This Gazette may contains Multiple Subjects

REGN. NO. D. L.—33001/99 The Gazette of India

PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY

No. 32] NEW DELHI, SATURDAY, AUGUST, 11 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 Separate Paging is given to this Part in order that it may be filed as a separate compilation

PART II-—Section 3—Sub-Section (ii)

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

(other than the Ministry of Defence)

(4049)

2347 GI/3000— 14650 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [TART II—SEC. 3(ii)] MINISTRY OF FINANCE

(Department of Revenue)

Central Board of Direct Taxes

New Delhi, the 30th May, 2001

(INCOME TAX)

S. O. 1956.—In exercise of the powers conferred by the sub-clause (v) of clause (23C) of section 10 of the Income-tax Act, 19*61 (43 of 1<)61), the Central Government hereby notifies the "Shri Gajanan Maharaj Sansthan, Shegaon" for the purpose of the said sab-clause for the assessment years 1997- 98 to 1999-2000 subject to the following condi- tions, namely : —

(i) the assessee will apply its income, or accumulate for application, wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established ;

(ii) the assessee will not invest or deposit its funds (other than voluntary contributions received and maintained in the form of jewellery, furniture etc.) for any period during the previous years relevant to the assessment years mentioned above other wise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of Section 11 ;

(iii) this notification will not apply in relation to any income being profits and gains of business, unless the business is incidental \o the attainment of the objectives of the as?essee and separate hooks of accounts are maintained in respect of such business .

(iv) the assessee will regularly file its return of income before the Tneome-tax authority in accordance with the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

(INCOME TAX) tv) that in tne event of 'dissolution, its surplus and the assets will be given to a chari- table organisation with similar objectivts.

S. O. 1957.—In exercise of the powers conferred [Notification No. 137/2001/F. No. 197/27/2001 LTA-l]

by the sub-clause (v) of clause (23C) of section 10 of the lncforne-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby notifies the "Institution a SAMAR BHADRA, Under Secy.

Dharamsthala, Karnataka" for the purpose of the said sub-clause for the assessment years 2000- 2001 to 2002-2003 subject to the following conditions, namely :—

(i) the assessee will apply its income, or accumulate for application, wholly and. exclusively -o thj objects for which it is established ;

(ii) the assessee will not invest or deposit its funds (other than voluntary contributions received and maintained in the form of jewellery, furniture etc.) for any period during the previous yv,ars relevant to the assessment years mentioned above other- wise than in any one or more of the forms or modes specified in sub-section (5) of Section 11 ;

(iii) this notification will not apply in relation to any income being profits and gains of business, unless the business is incidental to the attainment of the objectives of the assessee and separate books of acounts are maintained in respect of such business.

(iv) the asses^e will regularly file its return of income before the Tncome-tax authority in accordance with the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

(v) that in the event of dissolution, its surplus and the asse$ts will be given to a chari- table organisation with similar objectives.

[Notification No. 197/200I/F. No. 197/106/ 2Q00-ITA-1] MRS. PROM1LA BHARDWAJ, Director (TTA-1)

4°⁵L New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001

(INCOME TAX)

J>. O. 1958.—In partial modification of noti- fication No. 220? dated 1st March," i,9,7#' issued, from File Mo. 176/129/77-ITA-I in the words 'Margao, Goa' be rcpajced wil,h words 'Veling Mardol, Goa-403404' and the words 'Union Territory, of Gca' be repalced by the words 'State of Goa'.

Other contents of the notification shall remain unchanged.

[Notification No. 212/2Q0L/F. No. 17)5/11/

£2001-if A-1] MRS. PROMILA BHARDWAJ,Dirccior HTA-1] (Narcotics Control Division)

(Legal Cell)

New Delhi, the 27th July, 2001 S.O. 1959.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (8) ot section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), read with section 36C of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotrdpic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), the Cerrtral Government hereby appoints Shri A. P. Desai, Advocate, as Special Public F'rosecutor for purpose' of conducting cases of Narcotics Control Bureau 01 behalf of the Central Government under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in the counts ' at Ahmedabad, for a period of three years or until further orders, whichever is earlier.

New Delhi, the 3U July, 2001

(INCOME TAX)

Povided that Sbri A. P. Desai shall not appear as ai defence counsel an behalf of any accused booked by the Central or a State Government, for any offence under the Narcotic Drugs and¹ Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, during the said period of three years.

[F. No. IV|2j200l-NCD(Legal)l S. KUMAR, Dy. Legal Adviser

S. O. J960.—In exercise of the powers con- ferred by clause (23) of section 10 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Govern- ment hereby notifies the "Chandigarli Lawn Tennis Association, Chandigarh" for tho purpose of the said clause Tor assessment years 1994-95 to 1996-97 subject to the following conditions namely :—

(i) the assessee will apply its income, or accumulate it for application, in conso- nance with the provisions of sub-stction (2) and (3) of Section 11 as modified by the said clause (23) for such accumulation wholly and exclusively to the objects for which it is established;

(ii) the assessee will not invest or deposit its funds (other than voluntary contri- butions received and maintainod in the form of jewellery, furniture or any other article as may be notified by the Board under the third provision to the aforesaid clause (23) for any period during the previous years relevant to the assessnerat years mentioned above otherwise than in any one or more of the forms or modes) specified in sub-section (5) of Section 11;

(iii) the assossee will not distribute any part of its income in any manner to its members except as grants to any association or institution affiliated to it; and

(iv) this notification will not apply in rolation to any income, being profits and gains of business, unless the business is inci- dcntial to tho attainments of the objectives of the assessee and separate books of accounts are maintained in respect of such business.

[Notification No. 223/2001/F. No. 196/2/2000- ITA-1 MRS. PROMILA BHARDWAJ, Director (TTA-T) 4053

Mumbai, the 14th July, 2001 RESERVE BANK OF INDIA

(Rural Planning and Credit Department)

(Central Office)

Mumbai, the 14th July, 2001

S.O. 1963.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- jection (7) of Section 42 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (2 of 1934) the Reserve Bank of, India heieby exempts all State Co-operative Banks which are included in the Second Schedule to the Act from the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 42 of the Recsrve Bank of Tndia Act, 1934 for a further period cf one year from Ot January, 2001 to 31st December, 2001 only.

[RPCD No. RF-06/07.02.05/2001-20021

MOHAMMAD TAHIR, Executive Director S.O. 1961.—In eexercisc of the powers conferred by sub- section (7) of Section 42 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (2 of 1934), the Reserve Bank of India hereby exempts nil Regional Rural Banks constituted under the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976 (21 of 1976} from the provisions of the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 42 of the Reserve flank of India Act, 1934 for a further period of one ycai from 01 January, 2001 to 31st December. 2001 only.

[RPCD No. RF-03/07.02.05/2001-20021

MOHAMMAD TAHIR, Executive Director

Mumbai, the 14th July, 2001

S.O. 1964.— In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (7) oE Section 42 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (2 of 1934), tlie Reserve Bank of India hereby exempts all State Co-operative Banks which are included in the Second Schedule to the Act from the provisions of sub-section (1A) of Section 42 of the Reserve Bank of India Act. 1934 for n further period of one year from 01 January, 2001 to 31st December, 2001 only.

[RPCD No. RF-07/O7.O2.05/20O1-20021 MOHAMMAD TAHIR, Executive Director Mumbai, the 14th July, 2001

SO. 1962.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (7) of Section 42 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (Act No. 2 of 1934), the Reserve Bank of India hereby exempts all Regional Rural Banks constituted under the Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976 (21 of 1976) from trie provisions of sub-section (1A) of Section 42 of the Reserve Bank of India

Act 1934 foi a period of one year from 01 January, 2001 to

31st December, 2001 only.

[RPCD No. RF-04/07.02.05/2001-20021

MOHAMMAD TAIIIR, Executive Director4054 Ttffi GAZETTE OF INDtA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART ll—SEC. 3(ii)] Qipartmen¹ of Economic Affairs (Banking Division)

New Delhi, the 18th July, 2001

S.O-1965.—In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (e) of sub-section 1 of Section 6 of the National Pausing Bank Act, 1987 (53 of 1987), the Central ^Qovarninent hereby appoints the following persons as directors of National Housing Bank with immediate effect and until further orders :—

(i) Shri S.S. Chattopadhyay,

Secretary to the Government of Tndia, Ministry of Urban Employment and Poverty Aljeviation, New Delhi.

(ii) Shri Satish Chandra,

Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Rural Development, Department of Rural Development, Now Delhi.

(iii) Shri Shskhar Agarwal,

Joint Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Economic Affairs. (Banking Division), New Delhi.

[F. No. 7/15/2000-B.O.-1.] RAMESH CHAND, Under Secy.

MINISTRY OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, FOOD AND PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION (Department of Food and Public Distribution) New Delhi, the 19th July, 2001 S.0.1966.-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 Corpora- tion of India under the administrative control of the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food & Public Distri- bution (Deptt. of Food & Public Distribution), where of more than 80% of staff have acquired the working knowledge of Hindi :

Food Corporation of India, District Office, Mandr" (Himachal Pradesh).

[No.E-11011/l/200l-Hindi] RAJNI RAZDAN, Jt. Secy.

(Department of Consumer Affairs)

New Delhi, the 301h July, 2001

S.O. 1907.—Jr. exercise of the powers conferred by "ub- secuon (1) of Section 7 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986 (63 of 1986), the Central Government hereby appoints Shri K. M. Sahni, IAS (AGMUT:69), as Director- Geneial, Bureau of Jndmn Standards in the pay scale of Rs. 22,400-525-24,500, wilh immediate effect for a period of three yeru.s or until further orders, whichever event occurs earlier.

[F. No. 2/3/20Q0-BIS1 DJESH BANDHU, Under Secy.

4055

MINISTRY OF COAL

ORDER

New Delhi, the 30th July, 2001

S. O. 1968.—Whereas on the publication of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S. O, 375, dated the 12th February, 2001 ih Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii) of the Gazette of Tndia, dated the 2'4th February, 2001, issued under Su(?-

And • whereas the Central Government is satisfied that the South Eastern Coalfields Limited Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), a Government Company, (hereinafter referred to as the Company), is willing to comply with such terms and conditions as the Central Government thinks fit to impose in this behalf ;

Now, therefore, in exorcise of tho powers con- ferred by Sub-section (I) of Section II of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the rights in or over the land, so vested, shall, with cficct from the 24th February, 2001 instead of continuing to so vest in the Central Government, vest in the said Company, subject to the following terms and conditions namely :—

(1) the sard Company shall reimburse the Central Government all payments made in respect of compensation, interest, damzges and the like, as determined under the provisions of the said Act ;

rights in or over the said lands so vesting ;

(4) the said Company shall have no power to transfer the said lands to any other person without the previous approval of the Central Government; and (2) a tribunal shall be constituted for the purpose of determining the amounts payable to the Central Government by the said Company under condition (1), and all expenditure incurred in connection with any such tiibunal and persons appointed to assist the tribunal shall be borno by the said Company and similarly, all expenditure incurred in respect of all legal proceedings like appeals etc., for or in over the said lands so vesting shall also bo borne by the said Company ;

(5) the said Company shall abide by such directions and rond'tiens as may bo given or Imposed by the Central Govern- ment for particular areas of the said lands as and when necossary.

[NO.43015/13/98-PRIW SANJAY BAHADUR, Dy. Secy.

(3) the said Company shall indemnify the Central Government or ' its official against any other expenditure that may bo nocessary in connection with any pro- ceedings by or against the Central Government or its official regarding the 4057 2147 GII2001—2.

40#A

New Delhi, the 30th July, 2001

S.O. 1969.—Whereas by the Notification of the Government of India in the then Ministry of Mines and Minerals, Department of Coal number S.O. 3557 dated 29th November, 1999, published in the Gazette of India dated 11th December, 1999 under Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Develop, ment) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957), the Central Government gave notice of its intention to acquire the lands in the locality specified in the Schedule annexed to that notification ;

And whereas the competent authority in pursuance of Section 8 of the said Act, has made his report to the Central Government;

And whereas the Central Government after considering the aforesaid report and after consulting the Govern- ment of Madhya Pradesh is satisfied that :

(a) the lands measuring 64.073 hectares (approximately) or 158.32 acres (approximately) as described In the Schedtile ' A' appended hereto; and

(b) the rights to mine quarry, bore, dig and search for, win, work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 1074.436 hectares (approximately) or 2654.93 acres (approximately) described in the Schedule ' B' appended hereto should be acquired;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 9 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that—

(a) the lands measuring 64.073 hectares (approximately) or 158.32 acres (approximately) as described in the Schedule ' A' and

(b) the rights to mine quarry, bore, dig a mi ^earch-for, win, work and carry away minerals in the lands measuring 1074.436 hectares (approximately) or 2654.93 acres (approximately) described in the Schedule ' B' are hereby acquired.

The Plan bearing No. SECL/BSP/GM(PLG)/Land/246 dated the 28th February, 2001"of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the Office of the Collector, Shahdol (Madhya Pradejh) or in the Office of the Coal. Controller 1, Council House Street, Calcutta or in the Office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Revenue Section) Seepat R o ad Bilaspur—495 006 (Chhattisgarh).

S C H E D U LE ' A'

AM AD A ND BLOCK-I

S O H A G P UR C O A L F I E L DS -

D I S T R I CT S H A H D OL ( M A D H YA P R A D E S H)

A LL R I G H T S.

SI N a me of Village

Patwari Halka

District

R e m a t k s'

Tahsil

Area in hectares N u m b er

N o.

1. Majhauli

64 .'©7-3

PaVt -

26

Shahdol'

K b t ma

T O T AL : 64.073 Hectares (approximately) OR 158.32 Acres (Approximately)

1. Khasra numbers acquired in village Majhauli (Part) :

158 (Part), 159, 160, 163, 181 to 194, 195 (Part), 200 (Part), 201 to 229, 230 (Part), 231 to 248, 250 (Paft), 251 (Part) 252 to 258, 262 (Part) 287 (Part), 296 (Part) 297 to 344, 348 (Part) 349,350, 351, 352 (Part), 354 (Part).

BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION

I —J

Lines starts from point 'I' on the common boundary for villages Majhauli—Kubaka and passes in village Majhauli through Khasra Numbers 200, 195, then western boun- dary of khasra numbers 181, 182, 186, 163, 160 through khasra numbers 158, 230, western boundary of khasra number 248, through khasra numbers 250, 262, 251, along the western boundary of khasra numbers 256, 257, 258, 298, through khasra numbers 296, 287, 352, 354 and meets at point 'J'.

J —K

Line passes in village Majhauli through Khasra numbers 354, 348, along the southern boundary of khasra numbers 339 341, 342, 343, 344 and meet at point'K .

