REGISTERED NO. D.L.-33001/99 The Gazette of India
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
No. 17] NEW DELHI, SATURDAY, APRIL 28, 2001/VAISAKHA 8, 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 Defence )
the percentage of Hindi knowing staff has gone above 80 per
cent:
Central Detective Training School, Chandigarh.
[No. 12017/1/99 Hindi)
RAJENDRA SINGH, Director (OL.)
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
New Delhi, the 19th April, 2001
S.O. 847.—In pursuance of sub rule (4) of Rule 10 of
the Official Languages (Use for Official Purposes of the
Union) Rules, 1976, the Central Government hereby notifies
the following office of the Ministry of Home Affairs where
(1845)
1117 Gl/2001—1
•• m wH u A i m r i K UF t m u tA ; A K U L, * a. z w J i / V A U t f W U lA 5^ l y ^ Ji E f A I tT l A - ^ S B C^ ? y f r >J
New Delhi, the 10th April, 2001
MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBUC GRIEVANCES
AND PENSION
(Department of Personnel and Training)
New Delhi, the 10th April, 2001
S.O. 849.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-
•ectkm (1) of section 5 read with section 6 of the Delhi
Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946),
the Central Government with the consent of the State Gov-
ernmont of Karnataka vide Notification No. HD 200 PCR
2000, dated 23-8-2000, hereby extends the powers and Jurii-
diction of the members of Delhi Special Police Establishment
to the whole of the State of Karnataka for investigation of
offences punishable under section 120-B Indian Penal. Code
read with 13f2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of corrup-
tion Act, 1988 and attempts, abetment* and cons-
piracytorelation to or m connection with one or more
of the offence mentioned above and any other offence or
offencei committed in the. course of the same transaction or
arising out of the tome fact* against Sri Narender Jain, Addi-
tional Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore, registered
with DSPElCBIlACBlBangalore vide RC-24(A)|20OO-BLR.
fNo 228|llf2001-AVD.n(il)]
HART SINGH, Under Secy.
S.O. 848.—In exerclte of the powers conferred by sub-
jection (1) of section 5 read with section 6 of the Delhi
Special police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of
1946), the Central Government with the consent of the
State Government of Karnataka vide Notification No. HD
199 PCR 2000, dated 23-8-2000, hereby extends the power*
and jurisdiction of the members of Delhi Special Police
Establishment to the whole of the State of Karna'aka for
investigation of offences punishable under section 120-B read
with section 420 and Section 13(2) read with 13(l)(d) of
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and attempted abet-
ments and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with
OPC or more of the offence mentioned above and any other
offence or offences committed in the course of the same trans-
action or arising out of the same facts against (1) Sri D.
Rnaghu, Section Supervisqr, Office of the Deputy General
Manager (Rural) Bangalore Telecom District, Bangalore
(2) SrJ l^i Arogy*!". STD FT Franchise, City Railway
station. Bangalore. (3) M|". Globe Telecommunications 56,
JSS C6mple*. JC Road. Bangalore and others, registered
with DSPBlCBIlACBlBanaalore vide RC. No. 23(A)|20OO.
pNo. 228|ll|20011AVD.H(i)]
HARI SINGH, Under Secy.
•WM New Delhi, the 10th April, 2001
S.O. 850.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-
section (1) of section 18 read with sub-section (1) of section
11 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention)
Act, 1985 (Act No. 31 of 1985) the Central Government
after consultation with the State Government of Punjab,
hereby appoints Shri V. K. Saksena, Advocate New Delhi
as an Additional Public Prosecutor for conducting case RC-
1(SJ|87-SIU. nlCBI|SPE|SlC. H|New Delhi and any other
matter connected therewith or incidentlal thereto investigated
or instituted by the DSPE under the said Act in the Desig-
nated Court at Ludhiana constituted under the provision of
iub-section 1 of sec. 7 of the aforesaid Act In the State of
Punjab.
ENo. 225|14|2000-AVD. II(i)]
HAKI SINGH, Under Secy.
New Delhi, the 11th April, 2001
S.O. 852.—In exorcise Of the powers conferred by sub-
section (1) of section 5 read witn section 6 of the Delhi
Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946),
the Central, Government with the consent of tha State
Government of Uttar Pradesh Home Police Section 4, vido
Order No. 2011 Kha|VI-4-2001. Lucknow dated 4th April,
2001, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the
members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to the
whole of the State of Uttar Pradesh for investigation of
offences punishable under section 406, 420, 467, 468 and
471 of the Indian Penal Code. I860 of Crime No, 256|256A|
256B|256C|256D|2OO1 registered at Police Station Hazrat-
£onj, District Lucknow arid attempts, abetment* and cons-
piracy in relation to or in connection with one or more of
the offence mentioned above and any other offence and
offences committed In the course of the same transaction or
arising out of the same facts.
[No. 228|24|2001-AVD-W
HAW SINGH, Under Secy.
New Delhi, the 10th April, 2001
S.O. 851.—In exercise of (he powers conferred by the
proviso to sub-section (1) of section 13 of the Terrorist and
Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (Act No. 28
of 1987) the Central Government hereby appoints Shrl V-K.
Saksena, Advocate as Special Public Prosecutor for conduct-
ing case RC-10(S)|93^SIU.V|SIC-n; CBIt New Delhi and
any other matter connected therewith or incidental thereto
investigated or Instituted under the said Act in the Desig-
nated Court at Kanpur constituted under the provision of
section 9 of TADA(P) Act, 1987.
[No. 225J14|2000-AVD.II(li)]
HARI SINGH, Under Secy.
IMS THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : APRIL 28, 2001/VAISAKHA 8, 1*23 [PART U ^ - S E C. 3
N"w Dtlhi, th" 12th AprU, 2001
N"w Dathi, tiM 12th April, 2001
S.O. 853.—In exercise of the power* conferred by sub-
section (1) of section 5 road with section 6 of the Delhi
Special Police EatabliMuncnt Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946),
the Central Government with the consent of the State
Government of Karnataka vide Notification No. HD 177
PCR 2000, dated 5-8-2000, hereby extends the powers and
jurisdiction of th* members of the Delhi Special Police
Establishment to thf whole of the State of Karnataka for
investigation of offence* under sections 120B read with 420
Indian Penal Code, I860 an4 section 13(2) read with 13(12)
(c) & (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and attempts,
abettnents and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with
one or more of the offence mentioned above nnd any other
offence and offence* committed in the course ol the same
transaction or antinfl out of the same facts against S/Shri
Rathnakar, Senior Monnget, Corporation Bank, Karwar and
Srot. Shanthnkumari K H A.S., Formerly Chief Accounts
Officer, Zlla Panchayat, Karwar Group-A Gazetted (under
suspension) r"gist"r"* with CBI/ACB Bangalore vide RC.
22(A)/2000,
[No, 228/68/2000-AVD-I1J
S.O. S54.—In exercise of the powers conferred by tuW
section (1<) ol section } read wit)) section 6 of the Delhi
Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946),
the Central Government with the consent ot the Slate Gov-
ernment of Karnatak* vide Notification No. HD i05 PCR
2000, dated 1O-5-20O0, hereby extends the powers and jurii-
diction of the membnm nf the Delhi Special Police E"tab)isli-
ment to the whole ot tm State or Kamatoka tor investigation,
of.offences punishable under section 120-B read with 420,
468, 471. 477A todlitn Penal Code and section 13(2) read
with 13(l)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, J'988, and
attempts, abetment* AT.CJ conspiracy in relation to or In con-
nection with one ot more of the offence mentioned above
and any other offence and offences comitted in the course
of the surne transaction or nrining out of the same facts agalntt
Sri D. Bharath KutOi'i, Officer, presently working as coo-
current Auditor, Foreign Department State Bank of Mysore,
Head Office, Bangalore (2) Sri S. Venlcatesh. Officer, presently
working as Chief Mtnasef (Audit) Inspection Department,
State Bank of Myjvre, Mead Office Bangalore (3) M/s.
Scorpion Housing Development Co. Ltd. (Presently known as
Goodwill Housing B< veiopment Co. Ltd.) represented by its
Directors, Sri A. O. A*hplc, Smt. Nirmala Ashok and Sri
A. K. Shekar. Regisftrtd Office at Hitananda-2, 3rd Floor,
48, Lavolle Road, Bkflgalore-560001 and others registered
with DSPE/CBI/\< R Baop^lore vide RC. No. 9(A)/5000.
HARI SINGH, Under Secy.
(No. 228/(12)/2001-AVD-II(0]
HARI SINGH, Under Secy.
raw"
New Delhi, the 12th April, 2001 New Delia, th" 12th April, 2001
S.O. 855.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section di) of section 5 read with section 6 of the DelM Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 194G), the Central Government with the consent of the State Gov- ernment of Karnaia^a vide Notification No. HD 95 PCR 2000 IV dated 16-5-2000, hereby extend! the powers and jurisdiction of the nwmbei* of the Delhi Social Police Establishment to the whole of the StPte of KainataXa for investigation of offences punishable under section J20-B read with 420, 468, 471, 4/fA Indian Penul Code ami section 1-3(2) read with 13U)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and attempts, abetments and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offence mentioned nbove and any other offence and offences committed in the course of the same transaction or arisinp out of the came facts against (1) Sn Sure"n Adya, Chief Manager, (under suspension), State Bank, of Mysore, Sudhama Nagar Branch, Bangalore (2) Sri Kumai, Deputy Manager (Advance) (nrdcr suspension), State Bant of Mysore, Sudhama Najfar Brancli (3) Sri P. N. Balkasubramaniam, Bangalore (private person (4) Sri Ravi Micheal Batwi. Managing Partner, M/s. Ajtri- culture Developing Industrie;*, Mahadevapura, BanRftUire and (5i) M/s. Agriculture DEvelrrlnc Industries, MnhBdcvarura, Bangalore represented by (a) Sri Ravi Miche.il Babu, Mana- ging Partner, (b) Sri R. Ramakrishnacbari Partner and others registered with DSPElCBIlACBIBangalore vide RC No. 11(A)/2000.
[No. 228/12/2001 -AVD-Iftil)]
HARI SINGH, Under Secy.
S.O. 856.—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 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of Karnataka vide Notification No. HD. 95 PCR 2000 III dated 16-5-2000, hereby extends the powers and jurisdic- tion of the members of the Delhi Special Police Esta- blishment to the whole of the State of Karnataka for investigation of offences punishable under section 120-B read with 420, 468, 471, 477A Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Pre- vention of Corruption Act, 1988 and attempts, abet- ments and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offence mentioned above and any other offence and offences committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts against(l) Sri Suresh Adye, Chief Manager, (under suspension), State Bank of Mysore, Sudhama Nagar Branch, Bangalore (2) Sri L. Kumar, Deputy Manager (.Advance) (under suspension) State Bank of Mysore, Sudhama Nagat Branch (3) Sri P. N. Balkasubramaniam, Bangalore (private person) (4) Sri Ravi Micheal Babu, Managing Partner, M|s. Agriculture Developing Industries, Mahadevapura, Bangalore and (5) Shri Sunil Kumar, Proprietor, M|s. Kesri Jewellers, Lalbagh Road, Bangalore-27, and others registered witl. DSPEICBIIACBlBanttalore vide RC No. I2(A)|2000.
[No. 228|12|2001-AVD-II(iii)]
HARI SINGH, Under Secy.
wmso IfcE dX£tTfE G*r 'Ttibftt: 'APRIL 28,flOOr/VMSAKHA8, 1*2$ flfltt' #=<^&&. #|tf)] New Delhi, the 12th April, 2001 S.O. 857.—In CAurcise 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 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of Karnataka vide Notification No. HD 95 PCR 2000 ir dated 16-5-2000, hereby extends the powers and jurisdic- tion of the members of the Delhi Special Police Esta- blishment to the whole of the State of Karnataka for investigation of offences punishable under section 120-B read with 420, 46fc, 471, 477A Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Pre- vention of Corruption Act, 1988 and attempts, abet- nients and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offence mentioned above and any other offence and offences committed in the course the same transaction or arising out of the facts against(l) SriSuresh Adye, Chief Manager, (under suspension), State Bank of Mysore, Sudhama Nagar Branch, Bangalore (2) Sri L. Kumar, Deputy Manager (Advance) (under suspension) State Bank of Mysore, Sudhama Nagar Branch, Bangalore (3) Sri P. N. Balkasubramaniam, Bangalore (private person) (4) Sn Ravi Michael Babu, Managing Partner, M/s. Agriculture Development Industries, Mahadevapura, Bangalore and (5) Shri Hasmukh Shah, Proprietor, Mjs. Ambica Trading Company, B. V. K. Iyengar Road, Bangalore-53, and others registered with DSPE|CBI|ACB|Bangalore vide R.C. No. 13 (A) 2000.
[No. 228/12/2001-AVD-II(iv)]
HARI SINGH, Under Secy.
New Delhi, the 12th April, 2001 S.O. S58.—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 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the Slate Government of Karnataka vide Notification No. HD 95 PCR 2000 I dated 36-5-2000, hereby extends the powers and jurisdic- tion of the members of the Delhi Special Police Esta- blishment to the whole of the State of Karnataka for investigation of offences punishable under section 120-B read with 420 Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) read with 13(1 )(d) of Prevention of Corrup- tion Act, 1988 and attempts, abetments and conspi- racy in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offence mentioned above and any other offenc; and offences committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts against (1) Sri Suresh Adya Chief Manager, (under suspension), State Bank of Mysore, Sudhama Nagar Branch, Bangalore (2) Sri L, Kumar, Deputy Mana- ger (Adyance) (under suspension). State Bank of Mysore, Sudhama Nagar Branch Bangalore (3) Sri Ravi Micheal Babu, Managing Partner, Mis. Agri- culture Development Industries, Mahadevapura Bangalore, and others registered with DSPE|CBl| ACBjBangalore vide RC No 14(A)|2000.
