This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

REGISTERED NO. D.L.-33001/99

The Gazette of India

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

No. 26] NEW DELHI, SATURDAY, JUNE 30, 2001/ASADHA 9, 1923 SeparatepagingisgiventothisPartinorderthatitmaybefiledasa

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)

MINISTRY OF PERSONNEL, PUBLIC GRIE-

VANCES AND PENSION

(Department of Personnel & Training)

New Delhi, the 14th June, 2001

S.O. 1458.—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 187 GI/2001 -1

(2993)?994 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 30, 2001/ASADHA 9, 1923 [PART I I ^ S E C. 3(hV| for investigation of offence, punishable under section 120 B, 420 of Indian Fonal Code, i860 and 13 (2) read with 13(1) (d) of tho Prevention of Corrup1ion Act, 1988, and attempts, abetments and conspiracy in relation to or in connection wil h one or more of the offence mentioned above and any other offopco and offences committed in the course of the same trans- action or arising out of 'he samo facts against (1) Sh. A. Manoharan, D/o DE outdoor, BSNL, Coles Road, Bangalore (2) Shn KhalimuUa, No. 96/5, St. Johns Church Road, FrazcV Town, Bangalore and other regist;r°d with DSPE/CBT/ACB Banga'ore vide RC-4 (A) 2001-BLR dated 5-3-2001.

the consent of the Sute Government of Maharashtra vide Notification No. CII -04/2001/170A/Pol-12 dated 16th May, 2001 hereby extends the powers and juris- diction of the members of Delhi Special Police Esta- blishment to the whole of the State of Maharashtra for invcstifnition of offienccs punishable under section 49-B read with section 51 of Wildlife (Protection) Act,1972 (No. 53 of 1972) registered in SIU.XI Branch of CBT, New Delhi vide Crime No. RC-SIB 2001 £0003 dated 21-3-2001 relating to seizure of 4 Leopard ikins. rttempts abetmenls and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offences mentioned above and any other offence committed in the course of the same transaction arising out of the same facts.

[No. 228/29/2001-AVD. IT (i)l

HART SINGH, Under Secy.

[No. 228/36/2C101-AVD.TT]

HARI SINGH, Under Secy.

Now Delhi, the 19th June, 20Q1

New Delhi, the 19th June, 2001

S.O- I46O.— Tn exercise of the powers cor- ferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 toad with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. 25 of 1946), the Central Govern- ment with the consent of the State Government of KarnataVa vide notification No, HD/l8/pCR/"00j, S.O. 1459.—fn exercise of the powers con- conferred by sub-section (0 of Section 5 read with Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police " Establishment Act, 1946 (Act. No. 25 of 1946), the Central Govern- ment with the consent of the State Government of Karnataka vide Notification No. HD/10/PCR/2001, dated 20-02-2001, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of Dt-lhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Karnatalca dated 5-03-2001, hereby extends the powers and jurisdiction of the members of Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Karnataka foif investigation of offences punishable under section 12()B, road with 420 of Indian Panel Code, I860 and 20 read with section 4 of Indian Tekgiaph Ac, '88^ and scciion 13(2) read with 13(l)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and attempts, abetments and conspiracy in relation to or in connec- tion 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) Sh. Eric Raja Mahcndran proprietor M/s. Rolders Communication, Bangalore (2) Sh- P. V. Jacob, Director, M/s. Passport Commu- nication India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai-6 and unknown officials of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd., Bangalore and other registered with DSPE/CBI/ACB/Bangalore vide RC 5 (AJ/2001 -BLR dated 8-3-2001.

[No- 228/29/2001-AVD- II (ii)] HARI SINGH, Under Secy.

New Delhi, the 19th June, 2001 S. O. 1461.—Ln exercise of the powers con- ferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 readwth Section 6 of tho Delhi Special Police Ftfablislnnent Act, 1946 (Act, No. 25 of 1946), the Contral Govern- ment with the consent of the siatt Government of Maharashtra vide Notification No. CTI-04/2001/170/ Pol-12 dated 16th May, 2001 hereby oxtends tlv powers and jurisdiction of the member of Delhi Special Police Establishment to the whole of the State of Maharashtra for investigation of offences punishable under section 49-B read with section 51 of Wildlife (Protection)) (Act No. S3 of 1972) registered in SlU, XI Branch of CB', New Delhi vide Crime No. RC-SIB 2001 E 0002 dated 21-3-2CO1 relating to seizure of Tiger skins, skulls, bones of Tiger etc., attempts abetments and conspiracy in relation to or in connection with one or more of the offences mentioned above and any oihcr ofionce committed in the course of the same transaction arising out of tht same facts,

[Nr. 228/36/2001-AVD. II]

HARI SINGH, Under Secy.

'fflti ^aatte--OF ENOIA . mm ", vmn'^wim *; #23 PART n^sfic. - #"M

approved by the Central Government for the purpose of section 1O(23G) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with rule 2E of the Income-tax Rulas, 1962, for the assessment years 2001-2002, 2002-2003 and 2003-2004.

2. The approval is subject to the condition that :—

(i) the enterprise will conform to and comply with the provisions of section 10(23G) of the Tncome-tax Act, 1961, read with rule 2E of the Income-tax Rules, 1962;

(ii) the Central Government shall withdraw this

approval if the enterprise :—

(a) ceases to carry on infrastructure facility;

or

(b) fails to maintain books of account and get such accounts audited by an accoun- tant as required by sub-rule (7) of rule 2E of the Income-tax Rules, 1962; or

(c) fails to furnish the audit report as required by sub-rule (7) of rule 2E of the Tncome- tax Rules, 1962.

3. The enterprises approved are :

(i) Augmentation to Water Supply Scheme to K. R. Nagar Town with Cauveri river as source, by M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran (P) Ltd., under the agreement dated 13th October, 2000 between Chief Engineer, Karnataka Urban Water Supply and Drainage Board and M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran (P) Ltd., 216, Vats Market (Behind Shiva Market), Pitampura, DeIhi-110 034. (F. No. 205/97/99-ITA-II, Vol. 1).

(ii) Development of Dheeraj Presidency Housing

Project at Malad, Mumbai by M/s. Group Housing Development Corporation Private Limited, Ground Floor, Dheeraj Vihar, Service Road, Village Mogra, Jogcshwari (East), Mumbai-400 060 as approved by the Brihanmumbai Mahana^T* Pa'ika (F. T""?. 205/22/2001-ITA-H).

MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(iii) Development of Dheeraj Kirti Housing Pro- ject at Malad, Mumbai by M/s. Prithvi Realtor & Capital Private Limited, Para- mount, Pali Arcade, Pali NaVa, Baidrj (West), Mumbai-400 050, as approved by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mum- bai. (F. No, 205/25/2001-1TA-II).

(Department of Revenue)

CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2001

S.O. 1462.—It is notified for general information that enterprises listed at para (3) below have been

(iv) Development of Dheeraj Upvan Housing Project at Village Magathane Borivale (East), Mumbai by M/s. Sappire Land Development Private Limited, Ground Floor, Dheeraj Apartments, P. P. Duns Compound, Natwar Nagar, Road No. 1, Jogeshwari (East), im Mumbai—400 060 as approved by the Brihanmumbai Mahanagav Palika, (F. No. 205/26/2001-1TA-I1).

(v) Development of Dhecraj Presidency Housing Project at Borivalle, Mumbai by M/s. Awas Developers & Constructions Private Limited, as approved by the Brihanmumbai Maha- nagarpalika. Paramount Pali Arcade, Pali Naka, Bandra (West), Mumbai—400 050, (F. No. 205/27/2001-ITA-II).

[Notification No. 141/2001/F. No. 205/27/2001-

TTA-II ]

KAMLESH C. VARSHNEY, Under Secy.

2998 itffeOAZfcrrteoFtNplAiJtJttfe 30, 20Ot/ASADHA 9, l9$3 [PART ti-feEc, 3(ii)]2999 New Delhi, the 6th June, 2001

Division No. 2, Nandcd, Maharashtra Water Supply and Sewerage Board and M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited.

S.O. 14^3.—It is notified for genera) information thai enterprises listed at para (3) below have been approved by the Central Government for the purpose of section 10(23G) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 with rule 2E of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, for tlic assessment years 2002-200?, 2003-2004 and 2004-2005.

2. The approval is subject to the condition that—

(iv) Augmentation to Budhana Water Supply Scheme Construction of 25 lac Jjircs ESR and distribution system by M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited, 216 Vats Market (behind Shiva Market), Pitampura, Dellii- 110 034 under the Agreement No. B. 1-4/97- 98 dated 12-9-97 between Executive Engineer, Environment Division No. 1, Akola, Maha- rashtra Watc? Supply andSewngc Board and M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited.

(i) the enterprise/industrial undertaking will con- form to and comply with the provisions of section 10(23G) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with rule 2E of the Income-tax Rules, 1962;

(ii) the Central Government shall withdraw this approval if the enterprise/industrial under- taking :—

(a) ceases to carry on infrastructure facility;

or

(v) Augmentation to Nachangaon, Gunjkheda and Hiwra Regional Rural Water Supply Scheme by M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited, 216 Vats Market (behind Shiva Market), Fitampura, Delhi 110 034 under the Agreement No. B-l/52 of 97-98 dated 24-12-97 between executive Engineer, Maha- rashtra Jsevan Pradhikaian Works Division, Wardha and M/s. S. M. S. Pnryavaran Pri- vate Limited.

(b) fails to maintain books of account and get such accounts audited by an accoun- tant us required by sub-rule (7) of rule 2E of the Income-tax Rules, 1962; or

(c) fails to furnish the audit report as re- quired by sub-rule (7) of rule 2E of the Income-tax Rules. 1962.

3. The enterprises approved are (F. No. 205/97/

99/ITA.ll Vol. 11) :

(vi) Augmentation to Karanja Water Supply Scheme by M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited, 216 Vats Market (behind Shiva Market), Pitampura, Delhi 110 034, under the Agreement No. B-l/53 of 97-98 dated 24-12-97 between Executive Engineer, Maha- rashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran Works, Division, Wardha and M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited.

(i) Construction and commissioning of 10.25 MLD Water Treatment Plant at ChikhaH by M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited, 216 Vats Market (behind Shiva Market), Pitampura, Delhi—110 034, under the Agre- ement No. B-l/16 of 1996-97 dated 15-7-96 between Executive Engineer, Environmental Engineering Works, Division No. 1, Akola, Maharashtra Water Supply and Sewage Board and M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited.

(vii) Khapoli Sewerage Scheme Construction and commissioning of Sewage Treatment Plant of 28.50 MLD capacity at Khopoli by M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited, 216 Vats Market (behind Shiva Market), Pitampura, Delhi 110034, under the Agreement No. B.l/6 of 98-99 dated 13-5-98 between Execu- tive Engineer, Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhi- karan Works Division, Panvel and M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited.

(ii) Installation and Commissioning of 2.15 MLD Water Treatment Plant at Manali by M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited, 216 Vats Market (behind Shiva Market), Pitam- pura, Delhi—110 034 under the Agreement No. 7 of 1997-98 dated 3-9-96 between Exe- cutive Engineer, Irrigation and Public Health Department, Himachal Pradesh and M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited.

(iii) Construction and commissioning of conven- tional type 7.7 MLD Wuter Treatment Plant at Udgir by M/s. S. M.S. Paryavaran Private Limited, 216 Vats Market (behind Shiva Market), Pitampura, Delhi 110 034 under the Agreement No, B-l/17 of 1996-97 dated 28-2-97 between Executive Engineer, Works

(viii) Water Supply Scheme (or Buldana Tours & surrounding 13 villa'ges Construction and commissioning of 19 MLD Water Treatment Plant, raw water pump with connecting main by M/s. S. M.S. Paryavaran Private Limited, 216 Vats Market (behind Shiva Market), Pitampura, Delhi 110 034, under the Agree- ment No. B. 1/13 of 98-99 dated 15-5-98 between Executive Engineer, Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, Works Division, Bul- dhana and M/s. S. Mk S. Paryavaran Private Limited.

B-J/I2 of J999-2OOO dated 29-5-99 between

Rxecuttvc Eng'neer, Maharashtra Jeevan

Pradhikaran, Works Division, Bhandara and

M/s. S. M. S. Paryavaran Private Limited.

(*v) Djsigning, providing, constructing and com-

missioning of Wat^r Trostmont Plant for

I* MLD capacity atSy. No. 85 Dhuhu Road,

Cantonment, Punc by M/s. S. M. S. Paiya-3001 vities to the Secretary, Department of Scien- 1ific & Industrial Research, 'Technology Bhawan', New Mehiauli Road, New Delhi- 110 016 for every financial year on or before 31st May of each year;

(iii) The notified Inslitutkn fhall submit, on behalf of the Central Government, to (n) the Director General of Income-tax (Exemptions), 10 Mic'dleton Row, 5th Floor, Calcutta— 700 071, (b) (he Secretary, Department of Scientific & Tndu,lri?I Rcsoari.li, and (c) the Commissioner of Income-'tax/Director of Income-tax (Fxempfcions), having juu'diciion over the organisation, on or before the 31st October each year, a copy of its audited Annual Accounts and also a copy of audited Income & Expend ituie Account in respect of its research activities for whith cvmpl.icn WL>S granted under sub-section (1) of Seclitn 35 of Income rax Act, 1961 in addi'ion to the return of Income-tax to the designated asses- sing officer.

Name of the organi sation

approved

s. No.

Period ft r which Notifi- cation is effective

\.

1-4-2000 to

31-3-2003

Bai Jerbai Wadia Hospital for Children and Institute of Child Health Research Society, Acharya Donde Marg, Parel, Mum.bai-400012.

2.

1-4-2000 to 31-3-2003

Tata Energy Research Insti- tute, India Habitat Centre, Habitat Place, Institutional Area, Lodi Road, New Dclhi-110003.

3.

New Delhi, the 6th June, 2001

1-4-2000 to 31-3-2003 (INCOME-TAX)

Sv.ami Vivekanand Yoga Anusindhan Sansthan, N^. 9, Appajappa Agrahara, Chamarajap^'L Bangalore-560018.

S.O. 1404.- —Tt is hereby notified for gereral infor-

mation lhat the oiganisations mentioned below have been approved by Uie Central Government fur the period mentioned af ainst their names, for the purpose of chuse (u) o( sub-section (1) o1 Section 35 of the Tncome-tax Act, 1961, read with Rule 6 of the Income- tax Rules, 1962 under the category "Institution" sub- ject to the following conditions :—

Notes: The notified Institutions are advised to apply in triplicates and well in advance for renewal of the approval, to the Central Government through the Commissioner of Income-tax/Director of Income- tax (Exemptions) having jurisdiction. Three copies of application for renewal of approval shall also be sent directly to the Secretary, Dqwlment of Scientific and Tndustripl Research.

(i) The notified Institution shall maintain sepa- rate books of accounts for its research acti- v iticL;

[ Notification No. 140/2001/(F. No. 203/25/ 200I-ITA-IT)]

KAMLESH C. VARSHNEY, Under Secy.

(n) The notified [nbtituiion shall furnish the Annual Return of its scientific research ^.ca-

1S72 Gl/2001—2300' T&E GAZETTE OF TNDIA:-JUNE 30, 2001/ASADHA 9, 1923 [PV\RT *II—^SEC. 3(ii)] New Delhi, the 6th June, POOJ

(INCOMt-TAX)

S.O. 1465.—It is hereby notified for general infor- mation that the organisation mentioned below has been, approved by ihe Central Government for the period mentioned against its name, for the ptupose of clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, read with Rule 6 of the Tncoroc- tax Rules, 1962 under the emegory "Association" subject to the following conditions :—

(i) Tlic notified Association shall maintain tepa- rate boois of accounts foj its research acti* vitici;

(ii) The rotifed Association shall furnish the Annual Retrrn of its scientific research acti- vities to tlie Sccittiiry, Department of Scien- tific & Industrial Research, 'Technology iBtiawan', New Mehrauli Road, New Delhi- 110 016 for every financial year on or before 3Jst May of each year.

