Minutes of the Joint Secretary Meeting on July 9, 2010, in Lucknow

MOST IMMEDIATE
Speed Post

No.27/13/2010-SR(S)
Government of India
Ministry of Personnel, P.G. & Pensions
Department of Personnel & Training

3rd Floor, Lok Nayak Bhavan,
Khan Market, New Delhi,
Dated: 22 July, 2009

To

Shri R.M. Srivastava,
Principal Secretary,
U.P.Reorganisation Coord. Deptt.,
Vikas Bhawan, Janpath Market,
Lucknow.

Shri Shatrughan Singh,
Principal Secretary,
Reorganisation,
Govt. of Uttarakhand,
Dehradun.

Subject: Minutes of the meeting held under the Chairmanship of Shri Rajeev Kapoor,
Joint Secretary, DOPT on 9/7/2010 at Lucknow.

Sir,

I am directed to forward herewith the minutes of the meeting held on 9/7/2010
under the Chairmanship of Shri Rajeev Kapoor, Joint Secretary, Department of
Personnel & Training for information and necessary action. It is requested that the
minutes may kindly be circulated among the participant departments of your State.

Yours faithfully,

(S. Nayak)
Under Secretary to the Government of India

Copy to PS to JS(AT,A & CS)
PA to DS(SR)# MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF JOINT SECRETARY(SR), HELD ON 09.07.2010 AT LUCKNOW

XIVth meeting of the Committee under the Chairmanship of Shri Rajeev Kapoor, Joint Secretary, Department of Personnel \& Training was held at 11.00 A.M. on 09.07 .2010 at Lucknow. The list of participants is annexed. Initiating the discussion, the Chairman welcomed all the participants from the States of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand. Thereafter, the agenda/issues were discussed and recommendations made as under:

