Workshop on Restructuring of Common cadre of CSIR

Another workshop, good, at least we were away from our desks for one day, got involved in some game activity, supplemented with "a sumptuous meals and high tea". Oh god! at least for one day we were spared from not being chased by the scientists, a day of luxury , which we can't afford in our daily mundane life. Sounds interesting or irrational , either way , today first batch of CCO's of Delhi Labs & Hq participated into the workshop, subject of which is very close to their heart, may be it is only because of "carrear progression" and "cadre merger or demerger" issue.
The workshop was inaugurated with a thought provoking lecture by our very knowledgeable, esteemed, newly appointed J.S (Admin.), Dr.K.Jayakumar. I strongly feel that he is one of the leaders we will be proud of, having him at CSIR. He was assisted by Ms. Kutty, a senior retired bureaucrat, who has been appointed as consultant by CSIR to revamp CSIR administration and some senior HR professional from Hewitt Associates, Ms Sharmistha (Head at Hewitt Academy for Strategic HR, India) and Mr.Shiv.

From onset, the core of workshop was defined as complete revamping of CSIR Babulog bureaucratic structure, their role re-definition, evolution of babulog in a new awatar, administrative process re-definition. And the purpose of the workshop is to identify the areas of change and process of change by inviting ideas from every stakeholders, and identification of those CCO's (of course voluntarily) who can help in bringing out change.

After some discussion, the leader and motivators found that we as CCO's know that change is inevitable and we are bound to be a part of it. Who will tell them that we always felt the need of change and growth, as far I can remember, both at carrear progression and process automation front. In the year 2001 Mr.D.K.Chakraborty the then Dy.FA presented his dream of process automation of accounts procedures. Then during 2004-05 a plan of e-grid was floated upon and feedback from various labs were called upon before tenders for 'expression of interest' were invited. Recently too, our FA Ms.Sheila Sangwan stressed on the need for latest and modern ERP software for finance processes automation. In a nutshell we always need changes in these fronts and are eager for it but the question is only when it will come. The difference I felt this time, in the present approach, from earlier ones, is that the question of carrear progression and, cadre merger/ demerger and process of automation are merged in a bigger and one idea. The other difference is the pace of approach for cadre restructuring and cadre revamping. Here lies the catch point, the basic motive of organizing the workshop.... is it really for revamping and reorganization of administration at CSIR or just some shadow exercise to implement some hidden motives expressed at workshop in " between the line" statements.

Anyway some predetermined groups of CCO's were formed on and tasked with to came up with ideas of change of they desire, with logic behind it, how to effectively implement it and how the group can help in achieving the change. Apart from some diverse ideas, every group is unanimous about need of adoption of best practices, better carrear progression, better training (MoU have been singed with Amity and Manipal for providing MBA degree to staff of CSIR), specific role definition of CCO's, process automation, incentive for performance and some fringe benefits on the line of CSIR scientific staff.

On the question of fringe benefits, there comes the story of apples and oranges. It was reminded to CCO's that apples and oranges are two different category of fruits and they can't be treated at par and should not be mixed together. To be treated at par with apples the oranges must specialize themselves as MBA, CA or CS. Who will tell them that the oranges do have their own benefits by providing immunity and flexibility in system. It also helps in normalization of pressure(flow of establishment function) and prevent heart attack(collapse of system).

Some other aspects of restructuring and revamping were discussed at the workshop and also will be discussed on at some other labs in future also. But one thing I am very sure about that our new J.S and his team is very genuine and honest in their approach to problem and also welcome free flow of information and ideas.

One more thing I would like to mention here that by expressing my observation on my Blog is to provide alternate, informal and new platform of communication on the subject area as it can be accessed by any one 24 x 7 for discussion , i feel that this kind of a platform is still lacking in the present approach although JS (Admin.) did mentioned its need . During the workshop for the first time I did mention about my Blog, to which I got a positive response. Some seniors who had viewed my Blog occasionally with the help of fellow colleagues expressed their inability to view it periodically. So it's my humble request to all the tech friendly followers of blog to kindly guide them in bookmarking the blog and how to update it regularly and how to put comment on any post. I am looking forward for it and appreciate all your encouragement.

Last but not the least we also witnessed the gracious presence of our esteemed & honorable DG-CSIR, Dr. Samir K. Brahmachari and his noble, simple, straight and blessing thoughts. That came as a great source of encouragement for all of us.

CPWD clarification regarding contractor's profit and overheads , dt 9/6/2009

Purchase of Note Books/ Lap-Top computers by Ministries/ Departments, GoI OM Dt 26/05/2009

CAT says govt lacks grace, asks ITDC to pay arrears to ‘relieved’ employee

New Delhi : The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), country’s apex public services disputes redressal court, has slammed the government for dealing with difficult employees in manner that lacks grace.

“The court cannot but condemn circuitous ways (of the government) to cast out uncomfortable employees. As a model employer, the government must conduct itself with high probity and candour with its employees,” a Bench of Dr D P Sharma and N D Dayal of CAT observed in its written order, released on Wednesday.

