Haryana introduces model online transfer policy to ensure fairness, transparency across govt cadres
Chief Secretary Anurag Rastogi issued the notification on Friday, marking the withdrawal of all previous transfer policies, including the General Principles for Online Transfers (2020) and related departmental notifications.
The policy covers employees in cadres with 50 or more sanctioned posts, excluding All India Services, Haryana Civil Services (Executive Branch), and Allied Services, unless exempted by the Human Resource Department (HRD). 'Smaller cadres with fewer than 50 posts may be included at the competent authority's discretion. All cadre posts, including positions at headquarters, are part of the transfer drive. Within 15 days of notification, departments must publish a list of covered cadres, specifying Prescribed Tenure, Minimum Tenure, and Unit, with provisions for periodic revisions with HRD approval,' the policy mentions.
According to the policy, 'The post allocations shall be based on a composite merit score out of 80 points. Age contributes up to 60 points, calculated as age in days divided by 365 (up to four decimal points). For example, a 40-year-old employee scores approximately 40 points. Up to 20 points are awarded for special circumstances: 10 points for all female employees; 10 points for female employees who are unmarried and over 40, widows, divorced, or judicially separated; 10 points for male employees who are divorced, widowers with minor children, or judicially separated with minor children; 5 points for employees whose spouses work in State or Central Government if the transfer reduces posting distance; 10 points for spouses of military or paramilitary personnel; 10 points for employees or their immediate family with debilitating disorders (certified by authorized medical boards like AIIMS or PGI Chandigarh); 10 points for those with 100 per cent differently-abled or mentally challenged children; and up to 20 points for employees with disabilities under the RPWD Act 2016, based on disability percentage starting from 40 per cent.'
Apart from this, an employee who has been awarded a major penalty under the HCS (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 2016, will invite a penalty of '-10 (minus 10) marks' during the currency of the punishment.
The policy supports employees with personal challenges such as women, those with medical conditions, or disabled children, enhancing access to preferred postings. Departments must comply with the 15-day deadline, and employees should ensure documentation like medical certificates.
Employees may file grievances within 15 days of order issuance, but only after joining at the new place of posting. Complaints must be submitted through intraHaryana.nic.in and will be addressed within the same time frame.
The Chief Minister retains the authority to relax or modify provisions in the public interest or administrative exigency. The Human Resources Department will also be the final authority on clarifications. General online transfers will be made preferably once a year. However, transfer/posting necessitated by promotion, direct recruitment or administrative exigencies can be made anytime with the prior approval of the CM.
'The department will undertake rationalisation to redistribute or ascertain the number of posts in any unit based on administrative requirements and efficiency. This entire stage will be completed within 15 days. Within the first seven days, the department will undertake the preliminary rationalisation exercise. There may be a possibility that the number of employees posted in any unit is in excess of the administrative requirement.
Such surplus employees will be required to participate in the ongoing transfer drive. Amongst such surplus employees, the employee with the longest stay shall have to participate in the transfer drive. In the case where more than one employee has the same period of stay, then the younger employee shall have to participate in the transfer drive. Further surplus employees, who belong to the Protected Category shall not be transferred without their consent subject to the condition that not more than 50 per cent of such excess employees in that unit belong to the Protected Category,' a government spokesperson explained.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
9 hours ago
- The Print
Centre considers dramatic MRP overhaul to limit ‘irrational pricing'. What it'd mean for buyers, sellers
Remember rushing to the grocery store and checking the MRP labels before adding items to your cart? Consumers often refuse to pay the street vendors extra charges such as the 'cooling fee', considering that printed MRP is a government-mandated, fixed price that sellers must respect. Yet, rarely examined is how this price is determined. More importantly, why do identical products across brands carry varying MRPs? These questions have led New Delhi policy circles to rethink whether the MRP system is the best choice for consumers and retailers. Not a bureaucratic change, the overhaul will be addressing the chronic complaints of excess pricing, as well as misleading discounts, leaving consumers short-changed. New Delhi: From a package of biscuits to a bottle of shampoo in crowded shopping aisles—all bear that ubiquitous MRP tag, but change is in the offing. The Narendra Modi-led government is considering a dramatic overhaul of the Maximum Retail Price (MRP) regime, which has been a bulwark of consumer protection since the 1990s. At its core, the maximum retail price is the highest price at which a seller can sell a packaged product to consumers in India. It is not a suggestion; it is a legal cap, inclusive of all taxes; printed, right on the packaging. It is illegal for retailers to undercut the cap in a competitive market and illegal to charge even an additional Re 1. The MRP system avoided arbitrariness, ensuring transparency in prices where bargaining is not always doable, such as new retail environments. The root of this pricing system goes back to 1990, when amendments to the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976, introduced the MRP. India, then poised for economic