Letter from GS to Secretary demanding revision of bench mark for MACP from Very Good to GOOD

No. 4-1/2017                                                                                              Dated: 04-08-2017

The Secretary

Department of posts

Dak Bhawan

New Delhi-110001

Sir,

Sub: Revision of bench for MACP on par with Promotion – reg.

Ref: Your office lr No.20-45/2016-SPB-II dated 28-2-2017.

We are compelled to add the following submission, in continuation of previous letters, on the subject of the reverting the bench mark of “Very good” for upgradation in MACP to that of “Good” (as it was prior to VII CPC )

The VII CPC opined that the performance related career progression should be in place for giving promotion and for  that matter, even for granting increments too. Accordingly  the bench mark for up gradation in MACP has been revised as “very good” amending the para 17 of MACP order dtd 19.5.2009 Now the instruction in the latest orders of DG in OM no 20-45/2016-SPB II dtd 28.2.17 clarifies that the promotion can be continued to be given with “GOOD” bench mark.

 It is an irony that the up gradation( MACP), which is  contemplated to be a merely placement on personal basis in higher grade pay without any ascendancy/ change  in designation , classification or higher status  as per the provison of the para 16 & 19 of the MACP order ibid.Naturally it follows that upgradation is not par with promotion in its character and can not therefore command any aspects more than the  pre-requisites meant for promotion . It is the reason why the up gradation is exempted from roster applicability .Further in case of pending disc cases/ punishment etc also  the upgradtion process  is required to observe the same rules governing the normal promotion  and provision in fo CCS (CCA) Rule 1965.

                                                                                                                                

The upgradataion, which is personal to the employee is therefore slapped with a stringent stipulation and have been isolated to the disadvantage of an employee from the equilibrium they have been accorded  so far with that of promotion .Resultantly  a scheme of lesser kind which gives only financial upgradation is invoked with a higher eligibility criterion than a  another , which changes very  status , pay and designation etc.

This infirmity in having two level of bench mark for uprgaradation and for promotion is requested to be removed by making the “GOOD” as bench mark both as hitherto and render justice.

Yours Sincerely,

(D Kishan Rao)

General Secretary