dr kamal

The Cabinet decided to grant extension in the contractual services of Health/Veterinary Pharmacists and class IV employees working as service providers at the rate of Rs.7000 and Rs.3000 per month w.e.f. December 1, 2013 to May 31, 2014. It may be recalled these service providers were working in 1186 subsidiary health centers and 582 veterinary hospitals functioning under the Zila Parishads across the state.

In a ruling that would discourage the state governments to give employment through back door by engaging workers on daily wages or contract, the Supreme Court has held that such employees would not be entitled to salary equal to those of regular employees recruited through a due selection process laid down under the law. Deciding a bunch of appeals by the Haryana Government against the Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment holding that employees once recruited irrespective of the selection process, were entitled to “equal pay for equal work” under Article 14 of the Constitution. The apex court further held that the employees engaged on contract for a specific job, could not claim regularisation, as their service would be strictly guided by the terms and conditions of the contract. The Haryana Government, which itself was responsible for giving back-door employment to hundreds of persons by engaging them on daily wages and contract in Class III and IV grades in various departments over the years, had moved the Supreme Court, challenging the High court order. Setting aside the impugned judgment, a Bench of Mr Justice S N Variava, Mr Justice A R Lakshmanan and Mr Justice S H Kapadia took exception to the High Court deciding all the cases in a “mechanical” manner. “The principle of equal pay for equal work has no mechanical application in every case,” the Bench ruled. The Supreme Court said “Article 14 permits reasonable classification based on qualities or characteristics of persons recruited and grouped together, as against those who were left out... the very fact that those employees who have not gone through the process of recruitment may itself in certain cases, make a difference... even though the persons may do the same work, their quality of work may differ.” “Where persons are selected by a selection committee on the basis of merit with due regard to seniority, a higher pay scale granted to such persons who are evaluated by the competent authority cannot be challenged,” it said. The Bench said for the application of the principle of equal pay for equal work, the courts had to consider various dimensions of a given job. “The accuracy required and the dexterity that the job may entail may differ from job to job. It cannot be judged by the mere volumes of work,” it observed. The court said reliability and responsibility towards the job of a persons coming through a legally laid down selection process would be more than those engaged on daily wages or contract. Since many of the daily wage employees were regularised while the case was pending in the High Court and the Supreme Court, such workers had claimed back wages with arrears, therefore, the apex court referred all cases back to the High Court with a direction that each and every matter should not be decided in a “mechanical” manner. “These are not matters where a writ court can lightly interfere,” the Bench said adding, “In all these cases, we find that the High Court has blindly proceeded on the basis that the doctrine of equal pay for equal work applies without examining any relevant factors.” Laying down guidelines to the High Court how to proceed with these cases, the apex court said it must satisfy itself that the work discharged and the condition of service of a daily wager was equal to that of regular employees, if at all a case was made out for grant of relief. Regarding contract employees, the Bench said that the High Court had to take into consideration the terms and condition of the contract.

In a significant judgment affecting employees hired by the Punjab Government through ``service providers'' , the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that they are not covered under the state government's policy for regularisation of service. The significance of the judgment by Justice Surya Kant and Justice Surinder Gupta can be gauged from the fact that the Bench disposed of no less than 17 appeals filed by the employees hired through service providers. In their appeals against the State of Punjab and other respondents, Nishan Singh and others appellants had earlier challenged a judgment passed by a Single Judge on February 28. The Judge had dismissed the writ petitions for regularisation of their services ``in view of the policy decision'' dated March 18, 2011, issued by the Punjab Government. Engaged by a service provider, they were posted at the offices of Deputy Commissioners and Department of Excise and Taxation. Adjudicating the question whether employees engaged by any service provider were covered by the state policy of March 2011, the Single Judge ruled that the relationship of employer and employees did not exist between the government departments and the appellants. Taking up the appeal, the Bench asserted: “The submissions that the appellants are employees engaged by the respondent departments and the service provider has been used as a camouflage to deny the appellants their status as government employees or consequent at regularisation under the government policy and other statutory benefit has no substance or legal basis... “ The state has taken a policy decision for regularising the services of contractual employees who were appointed after fulfilling the eligibility criteria as per the procedure. In the case of appellants, neither were they selected under the Service Rules applicable to regular employees of Punjab, nor was there an advertisement issued by the state under which they applied for their engagement as regular or contractual employee of the state. “It was the service provider who entered into an agreement with the state agency to provide workforce on certain terms and conditions. The service provider selected the candidates and supplied the same to the government department. A service provider is not an agency of the state to make recruitment against civil posts...” POLITICS

now that is big relief. ..as 5 times increase in OPD fee would prove detrimental to number of Opd cases in hospitals(in my opinion)..so we should wait for official word from competent authority. ..