K —Kl

Line passes along the common boundary of villages Majhauli—Nimha and mee'.s at point'KT.

K l —I

Line passes along the common boundary of village Majhauli—Kuhaka and meets at the starting point T.

SCHEDULE 'B'

AMADAND BLOCK-I

SOHAGPUR COALFIELDS

DISTRICT—SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)

MINING RIGHTS :

District

Name of Village

Tahsil

Remarks Patwari Halka Number

Area in Hectares

SI. No.

Shahdol

25

1.

Kotma Kotma

26

Oora Payari

33.868 114.969

Part Part 26

2. 3.

Shahdol Shahdol Shahdol

26

4

Kotma Kotma Kotma

26

Sohibelha Majhauli Dhanauli

Shahdol

291.361 269.364 364.874

5

Part Part Full TOTAL : 1074,436 hectares (approximately) OR 2654.93 acres approximately.

1. Khasra numbers acquired in Village Oora (Part) :

975 (Part), 980 (Part), 981, 982 (Part), 983 to 992, 993 (Part), 994 (Part), 995 (Part), 996, 997, 998 (Part), 999, 1000 (Part), 1001 (Part), 1002 (Part), 1003 (Part), 1005 (Part), 1011 (Part), 1031 (Part), 1032 (Part), 1033, 1034 (Part), 1035 to 1043,1044 (Part), 1051 (Part), 1052 (Part), 1053 (Part), 1054.

2. Khasra numbers acquired in village Payari (Part) :

1076 (Part), 1077 (Part), 1078 (Part), 1079 (Part), 1080,1081, 1082 (Part), 1083 (Part), 1084 (Part), 1105 (Part), 1143 (Part), 1144, 1145 (Part), 1146 to 1158, 1159 (Part), 1160 (Part), 1161 (Part), 1178 (Part), 1179 to 1192, 1193 (Part), 1194 to 1199, 1200 (Part), 1201 (Part), 1207 (Parr), 1243 (Part), 1244 (Part),!245 to 1250, 1251 (Part), 1407 (Part), 1408 (Part), 1409 (Part), 1410 (Part), 1411 (Part), 1515 (Part), 1518 (Part), 1519 (Part), 1520 to 1530, 1531 (Part), 1532 (Part), 1540 (Part), 1541 (Part), 1542 (Part), 1543 (Part), 1544 to 1556, 1557 (Part), 1558 to 1581, 1582 (Part), 1587 (Part), 1588 (Part), 1589 (Part), 1590 to 1613, 1614 (Part), 1615 to 1632, 1633 (Part), 2010 (Part), 2011 (Part), 2012 to 2038, 1150/2092, 1181/2093, 1184/2094, 1250/2096, 1251/2098, 1251/2099 (Part), 1251/2100 (Part).

3. Khasra numbers acquired in village Sohibelha (Part) :

40 (Part), 41, 42 (Part), 43 (Part), 44 (Part), 52 (Part), 53 to 69, 70 (Part), 71 to 76, 77 (Part), 78 (Part), 84 (Part), 145 (Part), 146 (Part), 149 (Part), 150 to 168, 169 (Part), 170 (Part), 171 (Part), 179 (Part), 562 (Part), 563 (Part), 566(Par), 567 to 570, 571 (Part), 572 (Part), 573 to 618, 619 (Part), 620 to 622, 623 (Part), 624 (Part), 625 (Part), 647 (Part), 654 (Part), 655 to 662, 663 (Part), 664 (Part), 667 (Part), 668 (Part), 669 (Part), 670 (Part), 671 (Part), 672 (Part), 673 to 711, 712 (Part), 713 (Part), 714 to 890, 891 (Part), 892 (Part), 893 (Part), 894 to 900, 901 ftPart), 902 (Part), 903 to 1038.

406 i 4. Khasra numbers acquired in village Majhauli (Part) :

1 to 157, 158 (Part), 161, 162, 164 to 180, 195 (Part), 196 to 199, 200 (Part), 230 (Part), 249, 250 (Part), 251 (Part), 259 to 261, 262 (Part), 263 to 286, 287 (Part), 288 to 295, 296 (Part), 345 to 347, 348 (Part), 352 (Part), 353, 354 (Part), 355 to 424.

5. Khasra numbers acquired in village Dhauauli (Full)

1 to 285, 148/286, 106/287, 15/2SS.

BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION : A —B T" • • - •

Line starts from point 'A' in village Sohibelha through khasra numbers 562, 563, 566 619, 625, 624, 623, 647, 902, 901, 893, 892, 891, 654, 663, 664, 663, 668, 667, 669, 670 671,672,712, 713,179,171,170,169,145,146, 149,77, 78,70,84,40 and meets at point 'B'.

Line passes through khasra numbers 44, 43, 42, 52 of village Sohibelha and meets at B —C

point 'C\

Line passes along the northern boundary of village Dhanauli and meets at point 'D'.

C —D

Line passes in village Oora through khasra numbers 980, 982, 975, 1005, 1003 1002 D —E

1001, 1000, 995, 994, 993, 1011, 1034, 1032, 1031, 1044, 1052, 1053, 1051 and meet at' point 'E'.

Line passes along the common boundary of "villages Oora—Khodri, Oora—Kuhaka, E — F — G — H—I

Dhanauli-—Kuhaka, Majhauli—Kuhaka and meets at point 'I'.

Line passes as described in All Rights boundary and meets at point T. I —J

Line passes as described in All rights boundary and meets at point 'K\ J —K

Line passes along the common boundary of villages Majhauli—Nimha, Payari—Nimha, K —L — M —N

Payari—Bhad and meets at point 'N'.

Line passes in village Payari through Khasra numbers 2011, 2010, 1633, 1687, 1588 1589 N — O ^A

1582, 1557, 1540, 1541, 1542, 1543, 1551, 1532, 1515, 1519, 1518, 1411, 1410*1409' 1408, 1407, 1614,2100,2099, 1251, 1244, 1243, 1207, 1201, 1200, 1178, 1159, 1160 1161, 1143, 1145, 1105, 1082, 1083, 1084, 1079, 1078, 1077, 1076, then enter in 'village Sohibelha and passes through Khasra numbers 572, 571, 562 and meets at the starting point 'A'.

[No. 43015/15/98-PRIW]

SANJAY BAHADUR, Dy. Secy.

New Delhi, the 31st July, 2001

S.O. J 970,1—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that coal is likely to be obtained from the lands mentioned in the Schedule hereto annexed ;

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

The plan bearing Number SECL/BSP/GM (PLG)/LAND/249 dated 23rd April, 2001 of the area covered by this notification can be inspected in the Office of the Collector, Shahdol (Madhy.i Pradesh) or in the Office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Calcutta—700 001 or in the Office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Revenue Section), Seepat Rond, Bilaspur—495 006 (Chhattisgarh).

4063

„,——' All persons interested in the land covered by this notification shall deliver all maps, charts and other docu- ments referred to in sub-section (7) of Section 13 of the said Act to the Officer-in-Charge/Hcad of the Department (Revenue), South Eastern Coalfields Limited, SeepatRoad, Bilaspur—495 006 (Chhattisgarh), within ninety c|f\s from the date of publication of this notification in the Official Gazette.

, Name of Village

Tahsil 0.

SI, N

Patwari Halka Number

93

Y

Sohagpur Sohagpur 2.

93

93

Sohagpur Sohagpur 4.

19

19

5.

Khairaha Kbannatb Kandoha Bodri Antariya

99

Sohagpur Sohagpur 6.

7.

94

Chhirihiti Pipariya

Sobagpur DTAL : 2364.718 hectares (approximately) OR 5843.:

SCHEDULE

KHAIRAHA BLOCK

SOHAGPUR AREA

DTSTRICT-SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)

Plan No. SECL/BSP/GM(Plg)/Land 249

Dated 23rd April, 2001 (showing the land for prospecting)

Distiict

Area in hectares Remarks

Part Shahdol

370.000 423.683 125.125

Part Part Full

960.135 185.000

Shahdol Shahdol Shahdol Shahdol

Part

220.775 80.000

Shabdol Shahdol

Part Part 12 acres (approximately)

~f<

Boundary Description

A—B

B—C

Lino starts from point 'A' in village Bodri and passes along the partly Western Bounday, then Northern boundary of villages Bodri, Khannath and meets at point 'B\ Lines passes through villages Khannath, Chhirihiti and meets at ["point *C\

C—D

Line passes partly along the Eastern boundary of village Chhirihiti and meets at point 'D'.

D—A

Lines passes along the Southern boundary of village Chhirihiti then through villages Kan- doha, Khairaha, Piparia, Antariya, then along the Southern boundary of village'Bodri and meets at the starting point 'A',

[NO.43015/8/2001/PRIW]

SANJAY BAHADUR, Dy, Secy.

4065

New Delhi, the 31st July, 2001

S.O. 1971.—Whereas by the Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Coal number S.O, 973(E) dated 2nd November, 2000, published in the Extraordinary Gazstte of India dated 2nd November, 2000, under Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957 (20 of 1957), the Central Government gave notice of its intention to acquire the lands in the locality specified in the Schedule annexed to that notification,

And whereas the competent authoiity in pursuance of section 8 of the said Act, has made his report to tho Central Government; 2347 GII2001—3.

And whereas the Central Government after considering the aforesaid report and after consulting the Govern- ment of Madhya Pradesh is satisfied that;

(a) the lands measuring 61.428 hectares (approximately) or 151.78 acres (approximately) as described in the schedule 'A' appended hereto, and

(b) the rights in the lands measuring 42.178 hectares (approximately) or 104.22 acres (approximately) des- cribed in the schedule 'B' appended hereto should be acquired;

Now, thercforcv in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 9 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby declares that—

(a) the lands measuring 61.428 hectares (approximately) or 151.78 acres (approximately) as described in the Schedule 'A', and

(b) the right in the lands measuring 42.178 hectares (approximately) or 104.22 acres (approximately) as described in the Schedule 'B' are hereby acquired

The Plan bearing No:SECL/BSP/GM(PLG)/Land/245 dated the 11th January, 2001 of the area covered by this notification may be inspected in the Office of the Collector, Shahdol (Madhya Pradesh) or in the Office of the Coal Controller, 1, Council House Street, Calcutta or in the Office of the South Eastern Coalfields Limited (Revenue Section) Seepat Road, Bilaspur-495006 (Chhattisgarh). ,

SCHEDULE-'A'

BAKHI PROJECT

SOHAGPUR AREA

DISTRICT SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)

ALL RIGHTS

Rerrtarks

Tahsil

District

Area in hectares Name of Village

SI. No.

Patwari Halka Number

Anuppur

Shahdol

61.428

47

Part 1. Bakhi

TOTAL : 61.428 Hectares (appioximately) OR 151.78 Acres (approximately)

1. Plot numbers acquired in village Bakhi (Part)

1560, 1561, 1563, 1564, 1565, 1566 (Part), 1568, 1574 (Part), 1575 to 1594, 1621 to 1631, 1632 (Part), 1641 (Part).

1662 to 1711, 1590/1724.

BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION

A—B

Line start from point 'A' in village Bakhi and passes along the northern boundary of plot numbers- 1663, Western boundary of plot numbers 1664, 1665, through plot number 1641, Western boundary of plot number 1641, then through plot number 1632 Western bound- ary of plot numbers 1632, 1621, 1623, 1589, 1592, 1593, 1594, through plot number 1574, Western boundary of plot number 1568 and meet at point 'B'.

B—C

Line passes along northern boundaiy of plot numbers 1568, 1574, through plot number 1566, then northern boundary of plot number 1564 and meet at point ' C\ C—D—E

Line passes along the eastern boundary of plot numbers 1564, 1563, northern boundary of plot numbers 1561, 1560, 1585 and Eastern boundary of plot number 1585 and meet at point 'E'.

E—F—A

Line passes along the Southern boundary of plot numbers 1585, 1701, 1702, 1703, 1704, 1705, ,1711, Eastern boundary of plot numbers 1710, 1679, Southern boundary of plot number 1679, Western boundary of plot number 1679, Southern boundary of plot numbers 1663, 1662, 1663, Western boundry of plot number 1663 of village Bakhi and meetatthc starting point 'A'.

4067

SCHEDULE—'B'

BAKHI PROJECT

SOHAGPUR AREA

DISTRICT—SHAHDOL (MADHYA PRADESH)

MINING RIGHTS

Tahsil

District

Area in Hectares Remarks Name of Village

SI. No

Patwari Halka Number

42.178

Part

Anuppur

Shahdol

47

Bakhi

1

TOTAL : 42.178 Hectres (approximately) OR 104.22 Acres (approximately)

1 Plot numbers acquired in Village Bakhi (Part)

1179to 1181, 1184 to 1187, 1190, 1191(Part), 1192(Part), 1193(Part), 1194, 1195 (Part), 1199(Part), 1201/(Parl), 1202 to 1207, 1208 (Part), 1209 (Part), 1210 (Part), 1295 (Part), 1296 (Part), 1297 (Part), 1298, 1299 (Part), 1300 (Part), 1302 (Part), 1303 (Part), 1305 (Part), 1308 (Part), 1321 (Part), 1322, 1444 (Part), 1445 to 1467, 1468 (Pan), 1469, 1470, 1471 (Part), 1473 (Part), 1474 to 1537, 1566 (Part), 1567, 1569 to 1573, 1574 (Part), 1595 to 1620, 1632 (Part), 1633 to 1637, 1639, 1640, 1641 (Part), 1445/1722, 1530/1723, 1605/1730

BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION

A—B

Line start from point 'A' in village Bakhi and passes as described in AH right area boundary and meets at point 'B'

Line passes along as described in a," right area boundary and meets at point 'C'~ B—C

C—Cl

Line passes ajong the eastern boundary of plot numbers 1535, 1536; 1357, 1528, 1526, 1525, 1524, 1179, 1181, 1184, 1187, 1190, 119] and meets at poir.t 'Cl' Cl—C2

Line passes through plot numbers 1191, 1192, 1193, 1195, 1199, 120], 1209, 1208, 1210, 1296, 1295. 1297, 1299. 1300, 1302, 1303, 1305, 1308, 1321, 1473, 1471, 1468, 1444, and meets at point 'C2\

C2—A

Lines passes along the Western boundary of plot numbeis 1444, 1446, 1570, 1571, 1730, 1637, 1610, 1636, 1635, 1634, 1633, 1641, then Southern Boundary of plot number 1641, and meet at the starting point 'A',

[No,43015/l1/98-PRIWJ

SANJAY BAHADUR, Dy. Secy.