The Bench was referring to the case of M L Jain, former vice-president of India Tourism Development Corporation (ITDC), who was hastily “relieved” from duty after 34 years of government service. His only “indiscretion” was he wanted to postpone an official transfer to organise his daughter’s wedding. “In the modern and uncertain age it is very difficult to (be certain about) one’s future. Flexibility is required, and if it does not jeopardise government or administration, they should be graceful enough to acknowledge the flexibility of human mind and attitude,” the Bench said.

Jain, a resident of Gautam Budh Nagar, had worked outside Delhi for 25 years. When he received a transfer order to Kolkata as vice-president (East) on February 17, 2005, he wrote back requesting permission to operate from Delhi as preparations for his daughter’s wedding on July 13, 2005, were already underway.

Later, Jain wrote to ITDC again saying he was willing to opt for voluntary retirement as there was “no other male member in the family” and he had to make the necessary wedding arrangements.

Shortly after, Jain received a response from ITDC allowing him to continue in the Capital till the end of July, following which he had to join duty at Kolkata.

Happy with the response, Jain immediately expressed his wish to withdraw his request for voluntary retirement, but much to his chagrin, found that he had instead been relieved.

Jain told CAT he had requested for voluntary retirement only because he thought there was no other way he could be present for his daughter’s wedding. He also questioned why the ITDC had unexpectedly chosen to relieve him from service in “undue haste” and with “malafide intention” shortly after they agreed to defer his transfer till after the wedding.

ITDC contended before the Tribunal that Jain “wanted to stay in Delhi and for that purpose he put pressure on the respondent (ITDC) by opting for voluntary retirement”

“The applicant (Jain) has no right to withdraw his request, when his request for voluntary retirement had already been accepted by the ITDC management. No communication is required to be given,” the Corporation maintained, adding that his relieving from service was deferred only because of lack of funds to settle his claims.

Dismissing the ITDC’s arguments, however, the Bench ordered it to pay the entire arrears of salary due to Jain. “Much complication, which had arisen, could have been avoided by graceful attitude,” the Bench concluded.

Cortesy: Indian Express

Grant of family pension to the families of government servents kidnapped by insurgents/ terrorists

Reimbursment of the cost of cochlear implants under CGHS/CS(MA ) Rule

RTI applications received by a public authority relating to information concerning other public authority/authorities

DoPT OM Dt 12/06/2008

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ON THE PAYMENT AND SETTLEMENT SYSTEMS ACT 2007-RBI

Q1. When did Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 (PSS Act, 2007) came into effect?

Ans. The PSS Act, 2007 received the assent of the President on 20th December 2007 and it come into force with effect from 12th August 2008.

Q2. What is the objective of the PSS Act, 2007 ?

Ans. The PSS Act, 2007 provides for the regulation and supervision of payment systems in India and designates the Reserve Bank of India (Reserve Bank) as the authority for that purpose and all related matters. The Reserve Bank is authorized under the Act to constitute a Committee of its Central Board known as the Board for Regulation and Supervision of Payment and Settlement Systems (BPSS), to exercise its powers and perform its functions and discharge its duties under this statute. The Act also provides the legal basis for “netting” and “settlement finality”. This is of great importance, as in India, other than the Real Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) system all other payment systems function on a net settlement basis.

Q3. What are the Reguations made under the PSS Act, 2007 and when did they come into force ?

Ans. Under the PSS Act, 2007, two Regulations have been made by the Reserve Bank of India, namely, the Board for Regulation and Supervision of Payment and Settlement Systems Regulation, 2008 and the Payment and Settlement Systems Regulations, 2008. Both these Regulations came into force along with the PSS Act, 2007 on 12th August 2008.

Q4. What are the objectives of these two Regulations?

Ans. The Board for Regulation and Supervision of Payment and Settlement Systems Regulation, 2008 deals with the constitution of the Board for Regulation and Supervision of Payment and Settlement System (BPSS), a Committee of the Central Board of Directors of the Reserve Bank of India. It also deals with the composition of the BPSS, its powers and functions, exercising of powers on behalf of BPSS, meetings of the BPSS and quorum, the constitution of Sub-Committees/Advisory Committees by BPSS, etc., The BPSS exercises the powers on behalf of the Reserve Bank, for regulation and supervision of the payment and settlement systems under the PSS Act, 2007.

The Payment and Settlement Systems Regulations, 2008 covers matters like form of application for authorization for commencing/ carrying on a payment system and grant of authorization, payment instructions and determination of standards of payment systems, furnishing of returns/documents/other information, furnishing of accounts and balance sheets by system provider etc., .

Q5. Does the PSS Act, 2007 define what is a “payment obligation”, “payment instruction”, “payment system” and other commonly used terms like “electronic fund transfer”, “gross settlement system”, “netting”, “settlement”, “systemic risk”, “system participant” and “system provider”?

Ans. Yes, these terms are defined in Section 2 (1) of the PSS Act, 2007.

Q6. What is a “Payment Obligation”?

Ans. “Payment obligation” is defined as what is owed by one participant in a payment system to another such participant which results from clearing or settlement or payment instructions relating to funds, securities or foreign exchange or derivatives or other transactions.

Q7. What is a “Payment Instruction”?

Ans. “Payment Instruction” is defined as any instrument, authorization or order in any form, including by electronic means, to effect a payment by a person to a participant in a payment system or from one participant in such a system to another participant in that system.

