Degree holders demand review of recruitment rules

  • 9 Apr 2012
  • Hindustan Times (Delhi)
  • Rajesh Ahuja
  • CPWD HIERARCHY GAMES Allege important posts of executive engineers are being filled with diploma holders

NEW DELHI: Tension is simmering in the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) over the issue of diploma holder engineers getting preference over degree holder engineers.

Degree holder engineers allege that the important posts of executive engineers, who head any project execution team, are being filled with diploma holder engineers by ignoring their qualification and claim.

“Due to shortage of degree holder engineers, a provision was made in the recruitment rules to allow promotion of diploma holder engineers with outstanding ability and record to the post of executive engineer. In 1996, new recruitment rules were framed wherein the quota of diploma holders was made equal to that of degree holders for promotion to the post of executive engineer. But the department of personnel and training (DOPT) guidelines mandate a review in the rules after every five years, which has not been done for 16 years,” said a degree holder engineer, on the condition of anonymity.

The process to review the recruitment rules for the post of executive engineer is on at the moment in the CPWD.

“But the review has not taken place till now due to pressure from certain lobbies,” said another degree holder engineer.

Now, in many units the executive engineer is a diploma holder and his assistant engineers and junior engineers are graduates and post-graduates. At the moment, the CPWD has around 800 degree holder assistant engineers who also have experience.

Besides, the Supreme Court has also settled that regular service of any assistant engineer in degree quota will be counted only after he/she acquires the degree in engineering.

The recruitment rules say that besides a degree in engineering, a service of eight years will be taken into consideration for promotion to the post of executive engineer. In cases of diploma engineers, the length of service should be 10 years.

“But the department has been considering an assistant engineer for promotion to the post of executive engineer even before completion of mandated eight year service if he or she acquires degree,” said a frustrated degree holder engineer working with the CPWD.

According to sources, any executive engineer is engineering, administrative and financial in charge his unit.

It is a very crucial post. He is called drawing and disbursement officer (DDO) which is a sensitive assignment. The executive engineer signs contracts on behalf of the government. A small mistake on his part can lead to a loss to the government exchequer. “It is imperative that only qualified persons should be promoted as executive engineers,” said an official.

About CPWD Engineers' Association

It is a great pleasure to inform you that CPWD Engineers Association has launched its Blogging page. Now this page will bring to you latest developments/activities of our Members. All efforts are being made to ensure that this website caters to the requirement of CPWD Engineers so far as their various information through this Association is concerned. In course of time this page would be the most useful source of information and would reduce the gap between the Engineers and this Association. Please must inform to other members too. This page is added for various interesting things, Important News & Activities of Association .

Posted on Mon, Apr 9th, 2012, in service matter, What's new and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. 29 Comments.

  1. ankit kumar meena

    plzz tell me I am diploma holder .can I will promote for SE and CE .now I doing AMIE which complete coming 2 years than my degree count or not for upper post promotion. my stream electrical how many time I will promote from je to ae


  2. Hi,
    I have read few of the comments posted by few of our friends. We all are from the same family but still fighting among ourselves for our personnal greeds and the higher lobby is geeting the benefits. We should be united and our demands should be common and the echo should be so loud to wake the so called higher lobby, who are just getting the benefits for the work which is being done by our hands. But the question is that we do not take interest. So somebody should take the initiative to wake each n every member of our grp to take part in the agitation.


  3. Hi there to every , as I am really keen of
    reading this website’s post to be updated daily.

    It consists of good stuff.


  4. This piece of writing is genuinely a pleasant one it assists new internet visitors, who
    are wishing for blogging.


  5. Hello my friend! I wish to say that this post is amazing, nice written and
    come with almost all significant infos. I’d like to peer extra
    posts like this .


  6. Hello, i think that i saw you visited my website thus i came
    to “return the favor”.I’m trying to find things to improve my web site!I suppose its ok to use some of your ideas!!


  7. This is really interesting, You’re an overly skilled blogger.
    I’ve joined your feed and sit up for seeking more of your great post.

