July, 2014 | Info Provided by Ch. Muhammad Iftikhar President APA&AO Association

MEETING OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE
UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF DG (HRM) AGP OFFICE
Expected to be held on 08.07.2014

July, 2014 | Info Provided by Ch. Muhammad Iftikhar President APA&AO Association

PROPOSALS SUBMITTED BY
ALL PAKISTAN AUDIT AND ACCOUNTS OFFICERS (COMBINED) ASSOCIATION
TO THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY THE AUDITOR GENERAL OF PAKISTAN

1. Following the introduction of the administrative reforms by the PM on 20-08-1973 and abolition of services as a result thereof, the President was pleased to constitute an occupational Group called the Accounts Group(Now PA&AS). The broad framework of rules and regulations within which the group was to function was brought out vide Establishment Division OM No. 1/2/74-ARC dated 23-01-1974(Annexure-A). All officers entering BS-17 whether through CSS or by promotion were to be placed in one combined seniority list. All other occupational Groups except PSP constituted subsequently were constituted in line with these provisions placing Grade-17 officers, direct as well as promotees, in one combined seniority list. Promotees of a calendar year were to rank senior to their counterparts coming through CSS. PSP has different provisions because officers of BPS-17 belonging to provincial cadre of the Provinces are placed in Federal Service. Provincial Police Officers join the Federal Service in BS-18 against the quota of respective Province.

2. The provisions contained in OM dated 23-01-1974 were amended by the Establishment Division vide OM No. 2/1/75-ARC dated 03-03-1976 retrospectively w.e.f 23-01-1974 whereby IDC was created and placement of officers in one combined seniority list was denied. The said amendment was made without approval of the authority which approved the original provisions. Its legality remains questionable and is open to debate. This arrangement was also subject to review after five (05) years. The administration of the IDC was placed with AGPwhile that of departmental cadre with the respective departmental heads. Framework ibid provided that any major difficulty which may arise will be resolved in a meeting of the Establishment Secretary, the Finance Secretary and the AGP.

3. Creation of IDC is unique in nature and has no parallel with any other Service Group. Horizontal movement of departmental cadre in the IDC is another denial of the service put in by the officers. Experience gained in implementing IDC was to become subject matter of the review which had not been carried out and adhoc arrangement has been continuing un-abated and un-hindered till date.

4. Establishment Division which, as per Rules of Business, 1973 is mandated to issue rules, instructions and policy guidelines for various occupational Groups arranged three exercises for the purpose of reviewing the arrangements but the review could not be finalized. Position of all the three reviews carried out are reproduced below:-

a) First review letter No. 767-IDC II/I-I/81 dated 30-04-1991 (Annexure-B) from the AGP office recommended that;

• 40 percent of all Departmental cadre posts may be placed in BPS-18 with the incumbents retaining their existing designations of A.O. / equivalent.
• Induction of BPS-18 Departmental cadre officers into I.D.C. to be made against Dy. Accountant General/ equivalent posts after processing and approval by the existing D.P.C. and competent authority.
• All vacancies in Dy. Accountant General/ equivalent posts to be filled by promotion/ induction of BPS-18 Departmental cadre Officers in the ratio of 50:50.
• All posts of Dy. Accountant General/ equivalent of the I.D.C to carry a special pay of Rs.250 p.m.
• Recruitment to BPS 17 posts of I.D.C to continue through Federal Public Service Commission as hithertofore.
• Creation of 80 posts in BPS 18, 37 in BPS 19, 12 in BPS 20 and 1 in BPS 21 by conversion of 130 existing BPS 17 IDC posts.

b) Second review by Regulation Wing of Establishment Division vide their U.O NoF.9/1/94-R.4 dated 02-07-1995(Annexure-C) proposed that,

