Servants of Knowledge
Weekly Gazette of India · Government of India

This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

Published 31 March 2001

Ministry
This Gazette may contains Multiple Ministry / Organization
Department
This Gazette may contains Multiple Departments
Office
This Gazette may contains Multiple Offices
Gazetteid
NOT available ( 148548 )
Identifier
in.gazette.central.w.2001-03-31.148548
Languages
English, Hindi
Published at
Original source ↗

REGISTERED NO. D.L.-.33001/99

The Gazette of India

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

No. 13] NEW DELHI, SATURDAY, MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923

Separate paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a

separate compilation

PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (ii)

Statutory Orders and Notifications Issued by the Ministries of the Government of India,

(Other than the Ministry of Defences)

MINISTRY OF LAW, JUSTICE AND COMPANY AFFAIRS

(Department of Company Affairs)

New Delhi, the 16th March, 2001

S O 669.—In pursuance of Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language (use for the official purpose of the Union) Rules, 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies the following two offices whereof 80 percent officers|employees have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.

1. Registrar of Companies, Hyderabad

2. Official Liquidator, Indore

[No. E- l2018/2|99-Hindi]

SAT PAL, Under Secy.

(1301)

847 GI/2001-11302 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3$)} MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS (Rehabilitation Division) New Delhi, the 19th March, 2001 S.O. 670.—In exercise of the powers con- ferred by Section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971) an amended by Act 61 of 1980 and Act 35 of 1984, the Central Government hereby appoints Shri B. N. Lahri, Under Secretary, Rehabilitation Divi- sion, Ministry of Home Affairs, to function as an Estate Officer for the purpose of the said Act. He shall exercise the power;: and perform the duties of zn Estate Officer under the eaid Act in respect of Public Premises, situated at the Plot No. E-51-52, Kirti Napar, New Delhi in the National Capital terri- tory of Delhi.

2. This sirpmedcs th" Notification of even num- ber dated 2nd September, 1999.

[No. l(2)|97-Settleracnt] PHOOL SINGH, Director (R-I) New Delhi, the 19th March, 2001

S.O. 671.—In exercine of the powers con- ferred by Sub-Section (i) of Section 3 of the D>- placed Persons (Compensation & Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (44 of 1954), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri B. N. Lahiri, Under Secretary in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Rehabilitaton Divi- sion as Settlement Commissioner for the purpose of performing, the ructions assigned to a Settlement Commissioner by or under the said Act.

2. This supersedes Notification No. 1(2)|99- SetOement, dated the 22nd July, 1999.

[No. l(2)|99-Settlement]

PHOOL SINGH, Director(R-I) New Delhi, the 19th March, 2001 S.O. 672.—In exercise of the powers con*" fened by Sub-Section 2 of Section 34 of the Dis- placed Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (44 of 1954), I, S, K. Chattopadhyay, Chief Settlement Commissioner hereby delegate to Shri B. N. Lahiri, Under Secretary in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Rehabilitation Division, who has been appointed as Settlement Commissioner vide Notification of oven number dated the 19th March, 2001, the powers under Sections 23 & 24 of the said Act for the purpose of bearing appeals and revisions under these Sections.

2. TTiis supersedes Notification No. 1(2)|99- Settlemem dated 22nd July, 1999.

[No. l_(2)|99-Settlement] S. K. CHATTOPADHYAY, Chief Settlement m-1304 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31,2001/cHArrfcA 10, leas {BMT U*-$BC. nnn \m MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSTON

(Detriment of Personnel & Training)

New Delhi, the 13th March, 2001

members of Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the Sfiate of Uttaranchal for investigation of offences as specified in SekeiJals 1 of flip afore- mentioned notification and attempt, abetment and con- spiracy in relation to r in connection unto th© above said offence* and any oth*r offence|offences commit- ted in th^ course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts. However it i" atMtcl to the condition that no such investigation shall be taken up in cases relating to the pufilic servants controlled by the State Gwermraene of UttranchaJ except with the prior written permission of ific State Government.

S.O. 673.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 5 read with section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 194<5), the Central Gov- ernment with the consent of the State Government of Uttaranchal, Home Department Notification No. 70|Home|(CBI) |2001 dated 18th January. 2001, hereby extends the powen and jurisdiction of the

[No. 228/61/2000-AVD. II] HARI SINGH, Under Secy.

1306 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MAfeCH 3i, 2001 /CHAITRA 10, 1923 (PAUT II—SEC i(ii)J

List of Offences

SCHEDULE-I

Offence punishable u/w, 114, 120 B, 121, 121 A, 122, 123, 124, 124A, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133 134 135 136, 138, 140, 143, 147, 148, 149, 153A, 153B, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 165A, 166, 167, 167, 168, 169 171E 1 7 1 F' 182, 186, 188,189,190, 193, 196, 197,198, 199, 200, 201, 204, 211,212, 214, 216, 216A, 218, 220, 222, 223 224 225* 225B, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242,243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251' 252* 253* 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263, 263A, 277, 279, 284, 285, 286, 292, 295, 295A, 302, 303 304 W 304B, 306, 307, 308, 309, 323, 324, 325, 326, 328, 330, 331, 332, 333, 336, 337, 338, 341, 342, 343, 344 346 347' 352, 353, 354, 355, 363, 363A, 364, 364A, 365, 366, 367, 368, 376, 376A, 376B, 376C, 376D 379 380 381 ' 382 384, 385, 386, 387, 388, 389, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399,401,402,403,406, 407, 408 409 4l'j 41? 413* 414, 417,418, 419,420, 421, 426, 427, 429, 431, 435, 436, 440, 447,448,452, 454, 456, 457, 460, 461,'465 '466' 467 468, 469,471,472,473,474,475,476,477,477A, 489, 489A, 489B, 489C, 489D, 489E, 495,498A, 499, 500 501 502 504, 505, 506, 507, 509, of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Act No. 45 of 1860).

' '

CENTRAL ACTS

B. Offences punishable under:

1. Aircraft Act 1934 (Act No. 22 of 1934) and rules made under the said Act.

2. Anti-Hijacking Act 1982 (Act No. 65 of 1982)

3. Antiquities and Art Treasures Act 1972 (Act No. 52 of 1972)

4. Antiquities (Export Control) Act, 1947 (Act No. 31 of 1947) Repealed,

5. Arms Act 1959 (Act No. 54 of 1959)

6. Atomic Energy Act 1962 (Act No. 33 of 1962)

7. Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 (Act No. 1 of 1944)

8. Companies Act, 1956 (Act, No. 1 of 1956)

9. Customs Act 1962 (Act No. 52 of 1962)

10. Drugs and Cosmetics Act 1940 (Act No. 23 of 1940)

11. Essential commodities Act 1955 (Act No. 10 of 1955)

12. Explosives Act 1884 (Act No. 4 of 1884)

13. Explosive Substances Act 1908 (Act No. 6 of 1908)

14. Emergency Provisions (Continuance) Ordinance 1946 (Ordinance No. 20 1946) if committed by the Employee of the Central Government.

15 Electricity Act 1910 (Act No. 9 of 1910).

16. Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976 (Act No. 49 of 1976)

17. Foreigner Act (Act No. 31 of 1946)

18. Foreign Exchange Regulation Act 1973 (Act No. 46 of 1973)

19. General Insurance Business (Nationalisation) Act 1922 (Act No. 57 of 1922)

20. Gift Tax Act 1958 (Act No. 18 of 1958)

21. Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act No. 43 of 1961)

22. Import and Export (Control) Act, 1947 (Act No. 10 of 1947)

23. Insurance Act, 1938 (Act No. 4 of 1938)

24. Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 (Act No. 65 of 1951)

25. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

2 6. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (Act No. 61 of 1985)1307 27. Official Secrets Act, 1923 (Act No. 19 of 1923)

2B. Passport Act, 1920 (Act No. 24 of 1920) and rule 6 of Passport Rules 1950.

29. The Passport (Entry into India) Rules 1950 read with Passport (entry into India) Act, 1920 (Act No 34 of 1920).

30. Passport Act, 1967 (Act No. 15 of 1967).

31. Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (Act No. 2 of 1947).

32. Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Act No. 49 of 1988).

33. Post Office Act, 1898 (Act No. 6 of 1898).

34. Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (Act No. 37 of 1954).

35. Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984 (Act No. 3 of 1984).

36. The Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrotic Substances Act, 1988 (Act No. 46 of 1988) 37. Railways Act, 1890 (Act Np. 9 of 1890).

38. Railways Stores (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1955 (Act No. 51 of 1955).

39. Representation of the People Act, 1951 (Act No. 43 of 1951).

40. Representation of the People Act, 1950 (Act No. 43 of 1950).

41. Registration of Foreigners Act, 1939 (Act No. 16 of 1939).

42. Suppression of Unlawful Act against Safety of Civil Aviation Act, 1982 (Act No 66 of 1982).

43. The Religious Institutions (Prevention of Misuse) Act, 1988 (Act No. 41 of 1988).

44. Telegraph Act, 1885 (Act No. 13 of 1885).

45. Telegraph Wires (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1950 (Act No. 74 of 1950).

46. Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1985 (Act'No. 31 of 1985) and made thereunder.

47. Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act 1987 (Act No. 28 of 1987) and Rules made thereunder.

Offences punishable under:—

48. Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 (Act No. 37 of 1967).

49. Wireless and Telegraphy Act, 1933 (Act, No. 17 of 1933).

50. Wealth Tax Act, 1957 (Act No. 27 of 1957).

• 51. Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 (Act No. 69 of 1971).

52. Sections 3 and 4 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989.

53. Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Act No. 26 of 1881).

54. Section 24 of Emigration Act 1983 (Act No. 31 of 1983).

55. Section 3 of the Benami Transaction (Prohibition) Act, 1988 (Act No. 45 of 1988).

56. Section 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 (Act No. 53 of 1972).

57. Section 24 of the Securities Exchange Board of India Act, 1992.

58. Sections 11 and 12 of the Territorial Waters Continental Shelf, Exclusive Economic Zone and other Maritime ' '' Zones Act, 1976 (Act No. 80 of 1976).

Offences punishable under:—

' 59. Sections 63, 63A, 63B, 65, 67, 68, 68A and 69 of copy-rights Act 1957 (Act, No. 14 of 1957).

60. Section 25A of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrbphic Substances Act 1985 (Act, No. 61 of 1985). 6|, Offences under the Railways Act, 1989 (Act No. 24 of 1989).

62. Sees. 4 and 5 of the Prize Chits .and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 (Act NoT 43 of 1978).

63. The Press and Registration of Books Act 1867, (Act, No. 25 of 1867),190& THE GAZETTE OF INDIA ; KtAIlCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PART II—SEG. 3(tt) New Delhi, the 14th March, 2001 &O. 674.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act N o. 25 of 1946), the Central Govern- ment, with the consent of State Govt, of Jammu & Kashmir vide SRO No. 61 dated 16-2-2001, here- by extends the powers and jurisdiction of the mem- bers of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Jammu & Kashmir for investigation of the offences punishable under Sec- tions 366, 363 & 109 of Ranbir Penal Code, Samvat, 1989 and the matters incidental thereto and any other offence(s), attemptsjabetment and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with one or mare offences mentioned and any other ctfence or offences committed in the course of the same transaction arising out of the same facts in regard to case F IR No. 18)2001 dated 9-2-2001 registered at PS Udhampur ( J & K) in respect of abduction of minor girl Meenakshi Kumari d(o Shri Natha Singh r|o Barrian Mohalla, Udhampur.

,""' • ' * (NP, 228U612001-AVP-II]

HARI Smqi^Uada Secy, New Delhi, the 15th March, 2001 S.O. 675.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 5 read with Section 6 ot the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of Assam vide Politicall (A) Department, Vigilance Cell Notification No. PEA(V) 2(97-84 dated 9th July. 1999, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction, of the members of Delhi Special Police Establish- ment tr the whole of the State of Assam for investi- gation of Case?; FIR Nos. 199J98 and 202^98 both dated 12-4-98 registered with Paltan Bazar Police Station under Section 409 IPC and attempt*, abet- menis and conspiracies in relation to or in connec- tion with the offence| offences committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts in relation to the aforesaid cases.

[No. 228|84|99-AVI}-in

HARI SINGH, Under Secy.

1309

New Delhi, the 16th March, 2001 S.O. 676.—In exercise of the powers con- ferred by section 3 of the Delhi Special Police Esta- blishment Act, 1946 (Act, No. 25 of 1946), the Central Government hereby specifies the following olrences which are to be investigated by the are to be investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establish- ment, namely :—

(a) Offences punishable under sections 3, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 15 of the Tmmoral Traffic (Pre- vention) Act, 1956 (Act No. 104 of 1956).

(b) Attempts, abetments and conspiracies in relation to or in connection with the offen- ces mentioned in clause (a) above and any othci offence committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts.

[No. 228| 15|2001-AVTMfl HARI SINGH, Under Secy.

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Economic Affairs) (Banking Division)

New Delhi, the 12th March, 2001 S.O. 677.—In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 53 of Ihe Banking Regulation Act, 1949 847 GT|200l—2

(10 of 1949), tho Central Government on the re- commendations of the Reserve Bank d India, hereby declares that the provisions of Sub-clause (i) of clause (c) of Sub-section ( l) of Section 10 of the said Act shall not apply to Vijaya Bank in -so far as it ielates to the appointment of Shri S. GopalaJ-rishnaxi, Chairman and Managing Director, Vijaya Bank as a director on the Board of M|s. Canbank Computer Services Ltd., Bangalore.

[F. No. 20|2[98-B.O.-I] RAMESH CHAND, Under Secv.

MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

(Consular Section)

New Delhi, the 21st March, 2001

S.O. 678.—In pursuance of tho Clause (a) of the Sec- tion 2 pt the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Oaths and Fi:es) Act, 1948 f41 of 1948), the Central Government here- by authorise* Shri Sagar Maitra, Asst. in the Embassy of India, Berne to perform the duties of Assistant Consular Officer with effett from 19-3-2001.

[No. T. 413OUI200O1 Y. C. NARANG, Dy. Secy. (Cons-IIJ1310 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 200J/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [P**T II—SEC. 3(ii)l (22 c>f 1963), the Central Government hereby re- cognises, for a period of three year, from the date of publication of this notification M|s. S.G.S. India Ltd, Plot Nc". R-12 and L-16, Industrial Estate, T. B. Dam Road, Hospet-583203 as an agency for the inspection of Minerals and Ores, Group-I Iron Ocl specified in Schedule annexed to Ministry of Commerce Notification No. S.O. 3975 dated the 20th December, 1965 piior to export at Hospet, subject to the following conditions, namely :—

H) that M/s. SJ3S India Ltd., Sospet shall

give adequate facilities to the officers nominated by the Export Inspection Council in this behalf to examine the method of inspection followed by them in granting the certificate of inspection under rule 4 of Export of the Minerals and Ores Group-T (Inspection) Rules, 1965;

MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

(Department of Commerce)

New Delhi, the 15th March, 2001 ™

(ii) that M/s. SGS India Ltd., Hospet in the performance of their function under this notification shall be bound by such direc- tives as the Director (Inspection and Quality Control) may give in writing from time to time.

S.O. 679.—Tn cacrcFe of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section of the Export (Quality Control and Inspection) Act, 1963

[F. No. 5-2-2001-EI&EF] P. K. DAS, Director1311 j_312 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31. 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 TPART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 1M3

MINISTRY OF COAL

New Delhi, the 20th March, 2001

S.O. 680.—Whereas hy the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S-O. 611, dated the 25th February, 2000, published in the Gazette of India, Part-IT, Section-3, Sub-section (ii), dated the n th March, 2000, under sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of I 9 5 7) 't he Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 870.00 hectares (approximately) or* 2149.85 acres (approximately) of the lands in the locality specified in the Schedule annexed to that notification;

And whereas the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable in a part of said land;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 7 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the lands measuring 334.13 hectares (approximately or 825 64 acres (approximately) and all rights in or over such lands as described in the Schedule appended hereto :

N o tc ! The plan bearing No. C-1(E)HI/JJJR/664-1099, dated tho 22nd October, 1999 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the office of the Collector, Chandrapur (Maharashtra) or in the office of the Coal Controller, 1 Council House Street, Kolkata (PIN 700 001) or in the office of the Western Coalfields Limited (Revenue Department), Coal Estate, Civil Lines, Nagpur 440 001 (Maharashtra).

TsT0te 2 Attention is hereby invited to the provisions of section 8 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) which provides as folkws:—

"8. Objections to Acquisition :

(1) Any person interested in any land in respect of which a notification under section 7 has been issued may within thirty days of the issue of the notification, object to the acquisition of the whole or any part of the land or of any rights in or over such land-

Explanation — It shall not be an objection within the meaning of this sectio n for any person to aay that he himself desires to undertake mining operations in the land for the production of Coal and that such operations should not be undertaken by the Central Government or by any other person.

(2) Every objection under sub-section (1) shall be made to the competent autho- rity in writing and the competent authority shall give the objector an oppor- tunity of being heard either in person or by a legal practitioner and shall, after hcar'ng all such objections and after making such further enquiry, if any, as he thinks necessary, either make a report in respect of the land which has been notified under sub-section (1) of Section 7 or of rights iu or over such land, or make different reports in respect of diiferent parcels of such land or of rights in or over such land, to the Central Government, containing his recommendations on the objections, together with the record of pro- ceedings held by him, for the decision of that Government. (3) For the purpose of this section, a person shall be deemed to be interested in land who would be entitled to claim an interest in compensation if the land or any rights in or over such land were acquired under this Act." Note 3 The Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Kolkata has been appointed by the Cmtral Government as the competent authority under the Act vide notification number S.O. 2519, dated the 27th May, 1983.

J314 THE GAZH'i TE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PARI II—SEC. 3(ii)]

SCHEDULE

Gourideep Open-Cast Project

Ballarpur Area

District— Chandrapur (Maharashtra)

(Plan No. C-l(E)/in/JJJR/664-1099 dated tlie 22nd October, 1999) All riKhts

Patwari circk- Tahsil

District

Remarks Serial Name of Number Village

n umber

Area in hectares

Part Part 6 6 7

Goigaon Mutra Antargaon (Khurd)

Rajura Rajura Rajura

106.32 34.07 193.74

1. 2. 3.

Chandrapur Chandrapur Chandrapur

Part

Total area : 334.13 hectares (approximately)

or

825.64 acres (approximately) plot numbers to be acquired in village Goigaon :

84, 85, 86, 125 part, 126 part, 127 part, 132 part, 133/1-133/2-133/3 part, 134/1 A-l 34/IB-134/2 part, 135/1- 135/2 part, 136/1-136/2 part, 137/1-137/2 part, 138, 139/1-139/2-139-3-139/4-139/5, 140, 141/1-141/2, 142/1- 142/2, 143/1-143/2, 144/1-144/2, 145/1-145/2, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 155, 156/1-156/2-156/3, 157, 158/1-158/2, 159, 160/1-160/2, 161, 162/1-162/2-162/3-162/4, 163/1-163/2-163/3, 164/1-164/2-164/3-164/4, 165/1-165/2-165/3- 165/4, 166/1-166/2, 167 to 175, 176/1 A-l 76/1B-176/2, 177/1-177/2, 178/1-178/2-178/3, 183/1-183/2-183/3-183/4, 184/1-184/2-184/3, Road Part.