(iii) The notified Association shall submiL, on behalf of the Central Government, to (a) the Diicctor General of Income-tax (Exemptions), 10 Middleton Row, 5th Floor, Calculta- 700 071; (b) the Secretary. Department of Scientific & Industrial Research; and (c) The Commissioner of Income-tax/Director of Income lax (Exemptions), having jurisdiction over the organisation, on or before the 3lstj October each year, a copy of its audited Annual Accounts and also a copy of audited Income & Expenditure Account in respect of ils research activities for which exemption was granted under sub-section (1) of Section 35 of incoiuc-iax Act, 1961 in addition to the return of Income-tax to the designated asses- sing officer.

Name of the organisation

SI. No.

approved

Period for which Notifi- cation is effective

1-4-99 to 31-3-2002

Centre for Study of Man and Environment CK-II, Sector-U, Salt Lake, Calcuita,700091.

Notes : The notified Association i< advised to apply in triplicates and well in advance for renewal

Mrtf

of the approval, to the Central Government through the Commissioner of Income-tax/Director of Income- tax (Exemptions) having jurisdiction. Three copies of application (or renewal of approval shall also be sent4ire

[Notification No. 139/2001/(F. No. 203/57/99-+ TTA-ll) ] KAMLESH C. VARSI1NEY, Under Secy.

(Department of Economic Affairs) (Bunking Division)

New Delhi, the IHh June, 2001

S.O. 1466.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (a) of sub-section (\) read with sub-section (4) of section 8 of the Reserve Bank of Tndia Act, 1934, the Central Government, hereby appoints Shri Vepa Kamesam, presently Managing Director, State Bank of Tndi" as Drpipy Governor of the Reserve Bar^k of India with effect from the-date of his taking charge of the post on or after 1st July, 2001 for a period of two years or till he attains the age of 62 years, whichever is earlier.

[ F. No. 13/5/98-B.O.I (i) ]

SHEKHAR AGARWAL, Jt. Secy.

New Delhi, the 11th June, 2001

S.O.' 1467.—In exerciac of the powers conferred by clause (a) cf subjection (1) read with sub-section (4) of section 8 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934, the Central Government, hereby appoints Shri G. P. Muniappan, formerly Executive Director, Reserve Bank of India as Deputy Governor of th<, Reserve Bank of India with effect from the date of his taking charge of iht pot,l on or after 1st July, 2001 for a period of two years or till he attains the age of 62 years, whichever is earlier.

[F. No. 13/5/98-B.O.I. (ii) 1 SHEK.HAR AGARWAL, Jt. Secy.

New Delhi, the 11th Juno, 2001

S.O. 1468.—In exercise of the powers ccufeired by clause (a) cf subjection (1) read with sub-section (4) of section S rf t\c F S'-nv Hank of India Act, 1934, the Central Government, hereby re-appoints Dr. Y. V. Ri;dc',y, ar Deputy Governor, Re-.erve Bank of India for a psricd of two years with cflccl from 1 st'September, 2001 or till he attains the age of 62 yeais, whichever is LMJIILT.

[F.'No. 13/5;98~B.O.l. (iii-)] SHEKHAR AGARWAL, Jt. Secy.

3004 ?rHJ$BAZErr£ OF INDIA : JUNK Jo> 5001/ ASADttA £, Mt £?ART n—^bc. 3(ii)J New Delhi, the 15th June, 2001

New Delhi, the 15th June, 2001 S.O. 1469.—In pursuance of the powers con- ferred by sub-section (1) of section 5 read with sub-section (2) and sub-section (7) of Section 6 of the Sick industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 the Central Government hereby rc- appoints Shri Justice J. B. Goel as a Chairman of the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (AATFR) for a period beyond 12th June, 2001 and upto 31 st December, 2001 or till the abolition of AATFR whichever even occurs earlier.

\F. No. 7/2/2001-B.O. I (i)i

RAMESH CHAND, under Secy

S. O. 1471.—In pursuance of the powers con- ferred by sub-section (1) of section 5 read with sub-section (2) and sub-section (7) of Section 6 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 the Central Government hereby re- appoints Shri M. S. Dayal as a Member of the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (AATFR) ) for a period beyond 31st July, 2001 and upto 31st December, 2001 or till the abolition of AATFR whichever event occurs earlier.

[F. No. 7/2/2001-B. O. I (iii)]

RAMESH CHAND, Under Secy.

New Delhi, the 15th June, 2001

S. O. 1470.—In pursuance of the powers con- conferred by sub-section (1) oT .section 5 read with sub-section (2) and sub-section (7) of Section 6 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision;,) Act, 1985 the Central Government hereby re- appoints Dr. J. K. Bagchi as a Member of the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (AATFR) for a period beyond 8th June, 2001 and upto 31 st December, 2001 or till the abolition of AAIFR whichever event occurs earlier.

[F. No. 7/2/2001-B. O. I (ii)]

RAMESH CHAND, Under Secy.

tote

MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY (Department of Commerce)

New Delhi, the 12th June, 2001

S.O. 1472.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (I) of section 7 of the Export (Quality Control and Inspection) Act, 1963 (22 of 1963), the Central Government hereby recognises, for a period of three years fiom the date of publication of this notification, M/s. Anat^sl & Mariiimc Consultants, 9-28-7, Batoji Nagar, Waltair Uplands, Visakho- patnam-530 003 as an agency for the iusprciion of Iron Ore, Ferro Manganese and Bauxite Minerals and Ores Group-1 specified in ihc schedule to the Expjrt of Minerals and Ores Group 1 (Inspection) Rules, 1965; and Manganese Dioxide, Chrome Ore and Feldspar Minerals and O.es Group-Il specified in the schedule lo the Export of Minerals and Ores Group-II (Inspection) Rules, 1965, prior to export at VisakhapaLnam, subject to the following condi.iont, namely :

(i) That M,,. Aiiaiest & Maritime Consu'i.inls, Visakhapatnam, shall yive adequate facilities to the olIiccTft nomiiiated by the E\porl Ins- pection Council in this behalf to examine the method of inspection followed by them in granting the certificate of inipe^iion under rule 4 of the Export of Minerals iind Ores Group-1 and Group-11 (Intpecticn) Rules, 1965;

(li) Thai M /\ AraieU & Maritime Comuli.inti, VisaV.hapaliiiim, in ihc perfoiMLimr of ihejr function urder this r.oiifiraiior, shall be bound by such directives as the Director (Inspection and Quality Control) may give in writing from time to time.

[F. No. 5/6/2001-E1&EP]

P. K. DAS, Director MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS FOOD & PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION (Deparimcnt of Food & Public Distribution) New Delhi, the 18th June, 2001 S. O. 1473.— In pursuance of Sub-rule (4) of rule 10 of the Official Language (use for official purpose of the Union) Rules, 1976 the Central Government hereby notifies the following office of Food Corpo- ration of India under the administrative control of the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distribution (Deptt. of Food & Public Distribution), where of more lhan F0% of stall' have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi :

Food Corporation of India,

District Office,

Amritsar.

[No. E-iion/i/:.ooi-nindi]

RA.INIRA7DAN, Jt.Secy.

MINISTRY OF COAL

N"w Delhi, the 31st May, 2001

S. O. 1474.—Whereas by the notification of thc- Goverhment of India in the Ministry of Coal, number S.O. 2541 dated the 20th August, 1999, issuod under sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and published in Part-II, Section 3, Sub- section (ii) of the Gazette of India dated the 11th September, 1999 the Central Government gave notice of its intention to prospect for coal in 1158.652 hectares (approximately) or 2863.03 acres (approxi- mately) in the locality specified in the schedule annexed to that notification ;

And, whereas, the Central Government is satisfied that coal is obtainable- in a part of the said lands¹, Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers con- ferred by sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the said Act, 1872 0112001—3

the Central Government hereby gives notice of its intention to acquire the rights to mine, quarry, bore, dig and search for, win, work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 1158.652 hectares (approximately) or 2863.03 acres (approximately) described in the Schedule appended hereto.

Note 1 :—The plan bearing No. SECL/BSP/ GM (Plg)/Land/243 dated the 22nd September, 2000 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the Office of the Collector, Umaria (Madhya Pradesh) or in the Office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House, Street, Calcutta- 700001 or in the Office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Revenue Section), Seepat Road, Bttaspur-495006 (Madhya Pradesh).

Note 2 :—Attention is 'hereby invited to the provisions of section 8 of the aforesaid Act, which provides as follows :—

8 Objection to Acq uisinon.—(1) Any person nterested in any land in respect of which3010 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 30, 2001/ASADHA 9, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(II)] notification under section 7 has been issued may. within thirty days of the issue of the notification, object to the acquisition of the whole or any part of the hnd or of any rights in or over t,uch land.

in respect of different parcels of such bind o¹" of rights in or over siu h land, to the Central Government, containing his recommendation on the objections together with the record of the proceedings held by him, of the decision of that Go\crnmcnt.

(3) For tlx puipisc of this section, a person

shall be deemed to bo interested in land

who would be entitled lo claim an intCie t

in compensation if the land or uny rights

408

606

674

040

114

123

146

188

2. Plot numbers to be acquired in Village Malahdoo (Full)

1 to 330, 52/331, 39/332, 47/333, 105/334, 125/335.

3. Plot numbers to be acquired in Village Mudaria (Part).

1 to 34, 35 (Pait), 36 (Part), 37 (Part), 38 (Part), 39 to 42, 43 (Part), 44 (Pait), 45, 46 (Part), 47 to 52. 53 (Part), 54 to 63, 64 (Part), 65 (Part), 147 (Pait), 148, 149 (Part), 157 (Part), 158 (Pait), UjtSl.

4. Plot numbers to be acquired in village Uchehra (Part)

150 (Part), 165 (Part), 166 (Part), 167, 168 (Part), 169 (Part), 170 (Part;, 184 (rail), 185 io 189, 190 (Part), 191 (Part), 192 (Part), 193 (Part), 194 to 205, 206 (Part), 207 to 278, 279 (Pait), 280 (ParO, 281 (Part), 282 (Part), 289 (Part), 357 (Part), 35g (Part), 359, 360, 361.

5. .Plot numbers to be acquired in village Kuiawar (Part)

77 (Part), 114 (Part), 152 (Part), 154 (Part), 155 (Part), 156, 157, 158 (Part). 159 (Part), 160, 161 (Part), 162 (Part), 163 (Part), 164 to 211, 212 (Part), 214 (Part), 215 (Part), 218 (Part), 219 to 222, 223 (Part), 225 (Part), 230 (Part), 231 to 233, 234 (Part), 235 (Part), 236 (Part), 359, 360, 361.

6. Plot numbers to be acquired in village Kumardoo (Part)

46 to 53S 54 (Part), 55 to 56, 57 (Part), 58 (Part), 64 (Part), 65 (Part), 66 to 93, 94 (Part), 97 (Part), 98, 99 (Pait), 100 (Part), 101 (Part), 102 to 173, 174 (Part), 175 to 178, 179 (Pan), 180 (Part), 182 (Part), 276 (Part), 277 to 281, 282 (Part), 284 (Part), 285 to 296 297 (Part), 298 (Part), 300 (Part), 305 (Part), 311 (Part), 312 to 327, 328 (Part), 329 (Part), 341, 344 (Part), 286/432.

7. Plot numbers to be acquired in village Khalaundh (Part)

154 (Part), 155 (Part), 156 to 1?5, 176 (Part), 177 (Part), 184 (Part), 185 to 191, 192 (Part), 193 to 208, 215, 216, 217, 218 (Part), 219 to 260, 261 (Part), 263 (Part), 264 (Part), 265, 266. 267, 268 (Part), 269 (Part), 271 (Part), 305 (Part), 306 (Part), 308 (Part), 309 (Pait), 310 (Part), 311 (Part), 312 to 334, 224/335. 258/336.

8. Plot numbers to be acquired in Village Goraia (Part)

1 (Part), 2 (Part), 3 (Part), 4 (Part), 5 (Part), 6 (Part), 7 (Part), 23, 24, 25 (Part), 26 (Part), 27 (Part), 28, 29, 30 (Part), 31 (Part), 35 (Part). 36 (Part), 37 (Part), 38 (Part), 39 (Part), 40 (Part), 41,42 (Part), 43 (Part), 44, 45 (Part), 46, 47 (Part), 48 to 51, 52 (Part), 53 (Part), 54 to 59, 60 (Part), 61 (Part), 62 (Pan), 247 (Part), 248 (Part), 249, 250 (Part), 251, 252 (Part), 253 (Part), 254 (Part), 255 (Part), 256 (Part), 257, 258 (Part), 259 (Part), 260 to 263, 264 (Part), 265, 266, 267 (Part), 268 (Part), 269 (Part), 270 (Part), 284 (Pait), 285, 286, 287 (Part), 288 to 299, 301 (Part), 304 (Part), 335 (Part), 336 (Part), 337, 338 (Part), 350 (Part), 351 (Part), 352 (Part), 358 (Part). 380 (Part), 381 (Part), 382 (Part), 287/418, 291/420.

9. Forest compartment numbers to be acquired (Part)

539 (Part), 540 (Part), 541 (Part)

BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION

A—B Line starts from point 'A" in village Pali and passes along the Northern boundary of plot numbers 239, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 239, 216, 215, 214, 205, 204, 203, 875 and meets at point 'B'.

B—C Line passes along the Western boundary of plot numbers 964, 882, 884, 903, 917, 941, 940, 939, 933, then enter in village Khalaundh and passes along the Western boundary of plot number 164, 161, 158, 156, 155 and meets at point ' C.

C—Cl Line passes in Village Khalaundh through plot numbers 155, 154, 176, 177, 192, 184, 218, 261, 263, 271, 264, 269, 268, 311, 310, 309, 308, 306, 305 and meets on the common boundary of Vilhges Khalaundh and Uchehra at Point 'Cl'.

Cl— D Line passes in Village Uchehra through plot numbers 165, 166, 168, 169, 170, 206, 184, 190, 191, 192, 150, 192, 193, 282, 281, 280, 279, 289, 358, 357, then enter in Village Kuiawar passes through plot numbers 152, 155, 154, 158, 159, 114, 161, 162, 163, 77, 234, 235, 236, 230 and meets point ' D\ D—E Line apasses in Village Kuiawar through plot numbers 230, 225, 223', 218, 215, 214, 212 then enter in Village Mudaria and passes through plot numbers 64, 65, 51, 147, 140, 46, 44, 43, 158, 157, 38, 37, 36, 35 then passes thiough Forest Compartment number 539 and meets at point 'E'.

3OTZ •TflgGAfe&tfE Of INDIA :JtJWft'fcV 1001 /AtfAttKA "/ 1923 ^ ^ I M f e c . ^ t f t tj E—El Line passes through Forest compartment Number 539, 540, then thiough plot numbers 94, 101, 100, 99, 94, 97, 344, Southern boundary of plot numbers 341, then through plot numbers 328, 329, 311, 305, 297, 298, 300, 284, 282, 276, 174, 182, 179, 180, 65, 64, 54, 58, 57, 94 of Village Kumardoo and meets at point 'El'.

El—P Line passes through Forest compartment Numbers 541 then enter in Village Goraiu through plot Numbers 382, 381, 338, 380, 338, 336, 350, 351, 352, 358, 352, 335, 304, 301, 254, 253, 252, 250, 247, 248, 255, 256, 258, 259, 61, 60, 62, 53, 52Southcrn boundary of plot numbers 52, 51, 50, 49, 47, through plot number!, 47, 45, 43, 42, 4, 3, 2,1 and meets at point ' F\

F -G—H Line passes partly through JohiUa River then enter in Village Goraia and passes through plot numbers 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 39,40, 38, 37, 36, 35, 36, 31, 30, 27, 26, 25 Northern Boundary of ploi Numbers 24, 23, 263 then through pjot numbers 264, 270, 269, 268, 267, 284, 287 then partly along the Nullah and meets at point 'H'.

