Juniors getting higher pay then seniors: Haryana finance dept asks Home to clarify on IPS promotions

The Haryana finance department has asked the home department to clarify as to how IPS officers of the 1997 batch were promoted when the promotion of 1996 batch was still under consideration due to review of cadre strength and deliberations on creation of cadre and ex-cadre posts.

The state government had in February this year promoted two 1997-batch IPS officers, Sanjay Kumar and Amitabh Dhillon to the rank of additional director general of police (ADGP) and in April ordered refixation of their pay. The problem was that four IPS officers of the 1996 batch who were senior to them - Mamta Singh, M Ravi Kiran, KK Rao and Hanif Qureshi (on central deputation), were still to get a higher pay grade as their pay had not been refixed in level 15 in pay matrix while their junior counterpart of 1997 batch were granted a higher pay grade.

Following objections by 1996-batch officers, the home department asked the director general of police (DGP) to withhold the order of pay fixation of 1997-batch IPS officers till the finance department grants concurrence regarding stepping up the pay of 1996-batch officers as per their promotion order of May 2022.

A 1996-batch IPS officer, M Ravi Kiran wrote to the DGP stating since then the pay of 1996-batch officers had not been yet fixed despite their promotion in May 2022, the fixation of pay of 1997-batch IPS officers who were promoted recently was contrary to directions issued by finance department. As per the pay refixation orders of the two 1997-batch IPS officers issued by the home department, the officers were drawing a pay of about ₹1.99 lakh in level 14 in pay matrix with effect from July 2023. Their pay was, however, fixed at about ₹2.17 lakh in level 15 in pay matrix with effect from July 2024 under Rule 5(9) of IPS Pay Rules, 2016. The Rule says that on promotion from one grade to another in service, an IPS officer shall have the option to get his pay fixed in the level of the higher post either from the date of his promotion or from the date on which he subsequently earns an increment in the lower scale.

The matter was then referred to the finance department (FD). The FD after examining the matter observed that “it seemed contradictory that at the time of promotion of 1997 batch, the matter related to promotion of 1996-batch was under consideration due to creation of cadre/ex-cadre posts/review of cadre strength.”

The FD also observed that rule under which advice case of step-up has been referred by the home department was not relevant in this case as officers of both the batches have been promoted after January 2016. “Moreover, it is not a case of step-up rather it is a case of pay fixation. It is strange that the pay of 1997-batch officers have been fixed the pay of 1996-batch officers who have already been promoted in the year 2022 has not fixed till now,” the FD observed.

The FD has also sought to know the reasons for not fixing the pay of 1996-batch officers. “What was the need of step-up of pay of 1996-batch officers at par with that of 1997-batch officer. The proposal is silent,” the FD asked. It has also asked under which rule the pay of the 1997-batch officers has been fixed.