Thursday, January 1, 2015

NOINO writes to management on Election (counting) duty

NOINO submitted a letter to the ED(P) on 1st January 2015, on various aspects concerned with the Counting (Election) duty. The letter is reproduced below:

1.1.2015

The Executive Director (Personnel)
L.I.C. of India.

Respected Sir,

Sub: ON DUTY treatment for Counting (Election) duty

                        As you are aware, many of our officers in Maharashtra (including those in Central Office) were deputed for the counting duties in addition to the polling duties during the recent assembly elections held in Maharashtra. The counting of votes was on 19th October, 2014 i. e. Sunday.

                      Since the CO has issued instructions on 19.4.14 regarding the treatment of the following day of polling duty as ‘On Duty’, as also the payment of meal coupon, many officers remained absent next day(of counting duty). However, they were shocked when in some offices; such officers were asked to give the leave application for that day saying that they were not present in office on Monday. In this context, we would like to raise the following points:-                                                                                                           

1.    Whether Counting duty is a part of Election duty or not? If it is, then whatever facilities have been extended to the employees should also flow in this matter. If counting duty is not a part of Election duty, then LIC employees should not be called for it.

2.    The process of election is not over till the counting is over & the certificate is handed over to the elected representative. Hence, our contention is that counting duty is also a part of Election duty.

3.    Usually it is argued that counting duty is a National Duty. Nobody counters that. As an employee, we are bound to do it(of course, when proper procedure of deployment is followed). However, our contention is that Election duty is also a National duty & the same benefits/facilities available in the case of Election duty should also flow in the case of counting duty.

4.    It is also argued that the Counting duty is over at about 1.00 to 2.00 p.m. Hence, employee is not engaged for the full day. However, the point to be noted here is that the reporting time is 6.00 a.m.( in some places 6.30 a.m.). Most of the employees were relieved at 5.00 p.m. This means they worked for about 11 hours. Our official hours of duty are for 7 hours which means that they have worked for 4 hours more than that & have worked for more than a full day.

  1. To report at 6.00 am the employees had to leave their house at early hours (at 4.30 or 5.00 am). At such time getting proper (public) transportation is also an issue. Hence the payment of appropriate conveyance should also be considered same as per Election Duty.

6.    It is also to be noted that the Counting day was Sunday & not a working day. This means that the employees worked in the office during the working days & also worked on a Holiday. This means that they did not have a break in the week which is mandatory for optimum & efficient work. Hence they should be compensated with a leave next day (as also meal coupon).

7.    The Counting pertained to Maharashtra. The Mumbai High Court orders of the 2009 case are applicable here. The CO Circular ref CO/Per/ER-A/054/2014 dated 15.1.14 draws attention to the directives of the Court regarding the procedure to be followed while requisitioning the staff for election duty. It also makes a reference to the guidelines issued by the Election Commission vide their instructions dated 30.12.2009  which states specifically that the staff of Banks & LIC are to be requisitioned only after requisitioning the staff of State Government & Central Government. Our contention is that Counting duty requires a substantially lesser number of staff than that of staff required for Election duty. It is obvious then, that the procedure as specified above was not followed since it is clear that the staff of local authorities/state government & Central government was more than enough to carry out the Counting duties. LIC should have objected to such requisitioning there & then. Even now, if possible, LIC should explore the legal option to end this unnecessary requisitioning not only in Maharashtra but elsewhere in the country. We demand that a curative petition should be filed demanding an inquiry whether proper procedures are being followed by the EC or not.

8.    Many officers were given duty of Micro Observer. As per the EC directives (refer attachment) the person deputed for such post (i.e. Micro Observer) is required to be a rank of Gazetted officer. If officers of such rank are not available only then Class C or above officers should be called. The EC directives also clearly specify that the list of such gazetted officers is to be obtained from different offices of the district. It is very much doubtful whether this procedure was properly followed. This point should also be included in our curative petition. All in all, we have a very strong case.

We request you to take cognizance of the above points (regarding leave, meal coupon, conveyance & curative petition) & do the needful.

Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Dattaraj Prabhukhanolkar
GS, NOINO

No comments:

Post a Comment