ORDER

New Delhi, the 1st August, 2001 S. O. 197?.—Whereas on the publication of the notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Energy, (Department of Coal) number S. O. 222 dated the 14th January 1986, for an area of 1350.00 acres (approx.) or 546.32 hectares (approx.), issued under Sub-section (i) of Section 9 of the Coal Beating Areas (Acquisition and Development Act, 1957 (20 of 1957) and published in the Gazette of India dated the 25th January, 1986, the land described in the said schedule appended to the notification vested absolutely in the Central Government free from all encumbrances under sub-section (1) of Section 10 of ihe said Act.

And whereas the Central Government is satisfied that the Central Coalfields Limited, Ranchi, a Government Company, (hereinafter referred io as the said company is willing to comply with such terms and conditions as the Central Government thinksfitto impose in this behalf ;

Now, therefore, in exercise of the poewers con- ferred by sub-section (i) of Section 11 of the said Act, the Central Government hereby directs that the lands and rights so vested shall, with effect from the 25th January, 1986 instead of continuing to so vest in the Central Government, shall vest in the said company, subject io the following term and conditions namely :—

(1) The said Company, shall reimburse the Central Government all payments made in respect of compensation, interest, damages etc., 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 company under conditions (1) and all persons appointed to assist the Tribunal shall be borne by the said company, and, similarly, all expenditure incurred in respect of all legal proceed- ings like appeals, etc., for or in connection with the rights in or over the lands, so vesting, shall also be borne by the said Company.

(3) The said Company shall indemnify the Central Government or its ofiicials against ^any other expenditure that may be necessary in connection with any proceed- ings by or rights or in over the lands so vesting.

(4) The said Company, shall have no powers to transfer the lands specified in the schedule to the said notifications to any other person without the previous approval of the Central Government. (5) The said Company shall abide by such directions and conditions, as may be given or imposed ,by the Central Government for particular areas, as and when necessary.

[ No. 19/33/83/CL/CA/PRIW] SANJAY BAHADUR, Dy. Secy.

4069

MINISTRY OF HEALTH A FAMILY WELFARE

(Department of Health)

New Delhi, the 19th July, 3001

S.O. 1974.—In pursuance of clause (b) of sub-section(l) of Section 3 of the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 (102 of 1956), the Central Govern-40^70 J HE GAZETTE OF INDIA. AUGUST l i, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 tPAiu ft—SFC 3(ii)] ment hereby nwkcs the following amendment in the notification of Go\ eminent of India in the then Ministry of Health number SO. 138, dated the 9th January, 1960, namely —

In the said Notification, under tbc heading, 'Elect- ed under clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 3', the following serial njmbers and the names of the Universities shall be omitted : —

'8. Andhra University

12. Osmama University

20. Mysore University

28. Punjabi Univeisity

41. Bangalore University

45 Guru Nanak Dev University

57 Nagarajuna University

60. Mangalore University

62. Bharthidasan UniversitV

[No. V-llon/l/2000-ME(UG)] P.G. KALADHARAN, Under Sscy.

Note :—The Principal notification was published in the Gazette of India vide S.O. mimoer 138, dated 9th January, 1960.

New Delhi, the 27th July, 2001

S.O.I975—Tn exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) sub-section (4) of section 10 of the Den- tists Act 1948 (16 of 1948), the Central Government, after consulting the Dental Council of India, hereby makes the following further amendment in Part-Ill of the Schedule to tht said Act namely • —

In Part-ITI of the said Schedule after serial number 79 and the entries relating thereto, the following serial number and entries will be added namely •—

80. Smolensk Five > cars dip- Diploma in Me-

loma in Medi- dicine (Stoma- State Medical

cine (Stomato- tology), Academy, Russia

logy)

Smolensk State

The aoove qua- Medical Aca-

lified ion will be demy, Russia.

A recognized

dental qualifica-

tion when grant-

ed on or after

26-6-97.

[No.V-12018/2/2000-PMS]

S. K. RAO, Director (ME) 4071

MINISTRY OF POWER

New Delhi, the 26th July, 2001

S.O-1977.—In pursuance of sub-section 1 of

section 36 of the Indian ElectriciLy Act, 1910 (9 of

1910), the Central Government is pleased to nominate

Shri A. Vfrfgbese, Chief Engineer, Central Electricity

Authority (CEA) as Electrical Inspector (CEA w.e.f.

11-6-2001 vice Shrj S. Santhanam who has since

retired on superannuation as Cbier Engineer and

Electrical Inspector, CEA.

[F. No. 42/4/200l-R&R]

AJAY SHANKAR, Jt. Secy.

MTTSfTSTRY OF CTVTL AVIATION

New Delhi, the 27th July, 2001

S.O.I976.—Tn supersession of Notification No.

E-11011/8/96-Hindi dated 6-12-1997 under which

offices of Corporate & Operation of Alliance Air

had been notified. Further, it is intimated that

Corporate office and Operational office of Alliance

Air are clubbed as Alliance Air Head Quarter. Ac-

cordingly, in pursuance of Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10

of the Official Languages (Use fo.r the Official Pur-

poses of the Union) Rule, 1976 the Central Govern-

ment, hereby notifies Alliance Air, Domestic Arrival

Hall, 1st Floor, Indira Gandhi International Airport,

New Delhi of Ministry of Civil Aviation, where of,

more than 80% staff have acquired the working

knowledge of Hindi.

[No. E.-llOli/Ol/2000-Hindi]

MINISTRY OF STEEt C. B. NARNAULI, Director (OL)

New Delhi, the 30th July, 2001

S.O. 1978.--In pursuance of sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Official Language (Use for official puroose of the Union) Rules, 1976 (as emended, 1987) the Central Government hereby notifies the Steel Authority of India Limited, Raw Materinl Division, Industry House, 10, Camac Street, Kolkata-7.00017 under the administrative control of Ministry of Steel, where more than 80 per cent staff have acquired working knowledge of Hindi.

[No. E-I1011/6/20O1-HINDI]

ANITA PARVEEN, Dy. Secy.

MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT & POVERTY ALLEVIATION

(Delhi Division)

New Delhi, the 1st August, 2001

S.O. 1979.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub- section (1), read with clause (g) of sub-section (3), of Section 3 of thp Delhi Development Act, 1957 (61 of 1957), the Cen- tral Government hereby nominates Shri K. T. Gurumukhi, Additional Chief Planner who is holding the charge of the post of Chief Planner in the Town & Country PlanninR Organisation, as Member of Delhi Development Authority vice D. S. Mcshram and makes the following amendments in the notification of the Government of India, Ministry of Health No. 12-173/57-LSG dated 30-12-1957. namely:— "Tn item No. 10(A), for the entry "Shri D. S. Meshram, Chief Planner, Town & Country Planninfl Organi- zation", the following entry shall be substituted, namely, "Shri K. T. Gurumukhi. Additional Chief Planner, Town & Country Planninfi Organization."

[No. K-l 1011/20'/97-DDIA1

V. K. MTSRA. Under Secy.

(Directorate of Estates) New Delhi, the 6th August, 2001 S. O. 19S0.—in exercise of the powers con- ferred by section 3 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (40 of 1971), the Central Government hereby appoints the officers mentioned in column (1) of the Table below, being Gazetted officers of Government, to be estate officers for the purposes of the said Act, who shall exercise the powers conferred, and perform the duties imposed on the estate officers by or under the said Act within the local limits of their respective jurisdiction in respect of the public premises specified in column (2) of the said Table.

TABLE

Designation of the officers Category of Public Pre- mises and local limits of jurisdiction

(2)

(1)

1. Executive Engineer, All General Pool accom- modation owned or controlled by Control Government at Kanpur Kanpur Central Divi- sion, Central Public Works Department, Kanpur

2. Assistant Engineer,

Kanpur Central Sub- Division 11, Kanpur

All General Pool accom- modation owned or controlled by Central Government at Kanpur

[File No. 21012/2/99-Pol. I] DARSHAN LAL, Deputy Director of Estate 4073 • 2347GI/2001—ty4074 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA: AUGUST 11,2001 SARVANA20,1923 [PARI-II—SEC. 3 (li)] 4075

Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas

New Delhi, the 3rd August, 2001

s. o. 1981.—Whereas it appears to the Central Government that it is necessary in the public interest that for the transport of Natural Gas in the State of Gujarat in District Surat, Taluka Chourasi, Village Suvali to ViHage Mora pipelines should be laid by the Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation.

And whereas, for purpose of laying such pipelines, it is necessary to acquire the right of user in the lands described in the Schedule annexed to this notification.

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

Any pefsort interested in the lands described tn the said Schedule may .within twenty-one days from the date of which the copies of the notification, as published in the officiaJ Gazette, are msde available to the general public object in writing to the acquisition of the right of user therein or laying of the pipelines under the land to The Compliant Authority, Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Limited, Block No. 1$. 2fK* Floor, Udyog Bhavan, Sector NQ. 11, GandhinagaF-382 011, Gujarat4076 THEGAZETTEOFINDIA:AUGUST11,2001SARVANA20,1923 [PART II—SEC, 3(ii)]

P A

1

A/P

2 3

-A

1

Chourasi Suvali 498 446 Mora 230 233 231 148 263 150 151 151 157 158 163 174 171 170 169 168 174

Centiare 6 80 77 38 51 54 02 03 73 46 98 00 25 30 15 45 25 10 07 27

A/P

4 00 00 01 00 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00

State : Gujarat Area Are S 70 42 60 04 34 14 48 31 . 00 27 20 05 12 18 12 17 20 06 08

[File No. L, 14014/4/99 GP (Part-m)] SWAMI SINGH, Director till MINISTRY OF LABOUR

New Delhi, the 12th July, 2001

S.O. 1982.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Centra] Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Calcutta as shown in the Annexurc in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of National Insurance Co, Ltd. kind their workman, which was reccired by the Central Government on 12-7-2001.

[No. L-17012|36|95-IR(B-n)]

C GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL AT KOLKATA

Reference No. 10 of 1W7

PARTIES:

Employers In relation to the management of National Insurance Company Limited.

AND

Their workman

PRESENT:

Mr. Justice Bharat Proud Shnraa. Preiidlng Officer. ' APPEARANCE:

On behalf of Management: Mr. D. K Ghosh, Advocate with Mr. R. Do, Advocate.

On behalf of Workman: Mr, R. K. De, Advocate with Mi. M. Sarkar, Advocate.

STATE: West Bengal INDUSTRY: Insurance

AWARD

BY Order No. L-I70I2/36/95-IR(B-ID dated 04-03-1997 the Centra] Government in exercise of its powors under •cction 10(l)(d) and (2A) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of National Insurance Co. Ltd. in terminating the services of Sh, Prabir Kr, Dhar. Ex-pump operator on and from 20-8-1992 without following the provisions of Section 25F of the I.D. Act. 1947 is justified ? If not, to what relief is the said workman entitled ?" 2. The present reference has been initiated on the dispute raised by the workman. Shri Prabir Kumar Dhar r<5

by the Company for supplying water by running the pumps at the building'known as Royal Insurance Building at Netaii Subhas Road, Calcutta. There are several Offices in the build- ing and huge number of employees work in the building. Because of shortage of,water fp the building, the said work- man alongwith five others were engaged to operate the pumps. The workmen were required to maintain the pumps by check- ing it from time to time and the electrical Installations were checked by one Ranjit Kr. Dey, Electrician or temporary electrician Sanjay Kr. Dey. He also named the other five operators, including one Supervisor cum Assistant. According to him salaries were beinij paid to these workmen by the Company on monthly basis through one Pranab Kr. Dhar who used to draw lumpsum amount from the Company by A/c Payee cheques and disbursed the cash to these workmen. The workman concerned and others also used to sign the register in token of receipt of the salaries. Attendance Register was also maintained through the said Pranab Kr. Dhar. It is stated that the Company did not engage any contractor in terms of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, but Pranab Kr. Dhar was engaged ,as middle- man for recruit and appoint workmen to avoid various pro- visions of laws, rules and regulations, which according to the workman was unconstitutional and an instance of unfair labour practice. No tender was invited for engaging any contractor, nor the contractor was appointed, but the work- man concerned and the others were engaged for doing th" work for the Company and therefore they should have been Heated as direct employees of the Company. Accordingly, it has been asserted on behalf of the workman that he happens to be a workman under the definition of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act and he also claimed that he should be treated as a workman in terms of Section 25B of the said Act. According" to him some permanent employees were also engaged temporarily in similar manner but their services were later regularised, but so far as the case of the con- cerned workman was concerned, it was not regularised by the Company inspite of prayers According to him the work was of perennial nature and he had worked for a pretty long time, therefore, his sudden removal was illegal and it should be struck down and the workman should be ordered to be reinstated with consequential benefits.

3, The Company also filed written statement stating therein that first of all the reference itself is not maintainable for the reason that there does not v exist any relationship of em- ployer and employee between ttie Company and the concerned workman. It has further been itated that the statements made by the workman in his statement of claims are all incorrect and concocted. It has been denied that the said workman was ever engaged by the Company for operatinR water electric pump and other related jobs. It has been stated that so far as the water supply and related jobs are concerned, t he are" personnel employed by the Company and so far u the requirements qf checking of motors and pumps are concerned, there are specified personnel to look after the same. Similarly, the checking of electrical installations and supply lines aie nlso done by the personnel of the Company. It has further been itated that the workman concerned happened to be an employee of M/s. Pranab Kr. Dhar who w"? an agent and the workman has incorrectly claimed htm- Bctf nr, errmlovpe of the Company. Therefore, it h"" Vm^n Mtegorlcally denied that he was ever engaged by the National Insurance Co Ltd. It has been denied that the Company either appointed the said workman or controlled and super- vised his work and the Company also did not make any pay- ment to him and no attendance register was ever maintained by the Company in so far as the concerned workman and other persons are concerned. Accordingly, all the allegations mads in the statement of claims have been denied narawlse and it has been stated that the workman concerned is not entitled to any relief claimed by him.

