Dear All,

A lot has been said about Indian crab mentality whereby we climb on each other to reach the top, in the process pulling others down. What we excel in is also our ability to CLAW others in the process.
The attitude and stance of PEXs and ASDs across the board only speaks of such behaviour. We call ourselves intelligent and creative people, but cannot figure out the destructive tendencies of our detractors to split us and spread bad blood between us.
I have said enough number of times that no one gains by stalling the DPCs. People who voice these false accusations should realise that everyone is interested in promotions as they are long overdue. Why would people like Jose, Amlan, Pramod Mehta or Sachidanand Singh stymie the process when they have put all their energies and precious time, not to speak of money to bring to light all the errors of the past and get them rectified. People, for their selfish reasons want to believe the rumours that AUPO is opposing the DPC as such people want their own promotions in a hurry whether the list is rectified or not and other 'interlopers' supercede us or not. Their interest is not beyond their own selfish motive. In any 'agitation'/movement, matters that are broader and general are taken up to undo the wrongs of the system. But such selfish people have neither ethics nor courage to stand up for others. They can only remain in the background and complain about the 'delays' and 'divisions'.
If anyone is unhappy about the progress or the direction, one is free to always file a separate complaint in court. What is preventying them. Dont people know that Sachidanandji filed the case of denying production posts to PEXs as an individual. So did Pramodji on several cases or Jose and Amlan on Ashraf Lone case etc. One has to come forward and show the courage, conviction and temerity to expose the wrongs in the dept and not just end up whining that nothings happenning. Yes, i agree our opinions and approaches differ always. But if i'm not satisfied with the way things are going, then i should atleast take a lead by filing a case rather than bring others down. If i dont do it, then my approach would be to let others do something and wait for the benefits.
As we all agreed, AUPO does not have leaders. Everyone is equal and vested with the authority to take their own decision/action. Can we have a better democracy anywhere? So whats the complaint of people. What is stopping them from going ahead with knocking on the doors of courts for reasons they think AUPO is not concentrating.
I had many discussions in the past with Jose on many such issues on whether i can go to court on different issues. Jose was helpful with the background information and papers and also advised me about the approach. Recently, as a fallout of such grumblings which was conveyed to Jose, he readily sent all the required documents of the previous court orders and many related matters which are of immense help to 82/83 batch people. In spite of getting these papers, if the concerned officers cannot take a small walk to the nearest CAT, they have no right to blame poeple already engrossed in pursuing the other cases. If i were in their position, i would give up after hearing the constant crtiticism. But those in Delhi are made of more sterner stuff and integrity and conviction which is making them carry on the battle. Let us atleast do our bit. How many have really contributed to AUPO, may i ask?
Lets atleast lend our moral support and solidarity instead of complaining. If somebody disagrees, please come forward and lead the way.
Such people should ask themselves what PSA has done in all these years. They have waited for over 20 years for promotion as PSA has done nothing to get the dept to hold the DPCs annually. Ours is the only cadre for whom DPCs are not held annually. Even engineering cadre has annual DPCs. All PSA has done over the years was to promote their own cronies out of turn.The many other failings of PSA are --putting a ban on direct recruitment. Otherwise all of us would have become SDs through this channel years ago. The enhancement of basic from 1400 to 2000 in 96 exclusively benefitted the promotees. Why wasnt the PEXs scale enhanced to 2200. How can two unequal cadres draw the same scale. Didnt DRs lose as a result which was rectified by AUPO. The recent 'largess' to TREXs again wherein they got a double benefit from 4200 to 4600 prior to MACP and after MACP another raise to 4800. Why are PEXs denied this. The PSA bosses told me in Delhi that PExs scale would be raised from 4800 to 5400 on par with other central govt depts which never happened. When i asked Sanjay Srivastav for the reasons for delay in 2009, he said "PExs are going to get 5400 in any case because of MACP". I told him that we should be getting both these benefits, as one is part of VIth pay commissions and the other due to stagnation, he argued saying one cannot get two financial benefits in 10 years. If he is listening can he explain why TREXs got this benefit. Besides, how did only TREXs get promotion in 2009 when promotions a;ways take place from top to bottom and not the reverse.
If people can make sense of this and find answers in the deep recesses of their own hearts and minds, even if they do not want to say it aloud, you have been true to yourself.
I request everyone to stay united till our charter of demands are met in totality.