[No. 228|12|2001-AVD-II(v)]
HARI SINGH, Under Secy.
New Delhi, the 12th April, 2001 S.O. 859.—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 1946), the Central Government with the consent of the State Government of Karnataka vide Notification No. HD 94 PCR 2000 dated 16-5-2000, hereby extends the powers and jurisdic- tion of the members of Ihe Delhi Special Police Esta- blishment to the whole of the State of Karnataka for investigation of offences punishable under sections 201, 204, 409 or in alternatively sections 420, 468, 471, 477A Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) iread with 13(l)(c) and 13(l)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and attempts, abctments and eospiracy in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offence mentioned above and any other pffence and offences committed in the course of the Same transaction or arising out of the same facts against (1) Sri Syed Shabeer Ahmed, "Officer, pre- sently working as Dy. Manager (Accounts) State Bank of Mysore, Avenue Road Branch, Bangalore and others registered with DSPEiCBIIACBIBanHalore Vide RC No. 15fA)|2000.
[No. 228|12|2001~AVD-II(vi)] HARI SINGH, Under Secy.
1851 .MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Economic Affairs)
(Banking Division)
New Delhi, the 10th April. 2001
S.O. 860.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Com- panies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, read With sub-clause (1) of clause 3, clause 5, clause 6, claune 7 and sub-clause (1) of clause 8 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970, the Central Government, after consultation with the- Reserve Bank of India, hereby appoints Shri R. V. Shaitri, Chairman and Managing Director, Indian Overseas Bank an Chairman and Managing Director, Canara Bank from 1-5-2001 and upto 31-10-2004.
JP. No. 9|46|2000-B.O.l]
RAMESH CHAND, Under Secy.
New Delhi, the 11th April, 2001 SO. 861.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, read with sub-clause (1) of clause 3, clause 5, clause 6, clause 7 and sub-clausj (1) of clause 8 of the Nationalised Banks (Manage- ment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970, the Central Government, after consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby appoints Shri S. C, Gupta, Executive Director, Indian Overseas Bank us Chairman and Managing Director, Indian Overseas Bank for a period of five years with effect from 01-05-2001, after Shri R. V. Shastri, the present in- cumbent, demits office.
[F. No. 9!46|2000-B.O.I.(i)j RAMESH CHAND, Under Secy.
1852 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA ; APRIL 2J&, 2001/VAlSAfcHA 8, 1923 tPA"t U-^SBC. 3(ii)] New Delhi, the 11th April, 2001
MINISTRY OF SMALL SCALE INDUSTRIES
AND AGRO & RURAL INDUSTRIES
New Delhi, the 8th March, 2001 S.O. 862.—In exercise of the powers conferred by chuse (a) of sub-section (3) of section 9 of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, read with sub-clause (1) of clause 3 and sub-clause (1) of clause 8 of the Nationalised Banks (Management and Miscellaneous Provisions) Scheme, 1970, the Central Government, jfter consultation with the Reserve Bank of India, hereby appoints Shri R. Natarajan presently General Manager, Indian Overseas Bank as a whole time director (designated as the Executive Director of Tndian Overseas Bank for the period from the dntc v-f his taking charge and upto 30th June. 2002 after Shri S. C. Gupta, the present incumbent, demits office.
[F. No. 9|46!2000-B.O.I.(ii)]
RAMESH CHAND, Untfcr Secy.
S.O. 863.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unautho - rised Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971) and in super- session of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Industry, Department of Small Scale Industries and Agro and Rural Industries, num- ber S.O. 2516 dated 26th August, 1996, published in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii) dated the 31st August, 1996, except a s respects things done or omitted to be done before such supersession the Central Government hereby appoints the officer mentioned in column (1) of the Table below, being an officer of the Delhi State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (A Government Undertaking), of an equivalent to the rank of a Gazetted Officer of the Central Government to be an Estate Officer for tho purposes of the said Act, who shall exercise the powers conferred, and perform the duties imposed, on Estate officer by or under the said Act, within the local limits of his jurisdiction, in respect of the public premises specified in the corresponding entry in column (2) of the said Table:
TABLE
Name and Designation of the officer
Categories of public premises and local limits
of jurisdiction
1
2
Shri B.R. Singh, Estate Officer
Premises belonging to or taken on lease by the Delhi State Industrial Develop- ment Corporation Limi- ted, New Delhi (A Go- vernment Undertaking). It has its own properties in Mumbai, Maharashtra and in Delhi.
[No. 1S(1)/2OQO-SSI(P)-II] H.R. JOSHI, Under Secy.
18& 1117 GI/2001—2 1854 THE GAZETTE OF IMfclA : APRIL '1%, 20to\/VAI$&3TA 8, 1913 | £ ay tt—Sec. 3(H)] it'SS MINISTRY OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE
(Department of Health)
New Delhi, the 29th March, 2001
S.O. 865.—In exercise of the ptwers conferred by Sub-section <2) of the Section 11 of the Indian Medical Coomai A"t, 195<$ (i!02
In the said First Schedule—
(a) After "A.P. Singh Universrity" under the-heading 'University or Medical Institution' and Ihe entries rela- ting thereto under the heading 'Recognised Medical Qualification' [hereinafter referred to as coiumn (2)] and heading 'Abbreviation for Registration', [hereinafter referred to as column (3)], the following shall be inserted, namely :
Abbreviation for Registration Recognised Medical .Qualification
University or Medical Institution
(3)
(2)
(I)
MBfiS
Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor
"Assam University
of Surgery
(This qualification shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted in or after June, 1999 in respect of student being trained at Silchar Medical College Assam).
D.L.O.
Diploma in. Otolaryngology
(This qualification shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted in or after December 1998 in respect of students being trained at Silchar Medical College, Assam.)'1; .
f"56 mm GAZETTE OF INDIA : APRIL 28, 2001/VAI8AKHA &, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(fl)] (b) against the "University of Karnataka", in column (2), after the entry 'Diploma in Ophthalmic Medicine and Surgery1 and the entry relating thereto in column (3), the follwing shall be inserted, namely :~
(2)
(3)
"Master of Surgery (E.N.T.)
M.S. (E.N.T.) (This qualification shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted in or after August, 1970 in respect df students being trained at Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubli and J.N. Medical College, Bclgaum).
Diploma in Otolaryngology
D.L.O. (This qualification shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted in or after August 1968 in respect of students being trained at Karnataka Institute of Medical Sciences, Hubli and J.N. Medical College, Belgaum.)
Doctor of Medicine (Radio-Diagnosis) M.D. (Radio-Diag.) (This qualification shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted in or after August 1996 in respect of students being trained at J.N. Medical College Belgaum).
Diploma in Medical (Radio Diagnosis) D.M.R.D. (This qualification shall be a reeognised medical qualification when granted in or after February 1996 in respect of student being trained at J.N. Medical College, Belgaum.)";
(c) against the "Gulbarga University , in column (2), after the entry Diploma in Medical Radio Diagnosis' and the entry relating thereto in column (3), the following shall be inserted, namely : —
Diploma in Clinical Pathology D.C.P.
(This qualification shall be recognised medical qualification when granted in or after October 1982 in respect of students being trained at M .R Medical College, Gulberga)"
(d) against tho "Shivaji University", in column (2), after the entry 'Doctor of Medicine (Preventive and Social Medicine)' and the entry relating thereto in column (3), the following shall be inserted namely: —
(2)
0)
"Diploma in Child Health
D.C.H. (This qualification shall be a recognised medical qualification when granted in or after June, 1993 in respect of the students being trained at Krishna Institute of Medical Sciences, Karad)"-
[V.11015/18/99-ME(UG)J P. G. KALADHARAN, Under Secy.
tojr
ment hereby specifies that the period of practice of mdicine by Dr. Larisa Singh in India shall be limited lo :—
(a) a period of six months from the date of issue of
this order, or
(b) the period during which Dr. Larisa Singh is attach- ed to the Diyalok Chikitsa Kendra, Nehru Nagar, Buxar (Bihnr), whichever is shorter.
pNo. V-11016|1|2001-ME(UG)]
P.G. KALADHARAN, Uudcr Secy.
ORDER
New Delhi, the 11th April, 2001
S.O. 866.—Whereas medical qualification M.D. 'Physician' granted by Vitebsk State Medical University of USSR is a recognised medical qualification for the purpose of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956) under Section 14 of the said Act.
And whereas Dr. Larisa Singh who possess the said quali- fication Is attached to Dlvyalok Chikltsa Kendra Nehru Nagar, Btrxar (Bihar) for the purpose of charitable work and not for personal gain.
Now, therefore, in pursuance of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of the Section 14 of the said Act, the Central Govern- I8S* THE GAtfETTfi G£ INErfA : APWL 28, 2001/VAISAfcHA 8, 1925 [PART tl—SflC. 3ft&] MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE
(Department of Agriculture Research and Education^
New Delhi, the 30th March, 2001
S.O. 867.—In exercise of the powers conferred by
section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unautho-
rised Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971), the Central
Government hereby appoints the officer mentioned
in column (1) of the Table below, being Gazetted Officer of the Central Government, to be Estat e
Officer for the purpose of the said Act, who shall
exercise the powers conferred and perform the duties
imposed on the Estate Officer by or under the said
Act within the local limits of his jurisdiction in respec t
of the Public Promises specified in the correspondin g
entry in column (2) of the said Table.
TABLE
Designation of the Officer Categories of Public
Premises and local limits
of jurisdiction
1
2
Sh. G. Chandrasekhar •All immovable properties
Under Secretary (DARE) premises belonging to or
taken on lease by or on
behalf of Indian Council
Agricultural Research, and
its Institutes etc. situated
at various places across
the country.
[RNo. 17-11/95-Genl. Admn.]
SATWANT SINGH, Under Secy.
MINISTRY OF SHIPPING
(Shipping Wing)
New Delhi, the 18th April, 2001 S.O. 868.—In exercise of the powers conferred by section 5 of the Seamen's Provident Fund Act, 1966 (4 of 1966) read with paragraph 3 of the Seamen's Provident Fund Scheme, 1966, the Central Government hereby makes the following furthei amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the erstwhile Ministry of Transport, Depart- ment of Surface Transport (Shipping Wing) number S:O. 5757, dated the 11th December, 1985, namely:—
In the said notification for the headings "Chairman" and "Members" and the entries relating thereto, the following headings and entries shall respectively be substituted, namely: —
"Chairman:
The Director General of Shipping, Mumbai.
Members:
Government Representatives:
1. The Director or Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Shipping, New Delhi, looking after Mercantile Marine Administration, which includes Seamen's Welfare.
1&59 2. Deputy Director General of Shipping, Mumbai dealing with Seamen's Welfare.
3. Deputy Financial Adviser, Ministry of Shipping, New Delhi.
Employers' Kepresentatives (Appointed by the Cen- tral Government after consultation with Organisations of employers recognised by that Government in this behalf) :
4. Capt. N. A. Hiranandani, Maritime Association of ShipowneTS,Shipmanagers and Agents.
5. Shri D. P. Revawala, Indian National Ship- owners' Association, Mumbai.
6. Capt. Somnath Pahi, Indian National Ship- owners' Association, Kolkata.
Seamen's Representatives (Appointed by the Central Government after consultation with Organisations of Seamen recognised by that Government in this behalf) :
7. Dr. Leo Barnes, National Union of Seafarers of India, Mumbai,
8. Shri Vasant P. Samant, National Union of Sea- farers of India, Mumbai.
9. Shri Anil Baran Das, Forward Seamen's Union of India, Kolkata."
[File No. ST-14018|5l2000-MT]
R. S. BISHT, Under Secy.
Note : The principal notification was published vide notification number S.O. 5757 dated the 11th December, 1985 and was subsequen- tly amended vide notification numbers S.O. 568 dated the 13th February, 1991 and S.O. No. 277 dated 27th lanuary, 1996.
1&60 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : APRIL 28, 2001/VAISAKHA 8, 1923 [PAKT I I —S EC 4(ii)]
MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS
(Department of Posts)
Directorate of Postal Life Insurance
New Delhi, the 9th March, 200!
S.O. 869 —In exercise of powers cosfcrred vide
Rule 10 of Post Office Insurance Fund Rules and on
the basis of actuarial valuation of the assets and lia-
bilities of Rural Post Office Insurance Fund as on
31-3-1996, the Director General Posts is pleased to
declare a simple reversionary bonus on the Rural
Postal Life Insurance Policies on their becoming
claims, due to death or maturity at the following
rates for the year ending 31-3-1996.
Type of Insurance Policy Rate of Bonus
Whole Life Assurance - Rs. 75 per thousand of sum assured.
Endowment Assutance &—Rs. 60 per thousand of
Anticipated Endowment Assurance sum assured.
2. Interim Bonus at the rates mentioned above will
also be payable for all claims arising due to maturity
or death during the period from 01-04-1996 to
31-12-2001 for policies fon which premiums have
been paid and entered upon during the period from
01-04-1996 to 31-12-2001 (including first policy year
of assurance in respect of policies issued on or after
01-04-1996).
3. The amount of bonus involving a fraction of 50
paise or more shall be roimded of to the next higher
rupee and fraction below 50 paise shall be ignored,
4. This issues with the concurrence of Finance
Advice (Postal) vide Diary No. 1O8|FA|2OO11CS
dated 09-03-2001.