Plot numbers to be acquired in village Mutra :

8, 9, 10/1-10/2, 11, 12, 13/1-13/2, 14, 26, 27, 28/1-28/2-28/3-28/4, 29, 30/1-30/2, 244, 245/1-245/2-245/3- 245/4-245/5- Plot numbers to be acquired in village Antargaon (Khurd) :

6/1-6/2-6/3-6/4-6/5, 7, 8/1-8/2, 16/1-16/2-16/3-16/4-16/5-16/6, 19, 20, 34/1-34/2-34/3, 35/1-35/2-35/3 36/1-36/2-36/3-36/4-36/5, 37/1A-37/1B-37/1C-37/JD-37/1E-37/1F-37/2, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44/1, 44/2, 45, 46, 47,' 48, 49/1^9/2, 50/l-50/2A-50/2B-50/3-l-50/3-2-50/3-3-50/3-4, 51/1-51/2-51/3-51/4, 52/1-52/2, 53, 54/1-54/2, 55/1-55/2, 56/1-56/2, 57/1-57/2, 58/1-58/2-58/3-58/4-58/5, 59, 60, 61/1-61/2, 62, 63/1-63/2-63/3-63/4, 64, 65/1- 65/2, 66 to 71, 72/J-72/2, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77/1-77/2-77/3, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84/1-84-2, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91/1-91/2, 92/1-92/2-92/3-92/4-92/5, 93/1-93/2, 94/1-94/2-94/3, 95/1, 95/2, 96/1-96/2-96/3-96/4, 97/1 -97/2-97/3- 97/4, 98, 99/1-99/2-99/3, 100/1, 100/2, 100/3, 100/4, 101/1, 101/2, 102/1, 102/2-102/3-102/4, 103, 104/1-104/2, 105/1- 105/2, 106/1-106/2-106/3, 107/1-107/2, 108/1-108/2-108/3-108/4, 109/1-109/2-109/3-109/4, 110/1-110/2-110/3- 110/4, 111, 112, Road Part.

Boundary description : A- B Line starts from point 'A' and passes through village Antargaon (Khurd) and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 6/1-6/2-6/3-6/4-6/5, 8/1-8/2, 16/1-16/2-16/3-16/4- 16/5-16/6 and meets at point 'B\

B - C Line passes through village Antargaon (K.hurd) and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 16/1-16/2-16/3-16/4-16/5-16/6, 19, 20, 34/1-34/2-34/3, 50/1-50/2A-50/2B-50/ 3-1-5O/3-2-5O/3-3-5O/3-4 then passes alon the common village boundary of villages Goigaon and Antargaon (Khurd) and meets at point *C\

C - D Line passes through village Goigaon and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 184/1-184/2-184/3, 183/1-183/2-183/3-183/4, 178/1-178/2-178/3, 174, 173, 172, 155, 156/1- 156/2-156/3, 148, 149, 150, 146, 84, 85, 86, 126 and meets at pcint 'D'.

D - E Line pavsei th-ough village Go\iga©(n and passes in plo)t numbers 126, 125, 127, 132, 133/1— 133/2-133/3, 134/1 A-l34/1 B-134/2, 135/1-135/2, 136/1-136/2, 137/1-137/2 and meets at pojint 'E\1315 E - F Line passes along the coinmojn village boundary o]f villages Qfojigato.n and Mutra, then passes thiough village Mutra alcjng the o,uter boundary of plot numbers 30/1-30/2, 26, 27, 14 13/1-13/2, 12, II, 8, 9, 245/1-245/2-245/3-245/4-245/5 and meets at point , ' F. F -G Line passes through village Mutra along the eastern bank of nallah and passes along the outer boundary of plot number 245/1-245/2-245/3-245/4-245/5 then proceeds through village Antargaon (isJiurd) along the eastern bank of nallah and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 112, 111, 110'l-l 10/2-110/3-110/4, 67, 66, 65/1-65/2, 64, 63/1- 63/2-63/3-63/4 and meets at point *G"'

G - A Line passes through village Antargaon (Khurd) and passes along the outer boundary of p_lot number 63/1-63/2-63/3-63'4, crosses road and passes along the outer boundary of plot numbers 43, 44/1-44/2, 42, 41, 40, 37/1A-37/IB-37/1O37/1D-37/1E-37/JF-37/2, 6/1- 6/2-6/3-6/4-6/5, then passes along the eastern bank of nallah and along the outer boun- dary of plot number 6/1-6/2-6/3-6/4-6/5 and meets at starting point 'A'.

[No. 43015/8/99 PR1W] SANJAY BAHADUR, Dy. Secy.

1316 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 1317

New Delhi, the 20th March, 2001

S.O.fiSI.- -Whereas it appears to the Central Government that Coal is likely to be obtained from the lands mentioned in the Schedule hereto annexed;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957), the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to prospect for coal therein;

The Plan No. Rev. /6/2000, dated the 31st July, 2000, of the area covered by this notification can be inspected at the Office of the Central Coalfields Limited (Revenue Department), Darbhanga House, Ranchi, Jharkhand or at the Office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Kolkata or in the Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Chcitra,- or at the office of the Dy. Commissioner, Palamau, Bihar.

All persons interested in the land covered by this notification shall deliver all maps, charts and other documents referred to in sub-section (7) of section 13 of the said Act to the Oflicc-iivCharge/Head of Department (Revenue) Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, Ranchi, within ninety days from the date of publication of this notification.

SCHEDULE

Magadh Block Extension

District—Chatra and Palamau

Village

Thana

Sl. No

Thana No.

27/184

Tandwa

Kundi

J.

Tandwa

29/186 Saradhu

2.

61/218

Tandwa

Masilaung

3.

62/219

Tandwa

Raham

4.

55

Baiumath

Ara

5.

56

Balumath

Chamatu

6.

58

Balumath

Phulbasia

7.

59

Balumath

Chetar

8.

60

Balumath

Seregara

9.

Total

147 OI/2001—3

(showing land notified for prospecting) District

Remarks A rea in (ac)

Area in (Ha.)

Chatra

85.50

34.62 Part Chatra

1050.00 425.10 Part Chatra

475.00 192.30 Part Chatra

275.00 111.34 Part Palamau

390.00 157.90 Part Palamau

1225.00 495.95 Part Palamau

950.00 384.62 Part Palamau

475.00 192.30 Part Palamau

350.00 141.70 Part Total Area 5275.50 acres (approximately) or

2135.83 hectares (approximately)]318 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PART I I — S E C. 3(ii)I Boundary description

Line start from 'A' and passes through in villages Saradhu, Kundi, Ara, Chamatu, A—B

Phulbasia and Seregara and meets a*t point "B".

Line passes through in villages Seregara, along common boundary of villages Chctar and B-C

Ganeshpur through Phulbasia (which forms part common boundary of Pindarcom Ganeshpur Block U/s 9 (i) of Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (Vide S.O. No. 3155 dt. 20-10-62) and meets at point 'C\

Line passes through common boundary of villages Phulbasia and Chamatu (which form C—D

part common boundary of Pindarcom Ganeshpur Block U/s—9(i) of Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 vide S.O. No. 3155 dated 20-10-62) and meets at point 'D'.

Line passes through in villages Chamatu, Saradhu and Raham and meets at point 'E', D-E

Line .passes through in villages Raham, Masilaung and Kamta and meets at point ' F\ E-F

Line passes through in villages Masilaung and Saradhu and meets at point ' G\ F—G

Line passes, through in village Saradhu (which form part common boundary of Magadh G—H

Block U/s-9 (i) of Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 vide S.O. No. 872 (F) dated 2-12-94) and meets at point 'H'.

Line passes through in villages Saradhu and Chamatu (which form part common boundary H—T—J—K

of Magadh Block U/s-9 (i) of Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 vide S.O. No. 872(E) dated 2-12-94) and meets at point 'K*.

Line passes through in villages chartsatmi and Ara (which form part common boundary K—L—M—N—O—P

of Magadh Block U/s-9 (i) of Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) (Act, 1957 vide S.O. No. 872 (E) dated 2-12-94 and meeLs at point \P\ Line passes through in village Kundi (which forms part common boundary of Magadh P -Q

Block U/s-9(i) of Coal Bearing Areas (Aqcuisition and Development) Act, 1957 vide S.O. No. 872(E) dated 2-12-94 and meets at point *Q\

Line passes through in villages Kundi and Saradhu (which foams Part common Q -A

boundary of Magadh Block U/s-9(i) of Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 vide S.O. No. 872 (E) dated 2-12-94 and meet at starting point 'A'.

[No. 43015/24/2000-PRIW]

SANJAY BAHADUR, Dy. Secy.

1 3 19

N e* Delhi, the 20th March, 2001 .

S,O. M o . . 6 8 '- Tn exercise of the powers con-

ferred by section 3 of the Public Premises (Evicti on

of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971)

and in supersession of notification of the Government

of india in the trun Ministry of Energy in the Depart-

ment of Coal No. 43022/8/87-CA published in the

Gazette of India on October 24, 1987 issued vide S.O.

No. 2912 dated 8th October, 1987, the Central Govern-

ment hereby appoints the officer mentioned in

column (I) of the Table below being an officer equiva-

lent to the rank of gazetted officer of Government to

be EslaLe Offiivr of ihe purposes of the said Act and

futhcr directs that the said officer shall exercise trie

power conferred upon and the duties imposed, on

estate officers, by or under, the said Act, within the

limits of his jurisdiction in respect of the public pre-

mises specified in cloumn (2) ofthc Table, namely :—

TABLE

Designation of

Categories of public premises

the Officer

and local limits of jurisdiction.

2

1

All premises belonging to or

Manager

(Eslatc)

taken on lease by or on behalf

of Northern Coalfields Limited

in the. state of Madhya Pradesh

and Utter Pradesh.

[No. 43022/1/2001-PR IW1

SANJAY BAHADUR, Dy. Secy1320 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 200J/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PART II—SI.C. 3(ii)] 1321 MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AND

FORESTS

New Delhi, the 23rd March, 2001 S.O. 683.—In exercise of the powers con- ferred by clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 12 and section 13 of ihe Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (29 of 1986) read with rule 10 of the Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986, the Ccnfral Government hereby recognises the laboratories spe- cified in column (2) below as environmental labora-

2

1

"96. M/s. SGS India Ltd., General Laboratory Division Behala Commercial Complex Phase IT, 1st Floor, 620, D.H. Road, Calcutta-70 0034,

97. M/s. Envirochem Test Laboratory, HlG-79, Sector E, Aliganj, Lucknow-226 024

tories and specifies the persons in column (3) to be the Government Analysis and for that purpose makes the following further amendment in the notification of the Government ot Tndia in the Ministry of En- vironment and Forests, number S.O. 728 (E) dated the 21st July, 1987, namely :—

In the Table appended to the said notification, after serial number 95 and the entries relating there- to, the following serial number and entries shall be added, namely :•—

3

4

1. Shri Utpal Mazumdar

2- Shri Satya Charnn Manna 3- Shri Aruriava Chakrabopty

B,Sc., P.G. Diploma in Ecology & Env. M.Sc., (Bjo-ChemiMry] B.Sc., P.G- Diploma in Ind. Pollution

M.Sc. (Chemistry) B.Sc. BSc.

1. ShriPradeep Kumar 2. Ms. Saroj Singh 3. Shri Amit Agarwal

1. Shri G-D. Goel

98. M/s. Delhi Test House, AJ63/3, G.T. Karnal Road lndl. A tea Opp. Hans Cinema, Azadpur, Delhi-110 033

99. M/s. Netel Chromaiographs, S.V. Road, Manpada, Thane-400 607-

M/s. Mineral Engineering Services,

100.

25/XX V, Club Road,

Bellary-583103, Karnataka

101- M/s. Sky Lab Analytical Laboratory 2/10, R.B. Mension, Opp. Chaya Cinema, Near Kalyan Rly. Station, Kalyan (W), Distt. Thane (Maharashtra)

847 G I | 2 0 O l^

B.Sc. (Hons), (Chemistry

2. Dr. N.K. Mondal 3. Shri J. P. Mishra

Ph.D. M.Sc.

1. Shri Abhay Kumar 2. Shri Dilip K- Dube 3. Ms. Seema Somanathan

M.Sc. (Environment) B.Sc. (Chemistry) B.Sc. (Chemistry)

1. Shri M. Sachin Raju

B.E. (Environment Engineering) M.Sc. B.Sc.

2. Shri M.S. Bhaskar 3. Ms- P. Sunitha

Ph.D. Ph.D. B.Sc.

1. Dr. N.A- Degwekar 2. Dr. Ashok Y. Dhamankar 3.' Shri B.S. Pansare13n THE G\7CTTF; OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 LPART I I — S E C. 3(ii)] MfMSTIO Ol INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING The recognition of the laboiatories is valid for a

period ol five yt\iis ti"ir the date of publication of

New Delhi, the J5th M.uch, 2001 the notification The recognition can be revoked

SO 684—In MipersesNi.Jn of this Minjstiy\ Notifica- cailier b\ Ilk1 Government

tion ildlecl fi-11-2000 and jn exclude of the poweis con-

fciicd by suli-iule (2) of liile ') ot the Central Civil Seivii.cs [F. No. Q-15017'24|99-CPW|

(Cla,-:fieatiun Cimtiol jncl Appeal) Rules, 1965, it is lieie- DP. G. K. PANDEY, Director bv bpei-ified thai, in place of Direilor Geneials, All India

Radio and Doordarshan, New Delhi, the Additional Sccre- NOTE—The principal notification was published

tiu\ MiTiiuiy ol Information <^ Bioadi;a3tin£, Ncv, Delhi in the Gazette of India vide S.O 728(E) dated 21:st shall Htf "* the Appointing Authority in jespect of Gioup

H' employees tilicady appointed by the Government in the Juiv, J 987 .nd biibst.qut;ntly amended vide :•—

Duectiv.iie fieneiul : All India Radio and Dnectorato (1) SO. b38(U), dated 2Vd September, 1987,

General : Doordmshan till such time the posts of Director

Gencinl, All India Radio nod Director Qeneul, Doordar- (2) SO 989(E), dated 17th November, 1987,

slian are filled up oi the concerned Government servant* (3) S O. 156(El. dated 24th February, 1989,

tire absorbed in Piasm Bhamti (BrOadcnsting Corporation

of Tridta), whichevtT is earlier Howevei, this shall not (4) S.O. 489(E), dated 17th May, 1989,

apply for new recaiitmontslnppointmcnts and mntteis con- (5) S.O, 840i E), dated 24th October, 1989,

nected therein.

(b) S.O. 375(E) dated 26th April, 1990,

[File No. 39012|l|2()()0 B(A>] (7) S O. 633(E). dated 3Kst August, !994.

I P. MISHRA Under Sety.

(X) S.O. 54(E), dtited 15th January, 1997,

(9) SO 3O5(F), dated 7t1i April, 1997,

J O) SO 1 7 3 ( T J. dated 9th March, 1998,

(11) SO. 150N. dated 27th July, 1998 and

(12) S.O. J54, d' fed H th February. 2000.

MJNTSTRY OF C1VII AVIATION

New I")elhi, the J'nh M.uch. 2001

SO. 685.—In pursuance of Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of

the Qfflcml Languages (Use for the OfRciu.1 Pui poses of the

Union) Rule, l'J76 ihe Central Gdvernment, heiebv notifies

oJice of Ihe 1 eh Aeiodrome ol Airports Authority ot fridia

(NADi of Mmisiry ol Civil Aviation, where of, moic than

80 pei cent stiift have ucqniied the working knowledge of

Hindi.

rNo. E.-11011'Ol|2O00-fflnd5]

C B. NARNAULI Oircclorfo'l.)1323 1324 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31,2001/CHAfTRA 10, 1923 [PARI II—SF^. 3 (u)|

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

New Delhi, the 20th March. 2001

S.O. 686.—Whereas the Central Government after considcnn^ the report submitted to it b> ihe prescribed authority, is satisfied that the model described in the said report ( the figure given below) is in conforniil\ with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 19 76 (60 of 1076) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render its accurate service under varied conditions;

Now, thcrefoie, in exercise of the powers conferred b> sub-section (7) of Section 3o of the said Act, the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the automatic filling machine of VIP 6000 series and with brand name "Vijaipac" (hereinafter referred to as the model) manufactured by M/s R M C Packaging Systems Private Ltd , 25 A & B Electronic Complex, Kushaiguda. Hvderabad-500 062 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2000/287;

The said model ( figure given) is an automatic filling machine It works on the principle of gravit} feed under constant head The machine can be adjusted to deliver any range between 100 ml m KK)<) ml or of equivalent weight It can fill 5000 pouches per hour The machine is designed to fill Tree flowing products such as milk, butter milk mineral water, country liquor, liquid products etc. It operates on 220 volt, 50-Hcrtz alternate current power supplv

[F No WM-2H144)/97]

P A. KRISHNAMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology1325 1326 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PAR r II—SEC 3 (ii)]

New Delhi, the 20th March, 2001

S.O 687.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it bv the prescribed authority, along with model approval and test results, granted by Physialisch Tcchmsclic Bundesanstalt. Braunschweig und Berlin is satisfied that the model described in the said icport (sec the figure given below) it, in conformity with the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and ihe said model is likely to maintain its accuracy o\ er period1; of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions,

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (7) of section iu of the said Act, the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of the Altosonic V Ultrasonic Meters with digital display (hereinafter referred to as the model) with brand name "Allosonic V Multichannel Ultiasoruc measurement systems", manufactured by of M/s Krone AHomcter Kcrkeplaat, 3313 LC Dordrechl/Nederland's and sold in India by M/s Krone Marshall Ltd, A-34/3S M ID C Estate, H-block, Pimpn, Pune-411018 and which is assigned the approval mark 1ND/13/ 2000/234,

The model (see the figure) The technical features of the model a^follows

Viscocit} range 1 to 125 mp a s

Temperature range -10°C to 120° C

Pressure 160 bar

Nature of liquid All liquid petroleum products. Foot/, alcohol chemical products in liquid state This model approval shall also cover meter of nominal diame^r 100 mm to 1000 rnm

IF No WM-21U65V20001

P A KR&HN AMOORTHY, Director of Legal Metrology1327 1328 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3 (ii)]

New Delhi, the 22nd March, 2001

S.O. 688.—Whereas the Central Government, after considering the report submitted to it by the prescribed authoriiy. is satisfied that the model described in the said report (see the figure given below) is in conformity wilh the provisions of the Standards of Weights and Measures. Act. 1976 (60 of 1976) and the Standards of Weights and Measures (Approval of Models) Rules, 1987 and the said model is likely to maintain accuracy over periods of sustained use and to render accurate service under varied conditions,

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers confeired by Sub-sections (7) of Section 36 of the said Act. the Central Government hereby publishes the certificate of approval of the Model of automatic weighing machine (hereinafter referred to as the model) of "GFM" scries with brand name "TRIANGLE", manufactured by M/s. Triangle Automation, 44/5, Nav-Sahyadri Soc, Punc 411052 and which is assigned the approval mark IND/09/2000/38;

The model is an automatic weighing machine. It works on the principle of gravity feed under constant head. The maximum capacity is 1 kg. with scale interval of 0 5g The machine is designed to fill free flowing granular products like tea. sugar, spices, fcrtillizei chemicals, cereals, animal feed etc The rate of filling is 30 to 50 fills per minute;

And Further, in exercise of the powers conferred b> sub-section (12) of section 36 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that this certificate of approval of the Model shall also cover the weighing instrument of similar make, accuracy and performance of same scries with maximum capacity upto 5 kg. manufactured by the same manufacturer in accordance wuh same principle, design and wilh the same materials which the approved Model has been manufactured.

„

|F. No. W.M.-21(35)/99]1329 1 T T,() THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH 11 2001 CHAITRA 10. 1922 |PARIH—SFI- ^ (n)| *ff°T ^T HP?

2. 3. 4. 5- 6. 7.

0-00-7

3

0-06-8

7^

90

0-06-5

103

5

0-06-5

3<

10!