Regards
ujwala

Dear All,

In order to facilitate an early conduct of the DPC , and the attempts by the Department to delay the review DPC, AUPO had pleaded in the contempt peition that the Department was deliberately trying to delay the Review DPC by sending in lists of ineligible people to UPSC.
AUPO has also met Chairperson, Prasar Bharati and requested her that the CRISIS being faced by UPSC Pexs should be brought up as an Agenda before the Board..
In a major development , in the contempt petiiton, the court ordered that in order to ascertain the true facts about the undue delay in conducting review DPC from UPSC , a senior officer from UPSC to inform the court about the reasons for undue delay in review DPC /regular DPC and status of the matter.
The UPSC has now filed an affidavit in the contempt petition, stating that the Department has sent an eligiblity list of 804 persons for review and regular DPC’s for the period from 1993 to 1997 by showing their date of appointment from July 1968, to October , 1985 without indicating, how they were appointed.
The UPSC has willy nilly informed the court, through their affidavit that they are not in a position to conduct the review DPC using the eligibility lists sent by the Department .
The UPSC affidavit states:-
a) before undertaking the review DPC, the UPSC would need , to verify the date of regular service, of staff artists, who were inducted along with the Pexs as per the 1984 rules;
b) that the UPSC would need to verify eligibility of persons who were appointed on contract basis, after the cut off date for becoming government servant,
c) that they would have to verify final seniority list and options
Thus the UPSC affidavit, while rejecting the possibility of conducting the review DPC using the eligibility list sent to them also exposes the fact that DG:AIR and the Ministry have wasted a lot of precious time in preparing meaningless eligibility lists which do not even specify the date of regular service in the grade .
As UPSC says the lists have been prepared “without indicating, how they were appointed.”
T The UPSC affidavit states that concerted efforts will be made by UPSC to scrutinize the records with the administrative Ministry at the earliest possible time.
(AUPO would also like to clarify, that this so called eligibility list rejected by the UPSC ( was supported by the PSA). This list contains several irregularities such as using date of engagement on contract as regular service in the grade of Pex. It contains the names of Trexs who had been promoted in 1989 without regular vacancies. It further contains the names of all contractual people regularized in 1989/and by a Scheme of 1991.
At the same time, , this so called eligibility list does not contain the name of even a single UPSC recruited Programme Executive in regular service in the years 1988 and 1991 ….. who have put in 23 and 20 years service!
Meanwhile, AUPO had a meeting with Smt. Mrinal Pande, Chairperson of the Prasar Bharati Board, and Sh. Shiv Kumar, Member (Personnel) . AUPO has ALSO written to the present CEO, PB, Sh. Rajiv Takru asking that the serious crisis of the UPSC Pexs be taken up as an Agenda item before the Prasar Bharati Board . AUPO has pointed out that Stations/Kendras are functioning without Station Directors,while senior UPSC recruited Programme Officers with 27-28 years of regular service are retiring WITHOUT A SINGLE PROMOTION after having been forced to serve under those who were subsequently engaged on contract.
AUPO has submitted that :-
“A solution to this entire matter could be to immediately induct Programme Executives recruited by UPSC in the Indian Broadcasting Programme Service from its initial constitution in 1990 and grant them due promotions thereafter, as per the residency period specified in the rules. As a one time measure, super numerary posts could be created to accommodate even the illegal beneficiaries, so that they do not suffer undue hardship. A formula of placing the UPSC recruitees over the ineligible contractual persons could be worked out to avoid further complications and future litigation. Fresh recruitment which has not been done for many years, should also be done at the lower levels to strengthen the organization".
Jose Jude Mathew

Dear All,

I am typing the relevant extracts of affidavit filed by DG,AIR &
DG:DD on 23/5/2011 in response to affidavit filed by UPSC in
contempt petition filed by AUPO .
A. Please note that the department is trying to act as if the UPSC
requires sosme negligible clarifications with regard to only one
para in the UPSC's affidavit. A careful reading of the relevant para 6
of UPSC's affidavit (quoted below) shows that the UPSC has pointed out
that the real reason for non conduct of review DPC is that four vital
requirements for conduct of DPC has not been taken into account by the
Department in eligiblity lists sent to the UPSC.
The UPSC requires clarifications on the following four points :
(i) date from which regular service of Staff Artists who were
inducted as Programme Executive as per the All India Radio (Group B
Posts) Recruitment (Amendment) Rules 1984 to be counted.