The payment instruction can be communicated either manually i.e. through an instrument like a cheque ,draft , payment order etc or through electronic means, so that a payment can be made by either a person to the participant in such a system or between two participants.

Q8. What is a “Settlement”?

Ans. “Settlement” means the settlement of payment instructions received and these include settlement of securities, foreign exchange or derivatives or other transactions.

Settlement can take place either on a net basis or on a gross basis. Both netting and gross settlement system are defined under the Act.

Q9. What is a “Payment System” under the PSS Act, 2007?

Ans. Section 2(1) (i) of the PSS Act 2007 defines a payment system to mean a system that enables payment to be effected between a payer and a beneficiary, involving clearing, payment or settlement service or all of them, but does not include a stock exchange (Section 34 of the PSS Act 2007 states that its provisions will not apply to stock exchanges or clearing corporations set up under stock exchanges). It is further stated by way of an explanation that a “payment system” includes the systems enabling credit card operations, debit card operations, smart card operations, money transfer operations or similar operations.

All systems (except stock exchanges and clearing corporations set up under stock exchanges) carrying out either clearing or settlement or payment operations or all of them are regarded as payment systems. All entities operating such systems will be known as system providers. Also all entities operating money transfer systems or card payment systems or similar systems fall within the definition of a system provider. To decide whether a particular entity operates the payment system, it must perform either the clearing or settlement or payment function or all of them.

Q10. Are entities operating a payment system or intending to operate a payment system required to get a license, approval or authorization for the purpose?

Ans. In terms of Section 4 of the PSS Act, 2007 no person other than the Reserve Bank can operate or commence a payment system unless authorized by the Reserve Bank. Any person desirous of commencing or operating a payment system needs to apply for authorization under the PSS Act, 2007(Section 5).

The application for authorization has to be made as per Form A under Regulation 3(2) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Regulations, 2008. The application is required to be duly filled up and submitted with the stipulated documents to the Reserve Bank.

All entities operating payment systems or desirous of setting up such systems are required to apply for authorization under the Act. Any unauthorized operation of a payment system would be an offence under the PSS Act, 2007 and accordingly liable for penal action under that Act.

Q 11. Is there any application fee to be submitted along with the application for authorization?

Ans. A sum of Rs 10,000/- is required to be submitted as application fee, which can be submitted by cash or cheque or payment order or demand draft or electronic fund transfer in favour of the Reserve Bank along with the application for authorisation.

Q12. What are the factors which the Reserve Bank will consider while deciding on an application submitted for authorization?

Ans. The Reserve Bank will consider factors like the need for the proposed payment system, the technical standards and design of proposed system, the security procedures and terms and conditions of operation of the proposed system, the procedure for netting of payment instructions, risk management processes, financial status of the applicant, experience of management and integrity of applicant, consumer interests, monetary and credit policies and other relevant factors while deciding on an application for authorization for commencing or operating a payment system (Section 7 of PSS Act, 2007).

The Reserve Bank will endeavour to dispose of all applications received for authorization within six months from the date of their receipt.

Q13. Can the Reserve Bank refuse to grant authorization to commence or operate a payment system?

Ans. Yes, the Reserve Bank can refuse to grant authorization under the PSS Act, 2007. However, the Reserve Bank has to give a written notice to such an applicant giving the reasons for refusal and also a reasonable opportunity of being heard {Section7 (3) of the PSS Act 2007}.

Q14. Can the Reserve Bank revoke authorization granted under the PSS Act 2007?

Yes, the Reserve Bank is empowered to revoke the authorization granted by it, if the system provider contravenes any provisions of the Act or Regulations, fails to comply with its orders/ directions or violates the terms and conditions under which the authorization was granted to it (Section 8 of PSS Act 2007).

Q15. Is there any appellate authority to whom an aggrieved applicant whose application for authorization is refused or a system provider whose authorization is revoked, can appeal?

Ans. The aggrieved applicant or aggrieved system provider can appeal to the Central Government within 30 days from the date on which the order of refusal or revocation is conveyed to him (Section 9 of PSS Act, 2007).

Q16. Can the Reserve Bank collect any authorisation fees and direct the applicant to furnish a security deposit?

Ans. Yes, Section 7 of the PSS Act, 2007 empowers the Reserve Bank to collect authorization fees while granting authorization. It can also call upon the applicant to furnish a security deposit for the proper conduct of the payment system. The quantum of authorization fees and security deposit can be decided by the Reserve Bank.

Q17. Does the Reserve Bank have powers to lay down any standards?

Ans. The Reserve Bank is empowered to prescribe the format of payment instructions, size and shape of instructions, timings to be maintained by payment systems, manner of funds transfer criteria for membership including continuation, termination and rejection of membership, terms and conditions for participation in the payment system etc (Section 10 of PSS Act, 2007).

Q18. Whether the Reserve Bank can call for returns, information etc., from the system provider with regard to the operation of the payment system?

Ans. The Reserve Bank is empowered to call for from the system provider returns, documents and other information relating to the operation of the payment system. The system provider and all system participants are required to provide Reserve Bank access to any information relating to the operation of the payment system (Section 12 and 13 of PSS Act, 2007).

Q19. Can the Reserve Bank inspect the premises of the system provider?