0-04-8

101

3"

(^) - JT (ift) - (ft - JT (xft) - * Oft) -

0-04-8

103

3

0-03-0

4

103

105

0-07-3

5

Oft) (4t) Oft) -

0-01-7

4

105

0-06-8

105

3

0-00-7

105

0-00-2

106 K

0-11-0

106

4

107

1

0-06-8

107

0-00-5

2

107

0-01-2

3

0-04-5

2

883T

883T

0-01-0

3

108

1

0-00-5

108

2

0-03-6

0-04-8

109 1+2

109

3

0-00-5

109

0-02-5

112

0-02-0

112

1"

0-01-3

1^

112

0-02-384 4 0-00-5 1 82 0-01-0 82 2 0-00-5 114 1 0-06-6 0-00-7 114 2 '2) Oft)- Oft) - Oft) - (Tft) - Oft) - (ft - (ft - (ft - (ft - I (ft - (ft - (ft - 4 13T Oft) - r (^t) - P (Tft) - (^t) - (ft - (^r) - (*) - Oft) - 1331 x.m'ii'2ooi-fi H 32

T HE G A Z E T TE OF I N D IA • M A R CH 3 1. 2 0 01 C H A I T RA 1 0, 1 9 22

[ P A RT I I — S EC 3 ( i i )]

Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas

New Delhi, the 2lJth March, 2001

s. o. 689.— Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transport of the feed stock natural gas, fractionate C2/C3 or any mineral in village Gavhan Taluka-Panvek District Raigad in the State of Maharashtra, pipelines should be laid through the agency of Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Limited, Maharashtra Gas Cracker Complex, Nagothane, Taluka-Roha, District Raigad;

And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying such pipelines, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the lands under which the said pipelines is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification; Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby notify its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands referred to in the Schedule;

Any person interested in the land described in the Schedule may, within twenty-one days from the date on which the copies of tine notification, as published in the Gazette of India, are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipelines under the land to the Competent Authority, Indian Petrochemicals Corporation Limited, Maharashtra Gas Cracker Complex Division, Nagothane Taluka-Roha, District Raigad.

im

Srhedu1r

TAHSII.

H. \'O.

DIST.

OUT NO. ARfcA SR NO

VAUE OF VILLAGF

Sl . No.

H. H.

7 fi I 2

3

4

6

5

GtiWhan

1.

Pnnve I Ralgad

3 (P > 7 A. OM 5 ( P) 3A ( P) 3b ( V) 3 ( P) 4 < H) 3 ( P) 4 ( P) 3 ( P) 2 f P "> 1 ( 2) ( P) 4 ( P) 1 ( P) 2 I P> 3 < P) 2 ( P) 3 ( P) I ( P) 2 i P) 1 +2 ( P) 3 ( IM 4 ( P) 1A ( V) IM ( P) If C P 1

4 fPi 1 ( P) 2 ( P1) 1 ( IM 2 ( P) 3 ( P) 2 ( P> 3 ( P) 4 ( P) 1 +2 < P> 4 (P )

0-0O-7 0 - 0 h - H 0-06-5 0-06-5> O-Ot-H 0-04-8 0-03-0 0-07-3 0-01-7 0--06-H 0-0O-7 0-00-2 0-1 1-0 0-06-8 o-oo-;i 0 - 0 1 -: 0-0 4-f> 0 - 0 1 - 0 0-00-5 0-03-6 0-04-8 0-00-5 O-0 2-Ti 0-02-0 0-01-3 0-02-3 0-00-5 0-01-0 0-00-3 0-OB-h 0-00-7 0-09-8 0-04-2 0-08-S 0-04-8 0-18-1 0-00-2

0 - ) 0 - 7 0-23-\ 0-00-8 0-04-1) O-OO-'' 0-04-3 O-03-o 0-00-7 0-02-0 0-06-.- 0-05-5

I 1.} 90 103 101 10 1 103 103 105 105 10.-5 105 106 106 107 107 107 88 A 88 A KhM 108 109 109 toy 1 12 1 12 112 84 82 82 1 14 1 14 114 1 16 1 16 1 IF, 121 121 121 122. 124 124 124 124 124 124 12; 126 126

5 ( P) r" ( P) , ( P) 2 f p> 3 < p) 4 f p> 5 ( P> 6 C P) 8 ( P) 1 ( P) X ( P)1334 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH 31, 200] CHAITRA JO 1922 [P^rT II—SEC 3 (h>] -T

I

4 >

f>

-

> I P)

-

n-iib - ~

J ( F)

-

-

) 2 f. 125 125

-

1 f P) J (1J> L+2 ( P) 1 ( P) 6 I F)

-

-

7 ( PI 1 ( P)

—

U - 0 0 -7 0- I l-r> 0 -0 1 - u - o i- ' 0- I 1 - 0 - U i- - 0 ~ 0 - i -o

Zi ( P)

"7 5 7 \ hi 6L 73 b2

[No-L-l40'4/l/0l GP] ] S N PRASAD Din-ctoi n ij1336 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31,2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [PART II—SEC 3 (ii)]

New Delhi, the 29th March, 2001

S. 0.690.— Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transport of natural Gas in the State of Gujarat from Hazira in District Surat to Bharuch Dahej in District Bharuch, pipelines should be laid by the Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Limited,

And, whereas, it appears to the Central Government that for the purpose of laying the said pipeline, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the land under which the said pipeline is proposed to be laid, and which is described in the Schedule annexed to this notification,

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act 1962, (50 of 1962), the Central Government hereby declares its intention to acquire the right of user therein;

Any person interested in the lands described in the said Schedule may within twenty- one days from the date on which the copies of the notification, as published in the official Gazette, are made available to the general public, object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipelines under the land to The Competent Authority, Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Block No. 15, 2nd Floor, Udyog Bhavan, Sector No. 11, Gandhinagar-382 011, Gujarat,1337

State : Qujarat

District: BHARUCH

Namr of fulfill*

Nrnnr of Vlllngr

Survry No. flliotk No.

Hrrlmv

(.")

rnl NIT

(ft)

(2)

(1)

BHARUCH ALDAR

241

Alfl

BharuchPalGj Road SH-fo

PAGUTHAN 328

329

331

335

349

350

J52

396

395

394

354

355/P

356/P

236

Dram

234

233/A

317

KOTHI

770

314

313

311

310

312

298

294

295

296

297

279 <4)

Arm AIT ( (5)

21 10 00

10

41

00

00

.'0

v\\

40

rl?

00

00 05 (X) 00 30

00 08

20 no 00 12 20

20 00 26

20

24

00

11 30 00

08 40 00

30

16

00

00 00 01

15 60 00

00 06 10

90 00 20

00 15 00 00 22 20

03 60 00

00 05 00 00 38 90 00 15 30 00

60

25

40 00 06

00

60

19

40

21

.00

00

00

22

00 00 12

00

00

07

80 00 39

40 00 06

20 00 03

40

09

00

00 00 2900 03 30 280 00 02 50 Carttrack (Torrent - Kothi) 3 1118 THE GAZETTE OF fNDI \ MAP CHI 1 2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 |PVRT II—SEC T (n)l (4)

(5)

(6)

(3)

(1) (2)

40 00

03 17

KOTHI (Cont.)

02 02

00 90

00 00 00 00

274 275 Kothi-Mctallcd Read 143

THAM

(No -L-I4014'4/W UP (Vm Till

I S N PRAb'\D Director1339 K47CII 2001—7) 140 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH 11, 2001 CHAITRA 10,' 1922 [PART II-^SEC 3 (it)] 1141 H42 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: MARCH 31. 2001 CHAITRA "). 1922 |PART II—Str. 3 (ii)| 1343 1144 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001 CHAITRA 10. 1922 |PART II—SEC. 3 (ii)|

I US

H46 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH "H 2001 CHAITRA 10 1922 |PAIU11—Si< 1 (ii)| 1.347

*-i7f)r'2rjot-_f(

IP4S THE CiAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH M.jOOl CHAITRA 10, 1921 j [htttgi^fc.;^ , 1344 I ISO THE GAZETTE OF INDIA ; MARCH M. 2001 CHAITRA 10. 1922 IPABTII-SKC 1 (ii)] 1351 H52 HTffi GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH l1 2001 CHAITRA 10 l')22 [Purr II--Sn T (ii)1

New Delhi, the 2L>tli March. 2001

s.o.691.— whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.O. 2331 dated the 16th October, 2000, issued under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of crude oil from Haldia in the State of West Bengal to Barauni in the State of Bihar;

And whereas, the copies of the said notification were made available to the public on 06.11.2000;

And whereas, the Competent Authority in pursuance of sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act has submitted his report to the Central Government; And whereas, the Central Government after considering the said report is satisfied that the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification should be acquired;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the lands specified in the Schedule to this notification are hereby acquired;

And further, in oxercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of the said Section, the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said lands shall instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest, from the date of publication of this declatation in the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances.

1353

SCHEDULE Police Station Sutahata

District Midnapur Village

State West Bengal

Area

Jurisdiction Plot

Hectares i Ares Centiares

List No No

1

6 4

5

2 3

Kismat Shibramnagar

0

65 0

94 814

815

816

817

818

819

820

822

830

831

832

833

834

902

903

905

906

909

910

914

915

956

957

962

964

965

966

967

970

971

972

0

20 0

0

20 0

20 0 0

16

1

0

92 0

2

29 0 5

14

71 0

33

20

0

76

3

0

07

8

0

10

02 0

0

20 0

59

8

0

75

1

0

64

6

0

0

54 0

36 0

4

01

5

0

9

70 0

3

62 0

57 0

3

61 0

7

6

75 0

88 0

2

0

2

55

5

43 0

7

38 0

21 0

0

37 0 0

73

9

00 70 0 9"3 1354 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31,2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [PART II—SEC. 3 (li)] 6 4 1 2 3 5 20 0 975 0 1220 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1333 1336 1338 1855 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1900 1901 1902 1903 1921 1922 1923

60 0 0 0 56 0 0 1 34 0 4 27 4 08 0

0 1 09 3 62 0

4 18 16 0 0 3

14 0 2

10 07 0

13 0 6

42 0 11

58 0 10

0 0 83 76 0 5

58 0 5

4 36 0

4 55 0

23 0 2

78 0 2

1 23 0

1 39 0

1 26 0

0 1 39 1 95 0

37 0 2

62 0 3 0 20 0

0 20 0

52 0 0

0 0 28 1 67 03 1924 62 0 0 14 1925" 39

1T55

1 2 3 4 6 5

1927

0 00 98

0

1928

40

01

0

1929

47

09

2849

Chaulkhola

93

645 646

647

648

649

650

664

665

666

667

668 714

717

718

719

720

722 723

725

892

893

1052

1053

98

0 0

0 20

3 53

0 0

1 06

0

46

1

0

86

0 0

0 2

0 0

0 0

32 70 20

97

0 2

0 0 89

0 0 70

0 0 28

1

0

73

0

65

2

68

0 2

0 0

1

0

51

0 0

23

0 0

45

0 2

67

0 0

0

45

2

68

0 2

1054

1061

1062

1063

12

0 2

60

0

24

0

89"

0

0 5 1

1064

0 0 20

1068

0

0

20- 1081 0 1 89 1088 11 1 0 M7(.|20(ll •> 1.156 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [PART II—SEC } (ii)] i x > • ' > , 1 3 4 5 6 "2" 1694

a 1095

0 1096

0 1100

0 1101

0 1102

0 1103

0 1104

0 1105

0 1133

0 1134

0

0 1136

1137

0

0 1138

1139

0 1141

• o

0 1146

2477

0 2479

0 2480

0 2481

0

0 2482

2484

0 2487

0

0 2488

2489

0 2490

0 2491

0 2492

0

0 2496

0 2497

2498

0 2499

0 2500

0 1 ^ 30 0 83 0 20 0 56 0 20 1 83 0 20 2 65 0 20 0 70 0 80

21 0

1 81 2 78 0 75 0 20 0 80

91 0

58 1

. 1 53

37 0

1 02

20

12

30

79 0 2 1 0

78 2

0 75 0 47 3 68 0 63

20 0

97 0

20 01 0 92'- ' 28 M a n a t f a r o ur ' 0 H574 5 6 1 I' 14 0 60 0 15

16

18

19

20 21 22 23 T 24 82

83 84

85

147 154 157 158 159 160 161 167 169 172 173 174 175, 176 180 181 182 185

66

5

0

8 59

0

07

0

71 20

0 0

1 5 0

08

0 8

3 34

0

06

0 5

20

0 0

20

0 0

47

0 0

16

3

12 81

0 0 0 0

0

91 20 62

79

0 0

20

0 1 2 0

17

0 0 8

0 0

0 0

0 8

20 56 59 76 77

0 0

09

0

0

0

5 1 2 4 0

0 0

0 0

37 20 23 24

0 7

0 0 42 86

1

0

67

0 3

0

01 0 20 53 186 187 191 192 n$8< M, THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: MARCH 31, 2001 CHAITRA 10, 1V22 IPA*T U—SEC 3 (H)] 3 5 4 2 6 1 0 193 0 20 307 0 0 20 308

309 327

328

343

344

346

347

348

351 353

354

355

357

424

426

427

433 434

435

438

440 1830

1883

53

61

Gorankhali

395

396

397

399

400

401

407 0 2 46 1

0

90 0

0

0

1 A 0

1

0

16 46 32 45 0 3 34 0 0 78 0 0 98 0 0 83 0 0 65 0

0

37 74 1

0

0 2 02 1

0

19 0 7 52 20 0

06 0

0 7 4 04 0

42 0 0

32 0 0

91 0 8

11 98 0

45 0 0

1 77 0

36 0 4

0 2 28 0 2 1

55 11 0

02 0 2

20 0 0

70 3

047 0 0 408 1359 ••Hi^iMjiiiw^^l n ff i|Wi| 4 5 1 3 2 2 6 23 0 473 47 474 0 0 483

, 484

486

487

488

491

496

497

508

511

517

518

45 0

4

6

32 0

0

0

20

20

5

0

16 0

1

13

4

o ,

60 0

2

15

7

0

37 '

2

0

04

4

0 I

4

92 0 '

48

3

0

67 0

526

527

531

533

534

539

540

53 0

3

1 67 0

79 0

0

0

42 0

0

28

20

0

548

549

619

739

754

755

756

758

767

768

769

770

771 Barbasudebpur

62 .

941

20

0

0

23

0

0 i

14 02 0

1

02 0

7

29 0

11 Cl 3

0

20 n

0

20 <0

28 0

0

83 0

5

4

0

0

83 1 65 0

35

0

a

26 . 0


  1. 0 a ↩

0\mt - THE GAZETTE OFflJfcHA, MARCH 31. 2t)(\l CHAITRA 10,4922 [PART II— SEP 3 (u)j 1 2 3

942 943 944 5 4

6 27 06 3

34 05 9

0

947 948 949 950

85 5

28 0 0

20 0

39 1

44 10

23 951 952 2

03 0 6

85 0 962 964 1084 1086 1087 1089 1090 0 0 20 0 1 30

90 0 1

35 0 1

0 1 1091 1094 1095 1096 1116 1125 1126 1229 1231 1232 1233 1234 1256 1258 1512 1513 1515 0 3

20 0 0

0 2 97 0

11 5

37 0 0

75 0 0

07 0 1

32 0 1

0 7 3T 0 4 46

41 0 2

51 0 2

37 0 0

0

0

20 10

0

86 0 0 23 0

39 11


  1. 4 0 0 0 0 945 946 0 0 0 0 37 25 ↩

89 0 50 1516 59 4 ^*i1 2 3 „ 4__ 6 1517 0 1556

0 1558

0 1559

0 1561

0 1705

67

62

1 12 2 04

4 13

4 59

• 0

1706

0 1707

0 1708

0 1709

0 1711

0 1712

0 1714

0 1851

0 1852

0 1853

0 1854

1857

0 0 1858

0 1859

0 1869

0 1870

0 1871

0 1872

0 1874

0 1868

0 2061

0 2064

0 2065

0 2066

0 2181

0 2182

0 2183

0 2184

0 6 82

3 90

3 06

3 62

3 06

14 62

13

6

32 92

6 82

3 29

1 53

0 34

1 49 83

49

83

4 1 0 3 25

2 60

47

0 0 47

0 20

0 20

48

15

14 7 1 35

0 93

3 85

4 740 28 2185 0 1 67 2186 0 3 34 136? THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . MAPCH 11. 2001 CHAITRA Id. 1922 |P \nr II—Sn f (n)] 1 3 2 4 0 6 64 2329

2330

2331

2333 2334

2335

2336

2337

2338

2345

2348

2535

2536

2731

2732

2734

2739

2740 5 4

71 3

0

7

0

99

23 0 0

69 67 0

0

53

84 0

2 2 1 1 7 1

0

95 1

0

81 2

0

14 10

0

30 3

0

71 0

34 0

20 3

0

0

83 0

0

76 5 4

0

69 2

2739/3141

0

32 0

14

2743/3143

2

2743/3145

0

0

1

2744/3147

0

4

2744/3148

1847

58

Kunarpur

1848

1849

1850

1855

1856

1857

1859

1871

1872 0

20 58 46 0

45 6

0 12 88 0

0

23 7

0

40 0 3 09 0 6 68 0 20 0 0 2 88 0

0

20 0

71 30 1875 0 20 1888 0 32 2 1363 ' 1 6 4 5 2- 3 1890

1891

1892

1893

1900,

1901

1902

1903

1904

1907

1926

1930

1969

1970

1971

1972

2004

2017 2018

2019

2030

2031

2033

2034

2035

1

2036

2037

2041

2047

1853/3602 1853/3603 1856/3267 1859/3816 1859/3817

04

0 10

35

0

0

75

0 9

20

0 0

20

0 0

05

0 7

10

7

0

9 26

0

49

0 10

12 11 26

0 0 0

0 2 41

17 13

0

76

0 3

7 48

0

1 67

0

0

0

20 91

8

0

56

0 0

20

0 0

0

0

0 4 1 b'.

0

0 9 . 89

0 4 59 66

0 5

07

0 1

0 2 69

5 94

0

68 ' 0 6

15

0 7

46

0 2

0 0 98

0 0 2024 1859/3818 0 9 8 68 1888/3607 X 17 ( .I 2H(I1 Id 1364 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH 31, 2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [PART II—SEC 3 (ii)] 1 2

3

1888/3609

1889/3611

4 0 0

1889/3612

0

1979/3629

Kasbena

146

61

62 77 78 79 84 88 89 90 92

93

94

95

96

97

99

102

171

172

173

177

•

178 179 180 183

186

187

^'\o

300 0

5 7 0 5 2

6 24 20 99 83

19

0

75 20 45

0 17 7 80 0 0 0

4 16 0

0

0

0

0

0 2 5 15 1

0

0 0

20 62 57 29 21 56

1

0

06 0 3 73 24 0 2

0 2 14

58 0 0

00 0 10

23 0 11

1

0

35 0 2 51 0 4 56 0 3 44 0 6 28

1

0

17 0 0 81 0 3

0

81 04 (J20 J 0 0 4 73 0 362 363 1365 1 2 3 348/1749 4 0 5 0 6 70 Dihisibram Nagar

95

3

442

0

62

3

5

0

443 444 445

0 0 0

39 75 28

0

454

0

61

1

455

0

76

456

0 0 20 -

459

0 1 08

460

3 85

0

11

461

0 3

470

0 65

477

0 0 4 64

480

0 61

0

482

95

483

23

484

0 0

1 2 1 95

0

482/1001

0 60

|No-^l()l5/4V2()()0OR-!| S CHANDRA SEKHAR. UnderScc\1367 1368 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [PART II—SEC. 3 (it)] 1369 1170 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA'MARCH 31.20011 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [PART II—SEC T (ii) J P71

K47 GI/2001—11

1172 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH 31 20(11 CHAITRA 10 1922 | P V R T I I — SM 1 (II)1 1373 1T74 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH 31, 2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [PART II—SEC 3 (H)]

H751376 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31. 2001 CHAITRA |(). 1922 |PAKI II—Sr..-. 3 (ii)|, 1177 New Delhi, ihc 29th March 2001

s. o. 692.— Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas number S.0.1030 dated the 15th May, 2000, issued under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), the Central Government declared its intention to acquire the right of user in the lands specified in the Schedule appended to that notification for the purpose of laying pipeline for the transportation of crude oil from Haldia in the State of West Bengal to Barauni in the State of Bihar;

And whereas, the copies of the said notification were made available to the public on 01.06,2000;

And whereas, the Competent Authority in pursuance of sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act has submitted his report to the Central Government; And whereas, the Central Government after considering the said report is satisfied that the right of user in the land specified in the Schedule appended to this notification should be acquired;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that the right of user in the lands specified in the Schedule to this notification are hereby acquired;

And further, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of the said Section, the Central Government hereby directs that the right of user in the said lands shall instead of vesting in the Central Government, vest, from the date of publication of this declaration in the Indian Oil Corporation Limited, free from all encumbrances.

