Daya SagarNo body can deny that while issuing orders like SRO- 202 of 30-06-2015 (Jammu and Kashmir Special Recruitment Rules, 2015 ) by order of the Governor J&K under Section- 124 of J&K Constitution utmost care was needed for laying down general conditions of recruitment and service for the government employees to be appointed against regular jobs. More so when more than 80 per cent of the new appointees on regular graded posts after 30-06-2015 were to be covered under the rules contained in SRO-202 where in scope was even extended over some gazetted posts too that government of the day may decide for. But surely that was not done judiciously particularly while laying down rules 8, 9 and 10. So was also the requirement to be kept in view by while placing before the Lt Governor of UT of J&K proposals for vetting so as to issue notification S.O 184 of 04-06-2020 ( The Jammu and Kashmir Appointment to Class IV (Special Recruitment Rules 2020) using the authority resting in him under Art-309 of Constitution of India and here too regretfully it could be said that did not happen. No doubt Government of J&K has already issued Notification S.O 184 of 04-06-2020 but not much time has been lost, the posts are yet to be advertised.Even during the time process of new recruitments is going on the amendments could be made and it will have no legal implications since the amended rules would be better than against which the applicants would have applied. What matters is bringing even now the real facts and conditions to the fair information of the Lt. Governors of J&K and Ladakh and the wisdom resting in the “senior & elder” person in them would surely opt for immediate correction. Some good, but some may call them half suggestions, have been made by some people through media for reducing the 5 years probation period to 2 years and have talked of regularising those who have completed two years on an appointed date to be decided by government. To support the suggestion some have also quoted the report No.10 submitted under SLC/2019/R-10 on 13-11-2019 by Jammu And Kashmir State Law Commission headed by Retd Justice M.K. Hanjura(as per the mandate given to commission vide Government Order No. 3379-LD (A) of 2017 dated 04-08-2017 with respect to SRO-202) where in it has been recommended to reduce the probation period to 2 years. The report referring to SRO-202 says Rules 8, 9 and 10 have a direct bearing on the subject .And for making final recommendations the Report , in a way, relies only on Office Memorandum No.28020/l/2010-Estt(c) supra Dated the 2lst July, 2014 issued by theMinistry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel & Training) GOI, Rule 3 (3-i) of which relates to period of Probation or 2 years for direct recruits in Central Government Services other than posts carrying a Grade Pay of Rs. 7600 or above or to the posts to which the maximum age limit is 35 years or above and where no training is involved. The Law Commission report although in Para -1 also makes a reference of Rule- 9 ( During the period of first five years, the appointee shall be entitled to the minimum of scale of pay along with the grade pay ) and Rule -10 (The person appointed under these rules shall be entitled to annual increments, Dearness Allowance, House Rent Allowance and City Compensatory Allowance only after successful completion of five years’ service on consolidated salary ) but has no where examined these rules nor has made any observation about that. It is only Rule -8 ( A person appointed under these rules shall be initially on probation for a period of five years ) that is discussed in report and hence the report can not be taken for guidance with regard to all vital issues concerning SRO-202 and the socio-economic rights & future of those who are affected i.e those already appointed and those who may be appointed in future. Although not directly related to the issue under reference here some leads for applying corrections could be taken from THE INDIAN ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE (PROBATION) RULES, 1954. Asper Rule 3 Period of Probation for every person direct recruited shall be two years. As per Rule -13 Salary during the period of probation.- (1) A person referred to in clause (i) of sub-rule(1) of rule 3 shall receive salary in the lowest stage of the junior time scale applicable to the Service during the first year and at the second stage of that scale during the remaining period of probation. One thing that could be inferred is that the person during probation is getting allowances also and earns equivalent of increments beyond first year during the remaining period of probation. Therefore the recommendations of Law Commission (submitted after nearly 15 months exercise) can only be taken to support the demands / suggestions for revoking or amending SRO-202 but surely can not be accepted as being of ultimate value worth becoming the only base for modifying / amending SRO-202 of June 2015 since (i) though the commission had mandate for looking into Rule-8, 9 and 10 it has discussed only rule 8 i.e probation period (ii) the report talks of only those already appointed and nowhere discusses those who are to be appointed (iii) report has specifically based all recommendations only on one memo of Government of India Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions (Department of Personnel & Training). It is a good sign that some political leadership , though late , has started suggesting to government for revocation of SRO 202 or and modification of the rules contained in SRO-202 and as have been adopted S.O 184 of 04-06-2020 – The Jammu and Kashmir Appointment to Class IV (Special Recruitment Rules ) 2020 but simultaneously accusing others who are near to government. Let us not go into the controversies that politicians often generate and still appreciate what ever concern, though late, the political and social leadership is showing for the common man.
Playing Shakuntala Devi was as intimidating as it was exhilarating: Vidya Balan
‘Glee’ star Naya Rivera found dead at California lake
Sara Ali Khan’s driver tests COVID-19 positive
Amitabh, Abhishek Bachchan stable, don’t require aggressive treatment: hospital sources
Amit Sadh tests negative for COVID-19
© 2020 State Times Daily Newspaper