    Also, I have shared your web site in my social networks


  8. Very nice post. I just stumbled upon your weblog and wished to say
    that I have truly enjoyed browsing your blog posts.
    After all I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again soon!


  9. It is a simple commonsense for the department to follow 1996 RR rules for the promotion of the Executive Engineers. It is infight amongst ourselves that I will get the designation and you get the MACP. Financially it does not matter, but in some cases the EE is in the GRADE PAY of 6600 and the AE is in the grade pay of 7600, which embraces both the EE and the AE. The tender job there is no separate procedure for AE, EE, and both of them are having equal responsibility and the ASSISTANT ENGINEERS are well experienced to call a tender and award the work after scruitiny and negotiation. Degree holders are not to spend any extra technical knowledge to open a tender and award it except following procedure given in the manual and general conditions of contract. In this circumstance why there should be a difference of diploma and degree. because we are fighting amongst ourselves using degree and diploma and the department is taking advantage. Now everything is being setteled in the court, because of the silence of our department in representing the RR rules properly to court. Only one satisfaction is there that we are from one family, that is diploma family. Only very few Graduates joined in our departmemtn as JE whereas remaining all joined as a diploma JE then they obtained degree. This is nothing but the hadle of the axe helps the axe to destroy its own group or generation. This should be stopped and there should be some limit of greedyness for our own members to push the diploma holders back. We should not forget that the JEs’ Association had made the graduates as their members even though they had an Association without any activities with minorities except to go against the diploma holders. Now the graduates are dictating the terms from the court of law without knowing the seniority due to greedy nature. Tallented diploma and degree holders are still there, but it does not mean others are not intelligent. If it is the case then why the dept. should permit to get the designs outsourced when it has the Engineers selected through UPSC and graduates ! We have only a very small period to serve but what will be the future to our younger generation is a very big question mark.
    T. Manoharan,AE, Pune.


  10. So long entry qualification of JEs in the department remains Diploma, there is no reason to deny Diploma Holders to become EE. 1996 RR was in that way very fruitful. Our Association should fight to restore Diploma Holders right to be EE. Department did not agree to change RR of JEs with Degree (Diploma with 2 years experience) as entry qualification. Then how DOPT forces to change RR of AE / EE with Degree to be only promoted to EE ? The day when the RR of JEs will be changed with Degree as entry qualification, and when all Diploma engineers will retire from the department i.e. only Degree engineers will remain in the department, then only question of changing RR for AE / EE with only Degree to be promoted to EE may be thought off. On the other hand depriving entry of Diploma in the department as JE by changing the RR is not also desirable considering future of Diploma Engineers of the country.

    I think, we should fight for retention of RR 1996 with minimum riders that are beneficial to all of us as already discussed earlier many times.


  11. A list of 60 Nos. degree holders AEs (who will be considered for the promotion in future agaist the cadre review) has been placed on CPWD website on 23rd April 2012. This list is having so many discrepancies such as at S No.- 33 the name of already promoted AE has been mentioned & at S No.- 32 the name of an AE has been mentioned whose degree’s authenticity has been reported by the CPWD Directorate under question.The reservation in promotion as per the guidelines of DOPT has not been followed in this panel as the names of sufficient Nos of reserved categoy candidates have not been mentioned. This must be get corrected before issuing of promotion orders. The total vacancies in the grade of EE should be approximately 220 (114 Cadre review + 80 from implimantation of cadre review at higher level i.e SE to Spl. DG level & balance are physically lying vacant). Out of these the degree holder quota is approximately 110 ( 50% of 114, + 1/3 of 106, + 15 already promoted against degree quota and authenicity of their degree is in question). Accordingly the panel should be prepared for 110 candidates following the DOPT guidelines strictly.This matter should be take up with the administration at the level of Association.

