Agreed that Government employees on appointment, cannot be engaged on permanent basis straightaway unless one’s acquainting with the office work, learning of procedures and rules and exhibiting very good conduct in respect of official discipline and decorum, yearning to learn and show positive signs of proving in prospect beneficial for the department, office or at any other assignment, were all tested by superiors for some reasonable sufficient period. This ‘reasonably sufficient period’ has got to be determined not on heavy handed norms or provisions dictated by personal whims of the concerned higher ups but based on discretion, natural justice and parity.
Having said so, Special Recruitment Rules (SRO) 2015 needs a thorough review as primarily it lays stress on a probation of 5 years for a new recruit to complete in order to become eligible for benefits which were available to permanent employees. Why should the appointment order in itself use the word “temporary appointment” instead of omitting this clause, the same could be substituted by “You shall have to complete a period of probation of …….months and after your work, conduct, adhering to rules and regulations, learning and gaining office knowledge was found quite satisfactory and you were found medically fit, the report on your probation period stating so, you shall be confirmed in the service.” The wordings could be different but the contents should be the same. Why should, again, after rigorously and religiously passing the probation period to the satisfaction of one’s superiors, the employee’s permanent status be conditional to passing further tests and trainings instead of imparting him or her training in various courses intermittently after satisfactorily completion of probation and subsequently being confirmed as permanent employee? Admittedly, after completion of each training and refresher course or a work shop, the employee could summarily be asked to dish out what exactly he learnt or gained in the training by appearing in a normal routine test, the findings of which could be made his or her a basis for assessing annual performance.
Secondly, why should the employee on probation be paid fixed pay, wages or salary whatever the case be, which otherwise is quite meagre and why not the full pay as is payable against the post ? What logic is there in such a stipulation could better be explained by the framers of such provisions. In fact, the ‘bacteria’ of corruption of whatever level, unlawful means, misusing official position or raising huge debts start growing in the psyche of most of the ‘aggrieved’ employees when they get quite meagre amount at the end of the month. This provision is totally unaccepted and unethical. If the Law Commission has opined against the discriminatory and severe provisions of the SRO 202, it is definitely a welcome move and employees could see some ray of hope in its recommendations on the ground of being against the accepted norms of natural justice and equality.
The policy framers especially in respect of matters pertaining to employees must, as a matter of practice, take on board and be guided by the labour laws, employees’ recruitment process, their probation period and post probation procedures as prevalent in other states and UTs in the country. The provisions should be so flexible that not only should full wages, salaries or whatever, be paid to the employees during probation but even if some flaws were noticed in the performance of a probationer like having remained on leave when the same was not due because of some unavoidable exigencies and the like, it should be a practice to extend the period of probation by as many days one remained absent .In other words, more flexibility and less of severity should form the provisions of recruitment, probation and post probation period of the employee.
Why should these employees be asked to work only against the basic pay and denied other allowances like DA, HRA, CCA and annual increments during the long period of probation? Now that Jammu and Kashmir has become a Union Territory, SRO 202 is expected to be quite short lived rather reviewed clause by clause so as to bring at parity, the whole gamut of recruitment and following acts with other states of the country. While we advocate for adherence to strict discipline, hard work, integrity and performance by the employees at their places of work, at the same time the provisions governing pre and post probationary employees should not be draconian. Government of India Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) should become a model to eulogise and followed meticulously. While, otherwise the need was felt to amend and change labour laws in the country, the need to have a change in policy planners like authors of SRO 202 change their adamant and totally inelastic mindset, too was imperative.
Follow our WhatsApp channel