(ii) eligibility of those persons who were appointed on contract
basis after the cut off date for becoming government servant
(iii) final seniority list and year wise eligibility list and
(iv) consideration of options to be given to Programme Executives for
promotion as per the Hon’ble CAT order dated 26.3.2004 in OA
No.399/2001 and 2343/2001.
B. The Deparment in their reply affidavit reproduced below are trying
to act as if the concerns raised by the UPSC have already been
addressed in their meeting held with the UPSC on 19th August 2010.
These concerns were raised by UPSC last month when the court asked for
their views on the matter in their affidavit . This is long after the
meeting of 19th August 2010.
C. Further, it is understood that the UPSC has also communicated vide
letters to the Ministry why their explanation is not plausible. It
is understood that the Ministry is in receipt of these letters and
that the concerns raised by the UPSC to the Ministry include the
following:-
i) If the date agreed by the High level Committee for regularisation
as government servant according to the Ministry is 6.3.1982, why are
the eligiblity lists showing regular service of contractual employees
as 1968- 1981 etc .
ii). Further, if the second group of staff artists engaged on
contract after 28-2-1982/6.3.1982 like Baseb Dutta Mohanty ,
T.Chamiyar etc were by the Ministry's own admission regularised by the
Ministry's scheme on 29.11.1991, why is their regular service in the
equated grade of Programme Executive being shown from their date of
initial engagement on contract of 1983/1984 etc.
C. The Department is also desperately trying to confuse and complicate
the matter by dragging in the Ashraf Loner review DPC for the period
1982-1989 with this contempt case. This contempt case is for
implementation of the judgment of the Hon'ble CAT on 26.3.2004 to
include Pexs in the production posts of the IBPS.
regards
Jose.

All that I can say is that things will not come to us easily as the Department and the PSA is hell bent to try to deprive the UPSC Pexs of their rights. The Department has made huge mistakes in the past and they are still in the cover up mode in spite of the UPSC pointing out the irregularities.
The illegal beneficiaries are doing everything possible to retain what they have got, while our worst sufferers, seniors ahead of us in the queue are largely watching with silent hope instead of proactive action on their own part.
It has been repeatedly pointed out to some of the most serioulsy affected parties (including those who have been illegally reverted in 2000) that they have a court judgment in their favour (their reversions were in effect quashed by the court in 2004 ) and if in spite of that if they have to serve under those who were engaged on contract subsequently, they should have been shouting the loudest.
From Chennai we had/have a Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting. The Chennai unit of AUPO (Dr Murugan and others who were affected parties ) could and should have put legitimate pressure to ensure that their own rights were protected. The raising of a most genuine demand. by Chennai under affected parties Dr Murugan and Smt. C.S. Kumudam etc .would have not only been beneficial to them but would have helped the fight in Delhi immensely. So, is the case with Kolkotta which also had /has a MOS, I&B... and I am aware that Kolkotta did make efforts....but nevertheless a consistent /non stop effort is required . This effort can be made by each of us in different parts of the country.
Our battle in Delhi is to try to implement a fovourable judgment through the courts who have unfortunately been very lenient to the Department.
It is our constant plea to the Hon'ble Court that our people are suffering and retiring while the Department is deliberately dilly dallying and fudging the eligiblity lists so as to delay the review DPC.
Rumors are also being propogated by the PSA and the department / authorities that court cases are standing in the way of the promotion of UPSC pexs. This is noting more than a blatant lie. How can a contempt petition be called a court case?
a) Has AUPO or any one else taken a stay against the promotions?
b) If there are court cases standing in the way of promotions , how is it that CRs of ineligible producers like Basab Dutta Mohanty and Chamiyar are being collected by the Department/Ministry to promote them from STS to JAG?
c) Is a contempt petition to undertake the review DPC as per rules a stay against promotions ? ( A contempt is a plea to the court to take action against those who have not implemented the court orders.)
d) For those who are confused by the Supreme Court matter , let me clarilfy once again that the Supreme Court matter deals with a review DPC for the period 1982-1989.(There is no stay on any DPC. AUPO has approached the court pointing out that contractual dates are being passed off as regular service to deny UPSC Pexs. )
e) The contempt petiiton in CAT deals with a period beyong 1989. It deals with the fact that Pexs were denied Production posts of the IBPS and that they were wrongly reverted. This is for the period 1990 to the present.