4, However, both the parries have filed some documents and examined witnesses also Two witnesses have been exnmined on behalf of the workman WW-1, Prabir Kr Dhar happens to be the workman concerned. He has stated that he was appointed as Pumn Operator in the Comironv and had worked continuously from 17-05-1991 to 19-08-1992, the W"! nprVifJ, (yp °rrvicr h^Ttf 460 firv* H"W"vc'- ha vo, ^AA"\ that he was appointed by Pranab Kr. Dhar who happen* to be his elder brother. According to him Pranab Kr DJiar was not r|i employee of the Company and he used to do pump repairine works of the Company as and when required. He nlso riii'mcd rHt he med to aim attendance renter. He flNo Htrted that Prannb Kr Dhar never supervised his work, but he njed to pay hit salary. According to him one Anra4O7S THE GAZETTE QF INDIA: AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PAIT U—SEC. 3(ii)] Dutta taied to supervise Us work on behalf of the manage- ment and he used to wort in two shifts. According to him he used to get Rs. 350 per month as salary and Pranab Kr. Dhar used to disburse the amount after receiving the same from the management. According to him the work was of permanent nature. He also further stated that he applied for Tcgulariiation of his service in the Company and he has priiyed for his reinstatement with consequential benefits. In hii cross-examination, he has stated that he did not receive any appointment letter and trie attendance register used to be maintained ly one Indrajit Chnttopadhyay, who was also appointed by Pranab Kr, Dhar like him. According to him his salary register was also maintained by thif very person. He has also stated that he has no knowledge as to what was the relationship between Pranab Kr. Dhar and the Company. In his cross-examination he has clearly admitted that the tegiaters produced by him in no way suggest that he had worked for the Company. Accordingly, it is suggested to him that lie was neither ever appointed by the Company, nor there was any relationship of employer and employee between the Company and him. it has also been suggested that his work was never supervised by Arun Kr. Dutta.

The second witness WW-2 is Arun Kr. Dutta whose name transpired in the evidence of WW-1. He has stated that he happens to be an ex-employe* of the Company and he has since retired where he was an Administrative Officer. He Muted that in 1991-1992 he was working as Administrative Officer in the Comoany and according to him the concerned workman was workin* under him in Division-IV as Pump Operator from May. f991 fo August. 1992 and that he had forked for more than 400 days. He also stated that Mr. P. K. Shaw, Senior Divisional Manager of the Company appointed him fla Pump Operator. He has also stated that due to certain exigencies rhr Company had appointed th^e l*nmD Operators and had also appointed one Prannb Kr. Dhar as contractor to restore water supply which was fn very bad shape at that time. Accordlne to him Pump Operators worklnn in two shift., grid the work was of perennial nature. He further stated that these six persons including the con- cerned workman wrre brought bv Pranab Kr. Dhar who u"ed to nerform sundry work* of the Company at the behanf of th* Cnrnpanv *nd thut he had not licence *' a contractor. He further Mated that the management used to pnv salarv to the sir Piimo Operator* hy is" attendant*? r e n t er were maintained by Indraiit Chattcriee one of the Piiirm Operators who was BNO "nr><-M"nV(i m •wOTvfcnr of the Piimrt Onerator", H" Tin* rt"tM "",„" th^f. nrrton* wd t" work for th<- ComniTw In hi* TOSS pxamJnutlofl he has Mated that no appointment letter w"" tended over fo any of these perions and he has rather no Mrr a* to whfther any nurtointment 1"tt"r was ever issued •t "!'. He has "1FO eTt>re"srd his iftiomnce about the ComttanT •Ksuine anv letter to Pranab Kr. Dhar directing him to nnpoint "ix persons as Pump Operators. He ha* stated that Pranab Kr. Dhar had worked as a Middleman. He has further ndmitted that the said Pranab Kr. Dhar had no authority to "nporit any person for the management and therefore it hai ncert sneRcted to him that actually there was no relationship of master and servant between the management and the concerned workman.

"> An jrtterestint aspect of the matter u that after the \TnrIctrnn rTns^d h'< cs'e irtrt th"* manntrrinent wi" culled unon to examine its witnesses, a witness was produced on 16-02-2001, hut no one apneared on behalf of the workman on that date and the witness was discharged without cross-examina- tion. This witness, MW-1, Pahari Chand Shaw happens to •be -an employee of the Company who happened to be the Senior Divisional Manager of the Company at Calcutta from 14-10-1991 to 25-06-1995. He has denied that Prabir Kr. Dhar was ever employed as Pump Operator by the Company during that period, So, there was no relationship of employer and employee between the Company and Prabir Kr. Dhar. He stated that Prabir Kr. Dhar never did anything for the r'Gomp&ny as clafmed by him. He also stated that the said workman never signed any attendance register and also denied that his work was ever supervised on behalf of the Company. He has clearly stated that it is incorrect that he had employed Prabir Kr. Dhar as Pump Operator as a Divisional Manager and he has denied that the Company had encaged any per&on. including Prabir Kr. Dhar as Pump Operators. He has stated that Pranab Kr. Dhar actually happened to be a petty contractor undar the Company and h" sever Mgaged more than 10 persons it any point of ttme. He has also further stated that the method of recrultmer.t of Class! V employee* in the Company is that the posts are notified to the Employment Exchange. He also stated that the salaries of the employees of the Company arc paid by the Accounts Department. Accounts Department receives information from the Personnel Department and accordingly bills arc prepared and the salaries are paid. He has denied that any salary was paid to the concerned workman and others by the Company nnd has also denied that these persons ever worked for the Compnny. He has stated that in fact Pranab Kr. Dhar was entrusted to operate the pumps and it was his duty to get it operated and he actually made payments also. So, no direct payment was made by the Company to any such workman. He has also denied that Pranab Kr, Dhar was a middleman between the Company and the concerned persons and has also denied that the concerned workman was paid Rs. 350 per month as salary by the Company, He also produced and proved some papers, marked Exts. M-l and M-2.

6. So far as the documents are concerned, Ext. W-l is the attendance register. But, so far as this register is concerned, it has been admitted by the workman himself that it was not maintained by any officer or staff of the Company. Rather, it was maintained by one of the persons employed by Pranab Kr. Dhar like the concerned workman. So far as the Ext, W-2 is concerned, it is the salary register which was also admittedly being maintained by one of the persons engaged bv Pranab Kr. Dhar brother of the concerned workman. Though the workman concerned has claimed that he alongwith five other persons were appointed by Pranab Kr. Dhar on behalf of the Company, he could not produce the said Pranab Kr. Dhar for evidence though he happened to be a brother of this workman.

7. On the other hand, some papers have been produced on behalf of the management. Ext. M-l series ftre the copies of the bills presented by Pranab Kr. Dhar on a letterhead describing him as Electrical and Mechanical Engineer"), Repairers of fans, motors, house wiring and water pump. The bilh were presented before the National Insurance Company Ltd, and the bills described .the charges as hiring charges of submersible pump motor sets and operating charges. Different charges have been made for different periods and from these bills it does not appear that it had any concern with the payment ot aalary to any worker engaged on behalf of the Company. Another document which happend to be a letter addressed to the General Manager of the National Insurance Co, Ltd. by the said Pranab Kr. Dhftr is Ext. M-2. From thl" letter it appears that he was given contract of lifting water to the overhead tanks of the Companv and he has engaged some workmen for the purpose. He comrdained through this letter that his contract was cancelled unceremoniously. However, he also stated in this letter that lince some of the persons engaged by him had prayed for regularisatjon, his contract was terminated.

8. Considering all these facts including oral evidence of the parties and the documents, it becomes abundantly clear that the Company had no direct concern with the workman concerned or any other person and it appears that the Company had enrusted the work of lifting water through pump sets to the overhead tanks in the building to Pranab Kr. Dhar and that the payments were being made to Pranab Kr. Dhar for the services. Neither any appointment letter was issued to this workman by the Company, nor his work was ever controlled and supervised by the Company. Therefore, it is difficult to say that any nexus existed between the Com- pany and the workman concerned as employer and employee. It cannot be said that the workman concerned had ever worked on behalf of or for the Company entitling him to regularisa- tion. So far as the allegation regarding the perennial nature Of the work is concerned, there is no material to support it On the other hand, there has been categorical denial of all the allegations by MW-1 on behalf of the Companv in this regard and the witness has not even cross-exaxmined and so the entire evidence of MW-1 remains unrebutted. However, jt was sought to be contended that therc has been violation of the provisions of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970, but it has been clearly stated by MW-1 that this Pranab Kr. Dhar who used to render services to the Company from time to time had never engaged more than 10 person* "t any point ^ of time. Taking such work from a person also cannot be said to be a contract in real sense and therefore there i* no appllcati6n of the Contract Labour (Regulation tnd Abolition) Act, 1970 In thla cue The claim 407* "Whether the acnon of the management of United M"nit of lndim in withdrawing the scheme for providing special medical aid and leayo continuing since 1979 is iuttlfled? If not, whM relief are the eburfoyew entitled?"

of tho workman that he was illegally removed from service

or retrenched does not find support from any material what-

soovcr on the tecord. If he was engaged for some work.

entrusted to his brother, Pranab Kr. Dhar and if the Company

d'd not continue to take the work from Pranab Kr. Dhar,

the question of workman concerned continuing to work under

the Company did not arise. The Company neither appointed

him, nor controlled cr supervised his work at any point of

tmii: and it is obvious that the Company also did not remove

him from service or retrenched him in terms of Section 2(oo)

of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

2. Earlier this reference was disposed of om, account Of

the absence of the parties inipite ot notice by order dated

16-9-1999. But. subsequently the union appeared (•ad filed

a petition for recalling the said order of the Award of No

Dispute on 22-9-1999. The Tribunal heard the partiei in this

regard and by order dated 5-11-1999 set aside the said

order and matter was restored in its file and number.

9. In the circumstances, there does not appear to be any

reason to entertain the clans of the workman for grant of

relief to him-

10 Accordingly, this reference ii disposed of.

B. P. SHARMA. Prcfidinj Officer

Dated :

Kolkata,

the 27th June. 2001.

New Delhi, the 12th July, 2001

S O 1983 - In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award of the Central Government In-

dustrial Tnbunal|Labour Court, Calcutta as shown in the

annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers

in relation to the management of United Bank of India and

their workman, which was received by the Central Govern-

ment on 12-7-2001.

j*No. L-12011|85|98-IR(B-II)]

C GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURB

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL

AT KOLKATA

Reference No. 18 of 1999

PARTIES:

3. This dispute ha" been raised on behalf of the Unit"d

Bank of India. Employees Union on account of the fact that

the management of the United Bank of India, hereinafter

to be referred as the Bank, decided to withdraw some faci-

lities and benefits, like special medical aid and special leave

available to the employees of the Bank on the basis of the

order of the year 1979. It appears that the Bank issued a

notice under section 9A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

on 6-9-1996 expressing its intention to withdraw the facilities

granted to the employees as referred to above. It is stated

that the Bank had introduced a scheme in 1979 after due

consideration of the humanitarian ground as a welfare

measure while the provisions of the bipartite settlement

agreed upon between the unions with the I.B.A. were in

vogue. The management at the time of introducing the

scheme did not contradict or violate any of the provisions

of the bipartite settlement, because the said scheme was en-

visaged to give some benefits to its employees. Apart from

the other provisions of the bipartite settlement governing the

service conditions of the Award Staff in general, there were

schemes in different banks which were formulated as •

result of bilateral discussions between the unions and the

management in the individual bank. These scheme* were not

contrary to the provisions and spirit of the bipartite

settlement and were inter bank administrative circulars. The

said benefits were also being provided to the eligible emp-

loyees as a welfare measure within the Banks administrative

jurisdiction and it could not be termed as demand raised

in between the pendency of the bipartite settlement. It has

also been stated that actually the benefits or the scheme In

question introduced in 1979 were available only to a few

employees and only a few employees have alia enjoyed Ihe

benefits under this scheme. It appears that under this scheme

only n person suffering from a serious disease mentioned

in the scheme who has/have no leave of any kind left to

his credit was entitled to receive the benefits. So, it Is obvi-

ous that an employee could not pray for benefit of the said

scheme unless he became a victim of a very dangerous and

fatal disease. It is also further stated that after the notice

under section 9A was issued the union wrote to the Bank

on 25-9-1996 raising objection to the aforesaid notice, but

the union did not receive any reply. Therefore, the union

treated it to be arbitrary and negation o( humanitarian

scheme introduced by the management of the Bank. In this

view of the matter, it has been prayed on behalf of the

union that tho said act of the management in deciding to

withdraw the facilitv available to the emplovees of the Bank

be termed as unjustified and be struck down.

Employers in relation to the management of United

Bank of India

AND

Their workmen.

PRESENT .

Mr. Justice Bharat Prasad Sharma, Presiding Officer.

4. The management also filed a written statement to

contest the claim of the union The management stated in its

written statement that actually the Bank had formulated a

scheme in the year 1979 wherein the following provisions

were made :—

APPEARANCE .

On behalf of Management.—Mr. A. Moitra, Deputy

Chief Officer (Law) of the Bank.

On behalf of Workmen.—Mr. R.G. Chatterjee. Execu-

tive Committee Member of the Bank Employees'

Federation, West Bengal.

(a) The Bank may grant special leave for • maximum

period of 360 days to the members of staff who have

rendered 15 years' of continuous service, nnd who

may be suffering from any of the following diseases

and when leave of all descriptions have been ex-

haunted by such employee:

STATE : West Bengal. INDUSTRY ; Banking.

1. Cancer

AWARD

2. Tuberculosis

3. Leprosy

4. Coronary attack

By Order No. L-12O11|85|98|IR(B-II) dated 12-5-1999 the

Central Government in exercise of iti powers under lection

10(1) (d) nnd (2A) of the Industrial Dispute* Act, 1947

referred tht followlna dispute to this Tribunal for •djudic*-

5. Onbrel attack

6. Brain Tumour

7. Diebatic Gangrin

8. Paralysis

9. Orrobosis of Live

10. Major accident requiring hospitalisation.

(b) IH addition to the leave, such employees may also be granted an additional sum ot Rs. 250, to meet the medical expenses when the usual medical aid is exhausted.

(c) The authority to sanction such leave was vested with the Chairman or at least 3 Dy. General Mana- gers, subject to review by the Board every year.

It is further stated in the bipartite settlement governing the service conditions of the bank employees theie was no mention of any such benefit. It is further stated that the Oovt. of India from time to time instructed the banks that no additional benefit should be granted to the officerslawaid staff employees which are outside the purview of the officers •ervice regulations|bipartite settlement without obtaining prior permission of the Government. It is also further stated that paragraph 26(3) of the memorandum of settlement dated 14-2-15J95 between tho management of A Class Banks, Including the United Bank of India and their workmen rep- resented by All India Bank Employees Association, National Confederation o: Bank Employees, Bank Employees Fede- ration of India and Indian National Bant Employees Federation it wa" mentioned that the unions on behalf of their workmen had agreed that during the operation of the settle- ment the workmen would not raise any demand of any nature ivhat-so-ever on any of the banks in respect of matters covered by the memorandum of settlement. It is also further •tated that the United Bank of India Employees Union which has rained this dispute was also a signatory to the aforesaid memorandum of settlement. It is also further stated that there is no provision whatso-ever in the bipartite settle- ment for sanction of 360 days special leave to any employee who had rendered 15 years of continuous service and has exhausted all types of leave and is suffering from the diseases listed above. In this view of the matter, the Bank thought it prudent after discussions with the representative* of the Unfoni operating in the Bank to withdraw the scheme and accordingly the notice under sectfon 9A of the I.D, Act was Issued. It has been stated on behalf of the management that It denies the contention of the union that the Bank had unilaterally withdrawn the benefits as mentioned in the scheme. It has aluo been further stated that the alle- gation of the union is ineorrect that the letter of the union dated 25-9-1996 remained unreplied and it has been stated that actually the reply was sent by a letter dated 3-10-1996. Therefore, it has been submitted on behalf of the Bank that the action of the managrment should not be held to be arbit- rary and improper and it should be held to be justified and the employees be held not entitled to any relief.