    Er. Umesh Kumar


  12. The implementation of cadre review is in process for all posts to ease out the stagnation. It came to notice that increased posts in the grade of EEs are being proposed to be filled up by promotion from the feeder caders as per their respective quatas i.e 33% from AEEs and 67% from AEs. Despite the fact that there is no stagnation in the grade of AEEs and huge stagnation (about 10 years) in the grade of AEs. The AEEs quota (33% posts) will remain unfilled by this methodology. This will forefiet the main objective (reduction in stagnation period in promotion of caders) of cadre review. This issue must be raised with the CPWD Directorate with a demand that all increased posts (cadre review) should be filled up from AEs stream where huge stagnation exist.

    Er. Umesh Kumar
    Assistant Engineer,
    Dehradun Central Circle,


  13. Earlier before 1996, under 1954 rules, only degree holders and diploma holder AEs with outstanding ability and record were being considered. This means 75% ACRs outstanding. Hence very few diploma AEs were eligible. In 1996 RRs this has been modified as diploma with 10years and degree with 8 years service. The bench mark of CRs is only “Good” for all for promotion to the post of EE. Only for promotion above EE to NFJAG or SE, one needs Very Good bench mark as per DoPT guidelines.

    P R Charan babu, General secretary,
    CPWD Engineers’ Association


    • It is quiet true. Why the diploma AE is not promoted as EE even after 15 years of service ? and how the degree AE is promoted within 10 years.Is there any mutual understanding between the DEPT and the Association !
      T. Manoharan, AE, Pune.


  14. Since DOP&T has has amended Rules to the effect that engineering and scientific posts, having a grade pay of Rs6600.00, be filled by only graduate engineers, I do not think they would relax the Rules for CPWD only. They have been very rigid in their formulations. However, the matter can be taken up by all the departments of various ministries in GOI to pursue DoPT for the same.


  15. As far as I recollect , around 1995, EEs with diploma as qualification were demoted and instead degree holders were promoted to the post of EE. There-after I suppose, RRs were amended by CPWD making, Diploma holders with 10 years of experience as AE and having 10 outstanding CRs, eligible for promotion to the post of EE. I don’t whether this is still in vouge or RRs have further been amended . Pl thro’ some light on this issue


    • Central Engineering Service Group “A‟ Recruitment Rules, 1954 (for short the 1954 Rules) were replaced by Central Engineering (Civil) and also (E&M)Group “A‟ Service Rules, 1996 (for short the 1996 Rules) on 28/10/1996. Under 1954 rules diploma holder AEs were not eligible for the post of EEs and so by an amendment on 31/10/1972, govt. made provision so that outstanding ability and record diploma holder AEs could be promoted to the post of EEs along with graduate AEs. But since govt. went on promoting those diploma holder AEs who did not have outstanding ability (as recorded in CRs) along with graduate AEs. This was challenged and as per Hon’ble SC judgment in JN Goel vs Union of India on 14/01/1997, diploma holder AEs who were not having outstanding ability but promoted to the post of EEs were to be reverted as AEs. But by then 1996 RRs had come into vogue and to my knowledge hardly any AEs have been promoted regular basis based on these RRs. As per 1996 RRs diploma holder AEs with 10 years of experience and graduate AEs with 8 years of experience are eligible to the post of EEs. This RR allows diploma AEs to become EE without the need of having outstanding ability. However in 2006 when AEs were promoted to the post of EEs in a mass scale albeit on adhoc basis, junior diploma holder AEs superseded senior graduate AEs because of the 1:1 quota stipulated in 1996 RRs. Later Hon’ble PB, CAT in 2008 gave judgment that degree holder AEs having diploma qualification shall be considered for diploma quota too so that such senior AEs need not be superseded by junior diploma holder AEs just to maintain quota. However lacuna is that direct graduate AEs if they do not have a diploma may still be superseded by junior diploma AEs if graduate quota is fully utilised. To remove this anomaly govt. wanted to amend the 1996 RRs suitably to prevent this supersession by adding saving clause. But DOP&T has now come up with idea that in engineering and scientific posts having a grade pay of Rs6600.00 can be filled by only graduate engineers. I feel if the administration(CPWD) strongly recommends that diploma engineers can effectively function as EEs, I do no think DOP&T, UPSC or Court will oppose this. So association should pressurise the administration for allowing diploma AEs to be promoted to the post of EEs, remembering the fact that most of us entered the cadre in the rank of JEs as diploma holders and deserve to become EEs whether acquired graduate in engineering during the due course or not.