"Schedule Annexed"

1378 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH 31,2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [PART II—SEC 3 (ii)]

Schedule

District. Midnapur

Police Station : Sutahata

Jurisdiction Plot.

Village

List No. No. 1

State • West Bengal

Area

Hectares Ares Centiares 4

5

6

2 3

Kunarpur

0

4

36

58 232

233

234

235

237

238

240

242

243

249

250

251

252

253

254

256

257

258

289

290

291

292

293

294

295

296

297

298

299

339 0

0

20

12

81 0

0 0 39 0

73

5

43

7

0

61

12

0

0 11

14

5

55 0

0

20 0

0

56 0

34 0 3

20 0 0

1

07 0

0

20 0

0

75

5

0

20 0

5

29 0

0

64 0

4

20 0

1

11 0

14

2

0

44 0

3

0

0

42

14 0

4

18

4

0

1

84 0

07

3

0

20

0

0

20

0

08 45 0 340 0 28 0 342 1379 5 1 2 3 343 344

345

348

349

363

364

417

422

423 426 427 428

486

487

490

491 .

492

493

494

497

498

499 500

501

502

503

710

711

712

713

714

736 737 738

e 09 54 2 5 10 81

23

21

82

02 4 0 6 1

20 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0

80 24 0 5 5 4 41 04 3

02 0 0 0 0 2

20 0 0

14

0

0

54 42 87 4 5

0

20 0

0

60 0

0

56 1

0

0

0

6

0

20 54 64 9

20 0 0 0

33 0 2

69 0 2

22 3

0

80 0 3

0

0

20 77 0

00 0

8 2

1 16 0

1 67 0

0 0 3

32 04 018 739 0 2 si-'i.iiooi i: 118() THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . MARCH 31, 2001 CHAITRA 10. 1922 [PART II—SEC 3 (ii)] 1 2 3 6 4 b 740 741 761 762 764 765 766 776 0 4 50 0 6 01

0 20 0

0 4

18

37 0 2

03 0 6

0

02

3

7

0

61

1

1253

1254 1262 1263

36 0

56 0 0

0

75

7

20 0 0

1264

0

77

6

1267

0

48

5

4

1268

0

33 0

10

3

1269

19 0 2

1270

1271

1272 1282 1283 1285 1286 1287 1288 1292 1314 1315 1317 1318 1319 1321 1322

97 0 4

0

68

11

0 0 20

90 0 8

0 0

"•0 0 6

) 0 10

>->

1 0 n

i • i (J

a 0

0 *> >

0

•.

;

Ti

(,

'-!

i

11

i 'I4.' 1 0 1323 0 0 1324 ?n _ _74 1325 0 nsi1 2 3 4 5 6 1327 0 0 1328

0

0

1331

1332

1334

0 0

1335

0

1336

0

1434

0

1435

0

1904

0

1907

0

1926

0

253/3782

421/3347

423/3348

423/3349

424/3350

502/3368

744/3408

762/3470

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0

764/3472 776/3419

0 0

20 61

0 56

1 53

3 52

0 20

7

5

0

20 75 56

8 12

32

9 4 32 34

3

0 37

3 20

98

0 2 1

83 67

0 45

0 69

20 97

0 4

Brajalal Chak

1

57

0

0

2 Barsundara

219

0

54

0

220

221

0

222

0

223

0

235

0

236

0

237

0

289

0

290

0 32

2 5

1 02

5

8

6

29 22 65

49

-;7

0 39

%

8

?c

5

?O

0

01382 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 200 ] CHAITRA 10,1922 [PART*!!—SEC. 3 (ii)| 1 2

3 291

292 294

304

343

360

361

362

363

369

370 372 373

374

375

376

377

378

379

460

510

511

512

1024

1025

1026

1065

•

1067

1068

1076

1077

1078

1080 4 0

5 9

6 80 0

16 6

0 11 52 0

40 2

0 61 0

1 06 0

0 11

0

58 23 74 02 0 0

73 0

0 7 7 4 4 33 0

0 20 0

94 0

88 0 0

46 0

7 2 4 3 06 4 08 0

0 21 0

4 79 0

21 0 6

35 0 8

23 0

72

15 24 0 0 0 0 0

35 5 9 7 8

41 0 2

32 5

0

12 29 0

54 4

0

41 0

11 035 0 1087 16 0 1088 00 1089 8 7 1 5 1 0 1383 4 2 3 1 1092 1093

. o 0 0

1136

0

1137

1140

0

0

1141

0

1142

1143

0

1144

0

0

1179

1180

0 0

1189

1190

0

0

1191

0

1192

1193

0 0

1194

0

1195

0

1196

0

1228

1236

0

0

1277

0

1422

0

1

Iswardaha Jalpai

53

0

3

15

16

17

62

0 0 0 0

66 67

68

69

70

0 0 0 0 0 0

71

6 48 95 77 5 3 3 6 10 69 34

32

60 44 83

28

37 3 2 2 5 2 0 0 1 72 0 20 20 73 0 1 1 81

20 0 3 80 20 0

93

59 0 6 3 53

20 0

1 08 08 1

87 15

32 0

53 12

13 32 34

47

20 12 0 0

67 16

1 81 67 31384 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [PART II—SEC. 3 (ii)l 6 4 5 1 2 3 87 15 0 83 88

89

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100 101 .113 114 115 116 137 151 154 155 156 157 159 160 161 163 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202

60 0 6

17 12

0

57 0 14 5 43 0

62 0 5

95 0 3

21 0 4 2

0

65 49 8

39 1

0 0

2 32 0

23 0 0

20 0

0

15 2

67 0 0 3

84 1

0

04 11

0

39 12

0

30 0 7

14 0 2

0 6 29 97 0 2

10 0 8

95 0 3

64 0 6

48 5

0

95 1

0

1

0

95 84 0 1 1 21 0

73 1

0

93 4

0

26 0 0

20 0 073 0 4 203 H856 1 3 4 2 204 205

283

293 5 5

0

0

66 70

0

74

0

0

82

0 11 1

1407

90

0

1 54

0

2041

Kastha Khali

51

2045

467 0 20

0

53

0 2

Anandapur

52

539

540

541

553

554

555

583

584

585

586

587

589

591

592

600

601

625

626

627

628

663

668

669

672 0

21

75

0

8 5 9 89

0

1 11

0

0

65 00

0

0 2

56

1

0

94

0 3

04

4

0

05

0 9

20

0 0

60

0 4

93

0 9

85

0

91

0

5 1

43

0 24

50

0 4

46

0

41

0

5 7

27

0 5

1 08

0

20

0 4

20

0 1

34

0 201 673 0 5 1W) THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH 11 2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 |P\RTI[—St< T (ii)l 1 2 3

677

4 0 678

0

0 682 684

0 698

0

0 699

0 700 834

0 835

0 836

0 0 837

0 838 839

0 840

0 841

0 842

0 844

0 845

0

0 926

0 927

0 928

0 931

0 932

0 933

0

0

0 934 935 936

0 937

0 938

0 674

0 676 1042

0 5 7

6 98 2 69 7

3

0

0 0

38 11 42 37 70 53 1

54 3

20 0

79 81 20 70 0 1 0 0

87 4

80 3

61 1

20 0 4 51 3 98 51 0

79 0

1 95 4 08 60 2

00 6

37 0

0 22 92 2

26 8

60 0

20 01043 20 0 0 48 0 1044 0 1051 03 1052 11 (JO 28 6U 751 2 3 4 0 5 1 6 46 0 2

1102 1103

'or<

0

81

5

1104

3

0

1105

5fc

2C

0 2

1106

£/

0 5

1109

87

0 3

1114

0 3 99

1115 ^

7 8-;

0

1117 *

71

0 3

0 6

1120 1154

0 6

20

540/1209

35

0

586/1167

2

7?

1

0

626/1173

0

835/1177

[No -11015/2/20(1(111


  1. •/' ↩

S CHANDRA SEkHAR Undci1.188 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: MARCH 31,2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [PART II—SEC. 3 (ii)] m4

New Delhi, the 29lh March. 2001

s. o. 693.-Whereas by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas No. S.O. and date as mentioned in the schedule below issued under sub-section (1) of section 6 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land ) Act, 1962 (50 of 1962) the Central Government acquired the right of user in the lands specified in the schedule appended to that notification;

And whereas in the exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (4) of section 6 of the said Act, the Central Government vested the right of user in the said land, free from all encumbrances, in the Petronet Vadinar-Kandla Limited;

And whereas the Competent Authority has made a report to the Central Government that the pipeline for the purpose of transport of petroleum products from Vadinar to Kandla in the State of Gujarat has been laid in the said lands, so the operation may be terminated in respect of the lands, the description of which in brief is specified in the Schedule annexe'd to this notification ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by rule 4 of the Petroleum Pipeline ( Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Rules, 1963 the Central Government hereby declares that the dates mentioned in column 7 of the Schedule as the date of termination of operation.

"Scheduleannexed"

H90 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA MARCH ""1. 2001 CHAITRA 10, 1922 [P,vki II—SLC 1 (ii)]

Schedule

SO, N0.& DATE 1 DATE OF PUBLICATION I N GAZETTE OF INDIA 2 NAME OF THE VILLAGE 3 TEHSIL 4 DISTRICT 5 STATE 6 DATE OF TERMINATION OF OPERATION 7
72 06.01.1999 09.01.1999 BHADRESHWAR MUNDRA KACHCHH - GUJARAT 08.12.2000
3115 28.10.1999 30.10.1999 BHADRESHWAR MUNDRA KACHCHH GUJARAT 0 8 1 2 2000
706 22.03.2000 25.03.2000 BHADRESHWAR MUNDRA KACHCHH GUJARAT 08.12.2000
2332 19.10.2000 28.10.2000 BHADRESHWAR MUNDRA KACHCHH GUJARAT 08.12.2000
72 06.01.1999 09.01.1999 SANGHAD ANJAR KACHCHH GUJARAT 08.12 2000
72 06.01.1999 09.01.1999 NAGAVALADIA ANJAR KACHCHH GUJARAT 0 8 1 2 2000
705 22.03.2000 25.03.2000 NAGAVALADIA ANJAR KACHCHH GUJARAT 08 12 2000
2332 19.10.2000 28.10.2000 NAGAVALADIA ANJAR KACHCHH GUJARAT 08.12.2000
72 06.01,1999 09 01.1999 VIRA ANJAR KACHCHH GUJARAT 08 12.2000
2332 19.10,2000 2810,2000 VIRA ANJAR KACHCHH GUJARAT 0 8 1 2 2000

| No -2^0 I l " , : 0 (M ( ) R - ||

S C H A N D RA Sl KM \R Llndei S ou1391 MINISTRY OF LABOUR

New Delhi, the 5th March, 2001

S.O. 694.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of J 947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of tlfe Central Government In- dustrial Tribunal/J abour Court, New Delhi as shown in the Anncxuie in the Industrial Dispute between the employeis in relation to the management of M/s. National Handicrafts HamJIoom Museum and their workman, which was received bj ihe Central Government on 5-3-2001.

[No. L-42011/27/91 D-2(B)1

KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Oilicer

ANNEXURh

Blil ORE SHRI K. S. SRIVASTAV, PRESIDING OFFICHR, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

I.D. No. 1/92

In the matter of dispute between :

Shri Ashok Kumar, Vijender Singh, Man Singh and Udey Vir Singh, Through General Secretary, Delhi Labour Union. Aggarwai Bhawan, G. T. Rgad, TJs Hazari, New DelhM 10054.

Versus

The Development Commissioner. National Handicrafts and Handloom Museum M/o Textiles, Pragati Maidtm, New Delhi-110002.

I

, APPEAKANCES:

Shri Surender Bhnrdwaj for the workmen. Slir^ Snnll \pgarwal lor the Management.

AWARD

S / S l i t i M ok Kumar, Vijender Singh, Man Singh and Udcy 'Vir Singh were tho employees of M/s. National Handicrafts ilandloom Museum, Pragati Maidan, New Delhi (hereinafter jefened to ss Management). Thcr services of these employees vreic teiminalcd by the management w.e.f. 30-6-90 The cmnloyces hed then raided an industrial dispute against their termmatjon. Consequently the Central Government in the Ministry of Lubour vide its Order No, L-42011/27/91-D- |2(R) dated 18-12-91 referred tho dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication on the following terms :—

"Whether the action of the management of M/s. National 2. As mentioned in the para 2 of the statement of claim following chart will show the date of the joining and the nature of job of the workmen :

Job Name

s.

Date of joining

No-

\shok Kurnar Vijender Singh

28-2-88 2-5-88 2-5-88 12-10-83

Safai Karanichari Gallery Attendant Gallery Anendanl Safai Karamchari Man Singh Uday Vir Singh

1. Sh. i 2- Shri 1 Shri 4- Shri

3. It is stated by the workmen that job against which they were working1 was regular and peimanent nature and tfiey wcie being treated as daily rated /casual and muster roll worker on payment of their wages on fixed late being revised from time to time under the minimum wages Act by the Delhi Administration, Delhi.

4. The workmen have further stated that they were being discriminated for the payment of wages in the sense that their cuonter parts who were doing identical work were being paid their salaries in pay scale of Rs, 750—940 with usual allowances admissible undei rules and they were also enjoy- ing other service benefits like casual leave, earned leave, uni- foim etc. when these facilities were denied to them.

5. The workmen have further stated that they had unble- nation on the following grounds. Firstly the practice of the except a few notional, fictional and artificial breaks given here and theie to avoid complicacy of their being permanent in the employment.

6. The workmen have challenged the legality of their term^ nation on the following grounds. Fistrly the practice of the management-for employing persons on regular nature of job and treating them as casual/daily rated/miretei roll worked for indefinite period of lesser remuneration than those doing identical work was an unfair labour practice as provided in Section 2

7. The workmen havo further stated that they weic unemp- loyed since the date of termination of their services i.e. 3C-G-90.

1392 THH GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 'PART II—SEC. 3vii)]

10. The iccoid 'hows, that at tin.- fiist instance evidence was led on behalf of both lilt1 r"irii-s. All Hie four wo.knien Lave filed their aJJidavit in supr<"t of tlwn case but only two v.uikmen namely Aihok Kir mar und Uday Vn Sinjih as AWVI and WW2 respectively have examined themselves on oath as WWJ and WW2. I'licy hive proved llwir affidavits maik- ed EX). WW1/1 and WW2/1 respectively. On behalf of the Management affidavit of Miri R. K. Tewuri. Dy. Director h; 1393

a-, back waj/Ci and other benefits at. found above. The action ol the'IVniat'ement in terminating the services of the work- men is neithei found just nor pioper. The terms of reference is answered accordingly and the award is also given i" f ne Jikc nirinner. "

Fcbiuaiy 2R, 2001.

K S. SRtVASTAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 7th Maich, 2001

S O, 695.— In puisuanci: of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, J947 (14 of 1947), the Cential Government hereby publishes the award of the Cenhal Government Industrial Tribunal, Chennai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in Ielation to the management of Syndicate Bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 5-3-2001.

[No. L 12011 '97/2000^(8-11)]

C. GANGADHARAN, Undei Secy.

ANNEXURE

BtFORE THE CLNTRAL GOVfcRNMUNl INDUSTRIAL 'IR1BUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, THENNAI Tuesday the 20th F-biuary, 2001

PRESENT:

K. Karthikeyan, Presiding Officer

Indi'strial Dispute No. 68/200U

(In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under snuion 10(l)(di) and sub-section 2(A) of the Industiidl Dispute. Act, 1947 between the Claimant and the Managemsrii of the Deputy General Manager, Syndicate Bank, Chennai).

BETWEEN

The President, Syndicate Bank Employees Union,

Chennfti.

. . Claimant/I Party

AND

, .. .MannRemcri;/II Priiiy The Deputy General Manager, Syndicate Bank, Chennai. APPFARANCF :

For the Workman : M/s. P. Manuneghnlai, R G maihi Advocates.

For the Management: M/s. T S. fi ip^lan &. Co, Advocates,

REFERENCE:

Older No, L-l2011 /97/2000-TR(B 111 dated 15-9-20(10 Government of India, Ministry of I nbour New Delhi.

Counter Statement and other maleiial papeis on record, docu- mentaiy evidence let in on cither side and upon hearing the arguments of the counsel for woikmnn M/s, P. Mani mekalai and the counsel foi the Management M/s. T. S. Gopalan & Co mid this dispute h^ing stood over till this date for consideration, this Iiibunal pass, the following:—

AWARD

This lefeirnce by the Cential Government in exercise of the poweis confencd by Clause (di of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of ludustnal Dispulea Act J 947 in lespect of dispute between Sri D. Soundararajan, employee and the Deputy Gtncial Manager, Zonal Offict Syndicate Bank, Clisnnai, Management, mentioned as Schedule appended to the ordci of reference.

The Schedule Ietuis as follows :—

"Whethoi the imposition of ,>un;i,hmenl of compulsory retirement of Sn D. Somidaiaiajjn, Special Assis- tant from the seivices of the Syndicate Bank vide ordei dated 24-7-99 is legal and justified ? If not, what lelief is the woiknMa cutifled t o ?" On ltxeipt of this reference, this industiial dispute has been taken on file of this Tubunal on 26 9-2000 as fudustnal Dispute No. 6S/2000. On leccipt of the notice from this Tiibunal, both the parties appealed with their lespective counsel and hied then lespeUne Claim Statement and Counter Statement.

2. The aveicmtns in the Claim Statement of the Claimant/ I Fartv arc bi lelly as follows :—

The Geneial Secretaiy, Syndicate Uonk F mployees Union, *(T|l lind l S p l l t (' nn com!'p1e l'P h.'Cnre me fur final IKVLMITT on 1J-1-7001 ijpfjn pfrnsinp the rrJm-ncc, CJ inn Statement,1394 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] is highly illegal, unjustified and arbitrary. The transactions are not of commercial nature. So, the concerned employee continued the brisk operations with the express knowledge of the local Manager. The cmeployee has brought to the notice of the local Manager about the large ciedits either cash or clearing on various occasions like drawing heavy c;.sh or passing of cheques against clearing credits or dis- couut of local and outstation cheques. The then Manager of the concerned dcpaitment was well aware of the financial pioblems faced by the employee. Various documents marked as exhibits were made available only on later enquiry. For want of certain material details, the employee could not submit his detailed reply with documentary proof. Onl> after the enquiry, he had sufficient time to go through the volu- minous documents and was able to give a clear picture of entire transaction. The Disciplinary Authority overlooked all the submission)) of the chargeshected employee whj)c imposing the punishment. The employee has not acted against tho interest of the bank nor his actions caused any loss to the bank. Therefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may bo pleased to hold that punishment of compulsory retire- ment from service imposed on the emploee Sri D. Soundararajan is illegal, unjustified and arbitrary and ennse- qunetly direct the Respondent to remsiatc the employee oil service with effect from 3-N-99 with all back wages and consequential benefit with conlinirity of seivice.