[No. 13-1]98-LI]
A. K. PODDAR, Dy. General Manager 1861 i\ltyr\tjdH 1862 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : APRIL 28,2001/VAISAKHA 8, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3 (ii)] $fr
tflE G-XSfcgjflfe Wtti&lA>i APRIL 2&, 20tff/VATSXK^ fi i9$" fpAftVtta^ 'j"fflft m$ Ref: Column 2 (Design of the Standard Mark) MINISTRY OF FOOD, CONSUMER AFFAIRS AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION S.O. 933 dated 18th March 1999, No. 14 page 1927 (Department of Consumer Affairs) dated 3rd April, 1999.
BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS
Read
CORRIGENDUM
New Delhi, the 24th April, 2001
S.O. 870.—In the Notification No. CMD-I/13 : 9 published in Part II—Section 3-Sub-Section (ii) of the Gazette of India by Ministry of Food and Consumer Affairs (Department of Consumer Affairs) and Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, the following corrections are made :
JS : 3148 IS: 3148
IS : 8776 IS : 8776
Kef: Column '& (Design of the Standard Mark)
S.O. 128 dated 21st December, 1995, No. 3 page 173 dated 20th January, 1996.
For
IS : 14268 IS : 14268
Read
IS: 3148
IS: 3148 Ref: Column 2 (Design of the Standard Mark)
IS • 5348
IS : 5348
S.O. 2723 dated 31st August, 1999, No. 39 pages 6101-6163 dated 25th September, 1999.
For
Read
IS : 5507
IS: 163
IS : 163
IS : 5507
IS : 12823
IS : 1146
IS : 1146
IS : 12823
IS: 13592
IS: 13592 IS: 14102
IS: 14102 JS: 14104
IS: 14104 IS: 3148
IS : 3148 IS: 4158
IS : 4158 IS: 5133
IS: 5133 Part-2
Part-2 18G" THE UAZE'lTE Oh INDIA : APRIL 2", Z001/V AtSAltHA 8, 1WZ3 [f ART H—SEC, i {njj.
Ref: Column 2 (Design of the Standard Mark!
Ref: Column 1 (Design of the Standard Mark>
IS : 5245
IS : 5245 Part-2
Part-2
IS :5470 IS : 5470
IS :6030 IS :6030
IS : 6946 IS : 6946
IS : 7084 IS • 7084
IS: 7173 IS: 7173
IS :7408 IS . 7408
Part-1
Part-1IS : 8255 IS :8255
HI
IS: 8471 IS :8471
Part-1
Part-1
IS : 9206 IS : 9206
IS: 9971 IS : 9971
I S: 10228 I S: 10228
IS : 10322 IS : 10322
Part-5
IS : 10532
I S: 10532 Part-5 part-3
IS : 10758
IS: 10758 Part-3
IS: 11340 IS: 11340 1867 Ref: Column 2 (Design of the Standard Mark) Ref: Column 2 (Design of the Standard Mark)
IS : 13209
IS: 13209 IS : 11688
IS: 11688
IS: 13779
IS: 13779
IS: 11879
IS: 11879
IS: 11884
IS: 13954
IS: 11884
IS: 13954
IS : 13983
IS : 12088
IS :12088
IS: 13983
IS: 14101
IS: 14101 IS : 12299
IS :12299
IS: 14102
IS : 14102 IS : 12776
IS : 12776
IS : 12912
IS: 14103
IS: 14103
IS: 12912
IS: 12916
IS: 14104
IS: 14104
IS: 12916H
1868 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : APRIL 28, 2001/VAISAKHA 8, 1923 [PARI II—SEC. 3 (ii)]
Ref: Column 2 f Design of the Standard MarlO
IS 14105
IS: 14015 IS . 1415|
IS: 14151 Part-1
Part-1
IS: 14151 IS- 14151
Part-2 Part-2
SO 2205 dated 15th September, 2000, No 41 pages 6563 dated 7th October, 2000.
For
IS : 1238 IS : 1238
IS : 2712 IS : 2712
IS : 3099 IS : 3099
Rqf : Column 2 (Design of the Standard. IHnrJO IS : 5348
IS : 5348 IS : 11188
IS ; 11188 Part-1
-Part-1 IS : 11928
IS • 11028
P d i i -I Parl-1
IS . 12823 IS : 12823
IS M592 IS • 13592
03 SO 128 dated 21st Deeembei, 1905. Nc 3 page 173 dated 30th January, 1996
Ref SI No 2, Column 4 (No and yen ot the Indian Standaid)
LsiL Raid
Part-1 Part-1
IS I55M8 1681 IS 5348-1^)81
[No CMD-1M3 9| Dr SNEH BHATLA. Dnector (Central Marks) MINISTRY OF LABOUR
New Delhi, the 30th March, 2001 S. O. 871.—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, Goa as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bank of Maharashtra and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 29-3-01.
[No. L-12012/16/99-IR (B-II)] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
TN THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL GOVERNMENT OF GOA
AT PANAJI
(BEFORE SHRI AJIT. J. AGNI, HON'BLE PRESIDING OFFICER)
Ref. No. IT/82/99 Shri Sham Kamalkar Kocharekat, Rep. by The General Secertary, Bank of Maharashtra Employees Union, Kholapur. Workman/Party I v/s
The General Manager (Personnel), Bank of Maharashtra., Central Office, 1501 Lokmangal Shivaji Nagar, Pune (Maharashtra)—411005 .. Employer/Party II Workman/Party I—Represented by Shri Subhas Naik. Employer/Party II-Represented by Adv. S}]ri P. J.
Kamat.
"MHH5J;" AWARD
In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub section 2 (A) of section 10 of the Industrial Dispurtcs Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government by order dated 28-05-1999 bearing No. L-12012/16/99/IR(B-TT) referred the following dispute for adjudication by this Tribunal.
"Whether the actiqn of the Assistant Gen. Manager, Bank of Maharashtra, Pune in reducing the increment to lower stage in time scale by two increments with cumulative effect and compulsorily retiring Sh. Sham Kamalakar, Kocharekar, Clerk of Bank of Maharashtra, Regional Office, Ratnagiri from 11-1-1997 is legal and justified.
If not to what relief the workman is entitled for ?" the .case of M. P. State Road ^rattuport Corpo- ration v/s Industrial Ccrart, M. P. Indore reported in 1996 I CLR 291. Shri Subhas Naik representing the workman submitted on the other band that since the conciHiaiion (proceedings -were hold at Vasco- dtt'Gama, .Goa, byihe Asst. labour CommiesiQiier, (Central) the reference made to this Tribunal is maintainable .and hence this Tribunal has juris- diction to decide the reference. He submitted •that it is within the right of the ^Central Government to refer the dispute to the T'ndustrtal Tribunal in any State.
, fewang to him increased the punishment and imposed the punishemnt of reduction A6 lower stage in time scale by two increments with cumulative effect in (Cespect of charge no. 1 and 4; and oampulNoryirctirc- •rnontjn respect of charge nos. 2 and 3 antf stated that .all the dbove (punishments shall h"vc concurrent jiffect, TJiat tthe 'workman raised the dispute before Iht Canoiiliation 'Officer and Asst. Labour Com- missioner, 'Go-vt. of-India, Vasc©-dtt"Gaina, iGoa and the employer. That the concilliation proceedings ended in failure, and consequently dipsute was referred to this Tribunal for adjudication. The workman contended that the punishment imposed on "him is illegal, unjustified and discreminatory.
3. As mentioned earlier, though duly served with *he notice, the employer did not -participate in the proceedings and hence the case iwas proceeded ex- parte against the employer and subsequently cx-parte evidence of the workman was recorded, and Hhe case was fixed for ihearing *fina! arguments. At (thie stage. Adv^ Shri P. J, Kamat appeared on behalf c*f *hc tomploycr and •submitted that •lie wants to 'make submissions on behalf of the iemployer on the-point of maintainability of thcTeferance as the evidence produced by the workman himself shows that the reference is not maintainable. Accordingly arguments ion (the point of maintamabilrty of -the tfeference were heard from both line parties.
5. T have carefully .coBsidored the rival contentions of the parties. The point raised by the employer goes -to the "very root of the matter. The present reference lias .been made by the Central Government to this Tribunal by order dated 28-5-99. The order of reference states that the said reference is made under clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub- section 2A oF Section t© >of the Industrial ©ispute s Act, 1947. The third proviso to*clause -+"nrpowors the Central Government to icfer the ,da&pute ito 1he Industrial Tribunal constituted by the State Government for adjudication. However, the question is whether such & reference caivibe madciD Andtan Cable >Co. iLtd , v/t, its Workmen fepoirtod nn 1962 ILLJ >409; (2) l^ipton iiimited and another v/s Their .employees jopoo-ted -in ifiSO-fi^SiCUVol.a.jpg. 389; and .(3) Wockmcn !of Shri Kanga Vilas Motors (,P) Ltd., and .others v/" Shri- Rauga Vilas Moters ,(P) -Ltd., and others ;rq*"(sed in W5&-77 SCLJ Vol. 4 pg. 2301; and ,the tuigeme-nt of'the Madhya Pradesh High Court .in 1871 }872 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : APRIL 28, 2001/VAISAKHA 8, 1923 [PART II—Spc. 3(ii)]
New Delhi, the 3rd April, 2001
S.O. 872.—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, No. J, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation ro the management of M/S TISCO Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 30-3-2001.
[No. L-2OO12/59/96-IR(C-3)]
S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1, DHANBAD
In the matter of a reference under section 10(l)(d)(2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
Reference No. 83 of 1997.
Parties : Employers in relation to the management of
Jamadoba Colliery of M/S. TISCO.
AND
Their Workmen.
Present : Shri Sarju Prasad.
Presiding Officer.
ceedings were held by the Asst Labour Commissioner (Central) Vasco, that by itself will not confer jurisdiction on tuis Tribunal, Sec, 4 of the Indus- trial Disputes Act, 1947 provides for appointment of Conciliation Officer by the appropriate Govern- ment for the purpose of mediating and promoting the settlement of Indusrtja! disputes. Clause 2 of the said section states that (he appointment of the conciliation officer may be for a specified area or for specified industries in a specified area or for one or more specified industries and either permanently or for a limited period. Thus, if is within the discretion of the appropriate Government to confer jurisdiction on the conciliation officers over such area as it may deem fit In the present case since the ConciJi a+ion proceedings were held by the conciliation officer namely the Asst Labour Commissioner (Centra! i Vasco-de-Gamaf the only reasonable inference which can be drawn is that the Centra' Government had conferred powers on the Asst. Labour Commissi oner (Central,) at Vasco, Goa, to hold conciliation proceedings in respect of the disputes arising in some parts of Maharashtra including the Ratnagiri Region. In other words, the Asst. Labour Commissioner (Centra!) Vasco- da-Gama, Goa, was appointed as the Conciliation Officer also for the Ratnagiri Region, and therefore he held the conciliation proceedings with reference to the dispute in the present case. In. the light of what is ditcussed above. I am of the view that since no cause of action or the subject matter of the dispute or any part of it has arisen within the territory of Goa, (his Tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide the reference and consequently the reference of the dispute made by tno Central Government to this Tribunal is not maintainable and the same is liabb to be rejected. T, therefore hold so accordingly.
Appearances:
For the Employers : Shri B. Joshi, Advocate. In the circumstances, I pass the following order.
For the Workman : Shri C. Prasad, Advocate & ORDER
General Secretary, R.M.U.
State : Jharkhand. Industry ; CoaL
Dated , the 16th March, 2001.
It is hereby held that the reference made by the Contra! Government is not maintainable and hence the same is rejected.
AWARD
No order as to cost. Inform the Central
Government accordingly.
AJIT J. AGNI, Presiding Officer
By Order No. L-2OOl2/59/96-IR(C-l) dated 3-4-97 the Centra! Government in the Ministry of Labour has in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2A) ofSection 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal;
"Whether the action of the management in denial to provide employment to the dependent, Shri Manoj Kumar S/o Sri Ganesh Singh is j ustified? If not, to what relief is the concerned workman entitled /" 1873
is not entitled to immediate employment. However the management has admitted that his name has been registered by the concerned workman, Ganesh Singh and he will be given employment in due course of time in case of any vacancy js availably that j'so according to seniority !>st regarding employment to dependent In the result the management has prayed to give an award that the concerned workman t is not ent'tfed to any relief.
2. The present dispute has been raided by Rashtriya Mazdoor Union. The brief facts; giving rise to this dispute is that Ganesh Singh was a per- manent employee of M/s. TISCO Ltd. posted as M'nor/ Loader at 6 & 7 Pits colliery of the company. He was appointed on 4-7-77 and was discharged from his service on account of medical unfitness with effect from 25-7-94 on completion of 17 years of service. According to the sponsoring union as per Mines Act under Mines Rules, 1955 the concerned work- man, Ganesh Singh was examined under periodical medical examination on 28-6-89. As per the provision of Mines Rules, 1955 a miner/loader was required to bo periodically examined on completion of evciy five years, The concerned workman was aga'ii. directed to appear on 13-7-94 before the Medica Board at Tata Central Hospital^ Jamadoba through letter dated 29-6-94/1-7-94. Accordingly he appeared before the Medical Board and was found medically unfit for the original job and accordingly the con- cerned workman was discharged from his service with effect from 25-7-94 on medical ground. The concerned workman, Ganesh Singh demanded employment of his dependent son, Manoj Kumar Although the concerned workman was examined on ' due date i.e. after five years from his previous periodi- cal medical examination on 28-6-89 he has not been given the benefits of unfitness and he should have been allowed employment to his dependent son Accor- Jing to the sponsoring union, the concerned workman, Ganesh Singh was suffering from Lungs disease and was admitted in Tala Central Hospital, Jamadoba on from 22-11-93 and continued his treatment but the management did not send the concerned workman to the Medical Board at that time, rather bo was sent to Medical Board on 13-7-94 just after completion of five yean Therefore, according to Clause 9:4:3 of NCWA-IV the dependent son of Ganesh Singh is entitled fbr employment, but the management did not implement the said direction. Thus, the union has claimed employment of Manoj Kumar Singh son of Ganesh Singh on the aforesaid ground.