liberalisation, still had spotty consumer protections. The intention behind MRP was to protect consumers against exploitative tactics, such as retailers raising prices of a commodity during shortages. It developed from previous attempts in the 1970s to prevent tax evasions and extortionate local charges. By 2011, the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules legalised MRP, making it compulsory on all pre-packaged products, thereby eliminating dual pricing or preventing sellers from printing different prices on them. Legally, MRP, which falls under the Legal Metrology Act, 2009, is administered by the Department of Consumer Affairs. Violations result in fines or penalties imposed by organisations, such as the Central Consumer Protection Authority. The MRP system—a one-of-a-kind pricing system adopted by India, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka, among other countries—is different from the recommended retail prices prevalent in the United States and Europe, among other nations, where market forces allow greater freedom. Jump to 2025, the Union Ministry of Consumer Affairs is leading what may become the most far-reaching MRP overhaul ever. In a crucial meeting with trade bodies, including the Confederation of Indian Industry, consumer associations, and tax authorities, earlier this year, in May, the Centre mulled over new frameworks. The new proposal? Tie MRP closer to real production and marketing expenditure, particularly in the case of essentials and daily items, and that may require fixing 'standard costs' after consultations with stakeholders, and possibly, amending the Legal Metrology Act, or the new GST regulations. The government is currently attempting to introduce a formula that will limit 'irrational pricing' to create the illusion among customers that they are saving money. The revamp may include transparency interventions, such as compulsory cost segregation, or maybe product QR codes that enable consumers to scan the code to confirm pricing rationale. Talks on adopting a Suggested Retail Price (SRP) model, as in Western economies, are also ongoing. Under the SRP, retailers may have room to negotiate local costs, such as transport in hinterlands. These contemplations are not occurring in a vacuum but are part of a larger consumer protection push, including anti-profiteering under GST and attempts to rationalise prices with digital platforms. Up to July 2025, however, no announcement of any final decision had been made. But why this shift, now? The consumer retail business has been booming in India. Online titans and hypermarkets are driving this boom while causing price distortions. Manufacturers tend to overprice MRPs to allow flashy discounts, tricking consumers into believing they are snagging a bargain. Consider a plain juice sachet, say one priced at Rs 50 and another at Rs 150, without any apparent logic, though the contents are the same. This lack of transparency kills trust and stokes perceptions of profiteering, particularly in the backdrop of post-pandemic inflation. Another example of exorbitant pricing is overpricing in tourist spots or rural areas with limited competition. Wider economic changes are at play there. Considering the growth rate (six to seven percent) in India, the government is looking to create a more equitable market, enhancing consumption without suppressing any invention. Along with the worldwide trend of nations, such as the US, depending on antitrust regulations to cap cartels, India is also viewing the reforms in MRP as a means to modernise and safeguard poor consumers in an economy that remains uneven. The crossroads: Pros and cons If implemented successfully, the overhaul of MRP could be a game-changer. Tying the maximum retail price of a product to its expenses could potentially lead to a decrease in the effective rates of necessities and lower household bills. A consumer could easily identify pricing scams on a soap packet if they could scan a QR code and see the cost breakdown. For instance, MRP may be production costs (40%), taxes (20%), and profit margin (40%). It would prevent tax evasions, as well as harmonise the MRP with GST, and prevent the concealment of profits in inflated MRPs. For companies, more defined norms may lead to honest pricing, increased competition, and more innovations. It will be a move in the direction of fairness, particularly in rural India, where MRP is the sole price reference in the absence of bargaining power, Consumer lobbies say. On the whole, it could also increase economic efficiency; research has indicated equivalent reforms in fuel subsidies insulated business growth from external shocks. But not all are smiling. Industry group voices, such as manufacturers and retailers, caution that inflexible cost-based MRPs could freeze out adaptability in a heterogeneous market. India extends from metropolitan malls to isolated villages, but requiring standard prices overlooks differential costs, such as higher transportation costs in hill stations. A move to SRP may result in price instability or cartels in low-competition areas, harming the very people it is supposed to protect. Speaking to ThePrint, Abhishek Rana, an advocate at the Supreme Court of India, said that the proposed law might take away the right of business owners to practise their kind of business. 