ਚੰਡੀਗੜ੍ਹ, 19 ਜੁਲਾਈ : ਪੰਜਾਬ ਦੇ ਲੱਖਾਂ ਮੁਲਾਜ਼ਮਾਂ ਦੇ ਡੀ. ਏ. ਦੀਆਂ ਜਨਵਰੀ ਤੇ ਜੁਲਾਈ ਸਮੇਤ 2 ਕਿਸ਼ਤਾਂ ਪੈਂਡਿੰਗ ਹਨ ਤੇ ਅਜੇ ਵੀ ਖਜ਼ਾਨੇ ਚ ਪੈਸੇ ਦੀ ਅਣਹੋਂਦ ਕਾਰਨ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਇਸ ਮਸਲੇ ਤੇ ਦੁਬਿਧਾ ਚ ਹੈ। ਭਾਰਤ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਵਲੋਂ ਡੀ. ਏ. 10 ਫੀਸਦੀ ਕਰਨ ਕਾਰਨ ਹੁਣ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਨੂੰ ਵੀ ਐਨਾ ਹੀ ਡੀਏ ਆਪਣੇ ਮੁਲਾਜ਼ਮਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਦੇਣਾ ਪਵੇਗਾ ਤੇ ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਜਨਵਰੀ ਮਹੀਨੇ ਦੀ ਰਾਸ਼ੀ ਵੀ ਜੇ ਵਿਚ ਜੋੜ ਲਈ ਜਾਵੇ ਤਾਂ ਹੁਣ ਕੁੱਲ 18 ਫੀਸਦੀ ਡੀਏ ਮੁਲਾਜ਼ਮਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਦੇਣਾ ਪਵੇਗਾ ਪਰ ਬਾਬੂਸ਼ਾਹੀ ਦੇ ਆਲ੍ਹਾਮਿਆਰੀ ਸੂਤਰਾਂ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਦਾ ਖਜ਼ਾਨਾ ਵਿਭਾਗ ਇਸ ਮਸਲੇ ਤੇ ਇਕ ਵਿਚ ਦਾ ਰਸਤਾ ਕੱਢਣ ਦੀ ਫਿਰਾਕ ਚ ਹੈ ਤੇ ਇਸ ਮਸਲੇ ਤੇ ਸਕੱਤਰੇਤ ਚ ਚਰਚਾ ਜ਼ੋਰਾਂ ਤੇ ਹੈ। ਅਗਾਮੀ ਲੋਕ ਸਭਾ ਚੋਣਾਂ ਦੇ ਮੱਦੇਨਜ਼ਰ ਮੁਲਾਜ਼ਮਾਂ ਦਾ ਡੀ ਏ ਰੋਕਣ ਦਾ ਰਿਸਕ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਲੈ ਨਹੀਂ ਸਕਦੀ ਹੈ ਪਰ ਦੂਜੇ ਪਾਸੇ ਖਜ਼ਾਨਾ ਖਾਲੀ ਹੋਣ ਕਾਰਨ ਅਜੇ ਤਕ ਜਨਵਰੀ ਦੀ ਕਿਸ਼ਤ ਵੀ ਜਾਰੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਕੀਤੀ ਜਾ ਸਕੀ ਹੈ ਤੇ ਹੁਣ ਜੁਲਾਈ ਮਹੀਨੇ ਡੀ ਏ ਦੋ ਫੀਸਦੀ ਵਧੇ ਹੋਏ ਡੀ ਏ ਭਾਵ ਕੁੱਲ 18 ਫੀਸਦੀ ਰਾਸ਼ੀ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਜਾਰੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਕਰ ਸਕਦੀ ਹੈ, ਇਸ ਲਈ ਖਜ਼ਾਨਾ ਵਿਭਾਗ ਨੇ ਵਿਚ ਦਾ ਰਸਤਾ ਇਹ ਕੱਢਿਆ ਹੈ ਕਿ ਜਦੋਂ ਭਾਰਤ ਸਰਕਾਰ 10 ਫੀਸਦੀ ਰਾਸ਼ੀ ਜਾਰੀ ਕਰ ਦੇਵੇਗੀ ਤਾਂ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਜਨਵਰੀ ਤੇ ਜੁਲਾਈ ਦੀਆਂ ਬਣਦੀਆਂ ਡੀ ਏ ਦੀਆਂ ਦੋ ਕਿਸ਼ਤਾਂ ਦੀ ਰਾਸ਼ੀ ਮੁਲਾਜ਼ਮਾਂ ਦੇ ਜੀ. ਪੀ. ਐਫ. ਫੰਡ ਚ ਜਮ੍ਹਾਂ ਕਰਵਾ ਦੇਵੇਗੀ। ਇਸ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਕਰਨ ਨਾਲ ਇਕ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਇਹ ਪੈਸਾ ਖਜ਼ਾਨੇ ਚ ਹੀ ਰਹਿ ਜਾਵੇਗਾ ਤੇ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਨੂੰ ਸਿਰਫ ਜੀਪੀਐਫ ਤੇ 8 ਫੀਸਦੀ ਵਿਆਜ ਹੀ ਦੇਣਾ ਪਵੇਗਾ ਤੇ ਉਹ ਮੁਲਾਜ਼ਮਾਂ ਨੂੰ ਸਿਧਾ ਡੀਏ ਦੇਣ ਤੋਂ ਬਚ ਜਾਵੇਗੀ। ਬਾਬੂਸ਼ਾਹੀ ਦੇ ਆਲਾ ਮਿਆਰੀ ਸੂਤਰਾਂ ਅਨੁਸਾਰ 23 ਜੁਲਾਈ ਨੂੰ ਹੋਣ ਵਾਲੀ ਕੈਬਨਿਟ ਮੀਟਿੰਗ ਚ ਮੁਲਾਜ਼ਮਾਂ ਦੀ ਸੇਵਾਮੁਕਤੀ ਦੀ ਉਮਰ 60 ਸਾਲ ਕਰਨ ਦੇ ਏਜੰਡੇ ਤੋਂ ਇਲਾਵਾ ਡੀ. ਏ. ਨੂੰ ਜੀਪੀਐਫ ਚ ਜਮਾਂ ਕਰਵਾਉਣ ਤੇ ਵੀ ਵਿਚਾਰ ਵਟਾਂਦਰਾ ਹੋਵੇਗਾ। ਇਸ ਫੈਸਲੇ ਨਾਲ ਡੀਏ ਦੀ ਉਡੀਕ ਕਰ ਰਹੇ ਮੁਲਾਜ਼ਮਾਂ ਦਾ ਗੁੱਸਾ ਭੜਕ ਸਕਦਾ ਹੈ ਪਰ ਦੇਖਿਆ ਜਾਵੇ ਤਾਂ ਪੰਜਾਬ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਕੋਲ ਹੋਰ ਕੋਈ ਚਾਰਾ ਵੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੈ। ਇਸ ਮਸਲੇ ਤੇ ਜਦੋਂ ਵਿੱਤ ਮੰਤਰੀ ਪਰਮਿੰਦਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਢੀਂਡਸਾ ਨਾਲ ਸੰਪਰਕ ਕਰਨ ਦੀ ਕੋਸ਼ਿਸ਼ ਕੀਤੀ ਗਈ ਤਾਂ ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਨਾਲ ਸੰਪਰਕ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੋ ਸਕਿਆ।