H—I Line passes in Village Pali along the Western boundary of plot number 1206, through plot number 1200 then, Western boundary of plot numbers 1199, 1198, 1197, Southern boundary of plot numbers 1195, 1193 Western boundary of plot numbers 1193, 1182, 1183, 1184, 1189, 11S8, 761, 747, 749, 750, 761, 734, 733, 732, 731, 730, 729, 741 and meets at point T.

I _ j _K Line passes along the Southern boundary of plot numbers 718, 300, 292, 291, 289, 290, Western boundary of plot numbers, 290, 305, 306 through plot numbers 269, Western boundary of plot number 249, 247, and meets at point 'K'.

K—L—A Line passes in village Pali along the Southern boundary of plot number 874 the Western boundary of plot numbers 874, 239 and meets at the starting point 'A'.

[F.No. 43015/5/99'PRlW]

SANJAY BAHADUR, Dy. Secy.

"

^3RDPR

New Delhi, the 19th June, 2001

S. O. 1476. —Whereas on the publication of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal,'number S;O. 870 (E>, dated the 2nd December, 1994 published in ihe Gazette, of India, Parl II, Section 3, Sub-Section (ii) dated the 2nd December, 1994, issued under sub-section (I) of section 9 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Develop- ment) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) hereinafter referred to as the said Aci, the lands and all rights in or over such lands described in the Schedule appended to the "a.id notification (hereinafter referred to as the said land;,) vested absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances under sub-section (I) of section 10 of the said Act ;

And whereas the Central Government is satisfied that the Central Coalfields Limited, Ram hi (hereinafter referred to' as the snid Government Company), is willing to comply with sitoh terms and conditions as the Central Government Thirtks fit to impose in this behalf ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section H of the said Act, the Central Government .hereby directs that the lands and rights so vested shall with effect from the 2nd day of December, 1994, instead of conti- nuing to so vest in the Central Government, shall vest in the said Government Company subject to the following terms and conditions; namely :—

(1) the said company shall reimburse the Centr.il Government all payments made in respect of compensation, interest, damages and Ihc like, as determined under the provisions of the said Act ;

(2) a tribunal shall be constituted for the purpose of determining the amounts payable to the Central Government by the said Govern- ment company under condition (I) and nil expenditure incurred in connection with any such tribu'ial and persons appointed to assist the tribunal shall be borne by the said Government company and similarly, all expenditure incurred in respect of all legal proceedings like tppels, etc, for or in connection with itbe rights in or over the said lands so vested bhall also be borne by the said Government company ;

(3) the said Government shall indemnify the Cc-.itial Government and its officials against any other expenditure that may be necessary in connection with any procLvdinos by or against the Central Government or its ulliciuK n-tjnidini; the rights in or over the suid land so vested;

HH4 IttB^AZfiflft 6P INDIA : ittafe 36, 2001/ASADMA &, i9i$ LPARI it-^jic, 3Cii>J (4) the said Government company shall have no power to transfer the said lands to any other person without the previous approval of the Central Government ;

(5)' the suid Government company shall abide by such directions and conditions as may be given or imposed by the Central Government for particular areas of the said lands as and when necessary.

[No. 43015/16/89-PRIW] SANJAY BAHADUR, Dy. Secy.

MINISTRY OF HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE

(Department of Health) New Delhi, the 23rd May, 2001

S. O. M77.—Wr.oresis the Central Government, "n pursuance cf clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 or 1956) and in consultation with ihe Government of Goa have nnminaU-d Dr. U. G. Machinolcar, Prof, & 1Uad of Department (Ottho. Surgery), Goa Medical College, Bambolim (Goa) to be a member of the Medical Council of India with effect from 10th April, 2001.

Now, therefore, in pursuance of the provision of sub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Act the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendment in the notification of the Government of India in the then Ministry of Health number S. O. 138, dated the 9th January, I960, namely:—

Jn the said notification, under the heading, 'Nominated under clause (a) of sab-section (1) of section 3\for serial number 23 and the entries relating thereto, the following serial number and entries shall be substituted, jiamely :—

"23. Dr. U. G. Nachinokar, Goa Government "Anantdeep", H. No. E-473,

Odlem Bhat, Taleigao, P. O.

Caranzalem.,

Goa-403003

[NO. V-H013/1/2OO1-ME (Policy-I)] P, G. KALADHARAN, Under Secy.

New Delhi, tho 241 h May, 2001 S. O. 1478. -Whcr:T._N in pursuonco of clau-.e (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956) Dr. Munindra Mohan Deka, Principal, Gauhati Medical College and member of the Medical Faculty of Gauhati University, has been elected by the Court of the Gauhati University to be a member of the Medical Council of India with effect from 30-12-2000 upto 6-1-2004.

Now, therefore, in pursuance of the provision of sub-section(l) of section 3 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendment in the Notification of the Government of India in the then Ministry of Health number S.O. 138, dated the 9lh January, i960 namely :

Tn the said notification, under Lhe heading, 'Elected under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 3', for serial number 15 and the entry relating thereto the following .serial number and entry shall be substi- tuted, namely :—

"15. Dr. Munindra Mohan Deka, Gauhati Principal, University" Gauhati Medical College,

Guwahati-781032

[No. V-1I013/2/2001-ME (Policy-!)] P, G. KALADHARAN, Under secy.

New Delhi, the 31st May, 2001 S. O. 1479.—Whereas in pursuance of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956) Dr. P. K. Patcl, Dean, Medical Faculty, South Gujarat University, Sunit has been elected by the Senate of South Gujarat University, Surat to be a member of the Medical Council of India with effect from 25th March, 2001.

Now, therefore, in pursuance of the provision of iub-section (1) of section 3 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby makes the following further amendment in the Notification of the Government of India in the then Ministry of Health number S. O. 138, dated the 9th January, I960, namely :—

Tn the said notification, under the heading, 'Elected under clause (b) of sub-section (I) of section 3', for serial number 36 and the entry relating thereto the following serial numbei and entry shall be sub stituted, namely :—•

"36. Dr. P. K. Patel, South Guja,ral 19/20 Mangalam Park, University Opp. City Park Apartments,

Ghod-Dod Road,

SURAT-395007"

[No. V-11013/25/2000-ME (UG)] P. G- KALADHARAN, Under Secy.

Passed on thk 18th day of May, 2001

1. The Government of India, Ministry of Labour vide order No. L-120i2|16|92-IR(B.II) dated 24-3-92 has referred the following dispute for adju- dication by this tribunal :—

award in the Official Gazette. M the D.R.M. Northern Rail- way, Allahabad, fails lo take such decision within the stipu- lated petiod the concerned wotkman will be deemed to have been abjorbed on alt-e; native j< b of C-I aim C-1I category on a post under D.R M. Allahab.ui after expiry of six months, from th-" iJ.itc o[ publication of this award as colour blirdnc". is not ,i disqualification for absvr,}- tion on the post cf C I and C-II mtesjoiv mrnlioned above- and shall also be entitled to r>'t -til benefits attached to that post.

12. Reference is answered accordingly.

R. P. PANDEY, Presiding Oflicei

31-5-2001

"Whether the action of the management of Chhindwara Seoni Kshetriya Gramin Bank, i.- %oni in terminating the services of Shri Ramnath Gorale, Sjo Shri Baliram Gorale w.e.i. 10-12-90 was justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to ?"'

2. The case for the workman is that he was appointed u<; messenger by the oral order of the management pacsed in the month of January, 1988. He continuously worked upto 10-12-1990. He had con!;.iuou-h we iked lor more than 240 days in a calendar \car proceeding the date of termination from service. He was not given one month's statu- tory no.'c; piior to the date of his termination as required under Section 25 of the I D. Act. He has also not been paid any retrenchment compensation by the management. The termination order is there- fore bad in law which deserves to be qua

Nev, Delhi, the 7th June. 2001

3. The case for the management is that .he work- man w: s engaged us a daily wage part time messen- ger by the Bank Manage", Rakhari puiely on ad-hoc b.is's. No appointment letter was issued to him. Powers of recruitmenl of messengers in RRB are vested with Head Office and for this recruitment, recruitment procejuies ha'e !o he fallowed. The workman had continuously worked only for 214 days f-om October, 1989 to June. 1990. Thereafter he worked for 25 days in November, 1990. The workmon was not required to be given any notice as .claimed by him. He has not been retrenched as per his allegation. In view of all these facts, the work- man is nol entitled to ieinstatement with back Wi'ges.

S.O. 1502—In pursuance cf Section 17 rt Hie Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central 'Government hereby publishes' the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal Labour Court, Jsbalpur ?s shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Chh'indwara Seoni Kshetriya Gramin BanV and their workman, which was receiv- ed by the Central Government on 6-6-2001.

4. Following issues arise for decision in the rase :

[No. L-l20f2|16|92-IR-(B-I)] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

1. Whether the workman is entitled to rein- statement with monetary benefits as claim- ed by him ".

1. Relief and costs?

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TR1BUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR Cise No. CCUT|LC|R|81'I92 Presiding Officer : Sliii K. M. Rai.

Shn Rfmnath Goralc, Slo Shri Ba'irr.m Gorale. Gram : Crfnndori Khurd. Disft Seoni.

• .Applicant

Versus

The Chairman, Chhindwira Seoni K"heiri\a Gramin B-nk. Hcid Office Mnnd; and Kachehari r..j]abar.\ Chhindwnra,

. .Non-applicant

5. Issue No. 1.—The workman has claimed rein- statement as messenger in the Kshetriya Gramin Bank, Chhindwara Seoni. He was given employ- ment by the Branch Manager. In this respect the workman ha" not been able to establish that the Branch Manager was legally authorised to appoint as a messenger in the Bank. On the contrary as per recruitment rules, the Brunch Manager has no legal authority to make appointment as rncvseiHier in the Branch of the Bank. For this post, the recruitment rules have been framed and they must be followed in p'vins the employment to any candidate as mesen- ger in the ba.tk. If any appointment is done in violation of the^ rules, then such appointment is void-i.b-iniiio. In giving the employment as messen- cer to the workman +he recruitment rules have not been followed and therefore his initial appointment is bad ;n law arc' on this bnsis he cannot Jaim3049 i cgulai isation or reinstatement as messenger. He claim has m t bc.-'i unst uaidted on the basis of law At the -*iTvie time, the workman has not been able to osr ibiis'i that h° Md continuously worked for more than 240 days in a calcndai \eur in the eniplc>)ncnt of the Bank. Th.s fact also does not support the cla'm oi the workman for getting regular employment in it>e Bpnk.

f. In-vcw of the foregoing discussions, it >s held that the 'vor'uT:n is not entitled to rcim'a en.ent

7 V ic xo 2 — In vie A of my finding given on Is-4!.? INO. ', 'he workman is not legally entitled to reinstatement or regulansatun to the post of messen- ger m 'he Grumin Bai k t, claimed by him. He is also n ,t entiled to any monetary benefits attaching to llv ^a;d posf. The leference is accordingly ans- wered agrinn the workimn and in favour of the m;mceemcnt.

8. Copy of the

K M. RAT, Presiding Officer Ne-v D-lhi. the 8th June, 2001

S.O. 1503.—In pursuance of Section 17 of Use In- dustrial Dis-oute Act. 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central .Government he-el V:-l. iV v-vatd of the Cea- trol Govcnment J • iyi '.-I ! = - = •*::.=•=!. New Delhi as shown in the AnnsAure in the Industrial Dispute be- tween the employ ?rs in relation to the management of Northern Railway and their workman, which was received by the Central Government or 7-6-2001.

[No. L-4i012/35/95-IR(B-I)l AJA.Y KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI K F S HW SHARAN SRIVASTAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERN- M.r>H INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI

I.D. No. 39/96

In lie piatter of dispute between :

Smt. Ram Eeti W /o late Shri Samman Singh, R /o Napla Chaikoor, Post Office Tundala, District Ferozabad, Through AJhvankash,

1S7Z lil/ZUUI—b

R.C.S.R.M C^ngiess, 2 ">36, Namnei Agra-282001.

Versus

Senior D E M., Nordiern Railway, AUahabad-211001.

APPEARANCES:

Shri 3ui-3iirfer Singh, Advocate for the Woikman. None lor th; Management.

AWARD

This Indusijtal D'spute was raised by the Rasbtriya ChaUuth Shreiu R:ul Ma -Joor Congrebs (INTUC) aga'iict the Noitiein Railway Admin-stration, Allaha- bad oppointin^ in ->.'vice on compissionate grounds to Smt. R'ini BL!I W /O Shri Samman Sin^h (=ince de-id).

2. [he Cential Government in the Ministry of L ibour has thercaf C*J sent the re erence undei Sec- t'on 1 ( i ( ] ) ( J) a

"'Whc iher 'Jie action of the management of Sr. D.EN., Northern Railway Allahab-.d, for not giving a]i,'oin nient in Lom^ass crate grounds to S:;>t Ram Beti W|o late Sairman Singh, workman and not according tempo- rary status in time in spite of w n. nc for niori tha^t 120 davs contmuomh. with the management is lepal and iitsiified^ if not, she is emi'ted to what relief ?"

3. The Jtatemen* of claim has been filed by Shri Surender Singh, Advocate and Psesident of Rashtriya Chatu.-th Shreni M^zdoor Confess (INTUC), Agia on behalf of Smt. Pam Bet! (hereinafter referred to as Claimant).

4. The averments made in the statement of claim in short is that Shri Samman Singh was Railway emp- loyee and had worked under I.O.W. (1) Tundla from 31-8-76 to 5-9-83 continuously for 1746 days. He had acquiied temporary status after working conti- nuously ioi more than 120 days and had got CPC scale and MR.C.L. grade. Shri Samman Singh was not paid his sa¹'ny according to pay scale of regular employee Samman Singh had died and after his death claimant had given implication in writing for her emoloyment under the Railway Administration on compassionate ground but her application was reject- ed on the ground that according to circular letter No. 1963 the widows of the deceased employee having got the C.P C. scale could be appointed on compas- sionate giound when employee had died on or after 31-12-86 The deceased Somman Singh had become entitled to pet a'l the service benefits .of rejn.ilar emp- loyee on acquiring •emporary status after completing 120 davs of continuous service. The claimant has prayed for the same relief.

5. On beh?lf of the railway administration written statement Ins been filed bv D.E.N. (Head Quarter) Nr. Railway, Tundla and has denied the claimants case for her appointment on compassionate ground.

The case o) [he Railway A-ditrrmsti ation is that Sammau Sm^h was a casual worker and had worked for a total period ol 1746 da>s horn Jl-8-/t> to 5-9-83 and Ihcieallcr he hati voluiitaiy abandoned his service. Shri S:u-um.in Singh was paid all his salaiy according to e.^ting Jules and legu'alion and nothing was due 1o hi;n.

6. The case of the railway adnriiiistriition further is that alter 'leaving U,c service Sa'rnman Smgh had died at his residence cm 28-7-84 and thus the claimant was not cnliiled lor her appointment on compassionate ground iii terms of the circular No. 9J63 according to which the benefit ul the appointment on compassionate ground was available only to tiiosc widows of the workmen having acquired C.P.C. scale and died on or after 31-12-86, 'I he railway administration, how- ever, not denied factum of acquiring tcinpoiarj status hy late Samnian Singh allei completing 120 days of continuous s u v te as slated on behalf oi the claim.int.

piatetico in lailvay it is dillicult to obliterate the dis- tinction between the two categories oi employees till tempo:arv '-tatus is acquued. lhc casual labour in Signal Unit of Con'-tiiiction Department is entitled to the same piy as admissible to others ciher in the pio- jeet or in the open line. The raiiway administration was directed to consider claim of the casual labour promptly. I he second case iclied on behalf of the claimant is oi Union ol India and others Vs. Basaut Lai and others 1992 Supreme Court Cases L & S 611. It was the case relating m the regularisalion of the casual labour em;i!o\od by the railway who had con- tmuou-.tty worked loi over 120 days it is held that the casual labour v as entitled to be regularised us temporary labours and railway cannot deny them tem- prorary status on the ground that they had been ap- pointed as casual labour on a project work and not on constitution work on open line and they could acquire temporal y status only after compleing 3h(J days- of service.