Ans. The Reserve Bank, in order to ensure compliance of the provisions of the PSS Act, 2007 and the Regulations made thereunder, can depute an officer authorized by it to enter any premises where a payment system is being operated, inspect any equipment, including any computer system or document, and call upon any employee of the system provider or participant to provide any document or information as required by it (Section 14 of PSS Act, 2007).

Q20. Can the Reserve Bank issue directions to the system provider?

Ans. The Reserve Bank is authorized to issue directions to a payment system or system participant to cease or desist from engaging in any act, omission or course of conduct or direct it to perform any acts as well as issue general directions in the interests of the smooth operation of the payment system (Section 17 and 18 of the PSS Act, 2007).

Q21. Does the PSS Act 2007 deal with netting and settlement finality?

Ans. The PSS Act 2007 defines “netting” and legally recognizes settlement finality. It states that a settlement, whether gross or net, will be final and irrevocable as soon as the money, securities, foreign exchange or derivatives or other transactions payable as a result of such settlement is determined, whether or not such money, securities or foreign exchange or other transactions is actually paid. In case a system participant is declared insolvent, or is dissolved or is wound up, no other law can affect any settlement which has become final and irrevocable and the right of the system provider to appropriate the collaterals contributed by the system participants towards settlement or other obligations.

This Act also legally recognizes the loss allocation among system participants and payment system, where the rules provide for this mechanism

Q22. What are the duties of a system provider under the PSS Act, 2007 ?

Ans. The PSS Act, 2007 lays down the duties of the system provider. The system provider is required to operate the payment system in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Regulations, the terms and conditions of authorization and the directions given by the Reserve Bank from time to time. The system provider is also required to act in accordance with the contract governing the relationship among the system participants and the rules and regulations which deal with the operation of the payment system. The Act requires the system provider to disclose the terms and conditions including the charges, limitations of liability etc., under the payment system to the system participants. The Act also requires the system provider to provide copies of all the rules and regulations governing the operation of the payment system and other relevant documents to the system participants. The system provider is required to keep the documents and its contents, provided to it by the system participants, as confidential and is prohibited from disclosing the same, except in accordance with the provisions of law.(Sections 20 to 22 of the Act)

Q23. What is the mechanism for settlement of disputes under the PSS Act, 2007?

Ans. The Act lays down an elaborate mechanism for settlement of disputes between system participants in a payment system, between system participant and system provider and between system providers. The Act requires the system provider to make provision in its rules or regulations for creation of a panel to decide disputes between system participants. Where any system participant is dissatisfied with the decision of the panel, or where disputes arises between system participant and system provider or between system providers, such disputes are required to be referred to the Reserve Bank for adjudication, whose decision shall be final and binding on the parties. In cases where the Reserve Bank, in its capacity either as a system participant or system provider, is itself a party to the dispute, then there is a provision for referring such cases to the Central Government for adjudication. (Section 24 of Act)

Q24. What are the consequences of dishonor of electronic fund transfer under the PSS Act, 2007?

Ans. Under the PSS Act, 2007, dishonor of an electronic fund transfer instruction due to insufficiency of funds in the account etc., is an offence punishable with imprisonment or with fine or both, similar to the dishonor of a cheque under the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881. Subject to complying with the procedures laid down under the PSS Act, 2007, criminal prosecution of defaulter can be initiated in such cases. This provision was introduced to discourage dishonour of electronic payment instructions. (Section 25 of the Act)

Q25. Are there any penalties or punitive action laid down under the PSS Act,2007?

Ans. Under the PSS Act, 2007, operating a payment system without authorization, failure to comply with the terms of authorization, failure to produce statements, returns information or documents or providing false statement or information, disclosing prohibited information, non-compliance of directions of Reserve Bank violations of any of the provisions of the Act , Regulations, order, directions etc., are offences punishable for which Reserve Bank can initiate criminal prosecution. Reserve Bank is also empowered to impose fine for certain contraventions under the Act. (Sections 26 and 30 of the PSS Act, 2007).

Sensitizing the Public about corruption – display of standard notice board by Departments/Organizations - reg.

CAT chides Govt for denying medical reimbursement

NEW DELHI: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has chided the Centre for denying medical reimbursement to a government doctor's terminally-ill daughter who underwent treatment abroad and directed it to pay the hospital bill of Rs 17.31 lakh. "The decision (denying medical reimbursement) of the government is against all canons of humanity, sympathy, compassion and is also in flagrant violation of the Constitution of India," the tribunal said. Ravi Pathak, 45, a doctor at Deen Dayal Upadhyay Hospital here whose daughter was administered stem cell transplantation at Singapore and died later, was denied medical reimbursement after the standing committee concerned concluded that the success rate of such treatment was less. "The decision in review by the standing committee revoking their earlier decision without any logic, rationale and reasoning is not only arbitrary and inhuman but also runs counter to the guaranteed fundamental right under the Constitution of India to a citizen of this country," the recent order by Shanker Raju, Member, CAT, said. The tribunal while expressing its anguish over the decision to deny the reimbursement cited instances in which "important persons" were allowed treatment abroad despite knowing that there was little chance of their survival.