POST-GRADUATION QUOTA ROW RMOs to boycott work from Aug 1 Gagan K Teja Tribune News Service Patiala, July 14 The rural medical officers (RMOs) in state will boycott work from August 1 since the government has denied them postgraduate quota in all state medical colleges. The RMOs are going to stop sending data on various ongoing surveys to the Health department from July 21 onwards. Meanwhile, the decision of boycotting work at Suvidha centres across Punjab has been put on hold till the next meeting on July 21. The decision was taken today during a meeting of the Rural Medical Services Association, Punjab, presided over by State president Dr Aslam Parvez. The association officials condemned the various tactics adopted by the state government in preventing RMOs from availing the 60 per cent PG quota seats for admission to MD/MS courses despite being given the permission to do so by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. They alleged that the government did not let RMOs, who had cleared the post graduate entrance examination PG NEET 2013, attend the counselling sessions. Dr JP Narula, senior vice-president of the association said the Department of Health, the Department of Medical Education and Research and Baba Farid University of Health Sciences connived with each other to stop RMOs from availing the PG quota. “First the government postponed the counselling sesson on one pretext or the other. Thereafter, when we got interim relief from the High Court, the government filed a petition in the Supreme Court. “Now that the SC has given the petition a case status, the state colleges announced the counselling date for July 17. If the SC doesn’t rule in our favour, then we wouldn’t have enough time to file a review petition,” said Dr Amanpreet Kaur, executive member of the female wing of the Rural Medical Services Association, Punjab. She said that a few people were exploiting the state machinery and that the matter should be brought to the notice of Chief Minister and Deputy Chief Minister. “Over 1,200 posts are allotted to us while the Health Department has got 800 posts in rural areas. The government should divide the quota seats as per the number of posts in the respective departments,” said state press secretary Dr Manish Gupta. The rural doctors passed a resolution to demand a division of the 60 per cent quota seats as per ratio of the posts. They said that 36 per cent seats be reserved for RMOs while 24 per cent seats be reserved for doctors working in the Health Department so that no conflict of interest arises. The RMOs also demanded that they be shifted, absorbed, transferred or sent on deputation to the Health Department after they clear the PG entrance. The RMOs said they were willing to accept the terms and conditions applicable to PCMS doctors. RMOS’ DEMANDS The government should divide the number of reserved seats Thirty-six per cent of the seats be reserved for RMOs whiel 24 per cent for doctors working in the Health Department They should be shifted, absorbed, transferred or sent on deputation to the Health Department after they clear the PG entrance