"It is contended by the learned counsel for the lespondonl widows by ihe learned counsel that under paragraph 2511—"Rights and Privileges admissible to the casual iabouieis who are treated as temporary atter comple- tion ot hi\ months continuous service"—ot the Raiiv a> Estblishment Manual. They are entitled to family pension. We find it dilncuit to gi\e acceptance to the contemon. It Is seen that every casual labourei employed in he railvu." adrnini&ti alien fcr six months is euillcd to temporary staius. I hereafter they will be empanelled. A tier empaneunuit tliev ;u"e required to be screened by the com- petent authority and as and when vacancies for tempo?at} posts in the regular establish- ment au a\ailable they houid be appointed in ihe order of meat after screening. OP their appointment they are also lequired to put in minimum service of one ye at in the tcmooiary post. In view oi the above posi- tion, if any of those employees who had put in .the l-cquiied minimum se-svice of one vei.r (ha loo alier the appointment to the tempo- rary post died while in service his widow would be eligible to pension undei the Family Pension Scheme, 1&64. In all these cases though sorie of them have been screened yet appointments were not given since the tem- porary posts obviously were not available or in some cases they were not even eligible for screening b^eansp the po=!s become available after the death. Under these circumstances the respondent'widows are not eligible to the family pension."

In the said case the case of Ram Kumar and others Vs. U O . l. Supia and of Prabbawati Devi Vs. U.O.I. Supia were cited on behalf of the widow in support of their contention. Both these authorities were not accepted by Ihe Hcn'ble Supieme Court.

16. It is .thus -i settled position that unless a casual labour grt abcoibcd in temporary seivice after com- pleting J 20 days he shall not be entitled for the service benefits of regular employee. The said authority of the U.O.I, and others Vs. Rabia Bikaner etc. supra T find a later authority applies on all force in the case. On behalf of the claimants there is nothing to show that Saniman Singh was absorbed in temporary service after acquiring t mporarv status and on > this verv ground I find the claimant's case cannot be acceped.

17. In view of the fact 1 do not feel it necessary to enter ir^o discussions further on the case of the railway administration about the non-entilement of the claimant for a appointment on comonssinnate ground on the basis of Ihe circular No. 9163.

18. Tn view of the discussions I find that terms of reference should be decided in affirmative and the claimant is not entitled to anv relief. The Award in the case is given accordingly.

Ditfd : 4-6-2001.

K. S. SRIVASTAV, P r e l i m" Officer New Delhi, the 8th June. 2001

S.O. 1504.—Tn pursuance of Sec! on 17 of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes, the Award of the Cen- tral Government Indusmal Tribunal, Bhubancswar as shown jh the Annexuie in the Industrial Dispute bet- ween the employers in relation to the management of Reserve Bank of India and then- workman, which was receiyed by the Central Government on 7-.6-2001.

[No >L-12012|.'04i95-m'a-I)] AJAY KUMAR, Desk' Officer ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL liRiSUNAL-CUM-LAfiOUtR COURT, BHUDANESWAR

PRESENT:

Sri S. K. Dhal, OSJS (Sr Branch), Presiding Officei, C.G'IT.-Cum-I Erbour Court Bhubanes\r?r.

Industrial .Dispute Cast No. Tr. I D. 1522001 Dated, 'Bhtibane-A .ir, the 23rd Mav, 2>ul.

BETWEEN:

The > Management of Reseiw Bank of Trtdia, Bhifban?swar

.Fiist Party-

Managament.

(AND)

Their Workmen, Shri Sanat

Kumar Lenka & Others. . .Second Party- A'PPEA'RANCES :

Shri-P. S. N. Prddsad, Asst. Legal Adviser. & Sbri A. K Vobcitvi'ia, Ass*. M"naner. . .For the Is* Part-Managanserit Shri Sanat Kumar Lenka, and Others.

. For the 2nd Party

Workmen

AWARD

The- Go' enu.'i.'nt of India in the Mniisti v of labour, in exerci"o of nawers conferred by <^lf"ns? fd) of'Sub- secficn (1) of Section 10 of the Industrial 'Di"pir*ps Art 1947 '1 i of 10471 l me referred the foliouin" diqiijit" ffij nd! -\6'<< i 053^- ' T OT GAZETTE OF tNDIA : OTfe 36, 2001/ ASAPtJA" % ' 1923 fpARf fk-~$Ec. 3(ii)]

"Whether the action of the management ol Re- serve bank of India, Bhubaneswar in termi- naring the services, of Shn Samrat Kr. Lenka, Shri Nannder Nath Mallick and Shri Biswajit Digal is legal and justified ? If not to what relief the workmen are entiled ?" 2. The facts behind the reference may be stated in brief.

Xiic woijonon ri diui clann statement hdve pleaded thai uney wu.e the CUJC-UI njy^uouis cinpauL.i"ed and empioyui oy ine K..b.j. (Jierem aiiei called us tnc ivianagcmeni;. iney were eligible, quaiilkd and sunatue ana '-u oil tvuig seiecu-u tiKy HCIC enipaiHllcd in ine register o£ ilie iViawagenieiR ilien luimei pleadings is mai tney wue woiking as SUDS lit me oi '"badaii workmen in place ot regular woikers when they tound absence anu when there is lequnenicnt lor ddaitional woik. ihey were employed since iyy(J and Worked :is> subs.itu'e or badli woikers bo they nave got ri^ht to be absoibed as a permanent employee ot the Management. Whei tins was the practice, in jimuary iyy4 five workmen (who were the claimamts in this case) were trucked out from the rolls ot the Management and they were lefused ot employment. No work was given to them thereafter. 'Ihey made several representations for their aosorption but they did not find favour of the Management. So they raised a dispute. Reconciliation failed. Thereafter the Govt. of India have made a reference as stated above.

.The prayer of the workmen is that as they have worked for the Management tor a luig period they should be absorbed in the Management.

4. On the basis of the abov;. pleadings of the Parties the following Issues were settled :~

ISSUES

I. Whether the action of the Management of R.B.I. Bhubaneswar in terminating the ser- vices of Shri Samrat Ki. Lenka, Shri Narmder Nath Mallick and Shri Biswa- jit Digal is legal and justified ?

II. If not to what relief the workmen are entitled?

5. On behalf of the workmen two witnesses have been examined whereas, the Mamagement has examined one witness. The copy of the settlement has been filed and has been exhibited as Ext.-A and the statement showing the number of days worked by each workmen lias been exhibited as Ext.-B.

0. ISSUE NO. 1

The workmen have claimed that they weie ticca maz- doors. On the other liand the Management hat. adduced evidence to convince that the persons who were sponsored by tho employment exchange and applied for the post and had taced the interview were designated at ticcai mazdoors. The present workmen have never applied tor the post nor have faced any interview. Moreover their names were not sponsored by the employment exchange. This evidence of the Management has not been rebuted by the workmen. The witness examined on behalf of the workmen has admitted that their names were not sponsored nor they have faced any interview nor they had received any intimation from the bank for. doing any work. The witnesses examined on behalf of the workmen in cross examination have stated that there " as no written order from the Management empanelling them as ticca maz- doors. In face of this evidence I cam safely come to the conclusion that the workmen were not empanelled as ticca mazdoors. So the settlement mado between the Management and the Union could¹ not be appli- cable to them. The work winch was being attended by the workmen was temporary and casual basis on the need of the jobs.

7. It has been pleaded on behalf ol the workmen that they were engaged as ticca or substitute or badaii in the Management and they have been refuted to employment with effect from Janinry 1994 even it they did not coinpVte 240 day*, preccdinp to their discharge or lermmnion for which they are entitled! to be noticed and abn they aie also entitled for payment.

were not help to the workmen rather the principle deemed in case ol Maharashtra Mate L'o-opeiauve cuuon Uroweis Marketing Federation Ltd. -Vrs.- Maharaphira Mate Lo-optrative Cotton Groweis Marketing Fcdecai'uu Employees. Union reported in AiK 1994 SC 1040 favours the submission made on behalf ot toe Management mat mere completion of 2HU days by ticca mazdoors does not conlirm mny right to permanent absoipticn. Ihe Memorandum oi M.UL- ment dtd. 23-7-93 ha& been exhibited in this case as .hxt.-A. It was decided that, engaging persons on daily wage basis, pmely on ad hoc basis in Class-lV in various '/cadres shall l?e discontinued Exl.-li reveals tne number of days worked by the workmen. It is seen that one of the workmen namely Smarat Kr. Lenka has worked 48 days in the year 1990, 49 days in the }Car 1991, 71 days jn Uie yeai 19^2, 79 days in the year 1993, 2 Jays in the year 1994. His friend Shri Narendra Nath Mallick has worked 3 days in the year 1985, 87 days in the year 1990, 80 days in the year 1981, 128 days in the year 1992, 77 days in the yeair 1993 and in the year 1994 he was not worked for any day. Similarly. Shri Biswajit Digal has worked only for 217 days from the yeai 1990 to 1994. There has been a discontinuation of ticca system remains uncontroverted. That is supported by the merno- randum of settlement which has been maiked as Ext.-A.

8. From the evidence of both the parties aavilable on record' T am of the opinion that the workmen have not been engaged as ticca mazdoors •" the H:mk So when they have not applied for any job and have not faced any interview they would not be entitled for permanent absorption. Moreover as stated by the witness of the Management there is no vacancy in the bank for appointment of the workmen.

9. After careful consideration of the evidence on record and the materials pjaced 1 am of the opinion that there has been no violation of statutory provisions on the part of tie 1-t Party-Man,ipement in dispensing, the services of the 2nd Party-Workmen. So the action of the Management cannot be said to be illegal and un-justificd.

ISSUE NO. II

In view of he findings in respect of the Issue No. T the workmen ace not entitled for any relief, Reference is answered accordingly.

Dictated and Corrected by me.

S. K. DHAL, Presiding OTker New Delhi, the 8th June, 2001 S.O. 1505.- -iii pursuance of Scclini 17 ot the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Comt, Blnibanetwar as showi in t!,c Anncxurc in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Reserve Bank of India and their workman, which WHS iLceivL\l by the Central Government on 7-6-2001.

[No. L-12012 205/95-IRiB-IjJ AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRI- BUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, BHUBANCSWAU

PRESENT :

Shri S. K. Dhal, OSJS (Sr. Branch), Pressing Officer, C.G.I.T.-rum-Lahour Court, Bhubuncs- war.

Industrial Dispute Case No. Tr. I.D. 149/2001 Dated, Bhubaneswar, the 24lh M;iy, 2001

BETWEEN

The Management of Reserve Bank of India, Bnubancivar

. In Purly- Management.

AND

Shri Duryodhan Bcfiera, C/o Samrat Kr. Lenka, Laxmisagar, Bhubaneswar. . . . 2nd Party— Workman.

APPEARANCES :

Sri, P. S. N. Pm.sad, Asst. Lefial Advisor, a,nd A. K. Mohapatra, Asst. Manager. RBI, BBSR—For the 1st Party-Mamigemetii.

Shri Duryudhan Behcra, Biiubaiieswar--Fni him- self—Workman.

AWARD

T]ic Government of [ndia in thj Minislrv vt Labour, in Picercisc nf poweis conferred bv tibiae (d) of Sub-section (1) of Section 10 of t!v Industrial Dis- putes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), have referred the fol- lowing disputes for adjudication vde their order No, L-12012/205/95-JR(B-I), dated IR-12-1997 :—

"Whether the action of the management of Re- serve Bank of India, Bhubaneswar in termi- nating the services of Shri Duryodhan Behera is legal and justified ? Tf not to what relief the workman is entitled ?"

2. The ense of the workman is that he WJS em- ployed by the R.B.I, (hereinafter called ;"s the Man- agement) since 199'¹ as ticca MnzcVor on l-einc duly selected. lie was vvnii-inp ar subs3054 THE GAZETTE OF I N D I A: JUNE 30, 2 0 0 1/ \SADHA 9, 1923 [PXRT I I ^ S E C. 3(ii)1 Management. On the other hand in the veai 1994 liie Management refused him employment. So the workman raised a dispute beiore tha Regional Labour Commissionqr. Reconciliation failed. Hence, this reference. The workman has prayed for re-mstate- m^nt in regular post.

New Delhi, ihe 8ih June, 2001

S.O. 1506.—In pi.i-".ua"ce of Seciior. 17 of the Industrial

Dispute? Act, 1947 (14 of 1WM, the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government In- dustrii.l Tribun?ljL.3boni Couit, Bhubnaswar as shown in the Anncxure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Reserve Bank of India and their worVman. \\hith was received by the Central Gov- ernment on 7-6-2001.

/No. T.-120!2|20'?9c-TK(B-l)l MAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

?RT S K D T I M . O ' - i lS CSP P.R WC1H PKPStD- 1NG OFFirER. CFNTRAL GOVI TNPITS'IRIALTRT- BUNAL-CUM-I. \BOUR COURT

BHUBANESWAR

TVPTf^TRTM. D l ' T U Tr C'KSF NO. TR T D. 150|2U0l Dated, Blu'bines'.vir, the 22nd Mav 2001 BE UWEEN

The Management of Reseive Bank

ot India. Bhuban> swar .. 1st ParlylMan.igement.

AND

Shii GunamUhi Piadhan,

Bhubaneswar. .. 2nd Party-Workman.

APPEARANCE :

Shu Gunanrdhi Pwdh.in, . . Foi himself-2nd Party Shti A.K. Mahapatia,

As^. Manager and Shu P.S.N. Piusad. Asst. Legal Adv.^ei. . For 1st P v u- Managemem.

AWARD

Th.- Government ot India ia ihe Min stiy of Labour m exercise of powers conferred b/ Clause (d) of Sub-Secticn (1) of Section 10 of the Industii.il Disputes Act, 1947 (14 ot 1947), lefenec! (he following dispute for adjudication vide their ordci No L-12012 207|)5-TRJU dated 2<<-9-l995: —

'Whethei the action of die Management of Reserve Bank of India, Bhuban w ar in termina'ing the ser- vices of Shri Gunamdhi Pradban is legal and justi- fied? If not, to what idief tht workman is entitled⁷" 2. 1h • ca-e of the sj"co"d party "or'. nun is that he was employed by th ' 1st Paity Management since 1994 as ticca mazdoor on bi-v i selected. He \v,n bein? engaged as subs- titote in place of reguta' workers who remained absent or when thue \. a-> lequ I mem of additional work. It is pleaded that the we,) man along with othes app'oached the Management for t i vj rcru'a¹" t'b^orption but they did not find favour o( the Management but on other hand on January W4 the Management refused him >'mp.'oyment, the workman theie- af(er raised a disoute which on failure of conciliation was refeued for rdiudicaiion lo thU Tiibunal It has been pleaded that Section 25CF) ot F[) Ac has been \iolated by the 1st Partv Management.

5tb5 (.sthinjc and who have faced tne intfiview and had passed Lit meiljtal t^st have bi.en 1 -.ted as ticca?. The witness exa- i unea on beholf ot the woikman i.e. the woiknian himself ii's aumiticd in ti>e cioss examination that his name was not •^.."la'ored by the Employment E\clwna>j. He was not issued any oidrr of engagement. So m mat case he would not come uridei th" dcsigi^H on of ticca. 1 he workman has also admit- ted that he has worked for 188 days m all over a rerrrd ot live veal⁵. The copy of the settlement has been marked in this case as E\t. A. It reve t!s that the ticca system has .since been dts-contmued m the bank. The evidence ot the management is th.it the workman being not engaged on ticca m th" bank ard he having not applied for any job in the RBM\T?iiagement he is not en itl;d to any lelief. This fact has not b'en controverted, ihe engagement of the work- men being tempor?ry and casual basi, on the needs of the job he does not h iv anv li'ht of continuance in the emp- loyment "oieover ne lias aho not woiked for 240 davs. In •> "cv of the un-rha!!enged evidence of the Management and thr mateiials placed on rccoid f am of th(> opinion fhit thei • has been no violation of statc'irv provisions oa fie put of the 1st Paity-Mnn aemr"t in dispensing the ser- vice of the workman IT other wosds the action of the Mana- "fment con rot he snid to be il'esnl anil uti-'Ustified fssue No. If

6. In v;ew of the above findings no relief i" admi s ble to the 2nd Paiiv v orlsmin

7. Reference is answered acco.dmj>lv

Dscfa'cd and corree'ed by me.

