The President steps in to stem the rot

The above letter has been issued by the President of AIACEGEO, Shri. R. Chandramouli, calling for Units to suggest venue and dates for holding the Convention of the Association at an early date. 

This letter was not prompted by the resolution dated 8.4.2017 passed by certain units at Chennai, alone, but various developments that have overtaken this Association, for more than 2 years now.

It started with the ignoring of the President by the Secretary General during several important meetings and non consultation with him and various other office bearers when important decisions pertaining to the cadre had been taken either unilaterally or at the behest of certain vested interests within the Association or even from outside the Association.

The promotion of Shri. Ravi Malik as Assistant Commissioner and becoming ineligible to continue as Office bearer is only the last straw on the camel’s back to break the Constitutional machinery of the Association.

The just preceding one had been non-holding of the Convention within the time limit as prescribed by the Constitution before 3.2.2017.  No one other than the Chief Executive of the Organisation can be held more responsible for the lapse.

Certain persons have raised certain questions regarding the propriety of the President’s letter given above.  We attempt to examine those questions one at a time.

Point 1: Whether the President alone could exist as per the Constitution when the term of the entire AIB has expired as per the Constitution?

Analysis: The last election for the AIB was done in the Convention of the Association at Daman on 1 & 2.11.2014.   Article 8 of the Constitution deals with the   TENURE OF THE ORGAN OF THE ASSOCIATION  

“(I)                 The term of the Associate Committee shall be from one General Body Meeting to next General body Meeting and shall not exceed 24 months.  If election is not held within three months of expiry of the term, the office bearers would cease to be duly elected representative of the Association. 

(II)              The Associate Executive Committee shall cease to function on completion of the tenure of the Associate Committee.

(III)            The Regional Executive Committee shall cease to function on completion of the tenure of the Associate Committee.”

No one or anybody has the power to extend the tenure.  So all the Office bearers of the AIB have ceased to hold office since 3.2.2017.

Point 2: Then how the President can issue a letter for Convention?

Analysis: The President has not notified the Convention yet.  He has only sought the opinion of the Units.  This consultation is only an extension of the consultation that started for the said purpose at Delhi in February 2017.  But any further notice can be issued only by a person who can command respect and acceptance from the membership of the Association.  Who else other than Shri. Chandramouli, who was UNANIMOUSLY ELECTED AS PRESIDENT in the previous Convention could be found for that purpose in this situation? Further, as per the Constitution Article 10 A reads as below:

“10.  FUNCTIONS OF THE OFFICE BEARERS  

(A)              THE PRESIDENT

(i)        The President shall preside over all the meetings of the Association.

(ii)               He shall conduct the business of the Association in accordance with the Constitution.

(iii)             In any constitutional exigencies, his ruling shall be final.”

Point 3: Why the notice for Convention issued by the Secretary General itself cannot be accepted as notice for the Convention?

Analysis: The venue for Convention was not finalized at Delhi.  Units were asked to come up with suggestions.  When Gandhidham was suggested, some units felt that it would be better to hold it at a central place so that all units will find it convenient to attend.  Similarly, though Shri. Ravi Malik wanted to hold the Convention only by the end of May 2017, many units wanted it to be held at an earlier date since the AIB had expired.  However, subsequently, Shri. Ravi Malik had been promoted as AC and hence as per the Constitution of the AIACEGEO, the RSA Rules, 1993 and also as per the decision of the previous Convention of the Association at Daman, he cannot continue as Office Bearer of the Association after being promoted to the grade of AC. Relevant portion of Rule 5 of the RSA Rules, 1993 reads as below:

“5.            Conditions for recognition of Service Associations:

(c)            membership of the Service Association has been restricted to a distinct category of Government servants having common interest ,  all such Government Servants’ being eligible for membership of the Service Association ;

 (d) ( ii )      The membership of the Government Servant shall be automatically discontinued on his ceasing to belong to such category ;”

Point 4: Did not the Daman Convention permit Supdts promoted as ACs to become members of the Association and cannot all members also be Office Bearers of the Association?

Analysis: Yes.  It appears from various versions that the Daman Convention decided to permit Supdts promoted as ACs to be Members.  However, it had also been decided that they will not occupy any posts.  The decision of the Convention had been caused due to the fact that the promotee ACs did not have a separate Association to represent their cause.  But subsequently they formed a separate Association to represent themselves.  This Association has been recognized by all of us and has gained its own credibility.  Thus the necessity for having them as members of the Superintendents’ Association does not exist any more.  Even if the decision of the previous Convention is to continue, it would be against the provisions of RSA Rules, 1993, because any Association cannot represent members with conflicting interests. Precisely because all members will be entitled to become Office Bearers also, the decision to admit them as members but not as Office bearers, is flawed and self-contradictory.  Hence the decision is void and illegal.  The decision of the Daman Convention is against the Preamble of the Constitution itself, as reproduced below:

“ PREAMBLE:  WHEREAS it is expedient to amend and adopt the written Constitution of the “All India Association of Central Excise Gazetted Executive Officers”(hereinafter called as the Association) to suit the present requirements of the Group B Executive Officers in Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax…”

Point 5: President has powers only within the meetings and not outside.

