GDS/CHQ/41/1/2011 Dated: 16.08.2011
To
Ms. Yaesodhra Menon,
Member (P),
Postal Services Board,
Dak Bhawan,
New Delhi-110001
Subject:- Relaxation appointment of GDS on compassionate grounds-merit points and procedure for selection-Revised Provisions thereof.
Ref:- Your office letter No. 17-17/2010-GDS dated 01.08.2011
Madam,
A scheme for relaxation appointment of GDS employees was announced vide your office letter No. 17-17/2010-GDS dated 14.12.2010 wherein merit points were introduced to measure the suitability for relaxation on GDS on compassionate ground. Since, on our analysis of the point system, we found that the scheme was impracticable and would defeat the very purpose of appointment on compassionate ground, we offered our views vide our letter no GDS/CHQ/41/1/2011 dated 27.01.2011. In our letter we had offered the assessment of the scheme quite vividly to show that the scheme of introducing merit points is not practicable. For quite some time nothing was heard.
2. Now a modification of the scheme has been issued vide your letter under reference. This modification worsens the situation. The remedy is worse than the disease, so to say. The whole scheme negates the purpose of the scheme introduced for providing immediate relief to the bereaved family. This scheme and introduction of the merit points circumvent the fundamentals of introduction of the scheme; as also the basic principles even for appointment of out siders as GDS employees. The following may kindly be examined dispassionately to see whether the scheme of introducing merit points over-rides the basic rules and instructions and runs counter to them:-
(a) In para 4.7 (Educational qualification), the following merit points have been suggested.
| 1. | 25 | Graduate |
| 2. | 20 | 10+2 |
| 3. | 2 | Below 10+2 |
|
|
|
|
Now what qualification is required for appointment to the Post of any category of GDS employees? The Educational qualification, required for GDS posts as laid down vide several letters ending with DG(P) letter no. 17-66191-ED&Trg. Dated 12.03.1993 is as follows:
| ED Sub-Postmasters and ED Branch Postmasters: | Matriculation [the selection should be based on the marks secured in or equivalent examinations; No weightage need be given for any qualification(s) higher than matriculation](emphasis added)
|
| ED Delivery agents, GDS Stamp Vendors and All other categories of EDAs.
| VIII standard. Preference may be given to the candidates with matriculation qualification. No weightage age should be given for any qualification higher than matriculation. Should have sufficient working knowledge of the regional language and simple arithmetic so as to be able to discharge their duties satisfactorily. Categories such as GD messengers should have enough working knowledge of English. |
(The term ED has since been replaced by the term GDS)
The qualification 'graduate' qualifying for 25 points against the required qualification of matriculation carrying 2 points, runs counter to the basic orders and qualification required for appointment of G.D.S. The can be Justified by no rationale or logic. The instructions contained is the letters dated 14.12.2010 are thus ultra vires and must be withdrawn. Such qualification merit points are not compassionate appointment to department Posts.
(b) The very first paragraph of DG(P) letter no. 14.25.191-ED&Trg. Dated 16.12.1991 says:
"The purpose of giving compassionate appointment to one of the eligible dependents/near relatives of the deceased E.D Agents is to render immediate employment assistance to the family which has been left in indigent condition. The delay is finalisation of the requests for compassion appointments not only defeats the very purpose, but also gives rise to serious complaints from the beneficiaries concerned as also public representatives, both outside and inside the legislature. Besides causing suffering to the bereaved families inordinate delay in finalization of such cases also cause embarrassment to the department".
The merit point introduced and clarifications issued run contrary to the such instructions. The merit point system and that "hard and deserving cases" would mean cases over and above 50 merit points" defeat the purpose of compassionate appointment and overrule indigence. You will kindly agree that "indigence" cannot be bound within four walls of merit points as has been introduced. Indigence is what indigence means and not what merit points measure.
(c) We are of very strong opinion that there would be hardly any case which would earn more than 50 points to qualify for compassionate appointment. We take a every indigent case for compassionate appoint and measure it on the scale of merit points.
A G.D.S employees dies in harness leaving behind his wife and a three year old child may be girl or male; has more than 20 years of service left over. His wife is a candidate for compassionate appointment and she is a matriculate. She has got a small thatched house and ¼ acres of land. There is no other earning family member. The terminal benefits admissible to her are between 50,000 to 75,000. She earns the following merit points:-
- No of dependents : 2 (Including self) : 7 merit points
- Outstanding liabilities : Education : 10 merit points
- Left over service : More than 20 years : 10 merit points
- Own house and land : (both) : 0 merit points
- Family earnings : (No income) : 10 merit points
- Discharge benefits : (Rs.50,000—75,000/-) 6 merit points
- Education : (Matriculate) : 2 Merit points
Total = 45 Merit points
You will kindly agree that there can hardly be a case more indigent than this but fails to earn over 50 merit points despite having the requisite minimum qualifications of being a very indigent, hard and deserving case. What happens to the lady? She is denied compassionate appointment. Does this fulfill the purpose, which compassionate appointment stands for?
3. This letter is further to and supplement to our letter no GDS/CHQ/41/1/2011 dated 27.01.2011 and may be read along with that.
4. The merit points introduce and the condition for measurement of "hard and deserving "Cases fails to assess the pangs of indigence which means acute suffering. The boundaries of merit points are binding the actual assessment of indigence and thus are not only unpracticable but totally unjust. The conditions harder even than procedure for relaxation appointment to departmental Posts.
We, therefore, request you to kindly consider dispassionately the points raised by us and withdraw the instructions/merit points prescribed in your office letter no. 17-17/2010 which is unjust and bereaft of compassion.
With regards,
GDS/CHQ/41/1/2011 Dated: 08.08.2011
To
The Secretary,
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhavan,
New Delhi-110001
Subject:- Nonpayment of revised pay and allowances to Substitute GDS employees since 01.01.2006.
Madam,
According to the rules, the outsider candidates working as substitutes of the GDS employees on promotion or deputation or against some vacancies are paid the minimum of the pay-scale/pay bands plus grade pay for the period they have been working as substitutes. The Sixth CPC scales have been implemented with effect from o1.01.2006. The substitutes working on the day and during the period from 01.01.2006 to the date of implementation of the 6th CPC pay and allowances are due for payment of the revised pay and allowances. But such payment has not so far been made.
You are, therefore, requested kindly to issue necessary orders for payment of the enhanced pay and allowance to such GDS substitutes.
An early action with a word is reply in requested.
To
The Secretary,
Department of Posts,
Dak Bhavan,
New Delhi-110001
Subject: - Deputation of GDS employees to Army Postal Service (APS) as Group 'D' (now multi functional Group 'C').
Madam,
Vacancies of Group 'D' officials in APS are filled through Group 'D' officials in the Post offices; and the vacancies which remain unfilled due to non-availability of eligible group 'D' officials are filled in through GDS employees after the requisite tests. The GDS employees deputed to the APS have all along been discharging their efficiently officially and faithfully. This on one hand serves the APS in manning the vacancies; on the other it provides some further opportunity of mobility to the GDS employees.
Now, for some time it is seen that this practice of deputing GDS employees to APS against available vacancies has been put a stop to. This is neither beneficial to the APS nor to the GDS employees.
We, therefore, request you kindly to have a look at this issus and issue orders that the earlier practice of deputing GDS employees to APS against available vacancies is restored.
We shall be thankful for an early action and a word in reply.
Yours faithfully,
General Secretary
All India Postal Extra Departmental Employees Union