S K D H \ T. Piosidin^ Officer New Delhi, the 8th June, 2001

A On the h-> i- of flip nlenr!in"" of fhp nartie" the follT* 't>

jvcpgv v e ie 'ettled foi conciflprntion

TSSUES :

Act, 1947, between the Woikman, Sii R. GundsiLnan and the Management, The General Manager. Southern Railway, Chennai.)

BETWEEN

Shii R Gunasckaran. . . .. I Paity/Woikman

AND

"The General Managei, . . .. II Paity/Man^aement Southern Railway, Chennai.

APPEARANCE :

For the Woikman: Sii A. Mani, Advocate For the Management. .Sii G. Kalyanasundaram \d\oca

AWARD

The Govejnment of India, Ministry of Labour ,n ev:>cis: ot powers confened by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub- jection 2(A) ot Section 10 of Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, have referred the following dispute for adjudication vide Order No. L-41012/91/94-lR(B-I) dated 19-7-95:—

"Whether the action of the Management of Southern Railway. Madias, in terminating the services of Shii Gunasekaran w.e.f. February, 1992 in violation of Section 25F of the I.D. Act, 1947 is just, PIOPU and legal ? If not, to what relief is the wotkin^i entitled to ?"

2. This reference hos been made cailier to the Cental Government industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bangalo"¹, under refrience dated 19-7-95. Subsequently, as per the ord< I . of the Central Government dated 10-6-97, tlii' md>istrj il dispuie has been transfeired to the file of Tamil Nadu Industrial Tiibunal foi adjudication. On receipt o( .ecoids, that T ribunal took this case on file as I.D. No. S3 '97 and issued notices to both the parties to appear bef-Jre that Tribunal. On receipt of notice, both the patties appeared befote that Ti ibunal throueh their respective counsel on 23-2-98 later the Chim Statement by the T Party/Woikmnn was filed before that Tribunal on 22-9-98. The Counter Statement was filed bv the IT Party/Management on 3-12-98 P"eisince the enciuiry in this industrial dispute was pending in that Tribunal, till this case has been transfer'>*d to the file of this Tiibunal as per the orders of the Central Go^crn- n-K nt On rece'pt of records from that Tamil Nadu Indus*rial Tribunal, this ca"e was taken on file by this Trihun,! as in No 445/2001 on 9-2-2001.

(Dic'dtcd to the Stenogtapher, transciibed and typed bv i- ni cciect^J and piuiiounced by me in the open court o,i th<, d'i\ the 21st May. 2001.)

K. KARTHIKEYAN, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 11th June, 2001

SO 1508.—In pui^uance of Section 17 of the Industtiul I> putts Vet, 1947 (14 of 1917), the Central Government heiebv publishes the awaid nt the Cental Government In- dustrial Tribunal I Labour Coi'rt, Jaipur, as shown in the Annexu e in the industrial Uispiite between the employers in relation to the management of Western Railway, Kota. and thf*ir no'lmrn, which was receivd by the Central Gov- einment on 8-6-2001

l'No. L-U0l2|147i89-D-2(B)ilR(B-I)1 AJAY KUMAR, Desk O(Ti< er

ANNEXURE

< T>: i R \l GOVERNMENT INDUSTRKI. TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT, TAIPUR

Case No. CGIT -7112000

Reference No. L-4101211-17,89 D-2(B) dated : 2-5-90 The Divisional Secretary,

Paschim Railway Karmachari Parishad,

Kota

. • Applicant.

Vh.

The Divisional Railway Manager, W^^tern Rnilwa^', Kota

.. Non-applicant.

ATTEND A.NCH :

Foi the applicant : Shri A.D. Grower. For the ron-applKint . Shri Tej Prjkash Sharma.

Date cf \ n , 'd : 23-5-2001 :

New Delhi, the 11th June. 2001 PWl KoLu us a casual Labour and worked there upto 20-4 84. On 21-4-84 he was not taken on duty. He had completed moie than 240 days of service ;n the year preceding to the date of termination, His services were terminated without notice OT retienchment compensation ar> required undci Sectfon 25-F of the Act, 1947, It was priyed that he m.iy be reinstated in service fiom ihe date he was terminated fiom service with all the consequential benefits.

SO. 1509—In pursuance oi Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes (he award of the Central Government In- dustrial TiibunallLabour Courf, Jaipur, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers m relation to the management of Bank of Raiasrhan Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 8-6-2001.

TNo. L-12012I17I96-TJKB-W AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officei The non-applicant filed the reply to the claim slatme that the workina of Ihe applicant under the PWI Rajkot does not pertain to his Division. It was slated that the applicant was appointed on 21-2-83 under PWI (B) Kota. Tt was denied that he was not taken on duly on 21-4-84. It was stated thnt the applicant was directed for medical examina- tion on 26-3-84 to prant him temporary status, but he could not pass medical test of B-l category. He was again sent for medical i-x.iminntion on 3-S-34 for C-l category, but did not turned up thhereafter, It was dented that the applicant was retrenched.

The applicant filed 1-ejoineiei to the reply i ritei alinp the facts alleged in the stHtcment of claim. Tt was admitted by the applicant that he was ••ent for the medical examination on 26-3-F14 ard 3-5-S4. Tt was de'iied that Ihe applicant did not turned no nnd it was slated that he was nof taken on duty from 21-4-84.

On behalf of the non-applicint affidavit of Shri Kulbhushan Mrdi, Assistant Engineer was filed. The learned representa- tive of the applicant was given opportunity to cross-eximine him on his affidavit. On behalf of the applicant the affidavit of Ihs applicant was filed on which the opportunity was given to the lenined reprcsentnthe of 1hc non-applicant to cross examine him on his affidavit. The applicant also filed copy of the sci vice card mark "d W-l.

Heard arguments on brhalf of both ihe parties and perusM

the record

Tl is not disputed that the applicant had worked in the establishment of the non-applicant as per the details given fn the service card Fx-W-1 and had completed 240 davs of si-rvice in the year prior to the alleged date of termina- tion.

As per the order of reference it is to be considered as to whether (he termination of teivice of arp'icunt by the non- anpltCHnt on 1-4-8 4 is justified oi not. tn the statement cf claim the nprtlirant has not staled (hat his scivice was termi- nated on 1-4-R4 n1! statement his services wpre not terminated on 3 4-8^ nnd, therefore the question of retrenchmc-nt on that datf does not arise Tn view of these fncN Section 7^-V or i|i" ^ri, 1Q47 ic nn> attracted. The applicant is, th^iefore not entitled lo anv relief

The copes of the awaid may be senet to the Central Gov- ernment under Set t'On 17(1) of the Act, 1947 for publica- tion.

SdA Illegible Presiding Officei

"Whether action of the management of the Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. is justified in terminating the services of the workman (Shrl Narain Dutt) peon with effect from 18-11-94 from Branch Suratgarh of Bank of Rajasithan Ltd.? If not what relief the workman is en- titled and from what date?" 1872 GI/2001—93053 THE GAZETTE OF TNDIA : JUNE 30, 2001/ASADHA 9, 1923 [PART II—SEC -3(V)] 3059-30S0 " Tnfe GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUttE 30, 2001/.ASADHA 9, 1923- [PART It—Snc. 3(ii)] 3061 3062. THE GAZETTE 6P INEH^: JUNE 36,;2ART H ^ S E C. 3(k* "12. Weekly Holidays —Every establishment shall remain closed for one day's of the week the employer shall fix such date at the beginning3063 of the year, notify it to the inspector and sjpecity j,t in a notice prominently displayed in a conspicuous place in the shop of com- mercial Establishment. The employer shall not alter such day more after than once in six months and shall notify the alteration to the Inspector and make the necessary change in the notice in the shop or commercial establishment.

(.2) Notwithstanding anything eontained in sub- sec. (1) the State Government may allow an establishment to remain open throughout the week if they are satisfied that the estab- lishment employees additional ttafT for - meeting the requirements of sub-sec. (3).

(3) Every employee in an establishment shall be given at kast one whole day in a week as a holiday for rest.

(4) Tf shall not be lawful for an employer to c;¹'! an empiovee at |or'fnv an cmnkiyee to go to his establishment fir anv other place for anv work in connection with the busi- ness of his establishment on a v/eekiv holi- day or on n dav on which such establishment remains close!.

(5) No deduction <=hall be made from the w;:pes of an eniDlovee in onv establishment on account of thr hoUdsv s?iven *o him under nub-sac. Cl). If any emolovee is omplovcd on rlaiiv wanes, he shall none the le^ be nnid his wn^es for th? weeklv holiday."3004 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 30, 2001/ASADHA 9, 1923 [FARE II—SEC. 3(U)] (c) "tempoiuiy employee¹¹ means an employee who has been appointed for a limited period for work which is essentially of a temporary nature or who is employed temporally as an additional workman in connection with a temporal v increase in work of a permanent nature and includes ti|n employee other than a permanent employee who is appointed in a temporary vacancy caused by the absence of a particular permanent employee, and"3065 (1) "a workman shall be said to be in conti-

nuous service for a period if he is, for that period, in uninterrupted service, including service which may be interrupted on account of sicVness or authorised leave or an apci- dent or a strike which is not illegal, ot a lock-out or a cessation of work which is not due to any fault on the part of the workman.¹3066 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 30, 2001/IASADHA 9, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(iH] 3067 New Delhi, the 11th June, 200J S.O. 1510.—fn pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( ]4 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the Award of the Cen- tjral Government Industrial Tribunal Bhubaneswar as Shown in the Anmsxurs in the Industrial Dispute bet- ween the employers in relation to the management of Reserve Bank of India and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 8-6-2001.

fNo. L-120I2]204|95IR-(B-l)]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

SRI S. K. DHAL, O.S.J.S. (Sr. Branch), PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, BBSR Industrial Dispute Case No. Tr. I.D. 121|2001 Dated, Bhubaneswar, the 22nd May 200]

BETWEEN:

Shri B. Malleswar Rao & Others. Bhubaneswar.

.. .First Party-

Workman.

Vrs.

The Management of Reserve Bank of India, Bhubaneswar.

. .Second Party- Management.

APPEARANCES : Shri B. Malleswar Rao & Others, ...For the 1st

Party Workman, fehri A. K. Mohapatra, Asst. Manager, RBI, Bhubaneswar. , For the 2nd Party Management.

AWARD

The Government of India in tht Ministry of Labour in exercise of powers conferred upon them by clause (d) of sub-section 0) of Section 10 of the Indust- rial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) referred the following dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L-2~2012/204/95-ER(B-I), dated 25-9-95:—

"Whether the action of the Management of Re- serve Bank of India, Bhubaneswar. in termi- nating thcscrvicc, of Shri B. Malleswar Rao, Shn Mahendml Jena, Shri Nayan Navak Shri Upendra Natli Mallick, and Shri Linparaj Nunch is justified ? If not, to what relief the workman are entitled ?" 2. The facts behind the reference may be stated in brief:—The case ot the workmen is that they are ticca mazdoors working in the R.B.I, at Bhubaneswar on being empannelled by the Management. They had worked for more than 3 to 4 years but from January 1994 they have been refused of the employment. So they raised dispute before the Regional Labour Com- missioner. As the conciliation failed the matter has been referred to the Government of India! (Ministry of Labour) who in turn referred this matter to this Tribunal for answering the reference as stated above.

3. In the written statement the Management has pleaded that the procedure for appointment in baise cadre in Class—IV employees is that they call for names from the employment exchange and after due scrutiny regarding qualification and age the aplica- tions are invited from the short-listed candidates and they have faced the interview and medical test. There- after the wait-liset is prepared after taking into con- sideration the number of existing vacancies and they tire calJed as ticcis. The applicants -workmen do not come under the "ticcas" as their names were not Gjjonsored by the employment exchange and they have not faced any interview, They voluntarily come to the bank and if work is available their services arc utilised on daily rated basis. It is further submitted that, the settlement was reached between the Manage- ment and the Federation, representing the Class-IV cadre of the bank for consideration of persons selec- ted through proper procedure for engagement in the bank purely on adhoc basis. It is further pleaded that it was decided to dis-continue the practice of appointment of ticcas after adjusting, the list of ticcas which Was prepared. According to the Management, the workman do rot come under the category of ticcas and so they have got no right to claim regularisation.

4. On the above pleadings of the parties, the following issuia have been settled.

ISSUES

1. "Whether the action of the Management of Reserve Bank of Tndia, Bhubaneswar in terminating the services of Shri B. Malleswar Rao, Shii Mahendra Jena, Shri Nayan Nayak Shri Upentfra Nath Mallick, and Shri Linga- raj Nan da is justified ?"

2, If not, to what lelief the workman are entitled ?

• 5. On behalf of the Management three witnesses have been examined whereas on behalf of the workman one witness has hecn examined. The xerox copy of the mcmoTendum of settlement dated 23-7-1993 bet- ween the Management of RBI and All India RBI Workers Federation has been exhibited n this iase as Ext.-A on behalf of the Management.

6. ISSUE NO. 1.— On behalf of the workmen it has been submitted that 75 ticca workmen have been absorbed who have never rendered¹ continuous service of 3 years by 19-11-92. But the workmen oMhis case have been refused on the ground that they have not completed 240 days preceding to their discharge or termination. On the other hand it has been sub- mitted on behalf of the Management that as the work- men do not come under the ticcas and as they arc stand by worker they are not entitled to be absorbed in view of Hie settlement made between the Mange- merit and the Union. It has been further submittedSW WiE GAZETTE OF INDIA; JUNE 30i 2001/tfkSA&MA 9, 1$23 t P ^f IWSSBC. JfiOJ that, presently ihe system of appointment of ticcas has been abolished so there is no scope for the Management to absorb the workmen.

New Delhi, the 14th June, 2001

S.O. 1511.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Cen- tral Government Industrial Tribunal/Uaboui Court, Kanpur as shown in the Anncxure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of State Bank of India and their work- man, which was received by the Central Government on 13-6-2001.

[No. L-l2012/33/98-lR(B-I)] AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer

ANJSIEXURE

BEFORE SHRI R. P. PANDEY, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT' INDUS- T R IE TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, SARODAYA NAGAR, KANPUR

Industrial Dispute No. 31/99

In the matter of dispute between :

The President, Bhartiya Suma&th Bank Chatruth Shrcni Karamchari Sangh, Firozabad Road, Sitanajgar, Agra.

AND

The Assistant General Manager, State Bonk of India. Regional Office, Fir-,tArca. San jay Place, Agra.

AWARD

m On behalf of the workman statement of claim has been filed with the allegations that Sri Kishan Pal Singh was employed as canteen boy in State Dank of India, Aliganj Branch, District Etah in the year 1983 and since then he is working on that post. Ii has been alleged that he is serving the bank since 19R3 but he has not been made permanent in the service of the bank. Tt has been alleged that every year re- gular "selections of the employees is made in the bank and the concerned workman applied several times tor giving him regular employment in the bank but nc attention has been paid to his request hence he raised this industrial dispute which has teen referred to this tribunal for adjudication. It has been alleged that he is entitled LO get regular appointment in the bank. and is also entitled to get arrears of salary nt the rates mentioned in the claim statement.

