HC Deb 04 May 1893 vol 12 cc48-9
SIR SEYMOUR KING (Hull, Central)

I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India with reference to his recent statement that the scheme adopted by the Government of India for classifying and grading the officers of the Indian Telegraph Department had been approved by the Secretary of State, whether the effect of the classification and grading now instituted by the Indian Government has been that contemplated by the scheme authorised by Lord Kimberley, and ordered by Lord Cross to be carried into effect in 1887; whether, when an officiating appointment occurs in the first grade of a class, it is filled up from the second grade, and if in that case the officer remains in the same class without any increase of pay for the higher work; whether he is aware, as stated in The Pioneer, that recently cases have occurred where every (telegraph) officer in the country in the second grade of a class has been officiating in the first grade for months together, bearing additional responsibility without receiving one rupee of extra pay; if so, whether there are other changes advantageous to officers which the Secretary of State has sanctioned to outweigh the loss sustained by the officers under this state of things, and what the alleged advantages are; and whether it was intended by the Secretary of State that in Classes V. and VI. men should be drawing less pay now than they would have done under the old rules?


Yes, Sir; but certain modifications were made in the original scheme by the Government of India with the sanction of Lord Cross. With regard to the second and third questions of the hon. Member, the answer is that officiating promotions from grade to grade have been abolished, though not from class to class. The officers concerned receive benefit from the special terms of retirement offered to increase the flow of promotion; and those in the four assistant superintendent grades receive personal allowances. The Secretary of State is not aware whether the statement quoted from The Pioneer is correct. The answer to the last question is, No, nor is the Secretary of State aware that any such cases have occurred.