5. When the hearing commenced it was agreed upon by both the parties that so far as the facts of the ca"e are con- cerned, there is no dispute at all because the facts are all admitted. Therefore, the parties decided not to adduce evi- dence and only arguments were heard on behalf of both the parties.

6. So far as the contention of the management Is con- cerned, it has been stated that because the scheme in ques- tion was not covered by the bipartite settlement and because notice has been given under section 9A of the I.D. Act, tho action of the management cannot be treated as illegal, im- proper or arbitrary. However, it has been submitted on be- half of the union that It is true that the scheme under con- sideration was not covered by the bipartite settlement, but at the same time it also cannot be said that some demand was raised by the union which was outside the subjects covered by the bipartite settlement. It has been contended that the scheme in question was formulated only as a welfare measure to some most deserving employees in dire necessity and it is obvious that the benefits of the scheme have been withdrawn by the management unilaterally only on account of the fact that some instructions were issued by the Govt. of India Ministry of Finance. Therefore, it has been contended that because the benefits under tbe scheme were available t* tho employe* linoe 1979, It had become part of thdr lervlce condition and since tbe monetary implication of the scheme wa§ also not very heavy, there was no justification for with- drawing this scheme which wfli a welfare measure of the deserving employees.

7. Because all the facts are admitted and since there it no material to show that either the scheme was introduced at the instance of the union or that it w"" covered by the bipar- tite settlement of 1975, it cannot be said that it had not become part of the gervice condition of the employee* of the Bank.

8. So far as the two letters said to have been issued by the Government of India are concerned, the same have been filed on behalf of the Bank. One letter i" dated 31"t May. 1994 and another is dated 7th October, 1996. In both the letters it has been stated that it has been discovered by the Govt. of India that some banks have introduced some schemes for the benefit of the employees outside the purview of the bipartite settlement which effects the revenue and it has been viewed seriously, In the first letter it has been stated that if the bank decides to introduce some scheme it should not be done without the approval of the I.B.A., because it has an implication that similar demands are made by the employees of the other banks also, giving rise to complica- tion. In the second letter it has been stated that the banks are advised to issue standing instruction to all concerned officers that the officers submitting any note, modification or improvement for any of the facilities without intimating tho board about tho existing guidelines!instructions of the I.B.A. would be held personally accountable and requisite adminlst- rative|disciplinary action will be taken against him, It is ob- vious that because of the two letters the management of the Bank was under pressure to continue with the scheme and accordingly they decided to do away with the icheme and issued the notice under section 9A.

9. On behalf of the Bank it has been submitted that the decision has not been taken in arbitrary manner and the requisite notice under section 9A of the I.D. Act had been given and therefore the action of the Bank cannot be termed as illegal. But, il has been submitted on behalf of the union that though the notice under lection 9A of the Act had been given, the very action of withdrawing the facilities available to the deserving employees appears to be unjust, improper and arbitrarv. It has been contended that the benefit which accrued to the deserving employee* in tho year 1979 could not have been withdrawn in this manner in 1996 without discussing the matter with the employee*' unions because it amounts to withdrawing the facility which had become vested and curbing the service condition of the bank emp- loyees. Tn this regard it may be noted that tho provision under section 9A of the Act has been made in order t" safeguard the interest of the employees regarding bringing about any change and curbing the facility and changing the •ervice condition of the employees in arbitrary manner by the management. In this case tbe notice under section 9A of the Act has been given no doubt, but is It sufficient that a notice under section 9A is given and the facilities betas availed by tho emplovees are withdrawn? The purpose of the provision of the notice is that the unions should be given Opportunity to raise their objection* and to discuss the matter with the management. The union has alleged in this con- nection that though they wrote a letter to the management raising objection against the decision, thev did not receive any replv. It has been denied on behalf of the manage- ment and It has been stated that actually the letter was replied, but no inch letter has been produced. There is nn material to show, nor it has been asserted on behalf of the Bank that thwe was any discussion between the management and the union regarding the withdrawal of the facilities of tho scheme referred to earlier.

10. Therefore, the action of the management in withdraw- ing the facility which had become vested in the employees only on nccount of the fact that the Oovt. of India havs issurd some itroncly worded letters in this connection doei not nnpcnr to be Justified. Taking into account the two letteis referred to enriW it apDear-i that the Oovt. of India has riffhtlv warned the mnnneethent of hte Banks not to be voiv liberal in Krantimr focflitien to the emplovees outside the purview of the bipartite settlement and euldelines have been i^iiM ta *hh remrd tfiat If any such scheme in formulated or proposal Is made, the matter miM b" thoroughly dfeicuwed fa the Board and th* prior approval of the IB.A. 1* obtained, 4031 It !• a p p a r e nt t h at in t he p r e s e nt C AM w h en t he s c h e me in

question wa8 formulated in 1979 no such approval was

taken because at that time the instruction of the Govern-

ment of India wa* not thefe. But, after tb" issuance of the

letter in 1996 the management btcome very shaky and ner-

vous and without properly considering the pros and com deci-

ded to withdraw the scheme which was made available to

tb* employees as back as in the year 1979. The proper course

in this case for the management should have been to explain

the circumstance and necessity of introduction of this welfare

scheme to the IB A. and the Government of India and If

necessary to seek Es-post-facto approval. Because, the

scheme was based on humanetarian ground and was to be

made available only to a few most deserving person*, it was

not going to have great implication on the financial aspect of

theBani, It is clear that the facilities could be available to some

unfortunate persons suffering from serious kind of disease

and to the persons who had no leave due to his credit.

Withdrawal of such scheme does not appear to be proper

and reasonable. The action of the management, as such,

appears to be compelled by the fear psychosis of the Bank

created by the instruction of the Govt of India Rs referred

to above it had no rationale and therefore it must be termed

os arbitrary.

11. Accordingly, the action of the management is held to

be arbitrary and improper and it is accordingly struck down.

The scheme if already withdrawn should be reintroduced in

consultation with the I.B.A. in proper way.

12. The reference is accordingly answered and diipoted

of.

"Whether the claimant Shri Ratan S|o Shri Nath Ram Meena is legal and justified in raising an Industrial Dispute after a period of 13 years for th© termination of hi* services by Railway Administration Kota, on 21-5-85 if yes, to what relief Shri Ratan is entitled and from which date ?" B. P. SHARMA, Presiding Officer

Dated, Kolkatta,

The 28th June, 2001.

New Delhi, the 17th July, 2001

SO, 1984—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Indus-

trial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central

Govrnment hereby publisher the award of the Centra]

Government Industrial Tribunal|Labour Court, Jaipur as

shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between

toe employers in relation to the management of Western

Railway, Kota and their workman, which was received by

the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

(No. L^1012|232|99-IR(B-I)]

C GANGADHARAN. Under Secy

40"3 .

ANNEXUBJE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL

TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE

Dated : 2nd July. 2001

PRESENT:

HON'BLE SHRI V. N. KULKARNT, B.Cora. LLB,

PRESIDING OPFTCER

CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT,

BANGALORE

C.R. NO. 12S\99

X PARTY

Sri Hyiensab Nawabub Shekh,

South Central Railway,

Madagon Station,

Hubll Division,

R|o Chadachon, Ittdi,

Bijapur.

TI PARTY

1. The Sr Div. Personnel Ofllcer, SCR,

Hubli Division,

Hubli-580020.

2. The Div. Operating Supdt,

SCR,

Hubli-580020.

AWARD

1. The Central Government by cxerciifng the powert con-

ferred by clause (d) of iub-"cction 2A of the Section 10 of

the Industrial Deputes Act, 1947 hai referred thii dispute

vide order No. L-41012|224|99-IR(B-I) dated 29-11-99 for

adjudication on the following schedule :

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of South Cen-

tral Railway, Hubli Division is justified in terminat-

ing the services of Shri Husen"ab Nawabaab Shekh,

Ex

•vailinp his sendees intermittently from 10-7-1979

I* leftal and justified. If not, to what relief the

workman u entitled to ?"

2. First party union worknwm were working with the

•econd party management. Services were terminated and

therefore dispute h raised. When the notice! were lent to

parties, the Partiei remained absent.

3. In view of thi*. ro nuroone will be "erved if the mtter

is (tdjourned, Acconiingly I proceed to p"M rhe following

order.

ORDER

The reference it rejected

(Dictated to PA tratucribed by her corrected and lijtned by

me on 2nd July, 2001).

V. N. KULKARNI, Presiding Officer

Now Delhi, the 17th July, 2001

S.O. 1985.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial

Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publisher the award of the Central Government

Industrial TribunallLabour Court, Bangalore as shown in the

anncxu.c in the Industrial Dispute between the employer*

in relation tr> the management of South Central Railway and

their workman, which wn" received by the Central Govern-

mrm on 16-7-2001

[No. IM1012'|224|95>-m(B-D]

' C G A N O A D H A R A N. Under. i£cy.

New Delhi, the 17th July, 2001

(iii) Mr. Venlratesh Murthy ( Dhavnagare) of their

due wages and other benefits for work done in

company'* office.

(d) employing watchmen on fixed salary at a rate of

lower than what is paid by the company to its re-

gular employees; and

S.O. 1986.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial

Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government

hereby publishes the award of the Central Government In-

dustrial Tribunal|Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the

annexurt in the Industrial Dispute between the employe™

in relation to the management of United India Insurance Co.

Ltd. and their workman, which was received by the Central

Government on 16-7-2001,

(e) employing the workmen ai electricians, plumbers,

gardeners, caretakers, etc. on the basis of indivi-

dual contracts.

fNo. L-l70l2|21|89-IR(B-n)]

Is legal and justified? If not to what relief ara the work-

C. OANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

men entitled?"

ANNEXURE

2. First party Union workmen were working with the

Second Party management. They were terminated, not regu-

larised and proper duties were not given and they had other

reasons to Industrial Dispute was raised.

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUST-

RIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT

BANGALORE

3. Parties appeared and filed Claim Statement and

Dated : 29th June, 2001

Counter respectively.

PRESENT :

Hootle Shri V N. Kulkarni, B.Com., LLB., Pre"ldina

4. The first party Union Workmen is All India Insurance

Employees Association. Following are the point* of disputes:

Officer1.

(a) terminating the workmen mentioned in Annexure-1:

CGIT-CUM-LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE

(b) non-regulftrlwnj the workmen mentioned in Annex-

C. R. N. 54(90

ure-II.

I party

(c) giving its normal typing work to typing instites at

Muvsttupusha, Hospet ao4 Davangere thereby dep-

riving.

(i) Mrs. Prasanna (Muvattupuzha)

(li) Mrs. Padmasree (Hospct)

(iii) Mr. Venkatesh Murthy (Dhavnagare) of their due

wages and other benefits for work done in Com-

pany's Office;

All India Insurance Employee* CD

Association,

Bharat Insurance Building Annexe 93.

Mount Road,

Madrai.-60OOO-

TheGemeral Secretary (2)

Andhra Pradesh General Insurance,

Employees Association,

313, 3rd Floor, Satgwhi Commercial

Complex, Basher Bagh,

Hyderabad-500025

(Advocate-Shri Ganapathj HBgde).

(d) employing watchmen on fixed galary at 6 rate lower

than what is paid by the company to its regular

employees; and

II Party

(e) employing the workmen as electrician, plumbers,

tho Claim Statement and it h, iuid that the action of the rnanagement is not correct.

10 It fs the further case of the union that workmen en- caged on individual contracts such as Electricians, Plumbers, Carpenters etc. have been regularised w.e.f. 22-8-1999 but their past wages are not considered. It is the case of the union that they may be regularised w.e.f. the date of their initial appointment and they may be given consequential benefit. Many oilier allegations are made and contended that the principle of equal pay for equal work, is not followed and the union has prayed to pass award in its favour.

11. The case of the management in. brief is as under :

12. It is conteded that this tribunal had jurisdiction to adjudicate dispute pertaining to employment|non employment withm the state of Karnataka and not outside. R is said that the Central Government has not applied its mind in order to find out the nature of dispute. It is the further case of the management that 49 workmen out of 58 have already been absorbed in to the permanent service of thfe second party and they have accepted the terms and conditions of the ap- pointment.

13. Similarly Shri Venkatesh Murthy and Padmasree are also been appointed. The case of the union is not correct. All these persons were engagd on temporary basis. The recruitment of regular staff depends on various factors like rules of recruitment prescribed by Government and the (general Insurance Corporation of India, availability of vacancy, suitability and eligibility etc. The workmen who are not regularised are engaged on temporary basis or on daily Wages do not possess the ligibility criteria. Therefore, the action of the management is correct. The workmen who have completed 240 days continuous work and fulfilled the quali- fications, they are regularised and the remaining workmen have no case at all.

14. It is the further case of the management that except 29 persons all other persons have not put any continuous service of 240 days and therefore they are not entitled for any relief.

15. It is the further case of the management that the work- mbn who have not completed 240 days service are not en- titled for any benefit and all the allegations are not correct. It, is tho furher case of the management that none of the persons shown in the order of reference; namely Mrs. Pia- sqnna, Mr. PHdmasree and Mr. Venkatesh Murthy have either been appointed on regular basis or on temporary basis for f-ny work of the establishment. Merely because the typing instir tufes entrusted the work of the second party to the above persons and they will no right at all.

16. Tt is the further case of the management that prior to 1987, the company did not have any cadre pertaining to Security Staff)Watchman. There was no provision under the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition.) Act. 1970 and security work was entrusted to several organisations[individu- ali on contract basis and in the year 1987 these contract arrangements were dispensed with. There was no discrimi- nation at all and the allegations are incorrect.

17. It is true that the Electricians, Plumbers, Gardners, Caretakers etc. were employed and regularised w.e.f. 22-8-90'. Bijt they are not entitled for baekwages. The maflaeeraent for these reasons has prayed to reject the reference.

18. This is a case of 11 years old. Tn my opinion parties have unnecessary spent so much time in ncttinc disposed of this dispute.

19. ft is seen from the records that MW1 is examined for the management. Against this WW1 and II are examined for the^ workmen.