I.have heard the authorised representatives-for both the sides and have gone through the record oi' the case. The auhoriscd representative for the manage- ment has argued that Kishan Pah Singh was a canteen boy in Aliganj Branch of the Bank in¹ District Etah and was working as suvh-since 1933 and being ap- pointed by Local Imptemuntation Committee he could not be treated as an employee of the bank in the eye of "law and the bank has not committed any error in not treating him as employee of the bank. After going through the lecord of the case- I find toicc in this contention. Sri Suresh Chandra Agarwal, M.W.I clearly stated that Kishan Pal Singh was a canteen tooy -in the Ah'ganj Branch of the Bank and he- was never •appointed on any post under the bank. He stated -that canteen was being run by Local Imple- mentation Committee which was constituted by per- manent employees ol the bank and the concerned workman Vvas employed by Local Implementation Committee. He stated that Kishan Pal Singh never worked on any post in the bank. The oral testimony of this wjtiiess appears to be correct Kishan Pal 'Singh, W.\y.l admitted in his cross examination that he •was appointed by Local Implementation Committee as canteen boy and he was getting -salary as a canteen boy in Aliganj Branch of the Bank in District Etah. In his statement of claim also the concerned workman has been mentioned as canteen boy. In the reference order also Kishan Pal Singh has been mentioned as canteen boy, Aliganj Branch of State Bank of India situate in District Etah. The management has filed the original application dated 16-5-91 moved by Kishan Pal Singh in the bank for giving him regular appointment in the bank. In this application also he has mentioned bimscll as canteen boy who was work- ing there since 14-7-83. The check list of the Bank of Kislian Pal Singh is Ext. M-2 on record which shows that he was not considered for regular appoint- ment because he was canteen boy and was not eligible to be considered for regular appointment in view of the settlement mack- in the years 1988 and 1991. The aforesaid evidence on the record proves beyond doubt that Sri Kishan Pal Singh was appointed as canteen boy in the year, 1983, by Local Implementation Com- mittee and was working since then in Aliganj Branch of the Bank in District Etah.

The management has filed its reply with the alle- gations that the concerned workman Kishan Pal Singh was never an employee ol the State Bank oi India hence there was no quesfion of giving him regular appointment on any post in the bank. It has been alleged that he worked in the concerned biacch oi the bank as canteen boy in the canteen which was run by Local Implementation Committee which i* constituted by the permanent members of the local staff and which is run by the Secretary of Local Imple- mentation Committee nominated by the employees of the Bank. The Branch Manager is "Ex Officio Presi- dent" of that Committee. It has been alleged that Kishan Pal Singh was appointed as canteen boy by Local Implementation Committee and continues to be the employee of that committee. It has been alleged that the wages wcic paid to him from the account which is opened in the bank in the name of Local Implementation Committee. It has been alleged that in the settlement made between the management and Union of the employees of the bank in the year 1988 and 1991 the temporary, ad-hoc and daily wage em- ployee of the bank were given an opportunity to get regular employment in the bank after facing selection board but the concerned workman Kishan Pal Singh was not a temporary, ad-hoc or daily* wage employee of the bank hence his case for regular appointment could not be considered and he could not get any benefit of those settlements. As he was not in the employment of the bank he could not be given any benefit of the aforesaid settlements made in the years 1988 and 1991. ft has been alleged that the bank is not able to pay him any arrears of salary and the claim of the workman is not liable to he rejected and the reference should be decided in favour of the management and against the workman.

The authorised representative for the bank has drawn my attention towards the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in a similar case of State Bank of India and others Versus State Bank of India Canteen Employees Union, 2000-Lab. 1C 1481. In this ense the Ron'ble Supreme Court of India has considered the status of a canteen boy appointed by Local Implementation Committee and held as under—

On behalf of>the workman rejoinder has been filed in which allegations made in the claim statement have been reiterated and the facts alleged in the written statement have been denied.

Employees of the canteens which are run at vari- ous branches by the Local Implementation Committee as per the welfare sch&me framed by the SBI would not become employees of the Bank as the Bank is not having any sta- tutory or contractual obligation or obligation arising under the Award to run such canteens.

Union raising the present dispute examined Sri Kishan Pal Singh as W.W.I and filed 27 documents ma'-ked Exts. W-l to W-27. The management examined Sri Suresh Chandra Agarwal, the then branch manager of the bank as M.W.I and filed 7 documents marked Fxts. M-l to M-7 in support of its case.

The law laid clown in the case cited above fully applies in the present case also. I, therefore, hold that- Kishan Pill Singh' who was an employee of the canteen could no become employee of the State Bank of India hecause he was never appointed according to ruks against nnv post in the bank and the bank hag30 70 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: JUNE 30, 2001/ASADHA 9, 1923 [PARI II—SEC. 3(ift] not committed any error in not treating him the employee ot the bantc.

Kishan Pal Singh as bank employee and not giving him benefit of settlement dated 27-10-88. Consequently the concerned workan is not entitled for any relief.

Reference is, therefore, decided against the concerned workman and m favour of the management of State Bank of India.

8-6-2001

R. F. PANDEY, Presiding Officer

Ne.v Delhi, the !4Ji June, 2001

S.O. 1512.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dusrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government beiebv pub-'ishes .he award of the Cen- tial G "veinment Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Chenna< JS shown in the ;\imcvj,c in the Industrial Dispute between the •:'••)•lo<,c< in re'i^u^n to tntc n.ana^uicni of Southern railway, Madras and their voikman, uhich was reserved b\ the Centre I Covern- ncnt on 13-6-2OC!.

jNo. i --Mi2/171,97-IR(B-n]

AJAY KUMAR, Desk Officer I he authorised! representative lor the workman has drawn my attention towards the settlement dated 27-10-88 which was made between the SB1 and workmen employees in the SB1 a copy of that settle- ment is on the record. On tne basis vi tins settle- ment, the representative of the workman has argued tual tne concerned wouonan was entitled to be absorbed against a permanent post m the bank. On the other hand th3 representatn e of the bank has argued that this settlement was made between the employees of the bank and the management oi the bank tor considenng the cases ot daily waters tempo- rary workers and casual workers of the bank for re- gular appointment agains* the posts which were vacant and which may fall vacant up to 1992. He has also argued that only such persons could be considered ?for regular employment in the bank who were eligible ior the post vacant in the bank. He has also con- tended that canteen boy who was not employee of the bank was not eligible to be considered for regular appointment in view of settlement made on 27-10-88. I have gone through the contents of the aforesaid settle- ment. That settlement provides that only those per- sons w ho were engaged by bank on casual basis or on daily wage basis or on tempcrary[acF-hoc basis against the vacancies of messengers, sweepers, water boys, cash coolie etc., were entitled to be considered for regular appointment in the bank. In the settlement, the canteen boys ar.> not mentioned as persons eligi- ble t0 be considered'for legular appointment in the bank. Exts. M-l and M-2 also indicate that Kishan Pal Singh had also applied for regular appointment on a post in the bank as canteen boy but his applica- tion was rejected because he was not entitled to get the benefit of the settlement being an employee of Local Implem;nlafion Committee and not an em- ployee of the 'iank. I, therefore, hold that the bank has not committed¹ any mistake in not considering the case of Kishan Pal Singh for

ANNEX! RE

BJ-TORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUS I RIAL 1 Rf BUN AL-C! JM-L 4BOUR COURT, OIDNNAT

Monch>. the 21st May, 2001

PRESENT :

K. Kanhk^yan, Pie"iding Officer.

Industrial D'spute No. 494/2001

'Tamil Nadu Industrial Dispute No. 64/98)

(In (h: matter of the dispute for adjudication under Section l0(,!)(d) and sub-section 2 ( A) of the In- dustrial Disputes Act. 1947 between the Workman, SJI A. Vajiravclu and the Management. The Divi- sional P.air"ay Manager, Southern Railway.)

BETWEEN

Shii A. Vpi.r.ivelu. , . .I Parly/Woiktna.i.

On behalf of the concerned workman an attempt has been made to show that some persons ycrc en- gaced as canteen bov it. the past have sot regular ap- poitments on certain post in *he bank hence the same benefit should be extended to the concerned v oik- man also. I jo not find anv force in this contention. Tf some canteen boys were also engaged on ad-hoc basis casual basis on the post under the bank thev mieht have cot the benefit of the retilement dated 27-10-88, Some o* the canteen boys mirfit have appeared in th3 reeuHr selec'ion for such post before selection board constituted acco'dint* to rules mnd thev mieht have <"">t se'tvfion against those nost r.nd mipht have p-o* emnioym •"•>•' accordirtpiv There i^ nrthirm on record to show that the conceined workman ever appeared before selection committee constituted for making regular selection for sucl post. Hence he enn not claim any parity with those persons, who being canteen boys i"ot selection in the vacant post in the bank and were appointed accordingly. The concerned workman could not net anv benefit which wns granted to such crmteen ho\s in the post. Tn view of pbove considerations T do not find anv ille- gality in the action of the bank in not accepting Sri3071 AND

Tbz Divisional Railway Manager, Souihcui Ra'l'vay, Madras.

. , II Party/Management.

APPEARANCES :

For die Workman : M's. Sundararaicn and Sri V. Srinivasan, Advocates.

For the Management: Sri P. Arulmudi, Advocate.

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour in exercis; oi powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section ( I) and sub-section 2(*A) oi" Section 10 of Indust.iai Dispute Acl, 1947 (14 of 2947), have re- ferred the following dispute for adjudication vide Order No. L-4iOI2/171/97-IR(B-I) dt. 11-3-98:—

'"Whether the action of Divisional Railway Mana- ger, Chcnnai Division, Chennai, in denying umedial examination and employment to Shii A. Vriiravclu with effect from 1981 is iustificJ ? If nol, to what relief thi workman is entitled ?"

2. This reference has been made earlier to the Tamil Nadu Industrial Tribunal, wrure it was taken on file as I.D. No. 64/3 998. On receipt of notice tVom thai Tribunal, boih the parties entered appearance through their respective counsel and filed their respective Claim Statement Mid-Counter Statement. The mattei pending there for enquiry vias adjourned from time to time by that Tribunal on" request by either one of the parties, till it was transferred to the file of this Tri- bunal for adjudication on the orders of transfer b> the Central Government

3. On receipt of records of this case from the Tamil Nadu S'lte Indushial Tribunal, this has been taken on file of this Tribunal on 15-2-2001 as I.D. No. 494/2001. On receipt of notice sent by this Tribunal to the couircl on record on either side, both the parties appeared before this Tribunal with their respective counsel. Due to the adjournment sought for by either one of the parties, the matter was adjourned from time to time for enquiry till 21-05-2001, this day.

4. When the matter was taken up for enquiry today, both the parties appeared before this Tribunal with their respective counsel and informed this Tribunal that the subject matter of this dispute has been already raised as a collective dispute and it was made as a collective industrial dispute in the schedule of refer- ence mentioned in Industrial Dispute No. 419/2001 (Tamil Nadu State Industrial Tribunal I.D. No. 9/97). The I P.ir.//Workman and his counsel on re- cord have made join* endorsement on the Claim State- ment filed in this case for the withdrawal of this case without nreiudice to I.D. No. 419/2001. The counsel for the II Party/Management has also represented that as 'no obicrtion'. The endorsement made on the Claim Statement is recorded and this case is dismissed as withdrawn. An award is passed accordingly and this reference is closed.

(Dictated to (he Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in he open court on this day the 21st May, 2001.) K. KARTHIKEYAN,Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 8th June, 2001

S.O. 1513.—la pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 194/ (14 of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Bharat Gold Mines and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 6-6-2001.

[No. I.-43012/3/92-IR(M)] B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT IN- DUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE

Dated," the 23rd May, 2001

PRESENT :

Hon'ble Shri V. N. Kulkarni, Fi.Com. LL.B., Presiding Officer.

C.R. No. 16/93

I PARTY:

Bharat Gold Mines Employees, Union. Represented by its Secretary, Oorgaum, K.G.F. 563 120.

II PARTY:

The Management of M/s. Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. Represented by its Managing Director. Oorgaum, K.G.F. 563 120.

AWARD

1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub- section 2A of the Section 10 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 has referred this dispute vide order No. L-43012/3/92-IRfMisc), dated 2-3-93 for adjudi- cation on the following schedule :

SCHEDULE

"Whether the Bharat Gold Mines Employees Union K.G.F. is justified in their demand3172 THE GAZETTE OF TNTJTA: JUNE 30, 2001/ASADHA 9, 1923 [PART .II—SEC. .3(ii)] for promotion of S/Shri Karunanidhi PE No. 129222, Bagyanathan, PE No. 122500, Arumugam, PE No. 123938 and Suguma- ran, PE No. 144347 to clerical cndie? If so, what relief the employees arc cntitlul to ?"

2. First Party joined the services of second party en 11-7-1977 as General Labourer. He joined as a permanent employee of the Second party management since 1985 and has been working as Clerk and dis- charging duties as a Clerk. He was denied promotion so dispute is raised.

3. First party appeared and filed claim statement.

The case of the first party in brief is as under:—• 4. First party wiw working as a Clerk since 1QR5 but his designation remains as General Labourer and was getting salary of General Labourer. One Shri Armugam joined on 11-7-77 as Shiftman since 1985 and he was working as Clerk but still designated as General Labourer. '"So also Karunanidhi joined as Timbcrman and working as a Clerk. All these work- men have completed their SSLC and Junior Type- writing and management is taking work in the office. The \^>rkmen are working as Clerks since 1985 but tfriey are still designated as 'aboiircn. so the action of the management is illeg.nl and in violaion of statutory rights of the workmen. The first party has prayed to pass award in his favour,

5. The Second party appeared and filed counter.

The case of the second party in brief i* as unJcr:

6. Second Party is not aware whether Bhagynatban, Karunanidhi, Armuram and Sngumaran are union members. It is a fact that they joined the services of the Second party management- as General Labourer for underground work from the date of their joining till 1-9-90. Thev voi'nlaniv worked on their own grade on surface in t:me section to lenrn the job and accordingly thev were promoted to work on surface, It is not correct to sav that the workmen were work- ing as Clerk at any time. Their appointment was only on underground wo>"k r"_; General I alv.urer 7. It is the furtive case of the Suond party thnt .the workmen were appointed in 1977 and 1980 as Genera] Labourers. The contention of the first party that thev were working as clerks since 1985 is abso- lutely false. All the allcgaiirns made bv the second party are not correct. The contention of the firsL party workmen is that the management of Nandidoorg Mines have given unmerited promotion to 'D' grade to one Shri Pattabiraman, a general Jahourer W'IO was very much junior to this workman is false and the work- men are not entitled for promotion as Clerk. The man- agement ' for these reasons has prayed to reject the reference.

8. Tt is seen from the records that B. Bhagyanathan was examined as WW1 nnd documents marked in tvi<" evHenci". \painst this Sim N. B'llasitbramaman exa- mined ns MW1 and documents are marked.

'). 1 have hearJ the arguments and perusrd all the documents and read evidence carefully. The evidence of WW1 is not sufficient to say that the workmen of the first party union have worked ss staff as alleged in the Claim Statement. VVVV1 sfates in his cross-exami- n ition that he did not produce any document evi- dencing that he was working in the Magazine section afli-r 1979 and Ihcn he started working as clerk from 1985 in the time office. This it -self is sufficient to show that the case of the first patty union workmen is not correct. WW1 says in his cross examination that he has not passed any cross examination. He further says that they gave representation to the Personal Manager. They have not given any endorsement. He did not produce the copy of the representation to this Tiibunal. With this cross examination I am of the opinion that he is not speaking truth and his evi- dence will not helpful to show this workmen were working at any time as clerks and they are entitled promotion as of right. WW1 further says in his cross examination that he does not know whether there are no p^sts of clerks in other words it is clear from the above evidence that there are no clerical posts avail- able.

10. Coming to the evidence of the MWI he cate- gorically states that these workmen were working as General Labourer. He further says that m therr oral representation the second party ordered them to work in the time office as General Labourer to assist the clerks and to learn the job. This work was on a tem- porary basis. They are paid v/ages as applicable to GL cadre. He categorically states that these workmen arc not entitled to be designated as clerks which is three grade above the general labourer. He categori- cally states in his cross examination that general labourers are also eligible for promotion in their res- pective cadres.