1. Confirmation of the minutes of the meeting held on 24.02 .2010

The minutes of the meeting held on 24.02 .2010 were confirmed by the Committee. With regard to action taken on the recommendation as per the minutes, the Committee was informed that the recommendations have been accepted by the competent authority and compliance orders have been issued.
2. Compliance of Court Cases: As desired by the Chairman in the previous meeting, the representatives from the respective Administrative Departments of both the State Governments were called upon to appraise the Committee about the cases related to them.
(i) Home Department:
(a) The case of S/Shri Jagdish Chandra Dalkoti \& Jeevan Chandra Pant (WP No.279/07) was considered in compliance of the directions dated 26.4.2007 of Hon’ble High Court of Uttarakhand. The representative of the Administrative Department informed that these two persons belong to Cooperative Department whereas the posts they are working on belong to CBCID. This statement is contrary to the statement made by the Deptt. in the last meeting It was brought to the notice of the Committee that these two are yet to be allocated. The Committee recommended for referring the case to SAC for initiating the process of allocation through usual procedure. Before that the concerned Deptt. shall clarify the position in writing within 10 days.
(Action: UPRCD)
(b) In respect of directions of the Hon’ble Court in W.P. No.235/07 in various mutual transfer cases, the Committee was informed that no objection of both the State Governments have been made available to UPRCD. The Chairman asked UPRCD to send the proposals in the prescribed format as soon as possible so that the cases can be disposed of expeditiously.
(Action: UPRCD)
(c) Regarding the case of Shri Jagmohan Kashyap (WPNo.44507/2007), the Committee was informed that all the 4 juniors to Shri Jagmohan Kashyap are being finally allocated to Uttarakhand. This shall be confirmed by the Deptt. in writing. The Committee recommended to reject the representation subject to confirmation.
(Action: UPRCD/Home Department, UP)
(d) Regarding the case of Constable Armourer Yogendra Singh Rawat \& Others (W.P. 253/08), the representative of the Administrative Department informed the Committee that the petitioners are domicile of Uttarakhand whereas the DIG(HQ), Dehradun has given in writing that he is also optee of Uttarakhand. The Chairman requested to clarify his position in seniority as domicile in writing by 19.07 .2010
(Action: UPRCD/Home Department, UP)
(e) The case of Shri Ganesh Ram, WP No.1635/2007, was considered. The Committee recommended to allocate him on domicile basis to Uttarakhand.
(Action: DoPT)
(ii) Food \& Supply: Regarding the case of Shri Mahipal Singh, the representative of the Administrative Department informed that Shri Mahipal Singh has already retired on 31.12 .2009 from Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh. This was confirmed in writing. Case to be closed.
(Action: DoPT)
(iii) Medical \& Health Department: (a) The case of Shri Manmohan Khandwal (WP No. 358/2007) was considered. The representative of the administrative department clarified that Shri Manmohan Khandwal has not retired although in the previous meeting they had stated to the contrary. However, the committee wasinformed that the post was not included in the Notification as no such post was in existence. Case was recommended for rejection on this basis.
(Action: DoPT)
(b) Regarding the case of Shri Sushil Chandra (WP No.65270/09), the Committee informally learnt that his wife, Smt. Rachna Doval was appointed into service after 09.11.2000. The committee recommended for rejection of the representation subject to confirmation of the date by Uttarakhand.
(Action: UKCRD
(iv) Finance (Ayurvedic \& Unani Services Directorate): The case of Shri Ashok Kumar, Finance Controller was considered. It was informed that Shri Ashok Kumar was domicile of UP. The Committee recommended for his allocation to UP, being a member of SC community in terms of circular dt. 29.07.2008 read with clarification dt. 24.06.2010.
(Action: DoPT)
(v) Garhwal Jal Sansthan: The Chairman stated that the Garhwal Jal Sansthan being out of purview of the Reorganization Act, the Committee has no role to play in the matter. He suggested that the State Govts. Are free to take suitable action in the matter.
(Action: UPRCD/UKRCD )
(vi) Geology \& Mining: The cases of Shri Pratap Singh and Surinder Pratap Singh (WP No.1505/06) were considered \& deferred. Chairman directed the concerned Deptt. To clarify whether gradation lists were available for plain and hill cadres. Alternatively he suggested Uttarakhand to explore the possibility of absorbing them.
(Action: State Government of Uttarakhand/Uttar Pradesh)
(vii) Forest Department: The Case of Shri Ghanshyam Singh, (WP No.1715/2006) was considered. The representatives of the Administrative Department stated that contrary to claim of Govt. of India of non-receipt of his representation by them, he has personally handed over these. The Committee recommended to defer the matter as the Government of India has already filed an SLP in the case of Shri R.K. Singh and interim stay has been granted in favour of the Government of India with direction to issue notice to the Respondents to file counters, if any, by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
(viii) Irrigation:The compliance case of Sudhanshu Manohar Singh and Shri Pramod Kumar (WP No.1035(S/B)/09 was taken up by the Committee for discussion. The Committee was informed that the SAC is seized of the matter. It was therefore, decided to exclude it.
(Action: DOPT /UPRCD)
(ix) Rural Engineering Service: The cases of Shri K.S. Bisht (WP No.423/06(S/B), Shri Shamshad Mohammed Khan (WP No.422/06(S/B)) and Shri Jagmohan Singh Bisht (W.P. No.424/06(S/B)) were considered. Shri Arvind Singh Hayanki, Reorganization Commissioner Uttarakhand clarified that S/Shri. K.S. Bisht and Jagmohan Singh Bisht were holding the post of store-keeper on the appointed day. This might be the reason for their non-allocation to Uttarakhand. They were promoted as JEs later. These people are to be considered for allocation as store-keepers. He, however, added that Shri Shamshad Mohammed Khan was JE on the appointed day and his claim is to be considered. The Deptt. was asked to clarify within one week.
(Action: State Government of Uttarakhand/Uttar Pradesh)
(x) Home Deptt.(Sub-Inspector): The cases of S/Shri Satyavir Singh (WP No.943/09(S/S), Guru Prasad (WP No.5835/09(S/S), Parasnath Singh \& others namely, Jai Prakash Singh, Anirudh Singh, Prem Narain Dubey, Heera Singh, Anirudh Yadav, Devi Lal Chauhan, Ghulam Shabber Farooqui and Harpal Singh (WP No.7238/09(S/S), were considered. All these persons have moved court against their allocation as HeadConstables, although they have now been promoted as Sub-Inspectors. The Chairman observed that since this involves modification of an existing policy, this matter is to be referred to the SAC for consideration as the present committee is not competent to take a decision in the matter.
(Action: UPRCD/SAC)(xi) PWD: (i) Regarding the case of WP No.147/SS/09 Virendra Pratap Singh, Chairman directed to exclude the item from the agenda as the State Advisory Committee is already considering the matter.

(Action: DoPT)

(ii) The WP No. 35(S/B)/2010 involving S/Shri Tara Dutt Pant and Amrish Kumar Kapoor, Junior Engineers (Tech.), was considered. The Committee was informed that SAC has already disposed of the matter. The Chairman directed to link up.

(Action: DoPT)

1. The pending representations of the Dept. of Printing & Stationery received in compliance with the High Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench order dated 12.12.2007 were considered and the following recommendations were made:

1. The pending representations of the Deptt. of Police Radio received in compliance of the High Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench order dated 12.12.2007 were considered and the following recommendations were made:-

1. Head Constables: The Deptt. Informed that all the six Head-Constables have moved court subsequent to the order dt. 12.12.2007 of the Lucknow High Court, challenging their allocation on a lower post when all of them have been promoted as Sub-Inspectors. This is to be checked by DoPT and if found true, these cases are to be referred to SAC for consideration.

(Action: DoPT)

1. The pending representations of the Jail Department received in compliance of the High Court of Allahabad, Lucknow Bench order dated 12.12.2007 were considered and the following recommendations were made:-

| Sl. No. | Name & Designation S/Shri | Grounds for Request | Decision taken | Reason(s) | Action to be taken by |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 1. | WP No. 8566(S/S)/05 Sampurnanand Mishra, Jr. Clerk/Typist | Not junior-most, wife suffering from high blood pressure, requested for reconsideration of earlier representation | Recommend ed for rejection | His earlier representation has already been considered by SAC and rejected. The grounds given now in the fresh representation, do not make him eligible for change in allocation. | DoPT |
| 2. | WP No. 8566(S/S)/05 Rajeev Agnihotri, Jr. Clerk/Typist | Not junior-most, mother suffering from high blood pressure, requested for reconsideration of earlier representation and also requested for cancellation of allocation to Uttarakhand. | Recommend ed for rejection | His earlier representation has already been considered by SAC and rejected. The grounds given now in the fresh representation, do not make him eligible for change in allocation. | DoPT |
| 3. | WP No. 3897(S/S)/05 Bhoopesh Kumar Singh, Dy. Jailor | Optee and domicile of Uttarakhand, no seniority list, old age and ailing parents | Recommend ed for acceptance | Committee was informed that he belonged to SC community. Representation recommended for acceptance under SC/ST policy subject to verification. | DoPT |
| 4. | WP No. 436(S/S)/06 Anoop Kumar Chaudhari, Varishta Samparikshak | Father 80 years old, frequently falling ill, small children, younger brother handicapped, cancellation of allocation on the basis of | Recommend ed for acceptance | Committee was informed that he belonged to SC community. Representation recommended for acceptance under SC/ST policy subject to verification. | DoPT || | | provision of Rule 5(2) of
Asstt.
Accounts
Officers’Service Rules
1985. | | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 5. | WP No.
8539(S/S)/05
O.P. Srivastava,
Jr. Clerk/Typist | Appointed on
compassionate ground,
only child of parents,
mother suffering from
high blood pressure,
diabetes, breathing
problem and kidney
ailment | Deferred | Referred to SAC for
consideration being a medical
hardship case | UPRC
D/SAC |
| 6. | WP No.
3870(S/S)/05
Chhotey Lal,
Bandirakshak | Difficulty in climbing
and descending hills
due to fracture in back-
bone during an accident
in 2003 | Deferred | Referred to SAC to consider
being a medical hardship case | UPRC
D/SAC |
| 7. | WP No. 3966
(S/S)/05 Anil
Kumar Dubey,
Chakki Mistry | Not juniormost,
difficulty in children’s
studies, operation in
wife’s stomach, aged
parents | Recommend
ed for
rejection | Juniormost official in the
cadre, no other official is
junior to him. Position is to be
verified from the State Govts. | DoPT |
| 8. | WP No. 566
(S/S)/05 Kamal
Kumar
Kanojiya, Jr.
Clerk/Typist | No representation
submitted in terms of
court order dt.
12.12.2007 | Recommend
ed for
acceptance | Committee was informed that
he belonged to SC community.
Representation recommended
for acceptance under SC/ST
policy subject to verification. | DoPT |
| 9. | WP No.
188(S/S)/06
Shiv Dulare,
Asstt.
Accountant | Domicile of UP. No
option given for
Uttarakhand, Old father
suffering from low-
eyesight, breathing
problem and lung
disease, wife suffering
from heart disease,
stomach and bone
ailments | Recommend
ed for
acceptance | Committee was informed that
he belonged to SC community.
Representation recommended
for acceptance under SC/ST
policy subject to verification. | DoPT |

1. The pending representation of the Jail Department received in compliance of the High Court of Allahabad, order dated 19.11.2009 in 150 bunched cases were considered and the following recommendations were made:-