'India, being a price-sensitive market, with hidden charges levied almost everywhere, a proposal aimed at regulating the method of calculating MRP or linking it to inherent production value, may be a welcome change. However, a challenge that the government may face will be to balance it with the right to business,' Rana added. Rana further pointed out the intangible factor of quality. One excuse that companies tend to use in their favour is the idea of brand quality and trust. Companies tend to promote their products as better compared to their rivals' by stating that the quality of the raw material used is superior. There may be some truth in it; it does allow a lot of 'puffery'. Throwing light on the same, Rana said, 'An argument of costs incurred due to the intangible parameter of an item'squality, production method, or even method of sourcing its raw materials can be difficult to regulate with guidelines, more so for luxury goods. How the government overcomes these probable issues remains to be seen. A suggested or recommended retail price, as adopted by various countries, might be a consideration.' While the revamp may seem ambitious, it may be of interest to small firms that remain concerned over compliance costs. Estimating and rationalising each MRP may increase administrative expenses, which the firms could transfer to consumers. Critics highlight that the MRP's dysfunction stems from weak enforcement, not the system itself; overhauling it risks unintended hikes if guidelines are too prescriptive. There is also the risk of dampening e-commerce dynamism, where personalised pricing drives sales. In a price-conscious country, any perceived hike can trigger anger, reminiscent of earlier milk street vendor boycotts over MRP issues. Transparency is commendable, but over-regulation, as in other reforming economies, may stifle India's free-market ambitions. (Edited by Madhurita Goswami) Also Read: ̌BJP MPs go full throttle against Trump even as govt hails enduring India-US ties amid tariff tension
Mint
a day ago
- Mint
Former CJI DY Chandrachud vacates official residence, shifts to 14-Tughlaq Road bungalow
After a controversy had erupted over former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud's stay at the official residence of CJI in New Delhi beyond permissible time, he has vacated the bungalow. On July 7, Justice Chandrachud had told news agency PTIthat his luggage was packed and he, along with his wife and children, would soon move to a paid government accommodation. "We have actually packed up our luggage. Some of the luggage is already gone to the new house and some are kept here in the storeroom," Justice Chandrachud had said. Justice Chandrachud, his wife Kalpana and daughters Priyanka and Mahi, both of whom are persons with disabilities, were living in the official CJI residence. The former Chief Justice of India had expressed regret over the controversy, citing his daughters' medical condition and the need for a wheelchair-accessible home. He said he was awaiting the completion of the new house before moving in. On July 1, the Supreme Court administration had written to the Union Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs stating that Justice Chandrachud had stayed in the CJI official residence beyond the permissible period and sought the property to be vacated. The letter requested the MoHUA secretary to take possession of the bungalow from the former CJI without any further delay as the permission granted to him for retention of the accommodation expired on May 31, while the prescribed six-month period of further stay under the 2022 Rules ended on May 10. Earlier, Justice Chandrachud had said that he spoke to his successor CJI Sanjiv Khanna and told him he would return to 14, Tughlaq Road bungalow, where he lived before becoming the CJI. However, Justice Khanna had asked Justice Chandrachud to continue staying in the CJI bungalow as he did not want to shift to the official residence. Under Rule 3B of the Supreme Court Judges (Amendment) Rules, 2022, a retired Chief Justice of India can retain type VII bungalow, a level below the 5, Krishna Menon Marg bungalow, for a maximum period of six months after retirement.
The Hindu
a day ago
- The Hindu
Former Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud vacates official residence
Former Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud has vacated the official residence of the head of the judiciary in the national capital. Justice Chandrachud, who was the 50th Chief Justice of India, had superannuated from the office on November 8, 2024. Recently, a controversy had arisen over his stay at the official residence of CJI at 5, Krishna Menon Marg, New Delhi, beyond permissible time. Talking to the PTI on July 7, Justice Chandrachud had cleared the air saying that his luggage was packed and he, along with his wife and children, would soon move to a paid government accommodation. Justice Chandrachud, his wife Kalpana and daughters Priyanka and Mahi, both of whom are persons with disabilities, were living in the official CJI residence. "We have actually packed up our luggage. Some of the luggage is already gone to the new house and some are kept here in the storeroom," Justice Chandrachud had said while elaborating on the reasons for his overstay. He was responding to the Supreme Court administration's communication to the Central government on his purported overstay in the official bungalow. The former CJI had bemoaned the controversy and referred to the medical condition of his daughters, who required a wheelchair-friendly home, and said that he was waiting for the new home to be ready for occupation. Referring to the sequence of events, Justice Chandrachud had said that he spoke to his successor CJI Sanjiv Khanna and told him he would return to 14, Tughlaq Road bungalow, where he lived before becoming the CJI. Justice Khanna, however, asked Justice Chandrachud to continue staying in the CJI bungalow as he did not want to shift to the official residence. On July 1, the Supreme Court administration wrote to the Centre stating that Justice Chandrachud had stayed in the CJI bungalow beyond the permissible period and sought the property to be vacated. In the communication sent to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA), the Supreme Court administration had said the residence designated for the sitting Chief Justice of India ought to be returned to the court's housing pool, sources said. The letter requested the MoHUA secretary to take possession of the bungalow from the former CJI without any further delay as the permission granted to him for retention of the accommodation expired on May 31, while the prescribed six-month period of further stay under the 2022 Rules ended on May 10. Under Rule 3B of the Supreme Court Judges (Amendment) Rules, 2022, a retired Chief Justice of India can retain type VII bungalow, a level below the 5, Krishna Menon Marg bungalow, for a maximum period of six months after retirement.