3, The averments in the Counter Statement filed by the

11 Party/Management are briefly js follows .—- defence repi eseentative for the employee Ihat the charge- sheeted employed was not doing any trade or business outside the scope of his employment and further submitted that the proposed piuisliracui io bo imposed on the chBrge&heeted employee being harsh and dispropoitioiwte, proceeded by imposing with proposed punishment of compulsory retirement by his order dated 24-7-99 and 45 days time was given to the chaigesheeted employee to pieier an appeal against that order to the Appellate Authoiity at Munipal, Karnataka. On 20-8-99, the .chargesheeted employee submitted his reply to the Appellate Authority against the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority on 24-7-99. The Appellate Authority after giving the chargesheeted employee personal hearing on 25-10-99 in addition to taking into account his written sub- missions dated 25-10-99, dismissed the appeal on 24-11-99 by mechanically confirming the order of the Disciplinary Authority without applying his mind to the vital issue involved. The Petitioner raised industrial disputes on behealf of the chargeshected employee cm 24-12-99, which has resulted in the present reference to this Tribunal for adjudication. The punishment of compulsory retirement fiora the Bank is totally unjustified and liable to be set aside. The finding in the enquiry report submitted by the Enquiiy Officer is totally biased as being one sided, perverse and against the principles of natural justice. The Enquiry Officer merely relying upon tho documents produced by the Management side without taking any further cffoit in asking the Management to sub- stantiate the charges levelled against the concerned employee. The enquiry proceedings, though on the face of it seems to be properly held, suffers from serious irregularity due to the non-production of direct witness or any persons from the Mint Branch to witness transaction £t the relevant point of time. The Enquiry Officer merely carried nway by the statement of MW1, who acted as an investigating officer. The evidence of MW1 at no stretch of imaeination can be consi- deud as sufficient enough proof to the charges levelled against the employee. The Enfliihy Officer fculs to take into account the real issue "involved. He fails to consider as to whether any violation of Clause 19.5(a) of the Bipartite Settlement enteicd into between the Management and the employee and If at all there is a violation, then to fiuther enquire as to whether the Management has sufficiently proved its stand as to what was nature of the trade and business I he chargesheeted employee was carrying on. Instead of enquiring into it, the Enquiry Officer diaws inference on mers surmises and alle- gations on MW1 is without in any way substantiating his stand. The Enquiry Officer fails to take into account that MWt in his cross-examination, has submitted that there was no violation of batik rules at My point of time tior there is any restriction in the issuance of number of cheques bv a Hani staff. The Enquiry Officer fails to see that issuance of cheques for higher amounts than the income of the staff member, cannot lead to the conclusion that the employee was engaged himself in trade or business. The Enquiry Officer fails to see that the Management had utterly failed to discharge the burden of proving the nature of trade or business of the chargosheeted employee, but he merely drew a conclusion on the basis of voluminous documents produced by the Management side. No effort was taken on the part of Management to substantiate and corroborate the documents produced before the Fnquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer' fails to consider the fact that the Meal branch 'luthoritv did not raisj= any objection at riny roint of time to prevail upon the account holder to stop such transaction. Onry aftei the lapse of merely one year, the Management has resorted to initiate disciplinary actibn by issuance of chargesheet against the employee. On the basis of the names of certain financial companies and carrying out the operations in the joint account in the nam* of his wife and father and has drawn a conclusion that the employee himself was indulging in conducting the trade and business and treated as a RIOSS misconduct under Clause 19.5(a) of the Bipartite Settlement, The Enquiry Officer ought to have directed the Manasemrnt to prove the charges by producing documents as it is. The Enquiry Officer failed to consider the explanation piven by the chargesheetfd employee of those transactions and docu- ments produced on his behalf, but he pave perverse report on the basis of documents prnducede by the Management side. The Enquiry Officer analysed thi- rasp wiih a biased and pre-determined mind holds that it is immaterial to inter- fere as to what wns the nature of trmrnt OM *h". chnrppsheeted employee

The II Party/Managenlent (hereinafter refeiered to as Respondent) states that Syndicate Bank ia a nationalised bank. The wages and other service conditions of the workmen ore covered by awards and settlements made under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. The employees of the bank are required to devotee their whole undivided attention to the work of tho bank. While in employment the employees should not take up any other employment or engage in trading or business. The employes who have an account with the bqnk are extended certain facilities which are not normally available to the other account holders. For instance, any cheque presented by an employee account holder is discounted at once without subject to clearing and his account will be credited. Similarly, m the matter of purchase of demand drafts, employees can purchase demand drafts for a value not exceeding the monthly salary without paying any commission charges. The employees can utilise these facilities,only for their personal needs tnd should noi avail it for the benefit of any third parties. As the employees had to deal with the cash of the account holders, they should not indulge themselves in excessive borrownigs. The oxcessive indebtness is itself a misconduct and they should not use their position as an employee to extend any advantage or benefit to third parties. The concerned woikman was working as a Special Assistant In the Mint Street Branch from 27-5-94. On 18-7-94, he opened with the branch a joint S. B. account No. 16000 with Iiis wife Mrs. Vijayakumari and his father Mr, V, Desikan Sometime in the middle of 1998, there was an ananymous complaint that the concerned workman was. doing real estate business a,ud that ho was having a few binami companies. When an investigation was made, it catae to light that during 1996 and 1997 there were brisk operations in S. B. Account No. 16000 with the turn- over of Rs. 20.84 lakhs and Rs. 14,35 lakhi respectively, that there were frequest cash remittance involving substantial amounts and number of clearing instruments- involving huee amounts were credited to the account, that during the period between 31-12-95 and 3-9-97, he nad issued 65 cheques favouring Individuals, real estate developers, chit funds, investments and finance companies, that out of these cheques 17 numbers of cheques for substantial amounts were issued - favouring one M/s. Aditya Housing Plot Develr>pers P. Ltd. that according to the concerned workman these cheques represented the monthly instalments collected from the tiros- pective buyers of the plots whom he had enrolled fts, members, that he got discounted 67 local cheques issued by parties during period between 15-9-94 and 26-12-96 besides 22 other cheques issued by third nprties favouring himself and that he nurchased three Pay Orders favouring Cmfarnt Guardian Ltd. for an amount aggregating Rs. 2.79,445 All these transactions pointed out that he was carrying on some business and he was usinc- his account with the' bank for the promotion and operation of hk business. On 15-7-98 n chargeshret was issued to the concerned workman referring1395 2. Whether thr imposltlbn of rjunfehrneht. of compulsory retirement of Sri D. SotmdararHjno, Special Assistant from the services of the Syndicate 'Banlt vide order dated 24-07-99 is Jcfcal tfnd jtfttmedTif not, What relief is the workman entitled to ?" to the above transactions and he was charged with mis- conduct of "engaging in trading/business outside the scope of his duties". On 15-10-98, a corrigendum was issued lo the concerned workman adding a few more transactiwas indulged in by him to show that he was carrying on business. On 10-U-98, tlic concerned workman gave a reply denying the charges. The concerned workman was asked to -appear for an enquiry. In the enquiry tiio Deputy Chief Manager— Vigilance Unit Mr. S. Narayanan gave evidence placing documentary evidence in support of the charges. The concern- ed workman examined himself and placed i4 documnets on defence exhibits. The Enquiry Officer in his report dated 11-5-99 hold that all the charges against the workman were proved except the issue of theque to M/s. Choidia Syndicate for Rs. 7,000 which was credited to the party's account No. 2012 in the Mint Stroet Branch. On 18-5-99, a copy J£ the- Enquiiy Officer's report was furnished to the concerned workman and he was askod to make his submissions on the report. Despite several opportunities given to him, the concerned workman did not make his submission against the report of the Enquiry Officer. By a communication datfid 3-7-99, the concerned wrofeman was informed that as he has not submitted his sub- missions on the report of the Enquiry Officer, it was decided to proceed further in the matter, that the disciplinary authority concurred with the findings of th© Enquiry Officer, that it was proposed to impose a punishment of compulsory rttiie- ment from service i^id that he should appear for a personal hearing on 10-7-99. As the concerned workman did not report for duty, the notice dated 3-7-99 could not by served. It, was served on him only on 10-7-99. The personal hearing was adjourned'from 10-7-9* to 13-7-99. On 9-7-99, the Disciplines Authority received letter dated 2-7*99 from the concerned workman making his submissions against trie finding that the concerned workman appeared for the frnal hearing on 13-7-99 and made his representation. After considering his repte- sentation on 24-7-99 orders were passed holding that the concerned workman wai guilty of misconduct 6f engaging in trading/business outside the scope of duties and he was compulsorily retired from the bank with immediate effect. Against the said Order, the concerned workman preferred an appeal. After personal hearing, the Appellate Authority passed orderi on 24-9-99 dismissing the appeal. The termi- nation of the concerned workrnan is fully justified and valid in law and the same should not be interfered with, for all or any of the reasons urged in the Claim Statement. The charges raised against the copecrned workman were based on records and therefore, they were duly proved through the Deputy Chief Manager, Vigilance Officer. Hence, it was not necessary to examine any employee from Mint Street branch to prove the charges. The Enquiry Officer has analysed the evidence in detail and has given his reasnos for holding the charges to be proved against the concerned workman. As the charges were based on documents, the Enquiry Officer was only obliged lo consider the documents and draw his cohclusion. The persons with whom the concerned workman was transacting business, being obliged to him, would not come and give evidence against him in the enquiry. The Enquiry Officer considered the explanation given by the Petitioner and found that the explanation was not satisfactory and hence he rejected the same and came to the conclusion that the operation of the account was to do business. It cannot be said that the concerned workman was not acting against the Interest of the Bank. He was doing business and naturally it had caused distraction to the Banks woik. The concerned workmnn was carrying on business while in employment, the same cannot be countenanced by any standard of discipline and therefore, punishment cannot be characterised as bar4i Or excessive. Hence, this Hon'blr Tribunal may be pleased to pass an award upholding the compulsory retirement of t he concerned workman by rejecting the claim of the Petitioner.

4. When the matter was taken up for enquiry, the learned Counsel appearing on either side consented for mnrklnj? the xerox copies of documents produced by the Petitioner a^ Ex. WI to W.15. Apait from these document':, no oral or d"curnfntary evidence had let in on either side. The argu- ments advanced by the learned counsel of either side were heard.

"nrl iffnrd'nirt\i hr- ironni'pfl T'1ink1in*''"t ^nnlriof fJT** ?T>TH"""I "

cd rrn"lovpc 9vl D. Sonndiraniwn 1-iv rrv"n"nlcr1396 THE GAZLUTE OF lNt)IA : MARCH 31, ^UOl/cHAl'illA 10, 1923 L^ART If—SKC. 3(iijJ xerox copy of that proceedings dated 24-7-99 is Jjx. W10. That order ot the Disciplinary Authority was forwarded lo the concerned employee S>fi ^- Soundararajan willi u covei- ing letter daied 3-8-99. A Xerox copy of that covciing letter i3 tx. W l l. Then the concerned employee preferred an appal to the Appellate Authority. A xerox copy ot the appeal is Ex. W12. The Appellate Authority also had a pei- sonal hearirg of the employee Sri D. Soundararajan on 25-10-99. A copy pf the minutes of personal hearme before the Appellate Authority is Ex. W13. Apart from that the cmplojee had submitted the wiitten submission also to •he Appellate Authority dated 25-10-99. A xerox copy ol the same is tx. W14. The Appellate Authority after con- sidering the appeal has concurred with the Disciplinary Au- thority's decision for imposing of the punishment against the employee and accordingly dismissed the appeal by his oider dated 24-11-99 and the same was forwarded to the concerned employee with a covering letter of the same date. A xerox copy of the same is Ex. W15.

6. It is the contention of the Petitioner that the Appellate Anthonty had mechanically confirmed the oider of the Dis- ciplinary Authority without applying .Iiis mind and the punishment of the compulsory retirement fiom the bank is totally unjustified and liable to be set aside, since the findings of the Enquiry Officer is totally biased as being one sidtd, perverse and against the principles of natural justice.

7. II is not the, caie of concerned empoyee oi the PeJ- tiouer Union that the enquiry conducted by the Enquiry Officer was not fair and proper and while conducing the en- quiry, ho has not followed Hie principles of natural justice. It is also not his contention that he was not given sufficient opportunity to put forth his defence. On the other hand, the proceedings of the Enquiry Officer clearly show that proper, fair and sufficient opportunity was given to the chaigesheeled employee during the enquiry and through his defence leprc- sentative, he has taker* part in the enquity proceedings and he cross-examined the Management witness also al length. Apart fiom that, he himself has examined as a defence wit- ness pud has marked documents as defence exhibits in sup- port of his defence. Under such ciicumstances, it can not be said that the Enquiry Officer has acted as one sided without givinp sufficient opportunity to the chargesheeted employee to put forth his defence properly From this, it K seen thnt the Enquiry Officer while conducting the enquiry for the alleged charges against the employee mentioned in tiv charge sheet has not violated the principles of natural justice.


  1. heques were issued 'n favour of vniifuis Ihiid n;trties " h i i{{^{{FOOTNOTE 1}}}} !ransnciin" in (hit SR termini in thr^^p four ICT-S TTIK»I> mounts hnve alci remitted ;n tiint SB prco'nnt flui'r" 1996 md 1997, as if is rpv-iV'1 from Ihf iVTirtipemmt Fv 2 *n ifi. Further, it is r<*v?,V.-d fmm Ex 17 to 1f\ that ricirin" <*heoues tiTr deposited for mlistintiiT nmonnli i'i (Mt ^TC account Further in the Fv. 57 lo T>1. it is rpve-iWI fW ' If enrrerned fnipbvi"" i c i i^ rh<"me" fir"'{{^{{FOOTNOTE 1}}}}?{{^{{FOOTNOTE 1}}}}! Irnt M5 •ffOUnf fo viirlnns iflrfividu-'l'-, H^nsirir P'o* PiomntPi" , in- ' ^tm-rifc nnrf ehIf fnprH for *iiW»nfi'i ••\^^-^<↩

10 KS. i,t,;,UUO to JLVJ J a. Aduiiyu Huusuig pi'ols Dt-veiupeis r. i-iii. un'j iwjj. AUi-nya iiivcsniicius, WJHUI yu iu siiuw ni.ii Hit toiittim-a wiijJiuyce nua ^ugu^u uinibcti jji v^- jjium.juou ui-iivuiti. i n u i, as 11 i<, seen iioiu tni. iviauu^e- 111cm i.^ 0 / 10 l i i, UJ ciiL-que^ wcie issucii in tiiat icguia. 111 utiUAi.on iu linn tiic cuucinicii tuipioyec lias puicnased uie i-<-> Oiuois m Javotii 01 M[s. ijujaiat Cjuuuian Ltu., iJi.b'iii M ui 01 JUiuu.oii.Lo lu tin; luue ui Ki, 1,JO,UUU, iss. "u UUU and Ks. t]t>,i95 on iy-"/-yo, 2u o-96 yiid 'b-li-yo iwJiJttUvtiy aiiu -aii Int-.ii; i n u i^ WCIL; lujisucied ul Uiul aa .it-ouii iNo. ittUOO, us it is, setn Irorn me Management bxin- oits 12J LU 1Z8. r u i t i i ti on tlit- MUe ui tne iviunagemeni, uocuii.u-iiis luve been mai us i^Ainons as leugor siitem po,- Ljin/ug to L C I J UJ una O L u Ui nansacuons and mey were uuiwii on vanuus oanics and ZZ liisuum^uia on ULDUo aie me uu.oiaiioii liisuuinsnt^ Uiavvn 011 vuuous banKs. i-ike tiiat iviuuunib v/110 iransieiTcU Iiorn tile oinui savings baiiJt acLOUULs and UD accounls 101 tin, clinonleii ot tne bdnK to me ab Atcuunt iNo. ioUUU oi tlie uonc^iutd employee aunriK me months of April and JNovember, lyy6. Muu,it;e- iiicn. jiAiiiOU 14^ ieve.ti!> that on 4-4-97, 0. cheque was issued iu favour o£ Smt. KomaU Jiatiiam iur Rs. A4,M[} ttrrouuh uie i,ii ucoouui No. JoUUU'ot the columned employee, whici^ was leiumed subsequently as msuiiiciciH iunaa. iius got\s 10 show that ihe conecined employee hud financial dealings v.iih Jsmt. Komaia Rainam and yierc ere documents as IviauKyement hx. 13b to 140 to show aomand orafis weic pin caused by tJie concerncu e^aipuj>CL and they were not lor his peisonul benelit winch in turn show (hut the bank; 'a depnved uf tne genuine commission ot income in those Ljansaclions. Further, irom the Aianagemenl £ix. 135 10 lil, it is seen that in his ail account No. 16000, a sum OL Rs. 30,000 qn 2b-4-96, Rs, 3",92U on 11-11-96 and Rs. 5,72y on lti-2-97 were credited, lo represent that they v"ere re- ceived as demand draits by tlie concerned employee in nis iavour fiom Conoor orancij, Chattarpui, New Delhi branch and Puthur branch. All these evidences have been spoken to in evidence of Management witness No. 1 before the Lnquuy Officer, who found out in his investigation as an oilier ol Vigilance Cell, This witness has been cross-exa- mined in detail by the defence representative. Nothinfi has been brought out in Uie cross-examination to shake his evidence in chief. Befoie hee Enquiry Officer, .the chaige- ahected employee himself has examined as DW1 and he has ulso nled documents in support of Jus defence as- defence lix. No. 1 to 14. Among those documents, four pciiainimj to demand promisoiy note .tor huge sum^ like Rs, iO.OOO and Rs, 70,000 and eight dcuments peitainmg to cheques for huge amounts like Rs. 40,000, Rs. 50,000 and Rs. 70,000. All thOju cheqitis were drawn on SB account No. 1(5000 signed by the concerned, employee himself. All these cheques do not cjntain payee's name, except twp one in favour of Sl i S. Mahalmgam and the anqther is in favour of Sri M. Arui- \endan. Out of five Demand Promifiory Notes, two arc v ithout Payee's name and the other three uie in favour of S|Sii Sundareian, Dilip and S. Mahulingam lespeclivcly. None of those pei sons concerned in these documents had been examined as defence witness in supprt the stand of concern- ed employee before the Enquiry Officer. After analysing all these evidences, which are mainly documentary and also urucbutlcd one, (ho Enquiry Officer has come to the conclu- sion in his report that there was a busy operation of SB account of the chargcsheeled employee during (he years 1994, 1995, 1996 and 1997. Further he has concluded that all th— tiansactions revealed that the concerned employee Sri D. LSoundararajan was engaging in lradc|business which was beyond the scope of his employment. He has alto discussed in his leport with legard to the credibility of the documentaiy evidence produced by the concerned employee as defence exhibits, when he has examined himself an a witness on his side. For the cheque Issue by the employee himself for hiiqe amounts, he Kave an explanation before the Enquiry Officer that after he returned the amount to the concerned person from whom he borrowed amounts, cheques issued .to them by him for the borrowed amounts wete ie!urned to h tn. Like that he has given evidence in respect of Promi- TOIV Notes. Some of the Promisory Notes do not contain the name of the Payee, -as in the case of five cheque*. From this, the Enquiry Officer has concluded thnt he is not able to give anv credence to those dficuments and ultimately he has given n finding in his report that except serial number R in the clu'rpe^hret nil Other incidents mentioned in the chnri?es.lseel have been proved and thereby he has come to the conclusion that the concerned employee wns doinc trade1397 1-ui the pioposcd punishment by the Disciplinary Autho- nty, which was subsequently confumed by the Appellate Auitioiity. They have Li^arjy stattd in then oideis that they liuvc coniL to the i-onclubion alter a caietul consideration of all the aspects and found that the punishment imposed is pioper and is uot disproportionate to tlw gmvity of the miiLonduct. The Disciplinary Authority in Ins older Ex. Vv9 has also, stated that the misconduct is gi&ve m nature, \t an anting dctcirent punishment and considenbg the serious- ness and giavity of liie misconduct, he has proposed com- 1 ulsoiy luutflknt iiom the seivices of the bank against the concerned employee as proper punishment. The same has been confirmed by the \ppellate Authority in their order Ex. \V15. Hence, the arguments advanced by the learned counsel ioi the Petitioner should not be accepted as coirect and the Uonble Tnbunal miy be pleased to uphold the decision of tt>L- •Disaplinmy Authority m lmpowng the punishmeat nsamst the concemed employee of compulsory retirement fiom the services of the bank as justified one and thereby dismiss the claim of the Petitioner.

ni business outbide the scope of his employment. So from all these thing:,, it is clwuly seen that the allegation of tin-1 Petitioner in tue Claim Statement that the Euqmiy Office was louily biuotd and perveisi; is without any basis and tontrary to the materials available in this case. All t h o. trnsacUons pointed out that concerned employee was mi ty- ing on some business and he was using hu account with tiie bank for the momotion and operation of his business It is not disputed that the concerned workman is also Lvored b\ the scLtlcmeiits nude udder the provisions of Industrial Dis- pute Act and the said act of the concerned employee wn bo construed as a misconduct and a violation of Clause V) 5(J) of Bipartite Settlement as alleged by the II Party|Mannfl?- incnt. It is nn( disputed that siKh a mist nduu can be tidU-d .is violation of Clmi'c I9_Ma) of the Uipjrlite Settle- ment entered into botwoen the Management and the employee So on the basis of the above matrials. it can be easily con- cluded that the findings of the Enquiry Officer in his repuil is not biased or perverse nnd against the principles oF natural uistice. Thus, I jnswcie the point accordingly.