4, It is admitted that Gaaesh Singh, father oi" Manoj Kumar, was a minor/loader appointed on 4-7-77 and was discharged from h's service on account of medical unfitness with effect from 25-7-94 i. e, on completion of seventeen years of service under the company It >s a'so admitted that the concerned workman was sent for periodical medical examination on 29-6-89 and therefore as per Minos Rules he was due to be referred for periodical medical examination after 28-6-94- It is admitted that the management has directed the concerned workman to appear before Jhe MedicaJ Board on '3-7-94 when he appeared and was found medically unfit. It is admitted that in NCWA-IV there is the foot-note to Clause 9:4;3 which is a provision renting to employment of dependent in case of mcd'cal unfitness or otherwise with respect to TISCO. According to that fo6t-note the rules regarding dependent employment will be applicable in case of TISCO. But subsequently NCWA-V has come into force from 1-7-91 to 30-6-96, an extract of that NCWA lias been filed by the management as Ext.M-1. In NCWA-V in Clause 9:3:0 there is provision of employment of dependent and Clause 9:3:1 provides for one dependent of workers to be employed who are disabled permanently and also those who die while in service In the foot-note to this NCWA-V it has been mentioned that in the case of TISCO, the matter would be settled at Bi- partite level. But in the foot-note of NCWA-IV i t has been mentioned that in regard to employment to dependent of TISCO will follow their existing practice. Thus, what was the provision in NCWA- IV regarding dependent employment in case of TISCO has been left to be settled by Bi-partite agreement. The management has not filed any Bi-partite agree- ment regarding dependent employment after coming into force of NCWA-V. The foot-note of NCWA-V just above Cause 9:6:0 it has been mentioned that this would supersede all past agreements, circulars and instructions issued on the subject in so far as issues are covered by the provision here'nabove. That means after com'ng info force of NCWA-V any agreement or award contrary to NCWA-V re- garding social seniority in Chapter [X has been super-i seded The TISCO has not filed any Bi-partitc agreement after coming into force NCWA-V They have filed a letter of Joint General Secretary of R.C.M.S, which is recognised trade union in TISCO 3. The management has admitted that Gancsh Singh was appointed as miner/loader on 4-7-77 and he was discharged from service on account of medical unfitness with effect from 25-7-94. But according to the management, the provision of NCWA-IV is not applicable in case of employment of dependent in TISCO Ltd. and in its place ru'e for providing employ- ment to the dependent has framed by TISCO Ltd, is applicable and even the recognised union has agreed to follow the rule regarding employment of dependent framed by TISCO then to follow the provision of NCWA. According to the management, similar such dispute has already been decided m favour of the management and therefore tlic dependent of Ganesh Singh, namely, his son Manoj Kumar Singh isU TkE GAZETTE OF INTtfA : APRfL 28, 2001/VAISAKHA 8, 1923 [PART it—SEC. 3(ii)j
Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, No.-l, Dhanbad as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers iu relation to the management of M/s BCC Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 30-3-2001.
[No. L-20012/353/91-IR(C-l)]
S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 1 AT DHANBAD
PRESENT :
Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer
In the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section 10(1)(d) of the I.D. Act, 1947.
REFERENCE NO.' 8 OF 1993
PARTIES : Employers in relation to the manage- ment of Khas Kusunda Colliery of M/s. BCCL and their workmen.
APPEARANCES :
is dated 7-2-81 with regard to implementation of NCWA-FI. Thus, the said Jetler of R CM S, is not a Bi-partite agreement after coming into force of NCWA-V. Since NCWA-V supersedes previous agree- ment and provision of Chapter IX therefore unless there is any Bi-partite agreement the TISCO will also have to provide employment to the dependent of disabled workmen if the other conditions satisfy. Furthermore, the management's own witness MW-1 Vijay Pandcy who is Manager (Personnel) at Jamadoba of TISCO, has admitted in cross-exami- nation that there is seperate provision for a workman who is found unfit at periodical medical examination which is to be done after interval of every five years and if at the periodical medical examination a work- man is found unfit then the dependent must get employment under the company alongwith other money benefit. In the present case we find that the concerned workman has eJaimed that he was examined on 28-6-89 and he has been again examined after completion of five years on 13-7-94. It is admitted that as per Mines Rules the concerned workman was to be periodically examined to find out his medical fitness after completion of five years Thus, I find that the concerned workman, Ganesh Singh was found unfit when his periodical medical examination was due, therefore accordingly to the admission of MW-1 the dependent of Ganesh Singh was entitled for employ- ment besides other money benefits. Therefore, I find that the action of the management in not providing employment to Manoj Kumar Singh son of Ganesh Singh is not justified,
On behalf of the workmen : Shri Chandrika Prasad,
Advocate.
5, Accordingly, 1 render award—
On behalf of the employers : Shri B. Joshi, Advocate.
State : Jharkhand Industry : Coal
Dated, Dhanbad, the 19th March, 2001 That the action of the management in denial to provide employment to the dependent, Manoj Kumar, son of Ganesh Singh, is not justified and he is entitled for employment forthwith. The management is directed to provide him employment within 30 days from the date of publi cation of the ward.
SARJU PRASAD, Presiding Officer
AWARD
The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, in exer- cise of the powers conferred on them under Section 10(l))d) of the I. D. Act, 1947 has referred the fol- lowing dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/353/91-I.R. (CoaH), dated, the 17th December, 1992.
SCHEDULE
New Delhi, the 3rd April, 2001
"Whether the demand of National Coal Workers Congress for employment on the roll of Khas Kusunda Colliery of BCCL of Smt. Girija Kamin and 225 others (as per details annexed with annexure U-I) with full back wages is justi- fied ? If so to wliat relief the workmen are entitled ?"
S.O. 873.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Centr.il J ^ L l A M t e r i ^ ^ ^ ^ E T^ • [ • • II ii • • i" i •• " i -i i i ii MI t- r -r " i' If " H f if •• • \ -T
T i ii _i L i - : . . U . - L. , . -
' 2, Ttte present industrial dispute has been raised -by National Coal Workers Congress for employment •of Smt. Girija Kamin and 225 others for employment on the roll of Khas Kusuoda Colliery or M/&. BCCL with full back wages.
3. According to the sponsoring union Girija Kamm and 225 others whose names finds place in the annexure to the reference order were working as casual wagon loader at Khas Kusunda Colliery from the year 1976 to 1983 besides doing misc. jobs. According to them a list was prepared for regulari- sation of Girija Kamm and 225 others under the signature of the officers of the management but the management did not regularise them on the roll of Khas Kusunda Colliery. Then the sponsoring union has raised the present dispute.
4. The management has denied to have engaged the concerned persons as casual wagon loaders bet- ween the period 1976 to 1983. They have denied that the concerned persons have been ever engaged either on prohibited category .of job or non prohibited category of job. However, they have admitted that by notification of the Central Govt. engagement of contract. Labour has been prohibited in the job of loading and unloading of coal by notification of February, 1975. Thus according to the manage- ment there is no relationship of employer and emp- loyee between the concerned persons and the manage- ment -of Kankanee Colliery, therefore the present dis- pute is bad ialaw and the concerned persons are not crrtitled.io .any relief. The management has further stated that idwing the period 1973 to 1976 the supply of railway wagon was irratic and sometimes railway !was not in a position to supply any wagon and some- times they used to supply excess wagons and to get thai wonk loading work was being done by engaging extra labour who were separately enrolled as casual wagon loader but the concerned persons name does not find place either in the roll of permanent wagon loader or casual wagon loader. Therefore, according to them the concerned persons are not entitled to any relief.
5. In order to come to just conclusion let us first of all Bee whether the sponsoring union has been able to -prove thil the -concerned persons were ever emp- loyed as wagon loader at Khas Kusunda Colliery between the year 1976 to 1983.
which has been marked Ext. W-l. Similarly 3 other leave slips under the same signature are Ext. W-l/1 to W-l/3 granting leave to Mangal Yadav, Shanti Bai and Maharand Jha. He has again proved 12 leave slips under the signature of RX.P. Singh, P.M. of the colliery which have been marked Ext. W-l to W-l/15. Again six leave slips have been filed by him under the signature of Asstt. Manager which have been marked Ext. W-l/16 to W-l/22 and another leave slip Ext. W-l/22 under the signature of Subrata Pal, Asstt. Manager. These .leave slips go to show that the concerned persons were granted leave by the officials of the colliery on different times althoogh the management has suggested that these documents are forged document but the management has not examined any of the signatories of these leave slips to show that the same are forged and fabricated one. Further this witness has proved overtime slips Ext. W-2 to W-C/7 to show that the concerned persons have been issued slips to do overtime work. He has come to say that the concerned persons have worked as casual wagon loader. Again this witness has proved demand of the sponsoring union Ext. W-3 and a list of workmen prepared by the management under the signature of Nagendra Jha, Attendance Clerk, Krishnandan Singh, Att. Clerk, Ash Mohammad Bhatta, Incharge and Daljit Singh, Asstt. Colliery Manager and also signed by B. R. Tripathi, the Manager of the colliery which has been marked Ext. W-4. It has been pleaded by the sponsoring union that a list of casual wagon loader was prepared by the management under the signature of officers of the management and this is the said list which has also been enclosed as annexure to the reference order. Although this witness has come to say that this list contains signature of Asstt. Manager and Manager of the colliery besides the attendance clerk, the management has not examined any of them as wit- ness to refute the assertion of the sponsoring union. Therefore, from Ext. W-4 it appears tha| the manage- ment has prepared a list of casual wagon loader in which the names of the concerned persons .find place. Again this witness has filed and proved phot© copies of wage sheets of the concerned persons in 13 pages which has been marked Ext. W-8 and the sigimture ofSuraksha Singh, Bill Clerk, Chimanlal Majhi, Accountant and R. C. Sharma, Superintendent of Mines. This Ext. W-8 also proves that the concer- ned persons were paid wages and their Provident Fund was also deducted. Neither of the persons who is alleged to have put signature has been exa- mined by the management to deny such wagesheets.
6. In order to prove that the concerned persons have worked as casual wagon loader at Khas Kusunda Colliery the sponsoring union has examined WW-1 K: :D. Yad&v who was working as Medical Clerk at Khas Kusunda Colliery and is also the branch Presi- dent of the sponsoring union who has proved leave n&P jtlating to the concerned work women under "the signature of H. K. Jha, Manager of the colliery
7. W-2 Mahendra Pratap Singh is one of the concerned workmen who has said that he along with other concerned persons have worked in the job of wagon loading, truck loading and removal of ash WW* jMf; UAZittTfE OF INDIA I 'AFKIL 28, 2WI/VAT5AJEH$.%.$VIW T T " ' l ^ * i j ^ ir^ ) | t >]
and it appears that they are working from 1975 to 1988. Thereafter the management has also filed wageshects in 13 pages to show that the concerned persons have been paid wages for wagon loading and truck loading. They have also filed leave slips to show that they have been granted leave by the management and thus they were working directly under the control of the management of Khas Kusunda Colliery of M/s. BCCL. Therefore, I find that the sponsoring union has been able to prove that the concerned persons have been Working as causual wagon loader from the year 1976 to 1883. Therefore, the relationship of employer and employee has been established. The concerned persons are the workmen of the management of M/s. BCCL's Khas Kusnda Colliery who are doing the prohibited category of job in which engagement of contractor has been prohi- bited by issue of notification by the Central Govt. in the month of February, 1975. Therefore, applyi ng the ratio of Air Tndia Statutory Corporation versus United Labour Union's case decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 1997 Lab I.C. Page 365 the concerned persons are entitled for regularisation as permanent employee of M/s, BCCL. But we all know that at present financial condition of BCCL is very bad and BCCL is running in loss, therefore no order to back wages has to be made.
In the result, the following Award is rendered :
"The demand of the National Coal Workers Congress for employment of Girija Kamin and 225 others as per list contained in the reference order dt. 17-12-92 is justified. They are entitled, to wages of piece rated worker as admissible under NCWA. The management is directed to regula- rise the concerned workmen within 30 days from the date of publication of the Aaward failing which they shall be entitled to wages as per NCWA from the date of publication of the Award."
SARIU PRASAD, Presidng Officer
New Delhi, the 3rd April, 2UU1 from the Bhatta, and their attcnatice was more than 240 days in a year. He has said that they were being paid wages in the cash counter of the colliery although he has admitted that they were not given any appoint' ment letter or any paper to show appointment but the present dispute is only because the management has not given them any appointment letter or have enrolled them as permanent employee of M/s. BCCL. WW-3 Ash Mohammed was working as Bhatta Incharge at Khas Kusunda Colliery and he has admitted that he has forwarded leave application aft
S. O. 874.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central 1877 Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, New Delhi as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute bctwten the employers in relation to the management cf NF.PC Airlines Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 30-3-2001.
[No. L-11012/25/96-IR(C-l)]
S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.
Steel Authority of India Limited as a Pilot. He was also engaged in V.I.P. Flights for the last 18 years. He had also participated in the major armed conflicts across the borders during his career such as 1961 Goa operations 1962 Indo- Chinese conflict, 1965 and 1971 Indo Pak Wars. He was also awarded Vir Chakra and Vavu Sena Medal for his meritorious service with these service backgrounds he had joined services under the Management and had worked honestly and with all sincerety and devotion. His last .drawn pay was Rs. 32000/-.