CSIR reveals non-destructive method of mango testing

The Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) has revealed a non-destructive technique for sorting mangoes in Chennai. The launch kicked off at a two-day awareness workshop conducted by the Central Electronics and Engineering Research Institute (CEERI), an arm of the CSIR. The awareness workshop is a CSIR initiative to reach out to industry representatives and to use its research to develop real world applications thus benefiting society.

The technique employs soft X-ray imaging and similar to airport security scan systems. Export quality Alphonso mangoes are afflicted with two types of physiological conditions called spongy tissue and seed weevil. Certain countries had banned Indian mangoes primarily due to this.

"The X-ray imaging technology helps segregate the mangoes with deformities by processing the internal density of the fruit and thus will provide a fillip to the export industry," said R Govindaraj, the project head, CEERI.

India is the largest producer of mangoes in the world. The current Indian export market is 50,000 tonnes a year and the estimated worth is Rs 125 crore. "America and Japan had banned imports of Indian mangoes citing quality control. The ban has recently been lifted. There is huge potential for expanding the export market. The technology can be used even in the local market and will benefit the consumers a lot," said Vijay Mehta, vice-chancellor of Dr Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth.

Professionals from diverse fields such as horticulture, electronics and instrumentation, and marketing experts together attended the workshop. "Till around1990, Indian research institutions existed in isolation and there used to be no end-user participation. In foreign countries, industries have their own R&D wing and hence can scale up technology and increase productivity. But in India that is not the case. So central research institutions have to find a way to showcase their work and interact with industry," said Chandra Shekhar, director of CEERI. Industry representatives were encouraged to approach CSIR with their problems during the workshop.

A collaborative model where industry shares a part of the research cost has been evolved. "Industry should also take the cue. Tomorrow this opportunity might go to someone else," said Nagesh Iyer, co-ordinating director of CSIR. Each mango sorting unit costs around Rs 30 lakh and the estimated cost of processing each mango is 12 paise. But efforts are being made to bring the per unit cost to below 5 paise.

"The business model is based on the fact that increased processing cost would be offset by access to a wider market and better pricing because of adherence to quality," said Dr Chandra Shekhar.
Courtesy: Food & Beverage News

India’s top innovation fund slated for expansion, makeover

While beneficiaries approve of the rigorous selection and monitoring processes and speedy disbursement of funds, they are unsure how the programme will fare in its expanded role

Seema Singh and Jacob P. Koshy

Bangalore/New Delhi: Adding to a lean list of new drugs developed in India that seek US regulatory appro-val, Hyderabad-based Bharat Biotech International Ltd (BBIL) is set to move an application to test a therapeutic molecule on humans.
The molecule is targeted at methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacterium that causes difficult-to-treat infections, particularly in hospital settings. Its treatment has eluded drug developers so far.
Also See Encouraging Research (Graphics)
BBIL’s molecule has successfully completed mid-stage clinical studies in India for effectiveness in humans and owes its success to one of the country’s earliest innovation funding programmes, the New Millennium Indian Technology Leadership Initiative (Nmitli), which was launched in 2000.
“If it wasn’t for the support from Nmitli, I would have out-licensed the molecule to a big pharmaceutical company,” said Krishna M. Ella, chairman and managing director of BBIL, a privately held company with around Rs260 crore in annual revenue in 2008-09.
Encouraged by Nmitli, various government agencies have designed similar programmes to fund research, though none has been as successful. Nmitli, which has spent around Rs400 crore on 57 projects so far, has seen a fourfold increase in its budget to Rs230 crore a year for the next three years.
Now the programme, administered by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), India’s biggest public-funded research agency, is slated for an overhaul after its first review in nine years.
While beneficiaries approve of the rigorous selection and monitoring processes and speedy disbursement of funds, a rarity in Indian funding initiatives, they are unsure how the programme will fare in its expanded role, especially since it is being brought under a new CSIR entity, its planning and performance division.
CSIR director general Samir K. Brahmachari said this is being done to “bring synergy in the units” as the scheme will now focus on delivery of the technologies. “One reason why Mobilis (a low-cost mobile computer developed by Bangalore-based Encore Technology Pvt. Ltd) hasn’t reached the target audience in ,India but took off in Malaysia with government aid, is that it had no delivery chain linked to its business model,” Brahmachari said. He now wants to ensure that Soleckshaw, the solar-powered autorickshaw developed by a clutch of CSIR labs, gets 1,000 orders for the 2010 Commonwealth Games to be hosted in New Delhi in October next year.
Commercialization has never been Nmitli’s mandate. CSIR isn’t willing to reveal contents of the review report yet, but two review committee members said the report suggests having a finance and marketing professional in the core team, rather than outright commercialization.
The beneficiaries are divided on this. Mobilis creator Vinay L. Deshpande says India should implement a policy such as the First Order, a US department of defence practice, to ensure initial adoption of new technologies it funds.
Others such as Vishal Chandra, founder of Virtual Wire Technologies, a start-up incubated by the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, that is building a product to enable televisions to wirelessly connect to DVDs and set-top boxes, said government handholding should be restricted. “I don’t think the government should be involved beyond providing funds and an enabling environment. Stifling competition and promoting a product would amount to protectionism,” Chandra said.
Some fear that in the second phase, when the focus for the programme should be on autonomy, clubbing it with the overall CSIR system might impede its swiftness.
“Nmitli should be spun off as a separate, independent body or board,” said a former CSIR laboratory director, now a professor at the Indian Institute of Science (IISc) in Bangalore, who did not want to be identified. “It is known that most things at CSIR are in a mess.”
G. Padmanaban, a reviewer of several Nmitli projects and a former director of IISc, also advocates more autonomy for Nmitli.
Incidentally, Yogeshwar Rao, the scientist who built the programme over the years, is leaving it to join the Indian Institute of Chemical Technology in Hyderabad. “After eight years, I decided to move on,” Rao said. “Given an opportunity, I’d like to build something bigger than Nmitli.”
“Most of the credit goes to Yogeshwar Rao’s dedication, who single-handedly built this programme,” said M. Vidyasagar, executive vice-president of Tata Consultancy Services Ltd, which was the first firm to be funded in 2002 as a lead agency in a bio-informatics project that had 18 other research institutions as partners.
Two products came out of it—Biocluster and BioSuite, software packages for life sciences that have been established as world-class but low-cost alternatives for Indian research institutions.
Vidyasagar added that commercialization should be left to the markets and the government shouldn’t have a role in it. “Our financial system is mature enough,” he said.
Many experts believe that with more money in its kitty, Nmitli should aim at bolstering its bona fides. In February, the Union cabinet gave its approval to increase CSIR’s equity share in the firms it partners, and fund a greater number of projects. Currently, only 3% of the applications are ultimately funded.
“What is needed most is a pre-Nmitli grant towards developing proof-of-concept technologies, which will seed a lot more companies, a lack of which is choking innovation today,” said Chandrasekhar Nair, founder-director of Bigtec Pvt. Ltd. Bigtec has developed a point-of-care molecular diagnostics tool with Nmitli funds and is reapplying for more money to develop the device for global markets.
Experts from the industry, which is now entitled for soft loans at a simple interest rate of 3%, also said loans should be converted into grants, which currently only go to the public sector projects, specifically to CSIR labs.
“The aim of a programme like this is to allow industry to take risks,” said M.S. Kohli, general manager, product development at Samtel Colour Ltd, which is working on an improved plasma display television. “So I don’t see why the government can’t give a grant instead of a soft loan.”
Kohli, however, said it is unlikely that products with international appeal are going to come out of Nmitli-funded projects in the near future.
For that, said BBIL’s Ella, the programme should take up risky projects and fund it with grants. “They should now get international experts to evaluate and monitor the projects because we don’t have a critical mass of reviewers in this country,” Ella said.
Biting the bullet and converting loans to grants will help, but it raises the risk of heavy-handed supervision of the projects, which so far has been “very light touch”, Vidyasagar said.
Courtesy: Mint