The Rural Medical Doctors (RMOs) have rejected the state Health Department’s proposal to transfer RMOs to the Health Department in a phased manner. The department said RMOs as per their seniority would be shifted to fill the available vacancies so they could be eligible for 60 per cent quota while seeking admission in post graduation courses. RMOs currently work under the Rural Development and Panchayats Department. Speaking to The Tribune, Dr Aslam Parvez, state President of the Rural Medical Services Association, said the shifting of a small number of RMOs to the PCMS would be an injustice to the large number of RMOs left behind in the Rural Development Department. “Moreover, not many vacancies would arise in the Health Department if the state government decides to increase the retirement age of its employees. Therefore, we do not accept this proposal,” he said. Dr Deepika Puri, spokesperson of the female wing of the association, said, “On the one hand the Punjab government has begun negotiating with us, but on the other, the government has moved Supreme Court against the High Court’s decision of provisionally offering the PG quota to us. Worse still, the Baba Farid University of Health Sciences has scheduled the counselling for PG seats for July 17. We will not be left with any time to move the petition further in case the decision is against us.” However, Vini Mahajan, Principal Secretary, Health Department, said that RMOs should not mix up government’s proposal of shifting them to the Health Department with that of authorities moving the Supreme Court. “We have moved the Supreme Court as the High Court had only provided provisional relief. We want to know where the court stands on the issue. As far as shifting RMOs is concerned, we want to improve their growth prospects as there is no scope of promotions for RMOs in Zila Parishad,” she said. Newspaper Cutting : Tribune Rural medical officers (RMOs) in state will boycott work from August 1 http://www.rvopunjab.info/forum/topic/350-rural-medical-officers-rmos-in-state-will-boycott-work-from-august-1/' target='_blank' >Read Full Article »

here is important letter

All RVO welcome such exemplary moves by PRVOA....bravo docs :;

I strongly agree....union means one for all ; all for one .m i right

The Cabinet also gave approval to grant extension in the contract of Health/Veterinary Pharmacist and Sweepers working as service providers @ Rs.7000 and Rs.3000 per month respectively in 1186 subsidiary health centers and 582 veterinary hospitals under Zila Parishads w.e.f. June 1, 2013 to November 30, 2013 in the public interest as a stop gap arrangement up to November 30, 2013 or till regular recruitment, whichever is earlier. In a bid to boost the livestock sector and promote dairy farming as a push towards diversification of agriculture, the Cabinet approved the revival of 115 posts of Veterinary Officer and 175 Veterinary Inspectors so as to provide the best veterinary care services to the dairy farmers.

yesterday punjab and harayan high court refused to grant PG quota to rmo on basis that this quota is exclusive for PCMS cadre.. Newspaper Cutting : Punjabi Tribune. 28 May 2013 p3

What would be criteria for seniority list ? ? ?

