Shri Muralidhar Sethi, Esqr.
Sr. Supdt. of Post Offices,
Puri Division, Puri – 752 001
Subject:- Minutes of monthly meeting held on 26.08.2011, protest
against incorrect information
No.:- AIPEU-Puri/Con-32 dated at Puri the 26th September, 2011
Ref.:- Divisional Office letter No.B9-M-1/PIV dated 22.09.2011
I am constrained to bring the following facts to your kind notice for early rectification and appropriate orders.
That, I am in receipt of D.O. letter under reference in which the minutes of monthly union meetings held with my union on 26.08.2011 with SSPOs was communicated to me. It is a matter of profound concerned and regret that the minutes are contradictory to the discussions and decisions arrived at in the meeting and in some cases information is provided which was not at all discussed. The same are explained hereunder.
(1) That, along with the Divisional Secretary, Shri Magata Behera, SPM, Pichukuli S.O. attended the meeting on 26.08.2011 on behalf of Staff Side whereas the SSPOs, and ASP(Hqrs.) represented the administration side. But, surprisingly the minutes indicate that Shri Shatrughan Pradhan, SPM, B.S. Nagar accompanied the Divnl. Secy. in the meeting. This incorrect information displays the lack of seriousness of Divisional Administration in dealing with the Service Union. My union strongly protest this kind of activity and hope for better working atmosphere between staff and admn. in coming days.
(2) As regards to item no.5-05/2011, the Dvnl. Admn. agreed in the meeting to the proposal to create a separate work force for system administrator and appreciated suggestion of my union. But, instead of giving a reply in the positive direction reflecting what actually transpired in the meeting, the replies supplied stating that Shri S.K. Sarangi and Shri H.B. Nanda are now promoted to Grade-I Postmaster. This is absolutely irrelevant to our suggestion and not related to the discussion made in the meeting. The Admn. should come forward with specific action taken on the proposal made by my Union which was accepted as good proposal.
(3) As regards to item no.1-07/2011, the reply is most discouraging as it specifies no time for the exercise which will benefit the left out cases of MACP. In fact despite elapse of almost one year, the Screening Committee of our Division has yet to sit and recommend or otherwise the cases of below bench mark grading to the Circle Office for further action. Perhaps it is only in our division, the case very badly neglected which reflects the insensitive attitude of Admn. towards our members. It is not understood what made the Admn. to remain in inertia in spite of the fact that in all other divisions, the exercise has been completed and hundreds of affected staff are benefited. The reply in this item is most casual and is devoid of required sincerity.
(4) That, in respect of item no.2-07/2011, it has been replied that service books have been collected and now are under examination. But, the fact remains that service books have been received for more than five months by now and it is not understood how long it will further take for examination. In the meeting the SSPOs promised to settle the issue very shortly but the reply clearly indicate for an indefinite delay.
(5) As regards to a new item no.1-8/2011, the Divnl. Admn. cited a Dte. instruction against critical discussion any individual item. The service union never raised any individual item as made out to be. In fact we have categorically pointed out the definite violation of instructions contained in C.O. letter No.ST-13/65(RMS-BG) dated 15.06.1984. I enclose a copy of this instruction for kind reference of my SSPOs. Sl. No.ii of para-3 of the said letter clearly directs that no official should be retained in Division Office beyond the prescribed tenure. But, in the case of our Division Office there are a few officials who are working there far beyond their prescribed tenures. They are allowed to backdoor entry in shape of transfer to other offices and brought on deputation to Division Office only a few days thereafter, making a mockery of the instructions stated above. Similarly, the department of posts letter No.4-7/2009-Vig. dated 13.09.2010 clearly certify that the persons working in Staff, Building, Vigilance are dealing with sensitive matters and therefore should not be retained beyond prescribed tenure in compliance with CVC, New Delhi CIRCULAR No.17/4/08 vide No.004/Vgl./90 dated 01.05.2008. But, our Dvnl. Admn. heavily depends upon the Staff-I Assistant in clear defiance to the above three instructions. Therefore, it is not an individual item but an item where the service union pointed out the glaring disobedience of Dte. instructions and CVC guidelines. It is a matter of profound regret that in course of discussion the SSPOs promised to look into the matter and change the controversial Staff-I within a few days by providing adequate training to another staff to fit the post. But, the reply received by my union is entirely different what was actually discussed and arrived at in the meeting. At no point of time, the Admn. side ever pointed out that the service union is precluded from taking an individual item. We reiterate that we are not against any individual person nor my union runs after any individual but we demand that the violations of Dte./CVC guidelines be stopped forthwith and rule of law should prevail. The Divisional Admn. is most unfortunately is taking shelter under falls plea that it is an individual item.
(6) As regards to item no.7-8/2011 concerning inconsistent position of admn. on grant of leave to staff members, it is to point out that some officials have been favoured by the admn. and some others are badly discriminate against. We have not pointed out any individual case and demanded for an appropriate and indiscriminate approach by the admn. But, unfortunately admn. advised us to point out any specific case for examination. It is most amazing that the inconsistency in reply of admn. is glaringly visible in two successive items. In the previous item i.e. item no.1-8/2011, it advised us not to take any individual item whereas here it insists us to provide a specific case. This paradoxical approach demonstrates the confusion of the Dvnl. Admn. in dealing with matters of staff welfare.
Sir, it is most unfortunate to reiterate that this machinery for harmonious staff and administration relations has been devised at the top level for smooth management of affairs and the rights and welfare of staff are duly protected. Therefore, spending huge amount from public exchequer and consuming several man days from highest level to divisional level, from departmental council in JCM to Division union. But the attitude of our dvnl. Admn. is clear detriment to the very objective of functioning of service unions and is a sharp thorn in harmonious relations. The callousness and insensitiveness reflected in the reply communicated to my union vide D.O. letter under reference does not arise to generate from a sound and objective attitude which made a blatant twist to the discussions made in the meeting and contradicted almost every thing while communicating very irrational and irrelevant things which found no mention at all in the meeting. This is most unfortunate and not acceptable at all. If this falsehood persists, there is no meaning for further meetings wasting public money and consuming vital man days. I hope my respected SSPOs will take it in its correct perspective and take remedial actions for non-recurrence of this unfortunate incident in future, besides rectifying the communication made to my union.
With kind regards,
AIPEU Group `C’,
Puri Divisional Branch,
Puri – 752 001
eMail ID – firstname.lastname@example.org
Copy submitted to:-
(1) The Member(P), Postal Services Board, Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi – 110 001.
(2) Mrs. Devika Kumar, IPS Esqr. Chief Postmaster General, Orissa.
(3) The Chief PMG, Orissa Circle, Bhubaneswar – 751 001
(4) Com. K.V. Shreedharan, General Secretary, AIPEU Group `C’, CHQ, Dadaghos Bhawan, New Delhi.
(5) Com. M. Krishnan, Secretary General, NFPE, N. Delhi.
(6) Com. R.N. Dhal, Leader RJCM Staff Side, Cuttack
(7) Shri Ramesh Chandra Mishra, Circle Secretary, Bhubaneswar GPO-751001
AIPEU Group `C’,
Puri Divisional Branch,
Puri – 752 001
eMail ID – email@example.com