Recommendation 1: India Post should deliver lightweight, lowcost bank accounts to all Indian citizens and especially to the financially excluded population.
Recommendation 2: India Post should look for ways to leverage its low cost platform by providing India Post branded accounts to other strategic partners, such as MFIs, mutual fund and insurance companies, and telecom operators.
Recommendation 3: India Post should apply itself towards the challenge of achieving high volumes of moneyorders where payments of as little as Rs.10 are achieved at a charge of less than Rs.0.1 while requiring no subsidy from the exchequer.
Recommendation 4: India Post should evolve the moneyorder to become a mechanism for transferring money from one POSB account to another, instead of just being a mechanism for delivering cash from one person to another.
Recommendation 5: India Post must build a payments infrastructure, through an array of contracts with partners, connecting up all POSB accounts and accounts of its partners, to effectively become a persontoperson moneyorder capability (through mobile phones or web browsers) for a large swathe of India.
Recommendation 6: India Post must elicit a large number of partners in terms of financial inclusion players, mobile service providers and innovative new technological choices in order to increase the size of the network.
Recommendation 7: India Post must work closely with a diverse array of government agencies so that their G2P payments requirements are met through a combination of POSB accounts held by citizens and moneyorders delivered by government to those POSB accounts. The Ministry of Finance must work with India Post in rapidly rolling out this platform and network, given its important implications for direct, targeted delivery of government subsidies.
Recommendation 8: India Post should play a role in the emergency credit aspect of financial inclusion, through a platformbuilding approach where private lenders deliver credit to the poor through a competitive framework.
Recommendation 9: India Post should request the addition of its financial inclusionproject into the Terms of Reference of the recently announced Technology Advisory Group for Unique Projects, and the leadership team of the India Post financial inclusion project should closely engage in the work of this Group, so as to bring in the best practices forproject management.
Recommendation 10: The role of the Post Office Savings Bank as an agent of theMinistry of Finance should be revisited and expanded to enable India Post to play a larger, direct role in financial inclusion and build appropriate enabling architecture.
Sunday, August 1, 2010
COUNTING OF APS SERVICE FOR TBOP/BCR
The Department has issued orders to count past adhoc services in APS as regular service for TBOP/BCR promotion.
(Copy of Letter No 93-25/2003-SPB-II dated 21.07.2010 of Department of Posts)
Sub: - Counting of ad-hoc services rendered in Army Postal Service (APS) for the purpose of grant of financial upgradation under Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) Scheme – Reg.
I am directed to refer to the references received regarding the issue of counting of ad-hoc services rendered in Army Postal Service (APS) for the purpose of grant of financial upgradation under Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) Scheme introduced by the Department.
2. It is observed that the issue under reference was considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in C.A No. 5739 of 2005 in the case of UOI Vs Shri Mathivanan. The Apex Court in their judgment dated 09.06.2006 held that the official has completed 16 years of service (after taking into account his adhoc service rendered in APS) and would be entitled to the benefit of paragraph 1 of TBOP scheme and the action of the authorities in not granting the said benefit was illegal and contrary to law. Hon’ble Court observed that so far as placing of an officer in the next ‘higher grade’ is concerned, what was relevant and material was that such official belonging to basic grades in Group ‘C’ and D must have completed ‘sixteen years of service in that Grade’. They pointed out that it no where uses the connotation ‘regular’ service. It was also inter-alia observed “The scheme merely perused that any person having rendered 16/26 years of service without obtaining any promotion could be entitled to benefit therefore. It is, therefore, not a case where promotion to the higher post is to be made only on the basis of seniority.
3. In view of the dismissal of Civil Appeal No. 5739 of 2005-UOI & Ors Vs M. Mathivanan by the Hon’ble Supreme court on the above grounds vide their order dated 09.06.2006, the order dated 03.04.2002 of the Hon’ble CAT, Madras Bench pronounced in OA No. 1094 of 2001 was implemented subject to condition that the official will not be entitled to claim any seniority over those absorbed in the Postal Departmental before he was absorbed, for any purpose whatsoever.