List of GOI Holiday (Delhi) during the year 2010

career progression of isolated post-delegation of power to Director for grade pay of 5400 and above (PB-3)

Withdrawal/witholding/recovery of pension/gratuity in the case of minor penalty proceedings.

Government to introduce bill to protect bureaucracy from political interference

When the Civil Services Bill, 2009, becomes an Act, bureaucrats will no longer be at the mercy of the arbitrary transfers and postings regime that operates currently.

The Civil Services Bill, 2009, which envisages an enforceable code of conduct for all bureaucrats through a new Central Public Services Authority (CPSA), will be piloted immediately after the Budget session of the Lok Sabha.

This will provide statutory backing to the conduct of all civil servants and appointments, transfers and postings will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny. The Bill is being designed to prevent political interference in the bureaucracy.

The CPSA will be the body to professionally manage the civil services. This will include the appointment, performance, promotions, transfers and tenures of civil servants and how they spent the money allotted to departments.

The CPSA will have between three and five members, and will have a chairman who will have the rank of the Chief Election Commissioner. He will be appointed for five years by a committee comprising the PM, a judge of the Supreme Court and the leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha. The Cabinet secretary will act as the convenor of the committee. Persons from political parties, MPs and MLAs are debarred from membership of the CPSA.

The central idea behind the Bill is to monitor and evaluate government programmes by linking their performance to that of the bureaucrats who run them and to protect the bureaucracy from political interference.

When this Bill becomes an Act, bureaucrats will no longer be at the mercy of the arbitrary transfers and postings regime that operates currently. No minister or chief minister will be allowed to shift a bureaucrat without explanation. A draft of the aims and objectives of the Bill said: “The public servant needs to be protected from victimisation or other adverse consequences and refusing to follow directions of superiors in service which are not in accordance with applicable rules and regulations.”

Once passed, the Bill will initially be applicable to the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and the Indian Police Service (IPS). Later, all other services for which the Union Public Service Commission holds recruitment examinations, including the Indian Foreign Service (IFS), will come under its purview. In consultation with state governments, it will be applicable to the state services as well.

In other words, the Bill will, over a period of time, be applicable to all public servants in India who draw their salaries from the government.

Appointment criteria
The draft Bill visualises the appointment of all civil servants for a tenure not less than three years in one posting. If there is deviation from this, the public servant will have to be “compensated for the inconvenience and harassment caused due to such transfer before term”. The draft Bill doesn’t spell out what form this compensation will take.