ANNEXURE BEFORE SHRI K. S. SRIVASTAV : PRESIDING OFFICER : CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL
TRIBUNAL : NEW DELHI
T.D. No 124'97
In the matter of dispute between :
Shri Kirpal Singh, D-52, Jal Vahyu Vihar, Sector-21, NOIDA-201301
4. Workman has assailed order of his dismissal on the ground firstly that it was passed without giving any show cause notice or issuing charge sheet or holding departmental enquiry against him. Secondly that he was not paid a notice pay at the time of his dismissal. He was not even paid his earned wages for the month of August, 1994. He was only paid his salary upto 31-7-94.
Versus
The -Vice President, NEPC Airiiens Ltd., C-39, Pawan House, Middle Circle, Connaught Place, New Delhi-1.
APPEARANCES : None for the workman.
Shri Rajesh Kumar for the Management.
AWARD
5. He has further stated that according to his super-anmiation age he was to retire at the age of 60 in the month of August, 1995 and thus he was entitled for his reinstatement in service till the date of his said retirement date. Demand notice dated 18-1-95 through registered post as well as throuh U.P.Cl was sent to the Management and it was acknowledged accordingly but the Management did not give any heed to the workman request for his reinstatement with continuity in service and full back wages till the date of his retirement.
This is reference under section 10(l)fd) I-(A) of I. D. Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as Act) referred by the Central Government in the Ministry of Labour vide its Order No. 11012/25/96-IR (C-T) dated 13 August, 1997 for the adjudication of the industrial dispute on the following terms :
"Whether the demand of Capt. Kirpal Singh that his services he reinstated by the mana^'incit of N.E.P.C. Airlines Ltd. in legal and justified? If so, to what relief is the workman entitled?"
6. The Management has contested the work- man's claim. At the beginning in the written statement it has raised a preliminary objection about the incumpetency of the reference and it is stated that on the own showing of the workman he was to retire on his superannuation in the month of August, 1995 at the age of 60 years and thus according to the guidelines issued by D.G.C.A. no permit to a Commercial Pilot to serve beyond the age of 60 years should be given. Hence the workman's demand for ms reinstatement is un- justified and reference which only relates to the question of reinstatement of the workman is bad and improper. It is also stated that this Tribunal or court cannot travel beyond the terms of reference.
2. According to the workman he was appointed as Captain/Pilot w.e.f. 7-6-1994 by N.E.P.C. Airlines (hereinafter referred to as Management) and he was thereafter dismissed from service vide letter dated 27-8-1994 from the Management.
7. It is next stated that the workman was not the workman within the meaning of section 2(s) of the A^ and the reference on this ground cannot be held legal.
8. On facts it is stated that alongwith the workman several oth?r candidates were interviewed in the month of June, 1994 for appointment as 3. He has stated that he was having a flying experience of more than 40 years and holding Airlines Transport Pilot Licence of over 9500 hours of flying to his credit. Prior to joining the service under the Management he was employed inthsTndian Air Force and he had served there for 23 years and thereafter he had served 16 years in 1117 GI/2001—5 Un THE GAZETTE, OF INDIA : APRIL 28, .2001/VAISAltHA 8, 1923 [FAXT l ^ - S ea 3(U)J Commercial Pilot and then it was told to all the candidates including workman that they would be required to fly particular type of Aircraft such as King Air C-90 and they were asked to have a current licence in their favour issued by the competent authority. The workman had then assured the management for his handing King Air C-90 in an efficient manner and had also ensured to the management that he was having current licence valid for the year 1994, on these assertions of the workman he was then selected for his appointment by the management.
9. It is further stated that the workman had reported on duty on 8-6-94 at Madras to attend the Frying Test and when he was asked to fly Jong Aircraft from Madras to Delhi he refused to fly Air jCraft pleading that the whether was not favourable When in fact another Pilot was Asked to take Aircraft to Delhi on the same day which was done by him Again on inspection of the licence of the workman it was found that his licence was not current and the last endorsement which it bore was of 1-11-89 and the licence was not renewed thereafter. It was also found that in the lieence held by the Workman there was no endorsement for handling King Aircraft C-90 flight. Workman had given assurance that he would undergo training at h's own expenses to make himselffitforthejoband to geijiis licence renewed. It was then agrebd that since workman was not able to spare a huge sum of money required for training management had prepared to incure all the expenses on training which was to be re- imbursed by the workman in instalment or could be adjusted against his future salary and >n view of these arrangements letter dated 11-8-94 was issued to the worker. The workman was offered several chances after 10-8-94 to fly King Air Craft C-90 but he refused to fly Aircraft on one pretext and tlie other and the management has lost confi- dence in him. It is further stated that the workman v>as also found handling with the parts of the air- craft which directly endangered Ihc safety of the aircraft and on these circumstances flying services of the workman could not be utilised by the management He was dismissed on 27-8-94, A letter datsd 15-10-94 was sent by the management to the Director General Civil Aviation New Delhi about the facts of the dismissal of the workman. There is DO illegaljty in the order of dismissal passed agarfflst the workman,
10. In the rejoinder filed by the workman he has reiterated his alk-gations made 'n the statement of claim.
11. VJdfc order dated 6-6-2000 direction for ptotisedios expafte against the workman was siwtt wh*jrlie tad ftated to app#n in the case 12. Arguments oH behalf of the maoftgefflent was heard.
13. After having considered entire facts and circumstances of the case I find that petitioner's claim for his reinstatement in service cannot be accepted since serious lacunae in the terms of reference is found,
14. it is common case of the parties that the workman was dismissed from the service vide letter dated 27-8-94 of the Management, In the statement of claim workman had alleged about the illegality of his dismissal.
15. Terms of reference do not .contain the question of the otder of dismissal of the workman. It only speaks about the justification of the demand of the workman for his reinstatement in service. So long the order of dismissal continues and is not set aside or find workman cannot get his re- instatement in the service.
16. According to setcion 10(4) of the Act I 8nd this Tribunal has no right to travel beyond the terms of reference. True it is that incidental matters can be considered but in my view in the present case question of the validity or invalidity of the order of dismissal of the workman cannot be considered to b= an incidental matter. Thus I find that the terms of reference should be answered in negative and against the workman. The award in the case is given accordingly.
DATED : 28-3-200U
K. S. SRIVASTAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 3rd April, 2001
S.O. 875,.—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 No. 1, Dhanbad as shown in the Annefcore in the Industrial Dispute between the employers iit relation to the lOTT management of M/s. BCC Ltd. and thuir workman, which was received by the Central Government on 30-3-2001.
[No. L-20012/214/93-IR (C-I)] S. S. GUPTA, Under Secy.
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL (NO. 1) AT DHANBAD
PRESENT
Shri Sarju Prasad, Presiding Officer
Jin the matter of an Industrial Dispute under Section
10 (l)(d)ofthcl. D. Act, 1947
REFRENCE NO. 209 OF 1994
Parties :
Employers in relation to the management of ^oyabad Colliery of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and their workmen.
APPEARANCES :
On behalf of the workmen : Shri B. N. Singh, Addl. Gen. Secretary, & Ex-Secretary, National Coal Workers Congress.
On behalf of the employers : Shr; H*. Nath Advocate. State : Jharkhand Industry : Coal Dhanbad, the 15th March, 2001
AWARD
The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, in exorcise of the powers conferred on them Under Section 10(lXd) of tbe I. D. Act., 1947 has roforred the fol. lowing dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication vide their Order No. L-20012/2H/93-I.R. (Coal-I), dated the 12th August, 1994.
SCHEDULE
"Whether the action of the management of Loyabad Colliery of M/s. BCCL, P.O. Bansjora, Distt. Dhanbad in denying regularisation of the services of S/Sh. Uday Nand Jha and 46 others stone cutters (as per list annexed) is justified 7 If not, to what relief are the concerned workmen entitled?" .
of job but after the demands were made the manage- ment illegally stopped them from work against which there was agitation and there was discussion between the management and the union and as per record notes of discussion dt. 9-6-82 the management agreed that instruction would be given for formation of workers cooperative as done in case of Balihari Colliery to solve their problem and work ba allotted to thorn through cooperative. But the management inspite of that did not implement that record notes of discussion then a hunger strike notice was given to the management. Then the management again discussed the issue in the office of the G.M. p: 10-3-1983 with the union and as per the minutes o discussion, the G.M. agreed to submit details to management for taking necessary action within; 3 days and then the notice of hunger strike was with- drawn. Thereafter cooperative society was formed by the workers which intimated to the Agent of Mudidih Colliery by the Dy. P.M., Sijua Area vide letter dt. 24-9-83 and the conoerned persons were allotted work for driving of drift in Mudidih Colliery. Thereafter, the concerned workmen were getting work regularly from Mudidih Colliery to Loyabad Colliery interrupted by short intervals and they were continuously doing the work of stone cutting, coal cutting and Tyndal from 1984 to May, 1&88. They were also given the w*rk of coal cutting to do by hand picks from February, 1988 to May, 1931 In the meantime there was settlement to regularise all the cooperative workers m phased manner and 15 cooperative workers were regularised by the manage- ment but rest of them were not regularised jaspito of several demand by the union. Thereafter the union raised an industrial dispute by its representation dt. 21/28-1-91. There was long drawn conciliation in the dispute and on 27-4-91 in the Sijua Guest Houso the management proposed that in the event the union closed the dispute the management would considc the issue of joining of duties of the concerned workmen ponding consideration of their regularisation. As per that the union closed the dispute as per file settlement but the management neither provided thfc concerned person work nor regularised them an per the file settlement and therefore the union again made repre- sentation to the ALC(C) for reopening the dispute which ended in failure resulting reference to this Tribunal. The claim of the sponsoring union is for rogulari satton of the concerned persons as permanent employes of the management of Loyabad Colliery of M/s. BCCL.
3. The management has filed W.S.-
2. _The present dispute has been sponsored by the National Coat Workers Congress fojr regularisation of Uday Narayan Jha and 46 others whose names find place in the list annexed to the reference order wore engaged through contractor for doing job of stone cutters, coal cutter, Tyndal etc. as per the requirement and they worked as such in Kankancc Colliery continuously for quite a.long time. In due course of time they demanded their regularisation on the permament roll of the management because of the nature of their employment in prohibited category F88B T pm OAZJtliE. w IWOm : / W K UL / ", i w v i / v w i m i WA o, ly^J irAKr I*-"-OBC.*,J>UUJ was given civil work like making stoppings Bick works, sand cleaning etc. for a period between Sept., 1987 to June, 1988 through proper work orders. The work allotted to Shri Udaya Narayan Jha was purely of temporary nature and after completion of the job no further work was allotted to Shri Jha. Thus according to the management the first person Shri Uday Narayan Jha is a contractor. However, accor- ding to them the work allotted to Uday Narayan Jha , was of small in nature which hardly requires engage- ment of 4 to 5 persons. According to them the list of concerned persons attached to the reference order contains names of only job seekers who want to get employment by back door method and they have never worked with the management of Loyabad Colliery and none of them have worked even for a period of 190 days upto May, 1988. The manage- ment has got its own policy of employment and to regularise the concerned persons will offend the provi- sion of the constitution as well as the rules and regu- lations made for employment of personnel in BCCL. Further according to the management the dispute has been raised at a belated stage and therefore the dispute has become stale and the concerned perbons are not entitled to any relief. *
4. From the pleadings of the parties the point for consideration is whether the concerned persons had worked at Loyabad Colliery in the job of stone cutter, coal cutter or in Tyndal work whicb are the prohi- bited category of job i.e. in those categories no contract can be engaged ? If so, are the concerned persons entitled regularisation in the employment of the management ?