Point No. 2:—

T is f ' ie \ p o " l ] i lt"' \u'bi\'f"n r n f n ^ i V n1 n n f . - ii i n " t ' i"

M I h .- e n n ^ m ^d e m p l o y er b e f o ic P VI c i n ' m- to t he •? i - i ni

fJ 398 THE GAZETTE OF IN0TA ; MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PART II—SBC. 3(ii)] W8 2-7-1999 Xerox copy of written submission by Sri 0. Soundarara(

W9 3-7-1999 Xerox copy of the Disciplinary authority.

W10 24,7-1999 Xorox copy of letter from LR.C, ZO, Chenriai enclosing proceedings dated 24-7-99.

WU 3-8-1999 Xerox copy uf letter of Mint Street branch enclosing Z O. letter dated 24-7-99.

W12 20-8-1999 Xerox copy of appeal submitted by S>i D Soundararajun to Appellate Authority.

WI3 25-10-1999 Xerox copy of proceedings of personal hearing at H.O.

VV14 25-10-1999 Xerox copy of written submission of Sii D. Soundararajan to Qenoral Manager, HO.

WI 5 24-11-1999 Xerox copy of letter of IRD, HO en- closing GenerHl Manager's proceedings dated 24-11.99.

For H Party|Managcment: NTL.

New Delhi, the 8th March, 2001

Jf.O. &9G.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hftreby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Lucknow us shown in ihe Amexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bareilly Corporation Bank Ltd., and tbeir workman, which was received by the Central Government on 07-03-2001.

[No. L-non/so/g^-iiwB-Di

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRTBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, LUCKNOW Presiding Officer : Rudresh Kumar

ADJUDICATION

I. D. No. 16/99

BETWEEN

Pyare Lai, S/o Shri Babu Ram, R/o 3J7'Sit1apur Nr. Bana, Man Ral Das Mandir, Bareilly. —.- . „,,,. ..

AND

The Chairman, Bareillv Corporation Bank Ltd., Central Office,

' "™ D; Civil Lines,

On amalgamation in Bank of Baroda. lepresented through : The Chief Manager, Bank of Baroda (EBCBL), Amalgamation Cell, C/o 129 D, Civil Lines, BareiHy.

AWARD

By reference No. L-12012/50/99-IR(B-I) dated 3-8-1999, the Centra] Government in the Ministry of Labour, in exer- cise of powers conferred by clause (d) sub-section (1) and Mib'section Z(A) of section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act, )947 (14 of 1947) made over this industrial dispute between , Pyare Lai and the Chairman, Bareilly Corporation Bank Ltd., Central Office, BHieilly throngh Chief Manager, Bank of Baroda fEBCBL), Amalgamation Cell, Bareilly for adjudica- tion to the CGlT-cum-Labour Court, New Delhi anil Inter, transfercred the case to this Tribunal,

The reference is re-produced as under:

"Whether the action of the management of Bareilly Corporation Bank Ltd. in terminating the sci vices of Shri Pyare Lai, ex-cashier in charge w.ef. 30-6-98 by way of retirement on superannuation is just and legal ? If not what relief he is entitled lo and from what date ?"

2. Before ud verting to discuss merit of the case, it is appropriate to mention, that Bareilly Corporation Bank Ltd. has since been amalgamated with (he Bank of Baroda. Under the order of the Tribunal, Bank of Baroda was substituted and treated as employer. Parties did not raise any .dispute in this matter and the Bank of Baroda, treating itself, succesfor-in-ofrlce of the Bareilly Corporation Bank contested present case.

J. Shortly put the workman, Pyore Lai, was initially appointed in Bareilly Corporation Bank Ltd. as Sub-Staff w.e.f. 19-9-1957. He was promoted to the post of Cashier- cum-Godown Keeper w.e.f. 11-2-1982. At the time of initial appointment. Form No. 63, duly filled and signed by him WHS submitted to the bunk. He claims that his date of birth i.e. 3-6-1941 was. noted in the said Form 63 submitted at the time of entry in service. Ho however, on 5-10-1979 adver- tently mentioned his date of birth i.e. 3-6-1938, in place of 3-6-1941 in. application seeking promotion. On coming to know the said mistake, he submitted applications dated 24-10-79, 9-11-79 and 28-6-1982 to the Central Office to make, jicccewary correction and treat his, date of birth i,c. 3r6-1941 "s shown m Form 63. The management, instead of acknow- ledging his request, for correction in date of birth, treated his date of birth to be 3-6-1938. Accordingly, he WHS super- annuated w.c.f. 30-6-1998, and thereby forfeited his three year service tenure, causing pecuniary looses to him. Reinstate- ment with back wages from the date of illegal superannuation is being claimed in this adjudication.

4. The manafiement has refuted claims of the workman by stating thHt his correct date of- birth is 3-6-1938 find th" workman. al"o admitted this fact in his several applications fllei) with the bank. The management, however, concedes that Form 63, submitted at the time of initial appointment is not traceable in the office, and 3-6-1938 was taken to be correct date of birth.as ner adnvssion of the workman. It needs emphasis that the manacemcit has not denied loss of Form 63. It is conceded that entries in Form 63 are taken to be final nnd unrevocoblo, but in 'the instant case, the date disclosed bv the workmai in Replication dated 5-10-1979 was taken to be correct. There is no material on recoid lo> indicate that the management made anv inquiry to rorrect date of birth. It is also not disputed that correction was sought by the workman during thf service mid objection was raised against superannuation notice.

5, Thus, solitary question reeauirini^ determ'nufion in this ndindienfiop is, as what date should have been tnken for wir^f •/nniir'ioi of fh"* workman i e. 3-6-1938 or 3-6-1941. If the workman'' version is correct, his superannuation date wouW f,i" nn 30-6-2001. As he had been superannuated vff 30-6-199R Hf> wnnffl be entitled fn bnck WHPZI beside reinstatement till 30-6-2001.

i3y9

hereby publishes the Award of thr Central Government In- dustiu] Tribunal, Chennai as shown in the Anncxurc in the Industrial Dispute between (he employers in relation to tlK m.iiwgemenl Dharani Cement fid., and their woikman which was received by Iho Central Government on 8-3-2001.

INo. 1 -29011/52/99-IRCMl] B. M. DAVID. Under Secv.

ANNEXURE

Utf-ORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUST- RIAL TR1RUNAL-CUM-LABOUR CXXJRT, CHENNAI

Fnday, the 23rd February, 2001

!JRHSJ_NT :

K. Iwithikeyan, Pie.siding Officer.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE NO. 4612001

(in the matter of the dispute tw adjudication under action 10(l)(dl and sub-section 2(A) of the Industrial Dispute Act 1417 between the Claimant and the Manawe- •ncn! nf The ut-nctal Manager, Dharani Cement Ltd, Shri 'Jerri I.I i, COIHIactor and Sri Sivaiaman, Contnietoi.

T t i ii i i w ' h ii

ifUO l H i, C.AZbl Ih Of UNDiA . MARCH Sl, 2001 /CHAI1 RA 10, L923 [PARI H - - S i r. 3(U>]

side, t he nwtite sent oy kejjistered Post to the 11 Pany No. 1 was served and the postal acKrn>wledgt;ment was utso re- (.eived I he notices sent to me II Fdiiy numbeis 2 and J weie returned unservca. F oi the notice sent to the I J\uL} the postal acknowledgement was not returned ho ,i fresh notue lo both t he pdities by Registered Tost with .icUnow- ledgaHent due iws ortfeied toi ilu hearing on 7-2-2001. Accordingly, notices were sent by Registered POM with acknowledgement due to both ttie pirtics loi the 1 caring on 7-2-2001. When the mallei was uiken up on 7-2-20O1, mini. ii| the piu lies wds present iind then; was no lepiewnt^ tion on either side. 1 he iiesh notices sent to both the p a i n ts v e ie ictuined un erved with the postal endoi .ument 'returned to sendei 1 hen ayuin a final nolice v as ordered to be issued to both, the parties l> Hc^Licicd Post with acknowledgement duti lot t o d a y 's healing i e 23-2-2001 Vcoidn gl> tic-.Ii n 'ice us fin.il notice was i tm lo both the parties b> Rc({istc-ied P OA wUh uckriDWleclijLiicni due fin to-days healing. When the matter wns takt'n up lo-d.i> it is found that the notice sent to both the parties by Regis tcred Post with acknowledgement due, were returned ayiun us ungeived wiUi the postal andor>Qment 'icturned to Wilder' Theic is no reprc entahon on either side On seeina the earllei records it is f^und that this ease has been taken On hie in the Tamil Nadu Industrial Tribunal as T D Nii 46|2000, notices were &ent to both the par ies by Regiili'icd Post with rtcknowledgcnent due, nft^i initial notices sent h\ Certifacne ot Postinff tor the appe^iarjcc of paiti' s mi lh-5-2000 hJti no lespbnse Subsequent n o t i ce *.ni bv that I n b u n t il by Registered Post wilh Tcknovi-djtcnT'nt dtit .ilso had no leiponse Tn thwt Industrial Tnbuniil (hi < TSC WAh adjourned from time tn time from 16-5-1000 U 1-1-2001, the date on v hlch iin order ^a^ passed in tl n ! O fnj- tittnsferring this industrial dispute fiT- idjudic -tion In this Tribunal as per orders of Minl'trv of Labom s whv jr-vr of the pmty i' inteios'cd to lppenr before bnih the f-jc. m^ even offer r-ceipt of various notices sent by both the forums b" reg''tc;ed post Hence, Ih's reference is i lo ed for non-pfcmcciition by pissinj; a no 'rehVf nwnrd', since no dispute ns referred to in trie Schedule r-\\-,t

the management Tuticorin Stevedoures Association and tueir workman, which was received by the Central Government on K-1-2001.

LNo. L-44012 9,99-IR(M)J

B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-t UM-LABOUR COURT, CHENNAI

Friday the 23rd February. 200]

rRESF.^1

:

K. Karthikeyan, Presiding OHicer

Industrial Dispute No. 246'2001 (In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under Section 10(1 )(d) & Sub-section 2(A> of t-he Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 between the C Jaiiiunt and the Administrator, Tuticorin Steve- dores Association, Tuticorin.)

BETWEEN

I he Genet al Secretary, Kappal Thozhililai Munnetra Sangam, Tuticorin.

. .. ClaimantlT Party

AND

The Administrator, rulimrin Stevedori' Assiicnhon Tuticorin . . Management!II Party APPEARANCE :

Foi the Claimant : None

For the Management , Mis. P. Peppin Fernando New Delhi, the 8th March. 2001 S.O. 698.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Channai as shown in the Annexure In the Indus- trial Dispute between the employers in relation to

Sltri A. R. Nixon, Sn N. Edwin Jeyakumar. Advocates.

REFERENCE :

Order No. L-44012l9]99-IR(M) dared 21-9-99, GovL of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi

AWARD

Schedule ol Reference :

"Whether the action of the Management of Tuticorin Stevedores Association, Tun- corin in not accepting the date of birth certificate in respect of Shri S. Kadar- karai issued by the competent authori- ties is justified and legal ? If not, to what relef the workman is entitled 7" This order of reference for adjudicating the Schedule mentioned industrial dispute Was origi- nally referred by the Ministry to the Tamil Nadu HOL Industrial Tribunal and it was taken on ule as l.D. No. 259|99, Subsequently, as per the orders of the Ministry the dispute w^s transferred from ' the file o[ me Tamil Nadu Industrial Tribunal to .he rile of this Industrial Tribunal and was taken on rile as l.D. No. 246]2001 on 24-1-2001.

2. The Central Government by its order lelet- led to above, has referred the Schedule mentioned dispute between the parties for adjudication by this Tribunal.

to appear before this Tribunal so far. It is spen that the I Party | Claim ant, the General Secretaiy of Kappal Thozhilalar Munnetra Sangam, Tuticorin has raised this industrial dispuute espousing the cause of workman Sri S. Kadarkarai as referred to in the Schedule of reference, neither himself nor the aggrieved employee himself has appeared be- fore this Tribunal to make a representation and to file Claiim Statement in respect of this dispute. The learned counsel for the TT Parry alone was present. From this, it is evidently clear that the 1 Party Union has absolutely no interest or inclina- tion to prosecute this industrial dispute before this Tribunal for a proper adjudication to get the relief praytJ for in the Schedule mentioned reference. Under such circumstances, this Tribunal has to conclude that no dispute exists between the parties.

4. In the result, this Tribunal pass an award holding that the dispute under reference does not exist between the parties at present and hence dis- miss the claim referred to in the Schedule as non- exists and also for non-prosecution. No Cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer and transcribed & typed by him and corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day, the 23rd Feb- ruary, 2001.)

K. KARTHIKEYAN. Presiding Officer

New Delhi, Ihe 8th March, 2001

S.O. 699.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Industrial Tribunal, Chennai JS shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the en^loyers in relation to the management of Madras Dock. Labour Board and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 8-3-2OOJ.

[No. L~330l2/2/94-lR(M)l

B. M. D W I D, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL TRTBUNA1 , TAMIL NADU. CHENNAI-104

Monday, the 29tb day of January, 2001

PRESENT:

3. On receipt of this industrial dispute on trans- fer from the Tamil Naduu Industrial Tribunal and taken on tile as l.D. No. 246J2001 on 24-1-2001, notices to both the parties were ordered to be sent by Registered Post With acknowledgement due for hearing on 9-2-2001. Accordingly, notices were sent to the 1 Party,Claimant and the counsel on re- u rd I'cu the II PartylManagement by Registered POJL with acknowledgement due was served on 9-2-2001. When the matter was taken up on si-2-2001, the I Party|Claimant was not present and called absent. The notice sent by Registered Post wth acknowledgement due was served on the I Partyj Claimant and the postal acknowledge- ment for the service was also received. The counsel for the II Party was present on the day. So, a fresh notice has been ordered to the 1 Party to be sent by Registered Post with acknowledgement due for to-day's hearing. Accordingly, a fresh notice by Registered Post with acknowledgement due was sent to the I Party|Claimant for to-day's hearing. The said notice was also served and the postal ack- nowledgement has been received. When the matter was taken-up for enquiry on 23-2-2001 i.e. to-day the I Party Claimant was not present and called absent. There is no representation on behalf or the J PartylClaimant. The counsel for the TT Party alone was present. A perusal of the entire record shows that ever since the beginning the matter was taken up by the Tamil Nadu Industrial Tribunal en its file as l.D. No. 259)99 and when the case wars first taken up for appearance of parties on 7-12-99 and on all subsequent dates upto 4-12-2000 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Industrial Tribunal, the I Party|Claimant has not chosen to appear before that Tribunual to make any repre- sentation for this industrial dispute. Subsequently, as per the orders of transfer by the Ministry and on receipt of the file on transfer from the Tamil Nadu State Industrial Tribunal by this Tribunal and after taken on file fresh notices were sent to the I Parry| Claimant. The General Secretary of Kappal Thozhilalar Munnetra Sangam, Tuticorin by Registered Post wilh acknowledgement card for their appearance and to represent this dispute here in this Tribunal. No one was present to represent the I PartylClaimant and all through the J Party) Claimant rem;dned absent and unrepresented. In- spite of the fact the Registered notices were served twice on the I PartyjCMmant, no one has chosen

Thiru S. R. Singharavelu, B.Sc. B.L., Industrial Tribunals Industrial Dispute No. 202 of 19941402 THL GAZETTE OF INDIA ; MARCH 31, 2001/CHAtTRA 10, Jy23 [PARI II—SEC. 3(ii)] ] I. Shri D. Subramani.

12. Shii M. Wahuba.

13. Shu M. Sulthivcl.

[In the matter of dispute for adjudication under Section 10(i)(d) of the Industiial Dispute Act, 1947 between the Workmen and the Management of Madrid Dock Labom Beard, Chennai-1,]

2. "lhu mam avennents found in the Claim Statement of the BKTWEbN

petitioiiei ;uc as follows:

Nn 11, Uhumthi Stieci. Venuvampet, Mcdavakkam llifih Road. Madras-600091

1. Shri N. Kamachfindian. 2. Shri M. Subramanian 3. SJiri N. Aiumugam 4. Shri K. Paiamanjiridmi. 5. Shri R. Baliuj. C Shri 1, GnanaMiiui. 7. Shri L>. UaJu. 8. Shri k. Sirbbaiaj, 9, Shu l\ Ramasum\. [0. Shri P, Nunusamy. 11. Shri D. Subiirmuni. 12. Shri M. Wflhaba. 13. Smi M. Saktliivcl

AND

1 he Deputy Chairman. Madras Dock Labour Board. Kajaji Salai, Madras-600001.

REFERENCE:

Order No L-33012/2/94-1R

This dispute coming on for final heaiing on Thuisday, the 25th (.lay of January, 2001 upon perusing the reference. Claim wul Countei Statements uud all othei muteriai papers on refold iind upon hearing the arguments of Thiru S Vaidnva- nathan for 1V1 /s Ract and Reddy, Advocate;, appearing toi the workmen and of Thiiu O. Venkat Raman ior Tvl. Aiyci nnd Doliu, Advocates, appearing for the Management UIT.I this dispute Jiaving stood over till this Jay for consideration, this Tiibumil made the following:—

AWARD

The linvcmmcnt of India has lefened the following issue

for adjudication by this Tribunal ;.

' VvJiether the action of the management of Madras, Dock Labour Boaid, Madias in denying employment by way of Registration to Shii N. Ramachandran and 12 others (as per list enclosed) from the date of their employment in the Madras. Dock Labour Bouiil is justified ? If not, io what relief these workmen me entitled?"

ANNEXURE

j. Shri N. Ramachandran.

2. Shri M. Subramanian

3- Shri K- Arumiigum

4. Shii K. Paramaaandan.

1403

( Ramachandran and 12 others from the date of their, emp-

loyment in the Madru Dock Labour Board is justified? If not, to what relief these workmen are entitled?