The chief secretary and the director general of police (DGP) of a state will be selected out of a panel of suitable candidates of required seniority to be drawn up by a committee comprising the chief minister, leader of the Opposition and the home minister. Currently, it is the chief minister who is at liberty to choose chief secretaries and DGPs. In Uttar Pradesh, as in other states, DGPs are known to have been appointed for less than a year at a time.

Similarly, the Cabinet secretary will be selected from a panel by a committee comprising the prime minister, the leader of the Opposition and the home minister. Currently, the leader of the Opposition has no say in such an appointment. If there is deviation from the system, the Bill says Parliament must be told why it happened. By implication, the seniormost civil servant will not have an automatic right to become the Cabinet secretary, as is the current norm, weighted with performance parameters that are often termed subjective.

Performance evaluation
Currently, through the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) ministers and superiors have the power to make or mar a civil servant’s career.

With the new Bill, the ACR will become only a part of the evaluation exercise. The others are an enforceable code of conduct and a performance management system that will not only evaluate their individual performance but that of the department and the programme they run.

The ACR is a panoramic view of a civil servant’s work. In addition, what will be evaluated is job-specific achievements, through Annual Performance Agreements to which signatories will be the secretary (or head) of the department, the minister and the CPSA.

It is not that the government doesn’t currently evaluate performance of departments that run various programmes. This is done on a quarterly and annual basis. But in the absence of priorities and weighs, “some programmes get an implementation rating of 2 on 10, some get 10 on 10. The net result is the bureaucrat gets 9 on 10, but the people of India — the consumers of the programmes the state provides — give it 2 on 10. How can this happen?” asked Prajapati Trivedi, newly appointed secretary in the Department of Performance Management created in the Ministry of Personnel, while talking to Business Standard.

The new evaluation system will be based on a matrix of ratings given on the basis of performance agreements, drawn up and signed by the minister, the secretary and the CPSA. Currently, performance is evaluated based on a comparison of achievements against targets set between the evaluator and those being evaluated.

But Trivedi argues that what is needed is a selection of criteria and levels of targets by the evaluator at the end of the year.

He cites the example of a health minister in a country who agrees with the director general of hospitals on a set of criteria by which to evaluate the latter’s performance. One of the criteria is: total number of hospital beds available in the country.

The minister could also agree to allocate necessary funds from his ministry’s budget to help achieve the target of, say, 350,000 hospital beds. The quality of hospital beds has to be agreed on beforehand.

During the year, however, the minister is forced to divert funds allocated to hospital beds for an emergency programme to fight an unexpected epidemic. As a consequence, the director-general of hospitals is able to provide about 250,000 hospital beds that year.

How must the director-general’s performance be judged?

Clearly, the performance of the hospital department has been poor. But is the director general to blame for this? In fact, it is possible that the director-general managed to perform even under adverse budgetary conditions.

Therefore, mechanical task-setting will be replaced with a more flexible system giving weights to a number of tasks that a bureaucrat will perform as the leader of the team. In turn, he will set weighted targets for his team

Rewarding efficiency
Dimly recognising the problems in evaluation, the Sixth Pay Commission had recommended the introduction of a new performance-based pecuniary benefit, over and above their regular salaries, for government employees. The benefit was called the Performance Related Incentive Scheme (PRIS), payable to employees taking into account their performance over a period of time. It was based on the principle of differential reward for differential performance. However, while the salary increase was quickly implemented, almost no work has been done on this for the last two years.

One of the first suggestions on an accountability road map came in the report of Veerappa Moily, the Administrative Reforms Commission chief in the last government. He suggested that departmental minister and the secretary of the ministry sign an annual performance agreement providing “physical and verifiable details of the work to be done during a financial year”. He also said that the actual performance be assessed by a third party.Fired by the need to have a more responsive government structure, the government put in place a consultative exercise as far back as 2006 when the Cabinet secretary held a consultation with chief and home secretaries of states on a new system to govern bureaucracy.

Following this, Cabinet Secretary K M Chandrashekhar set up a new department called the Performance Management Department which has already taken baby steps to asses how the new systems will go down with the bureaucracy.

Workshops have been held in the ministries of commerce, labour, tourism and heavy industry to test receptiveness. The response is overwhelming: bureaucrats are happy to embrace a new, additional system of evaluation that does away with the subjective element. “There is a hunger for this, that surprised us,” Trivedi said. Bureaucrats see the new system as a hedge from ministers who for reasons of patronage or cronyism, try to tweak government programmes.

“Efficiency is equity’s best friend. If there is performance, there will be efficiency (in spending public money) and there will be equity,” Trivedi said. “The worst way to achieve equity is to spend more money to achieve it,” he said, in the context of reports of leakage in public schemes such as the National Rural Employment Guarantees Scheme.

Salient features of the draft Bill
A politically neutral, professional, accountable and efficient public service is an essential instrument for promotion of good governance

The public servant must conduct themselves in a manner as to promote the principles underlying the Constitution of India while providing honest, impartial and frank advice to political executive in discharge of their function

They must ensure that public money are used with the utmost economy and careA Central Public Services Authority will aid an advice to the central government in all matters concerning the organisation, control, operation and management of public service and public servants.