Some of our people in Delhi who dont understand the issues or fail to read the papers ending up toeing the PSA line which is "Let us not think or talk of the past". In the same breath, they say , we have not recieved any promotion for 20 -25 years.
The review DPC deals with the past . Forgetting the review DPC means losing the 'consequential benefits ' of 20-25 years of your service !
I reiterate that we need to look upon this task as a collective one. It is the duty of each and every UPSC Pex to take up our situation to influential people all over the country for their support.
This can be done by each and every single affected Pex.
In spite of having a favourable order from the court, and that too seven years ago, we are still struggling because the majority is still watching safely from the sidelines . Some are afraid of transfers. Many feel that if the persons who are fighting get something , the others will also automatically get it. Sadly the worst culprits are those who collude with the PSA and are still their active participants.
Let us not forget the past, if we want a future.
a) The record shows that first the Department tried to say that Pexs were not eligible for JTS production and using that ploy reverted our seniors, while allowing juniors engaged on contract after them to be promoted to IBPS Production.
b) When Sachidanand Singh and AUPO managed to win the JTS Production case in March 2004, the department then sat on eligiblity lists for nearly five years.(in site of our contempt)
c) When the Dept furnished an eligility list signed by S.C.Sharma in January 2009 , the list had 1977 UPSC pexs starting from D. Chandran , junior to the junior most contractual Producer and also showed the date of engagement of contract of all producers as their regular service.The PSA supported this list!
d) The Department after 8 months claimed that it was a typographical error! .The Courts asked first DG's to verify records (August 2009) and then asked UPSC to verify the records (Nov 2009)
e) The Department prepared a new eligiblity with 804 people. We have managed to ensure that Sh. Subramanium , Dr Raina and others who were reverted inb 2000 are now placed above those who are now being considered illegally for JAG Production (i.e Baseb Dutta Mohanty, Chamiyar, Indira Mathur etc ). However, even now this list is a farce. It does not contain a single UPSC pex of 1986/1988 batch.It inlcudes many illegal persons whose records are not available with the UPSC and the UPSC has informed the court that they would not be able to conduct the review DPC using this list.(This list also has the approval of the PSA)..
f) In this list whioch has been turned down by the UPSC, even V.K. Sambyal (seniormost and no.1 in the UPSC list whojoined in july 1988 and has 23 years of regular service as on date )does not feature in the eligiblity list . So you can guess the fate of 500 persons behind him in the list.
g) The simple truth is that no UPSC Pex of 1988/1991 features in the lists sent for review DPC/regular DPC to UPSC in the year 2011. So if this list which ithe PSA is trying to push through, had been used by UPSC, the UPSC Pexs who joined in 1988 and 1991 would have retired as Pexs. At least some of them would have. V.K. Sambyal and some others who are serving as adhoc ASD's would have to be reverted....Depending on availability of vacancies, those who are not on the list as of now, would be promoted only in future. We would not be eligible for any consequential benefit whatsoever.
h) There is also no stagnation among Pexs as claimed by the PSA. There is stagnation only if there are no posts available. In our case, there are hundreds of posts that have to be filled from a back date including current vacancies.
i) The PSA is also trying to lure and fool UPSC pexs with the lollipop/or band aid of ACP/MACP. They are trying to pretend that this is a benefit that they are giving us! . Anyone with some sense knows that this is a benefit given by the Government to those who have not been promoted for 12 years/ 10 years etc and that ACP for Pexs had become complicated only because the PSA cheated UPSC pexs by first dragging UPSC Pexs into an agitation and then equating their salary to Trexs for the period 1986-1996 (i.e 6500) . The Pexs were given a Prasar Bharati scale of 7500 only from 1996 . If it were not for this 7500 scale, those Pexs who joined in 1988, would have got an 8000 scale in 2000 and the next higher grade due to MACP in 2008 . As it is we are stuck with a 5400 upgradation after 20 years which is a disgrace by any standards. This is why we need to get consequential benefits legitimately due to us from a nbackdate.
j) Let us also not forget that whatever financial benefits that the UPSC Pexs are having as of now is because Pramod Mehta, and seven UPSC Pexs including me and Amlanjyoti Majumdar took the matter to court . Being is Court is a long and tedious battle. Pramod, Amlan and I had to attend every tiring court hearing for five whole years before Pexs all over the country could claim their stepping up options!
regards
Jose