/ 6. The point : The Madras Dock Labour Board It a ' statutory body constituted under Section 5(A> of the Dock Workers (Regulation and Employment) Act, 1948 to ad- minister schemes framed under Sectian 4 of the Act. The object* of the scheme arts u> ensure to greater regularity of employment for Dock Workers and to secure that an ade- quate number of Dock. Worker* are available for the efficient performance of the dock. work. The Dock labour Bowd is a Tripartite body.., In it equal number of represen- tatives of employer! and' dock workers and Government representatives ore appointed by the Central Government,

7. Till 1-8-1988 the Dock Labour Board administered Madras Duck Workers (Regulation of Employment) Scheme 1957 which regulated the employment of Registered Dock Workers called 'Registered Scheme'. In the Port of Madras there were many agencies In cargo handling opera- tions and services. Among them there were two labour pools under the private managements. One of them render- ed ancillary service* In stevedoring operations on board the ships and other puol of workers under the private manage- ment was engaged to render service in clearing and forward- ting transactions to the consignees. The later part of the aforesaid services wns done by the association of emp- Kjyees xindcr * private scheme, pursuant to a settlement beween the Clearing and Forwarding agents and the repre- sentatives of recognised union under Section 12(3) of I.D. \ct. The workers of the two private pools through their union agitated for being brought under statutory schemes to be framed by the Govt, of India, which formulated two sepa- rate schemes and notified the same In the Gazette of India ^on 12-1-98. Both these two schemes were brought under the administration and control of the respondent w.e.f. 1-8-88. The said new schemes are (i) The Madras unre- gistered Dock General Pool Workers (Regulation of Emp- loyment Scheme) 1988 called 'G.P. Scheme' and another j", (2) the Madras unregistered Dock Clearing and Forwarding Workers (Regulation or Employment Scheme) 1988 called C 4 F Scheme. We are actually concerned about this C4F Scheme which has been marked as Ex. WI. Clause 18(l)(a) o* the said Scheme provides at followg :

"Anv worker who has already been registered under the Pool run by Madras Port Clearine and For- warding Agents as on 11-4-1984 shall subject to being found suitable for listing and scrutiny of age, medical fitness and verification of character and antecedent*, he deemed to have been listed under this scheme. Those who are not found witatile for listing under the above conditions shall be kept out of the purview of the scheme." out a labour pool called 'Madras Port Cloaring and Fotnard- mg Labour Fool'. This pool was brought under a private scheme framed by the said employers, t he Bald scheme w^> brought into existence in 1972 and was called "Madias Pou Clearing and Forwarding (Regulation of EmpiaymeniJ 6chcmt:. The Administrative committee selected cjassiiicu and grouped the labourers into two lists—'A' List ana 'w' J JI v,inch consist of 585 and 394 woikerg respectively, um.i Uien combined strength was llxed as 7/0. 'itieie 77u weie cjihsitii jis Clearing and forwarding workers conlernng per- manent status on them. I he remaining 209 workers were iuaintimied as casual workcts. The said Committee rejected tt>t usiinc in regard to 683 workers*. These workers, who ucre ncitner in list 'A' nor in list 'B' made representation to bhu Li. K. Jayarama Rao, who then happened to be the ijeputy Chairman of the Madras Dock Labour Board. Mr. B. K. J.iyaraiua Rao was not an appellate aiuuonty under any Statutory Enactment Rule* or Statutory Schemed. In May li>;j nc ledciied the Hading that only 24 out ot 683 weie fit for being included in the permanent workers hst. Thu claimants who are 13 in number <>eek to allege that they come within the said 24 persons, in I.D. No. 54 of 1973. by the Award dated 2-4-1^74, the aforesaid Industrial Tri- bunal fixed the strength of permanent labour for clearing and Forwarding operation at 600. To be precise the 24 persons were neither in list 'A' nor in list 'B1 or in the com- bined list. The optimum labouret strength having been fixed JS 600, the Adminiiiraiive Committee of l^e Stneme. could not include the names of 24 persons in the permanent list. However in order to honour the recommendation of Sri B.K. Jnyaram Rao, the Administrative Committee placed these i4 pesons in a waiting hat and provided them employment opportunity as casual labourers. Out of the 24 persons stated above who were wait listed and given casual employment the claimants herein failed to turn up dally for availing work es casual labour. The other 11 persons regularly reported at the call point and worked at casual labour as and when the same was provided to them. On account of their regular attendance they could get employment as lucid and Intcr- rultant Interval*. Therefore, as and when the vacancies arose in the puat they were regularised by the previous private management. Since the claimants remained absent for lone periods, they could not be- regularised and their narnes were removed by the previous management for the listing of wait 1-ited casuals. I he respondent came into the picture only on 1-8-1988 under the Statutory Scheme namely Madras Unregistered Dock Clearing and Forwarding Workers (Regulation of Employment) Schemf. 1988. Such scheme fiamed by the Central Government under Sec. 4 of the Dock Worker") (Registration of Employment) Act came into force only from 1-8-1988. A" already stated the 13 claimants deserted their position as wait listed casual labour in 1974. The claimants name* did not and do not find a place in the list of casual maintained by the erstwhile management. The cut off date for updating the list was 15-4-79, Under clause 18 of the said scheme it ii proided that each of those labourer*, who had been listed as rep^ilar workmen as on 11-4*1984 and continuously employed by the erstwhile emp- loyer (Administrative Committee managW the private Emp- loyers' Scheme) till 31^7-88 alone are eligible to b" absorbed ac workmen of the 1st respondent. As the claimants deser- ted their position as wait listed casual from 1974 onwards, they were nnd nre not eligible to he nbiortwd -id listed worker* undT the Stntutory Scheme. As the claimants volun- tarily deserted their -xnlt listed casuals' position in 1974 itself, to the case of the claimant. Section 25O nnd 2*H of th" Industrial Disputes Act have no application Havinii deserted the position of wait listed casuals in 1974. and having failed from 1974 tilt 1-8-1988 to aoitate their ense against the erstwhile private i .imcement it is not open to the claimants to rahr a depute after 1988 belatedly againBt this respondent. The respondent prays to dismiss the petition.

1404 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA ; MARCH 31, 2001/CHAIT|tA 10, 1923 [PA*.T H—SEC. 3(il)l

Taking in consideration the fact the average engage-

ment varies from 2tSl to 354 and also to meet the

contingencies fur clearing heavy cargo, the clear-

ing and forwaidujg ataociatcOn could have atleast

a strength of 600 listed workers without any

casuals. So 1 fix the strength of listed workers at

600 without any casuals. Now association is able

to provide work only for 10 o- 12 days to the

month. The workers should get minimum guaran-

teed wages. The Dock Labour Board has progres-

sively inrceased from 12 days to 21 days. I am

of the view that the Minimum guaranteed wages

for 21 days in a month though not justified they

would be entitled to get minimum guaranteed

wane* for lj Jay" nt present."

such in the cote they cannot claim the benefit of the failure

on the part of the management to inform them. There it

also no statutory requirement to that effect. The total absence

of these petitioners after having known the result of the

appeal, amounts to abandonment of duty. They merely wrote

a letter on 5-1-83 (Ex. W16); 8 years after their letter dt.

7-4-74 (Ex. WI 5). They have neither raised any dispute on

7-4-74 or immediately thereafter. The fact remains that there

was wide publicity made under lO(aXiii) of the I.D. Act;

even after that these 13 persons kept quite. In fact, there

was an increase in the Cargo traffic and that 125 casuals

were included in April 1979 in the regular list; 25 casuals

were included in September 1979. Because of the spurt in

Cargo movement, 400 casuals were engaged in the later part

of 1979 by the private management. Even during the pen-

dency of the Writ appeal, in W,A. 100/85, in a Settlement

reached, 70 out of 400 casuals were agreed to be regularised

and 80 were wait listed with some conditions. Even then

these petitioners have not enlisted themselves.

13. Now the workmen would contend the case of Appoint-

ment order to Rajangam issued under Ex. W3 on 9-1-84 and

Boopathi on 12-9-79. As far as the Rajangam is concerned,

he worked as a wait listed casual; but he demanded that he

should have been treated as Maistry from the beginning by

virtue of nature of work performed by him. The Union

concerned on hi? behalf raised a dispute which was taken as

I.D. 26/82 the award of which was passed as Ex. W4 dt.

31-10-83. This has nothing to do with these petitioner. These

petitioners for the first time wrote a lettsr only on 28-4-88

and that there was no scope for taking them as regular

employees. It can be understood by seeing Ex. M12 and

Ml8 that the Government has not permitted the Madras

Dock Labour Board to take its workers who were not in

the regular list of erstwhile employer as on 11-4-84.

10. Therefore, the number of pe-ma"cnt workers was

reduced from 743 to 600 and the Tribunal found that there

was no scope for engaging casuals. To mention against

originally the workers of List A and List B who were under

tht ^Administrative Committee of the permanent management

had the strength of 770 workers; added to which Mr. B. K.

Jayarama Rao's Order through E*. W2 suggested to include

24 persons, including the petitioners. It could not be effectuat-

ed because of the Order of I.D. No. 54/73. Now as per the

Order in I.D. No. 54/73 marked ai Kx. M2, the workers

who come below the strength of 600 workers will be given

benefits under the Voluntary benefit Scheme and that the

listed workers who have to be retrenched will be entitled

to lumpsum exgratia of Rs. 2500 each and that the equals

will not be "ntitled to any of the retirement benefits. Thus,

the petitioners could not reach the number 600 and were

kept as casuals. However, the private management out of

deference to Sri B. K. Jayarama Rao's decision dated 14-5-73

kept the 24 persons in a waiting list of casuals. This will go

to show that they have accepted the verdict of Sri B. K.

Jayaram* R"o passed on 14-5-73. Therefore it is now not

open for them to contend the B. K. Jayarama Rao was not

an appellate authority at all. In such vacancies that had

arisen subsequently, the 13 persons mnong the 24 mentioned

in the Jayarama Rao's order, have been given job, except

the petitioners who are 11 in number. They could not be

absorbed because they have failed to report for work, even

after the verdict of Jayarama Rao.

14. The dispve itself was raised in 1988. The learned

Counsel for the Petitioner relied upon 2900(11) LAW Weekly

725, wherein exercise of power In that case after 7 years

of the management dismissing the respondents was held not

on any rational basis. Therefore, to, say that there is no time

limit is not the answer. Again the workman relied upon

1989 II LLN p. 699 for the just action of the espouse of

th" cause. There is no justification for the petitioner to raise

a dispute after so many years; and any offer of lob to them

will be only by way of deviating clause 18(l)(a) of the

C&.F Scheme of the year 1988.

15. Therefore, viewed in any angle, the action of the

management of Madras Dock Labour Board, Madras in

denying employment by way of Registration to Sri N. Rama-

chandran and 12 others from the date of their employment

in the Madras Dock Labour Board is only justified. Award

passed accordingly. No costs.

Dated at Cheimai, the 29th day of January, 2001.

S. R. SINQHARAVELU, Industrial Tribunal

I.D. No. 202/94

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Petitioner/Workmen :

WW1 : Th. N. Ramachandran.

)7pr Respondent/Management:

MW1 : Th. N. J. Tarakanath.

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Petitioner/Workman:

11. The contention of the respondent/management is that

had these 11 petitioners reported for work immediately after

the verdict of Jayarama Rao on 14-5-73. they could have

been found in the List and would have also been granted

permanent status. But they have not appeared. Therefore,

they have not been found in the registered pool as on 11-4-84

a" contemplated in clause 18(1XA) of the Scheme of 1988.

Thit respondent came into the picture only on 1-8-88 as

per- the above scheme and they can regulate or make workers

permanent only a^ per the list maintained us on 11-4-84 as

found in the above clause 18(1X8) of the 1988 Scheme.

Since the petitioners immediately after the Jayarsma Rao's

verdict on 14-5-73, had absented from work unlike the re-

maining ii 'persons they could not come into the pool main-

tained as on 11-4-84. Therefore the whole difficulty for the

p-tit'oner arose. In fact, they have made so many represen-

tations "i found in E< W14 to W19. The learned Counsel

for thi- Mrtnaqement argued that there is no proof that the

erstwhile management ever received these repre^ntations.

It was further argued that the acknowledgement du" receipts

have not been -produced. Anain they out forth the contention

that if rrally these 13 petitioners had -mended the workupot,

BN the 11 other workers d(d, they would be -having with

them, their identity cards and photo passes for which WW1

'n h't ^virt'nee H"TIO

for the neriod from 1974 to 1988. Therefore. It is clrar that

thounh thw petitioners wen- wait lirted as casuals they did

not report for work as the H other* did from 1974 onwards.

Ex. WI .. : The Madras Port Clearing and Forward-

ing Labour (Regulation of Employment) Scheme.

Ex. W2 14-5-73 : Order of Appellate Authority.

Ex. W3 9-1-84: Appointment order to Rajangam

pursuant to Tribunal's Award.

12. The contention of the workmen is that had thev befit

informed they would have reported to duty. While the 11

others hud attmdrd the work how could these petitioners

were not aware of fhe result of apneal It Is not also thet

€"•*• of fbrae jMtlfon"™ that they dM not know the fume.

Ex. W4 31-10-83 : Award in I.D. 26/82.

Ex W5 10-8-88 : Respondent's letter directing petitioner

to call at office.

Ex. W6 28-2-89: Respondent's letter directing petitions

Ktt-* •hnvirm admitted about the knowledge of result of

srmrai it is 'die rn the oart of the workman to hove awaited

•-,*• * n^ire to h* sent from the side of the management.

Tnff po>it is whether at BII these petitioners had the know-

Isdfte of the result of the appeal.- Admittedly they twd- when

to produce sworn affidavit.

1464

Ex. W7 11-3-89: Petitioner's representation representing

for permanint employment

fix. W8 12-4-89: Respondent's letter to petitioner will

be considered for Casual employment.

Ex. W9 19-4-89 : Petitioner's representation to reconsider

and provide permanent employment

Ex. W10 31-12-90: Dispute raised.

Ex. Wll 26-2-92: Respondent's reply.

Ex. W12 3-2-93 : Petitioner's rejoinder.

New Delhi, the 16th March, 2001 Ex. WI 3 28-12-93 : Conciliation failure report.

Ex. W14 14-3-73 : Petitioner's representation.

Ex. WI 5 7-4-74 : -do-

Ex. W16 5-1-83 : -do-

Ex. W17 2-2-84: -do-

Ex. W18 18-12-94: -do-

Ex. W19 4-1-86 : -do-

S.O. 700.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal |Labour Court, New Delhi, ns shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of New Delhi Municipal Council and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 12-2-2001 .

Ex. W20 28-4-88: Reproentation from the petitioner to

the Minister of State for Surface Transport, New

Delhi.

Ex. W21 15-6-78 : Letter from the Retpondent Board to

[No. L-22014|112001 |IR(C.n)] N. P. KESHVAN, Desk Officer M. Rajangam.

Documents for Respondent/Management:

ANNEXURE

Ex. Ml 30-10-72: Agreement reached with the Union

in (xerox) the Meeting held.

Ex. M2 7-5-74: Award of the Industrial Tribunal in

BEFORE SHRI K. S. SRIVASTAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI I.D. 54 of 1973.

Ex. M3 7-5-74: List of casuals who became of their

I. D. No. 117|98

dispute being wait listed

In the matter of dispute between :

Ex. M4 7-5-74: List of Casuals who are wait listed

regularly attending work and later absorbed an

regular workmen by the erstwhile management.

1. Shri Ram Avtar Gupta,

Ex. M5 3-6-83 : Settlement between eritwhile manage-

ment and the Two registered Representative Unions.

S|o Shri Om Parkash Gupttf, r|o E-51, Palika Enclave. Moti Bagh, New DeSl-l 10021.

Ex. M6 8-8-83 : Settlement to refer dispute for arbitra-

tion under Section 10-A of the I.D. Act to Regional

Labour Commisiloner.

2. Shri Bal Ram,

Ex. M7 5-3-84: Interim order.

Ex. MB 21-8-84; Award of the arbitrator Renjithamam.

Ex. M9 25-5-95: Settlement between eritwhile manage-

ment and the Two representative unions,

So Shri Sukhbir Singh, ro 35918, Gali No. 3, Ravi Dass Mandir Ma^g, Mandawali Fazalpur, Dclhi-92.

Ex. M10 13-5-85: 12(3) Settlement before the Re$.

Labou r Commissioner and Union and erstwhile

C &F Management.

Ex. Mil 25-2-86: Order of the High Court in WA.

100/86.

3. Shri Satish Kumar, S|o Shri Jai Singh, r[o 888|27, West Ram Nagar, Sonepat, Haryana.

Ex. M12 23-2-88: Letter from Government of India to

M.D.L.B.

4. Shri Mehar Chand,

Ex. Ml3 15-4-98: Letter from Government of India to

M.D.L.B.

Ex, M14 15-7-88: Letter from Government of India.

S|o Late Shri Hukara Singh, r|o A-22, Police Station Mandk Marg, New Delhi-110001.

Ex. M15 30-8-88 : Board Resolution.

Ex. Ml6 16-9-98: Letter from Government of India to

M.D.L.B.

Ex. M17 18-11-88: Lettef from M.D.L.B. to Govern-

ment of India.

5. Shri Mahender Singh, S|o Shri Munshi Ram, r]o E-42, Madipur, J. J. Colony, New Delhi.

Ex. MI8 5-12-88: Letter from Government of India to

M.DX.B.

6. Shri Rarmesh Chand,

S|o Shri Bheekh Chand, r|o 79-A, Kundan Nagar, Delhi-110092.

7. Shri Chander Mohan, S|o Shri Faqir Chand, r|o A-5A|183, Janata Flats, Janatpuri, New Delhi,

r1406 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA ; MARCH 31, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(iifl 8. Smt. (Ms.) Anita Sharma,

W|o Shri Divyanshu Singh, r|o 5|65-66, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi-110017.

9. Shri Om Parkash,

S|o Shri Sukh Dayal, r|o 675, Lodhi Road Complex, New Delhi.

10. Shri Neeraj BbardwaJ,

so Shri S. R. Bhardwaj, io D-100, Kamla Nagar, Delhi-110007.

11. Shri Sudarsban Kumar,

S o Shri M. R. Bhardwaj, ro Village Mundhela Kalan, New Delhi-110073.

12. Sh. Shinder Pal Singh,

Sjo Shri Dilip Singh, rjo Quarter No. 8, Gurudwara Mata Sundri, New Delhi-110002.

13. Shri Vijender Kumar, S|o Shri Mehar Singh, r|o H. No. 114, Village Hostsal, Post Office Uttam Nagar, New Delhi-110059.

14. Shri Ahmad Karnal,

S|o Shri Ameer Ahmad, r|o 362, Baghpat Road, Behind Dev Nagn College, Meerut City.

15. Shri Vishwadeep Gaur,

S|o Shri H. P. Gaur, r|o 9|4561, Ajit Nagar, Delhi-11.0031.

16. Shri Sharad Kumar Jiiamb,

So Shri Prem Nath, ro H. No. 109, Bhai Parmanand Colony, Delhi-110009. —

17. Shri Devender Kumar,

S|o Shri A. S. Sharma, r|o C-17, Mohalla Bhagat Singh, Scelampur. Delhi-110053.

Versus

New Delhi Municipal Council, Through : Its Chairperson, New Delhi Municipal Council, Palika Kendra, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001.

APPEARANCES :

Shri B. B. Gupta, Advocate for the Workman.

Shri Vinay Sabharwal, Advocate for the Management.

AWARD

By means of this petition all the 17 petitioners have performed their grievance against the indiffe- rent "ttlti"*- r" New Delhi Municipal Coundl (in short hereinafter referred to NDMC) for not allow- ing them the higher pay scale, allowance and other service benefit as recommended in the report of Shiv Shanker Committee (hereinafter referred to as SSC) benefit of which has already been given to other similarly placed employees of NDMC.

2. The specific prayer of the petitioners made in the petitioner is mentioned below :—

(i) adjudicate upon the claims of the peti- tioners | claimants and grant to the peti- tioncrs|claimants from the date of the ap- pointment of the respective petitioners! claimants. The benefit of pay scale of Shiv Shanker Committee including ex- giatia payment.

(ii) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to direct the Respondent to rcfix the salary of the respective petitionersl claimants according to the Shiv Shankar Pay-scale and pay the amount of arrears on such calculation to the petitioners! claimants alongwith interest @ 24 per cent per annum for illegally and unlawfully holding the benefits of Shiv Shankar Com- mittee pay-scales including ex-gratia pay- ment to the petitioners I claimants from the date the petitioners | claimants became en- titled to t,uch revision of pay scales.

(iii) Such other or further order including the cost of the present claim petition may also hz granted in favour of the petitioners! claimants and against the Respondent as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

3. It is to be recalled that before approaching this Tribunal the petitioners had preferred a writ peti- tion No. 2084198 for the similar relief before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Vide order on 15-5-98 of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi the petitioners were directed to approach the Central . Administrative Tribunal and it was also directed that the Central Industrial Tribunal Labour should adjudicate and decide all the issues raised by the parties and to give its award in accordance with taw. The copy of the order of Hon'ble Hi^h Court it filed aloncwith the petitioner's petition. This is how the petition have been filed in this Tribunal by the petitioners,

4. At the very outset I feel it necessary thaPfor proper appreciation of the points in dispute in the case and the contentions of the rival parties some factual and historcaj facts bom out by the material - available on the record in brief be dealt with.

1407

latter referred to as Act) M.C.D. came into exis- ;nce and the smaller other civil bodies than existing iepcndentjy to N.D.M.C. were amalgamated in it.