20. At vary late stage the application was filed by the fir* Party cawed to recall MW1. We should know here that in Ju v 1999, MWt was examined and there are no grounds to allow the application so that application was rejected Arguments were heard.

$1. We have the evidence of MW1 and he says that sorao Committees were constituted for regularises the workmen and. he was one of the member to the committee constituted. J-J47 t il [ 2001—'Q,

4085 They received representation from the union and the work- men and who have completed continuous work for more than 240 days their cases were considered for regularisation. They have verified the records pertaining to all the branches in Karnataka. They have considered the documents. They hava also indicated how they calculated 240 days. He has aiven detailed report. He says that they have regularised some work- men who have completed 240 days and more and Ex. M3 is the file containing all the details. I have carefully perused all the documents. It is clear from the evidence of MW1 that workmen who have completed 240 d< ys continuous service and fulfilled other qualifications have been regularis- ed.

22. We have the evidence of MW1 and H, WW1 isthe Joint Secretary of South Zone, He says in his cross examination that he has not filed any document to show that the affected workmen are the members of the AH India Union. He was in his cross examination that it is correct to say that the second narty hod followed thr following procedure for regu- larisalioji to recruit permanent employees.

(1) Availability of vacancy.

(2) Educational qualification.

(3) Sponsoiint from the Employment Exchange.

23. He says in his cross examination that he does not know whether workman Shri Raghavendra is working with Kama* taka Power Corporation at Ralchur.

24. We have the evidence of WW2 and his cross examina" (ion is very material. To appreciate the same I would like to quote his cross examination." I am aware of the fact that investigation was conducted with the assistance of the union to find out which of the employees completed 240 days and above and the regularisation was made in respect of the candidates who have completed 240 days and not considered the employees who have not put in 240 days''. He furthei says "It is true that there was no attendance register to mark the attendance but the payment used to be made". With the above cross examination it is abuduntly clear that the mana- gement has regularised and conducted investigation with tho assistance of the union to regularise the workmen who had completed 240 days.

25. Therefore in the instant case the first party union hat not filed any documents to say that the workmen have completed 240 days of continuous woik,

26. It was argued by the learned counsel for the first party that the union has no documents and all the documuents are with the management and therefore, the first party union could not produce any document.

27. It was further argued that the evidence of MW1 will not help regarding other workmen and therfbre, that evidence is not helpful to the management.

28. It is seen from the records that WW1, II and JTT are from different states. We have the evidence of W.W, III and according to W.W.HI he worked as Assistant Cum Typist at Hindupur from 15-6-1983 to 14-8-84. He also says in his cross examination that he was not aware that the committee was formed by the Second party and with the assistance of Union investigation was made for the purpose of regularisa- tion and temporary employees who have been put in 240 days above were regularised and other were not considered.

29. He categorically says In his cross examination that ft is true that his employment was not regularised because hff was not working regularly for 240 days. With this material I am of the opinion that there is no merit in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the first party.

30. In view of the evidence of WW.IIT it is clear that tho workmen who have not completed 240 days are not regu^. larised.

31. Taking all this into consideration I am of the opinion that the present reference has no merit and all the disputes referred are not proved, Acordingly I r—)ceed to pass the following order.

ORDER

The reference is rejected,

(Dictated to PA transcribed by hci coirected and signed by me on 29th June 2001).

V. N, KULKARNI, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 17th July, 2001

S.O. 1987.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jaipur as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Tndjan Overseas Bank and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-12012/209y99-IR(B-II)l

C. GANGADHARAN. Under Secv.

ANNEXURE

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL- CUM-LABOUR COURT, JAIPUR Case No. CG1T-4/20O0

Reference No. L-12012/99/IR(B-II) dated : 23-12-1999 Shri Vijay Kumar Valmiki, S/o Shri Shivnarayan Valmiki, Balanandil Ka Rasta, Hanian BastI, Chandpole, Jaipur,

. . .. Applicant

Versus

1. Indian Overseas Bank,

Regional Office, D-23 A, Prithviraj Road, C-Scheme, laipnr (Rajasthan).

2. Indian Overseas Bank, Sr. Regional Manager, A.C. 2. Jaisjngh Circle, Bani Park, Jaipur.

. . .. Non-applicants ATTENDANCE :

For the applicant: Shri J. L. Shah, Advocate. For *he non-applicants ; Shri Anil Sharma, Advocate. Date of Award: 20-6-2001

_ ^ AWARD

The Central Government vide order mentioned above has referred the following dispute under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred as the Act, 1947) for adjudication.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the fiction of the management of Indian Over- sea* Bank, Jaipur is justified in terminating the services of Shri Vija.y Kumar Valmiki S/o Shri Shiv^arayan Valmiki in violation of S-25-f and S-25-H of the l.D. Act, 1947 ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled and from what date ?" The applicant filed the statement of claim stating that he was appointed in the Indian Overseas Bank (hereinafter i eferred as the Lank) on the post of temporary sweeper on 2511-94. He continued to work on that post till 31-10-95. The details of which are given below :—

No. of days Month/Year

1

November—94

31

.December—-94

27

January—95

28

February—95

27

March—95

26

April—95

31

May—95

26

June—95

28

July-95

31

August—95

—

September—95

31

October—95

Thus he woiked in the Bank for a total period of 287 days. He was etf'en certain appointment orders for a period of 44 days but he continued to work even in the period during which the- appointment order were not issued. The work, which he was doing, was of permanent nature and the post was nlso vacant. In the month of September 95 he came to know that the Bank was going to terminate his services:, therefore, be filed a suit in the court of Additional Civil Judtje (West) Jairtir and pxayed for grant of stay order for not terminating his services. The Civil Judge on 30-10-95 rejected his application for stay. Thereafter on 31-10-95 his services were terminated vide verbal order w e.f. 1-11-95. Later on he withdrew the suit filed by him. He made a request to the non-applicants for taking him back in service vide letter dt, 5-11-98 but the non-applicants did not respond to the, same. Thereafter, he raised the dispute before the Assistant Labour Commissioner. On failure of the conciliation proceed- ings thr dispute has been referred to the Tribunal. It has been pleaded that he had worked for 287 days prior to the date of teimination, but was not given prior one month'a notice or pay in lieu of notice or compensation as required under Section 25-F of the Act, 1947. His services were termi- nated on the ground that he h over qualified which falls within the definition of 'retrenchment'. To treat over-qualifi- cation as inelicibilitv in service is unjustified. After termination of services Shri Kanhaivalal was called for interview for temporary appointment vide letter dt. 7-8-96 but he wns not called for interview Hnd thus the non-applicants violated Section 25 H of (he Act, 1947. It was prayed that the ordsr or lirminntion of his services mav be declared as uniust and illcgnl and he may be reinstated in service with back wages and continuity in service.

In the roply to the claim it was admitted that the applicant was civon temporary appointment on the post of sweeper but It was st-ifed that the appointment was for a fixed term for a period of 44 days and sb the same came to an end on th>- fTtiiry of trip term. The appointment was given on 25-11-94 after requisitioning names from the Employment Rxchanqc Later on the applicant was niven temporarv appointment for ^4 dHvs from time to t'me pnd lastly he was piven anpoint- ment for lbs fixed period from 18-9-95 to 31-10-95. Thr t'Tm of tiie .innointrnent of the anoiicnnt came to an mri on 11-10-95 ?s "er tt"- contractual neriod. Tt was also --tated that as per pnifWini"- for the nost of sweeper the candidate should not have studied beyond 5th standard and thus the applicarri wiis not erciblr for the post of sweener.

The nnn'innt filed rcininder to the replv. Tt was stated that d'lrinw tb" intr->-w,v hr bud aiven the information about his educational qualification a,nd also reiterated the facts mentioned in the claim.

In suppoit of the claim the applicant filed his own affidavit. The leaintd counsel for the non-applicaut was given opportu- nity to cross-examine him. In the torm of documentary evi- dence the applicant filed the copy of the appointment letter dt. 25-11-94 marked W-l the statement about arear paid to the applicant marked W-2, copy of the vouchers marked W-3 to \V S, copy of the letter marked W-9, copy of ihe postal receipt marked W-10, copy of the application marked W-ll, copy of the reply marked W-12, copy of the rejoinder marked W-14 copy of the failure report marked W-15, copy of the letter for interview marked W-16, copy of the vouchers marked W-l 7 and 18, and copy of the letter of the Bank marked W-l9. On behalf of the non-applicant Shri A. K. Biswas, Deputy Chief Officer of iho Bank was examined, lu the form oi documentary evidence copy of the appointment letter dt. 25-11-94 and 16-9-95 maftcd R-l and R-2 respectively and guidelines for the appointment to the post of sweepor were filed,

Heard arguments of the learned representative of the applicant and learned counsel for the non-applicant and perused the record.

The following points require consideration:—•

1. Whether the applicant had worked in establishment of the Bank for a period of 240 days during the period preceding to the date of termination of his seivicc i.e. 1-11-95 7

2. Whether the termination of service of the applicant falls under Section 2(oo)(bb) of the Act, 1947 7 3. Whether the non-applicant has violated Section 25F and H of the Act, 1947 ?

4. To what relief the applicant is entitled ?

Point No. 1 :—It is not disputed that the applicant was giveu temporary appointment on the post of sweeper initially for a period of 44 days vide order dated 25-11-94. Iho vouchers through the payment was made to the applicant marked W-3 to W-8 and the statement of arrear paid to the applicant .marked W-2 have been admitted by the non- applicant. As per the vouchers and the statement of flrrear lh" applicant had worked for 287 days during the period from November 94 to 31-10-95. It is thus proved that the applicant had worked for moie than 240 days during the year preceding to the date of termination.

Point No. 2:-—The applicant was initially appointed vide order dated 25-11-1994 marked W-l for a period of 44 days. He however continued to work thereafter. Lastly he was given appointment on the same post for the period from 18-9-1995 to 31-10-1995 vide letter dated 16-9-1995 marked R-2. Thus as per the last appointment letter he was given temporary appointment for the fixed period upto 31-10-1995. The learned counsel for the non-applicant has contended that as the applicant was appointed for fixed tenn his ser- vices stood terminated itself on cxpiiy of the term and termination falls under Section 2(oo)fbb) of the Act, 1947 and docs not amount to retrenchment and, therefore, ques- tion of violation of Section 25 F and H of the Act, 1947 does not arise. In support of his contention he has cited 1992 Lab. IC 1208 K. Rajan v|s. Kerala State Electricity Board and 1995 Lab. IC 37 P.S. Anitha V|s. Asstt. Director of Tea Development, Tea Board, Kottayam. On the other hand (he learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the work which the applicant was doing was of perma- nent nature as it has been admitted that after termination of service of applicant other persons were given temporal y appointment and therefore, clause (oo)(bb) of section 2 of the Act. 1947 is not applicable in the cr.se. He has also contended that higher qualification is no ground for ineligi- bihty to the upponiiment to the post. Tn support of his con- tention he has cited the following auhorities: .

1. Writ Petition No, 532(87 Smt. Santosh Kumar and others v|s. State of Punjab.

2. 1990 LLR 513 Bnibir Sin"h v[s. Kurukshetra Central Co-operative Bank Ltd.,

3. 1986 LLJfl) 127 H. D. Singh v|s. Reserve Bank of India (SC).

40S7 4 1994 (2) WLC 227 (RH) State Insurance and Pro- vident Fund Deptt, Rajasthan Jaipur v|s. Ramesh- war Prasad.

5. 1980 LLN (II) 170 (SC) Santosh Gupta v|s. State Bank of Patiala.

6. RLR 1991 (2) 691 Suiya Prakash Sharma v|s, Rajas- than Text Book Board Jaipur.

7. 1998 (II) LLJ 112 (Alld) Oriental Bank of Com- merce v[s. Union of India.

8. 1987 Lab. IC 1361 ("Gujarat HC) Gujarat Machine Tools Ltd.. v|s. Deepak J. Desai.

In case reported m 1992 Lab. IC 1208 it hat been held that under clause (bb) of Section 2(oo) 'retrenchment' does not include termination of service of the workman as a result of the rron renewal of the contract concerned on its expiry or of such contract being terminated under the stipulation on that behalf contained therein. It hag also been hold that Section 25 H is not applicable to the workmen who are not the retrenched workman.

In case of writ petition No. 532(87 the appointment of the petitioucr of fixed period of 89 days was challenged. Vacancies weie there which fact was not disputed. It was directed by the Apex court that appointment should be made on regular or temporary basis and petitioner's services not to be terminated on the basis that they have served already 89 days. In case reported in 1990 RLR 513 it has been held by the Punjab and Haryana High Court that Section 2(oo) (bb) requires to be interpreted as to restrict it to caiaes where work has been accomplished and agreement of hiring for specific period was genuine. In case reported in 1986 (I) LLJ 127 the name of the employee was struck off on the ground that he was betor qualified. The employee was not told that his name will be struck off if he passed matricula- tion examination. The Apex Court directed to treat the employee as regular employee. In 1994 (II) WLC 227 the contention that termination does not fall under Section 2(oo) was not accpted on the ground that no specific order of extension was given after expiry of the 3 month's term con- templated in the term of order. In case reported in LLN(H) 1980 170 termination on failure to pass the test was held to be retrenchment. In case reported in RLR (11) 691 it was held that Section 25 H is applicable Irrespective of the fact whether the workman has completed 240 days service or not. In case reported in 1998 (II) LLJ 112 the dispute about termination of service related to the year 1981 while clause (bb) in Section 2(oo) came into force on 17-8-84. Clause (bb) was held not to be applicable. In the case report- ed in 1987 Lab. IC 1361 it was held that as per rule 82(2) (b) of Gujarat Industrial Dispute Rules, 1966 retrenched employee must be given opportunity for employment.

In the case reported in 1996 (I) ADSC(L) 110 State "of Rajasthan v|s. Remshwarlal Gahlot it has been held by the Apex Court that when the appointment is for a fixed period, unless there is finding that power under clause (bb) of Sec- tion 2Coo) was misused or vitiated by it is rnalafide exer- cise, it cannot be held that the termination is illegal. In Us absence, the employer could terminate the services in terms of the letter of jirmoinirnent unless it is a colourable exercise of power. It must be established in each case that the power was misused by the management or the appointment for fixed period wai colourable exercise of power.