11. Taking all this into consideration I am of the opinion that the dispute has no merit and the first party workmen has failed to establish that they work- ed as clerks at any time. Tn view of the evidence by WW1 that no documents are produced to show that they started working as Clerk from 1985. It can be said that the General Labourer^ are also eligible for promotion but for regular promotion rules will have to be followed and the, first party Workmen have not established that they have fulfilled the qualifications for promotion and they are entitled for promotion as per the rules of the second party management.

12. Taking all this into consideration I am of the opinion that there is no merit in this reference and accordingly I proceed to pass the following order:

ORDER

The reference is rejected.

Dictated to PA transcribed bv her corrected .and signed by me on 22nd May, 2001.

HON'BLE SHRI V. N. KULKARNT

Presiding¹ Officer1073 New Delh\ the 8th June, 2001

S.O. 1514—HI pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute, Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government herebj' publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Murn- bal as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dis- pute between the employers in relation to the mana- gement of Mis. Timblo" Enterprises and their work- man, which was received by the Central Government on 6-6-2001,

[No. L-29011j60|99-IR(M)]

B. M. DAVID, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. II, MUMBAI PRESENT :

S. N. Saundankar.

Reference No. CGIT-2|41 of 2000.

Employers, in relation to the management of M[s. Timblo Enterprises.

The Proprietor, Kadar Manzil, Margao Goa-403 601.

AND

Their Workmen. The Secretary, Goa Mining Labour Welfare Union, Velho's Building, 2nd Floor, Opp. Municipal Garden, Panji, Goa.

APPEARANCES :

For the Employer : Mr. M, S. Bandodkar, Advocate.

For the Employer : Mr. M S Bandodkar, Advocate. Mumbai, dated 30th April, 2001.

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, by its Order No. L-29011|60|99|IR(M), dt. 25-5-2000, 1872(GI/2OO1—-11.

have referred to the following Industrial Dispute for adjudication.

"Whether the action of the management of Tirablo Enterpriser, Goa, in refusisg emp- loyment to 76 workmen (as per Anne- xure 'A' enclosed) w.e.f. 19-3-99 is legal and justified ? If not, to what relief the workmen ai>' entitled ?"

ANNEXURE 'A'

M s. Timbl" Enterprise¹ .

Sr. No. Name

1. Deepak G. Naik

Suresh B. Gaonkar

2.

3. Pta^hant D. Kholkar

4. Subhash B. Gaonkar

5. Sanriesh P. Naik

6. Santosh G. Gaonkar

7. Sagyn D. Nalekar

8. Narayan K. Sontakke

9. Maliadev S Velip

10. Krishna G. Gounker

-It. Suresh R. Gounker

12. Shivaj' B. Velip

13 Uihas P. Naik

14. Suresh K. Dessat

15. Rajendra P. Borker

16. Kushali K. Gaonkei

17. Navlo G. Natasso

18. Saju G. Gavli

19 Kamu R. Daipude

20. Ramesh C. Raiker

2!. Sandeep K. Dessai

22. Manoj N. Paryekar

23. Indrajit T. Gaonkar

24. Satywan B. Gaonker

25. Ratiiaker S. Neik

26. Bhairo Dhaipode

27. Anant K. Gaonkar

28. Nago B. Lambore

29. Jotto B. Lambore

30. Vittu R. Bekdo

31. Bombo B. Lambor

32.

33.

Prasad R. Gurav Sabhaji V. Arolkar3074 THE GAZETTE OF TNDIA : JUNE 30, 2001/ASADHA 9, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)J Varies S. Masc&renhas

Tulsidas Velip

34. 35.

Dhaklo J. Shelko

36.

Chandrakant N. Mirashi

37.

38. Nishikant Kakodker Smt. Bommi B. Warak

39.

Shambu J, Gaonker

40.

4J. Suresh G. Gaunkar Rohidas B. Vdip

42.

43. Subhas S. Laad Daya K. Kalewar

44.

Satyawan S. Gaonker

45.

Ganesh P. Gaimker

46.

47.

48.

Srirang R. Marvekar Smt. Laxmi V. Devidas Dhondo B. Rekdo

49.

Agostino D'Silva

50.

Jaiio J. Rekdo

51.

Ramchandra Gounkar

52.

53. 54.

55.

56.

Purushottam S. Gomlkar Gangaram Patil Hurichandra B. Gounker Subhash Shot Gounker

57. Melagrjs Fernandes John F. Femandes

58.

Tukaram R. Malik Ramesh K. Dessai

59. 60.

61.

62.

63.

Murari Kusta Gaonker Sadanand B. Vclip Kushali F. Dessai

64.

65.

Bhikaro Velip Yesso Velip

66.

67.

Francisco D'Costa Sayec Warak

68. Macho P. Misso

69.

70.

Ratnaker G. Naik Sun ay Naik

Nilesh Shirodker Vassant Gaoukar Thako Jangli

71. 72. 73. 74. Kanta Gaonkar

75. Vassu H. Gaonkar

76. Shaikh Saeiruddin

2. On receipt of the reference this Tribunal issued notices to the paries concerned. In response to that the union and the management were served with notices (Ex-3 and 4). The union vide (Exhibit-7) contended that they have settled the dispute with the management out of court, therefore, they do not desire to proceed with ihe reference. The manage- ment conceeded to that, vide endorsement of their Counsel Shri Bandodkar. Since the dispute has al- ready been settk-d out of court, the following order is passed :—

ORDER The reference .stands disposed of as settled vide (Exhibit-7).

S. N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer EXHIBIT No. 7

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2, MUMBAI Ref. No. CG1T-2|41[2000

Employers in relation to the Management of M|s. Timblo Enterprises

AND

Their workmen.

May it please your Honour

The workers concern in the above matter has already settled the subject matter of the Dispute. As such the union does not want to persuc the matter any further.

The concern order/award may be passed in view of the above. Date: 23-01-2001. Place : Murmugao-Goai.

Sd|-

SUHUOS NAIK, Secy. (Goa Mining Labour Welfare Union).

New Delhi, the 8th June, 2001

S.O. 1515.—In pursuance or Section J 7 of the In- dustrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Mumbai as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/s Castrol India Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 6-6-01.

[No. L-300l2/39/99-IR(M)] B.M. DAVID, Under Secy.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL No. 2, MUMBAr

PRESENT

S.N. SAUNDANKAR

Presiding Officer

REFERENCE No. CGlT-2/27 of 2000 EMPLOYERS IN RELATION TO THE MANAGE- MENT OF M/S. CASTROL INDIA LTD. The General Manager (Western Region), Castrol India Ltd., B-15/18, Commerce Centre, 78, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 034.

AND

THEIR WORKMEN The General Secretary, Petroleum Workmens' Union, Shramjeevi Avaz, 34, Sewree Cross Road, Sewri, Mumbai-400 015.

APPEARANCES:

FOR THE EMPLOYER : Mr. G.L. Govil,

Advocate

FOR THE WORKMEN : Mr. P.S. Desai,

Representative

Mumbai, Dated 18th May, 2001.

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, by its Order No. L-30012/39/99-IR(Misc), dated Nil have referred to the following Industrial Dispute for adjudication, to this Tribunal.

"Whether the demand raised by Petroleum Workers Union vide their letter dated 9-11-1998 (copy enclosed) against the management of M/s. Castrol India Ltd. subsequent to issue of notice dated 6-11-1998 issued by the management is justified? If so, to what relief the concerned workman are entitled?"

ANNEXURE

Employees Code

Name of Workman s.

No.

No.

3

L

I

Ahire S B Bhatkal SR Dias Affex Fernandes E Madhuram R J Mandrekar P D Panjanani M K Shavaji Shankar Arjun Vishram

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

1103 1121 1171 1196 1307 1308 1347 9692 1504

10. 1528,

Bhaguram L Sawant 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32.

1551 1591 1729 1732 1841 1977 9401 9691 9823 9967 9968 9970 9971 9972 9973 9974 9975 9977 9978 9981 9982 9983

Chandrakant Arjun Eknath Kashiram Laxman Dhondu Laxman Sudam Raghunath Sakharam Yeshwant Umaji Kisan Balu Sabajit J Singh Vijay Shivram Shankar Janu Kisan Rajaram Arvind J Khot Gregory M Menezes Thakiir P Sharma Dhutre S G Yadav A K S P Dinkar Vishram Gole Sanjay S Surve Aruu G Nandoskar R K Mulik D K Dhanawade B B

2. Pursuant to the notices, the General Secretary of the Union, Mr. Damle, filed Satetment of Claim (Exhibit-7) which was resisted by the management vide- Written Statement (Exhibit-8). On the rival pleadings of the parties, issues were framed at Exhibit-10 and consequently the matter was fixed for giving list of witnesses. The President of the Union, Mr. P.S. Desai and the Advocate Shri G.L. Govil for the management today, filed Settlement Deed dated 25-9-2000 with purshis Exhibit-11. Para 5 of the deed clearly mentions on amicable settlement, there- fore, reference will have to be disposed of and hence the Order:

ORDER

Reference stands disposed of as settled vide deed dated 25-9-2000 with purshis Exhibit-11. 18-5-2001

S.N. SAUNDANKAR, Presiding Officer BEFORE THE HON'BLE CENTRAL GOVERN- MENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL NO. 2 AT MUMBAI

REFERENCE NO. CGlT-2/27 OF 2000 BETWEEN

M/s. Castro India Ltd. B-15/18, Commerce Centre, 78, Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400 034.

AND

Their Workmen Represented by Petroleum Workman's Uiiion, Shramajcevi AYU^. 34, Sewroo Cross Road, Scwrce, Mumbai-400 015

MAY IT PLFASE THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL The paitijb to the above reference have amicably resolved the dispute coveied by this Reference by entering into Settlement dated 25-9-2000 under provisions of Sections 2(P\ 18(1) and 19 of the ID Act, 1947 and the Rules made thereunder. A copy of the said Memorandum of Settlement entered into by the parties is hereby annexed. In terms of clause 5 of the said Settlement the parties rejpectfully pray that this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to dispose of the said Reference accordingly.

Dated at Mumbai, this 18th day of May, 2001.

For and on behalf of Castrol India Ltd. S d /- (G. L. Govil), Advocate

For & oi K vi!f " workmen represented by Petro- leum We-¹'-- U^'on. Sd'- (P-S. Desai) President

Annexufe Memorandum of S.iUement daied 75-9-20

FORM-H

MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT (SEE RULE 58 OF INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES CENTRAL RULE 1957)

Memorandum of Settlement under Section 2(P) read with Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and the rules made hereunder:

PARTIES TO THE SETTLEMENT Representing Employer Represented by:

a. Castrol India Limited P.M. August in,

M.S. Warehouse, Bead-Mgmnt Devdop- 10, Magazine Street, ment & Emp Relations Darakhana, MUMBAI-400 010 V.V. Narayanan

Sr. Manager HR A.A. Balwalli Dy. Manager-HR & Admin.

. b. Representing Workmen: Represented by Petroleum Workmen's P.S. Desai, President Union S.V. Damle, General Secy. C/o A.l.T.U.C. Office A. Yadav Bhupesh Gupta Bhavau Arjun Vishram 85 Sayani Road Mumbai-400 025

Whereas Castrol India Limited was having a Filling Unit at M. S. Warehouse, Reay Road (here- inafter for brevity sake referred to as the ''Company") and for reasons recorded in preamble to Settlement dated 14-30-98, operations were discontinued in the Unit w.r.f. August 1998.

And Wheivas Reprcsemaiive.. of the Com- pan\ after discuyjons with the Petroleum Work- men's Union (h ;reinafter referred to as the "Imion"), entered into a Settlement dated 14-10-98 which amongst others, provided that the issue relating to the workmen who were left aftir transfer to Rital- ganga, would be discussed tvrther as rtcr the provisions of Law.

And Wjier as the Company vide Notice dated 6-! J 98 advi&ud all the workmen that since there was no work available, and as they were being p;>id their salary, t^iey were not required to report for duty for marking their attendance.

And Whereas the Union bsing aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the company, raised a dispute before tlic A,,iilant Labour Commissioner (Central) at Mambai on behalf of 23 workmen \ide their letter dated 09-11-1998 (copy enclosed as Annexure 'A") which finally culminated with a r frrence berni- made by the Central Government vide thur order no.: L-30Q12/39'99-IR before the Central Government industrial Tribunal No. 2 at Mumbai. as to whether the demand raiseo by the Petroleum Workmen's Union vide their letter dated 9-] 1-98 against the Management of M/s Castrol India Limited, subse- quent to issue of Nouce dated 6-11-98 by the Manage- ment- i& justified? L so, to what (d'?f the concerned v, 'Linen are entitled?

And Whereas pursuant thereto, t> series <-f di⁵-' ussions wtarc held with the Workmen/Union and the parties finally came to an understanding on 25-9-2000 and it has bsen \ t e r a ha agreed to settle tLe issue as a package deal for the 23 workmen oil behalt of whom the Union had raised the dispute.

Now, therefore, the parties have entered into the following settlement as a package deal.

TERMS OF THE SETTLEMENT 1. It is agreed by and between the parties that the company would provide jobs to seven workmen as per details given below:

EMP CODE

NAME

New Old Kisan Rajaram

*BhatkalS.R.

346 — 302 324 346 302

9968 1121 9975 9971 9967 9974 9982

325 910 300 324 325 300 205 Dinkar Vishram Gregory Me ieze" S1'a'\kar Janu Yadav AKSP Mulik B.K.

1.1 The aforesaid seven workmen would be provided jobs either at Head Office or at the Technology Centre at Wadala. Four would bs taken at3077 Wadala and three at Head Office. Five of the workmen would be provided training as Wrtch- men-cum-Drivers so that they a.'e^>ble to carry out the responsibilities of the job and fitted appropriately in tin; pay teak of Rs. 80-18-170- 22-390-28-950 and may be posted either at the Technology Certre or the Head Office as may be decided after the training. Insofar as Mr. S.R. Bhatkal is concerned he would continue to work as a Mechanic and. perfoim mu'ti-vatious tasks fiat would be allotted to him in the Technology Centre a! Wsdala. As regards Mr. B. Mulik, he would work in R & D Dsb at Wadala as General Workman and cany out such assignments that may be a He t ted io him.

1.2 It is undei steed ar.d agu-ed Aculd continue to be governed by Settlement d?ted 11-09-1997, t;ll it remains in force.

2. It is agreed ,l>at the following workmen would '-etire under the Voluntary Retirement Sclxrne of the Company and would be paid la. ? bio/tax-free com- pensation as under:

SI. Name No.

EMP Code

Tax-Frce Compen- sation

Taxab'e Compen- sation

R*.

Rs.

Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil 1. Arjun Visharam 2. Vijay Shivram 3. Sabajit Singh 4. Dias F.X. 5. Dhanvade B.B. 6. Chandrakant Arjun 7. Ahire S.B. 8. R. J. Madhuram 9. Mardrekar P.D.

1504 9691 9691 1171 9983 1551 1103 1307 1308

5,00,000 5,00,000 5,00,000 5,00,000 2,70,364 5,00.000 • 4,50,671 Nil Nil

1,47,051 1,32,992 2.1 As regards Mr. Arjun Visharam (Emp. Code No. 1504), there has been a dispute regarding his date of birih. It is agreed by and between the parties that his date of birth would be taken from his School Leaving Certificate which is ©2-04-1947. Accordingly date of birth in the Company records stands changed from 01-01-1943 to 02-04-1947. The new date of birth would b'e reckoned for purpose of retirement under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme.

2.2 The Uiiion had raised a dispute that the work- men were entitled to the increments and other allowances for the period they were not required to report for marking iheir attendance, as it was ihe company's decision of asking them not to 1872 GI/2001—12

report "for work. The Company, however, con- tended that since there was no work available and as they were not woiking, the workmen were not entitled to increments or other occu- pational allowances. Ap?rt from this, there were also disputes relating to Date of Birth etc. Without prejudice to the rights and contentions of either of the parties, and for a peaceful re- solution of the issue, it is agreed as z special case and without setting any precedent, as follows:

(a) 23 workmen on behalf of whom the Union had raised the dispute would be given the

(b) Insofar as the other allowances arc concerned, it is agreed that each of the workmen would be paid lump sum amout.ts in full and final settlement of all their claims as per Annextire 'B' attached hereto.