FINDINGS
was a contractor rather he has 3aid that he was also one of the worker. He has admitted that the ma nage- ment has not given them any appointment letter. WW-2 Minhaj Mian was working as Senior Overman at Loyabad Colliery from June, 1964 to September, 1993. He too has stated that the concerned persons have worked as cooperative workers and they were doing the work of stone cutter from 1985 to middle of 1988. He has further stated that 15 cooperative workers liave been regularised in service in the year 1985 and among them is Lakshman Rajak WW-1. He has further stated that the attendance of coop- erative workers were marked by the Attendance Clerk aDd Cap Lamp was also given to them. They were supplied with implements from the stone of the colliery: He has clearly stated that the concerned persons were doing the permanent job of stone cut- ting. Thus, WW-2 who was senior Overman at Loyabad Colliery has clearly supported that the con- cerned persons were working as cooperative workers. WW-3 Uday Narayan Jha lus also fully supported that they were working as cooperative workers and were doing the job of stone cutting. He has also produced a number of documents to support that they were working as stone cutter. Amongst docu- ments filed by the sponsoring union it is worth to mention that a few of the documents in order to arrive to a just conclusion. Ext. W-3 is the record notes of discussion dt. 9-6-82 from which it appears that the management has agreed to give to the contractors workers who have been rendered jobless work on formation of cooperative. Another record notes of discussion drawn on 10-3-83 Ext. W-14 goes to show that the General Manager of Sijua Area of BCCL agreed to allot work to the concerned persons through cooperative in-the light of the record notes of dis- cussion drawn between the Director (Personnel) M/s. BCCL and union after submission of paper relating lo the formation of cooperative and pursuant upon this assurance of the General Manager hunger strike was called off. Ext. W-15 is another important document which is letter dt. 29-9-83 by the Dy. Personnel Manager of Sijua Area to the Agent, Mudidih Colliery to give work of stone cutting to 66 contractors workers of Kankanee Colliery who were earlier engaged in the said work at Kankanee Colliery through Kankanee colliery labour coop- erative society and pursuant to that the workers of Kankanee Labour cooperative -society were allotted work of driving drift in Loyabad Colliery sometimes in the year 1985 which lasted till for sometime of the middle of 1988. Again record of notes of duscus- sion was drawn on 24-2-87 in the meeting of the management and the unjon which has been marked Ext. W-16 to consider the case of regularisation of workers engaged in drift cutting i.e. stone cutting in 5. The sponsoring union has examined in all three witnesses and have filed a number of documents to prove that the concerned persons have been wor- king as cooperative workers from the year 1984 to the Middle of 1988 in the job of stone cutter. WW-1 is Lakshman Rajak, a permanent employee of Loya- , bad colliery who has said that he knows all the con- cerned persons of this reference with whom he also used to work as contractor workers under contractor till 1983 and thereafter they were working under co- operative till 1985. This witness along with 15 others left the cooperative and sat on hunger strike. There- after an agreement was entered into with the manage- ment and the management regularised their services and agreed to regularise rest cooperative workers in phase manner 22 in each year but rest of the coop- erative workers were not regularised. AH of them worked upto June, 1988. He has further said that it was the management who was supplying equip- ments and materials for doing the job and the atten- dance was being marked by the Attendance Clerk of the colliery. Ho has denied that Uday Narayan Jba compliance to which list of 66 workmen was submit- ted to the management but only 15 were regularised. The management has filed request letter dt. 30-6-89 by Uday Narayan Jha one of the concerned workman and President of the- cooperative to G.M. of Sijua Area for non-payment of wages to the -concerned workmen and regarding Iheir stoppage of work. Similarly request was made to the G.M. by se\cul letters Ext. W-19, 20, 21, 22, 23. The sponsoring union tas n)s,o filed Ext. W-23 to show thjit they have raised industrial dispute which was closed due to settlement with the manage- ment that the management will consider giving employment to the concerned person;, and their regularisation. The management has hied a reply letter dt. .*0-9-91 by the Dy. t.P.M. of PB Area who has mentioned that he remembers that Shri R. K- Chaudhury, the then Dy. C.P.M. of Sijua Area has requested the union during the conci- liation on 27-4-91 to close the dispute raised by Ext. M-l, Ext. W-23, Ext. W-44 is letter dt. 14-9-92 of the then Dy. C.P.M. of the area to the then Dy. C.M-E- of Loyabad colliery in compliance to the decision taken during the discussion between the G.M. of the area and the union to provide work to them. The management has filed company's circular Ext. EW-5 dt. 8/9-5-86 from which it appears that the management was having vacancy for appointment as Mjner/Loadcr and it was decided to regularise the cooperative workers also who had completed 190 days work into tho underground mine^ Ext. W-6 is a letter dt.. 9-4-87 of the P.M. of the Area to the concerned workman Uday Nand Jha and Ext. W-8 is a letter dt. 14-4-88 by the Superintendent of Loyabad colliery to Udayanand Jha, President of the cooperative to produce relevant records and register. Ext. W-9 is a letter dt. 10-10-87 of Superintendent of Loyabad'colliery to the President of the Cooperative Society i.e. Udaynand Jha whereby he was intimated about the slow p r o g ^s in driving/cutting stone by cross-cut method via main galary in No. 5 Pit of No. 10 Scam of Loyabad and he was warned that if the work in question was not completed by 24-10-87 a strong action will be taken against the workman. This letter of the Superintendent of Layabad colliery proves beyond all doubt that the cooperative workers were engaged in the job of stone cutting in tho year 1987 at Loyabad colliery. Thus from the documentary evidence and Oral evidence it is crystal clear that the concerned persons were engaged in the job of stone cutting right from the year 1985" till the middle of 1988 which shows that the concerned persons were doing the job of permanent nature. The stone cutting job and drivage of stone drift has been declared to be a
prohibited category of jobby the Central Govt. by notification dt. 21-6-88 as prohibited for engage- ment of contractor for such work. On the other hand the management has taken a plea that Uday Narayan Jha was a contractor who was given sOmo civil nature of job from the month of September, 1987 to the middle of 1988 which were civil construction job of construction of ventilator stopping etc. by work order but the management has not filed any document or any work order to show that the management • has awarded contract work of civil nature only ; On the other hand the document which have been filed by the sponsoring union some of which arc the documents written by the management "it is clear that the concerned persons were engaged as cooperative workers from the year 1985 till Middle of 1988 for stone cutting job j.e. drivage of stone drift. The management lias examined three witnesses. MW-1 is Shri S. J. A. .Tafri, Senior P.O. working at Loyabad colliery from December, 1995. He has simply proved two copies of the letter given by the Union raising the industrial dispute which have been marked F.xt. M-l and M-l/1 and notice of ALC (C) is Ext. M-2. and photo copy of letter given by the management is Ext- M-3. He has clearly stated that he docs not know any details of the case and since he was not posted in that colliery between the year 1986 to 1988. Therefore he is not competent to say whother the concerned persons have worked in the job of stone cutting or not. MW-2 Ambika Prasad Goswami is a surveyor of Loyabad colliery who has said that the concerned persons have not worked year to year in any permanent job rather work was given to the contractor purely temporary in nature in which • maximum 5 to 10 workmen can bo employed. He has further stated that the payment to the contractor was made en the basis of measurement but no bill or measurement book has been filed by the management to show that Uday Narayan Jha was only given temporary contract work. MW-3 Nend Kishore Jha was Sr. P.O. from January, 1985 to March, 1988. He has stated that ho knows the concerted workman who was given contract work in the name of Shramik Sahayog Samiti for a very short period i.e. for one or two months. The contractor used to engage his workman and the management has nothing to do with such workman. Only S to 10 persons were required to be engage by the contractor but the management has not filed any paper to show engagement of contractor. The management has not been filed a registration of the establishment under Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act nor they have " . n QAmrrB
6. From the discussions made T find that the concerned persons were doing the job. of stone cutting through cooperative which was of permanent and perennial nature ajid therefore they are entitled to be regularised in the employ- ment of M/s. BCCL in Loyabad colliery but considering the financial condition of BCCL they shall not be entitled to any back wages.
7. In the result, I render the following Award "The action of the management of Loyabad Colliery of M/s. BCCL in not regularising the concerned persons as permanent employee is not justified. Consequently, they are entitled to be regularised as permanent employee of the BCCL in Loyabad colliery and are entitled to the wages as per NCWA without back wdges-. They are ordered to be regularised within 30 days from the date of publication of the Award failing which they shall be entitled to the wages as per NCWA from the date of publication of this Award."
SARJU PRASA.D, Presiding Officer T{ JrwfV, 9 wfar, 2001
"pr.OT. 876:—3ffaftfw forr^ ^rfa^wtr, 1947 (1947 VT 14) ift fflTT 17 % W^flTT ^', %^T New Delhi, the 9th Aprils 2001
S. O. 876.—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/Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of SECL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 3-4-2001.
[No. L-22012/23/93-IR (CTTI)J N. P. KESHVAN, Desk Officer ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR( MP). (PRESIDED BY SHRI K.M. RAD CASE NO. CGIT/LC/R/J 03/93
Shri Hircndra Kumar Singh & 4 others through SKM-S Workman Vs. Dy* General Manager, SECL Gevra Project ... .Management
AWARD
{Passed on this 19fh day of Feb. 2001) The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by order No. L-22O12/23/93-IR (C-lI^dfd. 18-5-93 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal,
"Whether the management of Gevra Project of SECL, BiJaspur is justified in nol regularising S/Shri Hirendra Kumar Singh, Ravindra Kumar Singh, B.P. Dubey, H.L. H&ldhar and Razak Khan as Auto Electricians in Gr. D (Group-Ill) w.e.f 10-3-90 instead oF regularizing them in Gr. E as done? If not, to what relief the workman concerned are entitled to?"
Parties to the dispute entered iqto written settle- merit praying for award in terms thereof. Accordingly the parties to the dispute having submitted an appb': cation dtd. 11-3*96 praying for passing ao dispute award as they have finally settled the matter out of the Court. Now no dispute exists between the parties. Hence no dispute award is passed.
Copy of the award be sent to the Govt. of India Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for publication according to Law.
K.M. RAI, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 9th April, 2001 S.O. 877.—In pursuance ;T Section 17 of th:- Industrial Dispute Act, ] 947 {14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court Jabalpur as shown in the Anncxure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of SECL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 3-4-2001.
[NJ. L-?r)i?./5:'9i-i:i-c-iT] N.P. KfiSHVAN, Desk Officer AN.NEXURE •
BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, J \ 3 A l . ? ' Jl (MP) (PRESIDED BY SHRI K.M. R\I) CASE No. CGIT/LC/R/129/91
The Secretary, RKKMS (TMTUC) Office 15, Block Qr. No. G-64. SECL, PO-Korba, B'laspur (Chhattisgarh)
1883 expired on 3-2-99 and no LR has filed application to substitute him as a party to his case within the pres •crjbed period of limitation. In this way, this dispute .abates.
3. On the above said reason no dispute between ths parties remeins to be adjudicated The reference is answered accordingly.
4, Copy of the award be sent to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for publication as jper rule.
K.M. RAI, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 9th April, 2001
S.O. 878,—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act,1947 (14 of J947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of WCL and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 3-4-2001.
[No. L-22O12/136/89/IR-CII]
. .. .Workman
Vs.
The Sub Area Manager, SECL, Manikpur Colliery PO : Manikpur, Dist. Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) Ma nagement
AWARD
(Passed on this 20th day of Februnry, ?00!) The Govt. of Tndia, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by Order No. L-22012/57/91-IR (Coal-JI) dtd. 2-7-91 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal—
"Whether the management of Manikpur Colliery justified.in recording the date of birth of. Shri DJ. Christopher, Shovel Operator as 25-12-31 ? If not, to what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?" 2. The management has informed this Tribunal by application dtd, 20-2-2001 that the workman
N.P. KESHVAN, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERiSTMENT IND- USTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT
JABALPUR
CASE NO: CGIT/LC/R/220/89 PRESIDING OFFICER ; SHRI KM. RAI Tjhe General Secretary, Khftdan Mawioor Saijgh Pathakbora
, ....Applicant Versus
The General Manager,
WCL, Pathakhcra . . .. Non-Applicant
AWARD
Passed on thi$ 1st day of March, 2001 1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide order No. L-22012/136/89-IR C II dated 26-10-89 has referred th* following disputeibr adjudicaton by this Tribunal— ' 1P84 THE^ GAZETTE Of INDIA : APRIL 28, 2001/VAISAKHA 8, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)1 "Whether the stoppage from work of Shri K,a*ibi Ran-,, S/o Devalaya, Telchand S/o Indal Punjab R:u> A/o Bhaiya and Shri Narayan S/o Bhadd General Mazdoor w.c.f. 15-1-87 by the management of Superintendent of Mines/manager Mine No. 2 WCL Pathakhcra is justified . Tf not what relief the work- man concerned are entitled?"
2. The c'ase for tlie workman Is that they were employed as General Maz'door on 11-3-84 in Patha- khcra mines No. 7 of WCL. They continuously worked in the said mine till 15-1-87. They were engaged for loading/unloading and transporting sand, bricks find stone etc. They were also digging ditches, helping is transporting of machines errecting electric poles and helping in repair works etc. Their work wjb oi permanent nature and was connected to the mining operation. Their attendance was marked in the attendance register by the attendance ,clerk of WCI. they were paid at the fate of Rs. 10.50 per day Inspite of their more than 4 years of regular sen ice, they were not regularised by the management. . .They were illegally retrenched in utter disregard of the provisions of Sec-25-F of ID Act 1947. Neither they weft- served with one month's notice nor they were paid retrenchment compensation by the management. The management adopted unfair labour practice in termimtinc fli.-ir services. In this way the termination of workman w.e.f. 15-1-87 deserves to be quashed . The workmen arc entitled to reinstatement with b.ick wag,;j and other monetary benefits.
3. The case for the management is that the work- men were never employed by the management of WCL Pathakhera mines No. 2. These workmen never worked in the employment of WCL a. all. There was no relationship of employer and employee between the parties. No order of appointment was i^ucd to the workmen by the management The management is not aware that which contractor had employed these workmen to perform temporary nature of job 'The contractors arc given the temporary civil nature of job by thdWCL and therefore no casual labour can claim to be regularised. The recruitment in WCL is done by the prescribed procedure. The name should be sponsored by the employment rxchange for recruiting the workmen. All these formalities were never performed in the instant case. These workmen were never employed by the WCL and therefore they are not entitled to any relief as claimed by them.
4. The following issues arise in this case—
1. Whether the workmen are entitled to rein- statement with back wages6
2. Relief and costs?
5. Issue No. 1 : The workmen have not produced appointment order issued by the management to show that they were employed as General Mazdoor in Mine No.,2 of WCL. Pathakhera . They have also not filed the copy of Form B register. Forra-C, D & E register to show that they were employed as General Mazdoor by the competent autholity of WCL. In the absence of th-se authentic d^umints, it cannot be accepted that the workmen were in the employ- ment of WCL.
6. Fnr the purpose of recruitment for the post of General Mazdoor in the coal industry, the recruit- ment policy has been laid down as per National Coa[ Wage Agreement executed from time to time between the representative of Union and the management. For the recniitmnt of General Mazdoor, the vacan- cies are notified with the local Employment Exchange and their names are sponsored through the same. Only eligible candidates can be sponsored by the Fmployment Exchange. The selection committee constituted by the Competent Authority selects the candidates for the appointment to the post of General Mazdoor. The selected candidates are issued the appointment order mentioning the terms and condi- rions for employment, In the instant case no such formalities had been ^aid to have been observed in employing the workmen. Any employment against the recruitment policy of rules is void ab-imtio.