• The Establishment Division O.M.No 1/2/74- ARC dated 23-01-1974 may further be amended with immediate effect by deleting the amendments made vide Establishment Division’s O.M No 2/1/75pARC dated 03-03-1976.
• Instead of induction of the officers in IDC in BS 17 or BS-18, all the posts in the Accounts Group as exist presently whether in the IDC or in Departmental cadre be placed in one cadre with combined seniority list.
• The posts in the Accounts Group in BS-17 may be filled in the existing ratio by direct recruitment and by departmental promotion respectively.
• Seniority of all the officers in BPS-17 be maintained in accordance with the provisions of section 8 of the civil servants Act 1973 read with the civil servants (seniority) rules 1993.

c) Third review by CP Wing of Establishment Division vide their U.O. No. 3/1/78-CP-11 dated 13-12-1997 (Annexure-D), in addition to the recommendations given in para (b) above pointed out that the petition filed by the All Pakistan Audit and Accounts Officers (Combined) Association to the President Islamic Republic of Pakistan has been considered in this Secretariat. It has been observed that the officers of Departmental Cadre in the Accounts Group have not been given their due share of promotion as envisaged in the Administrative Reforms. Main reasons of blockade of their career progression is the creation of Inter Departmental Cadre which in itself is a defiance of equal rights of promotion to the entrants of a particular grade and is also discriminatory and unique in its nature as no such reservations are available in any other occupational group. There is another alternative option under consideration too and that is to keep the direct entrants and promotee officers in their own streams in BS-17 and to make inductions in BS-18 at the ratio of 75:25 of departmental officers and direct officers respectively, the ratio of their contribution in BS-17. Establishment Division is in touch with the Auditor General of Pakistan and will resolve the issue amicably very shortly.

5. The administration of AGP has all along been pro-direct officers and anti promotees. In the Era from 1976 to 1991 the post of IDC in BPS-17 were never filled in the ratio of 50:50.Supreme Court of Pakistan in its judgment dated 16-07-1991 held that the words 50:50 and on year to year basis are significant. They provide the principle, or a special formula, for induction in the Inter departmental cadre. This formula required that in each year a number of posts available for the promotes should be equal the number of direct recruits appointed in that year; otherwise the ration of 50:50 on year to year basis could not maintained. In pursuance of this judgment AGP inducted 108 officers to make good the shortfall. The officers were however, not placed along with the batches of CSS and were deprived of their consequential promotion rights.
6. Following the administrative reforms all services stood abolished and employees of a specific Service Group are appointed with reference to posts and pay scales. Similarly service put in by the Govt. Servant in the feeding cadre is duly recognized and counted for the purposes of promotion in BS-18 and above in terms of Establishment Division OM No. 1/9/80-R-2 dated 02-06-1983. These provisions are implemented in all S/Groups and were implemented in the PA&AS too up to 2008. Present Admin in sheer disregard of the Government instructions has withheld this benefit.

7. Seniority on promotion is determined with reference to date of regular promotion provided that officers promoted in one batch retain their inter-seniority as in the lower post. (Section-8(4) of CSA, 1973 and para-9(iii) of Framework of rules and procedure applicable to PAAS). All other provisions to determine seniority of the PAAS officers stand either abolished or the same do not apply to the PAAS. The present admin has not implemented these rules and CSS officers promoted in 2007 & 2008 have been placed senior to the inducted officers promoted in 2006. This is the height of un-fairness and injustice and is needed to be addressed.

8. Posting on Own Pay Scale (OPS) basis has been held irregular by the Honourable Supreme Court. The AGP office is still continuing with the same and no officer posted as such has been reverted to the original position.

9. The posts in departmental cadre were up-graded in pursuance of FST’s Judgment upheld by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Government of Pakistan issued necessary notification and subsequently upon placement of the offices in the higher pay scale, Recruitment Rules of all these posts i.e. qualification and experience were reviewed, revised, approved by the Establishment Division, FPSC and notified by the AGP. The posts and the incumbents were once up-graded but promoted on regular basis thereafter from time to time. The up-gradation is now an event happening some 4 years ago and repeated adverse references made by the IDC officers association against the up-gradation is a far cry and an attempt to frustrate the judgment of the honorable court. This is needed to be avoided. The hard fact of upgradation is also needed to be realized, swallowed, digested and consumed even if it is a bitter tasted pill.

