ALL INDIA CENTRAL EXCISE INSPECTORS ASSOCIATION, HYDERABAD ZONE BRANCH, HYDERABAD

Date: 14-7-2011 To: The Secretary General, AICEIA.

Dear Comrade,

The following are the suggestions of Hyderabad Zone Branch on the proposed Transfer Policy for GroupB (Gazetted and Non-Gazetted) Officers of CBEC.Kly do peruse these suggestions and incorporate the same in your letter to Chairman and DG-HRM. 1.The Draft Transfer Policy (DTP) eloquently stated that the objective and the aim of the proposed transfer & posting policy guidelines for Group B Executive Gazetted& Non-gazetted officers is: to provide standard norms, transparency, objectivity and increased perception of fair-play and clarity in annual general transfers and to promote integrity, efficiency, improved performance and at the same time provide necessary flexibility to senior management and empower them to formulate zonal transfer policies taking into account local factors.

While lauding this avowed objective, it can be surmised from this DTP that the Board wittingly or unwittingly is trying to empower the local Chief Commissioners to formulate a local Zonal Transfer Policy without following the tenets of fairplayand transparency since in para Q (ii) of the DTP it is mentioned that the Chief Commissioners have the discretion to deviate from the transfer guidelines, subject to recording the reasons for deviation in file. This empowerment will entitle the CCs to formulate their own transfer policy discriminately for exercising discretionary powers under colourable perceptions and without taking into account the local and regional factors. Once these guidelines are issued, the CCs should frame the local Transfer Policies which should be in consonance and consistent with these guidelines and no discretion to deviate from these guidelines should be bestowed on CCs.
2. The then Chairman of CBEC vide his DO letter 11-7-1997 and Board vide its instructions vide DOF No. A-22015/27/96-Ad.III, dt.24-6-1996, DOF No. A.22015/30/2001-Ad.III, dt.17-4-2011 and F.No. C-18013/93/99-AD.III-B, dt. 20-1-2000 has categorically and unambiguously stated that while framing any transfer policy at local level, the views of the associations should be called for and the transfer policy should be finalized after taking into account the views of the associations and on the basis of regional, geographical and local conditions. This crucial condition is glaringly missing in the DTP as in para Q (i) of the DTP states that the Chief Commissioners are empowered to issue Zonal Transfer Policies,

which are consistent with these guidelines. In the absence of this conditions, the CCs will not frame the transfer policy judiciously and dispassionately and may be tempted to frame a draconian and retrograde Transfer Policy which may cause untold mischief, misery, unrest and displacement to the Group-B Officers. Therefore, it is of paramount importance that before Transfer Policy is framed, Associations views should be called for and it should be finalized after taking into account the associations views and suggestions. 3. The vigilance sections are proposed to be categorized as sensitive in the DTP. To be categorized any formation as sensitive the criteria should be the interaction with the Trade and doing basic field work and since the vigilance sections do not envisage any interaction with Trade and doing the field work, there is no meaning in categorization of Vigilance as sensitive. 4. Para E (vi) of the DTP states that First posting on appointment / promotions / reversion from Customs Commissionerate of the officers in the grade of Inspector /Superintendent in a Central Excise / Service Tax Commissionerate, should be, as far as administratively possible, to a non-sensitive charge. While this is required for promotion to the entry level officer into the executive cadre i.e. Inspector Cadre on promotion or on Direct appointment, there seems to be no merit for including this condition for subsequent promotion in the executive cadre i.e. from Inspector to Superintendent cadre. As such, this condition should not be there for promotion to Superintendent cadre. 5. Para E(vii) states the first posting of the officers coming on an InterCommissionerate Transfer, within a zone, should be, as far as administratively possible, to a non-sensitive charge. This condition will defeat the very purpose of rotation of officers between sensitive and non-sensitive postings after certain periodicity. Suppose one officer who has completed his prescribed tenure of nonsensitive posting in one Commissionerate and is due for sensitive posting and is transferred to another Commissionerate on ICT transfer within a Zone, if he is posted to non-sensitive posting based on this condition, he will be deprived of his sensitive posting in the new Commissionerate. As such, this condition has no meaning and relevance and will create heartburn and problems in the rotation of the officers. 6. At paraJ it is stated that posting to Central Excise formations located outside Commissionerate / Directorate where no residential accommodation is available should ordinarily be for one year. However, a willing officer may be permitted to work in such charge not exceeding two years at a stretch. This condition seems to be a little harsh and uncalled for. If the officer belongs to a particular mofussil area and interested to work in and around particular moffussil area he should permitted to work there without any restricted tenure. This will stop compulsory rotation between main Commissionerate city areas and outside areas like moffussils and thus saves precious government expenditure on transfer TA on account of compulsory rotations. The basic objective of the transfer should be to take care of the well being of the officers and once this is taken care of, the

productivity of the officer will be enhanced and vice-versa if unwilling officers are posted in the moffussil areas as a matter of routine and policy matter. Thanking you, Yours comradely, Sd/(B.P.K.Reddy) General Secretary