An interesting discussion from www.iricen.gov.in
www.iricen.gov.in/modules...=1830#1830
Sudhir Chandra committee report regarding conditions of eligibility criteria states that only certificates from private individuals should not be considered.
Now there is a hot issue in BCT division regarding the interpretation of the word `private individuals'.
A circular was issued by CE(Works) W.Rly with the approval of the GM which states that the following should not be considered as `private individuals'.
(a) Government departments/PSUs & other Govt institutions
(b) Public Limited Company
(c) Private Limited company
(d) Government recognized institutions
(e) Co-operatives registered with `Registrar of Co-operatives
(f) Partnership firms registered with `Registrar of firms
(g) sole proprietary firms registered with `Registrar of companies
However the divisional Finance had issued a circular stating that HQ Finance concurrence for these instructions should be linked, though the circular may be issued with the approval of GM. A number of tenders are kept pending by the Finance members onthis account
Our CE's office insist that these are only interpretation of Sudhir Chandra Committee report and therefore does not require any finance concurrence. Therefore the tender committee can have its own interpretation and act accordingly.
Should not clear definition for `private individuals' issued by the Railway board and not left to interpretation of individuals. There are a number of clarifications coming from the Board from time to time regarding the subject of eligibility criteria as instructions issued earlier seems to be `not clear'. One comprehensive and clear circular may be required from the Board on all the issues.
--------
every thing can not be issued by the board.GM instruction are equally sacrosanct & IF FINANCE does not agee to it ,they should take it to GM for review & clarification rather than holding tender cases
such cases should be handled by DRM in divn if one of their branch officer refuse to follow GM orders
GM ORDERS NEED TO BE FOLLOWED TILL IT IS EITHER WITHDRAWN BU HIM OR OVERRULED BY RAILWAY BOARD
------------
Following interesting questions arise from above discussion:
1. If Finance is right, then all the letters (at all level) issued by all the departments (other than finance), must first be concurred by finance and then only issued.
2. Can such discussion on official subjects be posted on websites and the discussion forum, which are open for public view?
3. If the executive is right, what is the solution for such day today clashes in official working? Letters issued with the approval of senior officials (GM, Members of Railway Board) have no meaning unless they are issued with finance concurrence.
www.iricen.gov.in/modules...=1830#1830
Sudhir Chandra committee report regarding conditions of eligibility criteria states that only certificates from private individuals should not be considered.
Now there is a hot issue in BCT division regarding the interpretation of the word `private individuals'.
A circular was issued by CE(Works) W.Rly with the approval of the GM which states that the following should not be considered as `private individuals'.
(a) Government departments/PSUs & other Govt institutions
(b) Public Limited Company
(c) Private Limited company
(d) Government recognized institutions
(e) Co-operatives registered with `Registrar of Co-operatives
(f) Partnership firms registered with `Registrar of firms
(g) sole proprietary firms registered with `Registrar of companies
However the divisional Finance had issued a circular stating that HQ Finance concurrence for these instructions should be linked, though the circular may be issued with the approval of GM. A number of tenders are kept pending by the Finance members onthis account
Our CE's office insist that these are only interpretation of Sudhir Chandra Committee report and therefore does not require any finance concurrence. Therefore the tender committee can have its own interpretation and act accordingly.
Should not clear definition for `private individuals' issued by the Railway board and not left to interpretation of individuals. There are a number of clarifications coming from the Board from time to time regarding the subject of eligibility criteria as instructions issued earlier seems to be `not clear'. One comprehensive and clear circular may be required from the Board on all the issues.
--------
every thing can not be issued by the board.GM instruction are equally sacrosanct & IF FINANCE does not agee to it ,they should take it to GM for review & clarification rather than holding tender cases
such cases should be handled by DRM in divn if one of their branch officer refuse to follow GM orders
GM ORDERS NEED TO BE FOLLOWED TILL IT IS EITHER WITHDRAWN BU HIM OR OVERRULED BY RAILWAY BOARD
------------
Following interesting questions arise from above discussion:
1. If Finance is right, then all the letters (at all level) issued by all the departments (other than finance), must first be concurred by finance and then only issued.
2. Can such discussion on official subjects be posted on websites and the discussion forum, which are open for public view?
3. If the executive is right, what is the solution for such day today clashes in official working? Letters issued with the approval of senior officials (GM, Members of Railway Board) have no meaning unless they are issued with finance concurrence.