10. Let me also place on record that the framework of rules and procedure applicable to the PAAS as it exists is also a living document catering for various scenarios as and when those emerge. Para 4(a) caters for the situation on initial formation of the cadre, distribution of BS-17 posts sanctioned after 20-08-1973between DC and IDC and the provision that the cadre shall in addition comprise all posts in grade-18 and above in the Accounts Group. Para-4(b) provides that appointment to BPS-17 on the initial formation of IDC will be made by allocating posts to the promotee officers and direct recruits in BS-17 in the ratio of 50:50 on year to year basis. Future appointment to BS-17 posts in the cadre will also be made in the same ratio. The officers so placed in IDC BS-17 will interms of para 5 be promoted to Grade-18 and above in accordance with prescribed procedure.

11. Para 4 © lays down that all officers who are holding posts in BS-18 and above on regular basis shall be deemed to have been appointed to the IDC in their respective grade. This leads to conclude that para -4(b) read with, para-5 deal with the officers who are appointed to IDC (BS-17) and para-4(c) exclusively deals with the officers of the group in BS-18 and above. These appointments to grade -18 may be through lateral entry or any other mechanism like the one in the instant case. Induction as provided in the set of rules is in BS-17 and the feeding cadre as at present is AAO (BS-17). AOs are regular BS-18 officers and come under the purview of para 4(c). This is the only interpretation of the existing rules and our first priority is to emphasize upon the administration to implement it in letter and spirit and fill in all BS-17 IDC posts reserved for induction of promotee officers since 2009 till 2014 and place them along with the respective batches of the CSS because non induction has caused a serious damage to lateral promotions of Senior Auditor as AAO and Junior Auditors as Senior Auditors.

12. The association therefore, proposes following amendments in the rules for the future:

The IDC may be abolished with immediate effect and all the offices whether in the DC or the IDC may be placed in one combined Seniority List with reference to regular appointment in a particular grade as recommended by the Establishment Division vide UO No.3/1/78-CP-II dated 13-02-1997

or

• (a) The IDC may continue but all posts in BS-17 may be distributed amongst the DC officers and IDC officers in the ratio of 87.5:12.5. The IDC officers in this grade will be the CSS officers only.
• (b) All BS-18 posts borne on IDC may be filled in by promotion of CSS officers joining service in BS-17.
• (c) The posts in BS-19 may be distributed amongst the DC officers and IDC officers in the existing ratio of 50:50 and the two classes may be promoted against the posts so reserved for them as is done in PSP. Seniority in this grade be combined.

13. IDC was created in 1976 and has been in the field for last 38 years. Its practical implementation has frustrated all norms of justice and fair play. The CSS officers who had been 12½% of the cadre strength of BS-17 have occupied all positions un-shared and in whole some. The association regrets to be a part of it any further and work like bonded labour but no future advancement in the service.

(CH. MUHAMMAD IFTIKHAR)
President

July, 2014 | Info Provided by Ch. Muhammad Iftikhar President APA&AO Association

REDRESSAL OF GRIEVANCES
DEPARTMENTAL PROMOTEES OF PAKISTAN AUDIT & ACCOUNTS SERVICE
TO PRIME MINISTER OF PAKISTAN

I have the honor to submit following few lines to highlight the treatment meted by the Auditor General of Pakistan to the Departmental Promotees of Pakistan Audit & Accounts Service. Your kind intervention to redress these genuine grievances with the kind approval of the Honorable Prime Minister of Pakistan.

Sir, Department of the Auditor General, as per Rules of Business 1973 as an attached department of Ministry of Finance. Its employees are Civil Servants as defined in Civil Servant Act 1973 and are governed by the provision of the Act, Rules made there under and policy instructions and orders issued by the Establishment Division, Government of Pakistan from time to time. Frame work of rules and procedures applicable to Pakistan Audit & Accounts Service (PAAS) is the key document to be observed for personnel management. Auditor General of Pakistan (AGP) is administrator of the service group and is responsible to administer service. Any difficulty in practical implementation is to be sorted out by the AGP in a meeting amongst him, Secretary Finance and Secretary Establishment.

Department has however, miserably failed to promote professionalism, ensure implementation of key provision of the framework of rules and procedures of PAAS just and equitable opportunities of promotion to all on the basis of qualification and experience. Management has been CSS friendly and have declined the Promotees their just legitimate rights and opportunities of promotions. Present AGP has been extremely unfair, callous and ruthless to the promote class. Some of his venomous actions are:-

• Establishment Division, Government of Pakistan S.R.O-41(1)/81 dated 12 th Jan 1981 imposed a ban on promotion of an officer unless his senior in seniority list is regularly promoted. S.R.O.269(1)/2000 dated 19 th May 2000 undid it. Three AGP’s named Mr. Manzoor Hussain, Mr. Muhammad Younis Khan and Mr. Tanveer Ali Agha made promotions of all officers eligible under the provisions of S.R.O dated 19 th May 2000. Present Auditor General has refused to make any such promotion. He is running the business by posting officers of lower grade against higher posts in “Own Pay Scale”, the term which is nowhere provided in APT Rules 1973.
• Minimum length of service for eligibility of promotion of officers is determined under instructions issued by the Establishment Division vide its O.M No 1/9/80-R-2(A) dated 12 th Jan 1981 read with O.M No 1/9/80-R-2 dated 2 nd June 1983. This amendment dated 18 th Dec 2008 was withdrawn abinitio vide Establishment Division O.M No 1/9/80-R-II dated 3 rd March 2010 present AGP has not implemented this withdrawal and continuing with the provisions of O.M dated 18 th Dec 2008 despite clear orders addressed to him vide O.M No F-3/22/2007-R-II dated 12 th Sep 2011.
• Seniority of PAAS officers in BS-18 and above is determined w.r.t. date of regular continuous officiation in the post as provided under section 8(4) of CSA 1973, para 9(iii) of Rules and procedures applicable to PAAS and rules 7(iii) read with rule 1(2)(iii) of civil servants (seniority ) rules 1993. AGP managed a wrong clarification from Establishment Division vide their O.M No 3/22/2007-R-II dated 31 st Oct 2008. On pointing out that wrongness to the Establishment Division that Division withdrew their clarification vide O.M No F-3/22/2007-R-II dated 16 th April 2012 addressed to the AGP. The Honorable AGP had stood firm and unmoved and is continuing with the clarification dated 31 st Oct 2008.
• Para 4(b) of the framework of Rules and Procedures applicable to PAAS provides for appointment in IDC (B-17) posts by allocating vacancies arising in that grade to the officers of Departmental cadre and the CSS officers in the ratio of 50:50. No induction has been made by the AGP against this 50% quota of departmental cadre for last 6 years i.e. 2009 to 2014. CSS officers are continuously enrolled each year. This has caused promotion blockade of the Departmental Cadre officers.
• Post of AOs was upgraded to B-18 by the Government of Pakistan in compliance of FST Judgment upheld by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Para 4(c) of the framework ibid enjoins that all officers who are holding posts in grade 18 and above on regular basis shall be deemed to have been appointed to the IDC in their respective grade. AGP declined to recognize this position and had been trying to hoodwink and frustrate the court judgment. The stances taken by the AGP from time to time are explained here under:-
• It gave a clarification at its own that upgradation of post of AO is for the purpose of pay only and there is no change in status.
• AGP wrote to the Establishment Division that upgradation of the post of AO to BS-18 poses serious challenge to the structure of the PAAS. AO’s (B-17) were serving under DAG/DD (B-18). Due to this upgradation, it is not practical to implement this arrangement. AGP under the garb of this difficulty proposed to upgrade post of AAG’s (CSS officers) from B-17 to 18.
• Establishment Division declined the proposal being discriminatory with other service groups and proposed that induction of departmental cadre officers be made at two levels. Firstly in B-17 amongst B-17 officers and 2 nd in B-18 amongst B-18 AO’s in the ratio of 50:50 on year to year basis.
• AGP had meeting with the Establishment Division at Additional AGP level and in the joint meeting it was recommended that AO B-18 may be given an option to join IDC in B-17 in the ratio of 50:50 on year to year basis and to make amendment in the framework ibid accordingly.
• Establishment Division vide its OM dated 26 th July 2011 requested the Auditor General office to confirm that proposed change will not amount to violation of FST judgment read with directions dated 15 th March 2010 regarding upgradation of the posts of AO’s from B-17 to B-18. AGP at its own confirmed that it will not in conflict with the judgment order.
• In the meanwhile Former Law Minister wrote a DO letter to the Secretary Establishment Division with the following proposals:-
• The direct officers and the promote officers may continue to be appointed and promoted in B-18 in their own stream.
• Supervisory post may start in B-19 as is being done in other occupational groups, these posts may be distributed amongst the promote officer and direct officers in the ratio of 50:50. Seniority in this grade may be combined and maintained with reference to regular continuous officiation in that post.
• Alternatively 4 tear formula presently working in education & health department successfully may be extended to the promote class of audit and accounts service.
• Establishment Division accordingly moved a summary for the Prime Minster for making proposed change in the framework ibid of the PAAS. AGP opposed the proposal of Federal Minster for Law, Justice & parliamentary affairs and solicited approval of the Prime Minister to induct AO (B-18) in IDC (B-17).
• Law Justice and Parliamentary Affairs did not support the summary on the following grounds:-

The summary seeks to

• Amend retrospectively the establishment division OM No 1/2/74-ARC dated 23 rd Jan 1974 for the purpose of making consequential amendments after upgradation of the post of Accounts Officers and Audit Officers from B-17 to B-18 and
• Require incumbents of the upgraded post to give a definite option for joining the IDC in B-17 (and not in B-18) viz-a-viz direct recruits (who are appointed in B-17) whoever protecting their pay only in B-18.

It may be pointed out that:-

• Sub section 2 of section 3 of civil servant act of 1973 provides that the term and condition of the service of any person to whom this act applies shall not be varied to his disadvantage. Whereas in this case these are being varied adversely.
• Section 8 of the said act read with civil servant seniority rules 1993 provides for determination of sonority of a civil servant to be at par with other civil servants in the same cadre service or post but the proposed summary in its present form would affect this right of the civil servants of the upgraded post.
• An order or notification operation of which is to the disadvantage of a party cannot operate retrospectively and if it is for the benefit of the party then it can be made operative retrospectively. Reliance is made on judgment of the superior courts reported as PLD 2001 SC 340 and PLD 2006 Lahore 525.
• From the above it will be clear that the AGP has blatantly violated the rules and the instructions issued by the Establishment Division from time to time. His reply to the Establishment Division that induction of B-18 officers in B-17 will not be agsint the FST/ Supreme Court judgement has proved incorrect as per views of Law & Justice Division. All these actions have frustrated the judgments given by Honorable Court incompliance whereof the post of AO was upgraded. The AGP has also not proved his ability to dispense justice even to the manpower of his own department i.e. promote class and had sided with the CSS officers at the cost of ranker officers. He had made a mess of good governance and rule of law. It is accordingly requested that:-
• The administration of the service group may be withdrawn from the AGP and entrusted to the Establishment Division, Government of Pakistan for transparent administration of the service.
• The rules and instructions issued by the Government of Pakistan, Establishment Division as refer to above may be ordered to be implemented.
• On upgradation of the post of AO, it is not practical to continue with the existing system and structure. The proposal given by the Law Minister is the most practicable preposition and may be considered for approval.
• Another option is induction mechanism at two levels as recommended by the Establishment Division which may be considered for approval.

(CH. MUHAMMAD IFTIKHAR)
President

July, 2014 | Info Provided by Ch. Muhammad Iftikhar President APA&AO Association

INDUCTION IN IDC
AUDIT OFFICERS (BS-18) / ACCOUNTS OFFICERS (BS-18)

July, 2014 | Info Provided by Ch. Muhammad Iftikhar President APA&AO Association

ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUE ARISING DUE TO UP-GRADATION OF AUDIT/ACCOUNT OFFICERS
by Ahmad Taimoor Nasir Director MATI & Mr. Raza Shah (CMA-OP) 2nd July, 2014

*******************************************************************************