less than his entitlement. 2 stages for reduction and 1 stage for non-earning of increment.
13/03/2014	30/06/2014	16030+4200	16030+4200	Without cumulative effect. Punishment ends on 13.3.2014. The pay reduced is restored.

But, as per the operation in the OM, the official has to draw Rs.14320+4200 during the entire period of reduction i.e. from 13.3.13 to 12.3.14 without any increment on 1.7.2013, which is correct since the official will not earn increment during the period. But, after the punishment is over, the official is entitled for 16030+4200 since the punishment order is without cumulative effect.

As per the operation of this punishment as per this OM the pay is fixed at 15440+4200 on expiry of the reduction. As per this operation of pay, the punishment automatically modified as “he will not earn increments during the currency of punishment and that the reduction will have the effect of postponing future increments of pay” which is against the original punishment order. The official is put into a loss from 1.7.13 to 12.3.14. Also, this punishment could not be awarded under Rule 16.

Case 3: Reduction to a lower stage

The penalty:

The penalty of reduction to a lower stage in the time scale of pay by one stage for a period of two years, without cumulative effect and not adversely affecting his pension is imposed on a govt. servant w.e.f. 13.3.2013. The GS was drawing Rs. 15440+4200 in pay band 2 (Rs. 9300-34800)

In this case, the punishments is

• The pay is reduced by one stage for two years.
• Since there is no mention about increments, the official will earn increments during reduction.
• Without cumulative effect.

The punishment is to be operated as follows:

Pay as on the date of reduction :Rs. 15440+4200
Reduced payby one stage: Rs.14870+4200

From	To	Pay due but for punishment	Pay actually to be paid as per punishment	Remarks.
13/03/2013	30/06/2013	15440+4200	14870+4200	Punishment starts.
01/07/2013	30/06/2013	16030+4200	15450+4200	Will earn increment on reduced pay
01/07/2014	12/03/2015	16640+4200	16040+4200	Will earn increment on reduced pay
13/03/2015		16640+4200	16640+4200	Without cumulative effect. Punishment ends on 13.3.2015.The pay reduced is restored.

But, as per the operation in the OM, the official has to draw Rs.14870+4200 during the entire period of reduction i.e. from 13.3.13 to 12.3.15 without any increment on 1.7.2013 and 1.7.14. The official is put into a loss of Rs. 580 per month (15450-148700 from 1.7.13 to 30.6.14 and Rs.590 per month from 1.7.14 to 30.6.15. In this case the punishment automatically modified as “he will not earn increments during the reduction” which is against the original punishment order.

Article shared by Shri. R.Hariharakrishnan Postmaster Srivaikuntam HO Tamilnadu 628601