6. N.D-M.C. was a compact Unit but its civil .ork was directed into various departments and

. judgment and order reported in the case Narinder Kumar and others Vs. Dharam Dutt and others 1993 supplementary 3 SCC 205. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has extended the- same benefit of S.C.C. to these employees also that an exception to the school employees and Telephone Operators of N.D.M.C. th the technical staff as well as non-technical staff •ere engaged by N.D.M.C. The non-technical staff consisted of the Municipal Staff Clerk etc. As regards .he set up of MCD 1 find it not necessary to give ince the dispute piescntly existing is between N.D.M.C. and the petitioners who are its employees but suffice is to say that the Corporation Act as pres- cribed for the constitution of wings such as Electri- city Wing. General Wing and Water Severage Wing. ''Tie electricity Wing of M.C.D. was designated as Delhi Electricity Supply Undertaking commonly :nown as DESU.

9. Now coming to the main case the allegations of the petitioners made in the petition in short is that they were the employees of the N.D.M.C. being appointed on the post named as Attorney which according to the petitioners is other nomenclature given to the post of Assistants Clerks of N.D.M.C. The recruitment rule as well as the termi and condi- tions of the service of Aftomey and also of assistant clerk were the same and both the categories afore- said \rere governed by the game recruitment rules and terms and conditions of services.

10. The fact that the attorneys as well as Asstt. Clerks of N.D.M.C. were governed by the same recruitment rules and terms and conditions of services according to the petitioners clearly shows that both the categories belonged to the ministerial 'C' posts.

7. It is to be noted that after the publication and "areement °f 3rd pay Commission in order to itisfy the demands of the employees of M.C.D. nd N.D.M.C. the pay scale recommended by the ''' i pay commission was accepted by the M.C.D. nd N.D.M.C. but the technical staff of DESU of !.C.D. was not satisfied with the pay scale recom- ended by the third pay commission and they de- ded for a higher pay scale. Consequently a :ommittee known as Shiv Shankar Committee in hort (hereinafter referred to as SSC) was constitu- ted by the Government to examine the demands of the Technical staff of DESU. The S.S.C. submitted ts report in the year 1973 in favour of the technical taff of DESU. Thereafter the non-technical staff and ministerial staff of DESU who were not covered by the SSC report had raised their demands in the similar benefits which was accepted accordingly.

11. The petitioners have further alleged that as attorneys they were placed in the law department of N.D.M.C. and were looking after the litigation matters of N.D.M.C. in the various courts including Hon'ble High Court of Delhi as well as of Hon'blc Supreme Court of India. In this manner they have further stated that they were performing the same functions which were being performed by the Assis- tant CJerk Junior Clerk and by Senior Clerks of N.D.M.C. It is again stated by the petitioner that there was no difference of any nature in their func- tions and activities performed by the attorneys and the assistant! clerk and both the posts were inter- changeable and inter transferable and further attorneys as well as Assistant Clerk both formed a common cadre for promotion to the post of junior clerk. The next promotional post is the only criteria for the promotion to the junior clerk was seniority in fht common cadre of attorneys and of assistant clerk. It is further alleged by the petitioners that undisputedly the assistant clerks were granted bene- fit of the S.S.C. report whereas the petitioner's were deprived of the same benefit despite the representa- tions and reminders given by them the copy of one of such representation and reminder are annexure F of the petition. It is also stated that vide resolution dated 27-6-78 N.D.M.C. had constituted the electri- city Wing w.e.f. 1-5-78 or from such subsequent date as may be fixed with 28 post of Pump Drivers, two posts of balcdars and three posts of car drivers and one post nf pump mechanic and 496 posts of minis- terial staff and had given all of them pay scales as recommended by the S.S.C. Committee. The said 496 posfls of Ministerial Staff created were treated T- ex-cadre post and even then benefit of SSC report was given to the said ministerial staff,

12. The N.D.M.C. has contested the petitioners petition and has filed written statement. In the beginning following preliminary objections have been raised in the written statement.

8. Now comes the turn of N.D.M.C. and since the technical and ministerial staff working in DESU were granted Pay Scale recommended by S.S.C. by the M.C.D. N.D.M.C. also decided to give the same benefit to the Technical and Ministerial staff working in its electricity wing. On the assumption that the staff working in the electricity wing were performing the saim funcJ>-/> find duties as performed by the staff of D.E.S.U. This was done by Resoultion dt. October 19, 1973 of the N.D.M.C. The action of the N.D.M.C. granting pay scale to the staff of electricity wing ministerial and technical has raised discontentment rmongit the staff working in the general wing of N D M.C. and they started claiming that they should aJ-o be given said benefit of the report of SSC and for that wrjt petitions were also filed before the Hon'blc Supreme Cdurt of India. In the case of R. D. Gupta, Vs. Lt. Governor of India and others (1Q87) 4 SCC 505 of the ministe- rial staff working under N.D.M.C. were direct- ted to be given the same benefit of S.S.C. report and in compliance of the aforesaid directions of the Honl>]e Supreme Court of India. N.D.M.C. had given the benefit of the Supreme Court also to all its ministerial staff of the three wings. It is fur- ther to be noted that tlhe employees of the categories consisting of Auto Workshop Employees Duplicating Machines Operators, Gunmen, Dock Shooters, Junior Technical Assistant (Hindi) Translators Hindi, Assistant Store Keeper, Pump Drivers, School em- ployees and Telephone Operators were denied the said benefit of S.S.C. report P^1 f'm t'iey had ako approached Hon'ble Supreme C'aurl and vide its


  1. Claim is highly belated and dispute between the parties had abated. In rhis respect the ↩
1408 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA i MARCH 3l, 2001/CHAITRA It), 1923 [Pxxt II—SEC. 3^.

specific contention of the N.D.M.C. is that the petitioners have based their claim on the SSC report and on the various resolu- tions of N.D.M.C. giving benefit of the pay scale to some of the staff members as per SSC report. The first resolution was passed on 19-10-87 and second WET, L^^XI on 9-2-88 and further on varroua datca in.' the year 1988 extending benefit of report of SSC to the various categories of the workers the petitioner has failed to take any step then and the claim by the peti- tioners now is liable to be rejected, summarily.

2. Secondly the petitioner's objection is that the petition has not been filed by the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of the I.D. Act (hereinafter referred to as Act 1947) no dispute as declined under section 2(k) of the Act thus is said to be raised. The dispute has also not been espoused by the competent body of the workman or by the Trade Union of the workers having locus standi to do so. The petitioner has also failed to approach the Tribunal with- out going into conciliation proceeding and the petitioner's petition has to be rejected.

3. The next objection is that the approapriaifc Government in relation to the dispute aris- ing in N.D.M.C. to the Delhi Government and not Central Government hence it was the Industrial Tribunal which can be consti- tuted by the Delhi Government was only competent to try the dispute and the peti- tioners' claim is liable to be rejected on this ground also.

13. On merit it is denied by the N.D.M.C. that attorney is another given to the post of Assistant Clerk and functions and responsibilities of attorneys and assistant clerk are similar. According to the N.D.M.C. the attorneys are a separate and distinct cadre posted only for the legal work of the N.D M.C and they function only in the law department. 14. The N.D.M.C. has denied that the services of tine attorneys were transferable and inter changeable. They have also denied that attorneys were doing minisferial functions in this respect the assertion sub- sequently is that the attorneys were posted in the field such as various courts in Delhi and fhe Assistant clerks and clerks were posted in ifie other wings of N.D.M.C. The Cadre of attorney is distinct and separate from the assistant clerk. It is further asser- ted by the N.D.M.C. that in view of the direction of thte Hon'ble Supreme Court the benefit of S.S.C. Report was given to the Minisferia! staff only and since the petitioners never belonged to the ministerial staff tiheir claim for the benefit of the SSC report cannot be allowed. However, it is not denied by the N.D.M.C. that there was a common seniority main- tained in respect of the attorneys and assistant clerks but has stated that it would never mean that the attor- neys as well as assistant clerks were performing the flame functions and obligations.

15. The petitioners in the rejoinders filed agah the written statement have reiterated their allcgatic made in the petition and have controverted the al gations of the N.D.M.C, made, in this respect of t fact that the class of attorneys and assistant cle was different and distinct and the attorneys ne. belonged to the ministerial staff.

16. Both the parties have led evidence in the cas Each of the petitioners has filed his affidavit in >,_,_,_ of Ilheir case. On behalf of the N.D.M.C, only OP affidavit of Shri Bhagmal Bali Senior Assistant Persoi nel Department (Secretary Establishment N.D.M.C has been filed).

17. Since the affidavit filed by the petitioners ir the case were consisting the same facts hence only i. petitioners namely Shri Ram Avtar Gupta WW1 ar Shri D. K. Sharma WW2 were examined on . Both of them have proved their affidavit marked E WW1/1 and WW2/1 respectively. They have •' been cross-examined by N.D.M.C. Shri Bl.'B Bali MW1 has proved his affidavit marked as MW 1. He has also been cross-examined on behalf of t petitioners.

18. Arguments were heard and necessary mater perused.

19. After having considered the submissions of parties and facts and circumstances of the case noi of the preUminary objections raised by the N.D.M.C against the maintainability of the petitioner's pctitk is found satisfactory.

20. It is beyond doubt that the provisions of ti Limitation Act are not applicable in the cases arU under the Act. No limitation for filing petition etc. L provided under the Act. Apart from it I find that it is recognised principle that an employee is entitled in law to get his full salary and if he is denied payment of full salary it gives a continuing cause of action. Giving a fresh limitation to prefer his claim in the court of law. In this view of the matter also the petitioner's petition I find cannot be held to be dela- yed as contended by the N.D.M.C, This objection of N.D.M.C. is thus rejected.

21. As regards the next objectioi that the petition has been filed without complying the provisions of the Act and without espousal of the competent party I find that this objection of the N.D.M.C. has also got no force. Undoubtedly petition has been preferr- ed by the petitioners in this Tribunal on the direction of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi given in the writ petition No. 2084 of 1998 filed by the petitioners on the same facts. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi while giving direction to the petitioners to prefer their claim before this Tribunal has made specific obser- vations in this respect. The observations of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi so made is mentioned below:—

"Since in similar matters, the writ petitioners were directed to approach the Centra* Industrial Tribunal (Labour) with a further direction to the said Tribunal to adjudicate upon all the points raised by the petitioners and the respondents. I da not find any reason to depart from the said view cm cona&eiiticm1409 of the tacu and circumstances of the present case.

the N.D.M.C. in the courts and with the lawyers of N.D.M.C and S.S.C. N.D.M.C. Lawyers in prepare ing and conducting the various court cases and thus their dutiet* and functions which were well known it is clearly established that their substantial duties were onjy in field and they could only be the field worker.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, however, states that the petitioners are apprehensive tihat the respondents may take the plea that the points which may be- urged by the petitioners would not come within the purview of the Central Industrial Tribunal or that reference is to be routed from the Delhi Administration.

25. It is also asserted on behalf of the N.D.M.C. that it was the predominent and main function and not the incidental or peripheral functions which deter- mines the category of an employee and thus if there was some minor clerical work involved in the caw of the petitioners they cannot claim their main Junc- tions as ministerial in nature.

The directions as contained herein are being J issued in pursuance of the direction of the Supreme Court and, therefore, the appre- hension of the petitioners are misplaced and the case shall not be thrown out on the aforesaid grounds.

In that view of the matter, I direct the peti- tioners to approach the Central Industrial Tribunal (Labour)."

The above observation of the Hon'ble High Court of DeJhi clearly shows that keeping in view the ob- jection of Che N.D.M.C. so made the Hon'ble High Court has given the said direction of filing the petition in the Tribunal. The direction of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi I find has a binding precedent on this Tribunal and it cannot be deviated h? any manner. In this respect it is also important to note that in the similar manner but on the directions of the Hon'blc Supreme Court of India had sariier given direction in the writ petitions preferred by some of the employ- ees of the N.D.M.C. which was registered as a writ petition No. 647|1992 Rajindcr Pd. and others Vs. Ld. Governor of Dejhi and another and on the direc- tion of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India after the receipt of the records of the writ petition aforesaid the djsnirfit was registered in this Tribunal as I.D. No.' m/9t "and it was decided by this Tribunal vide award/order dated 27-2-1997. The petitioners have stated about the aforesaid award in the petition and it has not been denied by the N.D.M.C. The said award I have been given to understand has become final. Thus on this ground too the N.D M.C. objec- tion is not found satisfactory and is rejected.

26. The petitioner's on the other hand have, how- ever maintained that the duties performed by them clearly shows that they were performing the minis- terial functions. In this respect the clear assertion of the petitioners are that the recruitment rules as well as (terms and conditions of the service clearly shows that post of attorney was a ministerial post. Their recruitment rules certainly shows that it was the3 same which was for the post of clerical assistants and there was no difference in the duties and functions c# the attorneys and clerical assistants. They have fur- ther claimed that they were performing the function* akin to the junior clerks and the senior clerk of N.D.M.C. The petitioners have claimed parity in this respect with the assistant clerks of the N.D.M.C. and have asserted that the recruitment rules and terms and conditions of the recruitment of both the attorneys and assistant clerks are the same. Both the posts of attorneys and assistant clerks were interchangeable and inter transferable and it has a common channel of promotion to the post of Junior clerk on the basis of seniority in the common cadre of attorney and assistant clerks. They have denied that they were the field workers. In this respect they have asserted that it was not the fact that the attorneys were placed only in the law department of N.D.M.C. but were also placed hi other staff officers of munici- pal council at Tis Hazari Courts, Patiala House Courts, in the office of standing counsel and legal adviser and used to prepare court file and also to receive and despatch the dak to assist advocate in the court and to prepare the day today functioning of the progress report of the office and their counsel to report to their superiors to prepare the case for pur- pose of filing in the court and these all goes to show that they were performing ministerial func- tions.

22. Now coming to the merit of the case it is un- doubtedly true that thcfmoloyees of the NDM.C. beloncinp to ministrial s'aff have been given the bene- fits of SSC report even on the direction of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India (riven in the case of R. D. Gupta Vs, Delhi Administration and others Delhi Govt. Sur>ra and Narinder Kumar and others Vs. Dharam Dutt and another Supra.

27. It is also asserted by the petitioners that the Assistant clerks junior clerks and senior clerk? have undoubtedly been given benefit of SSC report) and higher pay scale on the ground of being ministerial 23. Thus point for consideration mainly arises is whether the petitioners belonged fb the ministerial staff and are entitled to get the benefit of S.S.C. re- port for the palyment of higher pay scale and other allowances.

28 I proceed to examine it. At the very outset I 2* On behalf of the N.D.M.C. it 3s strongly obiec- red that the petitioners betonurd to the ministerial staff arcording to them the neifioner? since were) aorjointed as altornevs their function was that of a oarokar in the Htitratfon matter of N.D.M.C. and their substantial duties were to follow legal c ws of

S L K? t0 fltld t h at ^though on behalf of AS N . D . M . C. a strong plea has been taken that the peti- T^JS*?** b e l o nR to ** ^'"isterial staff and are not entitled to get higher pay scale according, to SSCL r r j? the N-D-M.C.PhaS failed teSwtaSfl S r i E SS Wt5 my COpem P*** **" Petitioners wtul|p"rting that they belonged t6 the ministerial1 4 10 TOE GAZETTE Of INDIA : MARCH ?i, 2001/CHAITRA 10, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(li)) technical assistants now translator Hindi Assistant. Store Keeper, Pump Drivers on the directions of th^ HonTMe Supreme Court of India given in the case of Narinder Kumar and other Vs. Dharam Dutt and others Supranc then why not the same benefit should bs given to the petitioner for working as an attorney and on this ground too 1 find that tihie petitioners claim for the grant of higher pay scale and allowance as per S.S.C. report is justifiable and proper.

32. Again petitioners have based their claim of the payment of higher pay seal© in accordance with a.S.C. report on th" principle of equal pay for equal work -\Lo r.ssertmg parity with assistant clerk. The principle of equal pay for equal work has well bJGed accepted by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Dhircnder Chainoli and another vs. State of U.P. 1986 S.C.C. (L&S) 187. Hence principle I find can v.cll be accepted in the case of the petitioner parti- cularly when petitioner's case uf parity with assistant deik has been accepted above. The contention of thtf petitioner made in this respect is accepted. \n vhe end I will like to r-nvirk that N.D.M.C. is undoubtedly a public body within the scope of Art. 12 of the consti- tution of India an>3 thus it is necessary for N.D.M.C. to deal all it*, employees equally and jointly while dealing with the questions of fairplay. Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the case of K. I. ShepJiard Vs. Union of India (1988 Lab^I.C. 1497) para 15 that :

"Fair play is apart of public policy and is guaran- tee for justice to the citizens. In pur- suance of the R'Jlc of law every social agency conferred with powers is required to act fairly so that the social action would he just and there would be furtherance of tffie well being citizens."

staff having dearly claimed parity with, the assistant clerks of N.D.M.C and have stated that as per toe recruitment rules and the terms and conditions of services clearly shows that both of ftese posts arc similar. Berth of these posts are common feder channel for the promotion on Che post of Junior Clert on -the basii of a common seniority so main- tained. It is nowhere subsequently denied by the N.D.M.C. The petitioners have clearly stated about all these facts in the affidavits filed by them. The petitioners namely Shri Ram Avtar Gupta and Shri D. K. Sharma who have also stated on oath have con- firmed it. N.D.M.C. has not been able to elicit any- thing favourable to it. BoiSi these petitioners have denied the suggestions given to them by the N.D.M.C. that their post was neither transferable nor inter- changeable and also that they do not belong to the ministerial group. I do not find any reason to dis- believe the affidavit of these petitioners in the evi- dence given on behalf at the N.D.M.C. it is found that Shri Bhag Mai Bali whose affidavit has been filed and who has been examined in the case as MW1 is only a senior assistant and is not holding any ad- ministrative post- However, I find that in the cros*- examination he ha& admitted the case of the peti- tioners. H& has stated that in N.D.M.C. posts ri Assistants and Assistant Clerks do exist and the Assistant Clerk has now been designated as clerical assistant and the attorneys has also been designated as court clerk recently. Thus the evidence of Bhagmal Bali clearly shows that the post of Assistant Clerk and attorneys are the same. It is further found thaf undisputed! r.nw it is an established fact that post of Assistar ' ', '. falls under the ministerial staff and thus in \ • of the matter the post of attorneys as well as a.s^.mt clerk both have been found to b© same, I find it will be unjustified to hold that the petitioners do not belong to the ministerial clerk. On the ground of parity which I find the petitioners have been able to establish from the above facts it will be unjust and improper that they do not belong to the ministerial group.

33. It is thu$ found that the action of NP.M.C, tfor n'Jt allowing them'the bmrftt • of- M^ei" pay Scales et as per S.S.C. report on hyperifechnical ob- jections is neither justified nor proper.

29. Admittedly the assistant clerks have been given the benefit of higher pay scale as per SSC reports and if the same benefit is denied to the petitioners under the circumstances it in my view will be discriminatory and will neither be just nor legal.

30. The petitioners thus I find are entitled for the benefit of higher pay scale and other allowances as per S.S.C. report as has been given to other ministerial staff of N.D.M.C.

34. Tn view of the discussions made above the petitioners prayers made in the petition and referred to as above is allowed and the award in the casef is given accordingly. It is directed that th# "^IJScnt found duo to each cf the petitioners shall be emulat- ed and paid to Chcm as arrears from the date of their entitlement it should be don© by the N.D.M.C. with- in three months fit>m the date of the publication of the award in the gazette etc.

22-1-2001.

K. S. SRIVASTAV, Presiding Officer, 31. That apart T find that undoubtedly benefit of higher pay scale and allowance as per S.S.C. report has been allowed to the following group of emplo- yees of N.D.M.C. i.e. a workshop employees, duplicate machine operator, gunman dock shooters, junior

Printed by the Manager, Govt, of India Press, PJnjr Road, New DOhi-110014

fmd PublljihfidJw. th? Controller of P^bH^oT, Dfihi-110

Cite this issue. Weekly Gazette of India, Government of India, 31 March 2001. Indian Gazettes, https://egazette.servantsofknowledge.in/details/in.gazette.central.w.2001-03-31.148548/. Archive identifier in.gazette.central.w.2001-03-31.148548.