    RR Rules state as under : It should precisely be stated whether age and educational qualifications prescribed for direct recruits should also apply in the case of promotees. Unless there are any specific grounds, the age limit prescribed for direct recruits are not insisted upon in the case of promotees. Regarding educationalqualifications, these are not generally insisted upon in the case of promotion to posts of non-technical nature; but for scientific and technical posts, these should be insisted upon, in the interest of administrative efficiency, at least in the case of senior Group A posts in the Pay Band-3 Grade Pay Rs. 6600 and above. Sometimes the qualifications for
    junior Group A posts and Group B posts may not be insisted upon in full but only
    the basic qualification in the discipline may be insisted upon. For example, if a
    degree in Civil Engineering is the qualification prescribed for direct recruits, the promotees may be required to possess at least a Diploma in Civil Engineering. Insuch cases, the entry under this column may be edited as “Educational
    Qualifications: No, but must possess at least ………………………..”.


    • The degree programs in civil engineering, mechanical engineering and electrical engineering were started in 1908, 1912 and 1932, respectively in Government College of Engineering, Pune(College of Science, Pune). The Licentiate in civil engineering was for instruction to subordinate officers of Public Works Department. All the Licentiate programmes in this college were closed in 1909 and the first BE(Civil) graduated in the year 1912. This information is from the website of College of Engineering, Pune. The Licentiate programmes were meant for matriculated students. Sir.M.Visweswarayya got his LCE in the year 1883. During November 1909, Visvesvaraya was appointed as Chief Engineer of Mysore State. Further, during the year, 1912, he was appointed as Diwan (First Minister) of the princely state of Mysore.


  17. Why diploma holders cannot be considered for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineers, Chief Engineers etc. ? Why a degree in Engineering is required for these posts ? I request somebody to throw some light on this. When diploma holders can successfully perform the duties of EEs, I feel, they can do so as SEs and CEs also. This is high time to change the rules of the British Era. The greatest Engineer India has seen, Sir M.Visweswaraiah was a diploma holder!!!!!!! Todays M.Techs cannot do whatever he has done decades back.


    • On completing his BA in Central College, Bangalore, Sir M Visvesarayya moved to Pune to obtain an engineering degree from the College of Science (Now Government College of Engineering). He emerged in 1883 ranked first in L.C.E (equivalent to today’s BE degree) and went on to become one of the finest Civil Engineers of his time.So let us not drag the great soul’s name in our issue degree-diploma for the post of EE or above


  18. Arvind mahajan A.E chandigarh

    it is painful to read this H.T news.Promotion of executive engineer in cpwd and in all the state from
    decades ago and graduate engineers has made no of attempts to stop this promotion for the post of executive engineer. Finally there are supreme court judgements in favour of diploma holder in various states diploma engineer cases and all the state govt has promotion quota for diploma holders This issue must be dealt with grate care otherwise it will create split in association . my graduate/ post graduate engineers brothers must have faith on our association I also agreed with the comments of my brother MR. sehajpal A E


    • Promotion to the post of EE from diploma AEs under 1954 rules(amended in 1972)were challenged by graduate AEs stating that diploma AEs who did not have oustanding ability cannot be promoted even on adhoc basis and the Hon’ble SC Judgment delivered on 14/01/1997 (JN Goel vs UOI)resulted in reversion of some diploma holder AEs. But in the same judgment SC has not objected implementation of 1996 rules where diploma holder AEs with 10 years of experince can be promoted.Rather it has supported its implementation. So its our association duty to get the CPWD administartion recommend strongly to UPSC and DOP&T that diploma holders are eligible apart from graduates!


