Tussle between babus over cadre restructuring
The ongoing tussle between the civil servants of DANICS cadre and subordinate officers in Delhi on Monday came to the fore as the two sides took opposing stands before lieutenant- governor Anil Baijal over recommendations of a three- member committee regarding restructuring of the Delhi Administration Subordinate Service ( DASS) cadre.
Hundreds of the DASS employees on Monday took out a “silent protest” outside the L- G Secretariat, demanding the implementation of committee’s recommendations even as Delhi Andaman and Nicobar Islands Civil Services ( DANICS) officers’ body opposed it, saying that the DASS employees want to create a “parallel cadre”, which is “illegal and unconstitutional”.
Sources said that the three- member committee, headed by Delhi finance secretary S. N. Sahai, has submitted its report which has advocated restructuring of the DASS employees.
In March, the Delhi Assembly had passed a government resolution seeking restructuring of DASS and steno cadres within one month.
There are three cadre officers — IAS, DANICS and DASS — in the Delhi government.
After IAS cadre, DANICS is considered the second highest cadre, whose officers are also appointed through Union Public Service Commission exam, while DASS employees are appointed Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board ( DSSB) and other boards.
Delhi Government Employees’ Welfare Association’s general secretary Deepak Bharadwaj, who represents the DASS, said that after protest, a delegation of subordinate officers met Mr Baijal and requested him to implement the committee’s recommendations.
Sources indicated that committee has recommended to appoint 600 additional and joint secretaries through appointment of theDass employees. “The DANICS officers have always scuttled efforts to restructure the DASS cadre. We have staged a silent protest on Monday and our delegation has met Mr Baijal and demanded that the recommnendations of the Sahai committee be implemented,” he said.
An office bearer of the DANICS Officers’ Welfare Association, alleged that the committee did not give an enough opportunity to them to raise their issues.