Chandigarh: Punjab govt has refused to extend dynamic assured career progression (DACP) scheme and other financial benefits to rural medical officers (RMOs) on a par with doctors of the health department, saying that they were “class apart”.It has held the two categories belong to separate cadres governed by different service rules, appointing authorities and service conditions.RMOs are posted at rural dispensaries across Punjab, with each dispensary catering to an estimated population of 10,000 people.The order was passed by the state director, rural development and panchayats department, following directions from the Punjab and Haryana high court to decide on representations submitted by RMOs seeking DACP and other financial benefits equivalent to those granted to health department doctors.After examining the issue in light of service rules, organisational structure, duties and legal provisions, the department concluded that RMOs employed under zila parishads and doctors serving under the health department could not be treated as similarly placed employees.The order noted that RMOs under are employees of zila parishads, which function as local self-govt institutions. They were initially appointed by zila parishads in 2006 on a contractual basis at a monthly remuneration of Rs 30,000, which included salaries of paramedical staff and cleaning expenses. Their appointments were made through district-level committees and services were regularised in 2011.In contrast, doctors in the health department are appointed through selection or recommendation by the Punjab Public Service Commission (PPSC) at the state level and are governed by separate service conditions.The department held that both categories are “class apart”, as one belongs to district-level institutions while the other forms part of a state cadre recruited through the PPSC.On the applicability of service rules, the order stated that although RMOs may be entitled to certain financial benefits admissible to health department doctors, such provisions cannot be interpreted as automatic entitlement to DACP benefits.The order said the DACP scheme was a cadre-specific policy meant to address stagnation among health department doctors and could not be claimed as a matter of right by employees of another cadre.The finance department also clarified that the modified assured career progression (MACP) scheme had been approved only for health department medical officers and incorporated into that department’s service rules. Since no approval existed for extending DACP benefits to RMOs working under zila parishads, the benefit could not be granted, the order said.Rejecting the plea, the director held that parity could not be claimed merely on the basis of similar qualifications or broad nature of duties.Concluding that the demand was “devoid of merit and not legally sustainable”, the department rejected the RMOs’ representation.