,7. Shri Phoolchand and Ramdev have stated that the workmen were engaged for the work of loading, unloadinp, tranrportation of sand, bricks etc. digging ditches, erecting electric poles under the supervision of survey officer. The General Secretary of theJUnion Jayram Suryavanshi has stated that the workmen were working in civil department of WCL. They were being paid daily wages. The workmen have not been able to get the attendance register produced before this court to establish that their attendance was being marked in the survey office. In view of this- fact it cannot be accepted that they were actually working under the supervision of Survey Officer of WCL.
8. Shri Ganesh and Ramsinph were given contract for doing some field work by the management. As per the work order, They completed their work and submitted bill Exhibit M-l, M-2 & M-3.' The management made the payment as per bills and the contractors paid the wages of the workers employed by them for completing the work. This fact also goes to show that the workmen were never employed by the WCL as claimed by them.
9. In view of the foregoing reasons, it is amply established that the workmen have not been able to prove that they were appointed by the WCL in accor- dance with the recruitment policy/rules laid down in respect thereof. Any appointment in violation of these rules ia void-ab-initio and on the basis of sucli appointment no workmen can claim regularisation In this case, the relationship of employer-emplQyee between the parties have not been established. Hence they cannot claim any regularisation and back wages. Issue No. 1 is answered accordingly.
10. Tssiie No. 2: In vifrw of my finding given on issue no. 1 the workmen are not entitled to any relief as claimed by them. The reference is accordingly answered in favour of the management and against the workmen.
11. Copy of the award be sent to the Ministry )f Labour as per rules.
K.M. RAT, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 9th April, 2001 S.O 879.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Centra Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court], Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure in the 'Indtistria Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of WCL and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 3-4-2001.
[No. L-22012/J37/89/IR-C-II]
N.P. KESAWAN, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORL THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR
CASE NO. CGIT/LC/R/219/89
PRESIDING OFFICER: SHRI K.M. RAT The General Secretary, Khadan Mazdoor Sangh (A.ITUC), Pathakhera Applicant Versus
The General Manager, WCL, Pathakhera - . . .. Non-Appliant 1117 GI/2001—6
1885
AWARD
Passed on this 2nd day of March-2001.
1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide order No.L-22012/137/89/TRC. II has referred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal—
"Whether the stoppage from work of the following wormen w.e.f. 24-11-86 by the management of superintendent of Mines/Manager, Regional work- shop, WCL Pathakhera is justified? If not what relief the workmen concerned are entitled?" '
List of workmen
1. Gokul S/o Chhotelal 2. Shivaji S/o Cluidlya 3. Dayashankar S/o Sukhdevrao 4. Kishorilal S/o Saliyattu 5. Manohar S/o Kisan 6. Munnalal S/o Ballu 7. Laichand S/o Raju 8. Mdtji S/o Kohalu 9. Govind S/o Bajulal 10. Jagdish S/o Sitaram 11. Hamraj S/o Ganpat 12. Dhannu S/o Kanidev
2. The case for the workman is that they were employed as General Mazdoor on different dates. The oldest workman Shivaji was appointed in the year 1980 and the latest workmen Dhannu was appointed in January-86. All the workmen were employed in the regional workshop of WCL, Pathakhera, Distt. Betul. These workmen conti- nuously worked till 24-11-86 when their services were terminated without assigning any reason in respect thereof. PriGr to termination of their service, neither any notice nor the retrenchment compensation v as given to them by the management. These workmen were working along with other permanent workers of WCL for digging h6tes in errectjng electric pole and laying over head line. They performed their duties as per the direction of the officers of workshop 3. The workmen further alleged that their work was of a permanent nature and it was integral part of the mining operations. They were marked present regularly in the attendance register by the clerk of the regional workshop. They were paid Rs. 10 60 pe day. Tn this way they were in local employment of WCL. Inspite of their continuous service for more than 1-6 years they have not been regulansed by the management. They have been illegally terminated in clear violation of the legal provisions of I. D. Act, 1947 which amounts to unfair labour practice. They have been illegally retrenched without complying the provisionsof Sec-25-F of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. Tn view of all these facts, they deserve to be reinstated with back wages and other consequentia\ bnefits w.e.f. 24-11-86 wm fto GAZETTE 8, 19^3 (P{{^{{FOOTNOTE **}}}}^{{^{{FOOTNOTE ****}}}}^^)] 4. The case for the maf>afcmcnt is that the 12 workmen, as per list of this ense were never employed by the management of WCL, Putbakher?. Thc^-c (W"rkOTC,n , neithen performed thfrindudes in rcpional 'W5>rk(*liop flathaibcra noi they were controlled by the NSr/ Executive- eisvyj'neor of the workshop. The work- . men were r ot the employee of the management and therefore tl;ey cannot claim to be the members Of the JCjyiS Union. In view of this fact the said Union ., carniot file. their, claim before this > tribunal. No relationship of employer-employee exists between the parties. The manafement had engaged certain civil contractors for carrying civil nature of "^ob. It is not known to the management us toi\yhether these work- men were employed by the contractors or'iiol. The civil nature of job-is'piMy,teJV>p1 are the employees of the \WCL\Management. The workmen are not entitled to any relief as..claimed by them because no ielationjbl|iip of jmaster.and servant exists between the parties.
5. The following isues arises for this case :
' 1. Whether the workman • arc entitled > to re- instatement with baclc wages w.e.f.'4'MK'86. 2.' Relief und costs ?
6., Issue No. 1 :
8.' For the puiyose -of Teorttltinemt fiof the post of General >Maa2do"r in the c®al iffliustry, 'the-roaruit- ment pwlicy ha< been laid down as pef National Coal Wage Agreement executed from time to time between the representative of Union and the management. For thttLTCeruitment of General Mazdoor, the vacan- cies are notified with the local Employment Exchange and'their names are sponsored* through the same. Omy Wigible cartdittktes can' be sponsored by the Employment Exchange. The selection committee constituted by the Competent Authority selects the candidates for the appointment to the post of General Mazdoor. The selected candidates are issued the appointment order.motioning the terms and condi- tions for employment. In the instant case no such formalities hAd'boen7 said to have-been observed in emplnyj,"g>the workmen. ^Ajiy employment
9. The-workajen bavoiurotfceen atrfe tq produce Form B. register, $am Q.DV Eqipgiatars to prove.-t&at they were .really .appointed by. t3Jt"e."WCL. Thescare authentic documents .which can prove the employ- ment of any 'General' Mazdoor in the coal industry. Tn the absence of these authentic documents it can- not be held that any person was appointed as General \ fttaadoQF by the orai-oMer "of any Competent Autho- . rity. "Eh"[iTt*jTpBeniCDt lias filed the bills of the con- tractors vide Exhibit M - l, M-2, M-3 & M-4 which goes to show that som" of'the workmen, whose dis- pute lias been referred, were, employed by ttiej cont- ractors a"l.their w^agps- were, paid by> them,in bhe presence.of the representative o£,lbe managenient. As. per the. work x>rder* the paymeflt is made to the concerned contractor by the management "ndt,the contractor makes payment of wages, to,his workers whom, he engages-for. ctojflg, the-jwjfwctive work.
' 10/ Dayashatikar has not entered dhto- witness box nor,ha-* wwdOfftny cMm before this court. In such a circumstances, he can hardly claim adjudica- tion regarding the aHeged dispute between him and the management. He does not deserve any relief as claimed by him.
tm Eiiff'UAiatrri'ii up iNtHA : A m tL Z B . I Z U U J / V A I S A K M A U, IVZJ (TAST H — S E C . ' S WJ
,
The Secretary, RasbJriya Koyla KMidan Mazioor Sangh, Block No. 15, Qr. No. G-64, Post Korba Colliery, (For Satpal Singh, Dumper Operator)
. Union/Workman
Vs.
Sub Area Manager, SECL, Kusmunda Project,
.. Management Distt. Korba
AWARD
(Passed on this 19th day of February, 2001)"" The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by Order No. L-22012(258)/89-lR (Coal-TT) dated 8th Feb., 90 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal :
"Whether the action of the management of Kusmunda Colliery of M/s. SECL, Bilaspur in not promoting Shri Satpal Singh, Dumper Operator as Senior Dumper Operator Cat. A w.e.f. 26-11-86 when his juniors S/Shri Nand Lai and Mohd. Washim have been promoted is justi- fied ? If not, to what relief the workman con- cerned is entitled ?"
2. The workman did not appear in the Court of the date of hearing. The Union also did not repre- sent through any of his office bearers. It appears thpt they are not interested in pursuing the dispute.
New Delhi, the 9th April, 2001
S.O. 882.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Centra' Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jabalpur, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute' between the employers in relation to tho management of SECL and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 3-4-200).
[No. L-22012/303/94/IR-(CH)] N. P. KESAVAN, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL, TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR (M.P.)
(PRESIDED BY SHRI K. M. RAI) CASE NO. CGIT/LC/R/207/95
U. K. Dutta Workman
Vs.
SECL, Korba
3. From the statement of claim of the workman and the management it appears that the workman has been given promotion with effect from 16.5.87 the day he was Eligible for the same.
4- From the above mentioned facts cf the case it is absolutely clear that the workman had boen given promotion from the day he was entitled. In view of this fact, no dispute regarding the promotion of workman exists. He is not entitled to promotion w.e.f. 26-11-86 as claimed by him.
5. On the reasons stated above, the reference is answered in favour of the management and against the workman".
6. Copy of the award bo sent to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for publica- • tion according to law,
K. M..RAT, Presiding Officer
, Management
AWARD
. (Passed on this 20th day of February, 2001) The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by Order No. L 22012/303/94-IR (C-II) dated 7-12-95 has referred the following dispute for adjudi- cation to this Tribunal :
''Whetner the demand of SKMS Union to regularise Sh. U. K. Dutta, General Mazdoor, Cat. T as MTX Auto Section, SECL, Korba is justified ? If so, what relief is the workman ' entitled to ?
Whether the change in . the duty hours ordered by the management in the office of Dy. CSO, SECL, Korba is justified ? Tf not, what. relief are the workers entitled to ?"
2. The workman filed an application praying for dismissing his claim as he has been promoted by the management and the dispute in this respect has been finally settled. The application of the workman goes to show that he has received the promotion which was due to him. In this way now no dispute in this connection exists between the parties.
3. In view of the fact it is held that the workman ias been properly promoted by the management, No dispute in this regard remains to be adjudicated by this Tribunal. The reference answered accordingly.
4. Copy of the award be sent to the Govt- of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for publica- tion accordingly to law.
K. M. RAJ, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 9th April, 2001 S.O- 8,83.— 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/Labour Court, Jabalpur, as shown ia the Annexure in the industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of SECL and their workman. Which was received by the Central Government on 3-4-2001.
[No. L-22012/355/97/IR (C-II)] N. P. KESHVAN, Desk Officer ANNEXURE
BEFORE THE PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
(PRESIDED BY SHR1 K. M. RAI) CASE NO. CGIT/LC/R/123/98
Shri Ramlal Laherc S/o. Lachhiram Lahere Ex-Pump Khalasi, Cat. Ill, Balgi Project
. .Workman.
Vs.
Dy. General Manager $ECL, Balgi' Project, Bilaspur (MP) ..
Management.
188?'
AWARD
(Passed on this 19th day of Feb. 2001) The Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi by order No. L-22O12/355/97-1R (C-II) dtd. 25-5-98 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this Tribunal.
"Whether the action of the management of SECL, Balgi Project, Distt. Bilaspur (MP) in terminating the services of Shri Ramlal Laherc S/b. Sh. Lachhiram Lahere, E\-Pump Khalasi, w.e.f. 6:5-97 vide their Order No. SECL/SAM, BALGI/CS/18/1 dtd. 6-5-97 of the Sub Area Manager, Balgi, Distt. Bilaspur (MP) is justified. If not to what relief the workman is entitled 7" 2. The parties to the dispute have entered into written settlement praying for an award in terms thereof. In view of the settlement it is ordered that the workman would be re-instated as General Mazdoor, Cat-I and posted at Baikunthpur Area on the following terms and conditions as per FORM *H\
(A) That his absence from duty from the date of termination till the date of reporting for duties on reinsta'ement at the place of posting shall be treated as NO WORK NO PAY.
(B) Before joining for duty he shall under go a medical examination.
(C) For the purpose of payment of gratuity his service shall be treated as continuity of service.
(D) The matter having been finally settled between the parties, no further dispute shall be raised regarding present dispute in question.
3. Copy of the above award be sent to Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour, New Delhi for publication according to law.
K. M. RAI, Presiding Officer 189& 11HE GAZETTE OF tWtA'i P&&X& 28,* 20O1/VA1SAKHA 8, 1^23 [PART tt^a^a^fjff New Delhi, the 3rd April, 2001
1947 ? If not, to what relief thb work-man is entitled and from what date?" S. O. 884.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government here by publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jaipur as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 3-4-2001.
[No. L-42012/204/99-1R (DU)]
KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer
"Whether the nctlon "f the management of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Jaipur is termina- ting the services of Sh. Revatdhan Charan S/o Sh. Ramkaran Dhan flareth Class-IV employee (waterman) on 3-3-1993 was justified though, his name was sponsored by Employment Exchange for regular selection on the r>°st of class IV em- ployee and his services were terminated In viola- tion of S. 25 F, S 25O and S. 25H of the ID Act, m.," 1892 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : APRIL 28, 2001/VAISA^HA B, 1923 [PART II^SEC- 3(ii)J 1S93
"Whether the action of CommandQr Works Engineer, Military Engineering Service Joudhpur in not pro- moting Shri Naval Singh P.H.D. to the post of MT Driver is justified and legal 7 If not, to what relief the workman is entitled to" ?