4. It had been brought to the notice of the Directorate that a number of cases have been filed by the officials who have rendered adhoc service in APS seeking the benefit of above stated Apex court order in their cases also. The Department has considered the matter. Department of Personnel & Training and D/o Legal Affairs have also been consulted in the matter.
5. Keeping in view the Apex Court’s decision in M. Mathivanan’s case and the fact that TBOP is not to be granted on the basis of seniority. it has been decided with approval of competent authority to extend the benefit of the Apex Court’s order to similarly placed serving officials.
6. The TBOP scheme now stands withdrawn w.e.f. 01.09.2008 after introduction of Modified Career Progress Scheme (MACPS). It is, therefore, advised that all the cases of officials similar to the case of Shri. Mathivanan for grant of TBOP/BCR upto the period 31.08.2008 may be decided by counting the adhoc service rendered by them in APS.
7. This issues with the approval of Secretary (Posts)
(Copy of Letter No 93-25/2003-SPB-II dated 21.07.2010 of Department of Posts)
Sub: - Counting of ad-hoc services rendered in Army Postal Service (APS) for the purpose of grant of financial upgradation under Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) Scheme – Reg.
I am directed to refer to the references received regarding the issue of counting of ad-hoc services rendered in Army Postal Service (APS) for the purpose of grant of financial upgradation under Time Bound One Promotion (TBOP) Scheme introduced by the Department.
2. It is observed that the issue under reference was considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in C.A No. 5739 of 2005 in the case of UOI Vs Shri Mathivanan. The Apex Court in their judgment dated 09.06.2006 held that the official has completed 16 years of service (after taking into account his adhoc service rendered in APS) and would be entitled to the benefit of paragraph 1 of TBOP scheme and the action of the authorities in not granting the said benefit was illegal and contrary to law. Hon’ble Court observed that so far as placing of an officer in the next ‘higher grade’ is concerned, what was relevant and material was that such official belonging to basic grades in Group ‘C’ and D must have completed ‘sixteen years of service in that Grade’. They pointed out that it no where uses the connotation ‘regular’ service. It was also inter-alia observed “The scheme merely perused that any person having rendered 16/26 years of service without obtaining any promotion could be entitled to benefit therefore. It is, therefore, not a case where promotion to the higher post is to be made only on the basis of seniority.
3. In view of the dismissal of Civil Appeal No. 5739 of 2005-UOI & Ors Vs M. Mathivanan by the Hon’ble Supreme court on the above grounds vide their order dated 09.06.2006, the order dated 03.04.2002 of the Hon’ble CAT, Madras Bench pronounced in OA No. 1094 of 2001 was implemented subject to condition that the official will not be entitled to claim any seniority over those absorbed in the Postal Departmental before he was absorbed, for any purpose whatsoever.
4. It had been brought to the notice of the Directorate that a number of cases have been filed by the officials who have rendered adhoc service in APS seeking the benefit of above stated Apex court order in their cases also. The Department has considered the matter. Department of Personnel & Training and D/o Legal Affairs have also been consulted in the matter.
5. Keeping in view the Apex Court’s decision in M. Mathivanan’s case and the fact that TBOP is not to be granted on the basis of seniority. it has been decided with approval of competent authority to extend the benefit of the Apex Court’s order to similarly placed serving officials.
6. The TBOP scheme now stands withdrawn w.e.f. 01.09.2008 after introduction of Modified Career Progress Scheme (MACPS). It is, therefore, advised that all the cases of officials similar to the case of Shri. Mathivanan for grant of TBOP/BCR upto the period 31.08.2008 may be decided by counting the adhoc service rendered by them in APS.
7. This issues with the approval of Secretary (Posts)
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(Suraj Bhan)
Asstt. Director General (SPN)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