In case reported in 1996 (I) ADSC (L) 262 State of HImachal Pradesh v|s. Suresh Kumar Verma it has been held that if appointment is not made according to rules the same cannot be used as conduit pipe for regular appointment. In the case reported in 1994 (II) LLJ 888 Kerala Solvent Ex, Ltd. V|s. A. Unnikrishnan, the facts were that the "er- vice of Badli worker was terminated on the ground that he suppressed the fact that he had passed 10th standard. While condition for eligibility for appointment to the post was that candidate should not be more than 8th standard Labour Court set aside in the order of termination. In writ petition single judge disapproved the view of Labour Court but ord- ered reinstatement. The writ was dismissed by Divisional Bench. The Apex Court allowed the appeal and set aside the order of SB and DB and rejected the industrial dispute,4688 THE GAZETTE OF INttfA: AtftitfST II, 2601/&ftAVANA 26, 1$23 PART tL-Asc. 4$)] As per the last appointment letter the applicant was appointed for a fixed teim, The applicant on having come lo know that his services were going to be terminated filed civil suiL in the Court of Additional Civil Judge Jaipur (West) and prayed tar stay, which was refused on 30-10-95. The contractual term of appointment expired on 31-10-95, which was not lenewed. There were directions from the Regional Ofllcc that services of the applicant may be dispensed with as he is overqualifled and he is not eligible. The appointment was not given as per the guidelines provided for the post of sweepei in which it was laid down that the candidate should not have studied beyond 5lh Std. The applicant was admittedly over qualified. In these circumstances when the applicant was over qualified and his prayer for stay for not terminating his sei vices was rejected by civil court and the contractual tcim having expired on 31-10-95 on account of non-renewal of the contract the power to terminate services of the applicant cannot be said to have been misused or vitiated by its malafide exercise. Jt may also be stated that the applicant was not communicated that his services were terminated on the ground of being overqualified. The contractual term was not renewed. The termination Of seivice of the applicant, therefore, falls under clause (bb) of Section 2(oo) of the Act, 1947. which is an exception to the 'retrenchment", In writ petition No. 532/JJ7 appointment for fixed term was challenged and not termina- tion. Jn case reported in 1986 (1) LLJ 127, the service was terminated on ground of over qualification. While in the present case, contractual appointment was not renewed. The facts of the above cases, therefore differ from the present case.

Point No. 3 :•—As the termination of the services of Hie applicant doesn't fall in the category of 'retrenchment¹ as defined under Section 2(oo) provision of Section 25F of the Act, 1947 are not attracted. In spite of the admission on behalf qf non-applicant that Shri Ramgopal Meena and Shri Prabhu Meena were given contractual appointment after termi- nating the services of the applicant the provisions of Section 25H are not attracted as the applicant was not retrenched workman. It may also be stated that there is nothing on record to suggest that they were given contractual appoint- ment in spite of their ineligibility to the post.

Point No. 4 :—For the reasons stated above (he termination of the services of the applicant cannot be said to be illegal or unjustified and the applicant is not entitled to any relief.

The copies of the award may be sent to the Central Gov- ernment under Section 17(1) of the Act, 1947 for publication.

SdA Illegible Presiding Officer

20-6-2001

"Whether the action of the management of State Bank of India in terminating the service of Shri Srichand w.e.f. 3-12-97 is legal and justified ? If not to what relief the said workman is entitled?" New Delhi, the 17th July, 2001

SO 1988.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, T947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Jaipur as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of State Bank of India and their workman which was received by the Central Government an 16>2001.

[No. L-12012/187/99-IR(B-J)] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

40S9

40914092 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] New Delhi, the 17th July, 2001 SO. 1989.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribualj Labour Court-II, Mumbai as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Dcna Bank and their work- man, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. l-12012|176|98-TR(B-II)li C GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

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

S N. Saundankar, Presiding Officer.

Reference No. CG1T-2|65 of 1999 Employers in lelation to the management of Dena Bank.

23-17 GII2001—7.

4093 Die Asstt. Gen. Manager(P), DB, 7th Floor, Maker Towers,,'E' Wing, P. B No. 6058, Cufte Parade, Mumbai-400 005.

AND

Their Workmen.

The General Secretary, Dcna Bank Employees Union, 17, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mutnbai-23.

APPEARANCES :

For the Employer —S|*"hri S. K. Talsania and J. K. Mistry Advocates.

For the Workmen.—Mr. M B, Anchan Advo- cate.

Mumbai, dated 22nd June, 2001

AWARD

The Government of India, Ministry of Labour, by its Order No L 12012ll'76|98|IR(B-II), dated 25-2-1999|8-3-1999, have leferred the following dis- pute for adjudication to this Tribunal in exercise of powers conferred on it by clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section (2A) of Section 10, of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947.

"Whether the action of the management of Dena Bank, Mumbai in superannuating the workman, Shri C R. Tiwari by treating his date of Birth as 15-3-1937 is justified? If not, then what relief the workman is en- titled to 7"

2. The facts of the pu'seut case in short are as under ,

The workman Shri C R Tiwaii had entered into service of the Dana Bank, as a watchman on 9-10^62. He had then aiven his age roughly as 25 years. He was not asked to submit his School Leav- ing Certificate in proof of his age. He applied for promotion to the post of clerk in the year 1979. At that time the bank asked him to submit proof re- garding his age and qualification and accordingly he had submitted the School Leaving Certificate issued by the Board of High School and Intermediate Edu- cation, U P. showing his date of birth as 15-9-1943 and qualification The hank accepted the said cer- tificate and promoted him to the post of clerk in the year 1980 and recorded his date of birth as 15-9-1943 m his service records. It is contended according to this certificate his date of retirement would be 30-9-2003, however the bank vide its tetter Ref. No 172|97 dated 6-2-1997 informed him that he would be completing 60 years of age on 31-3-97, and as such he would be letired from 31-3-97 It is contended on making complaint by the workman regarding his premature letirement the bank rectifi- ed its mistake vide letter dated 27-3-1997 informing him as per the School Leaving Certificate submitted by him his date of birth was recorded as 15-9-1943 and accordingly his date of retirement would be 30-9-2003. However it is contended, subsequently4094 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] the General Managrr issued him a notice dated 21-6-1997 mentioning therein that the workman's date of birth in the Service Record has not been changed and that his date of birth is 15-3-1937 and not 15-9-1943, as (here is no written representation, from the workmon for change of his date of birth and by that letter, he cancelled the letter of the Dy. Gen. Manager(P) dated 6-2-1997, issued to him. It is contended workman approached the appropriate authority, however they did not take decision and asked him to give explanation as to why he should not be retired w.e.f. 31-3-1997. Accordingly work- man had given his explanation on 4-7-1997. How- ever by an order daled 1-9-1997 the bank retired him from service with retrospective effect from 31-3-1997, calling upon him to repay the salary and allowances and surrender the benefits if any received by him, for his service beyond 31-3-97. It is contended that, the bank did not ask about his age at the time of his appointment and that in the year 1979 only, he was asked to produce the school leav- ing certificate and accordingly he had produced and consequently he was promoted. In the year 1986 he applied for housing loan mentioning his date of birth as 15-9-1943 and later on, in 1994 for additional Housing loan and on that basis he was granted loan, and this date of birth mentions in the seniority list. It is'contended the union had taken the matter 1o the appropriate autho- rity and thereafter before the Assistant Labour Commissioner(C), however, conciliation failed, and therefore he had moved the Ministry.

mi Settlement dated 17-9-84 the age of superannuation oi the workman is sixty years. According 10 workman Mr. fiwan, he hau roughly given his uge 25 years at the time of entering the service since he was not having his School Leaving Certificate at that time, and that when he applied tor promotion to the post of clerk in the year 1979 the bank asked him to submit proof regarding his age and qualification and accordingly he had submitted the school leaving cer- tificate issued by I he Board of High School and Inter- mediate Education U.P. showing his date of birth as 15-9-1943 and qualification and that bank had accep- ted the said certificate and promoted him in the post of clerk in the year 1980 and since then the said date of birth was continued and therefore his date of retirement is 30-9-2003. The bank however contended that while applying for the post of watchman he had declared himself to be 25 >eats of age in an applica- tion dated 9-10-62 and that in the Bio-data under his own signature declared his date of birth as 15-3-37, , and that since then in the service record his date of birth was always 15-3-37 and was never changed, and therefore he was to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 31-3-97 and accordingly he was issued letter dated 6-2-1997.

clerical staff was admittedly prepared by the bank vide £xhibit-37. This clearly shows the name of the workman at serial No. 738 snd his date of birth ]5-9-43, The workman was sanctioned house loan in the year 1986 and that the Senior Branch Manager of the bank Mr. Marandi admits that, on the basis of the application and the certificate of the officer, the loan was sanctioned and that instalments of the loan is fixed taking into consideration the age of the work- man that is lemaming service period. Application for housing loan (Ex. 11/11) of the year 1986 and (Ex. 11/12) of the year 1994 clearly show the date of birth of workman i5-9-43 and the same was verified by the bank officer and found correct. Admittedly no action against, the ^officer vvho verified the appli- cation forms was taken. When application for loan of the year 1986 mentioning the date of birth of work- man 15-9-43 on verification found correct by the bank officer, in the year 19S6, it is surprising on what strength the management say that Bio-data was fur- nished in* 1962 wherein date of birth 15-3-37 men- tioned and it was part of his service record and that cannot be changed. The Bank has admittedly pre- pared the computer sheets on the details of the emp- loyees including the workman. These sheets (Ex. 35,\ 36) of the years 1992 and 1993 also show the date of birth 15-9-43 and date of retirement 30-9-2003. A feeablc attempt is made by the Senior Officer Mr. Marandi saying that these computer sheets were not issued by their department, however thatjiocs not implicit reliance. In fact, record of the bank itself shows that the workman would retire on 30-9-2003¹ on the basis of his birth date 15-9-43 and that they have not acted upon at any time on the so-called Bio-data (Ex. 9/1). Had really, workman given the Bio-data at the time of entering the service, bank officers would have taken note of that immediately or at least at the time of verifying the application for housing loan in the year 1986. This position goes against the management.

9. The Learned Counsel Mr. S. K. Talsania for the management submits th;tf as per the bank rules service record does not change, and that service re- cord only can be changed by the Chairman/Manag- ing Director and that Deputy General Manager has no authority. The Senior Manager Marandi said that he would produce the necessary tules, however, no rules to that effect are produced.

7. It is in the evidence ot workman that he had not given any implication to the bank for getting employment. He however admits his signature on the Bio-data (Exhibit 9|1). This no doubt mentions the date of birth 15-3-37. The Learned Counsel Mr. S. K. Talsania for the bank at this juncture, submits that the bank management obtained the necessary Bio- data which admits clearly the signature of the work- man. Under Sections 114(e) and (f) of the Indian Evidence Act the court may piesume that the judicial and official acts have been regularly performed and the commoa course of business have been followed in the particular case. He submits that when the said workman declared his date of birth 15-3-37 in the Bio-data it will be presumed thai his date of birth is 15-3-37. On the basis of this documents, the work- man retires on 31-3-97. Presumption is urged by Mr. Talsania for the management is rebuttable. The bank's witness does not speak that as to how this Bio-data has come on record. On plain reading of the same, it docs not bear the signature of the bank authority nor the date and does not show that it was received by the bank and that it was part of service record. This does not show that it was given by workman at the time of joining the service. No- thing on record to show that the bank recorded this date of birth in the service record of the workman. Bank's senior officer Mr. Marandi admits in cross- examination para 8 that when the workman joined the service he did not produce birth record. The Bio- data, on which management heavily relies to show the birth date of workman 15-3-37, does not speak that it was received by the bank, and when, no proof of age was produced at the time of entry into service, hardly presumption as urged by Mr. Talsania, Learned Counsel for the management, can be raised. The Bio- data is not at all helpful to the bank and therefore I find no substance in his submission.

10. It is significant to note that as seen from the letter of the Dena Bank dated 9-3-82 (Ex. 11/23)* the Chief Oliiccr (Personnel) on the application of its employee dated 4-3-82 (Ex. 11/22) Mr. Kashi Prasad Tiwari of Goregaon Branch (West) recorded at the verge of his retirement his date of birth 31-1-33, changing the earlier date of birth of the basis of School Leaving Certificate pioduced by him with his application mentioned above. If the Chief Officer changed the birth date of said Kashi Prasad Tiwari serving in Dena Bank only then Senior Officer i.e. Dy General Manager how cannot change the record of the workman. On this b?ck ground, the submis- sion of the Learned Counsel that Deputy General Manager has no authority in the matter, is absolutely of the record.

11. In fact, the submission of the management that they cannot change the record of the workman itself is erroneous as on the alleged Bio-data (Ex. 9 / 1) 8. The workman has filed School Leaving Certi- ficate (Exhibit-11/2) to show his date of birth 15th Scptcrnber, 1943. Admittedly workman was promoted as clerk in the year 1980. The seniority list of the4096 THE GAZETTE OF] INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2 0 0 1 / S R A V A NA 20, 1923 flfaRT If—SEC. 3tfi)1 iiothing on record to show tha', they have taken entry to this effect in the service iecord and therefore the question of changing the date does not arise as the bank has taken note of the buth 15-9-43 as apparently seen from the bank iecord itself,

12. The date of birth of the employee is not only important for the employee but for the employer also. On the length of .service put by the employee depends the quantum of retiral benelUs he would be entitled. In this context the service record prepared by the bank referred to abovo throws light.

13. The Learned Counsel Mr. S. K. Talsania, sub- mits that the court/tribunal should be very cautious in such matters because permitting the change in the date of birth is likely to cause frustration down the line resulting in causing an adverse effect on efficiency in functioning. He relied on G.M., Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. W.B. V. Shib Kumar Dyshad 2001 LAB I.C. 28. I have gone through the said decision where- in Their Lordships of the Apex Court pointed out the consequences in change of birth at the belated stage. In the case in hand, Kothingyjn record to show that the bank acted upon the date of birth 15-3-37 mentioned in the Bio-data (Exhibit 9/1) alleged to have been furnished by the workman at the time of joining the service. In lact the bank shows that the date of birth of workman in the service record is 15-9-43. Therefore the question of change on the birth date of workman dues not arise. Consequently the said ruling is no avail for the management.

14. Mr. Talsania for the management submits that workman Mr. Tiwari entered in the service on 9th October, 1962 and that as per his admission in cross- examination para 13 he passed S.S.C. in 1958 and that School Leaving Certificate (Ex, 11/2) was pre- pared on 17th June, 1958. If that is so, he could have very well submitted the same to the bank at the time of entering the service in the year 1962 and that, act of filing this certificate is an after-thought with mala fide intention, and that this supports the contention that he had given birth date as 15-3-37 by way of Bio-data which was. correct. At this junc- ture it is material to note that, prior to the nationali- sation of the bank, no policy for recruitment of sub- ordinate staff was framed. Therefore probably bank might not have asked information on the date of birth seriously, resulting in submitting then school leaving certificate. On this back ground I find no substance in the submission of Mr. Talsania

15. It is clearly seen fiom the record that at the time of entering the service, workman Tiwari was of 19 years of age. Therefore hardly find force in the submission of Mr. Talsania that the workman might be under age and therefore not disclosed the true birth date, with a view to get employment in 1962.