Analysis: Such a situation is available only in respect of Chairpersons of meetings alone.  In the case of the President of the Association, he is clearly the head of the Association.  In fact the Constitution makes it clear in Article 10 B that the Secretary General shall act only subject to the direction and control of the President. The said provision is extracted below;

“10.  FUNCTIONS OF THE OFFICE BEARERS  

(B)       THE SECRETARY GENERAL

Subject to the direction and control of the President, the Secretary General shall be the Chief Executive of the Association and shall

(i)                 Spear-head all the activities of the Association;

(ii)               Convene all meetings of the Association;”

Thus when the President has issued the above letter, it automatically proves that he has either not permitted the SG (even if he is continuing as SG for the sake of argument) to issue the notice for Convention or that he has withdrawn the consent.  Hence, those who argued that by accepting that the AIB has ceased to exist due to Constitutional reasons, we will be walking into a terrain of divisions or anarchy, can very well be sure that by throwing to winds this constitutional provision also, they will certainly land there.

Point 6: How the President can seek to change the voting rules for the Convention?

Analysis: The President has only stated that the issue regarding changing the voting rules is to be considered by the Convention as per the decision of the decision of the EC meeting held at Kolkata on 6.3.16.  He is only giving a prior notice regarding the issue so that all units would be prepared for any decision in the Convention.

Point 7: Insistence upon voting rights based on paid up membership and that only persons duly elected in the units can be permitted to represent the units in the Convention, amounts to interference with regional democracy.

Analysis: It is an All India Association.  Not a Federation of Associations.  Members are members of the Association.  They are divided into regional bodies only for proper representation at regions.  Hence, insistence upon paid up membership for any participation and decision making is the correct democracy.  It is based on this principle alone that an Association can claim representation in various parts of the country.  The present method of election in our Association is as below:

“9 (A).  ELECTION :

 (ii)               The voting right of each Associate Unit shall be equal to the number of Commissionerates the Associate Unit represents.

(iii)                Each Associate Unit shall have the right to cast the votes by the unit General Secretary or a person nominated by the unit.

One person casting votes as per the number of Commissionerates is absurd and illegal.  It is based on the membership base that recognition of the Association itself is granted or for that matter even considered as per the RSA Rules, 1993. The relevant provisions of the said Rules are as below:

“5.            Conditions for recognition of Service Associations:

 ( d )      ( i )            The Association represents minimum 35 percent of total number of a category of employees

6                    Conditions subject to which recognition is continued :

Every Service Association recognized under these Rules shall comply with the following conditions ,  namely :-

( e )      a list of members and office hearers ,  and up-to-date copy of the rules and an audited statement of accounts of the Service Association shall be furnished to the Government annually through proper channel after the general annual meeting so as to reach the Government before the 1^st day of July each year ;”

Thus, membership cannot be divorced from the right of the existence of an Association.  Of course Rules are not really required to prove this fundamental organizational point.

Point 8: Whether such a decision taken in a Convention can be implemented immediately in the same Convention?

Analysis: Nothing prohibits the Convention from giving immediate effect to any of its’ decisions, in the larger interest of the Association and cadre. Earlier, the number of posts have been amended in the Conventions and given immediate effect.

Point 9: But in the case of paid up membership becoming the basis for voting, will it not require some time for the units to bring delegates according to such a decision?

Analysis: That is the precise reason why the President has to notify about such an eventuality so that delegates are brought accordingly.

Point 10: Will not the difference in number of delegates required as per the revision of voting as per new decisions, require time to bring such differential number of delegates?

Analysis: One person exercising more than one vote per post is totally against the provisions of the RSA Rules, 1993.  The argument that the existing provisions of the Constitution of the Association provide such a facility and that the Constitution has been approved by the Board because of the recognition given to the Association is far from legal.  The Board has not given any express approval for the Constitution.  If challenged, it will be exposed.  Further, having such a method of one person from any unit exercising as many votes as the number of votes the unit is entitled for, is against the principles of democracy and it has only lead to feudalistic tendencies to take roots in the Association, instead of making it broad based. Even as on date the number of delegates for the Convention as per the Constitution is as below:

 “6 (iv) The General Body -- The General Body shall be constituted by the Associated Executive Committee & the delegates nominated by the Associate Units where number of delegates shall reflect the number of Commissionerates the Associate units represent.” 

The number of delegates as per the number of Commissionerates is definitely going to be more than the number of delegates as per paid up membership.  Hence, the question of requiring to bring delegates to implement such a decision may not arise at all.