( d) Are the existing 32 grades of scales of pay adequate? Yes
Pay Scale Structure Based on the Master Scale proposed at 3( c)
PRC Scales in 2010 |
Corresponding Scales |
Proposed in 2013 PRC |
1. |
6700-20110( 40) |
1. |
15000-35340( 30) |
2. |
6900-20680( 40) |
2. |
15450-36400( 30) |
3. |
7100-21250( 40) |
3. |
15915-37490( 30) |
4. |
7520-22430( 40) |
4. |
16885-39775( 30) |
5. |
7740-23040( 40) |
5. |
17390-40970( 30) |
6. |
7960-23650( 40) |
6. |
17910-42200( 30) |
7. |
8440-24950( 40) |
7. |
19000-44770( 30) |
8. |
9200-27000( 40) |
8. |
20760-48925( 30) |
9. |
9460-27700( 40) |
9. |
21385-50395( 30) |
10. 10020-29200( 40) |
10. 22685-53460( 30) |
11. 10900-31550( 40) |
11. 24785-58415( 30) |
12. 11530-33200( 40) |
12. 26295-61970( 30) |
13. 11860-34050( 40) |
13. 27085-63830( 30) |
14. 12550-35800( 40) |
14. 28735-67715( 30) |
15. 12910-36700( 40) |
15. 29595-69745( 30) |
16. 13660-38570( 40) |
16. 31400-73990( 30) |
17. 14860-39540( 38) |
17. 34310-80850( 30) |
18. 15280-40510( 38) |
18. 35340-83275( 30) |
19. 16150-42590( 38) |
19. 37490-88350( 30) |
20. 18030-43630( 35) |
20. 42200-99435( 30) |
21. 19050-45850( 35) |
21. 44770-102420( 29) |
22. 20680-46960( 33) |
22. 48925-108660( 28) |
23. 21820-48160( 32) |
23. 51905-111920( 27) |
24. 23650-49360( 30) |
24. 56715-115280( 25) |
25. 25600-50560( 28) |
25. 61970-115280( 22) |
26. 27000-51760( 27) |
26. 65745-115280( 20) |
27. 29200-53060( 25) |
27. 71835-118740( 18) |
28. 31550-53060( 22) |
28. 78495-118740( 15) |
29. 34050-54360( 20) |
29. 83275-118740( 13) |
30. 37600-54360( 16) |
30. 88350-122330( 12) |
31. 41550-55660( 13) |
31. 93720-122330( 10) |
32. 44740-55660( 10) |
32. 99435-122330( 8) |
PROPOSED PAY SCALES FOR THE TEACHERS
Category of Post |
Existing Scale Proposed Scale |
SGT and its equivalent cadres |
10900-31550 |
24785-58415 |
School Assistants |
14860-39540 |
34310-80850 |
Grade II Head Masters |
18030-43630 |
42200-99435 |
Mandal |
|
|
Educational Officer 16150-43630 |
* 42200-99435 |
* Mandal Educational officer post is equivalent to Grade II Head Master Post. Both are feeder cadres for the promotion of Dy. Eo / Gr
I H. M. Post. Previous PRC set aside this and said that Mandal Educational Officer Post is only administrative Post, whereas Gr II H. M Post is administrative and academic. Hence 10 th PRC has sanctioned higher scale to Grade II H. M posts in the same cadre have different scales. It is a disparity. So we propose to set right the disparity and Mandal Educational Officers should have the same scale i. e. of Gr II H. M.
( e) If‘ No’, how many grades of scales do you suggest?
( f) The Sixth Central Pay Commission introduced the concept of Pay bands and Grade Pay. The 9th Pay Revision Commission had also gone into this question and did not agree for adoption. Do you agree with the above view or else what do you suggest?
The Central Government Employees could not get equal benefits of their existing basic pay. The Grade pay ranges are from 84 % to 46 %. So Grade pay system proposed by VI Central pay commission is not acceptable. Hence we proposed fitment as percentage on pay.
( g) In case you advocate for implementation with modifications what modifications you would like to suggest?
4. Fitment:
( a) In the Central Government, during the earlier pay revisions fitment used to be allowed for fixation of pay in the Revised Pay Scales. So is the case with the State Government. In the light of the above, what is your opinion on fitment?
Fitment should be allowed for fixation of pay in Revised Pay Scales.
( b) Should it be( Tick your choice)
i) A percentage of pay ii) Increments based on service
( c) Percentage of fitment Rs._________/ 69 %.
5. Increment
( a) State Government employees are now getting annual increment at the rates ranging from 2.48 % to 2.985 %. Do you think that this is alright?
No
( b) If your opinion is“ No” then what should be the quantum of increment in your view? The rationale behind
your suggestion may please be indicated.
Quantum of increment should be 3 %. 9 th PRC also recommends 3 % rate of increment. But in the Master Scale rate of increment was enhanced for every three stages. Hence the average rate of increment is being reduced. So we are proposing the rate of increment at 3 % and it should be given at every stage of the Master Scale
✔ pHé 2013
35 ñbÕ < Ûë ´ j · T