It will recommend to the central government, policies on recruitment, tenure, nature of employment transfers, deputation, retirement, termination discharge, evaluation of performance, performance-linked payments to public servants, and all other matters concerning the services of public servants

It can review performance parameters of public servants
It can, subject to the declared policies of the central government including “but not limited to, reservations in the public service”, recommend ways in which recruitment to and career advancement in public service is “increasingly based on merit and on open competition”.

It will ensure transfers and postings are undertaken in a “fair and objective” manner.

Courtesy: Business Standard

Domestic Corporate Deal between Jet Airways (Jetlite also) and ICAR

Taking a cue from Govt. of India notification ICAR has entered into corporate deal with jet airways. In one of my earlier post I had mentioned about corporate deal of Air India. CSIR may take some initiative in this regard and save some amount of tax payer money.

ICAR Notification: here

ICAR Award for Administrative Staff-To promote excellence in performance

The term 'information' as defined in the Right to Information Act does not include answers to the questions like 'why'.

Govt officer fined for delay in providing info under RTI

New Delhi The CIC has slapped a maximum penalty of Rs 25,000 on an employee of the Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions for not providing information to an RTI applicant on time.

The applicant Mahendra Kumar Gupta had sought some information from Kendriya Bhandar, which is under the Ministry of Personnel Public Grievances and Pensions.

But the Central Public Information Officer of the department R K Singh provided the information after a delay of 215 days.

The information was to be provided by September 27, 2007, as per provisions of RTI Act.

The commission in its order imposed penalty of Rs 250 per day not exceeding Rs 25,000 as per the provision of RTI Act and directed the Kendriya Bhandar chairperson to recovered it from Singh's salary either directly or through deducting Rs 5,000 per month.

The CIC in its earlier hearing had directed the department to show cause as to "why a penalty of Rs 250 per day from the date when information fell due September 27, 2007 to the date when the information is actually supplied, April 30, 2008, not exceeding Rs 25,000 should not be imposed."
Courtesy: Indian express

Senior Citizens Savings Scheme, 2004 - Acceptance of Form 15-G from the Nominees

RBI/2008-09/493
Ref. No. DGBA.CDD.H-10566/15.15.001/2008-09

June 5, 2009

The General Manager
Government Accounts / Business Department
State Bank of India / State Bank of Indore/State Bank of Patiala
State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur /State Bank of Travancore
State Bank of Hyderabad / State Bank of Mysore /Allahabad Bank
Bank of Baroda / Bank of India / Bank of Maharashtra
Canara Bank/Central Bank of India /Corporation Bank Dena Bank / Indian Bank
Indian Overseas Bank / Punjab National Bank / Syndicate Bank / UCO Bank
Union Bank of India / United Bank of India / ICICI Bank Ltd / Vijaya Bank/IDBI Ltd

Dear Sir,

Senior Citizens Savings Scheme, 2004 - Acceptance of Form 15-G from the Nominees

As you are aware, investors under Senior Citizens Savings Scheme, 2004 (SCSS) are eligible to file Form 15-G and 15-H to claim exemption from TDS on the interest payable on the deposits under the said scheme.

2. Central Board of Direct Taxes have now clarified, vide their Office Memorandum F.No.275/36/2009-IT(B) dated May 14, 2009, that nominee of the investors of SCSS can also produce 15-G form (declaration of non-deduction of tax from the amount of interest payable) at the time of payment after the death of the depositor.

3. The contents of this circular may be brought to the notice of the designated branches of your bank for information and compliance.

4. Please acknowledge receipt.

Yours faithfully,

(Imtiyaz Ahmad)
Assistant General Manager

Senior Citizens Savings Scheme, 2004 - Acceptance of Form 15-G from the Nominees

RBI/2008-09/493
Ref. No. DGBA.CDD.H-10566/15.15.001/2008-09

June 5, 2009

The General Manager
Government Accounts / Business Department
State Bank of India / State Bank of Indore/State Bank of Patiala
State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur /State Bank of Travancore
State Bank of Hyderabad / State Bank of Mysore /Allahabad Bank
Bank of Baroda / Bank of India / Bank of Maharashtra
Canara Bank/Central Bank of India /Corporation Bank Dena Bank / Indian Bank
Indian Overseas Bank / Punjab National Bank / Syndicate Bank / UCO Bank
Union Bank of India / United Bank of India / ICICI Bank Ltd / Vijaya Bank/IDBI Ltd

Dear Sir,

Senior Citizens Savings Scheme, 2004 - Acceptance of Form 15-G from the Nominees

As you are aware, investors under Senior Citizens Savings Scheme, 2004 (SCSS) are eligible to file Form 15-G and 15-H to claim exemption from TDS on the interest payable on the deposits under the said scheme.

2. Central Board of Direct Taxes have now clarified, vide their Office Memorandum F.No.275/36/2009-IT(B) dated May 14, 2009, that nominee of the investors of SCSS can also produce 15-G form (declaration of non-deduction of tax from the amount of interest payable) at the time of payment after the death of the depositor.

3. The contents of this circular may be brought to the notice of the designated branches of your bank for information and compliance.

4. Please acknowledge receipt.

Yours faithfully,

(Imtiyaz Ahmad)
Assistant General Manager

GoI Clarification on new pension scheme dt 25/02/2009

Story of an Orchid Flowering (Dendrobium densiflorum)