That is ridiculous. If cattle population is same and some other person by govt.( here AI worker) work in same area ..how can doctor work not affected..that is most lame thing i ever heard..what PRVOA doing regarding same

i want to highlight this issue as i m the one having AI workers and somebody else may not have. so this is for those who have AI workers. my queries are as follow a) i heard recently govt is fixing AI workers target(annual 500 cattle 500 buffalo). if that is true would doctor target be relaxed.( they should be as AI workers are working under his/her jurisdiction.) in some AI workers does not even report to concerned RVO/VO and speacily RVO. what are they gonna do ? ? ? ?

Here are RMO budget letters

here are letters Dr. Vipin Brar : With continuous effort and follow up of RVOA at state level, salary budget is released to all ZP and DDO powers have also been dispatched by AG Dept. to all ZP.

two latest letters r there(must read) ...

letter is attached PRAN letter.PDF PRAN letter.PDF PRAN letter.PDF PRAN letter.PDF PRAN letter.PDF PRAN letter.PDF PRAN letter.PDF

Thats realy encouraging news.....lets hope for best

Alright lets talk of team ( i will not elaborate as i m not that philosphical) . Why few team members want to get ahead in race by using this MVSc push when all team started at same start line in may 2011. Now why team does not bother abt problems faced by varius dist. Like in muktsar they are pressurising to deposit AI fee for embezzeled straws and nobody making hue and cry also in some dist AH dept. Is exploting RVO in varius issues ..but then team says it is dist. Problem one hand team says dont get any communication directly from AH on other hand in varius dist RVO community get harrased by these so called VO ...then team says it is dist problem not state..so go find some refined lexicon to define this TEAM word...........and once again i m not critisising union just....telling to reconsider theirs actions and reflections....y

I agree with you doc.. Union is busy in world veterinary day and all that work done in 2 yrs phenomenon....but what abt ACR...no ACR is written till date...wait a second who gives damn about ACR if we dont get directorate wait a second who gives damn abt directorate we are not getting salaries regularly i m not criticising union i m just saying dont fantacise our goals just try to relize it....as somebody said....actions speak louder than words

We would complete 2nd year of regular job on 1 may 2013 . 1) would there be 2nd increment in may ? 2) what is case scenerio regarding probation period ? ? ? 3) what are future objectives of PRVOA ? ? ? ?

We in sangrur dist . filled PRAN form almost 2 years ago . Then our ADC changed last year . Those forms become void. Now yesterday we filled simple CPF account form ( joint with ADC) of local bank( not PRAN form ) what does that mean . Kindly clarify

punjab state veterinary council documents Performa-Affidavit-for-GCC.doc PERFORMA-FOR-APPEAL-FOR-RESTORATION.doc Performa-for-Full-Regn.doc Performa-Affidavit-for-GCC.doc PERFORMA-FOR-APPEAL-FOR-RESTORATION.doc Performa-for-Full-Regn.doc Performa-Affidavit-for-GCC.doc PERFORMA-FOR-APPEAL-FOR-RESTORATION.doc Performa-for-Full-Regn.doc Performa-Affidavit-for-GCC.doc PERFORMA-FOR-APPEAL-FOR-RESTORATION.doc Performa-for-Full-Regn.doc Performa-Affidavit-for-GCC.doc PERFORMA-FOR-APPEAL-FOR-RESTORATION.doc Performa-for-Full-Regn.doc Performa-Affidavit-for-GCC.doc PERFORMA-FOR-APPEAL-FOR-RESTORATION.doc Performa-for-Full-Regn.doc Performa-Affidavit-for-GCC.doc PERFORMA-FOR-APPEAL-FOR-RESTORATION.doc Performa-for-Full-Regn.doc