  19. Issue of promotion to the post of Ex Engineer already have a number of disputes with class I cadre. Now new issue of Degree/ diploma quota further added. This issue should be dealt with grate care otherwise it will further create split in Class-II cadre. CPWDEA should come up with solution so that this spilt could be avoided. Batter solution to deal with issue is that each member of Engineer associations and Junior Engineer association must give their open suggestions on this blog.


    • Our entry cadre is JE for which minimum qualification is diploma in engineering Some join with engineering degree whereas some others acquire degree after joining CPWD. Denying promotion to diploma AEs to the post of EE will be a big injustice. 1954 rules(later amended in 1972) allowed oustanding diploma holder AEs promotion whereas 1996 rules allow diploma holders allow after 10 years when compared to 8 years for graduates. So both the rules are/were as per the Constitution . 1954 rules motivates diploma AEs to work harder to come par with graduate AEs whereas 1996 rules motivate diploma AEs to acquire degree in engineering to get the promotion minimum 2 years earlier. Now its association duty to tell this fact clearly to our administartion so that they can recommend continuation of existing rules with amendment that senior graduate AEs cannot be superseeded by junior diploma AEs while promoting


  20. A.K.Khindria A.E. from Chandigarh

    The basic qualification for a Junior Engineer is Diploma in Civil/Elect./Mech Engineering. Basic qualification for an Asstt. Executive Engineer is Degree in Civil/Elect./Mech Engineering. The degree holder are coming as Junior Engineering after competeing at par with diploma holders for this post. Rather diploma holder should protest for their entry, who are otherwise unable to get entry as A.E.E., for which post, they are eligible.Degree holder are rather rejected/unable to compete that is why they get entry as J.E. Regarding 1996 rules these are framed after historic Hon’ble Supreme Court Judgement. Reporter of Hindustan Time must study it first to avoid panic/divide in the cadre by giving this type of reporting in leading daily.Association must come forward to clarify position in the same daily newspaper to avoid panic/divide in the cadre.


    • The promotion of diploma holders to the post of Executive Engineers is being done for the decades altogether in C.P.W.D. i.e. even prior to the prevailing recruitment rules of 1996 and they are successfully undertaken the duties and responsibilities even as DDOs. These rules were framed to stop the direct recruitment of Class II engineers and not for the shortage of diploma holders as alleged by the so called graduate engineers. These graduate engineers have entered the department where the entry criteria was a diploma only. Due to their incompetence i.e. as they could not clear the UPSC and other examinations meant for the degree holders, they entered the posts meant for the diploma holders. The lowermost post i.e. Junior Engineer for which diploma is a criterion has been presently occupied by the M.Tech. If these post graduates now start claiming that they are above the Chief Engineers /A.D.G.(W)/D.G.s because they are just graduates, can it be allowed? Definitely not ! In this manner all the IAS/bureaucrats who are working under the lesser qualified seniors should be promoted and placed on the top. In India the qualifications are relaxed to a large extent for the reserved category even for the sensitive posts of engineers doctors etc. and hence the issue raised in this article is totally biased and an act of favorism towards a particular section of the employees.


    • 1996 rules came into existance from 28/10/1996 whereas Hon’ble SC judgment you may be referring to was delivered on 14/01/1997(JN Goel vs UOI). As per this judgment diploma AEs who did not have outsatnding ability as assessed by CRs were reverted from the post of EEs which they were holding on ad-hoc basis. So I feel 1996 rules were framed not as per any judgment but to help many diploma AEs to get the post of EEs without requiring to get oustanding CRs. However a gap of 2 years in the experience eligibilitywas kept between diploma and degree AEs which I feel is within constitution. But 2006 mass promotion which resulted in supersession of graduate AEs by junior diploma AEs is due to wrong interpretation of rules which should not have happened. I do not think when seniority list is common a junior with lesser qualification can overtake a senior (except for SC & ST category which is protected by a sepearte provision ) who is otherwise eligible. This is against article 14 & 16 of our constitution where every one is treated as equal. So simple amendment to 1996 rules that senior graduate AE will not be superseded by junior diploma AEs during promotion to the post of EEs will suffice.


Please post your feedback/comments

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: