CO885-(11-12) — Page 495

415

FORLI

RECORD OFFICE

Reference -

bili C.O.882/12

PUBŪTŲ, RECORD OFFICE, LONDON:

ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO BF ALPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC-

A2

scale which they recommended for hirn, in view of the very small immediate increase of salary which his promotion would otherwise bring him. The Financial Secretary informed me that the Board declined to accept the proposal.

7. You will observe that I had decided to abandon my proposal that the (Rs. 12,000-15,000) scale of salary recommended by the University Commission

Rs. 600 should be adopted for the post of Professor of Chemistry, and agreed to the substitu- tion of a lower scale of salary. It was quite evident to me that the adoption of any lower scale would commit me to the adoption of that scale for any other persons appointed to professorships in the University College in future, whether appointed from outside the College or promoted from its lower ranks. It was equally evident to me that the adoption of an unduly low standard of salary must ultimately result in a lowering of the standard of education provided at the University College. If I had feared that the lowering of the standard of salary would affect not only the standard of education but the efficiency of the teaching staff, I should have felt bound to insist that the present standard of salary should be maintained, or at least that no scale lower than that recommended by the University Commission should be adopted, for I think I am right in holding that the Governor is responsible, under the present Constitution, for maintaining the general efficiency of the public services. But it cannot very well be argued that because the standard of education will be lowered the teaching staff will become inefficient, and I therefore did not feel that I should be justified in completely over-riding what I must presume to be a considered recommendation of the Executive Committee for Education for the sole purpose of preventing a probable lowering of the standard of education in an institution the general control of which has been placed by the Constitution in their hands, when both the Executive Committee and the Board of Ministers were aware of the risk of a lowering of the standard and were prepared to accept it. I decided therefore that I could not insist on the scale recom- inended by the University Commission, and that I must agree to accept the lower scale Rs. 9,000—12,000

1 recommend that you should approve of this.

Rs. 300

Rs. 8,000 12,000 8. But if Dr. Chandrasena is to be placed on the seale Rs. 300 I consider it essential that some adjustment should be made which will allow him an adequate increase of salary in consideration of the increased responsibilities which he will undertake as Professor of Chemistry. If he were to be converted to that scale by the ordinary application of Financial Regulation 847, as the Board of Ministers intend, Dr. Chandrasena would gain an immediate increase of salary of Rs. 300 per annum only, with the prospect of rising, in four years' time and by increments smaller than those which he drew as a Lecturer (Rs. 300 as compared with £25 or Rs. 375), to a maximum salary only Rs. 1,500 per annum higher than the salary on which he has been serving for upwards of four years. Acceptance of this recommendation woukl in my opinion be entirely contrary to the principle (to which I have already referred as enunciated in your despatch of the 14th November, 1932) that no officer should be com- pelled to accept a position of greater responsibility without a reasonable increase of salary. If the smallness of the immediate increase were the only objection it would not be a valid one, for it quite frequently happens (where scales of salary overlap, or the maximum of the lower scale coincides with or falls little short of the minimum of the higher) that officers receive promotion with little or no immediate increase of salary. But where the immediate increase is small they have every right to expect a substantial prospective increase in the difference between the maxima of the higher scale and the lower, while the increments in the higher scale invariably coincide with or else exceed the increments in the lower. In Dr. Chandrasena's case, the smallness of both the immediate and the prospective increase, and the fact that the increments in his new scale are actually lower than those of a Lecturer, combine to make the lary proposed for him represent a quite inadequate increase, in my opinion, if no special adjustment is made.

9. It was for these reasons that I cansed to be submitted to the Board of Ministers, who rejected it, the proposal that Dr. Chandrasena should be placed imme-

(Rs. 9,000-12,000) diately on the maximum salary of the new scale Rs. 300

proposed for him, which would of course be equivalent to placing him on a fixed salary of Rs. 12,000 per annum. I consider that this proposal would give Dr. Chandrasena an adequate, but not an excessive, increase of salary, the large immediate increase compensating him for the fact that there is no further increase in prospect, and I recommend that you should authorize me to put my prosposal into effect.

63

10. The appointment as Professor of Chemistry carries with it appointment to the post of Registrar of Patents, to the occupant of which a special allowance is payable. Dr. Chandrasena's predecessor as Professor of Chemistry, Professor W. N. Rae, drew an allowance of Rs. 4,000 per annum for performing the duties of the Registrar of Patents/from 1922 until his retirement. Dr. Chandrasena having agreed to accept the reduced allowance of Rs. 1,800 recommended by the Salaries and Câdres Commission (paragraph 277 of Sessional Paper XVI of 1932) I approved of the reduction of the allowance to that figure, as a measure of retrenchment. Although Financial Regulation 875 refers only to officers on sterling salaries, whereas Dr. Chandrasena will, as Professor of Chemistry, draw a rupee salary, I have considered it advisable to ask for your sanction of this allowance, since it was formerly paid to an officer on a sterling salary and Dr. Chandrasena was himself on a sterling salary in his last appointment. With the frequent conversion of sterling salaries to rupee salaries that is now taking place it may be necessary to consider an amendment of Financial Regulation 875. I shall address a separate despatch to you on that subject if it should be necessary. In the meantime I request that you will sanction the payment of the allowance of Rs. 1,800 per annum to Dr. Chandrasena.

14327/33 [No. 2].

No. 32.

I have, &c.,

GRAEME THOMSON,

Governor.

THE GOVERNOR to THE SECRETARY OF STATE. (Received 7th August, 1933.)

(Confidential.)

SIR,

Ceylon, 19th July, 1933. I HAVE the honour to refer to my open despatch No. 442 of the 15th July, 1933,* on the subject of an appointment to the post of Professor of Chemistry at the Ceylon University College, and in particular to the recommendation which I have made in paragraph 9 thereof, that Dr. J. P. C. Chandrasena, if appointed to it, should Rs. 9,000 12,000

Rs. 300

be placed immediately on the maximum salary of the new seale proposed for the post.

-

2. The Estimates of the current financial year contain provision for the post of

£800 - 1,150 Professor of Chemistry on the salary scale

I am in a position, there- £40 & 50

fore, to appoint Dr. Chandrasena immediately to that post on a fixed salary of Rs. 12,000, which is the rupee equivalent of the minimum salary of the scale provided in the Estimate. Having appointed him on that salary, I shall then be in a position to protect his salary by the introduction of a supplementary vote declared under Article 22 of the Order in Council to be "essential to give effect to the provisions of this Order" if (as will certainly happen) provision is made in the approved Estimates for 1933-34 for a sum less than the sum of Rs. 12,000 required for his salary, and the alteration of salary thereby intended by the State Council does not receive your approval under Article 87 (1). If. on the other hand, the appointment is not made until after 1st October, 1933, the provision for his salary in the next year's Estimates will already have been reduced to below the sum of Rs. 12,000, and I am advised that there will then have been no "' alteration " of Dr. Chandrasena's salary, sub- sequent to his appointment, within the meaning of Article 87 (1). In that event the supplementary vote providing a higher salary than that for which there was financial provision at the time of or immediately prior to his appointment would have to he leclared to be a matter of paramount importance, which is clearly not desirable.

3. If, therefore, you agree with my proposal that Dr. Chandrasena should be Rs. 9,000 12,000. appointed Professor of Chemistry on the maximum salary of the scale

Rs. 300

it is a matter of considerable importance that your approval should be conveyed to me in time to enable me to appoint him before 1st October. I request that your

* No. 31.

1