Ensure minimum 3% Increment in all stages : Staff Side, NC(JCM)

Ensure minimum 3% Increment in all stages : Staff Side, NC(JCM)

Ensure minimum 3% Increment in all stages : Staff Side, NC(JCM)

Goverment of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances &
Pensions, Department of Personnel Training, North Block, New Delhi,
Letter F.No.11/2/2016-JCA-I(Pt.) dated 30th October, 2017 regarding
Items proposed by the Staff-Side, NC(JCM) for discussion in the National
Anomaly Committee — Comments of DoPT regarding

 3% Increment in all stages – Staff-Side, NC(JCM)


DoPT comment: The Staff-Side argues that in spite of the foreword to the Report making it clear in para 1.19 that the prevailing rate of increment is considered quite satisfactory and has been retained, an illustrative list appended by them shows instances where the pay, gone up after the addition of annual increment by 3%, falls short of what it would have been. They have quoted para-5.1.38 of the report also which states that the rate of annual increment would be 3%.

While what the Staff-Side has stated has its own merits, the fact of the matter is that the principle followed here is whenever a stage of pay, after addition of an increment, falls short of the nearest hundred by less than 50, the employee would be entitled to get the amount mentioned in the immediately next cell in the Pay-Matrix. However, when the gap is that of more than 50, the pay, on addition of an increment, is rounded off to the nearest hundred which travels backward.

Read also :  Revised rate of Uniform Allowance, Kit Maintenance Allowance and Washing Allowance for RPF/RPSF personnel | 6th & 7th CPC

For instance, if staying at Rs. 46,100/- one gets an increment @ 3%, instead of having his/her pay fixed at Rs. 47,483/- (which is the exact figure), it will be Rs. 47,500/- (thus gaining by Rs. 13/-). Thus it is not a case of permanent loss as the loss in one year is made good in the second/third year. Considering this to be a situation of swings and roundabouts, this may not be treated as a case of anomaly.

click here to read DoPT’s F.No.11/ 2/ 2016-JCA-I(Pt.) dated 30.10.2017