New Delhi, the 4th April, 2001
S. O. 885.—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/Labour Court, Udaipur as shown in the Annexurc in the Indus- trial Dispute between the employers in the relation to the management of Commander Works Engineer, MES and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 4-4-2001.
[No. L-14012/120/9MR (DtJ)]
KULDTP RA1 VERMA, Desk Officer
117 GI|2001—7.
IE94 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : APRIL 28, 20Q1/VAISAKHA 8, 1923 fPA"x II—SEC, 3(11)] TW5"
Telecom and thin workman, whush was received by the Central Govar-nrnent on 4-4-2001.
[No. L*40012/69/98TJR (DV)]
KULDIP RAT VERMA, .Desk Officer
ANNEX miH
Before Sri R. P. Pandoy Presiding'Officer Central Government Industrial lEribunal cum .Labour Court, Sarvodftya., Nagar ,K,an$mr. Industrial Dispute No. 28 of 1999
In,the matter of dispute between
Sn Sughar Singh 46/98/O Bheem Nagar Jagdish Pura Agra.
AND
The General Manager
Telecom AGTD Agra
Award
1. Central Government, Ministry of Labaur New Delhi, vide -its notification No, L-4©0i2/ 69/98/IR (DU) dated Iifc2*99 has referred the following dispute for adjudication to this tribunal :—
Whether the action of the General Manager TcUJCom, Agra in terminating the services of Sri Sughar Singh is legal and justified 7 If not to what relief the workman is entitled ?
2. In the present case, the concerned workman is not purting his appearance since the filing ©f the claim statement. The elaim statement of (he concerned workman was received on 15-249- and the copy of same was given to the management. • The management filed its. written statement .on 5-5-99. Thereafter the case was fixed for filing of rejoinder by the workman but neither the workman appeared nor rejoinder statement was fUed in the case. The case is pending since 18-5-99. Having regard to the conduct of the concerned workman and the circumstances of the case, I am qf the opinion, that the case cannot be allowed to linger on any more specially when the concerned workman seems to be not intoiestfid in the case, and did not advice any evidence on the date of incident.
New Delhi, the 4th April, 2001
3. In view of .above considerations, it is held that the concerned workman is not entitled for any relief fofwant of proof.
4. Accordingly it is held that the concerned workman is not entitled to any relief for want of proof pumiant to the reference made to this tribunal.
5. "Reference is answered accordingly.
R. P. PANDEY. Presiding Officer S. O. 886.—4n .pursuances of Section 17 of the Industrial EJisfartes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the iCejjlral tGovctfWtent heicby publishes the awa*d of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/ L"b©wr Court, Kwnpur as shown-in the Annexure •in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relations to the management of General Manager, JB90 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : APRIL 28, 2001/VAI5AKHA 8, 1923 [PART II-*5Eev 3(J$] New Delhi, the 4th April, 200/ S. O. 887.—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, Kanpur as shown in the Annexuie in the Industrial dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Soil & Water Conservation Research & Training Institute and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 4-4-2001.
[No. L-42011/lS/96-IR(DU)] KULDIP RA1 VERMA, Desk Officer
ANNEXURE
BEFORE SRI R. P. PANDEY, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUS- TRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT SARVODAYA NAGAR, KANPUR Industrial Dispute No. * 137 of 1997
In tht. matter of dispute between :
Secretary Bhumi avam Jal Sanrakshan Sramik Union Soakuri, Dehradun
And
Director Central Soil & Conservation Research and Training Institute, 218 Kaulagarh Road, Deliradun.
Award
1. Cential Government MinisUy of Labour, vide its notification no. L-42011/18/96/IR (DU) dated 13-8-97, has referred the following dis- pute for adjudication to this Tribunal :-——
Whether the action of the management of Central Soil & Water Conservation Research and Training Institute Dehra- dun in not giving the temporary . status at par wilh other co-workers, to S/Sri BhawaniPrasad, Ram Prasad, Kanhiaya Lai, Hardwari Lai and Govind all Iabou is just and fair and Legal ? If not, •o what relief they arc entitled and from what date ?
2. The statement of claim has been filed by the Secretary Bhumi avam Jal Sanrakshan Shramik Union on behalf of the workmen with allegations that the management of the aforesaid Institute of Dehradun has granted temporary status 10 S/Sri Bhawani Prasad, Ram Prasad, Kanbjya Lai and Hardwari Lai w.c.f. 1-9-93 vide order dated 10-9-96 but the same benefit have not been granted to Sri Govind whose case was simi- lar to the other workmen, it has been alleged that when temporary status was not granted to the aforesaid five workmen the dispute was raised before ALC(C) and finally the case has been referred to this tribunal for adjudication. When the matter was pending before the competent authority the management granted temporary status to the four persons vide order dated 10-9-96. As Sri Govind had died on 22-12-95 when the matter was under consideration with the. Govern- ment of India, he was not given the same benefit of temporary status vv.e.f. 1-9-93 which was granted to other workmen. It has been alleged that the action of the management in not granting temporary status to Sihri Govind w.e-f. 1-9-93 is illegal. It has been prayed that a direction may be issued to the management to, grant the temporary status to Late Sri Govind w.e.f. 1-9-93 to 21-12-95 and to grant * all conse- quential benefits to his widow.
3. The management has filed written state- ment with the contentions that this tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide this dispute because Central Soil & Conservation Reserch Sc Train- ing Institute is not an Industry and Govind did not come within the definition of workman. It has also been alleged that 1CAR has not given consent for granting temporary status to Sri Govind and as soon as the Instruction are received from ICAR the cuse of Govind shall be considered. It has also been stated that lie did " not fulfil the requisite qualifications for getting temporary status.
4, Rajoinder has been filed on behalf of the Workmen with contention that all the five workmen mentioned in the reference order worked for more than 260 days during the year 1993 and. thereafter -they worked continuosly and that when the benefit of temporary status was granted to 4 of them and same benefit could not be granted to Govind as he died on 22-12-95 before the orders of temporary status were passrd on 10-9-96 . Tt has been wt H— '— • •—•'• ' ' 1
alleged that the management lias wrongly re- fused to grant temporary status to Govind which he was entitled to get from 1-9-93 till the date of death.
5. On behalf of workmen Sansar Singh has been 'examined as WAV- 1 and 6 document Ext. W-t to W-6 have been filed. Management examined Sri D. D- Dhawani M.W. 1 and filed 2 documents Ext. M-l and M-2 in support of its case.
6. 1 have heard the authorised representatives. for both the sides and have gone through the record of the case. The contention of the nanagement that this tribunal has no juris- ':tion to decide the dispute regarding con- \ed workmen including Govind appears to lx*. ^ut any substance. It is admitted case of parties that 35 workmen of the same msU- including concerned workmen were retrenched the management against which these work- men had filled I.D. No. 60 of 87 before this tribunal, That case was decided in favour of the workmen and their retrenchment was held to be illegal and they were directed to be reinstated in service. Writ - filed by the manage- ment againt that award was also dismissed by the hon'ble High Court and all the workmen were reinstated in service. Management granted temporary status to 30 workmen out of 35 who were retrenched from service and were later on reinstated in service whose case has been referred to this tribunal for grant of tem- porary status. Now it does not lie in tho mouth of the management to say that this tribunal has no jurisdiction to decide the in- distrial dispute in respect of the same workmen who were reinstated in service with back wages.
8. Sansar Singh W.W. 1 clearly stated on oath that the concerned workman had worked for more than 300 days in every year before the date of his death under the management. His testimony on this point goes uncontro- verted. D.D. Dhawani M.W. 1 admitted that all the workmen mentioned in. the reference order except Govind were granted temporary status w.e.f. 1-9-93. He admitted that Govind was continuously working under the management till the date of death. He did not state in his examination in chief that Govind had not worked for more than 240 days in the year 1993, hence he was ,not granted temporary status. His mere denial of the suggestion made on behalf of the workman that Govind had worked for more than 240 days during the year 1993 is of no consequence. I am therefore, inclined to believe the case pleaded on behalf of the workmen that all the worfcxnen including Govind . had worked for more than 240 days in. the year 1993 and even thereafter and that why not them were granted temporary status w-e.f. 1-9-93. Ii appears that ground was not granted the same benefit because before the orders granting temporary state were passed on 10-9-96 Govind had died. I think his death coul4 not be impediment in granting temporary status to Govind from 1-9-93 the date frqm which the same benefits were granted to the other colleagues of this work- man mentioned in the reference order. This action of the management in not granting tem- porary status to Govind w.e.f. 1-9-93 appears to be discrimint'ory and violativc of articles' 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. T, therefore, hold that the action of the management not granting temporary status to Sri Govind from 1-9-93 is illegal and Late Sri Govind was entiled to get temporary status w.e.f. 1-9.93 like other workmen.
9. In view of findings recorded above the management is directed to grant temporary status to late Sri Govind w.e.f. 1-9-93 and to grant other consequential benefits to his legal heirs within a period of three months from the date of publication of this award in the Official Gazette.
10. Reference is answered accordingly.
R.P. PANDEY, Presiding Officer 7. It was clearly pleaded on behalf of the workmen in the rejoinder that all of' them as had completed 260 days during the rele- vant year of 1993 and continously worked thereafter. It is also pleaded that Govind also worked with other workmen till 22-12-95 when he died while working under the employment of the aforesaid institute. It appears thai, tem- porary status have been granted to all -four workmen mentioned in the reference order except Govind who has died before died the orders for graning temporary status were passed. From' the allegations made in para ]8 of the written statement it appears that the matter of Govind is still pending for decision before ICAR and there is nothing on record to show that Govind did not fulfil those terms and conditions which were required for granting temporary 3tatus.
fffl THE GAZETTE fflF IMDTCA : ifcPftlt ^ 8, 2001/VAfSAKlfA &, 1923 [I*ART I t - S e e. fcfli)j New Delhi, the 4th April, 2001
X999
cas: cDitiai'jJ ^giinst tlio Cuainnaa, K.lndi land Gramodyog Commission, Mumbai, and Deputy Director,, Khadi Gramodyog Bhawan, 8 Cantt, LucKnow.
4. Fresh notice* were sent to the Chairman and Dy. Director but no wriiten statement was filed by them in this case. Hence the case proceeded exparte against them.
5. The workman has filed affidavit in Support of his case and has also filed a number of documents in support of his case.
6. I have heard the authorised representative for the workman and have gone through the record of the case.
7. It has been contended on behalf of the workman that lie was workman as defined under the provisions of the Act and was entitled to get protection of the provisions of the Act. It has been clearly pleaded by the workman that he was Accounts clerk and worked under the management of the opposite party. Accounts clerk come within the defini- inition of workman as defined under section 2(s) bf the Act.
8. It was clearly pleaded by the workman in his statement of claim that the worked for more than 240 days before 1-7-97 i.e. preceding one ^ear from the date of retrenchment of his services. This fact is supported by the uncon - troverted affidavit of the workman. As statement foiade on Oath in the affidavit of the workman goes uncontroverted, I am inclined to. believe the base of the workman as pleaded in the statement of ^laim that he had completed for more than 240 days in one calendar year preceding the date of his Retrenchment and he was entitled to get protection pf the provisions of section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act.
% The. workman has clearly stated that no Notice, notice pay or retrenchment compensation was paid to him as required ' under section 25F pf the Act. The case of the concerned workman on ibis point goes uncontroverted, I am therefore, inclind to believe the case of the workman on this point also.
10. I, therefore, hold that the termination of service of the concerned workman is in breach of ihe provisions of section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and is illegal and the concerned workman is entitled to be reinstated in the ser- vices of the management with full back wages nd other consequential benefits.
11. In view of findings recorded above, T hold that the termination of the concerned workman w.e.f. 1-7-97 is illegal and the same is hereby quashed. The opposite parties are directed to reinstate the concerned workman iii the services of the manage- ment with full back wages and to grant him all consequential benefits within a period of three months from the date of publication of this awatd in the official gazette. The concerned,, workman shall also get Rs. 500 as costs of this litigation from the management.
12. Reference is answered accordingly, R. P. PANDEY, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 28th March, 2001 S.O. 889 .—In exercise of the powers con- ferred by sub-section (2) of Section 33C of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby specifies the Labour Court, Hyderabad constituted under Section 7 of the said Act by the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour S-O. 2363 dt. 16-10-2000 as the Labour Court which shall determine the amount at which any benefit referred to in that sub-section would be computed in terms of money in relation to workman employed in any industry in the States <5f Andhra Pradesh and Yanam in respect of which the Central Government is the appropriate Government.
[File. No. Z-13011/1/97-CLS-II] SMf. KRISHNA SHARMA, U ^t^OO T HE GAZfeTTE OF INDIA : APRIL 28, 2001/VAISAKHA 8, 1923 [PART II-v-SEC.3(iI)]
New Delhi, the 29th March, 2001
S.O. 890.—In exercise of the power* conferred by sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 7(A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby constitutes an Industrial Tribunal with Headquarters at Hyderabad for the adjudication of Industrial Dispute^ relating to any matter specified in the Second Schedule and for performing such other functions as may be assigned to it under the said Act, and appoints Shri E. Ismail as presiding Officer of the Tribunal with effect from 20th October, 2000 (A.N.).
[F. No. Z-13O1I/1/97-CLS-II] SMT, KRISHNA SHARMA, Under Secy.
• Printed by the Munugu-, Gc\t. of India Press, Ring Road, New Delhi-H0064 and Published bj; the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054, 2001