“An entity cannot be a judge in its own case”

Fact-sheet on issue of encadrement of the post of Member Staff

It is a clear case of ‘conflict of interest’ on the part of incumbent Members

No service other than IRPS can have legitimate claim over the post of MS

Denying the post of MS to IRPS at this juncture is neither appropriate nor logical

Railway Board: an illegal entity with no power to interfere in the encadrement process

Railway Board is trying to scuttle the proposal by employing all sorts of far-fetched and flawed logic

Presented by: Surresh Tripathi

The Cadre Review Committee (CRC) is headed by Cabinet Secretary and comprises Secretary DoPT, Secretary DoE, Chairman Railway Board and Member(Staff) Railway Board. It has, after detailed deliberations, recommended that the post of Member Staff (MS) be made a cadre post for ‘Indian Railway Personnel Service’ (IRPS). There cannot be a more powerful and competent body than the CRC on the issue of cadre restructuring.

The CRC’s recommendations have been approved by the Minister of State (DoPT & PMO) and the Minister of Finance. Moreover, CRC’s recommendations are also in line with the recommendations of various Pay Commissions.

Railway Board’s flawed arguments:

However, Railway Board is trying to subvert the proposal of encadrement of the post of MS for IRPS by advancing a fallacious and deceitful argument that the cadre strength of IRPS is less as compared to some other Services (like Stores and S&T) which, despite being larger cadres, do not have a post of Member at the Board level. Following paragraphs would bring out the fallacy in Railway Board’s misleading arguments.

The cadre strength of the Services would be as under (post-restructuring):

It may be noted that CRC while recommending the encadrement of the post of MS, was well aware of the cadre strength statistics.

The logic advanced by Railway Board that the cadres (with lesser number of sanctioned posts) should not have encadred post of Member is without any basis in view of the fact that, as on date, Accounts Department has lesser number of posts as compared to S&T, still IRAS has been given an encadred post of Board Member based on functional justification.

Therefore, on the same analogy, keeping in view the fact that HR/Personnel is also a staff function akin to Accounts, Personnel should also have encadred post at Board level. It is very clear that Railway Board is trying to advance misleading logic to smother and bury legitimate career aspirations of IRPS officers.

Whether the creation of the post of Members for S&T/Stores has any linkage with MS encadrement process?

IRPS is not opposed to creation and encadrement of the posts of Member (Stores) and Member (S&T). If approved by the Government, these posts can be created by redesignating the existing posts of DG(Stores) and DG(S&T) which would not have any financial implication. However, linking of the encadrement of the post of MS to that of new posts of Member(Stores) and Member(S&T) is nothing but a duplicitous ploy and ruse to deny Board level post to IRPS.

It is a delaying tactic based on faulty logic. It should be borne in mind that the post of MS has always existed and the issue is only its encadrement to IRPS. However, the posts of Member (Stores) and Member (S&T) would be new to the Board and, therefore, would involve an expansion of the Board. In any case, the Railway Board has already proposed the creation of the posts of Member (Material Management) and Member (S&T) separately.

The functional justification for encadrement of the post of MS:

The post at all levels, and definitely more so at the Board level, must be supported on functional grounds. This has been repeatedly emphasized by various Pay Commissions and DoPT. IRPS is the only service in Govt of India that specializes in the administration of HR and Establishment Issues. The basic purpose for the creation of a separate cadre (IRPS) was to address the HR issues facing the giant labor-intensive Organisation – Indian Railways.

It was because of the functional requirement that the Post of Member Staff has been there on the Board since the beginning. It may also be noted that while several Expert committees on Railway Restructuring (including Rakesh Mohan committee, Bibek Debroy committee) have recommended either merger or functional recasting/integration of various Technical Members’ post, they have always recommended on retaining the Member Staff post as a distinct functional portfolio.

IRPS is the corresponding functional service for MS:

The issue is only of manning the post of MS by an officer of appropriate Service. The only organized Group ‘A’ service specializing in HR matters in the Govt of India is IRPS. Therefore it is only logical and reasonable that this post is manned by an IRPS officer who has the requisite competence and skill set. As earlier the IRPS was relatively a new service and the IRPS officers had not attained requisite seniority, the post of MS was manned by officers of other cadres. However, now when the officers of IRPS, with requisite service (1981 batch onwards) and domain experience, are available, denying the post of MS to IRPS even at this juncture is neither appropriate nor logical.

Functionally, no service other than IRPS can have legitimate claim over the post of MS. The Railways is a labor-intensive organization with almost 13.50 lakh employee strength. While other Service officers may have knowledge of employees belonging to their own cadre, it is the IRPS only which deals with employees of all departments throughout and acquire deep HR specialization. IRPS officers alone have varied experience in dealing with employees of all cadres. Therefore, it is imperative that the post of MS is encadred for officers of IRPS.

Rampant Departmentalism:

The CRC’s recommendations have been endorsed by DoPT and DoE. If such well-considered and justified recommendation is allowed to be subverted and scuttled by Railway Board a very wrong message will go down to all the IRPS officers. The feeling of victimization due to the policy of departmentalism, which is rampant in Railways and more rampant at Railway Board level will further get deepened.

Railway Board: an illegal entity with no power to interfere in encadrement process:

It is to be noted that as far as matters relating to officers are concerned, Railway Board has no locus standi (as pronounced by Principal Bench, CAT in OA No. 591/2009, judgment dated 31.05.2016). Railway Board is the creation of an executive order of 1905. It derives its powers from a repealed Railway Board Act, 1905 (and not yet replaced). As per this Act, Railway Board powers are limited to the areas which Central Government confers on it by specific notifications.

The Cadre Restructuring of Group ‘A’ officers find no mention in any of the notifications of the Central Government. Hence, it is only the Central Government (DoPT and MoF) which have the powers to take a decision about Cadre restructuring, encadrement etc. of officers.

However, Railway Board, which has its power limited to superintendence over Railway Administrations (i.e. Zonal Railways only) is exceeding its jurisdiction by actively interfering in a matter which is purely within the domain of Central Government.

Moreover, when Central Government (DoPT/DoE in the instant case) had clearly approved the recommendations of CRC, the Railway Board is trying to scuttle the proposal by employing all sorts of far-fetched and flawed logic.

Conflict of Interest:

It is a cardinal principle of Natural Justice that an entity cannot be a judge in its own case. Railway Board cannot decide its own restructuring in this case particularly because incumbent Members of Railway Board would not like a dilution of their powers. The incumbent Members mostly belong to Engineering Departments. None of them would like their fiefdom and stranglehold on the post of MS to go. Therefore, it is a clear case of ‘conflict of interest’ on the part of incumbent Members belonging to Engineering departments who are hell-bent to mar the rightful career aspirations of IRPS officers.

In view of points brought out in foregoing para, it will be fair and just that the recommendation of the CRC regarding encadrement of the post of MS for IRPS, approved by DoPT and MoF (Central Government) should be implemented in right spirit. Moreover, any recommendation of Railway Board (in deviation to the recommendations of Central Government) should be summarily ignored.