(c) In respect of M/s. E. Fernandas, Employee code 1196, S. Gole, Employee code 9877 and R.K. Nanduskar, Emp code 9981, as they have already retired under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme of the Company, they would be given a lumpsum amount in lieu of re-workings eic. as under :

EMP Code Lumpsum Amt (Rs.) SI. Name No.

76,578 69,194

70,522

1196 9877 9981

I. E. Fernandas 2. S. Gole 3. R.K. Nanduskar

(d) In so far as Mr. Eknath Toraskar (Emp. Code No. 1591) and Mr. Kisan Baloo, (Emp. Code No. 9401) in whose cases there have been disputes on the age, it is agreed that the age as communi- cated to the Union vide company's letter dated 9-6-98 would be taken. In terms of this they would be taken on rolls and there after they would retire under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme w.e.f. 25-09-2000. The arrears of salary, their retirement dues like P.F., Gratuity etc. are re-worked and the details of the same are enclosed hereto and marked as Annexure ' C. (e) It is funher agreed that as the Company was not in a position to pro\ide gainful employment to the workmen who are letiring undet Voluntary Retirement Scheme as per Clause No. 2 above,3078 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 30, 2001/ ASADHA 9, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] in order to provide them an assistance to settle down after taking up aKirate emp^^ment and for peaceful resolution of the issue, the Company in consideration thereof would pay lumpsum ? mounts within 15 days from the date on which the same would accrue and become payable to the workmen concerned as per table in Annexure 'D" attached hereto.

3. It is agreed by and between the Parties that such of the workmen who retire under the Voluntary Retirement Scheme of the Company would be covered under a Mediclaim Policy for Hospitalisaticn upto Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) per annum, each for self, spouse and two dependent children upto 21 years of age for a period of 10 years or upto the age rf retirement of workmen conttrned, whichever is eailier. 3.1 The premium to the aforesaid Mediclaim Policy would bo piid by the Company, The Mediclaim covers only Ho^pitalisation and the procedure for the claims would be ecmnmniceied to the workman separately.

3.2 As the Mediclaim would be operative only after one ye?r, the Hos-pitalisation in ca^c of emergen- cies will be extended through Shushrusha Hospital, Shivaji Park, Dadar through the Company Doctor. After 25-09-2001 the afore- said arrangement with Shushrusha Hospital would cease and the workmen would have to avail of the benefits under the mediclaim hos- pitalisation policy.

3.3 It is clarified that DOMICILIARY EXPENSES are not covered in ibe above and the same will have to be borne by the concerned workman.

4. The Union has spent a considerable sum of money- for litigation etc. and had requested the com- pany to p irlly defray the expenses. The Represen- tatives of the company contended that the company was in no way responsible for the same. However, considering the extenuating circumstances and the fact that closure of M.S. Warehouse has been ami- cably resolved,-it is agreed that as a special case and without setting any p-ecedent for the future, part expenses of the Union would be paid to them. Accordingly, it is agreed that a sum of Rs. 35,000/- would be paid to th& Petroleum Workmens Union after the entire issue has been resolved.

5. It is understood and agreed by and between the parties that pursuant to the above all the issues of the workmen have been fully resolved and no claim of any nature whatsovcr shall be made either by the workmen at by the Union and a copy of the Settle- ment would be filed before the Cential Government Industrial Tribunal No. 2 in Reference No. 27 of 2000 for passing "No Dispute Awaid" and the concilia lion proceedings befoie the Ast.ii. Labour Commissioner (Central) regarding Mr. E. Toraskar for closijre of the conciliation proceedings.

5.1 It is agreed between the parties that the payment of Rs. 35,000/- to the Union icferred lo in para 4 would only be made af^-r a joint application is made by the parties for passing cf "No Dispute Award" and for the closure of the conciliation proceedings regarding Mr. Eknath Toraskar.

6. It is agreed by the company that Union's contribution from the 23 workmen as per Annexure 'E' attached hereto would be deducted from the dues payable immediately and only the net amount would be paid to the individual workmen concerned.

7. It is understood and agreed that benefits under this Settlement would be extended to only those workmen who give individual undertaking through the General Secretary, Petroleum Workmen's Union to ?b:de by the terms of this Settlement.

8. It is understood and agreed between the parties that all and any issues relating to unit ai M.S. Ware- house have been fully and amicably resolved, Conse- que it to this, the Company would be free to deal with property of M.S. Warehouse (moveable and immo- vable like land, furniture, fixtures etc.) as it deems fit and prcper.

9. It is understood and agreed between the parties that any and all payments made pursuant to this Settlement shall be subject to deduction of tax at source as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

10. It is agreed by and between the parties that a copy of the Settlement shall be forwarded jointly to the authorities to whom the same has to be sent as per the provisions of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947." Now Therefore in witness whereof the parties have set their hands on this 25th day of SEPTEM- BER, 2000.

Representing Company Representing Workmen For CASTROL INDIA For PETROLEUM LIMITED WORKMEN'S UNION Nami Signature Name Signature P.M. Augustin, Sd/- P.S. Desai Sd/- Head-Mgmnt. Piesident Development & Emp. Relations

V.V. Narayanan Sd/- S.V. Damle Sd/- Sr. Manager— HR General Secrtary A.A. Balwalli Sd-/ A. Yadav

Dy. Manager—HR &Admin

Arjun Vishram Sd/-3029 (Copy to:

Office of (he Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) Shram Raksha Bhuwan, Opp. Priyadarshini Shivsrishti Road, Sion East, MUMBAI-4OO022.

3. Chief Labour Commissioner (Central)

New Delhi.

1. Assistant Labour Commissioner t(Cential) Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour Office of the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Shram Raksha Bhawan, Opp. Priyadarshini Shivsrishti Road, Sion East. MUMBAI-400 022.

4. Secretary to the Govt. of India 2. Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) Govt. of India, Ministry of Labour

Ministry of Labour NEW DELHI.

9lh November, 1998 BY REGISTERED POST A.D

To The General Manager (Western Region),

M/s Castrol India Ltd., Reay Road, Mumbai 400 010. Ref. : Your Notice dated November 6-1998

Sir,

We have been informed by our members of a notice dt. 6-11-1998, which you have unilaterally displayed on, the factory notice board and have also immediately implemented. We must regretfully say that the contents have shocked us. We have the following say in response :

1. You say that negotiations with the Union, in respect of the-workmen not transferred and remaining after the settlement dt. 14-10-1998, are in progress, which is just not true. There has been no negotiation/discussion in respect of the said workmen after the settlement^dt- 14-10-199S.

2. The said settlement specifically states that the matter of remaining workmen will be. dealt with as per the existing law. But you have brazenly contravened this clause by replacing your permanent waJchmcn by new con- tract watchmen immediately after putting up the said notice and by actually preventing the regular workmen from entering the Company premises at Roay Road.

3. The subsisting long term settlement dated 11-09-1997, makes it binding On you to provide wrrktothe work men covered by the settlement. Only paying them their monthly salary does not absolve you of your commit mem-undei the said settlement. You have tafo-n this step only with a view to :enoriso and pies&urise the work- men to accept the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, which you have been trying to thrust down the throats of your workmen. Tn fact your officers have time and again been telling the workmen that the notice under reference has been necessitated because the- workmen have not been accepting the Voluntary Retirement Scheme.

4. Please note that your above action amounts to a lock-out without compliance of the provisions of Law and therefore an illegal lockout and the samo is an unfair labour practice on your part. We, therefore, reject the said notice. Please note that our members shall report for dufy normally every day to seek work and they will accept theii monthly salaries at the factory only, on the normal pay-day.

In view of the facts stated above, we make the following demands on you.

DEMANDS

1. "that all the workmen those names arc listed in the annenure attached herewith , should be allowed to enter Ilie factory premises forthwith and they should be provided regular and normal work;"3080 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : JUNE 30, 2001/ASADHA 9, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 2. "that the fresh contract watchmen that you have appointed in place of your regular permanent watchmen with effect from 06-11-1998 be discontinued Immediately and your regular permanent watchmen be given their normal regular work."

We trust you will concede the above demands in full on receipt of this letter, telling which we will be cons- trained to take such steps as we deem fit to secure the grievance of our members.

Yours faithfully,

For PETROLEUM WORKMEN'S UNION

(V.V. DAMLE) General Secretary

C.C. to the Regional Labour Commissioner (Cm ral), Sion.

ANNEXURE 'C

REF. CLAUSE No. 2:2(d) of Settlement dated 25-09-2000.

STATEMENT OF ARREARS OF SALARY & RETIREMENT DUES LfKE P.F., GRATUITY, ETC. Employee

Name

Basic + DA >. Code

Sr. Nc

-t-FDA Difference

77421 1591

17

65826 EKNATH KASHIRAM KISAN BALOO

9401

2.

PF on Arrears

PL

Differential Gratuity HRA 5% Education

Compensa- Allowance

Conveyance Allowance tory

Allowance 3871

800

3720

1960 3291

315 700

3255

Misc. Allow. Total CL

Encashment

VRS Taxfree Compens.

25504 14585

10384 8464

9H(T 8181

"^500000 500000

Encashment

6642 6532

11165 11165

839367~ " 813545 NOTE : A Sum oi Rs. 12,455/- will De deducted irom tne aues oi Mr. fcicnath Kashiram and Rs. 9,643/- from Mr. Kisan Baloo towards interest recovery from Gratuity received by them earlier.

ANNEXURE 'D'

Ref. Clause 2.2(e) of Settlement -Statement of amounts *hat would accrue and become payable within 15 days, from the dates mentioned here under in respect of each of the Workmen

B.B.

" P.O.

RJ.

Madhuram E. Code 1307 Date of Accrual & due date of payment

Duanawade E Code 998:

Mandrekai E. Code 1308

352949 125000 125000 124680

367000 125000 125000 125000 32640

0 125000 125000 125000 125000 88063 October 1, 2000 October 1, 2001 October 1, 2002 October I, 2003 October 1, 2004 October 1, 2005 October 1, 2005 October 1, 2006 October 1, 2007 October 1, 2008 October 1, 2009

Chandrakant

S.B. Ahire E. Code 3 1103

Arjun E. Code 1551

Arjun Vishram, E. Cod e 1504, Vijay Shivram, E. Code 9823, E. Kashiram, E. Code 1591, Kisan Baloo, E. Code 9401. F.X. Dias, E. Code 11^3, Satajit Singh, E. Code 9691

0 120000 116480

50000 125000 125000 123740

0 125000 125000 124678 Mi

ANNEXUEE 'E'

Ref. Clause No. 6 of Settlement dated 25-09-2000 UNION CONTRIBUTION IN RESPECT OF 23 WORKMAN

Union Contributior (in Rs )

Fmp Code No

Sf. Name of the Employee No.

1103 1171 1307 1308

35217 47129 30394 30339 1. AHIRESD 2 D1AS F.X- 3. MADHURAM RJ 4 MANDREKARPD 5. ARJUN VISHRAM 6. CHANDRAKANT ARJUN 7. SABHAJ1T SINGH 8. VIJAY SHIVRAM 9. DHANAWADE B B.

1504 1551 9691 9823 9983 1591 9401 1196 9877 9981 1121 9967 9968

10. EKNATH KASH1RAM 11, KISANBALOO 12. E FERNANDES 13. S. GOLE 14. R.K. NANDUSKAR 15. S.R. BHATKAL 16 SHANKARJANOO 17. KISAN RAJARAM

9971 9974 9975 9982 9973 9978

49823 49137 45766 44460 29129 25144 24296 19727 11741 11781 24658 17752 .17752 17699 20261 20261 20508 15164 17280 18. GREGORY M. MENEZES 19. YADAVAKSP 20. DINKAR VISHRAM 21. B.K. MULIK 22. S G- DHUTRE 23. A G. SURVE

Act, 1947 (14 of 1947),- should be dec- lared to be a public utility services for the purposes of the said Act.

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (vi) of clause (n) of section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government hereby declares with immediate effect the said industry to be a public utility service for the purposes of tbe said Act for a period of six months.

i[No. S-11017|l|94-IR(PL)| H. C. GUPTA, Under Secy.

New Delhi, the 20th June, 2001

S.O. 1516.—Whereas the Centra] Govern ment is satisfied that the public interest re- quires that the services in the India Govt. Mint, Noida which is covered by item 11 ot the First Schedule to the Industrial Disputes3"0&2 tfJi^AZfetTfe6^lNDlA:'JUNfe 30, 2061/ASABHA 9, 1923 [PART TI^-SEC. 3(ii)j New Delhi, the /0th June, 200] S.O. 1517.—Whe' .as the Central Govern- ment is satisfied tha. the public interest re- quires that the services in the India Govt. Mint, Hyderabad which is covered by item 11 the First Schedule to the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), should be declared to be a public utility services for the purposes of the said Act :

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (vi) of clause (n) of section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government hereby dec- lares with immediate effect the said industry to be a public utility service for the purposes of ihe said Act for a period of six months.

l[No. S-11017|1|96-IR(PT )) H. C. GUPTA, Under Sec\. New Delhi, the 20th June, 2001 S.O. 1518.—Whereas the Central Govern- ment is satisfied that the public interest re- quires that the services in the India Govern- ment Mint, Calcutta which is covered by item 11 of the First Schedule to the Industrial Dis- putes Act, 1947 (14 of J947), shoud be declared 1o be a public utility service for *hc purposes of the said Act :

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause ,(vi) of clause (n) of section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Aat, 1947, the Central Government hereby declares with immediate effect the said industry to be a public utility service for the purposes of the said Act for a period of six months.

l[No. S-J1017|l|97-lR(PL)J H. C GUPTA, Under Secy.

New Delhi, the 20th June, 2001 S.O. 1519.—Whereas the Central Govern- ment is satisfied that the public interest re- quires that the services in the India Govern- ment Mint, Mumbai which is covered by item 11 of the First Schedule to the Industrial Dis- putes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), should be dec- lared to be a public utility services for the purposes of the said Act :

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (vi) of clause (n) of section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government hcrebv dec- Irres with immediate effect the said iiv'ustiy to be a public utility service for the purpo^s of the said Act for a period of six months.

(No. S-11O17|14|97-TR/P! >|

H. C. GUPTA, Under Secy.

New Delhi, the 20th June, 2001 S.O. 1520.—Whereas the Central Govern- ment is satisfied that the public interest re- quires that the services in the Security Paper Mill, Hoshangabad which is covered by item 21 of the First Schedule to the Inclutrial Dis- putes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), should be declared to be a public utility services for the purposes of the said Act :

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (vi) of clause (n) of section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government hereby dec- lares with immediate effect the said indusuy to be a public utility service for the purpose of the said Act for a period of six months.

{No. S-11O17|16I97-IR(?I )1

H. C. GUPTA. Under Se^y New Delhi, ihc 20th June, 2001 S.O. 1521.—Whereas the Central Govern- ment having been satisfied that the public interest so required had, in pursuance of the provisions of sub-clause (vi) of (he clause (n) of section 2 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1Q47 (14 of 1947), declared by the Notifi- cation of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour S.O. No. 2752 dated 1st December, 2000 thei services in India Govt. Mint. Cherlapally to be a public utilitv service for the purpose of the said Act, for a period of six months from the 26-12-2000.

And whereas, the Central Government is of opinion that public interest requires the extension of the said period bv a further period of six months;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to sub-clause (Vi) of clause (n) of section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Central Government hereby declares iie said industry to be a public utility service for the purposes of the said Act for a period of six months from the 26-6-2001.

l[No. S-110I7|3l98-IR(PL)]

H. C GUPTA. Under S:cy.

bunted by Ihc M.tnayer, Gnvi of India Press, Ring Rodd, New Delhi 110064 ;nd Published bv ihe ("ontu lln of Publiculinns Delhi 110(m ?W\