| Sl.
No. | Name | Grounds for request | Decision
taken | Reason(s) | Action
to be
taken
by |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| | WP No.
49431/05
Dadhi Ram,
Jail Supdt. | Seniority not yet
decided, juniority on
batch-wise pro-rata basis
not followed,
Reservation policy not
followed, Domicile of
UP, mother suffering
from Gathia and old age, | Recommen
ded for
rejection | Earlier representation
considered by SAC and
rejected. Grounds mentioned
in the new representation do
not make him eligible for
change in allocation. | DoPT |10. The pending representation of the Panchayati Raj Department received in compliance of the High Court of Allahabad, order dated 19.11.2009 in 150 bunched cases were considered. The Deptt. Intimated that it is not aware about the court judgment. The Chairman directed DoPT to see whether representations have been forwarded to UPRCD. This is to be confirmed and if not forwarded, same needs to be sent immediately. (Action: DoPT)
11. The pending representation of the Tehseeldar Cadre received in compliance of the High Court of Allahabad, order dated 19.11.2009 in 150 bunched cases were considered. The Deptt. Intimated that it is not aware about the court judgment. The Chairman directed DoPT to confirm whether representations have been forwarded to UPRCD. This is to be confirmed and if not forwarded, same needs to be sent immediately. (Action: DoPT)
12. The pending representation of the Food \& Civil Supplies Department received in compliance of the High Court of Allahabad, order dated 19.11.2009 in 150 bunched cases were considered and the following recommendations were made:-

1. The proposal of Agricultural Directorate of Uttarakhand Government for allocation of 10 Class-IV employees to Uttar Pradesh, as per their option, which was considered in the last meeting and was deferred with request to Uttarakhand to find out whether these employees are willing to be allocated to UP at present, was considered again by the committee. Deptt. Informed that except one working in Uttarakhand, all others are posted in UP. The Committee recommended to allocate all the 10 Class-IV employees namely, S/Shri Ajit Kumar Gupta, Pramod Kumar Singh, Mahendra Pratap Yadav, Ranjeev Kumar Singh, Chandra Sekhar, Suresh Prasad, Vishram Prasad, Adha Prasad Shukla, Sanjay Kumar and Awadhesh Narayan Tripathi, to Uttar Pradesh, as per their option, as per the revised guidelines dt. 02.11.2007.
   (Action: DoPT)
2. Mutual Transfer cases forwarded by UPRCD for consideration of Central Deptt. were considered by the committee and the mutual transfer were accepted since both the States have given no objection and all other conditions are satisfied :-

| S.
No. | Name \& Designation \&
Deptt.
S/Shri | Date of
Appointment | Name \& Designation \&
Deptt.
S/Shri | Date of
Appointm
ent | Action to
be taken
by |
| :– | :– | :– | :– | :– | :– |
| 1. | Pankaj Sharma, Jr. Clerk,
Commercial Taxes Deptt. | 24.03 .1993 | Brijpal Satpuri, Jr. Clerk,
Commercial Taxes Deptt. | 18.06 .199
3 | DoPT |
| 2. | Ram Krishna Dubey, Sr.
Clerk, O/o
D.
Commissioner | 28.11 .1979 | Jarif Ahmad, Sr. Clerk, O/o
Dy. Commissioner(Admn.) | 12.08 .197
7 | DoPT |
| 3. | Anish Ahmad, Asstt.
Teacher (LT), Rajkiya
Inter College | 05.12 .1988 | Kum Kamlesh Shah, Asstt.
Teacher (LT), Dr. Sushil
Tiwari Rajkiya Kanya Sec. | 20.08 .198
1 | DoPT || | | | School | | |
| — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 4. | Pradeep Kumar Dikshit,
Sr. Assistant | 18.01 .1978 | Smt. Rita Juyal, Sr. Assistant | 30.06 .198 | DoPT |
| | | | | 2 | |

The dates of appointment in two mutual transfer cases of S/Shri Pankaj Sharma, Jr. Clerk, Commercial Taxes Deptt. with Brijpal Satpuri and that of Ram Krishna Dubey, Sr. Clerk with Jarif Ahmad, were intimated by the Deptt. in the meeting. 15. The Committee considered the representations received from the following personnel belonging to reserved category employees of PWD Department. Confirmation regarding SC/ST status have been received from the Government of Uttar Pradesh and Government ofUttarakhand vide Letter No. 2232 EAD/Uttaranchal/08 dated 21.6.2009 and 2416/111 (1)/08-125 (PWD)/2002 TC-2 dated 21.10.2008 and 1063/111(1)/09-125(PWD)02 TC Dehradun dated 22.6.2009. The Committee recommended to allocate all the 17 officials hereunder in view of the clarification issued on 24.6.2010:-

(Action: DoPT) 16. Allocation of Dr. Tripti Bahuguna, Medical Officer (Female), PMHS.

The case of allocation of Dr. Tripti Bahuguna, Medical Officer (Female), PMHS was considered by the Committee. The Deptt. Informed that she had initially opted for Uttarakhand but gave a subsequent option for UP within the option deadline. Her first option was provided to the Committee for consideration. The Committee recommended for her allocation to Uttarakhand on first option basis. (Action: DoPT) The meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.