16. From the evidence on record it is clear that the date of birth of the workman Mr. Tiwari as per the bank record is 15-9-43 find not 15-3-37. There- fore, treating his dale of birth 15-3-37 superannuat- ing him on 30-3-97 is not legal and proper. There- fore action of the management is not just and proper and also not legal. Consequently Tiwari will have to be treated in continuous service till his superannua- tion i.e. 30-9-2003, resulting in getting consequential monetary benefits. Issues are therefore answered ac- cordingly and hence the order :

ORDER

The action of the management of Dena Blank, Mumbai in superannuating the workman Shri C. R. livvari by treating his- date of" birth as 15-3-37 is not just, proper and legal.

Mr. Tiwari would ictire as per his date of birth in service record is 15i-9-43, on superannua- tion on 30-9-2003.

He should be treated in continuous service, and he is entitled to back wages and consequen- tial monetary benefits.

S. N. SAUND>\NKAR, Presiding Officer New} Delhi, the 17th July, 20O1 S.O. 1990.—In puisuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal/Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Batik of Baroda and their workman, which was received by the Central Gov- ernment on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-12Oil/53/99-IR(B-Il)] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURL

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT IN- DUSTRIAL TRTBUNAL-CUV1-LABOUR COURT,

BANGALORE

Dated : 3rd July, 2001

PRESENT:

Hon'ble V. N. Kulkarni, Presiding Officer.

C.R. No. 103/99

I Party :

The General Secretary, BOB Employees Union, C /o Bank of Baroda, P.B. No. 2, K.G. Road, Bangalore-560 009.

4GW'

Ilnd Party :

The Regional Manager, BOB Registered Office, No. 26, H. T. S. Chambers, III Floor, Richmond Road Bangalore.

APPEARANCES :

1st Party : None.

Ilnd Party ; None.

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 Indus- trial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred this dispute vide Order No. L-120ll/53/99/IR(B-II) dated 31-8-1999 for adjudication on the following schedule.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the Bank of Baroda Employees Union is justified in claiming the rate of wages as per the hours of work shown in the Ap- pointment Order issued to the part-time sweepers ? Whether the part-time sweepers have actually worked for the hours showh in the Appointment Order, If so, whether the management of Bank of Baroila Is justified in refusing to pay the higher rate of wage to the sweepers. If not, what relief the workmen are entitled to ?"

2. None is present. The Central Government has raised the dispute.

3. When the Notices were issued, parties did not turn up. Many adjournments were given.'It appears that the parties are not interested in the dispute and therefore, I proceed to pass the following order:

ORDER

Reference is rejected.

(Dictated to the L.D.C., transcribed by him, cor- rected and signed by me on 3rd July, 2001 >.

V. N. KULKARNI, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the- 17th July, 2001 S.O. 1991.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Government Industrial Tribunal]Labour Court, Chennai as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute beftflfecn the employers in relation to the management of Bank of Baroda and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001'.

[No. L-12012j43|95-IR(B-]l)] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHENNAT

Friday, the 15th June, 2001

PRESENT :

K. Karthikeyan, Presiding Officer

Industrial Dispute No. 3931200!

(Tamil Nadu State Industrial Tribunal I.D. No. 55|95) (In the matter of the dispute for adjudication under clause (d) of sub-section (1) and subjection 2(A) of SecJtinn 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), between the Workman Smt. S. Shanta and the Management of Bank of Baroda, Coimbatore.)

BETWEEN

The General Secretary, 1st Party|Claimant Bairkr of Baroda Employees Association, Cbimbatore.

AND

The Regional Manager (TN II) . . Ilnd Party|Mana- Bank of Buroda, Craimbatore gement APPEARANCES :

For the Claimant : M[s. Aayar & Dolia & C. R. Chandrasekaran, Advocates.

For the Management : M|* K.S.V. Prasad & S. Gunaseelam, Advocates.

AWARD

The Govt, of India, Ministry of Labour in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 of Industrial Dis- pute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), have referred the follow- ing dispute for adjudication vide Order No. L-l'201.2|43|95-IR(B^II) dt. 25-8-1995 :—

"Whether the action of the Management of Bank of Baroda, Coimbatore in imposing the penalty of stoppage of two increments with commulative effect on Snvt. S. Shanta, Shroff-cum-Cterk vide their order dated 5-9-91 is legal nnd justified ? If not, to what relief is the said workman entitled 7"4698 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART I I ^ - S E C. 3(ii)] This dispute" on coming up before me for final hearing on 15-6-2001, the counsel tor the 1 Paity Union as well as the II Party|Ma,nagement were pre- sent. The learned counsel for the I Party,Claimant Union represented that the concerned workman referred to in the industrial dispute under reference Smt. S. Shantai has since been ldieved by the IT Party| Management on voluntarily retirement scheme re- cently, So, the 1 Party | Claimant Union has decided to withdraw this industrial dispute and hence the T Party|Claimant Union may be permitted to withdraw this claim made in this industrial dispute. The learned counsel for the I Party]Claimant Union had also made an endorsement to that effect today in the Clalim Statement filed by the I PartyjClaimant

2. The learned counsel for the II Parly|Manage- ment had expressed that the II PaityfManagement had no objection for the I ParlylClaimant Union to withdraw this claim made in the present industrial dispute as it is represented by the learned counsel for the T Party'Claimant Union and has staled that the management had incurred expenses in defending this industrial dispute to the tune of Rs. 5,000 and it may be considered and he made an endorsement to that effect in the Claim Statement ot the I Party! Claimant.

3. Since the I PartyjCIaimant Union winch espou- sing the cause of the concerned workman Smt, S. Shanta had decided to withdraw this claim made in| this industrial dispute and a request has been made by the counsel on record for the I Party|Ciaiman' to wihdraw this industrial dispute and had made an en- dorsement to that effect in the Claim Statement, I PartyJClaimant Union is permitted to withdraw this industrial dispute. The learned counsel for the IF Party|Management by his endorsement on the Claim Statement requested this Tribunal to consider the ex- penses of Rs. 5,000]- incurred by the II Party) Management in contesting the industrial dispute while disposing of this case.

4 .From the endorsement made by the learned coun- sel for the I Party [Claimant Union, it is seen that the II PartyjManagement, Bank uf Baroda had relieved the concerned workman on voluntarily retirement scheme recently. While doing so, the II Farty]Mana- gement bank had not considered about the expenses incurred by it in defending this industrial dispute before the Tribunal from 1995 on wards. So, under such circumstances, I feel that the request made by the learned counsel for the II Party'Management for considering the expenses made by the Management in defending this industrial dispute does not assume any importance for consideration. Hence, it is concluded that that the request made by the learned counsel for the II PartylManagctnent on this aspect cannot be considered.

5. In the result, an award is passed holding that 'no dispute' exists between the parties as referred to in the Schedule, since the I Party¹ Claimant has with- drawn the same. No Cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and typed by him, corrected and pronounced by me in the open court on this day the 15th June, 2001.

K. KARTHKEYAN, Fresiding Officer Witnesses, Examined :

On cither side : None.

Documents Marked .

For the I Party|Chimant : Nil For II Party [Management : Nil.

New Delhi, the 18th July, 2001 S.O. 1992.—In pursuance of Section J7 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publi- shes the award of the Central Government industrial TribunaT|Labour Court, Jabalpur as shown in the annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Bank of India and their workman, which was received b> the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

(No. L-12012|417|96-TR(B-ll)] C. GANGADHARAN, Under Secy.

ANNEXURE BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, JABALPUR

Case No. CGIT|LClR|266|97 Presiding Officer : SHRI K. M. RAI Shri Ramcsh Chandra Verma. 14-A, T Ward, Sainik colony, Bairagarh, Bhopal.

• Applicant.

Versus

The Regional Manager, Central Bank of India, E-3|5O, Area colbny. -. Nonapplicant. Bhopal.

AWARD (Passed on this 6th day of July, 2001) B- II dated 29-8-97 has reJerred the following dispute for adjudication by this tribunal :—

"Whether the action of the management of Central Bank of India in termi- nating instead of regularising the services of Shri Ramcsh Chandra after facing an interview for regu- larisation is justified or not ? If not, to what, relief the applicant is entitled ?"

2. The case for the workman is that in the month of Dec. 1989, he was appointed as peon on daily wage basis by the Central Bank of India, Bhopal. He had regularly performed his duty as peon and was transferr- ed to the Bank Branches at Immaigate branch, Ibrahimpura branch and regional office. He was called for interview by the letter dated 12-3-91 for permanent appoint- ment as peon against the vacancy of General candidate as he was eligible for the same. In he interview, he was declared successful and even then, the appointment order for the permanent post of peon was not given to him. He has acquired the status of regular em- ployee and therefore he is enitlcd to get the permanent appointment for the post of peon in the Bank. The direction in this connection is therefore solicited.

3. The case for the management is that the workman was given temporary appoint- ment on daily wages for a period commenc- ing from 2-5-90 to 11-6-90 at lmamigate Branch. Thereafter his services were discon- tinued. There was no vacancy in the bink. After this period the workmen did not per- form his duty in the Bank at all. On 14-3-93, ' the written test was conducted by the bank for the appointment of sub-ordinate staff and the applicant was intimated to apppor in the tppl. In that test, 23 other candidates had also participated. This test was conducted, for the appointment of the peon apainst the vacancies for the candidates of SC nnd ST only as per direction of Government of Tndia.. The workman was not SC and ST candidate and therefore he was not entitled to get the appointment for the post of peon m

4099 continuously worked for 180 days in the Bank. He worked only for 30 days in the Bank. Tn view of this fact, he is not entitled to get the required appointment as peon in the Bank,

4. In view of all these facts, the claim of the workman deserves to be rejected.

5. The following issues arise for decision in this case and my findings thereon are noted hereinafter :—

1. Whether the workman is entitled to the regularisation of service as claimed by him ?

2. Relied and costs.

7. Issue No. 1.—The claim of the work- man is that he was appointed peon on daily wage basis by the Bank in the month of Dec. 1989. He has not filed an order of appoint- ment to show that he had been appointed Jn the month of Dec. 1989 to perform the duty of peon in the Bank. The Bank has admitted that he was appointed as peon for a fixed period of time in the year 1990 only. After expiry of this period, the workman did not (^charge his duty in the Bank at all. The workman had also not filed any document to show that he had continuously worked for 240 davs in a calendar year preceding the date of his termination from service. The burden was on the workman to prove that he had attained the status of regular employee by discharging his duty in the Bank.

8. The claim of the workman is that he wic called for interview on 14-3-93 for ap- pointment as permanent peon in the Bank. He was declared successful and even then the appointment was not issued to him. The con- tention of the bank is that the permanent vacancy for the post of peon was for the can- didate of SC and ST only and therefore the successful candidate of this category was given the regular appoinment as per direc- tion of the Government of India. There was no vacancy for the general category candi- date and therefore no appointment order was issued to the workman as he did not belong to the reserved category The workman has noi been ahle to establish by adducing cogent evidence that there was clear vacancy for the post of peon in the Bank for general mteeorv also Tn the absence of such evi- den^o ^^ is not possible to hold that the vncnnrv for peon was not reserved for SC and ST candidate only. The burden was on4100 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] the workman to prove that the said vacancy was for the General Candidate also. He has failed to discharge his burden by not produc- ing the cogent evidence in the case. Merely by appearing in the test for appointment to a particular post, will not create any right for getting the appointment from the em- ployer. The workman does not belong to a reserved category and therefore he is not en- titled to get the appointment for the post re- served for SC and ST candidaes. In view of all these facts, the workman is not entitled to the regaUrisation .as claimed by him. Issue No. 1 is answered accordingly.

8. Issue No. 2.—In view of my finding given on issue No. 1, the workman is not en- titled to the regularisation as claimed by him.

The reference is accordingly answered in favour of the management and against the workman. M 9. Copy of the award be sent to the Ministry of Labour, Government of India as per rules.

K. M. RAI, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 1993.—In 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 Trihunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Resarch on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001.

[No. L-42012l62|92-TR(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFI- CER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-L ABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 11 of 1994

Sh. Amar Singh S[d Sh. Thambu Ram, H. No. 40, Near Hanuman Mandir, Bhagat Nagar, Hissar.

. . .Petitioner.

Veisus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryam.

. . .Management.

APPEARANCES.

For the workman—Shri Darshan Singh.

For the management—-Shri R. K. Shanna, Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June 2001)

The Central Government vide Gazette Notification No. L-42012/162/92-T.R.(D.U.) dated 16-12-93 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Sh. Amar Singh, S/o Shri Thambu Ram w.e.f. May, 1988 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman concerned h entitled to and from what date ?"

2, The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the manage- ment. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the representative of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Government be informed.

Chandigarh, 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the J6th July, 2001 S.O. 1994.—In pursuance of Secton 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 uf 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute betwfcen the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Resarch on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001.

[No. L-42012/174/94-TR(DU)l KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SKRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFI- CER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LADOUR CQURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 69/9*5

Sh. Dharambir S/o Sh. Tara Chand, C/o Sh. Darshan Singh, President, District Agriculture Workers Union, 123/5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar. ,

. . .Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . .Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the workman— Shn Darslian. Singh.

For the management—Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001)

The Central Government vkle Gazette Notification No. L-42012/174/94-I.R.(D.U.) dated 4-8-05 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Shri Dharambir Daily paid labour w.e.f, 1-11-87 is just, fair and legal ? If not, what relief the workman is entitled and from which date ?"

2, The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the manage- ment. Tile representative of the management has no objection. Tn view of the above, the request of the representative of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Government be informed.

Chandigarh,

8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer 2347 GH2001—8.

4101 New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 1995.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (U of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001.

[No. L-42012/175/94-IR(DU)l KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFI- CER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 71 of 1995

Smt. Kanta W/o Sh. Pal Singh, C/o President, District Agriculture Workers Union, 123/5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar.

. . .Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . .Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the workman—Shri Darshan Singh.

For the manngsmem - -Shii R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 3th of June, 2001)

The Central Government vids Gazette Notification 'No. L-42012/175/94-I.R.(D.U.) dated 4-8-95 has re- ferred the following dispute to this Tribunal for ad- judication :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of4102 THE GAZETTE OP INDiA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] Shrimati' Kanta W|o Shri Pal Singh cx- beldar w.e.f. 1-4-1990 is just, fair and legal ? Tf not, what relief she is entitled and from what date ?'"

' - • • , - - -• 2. The representative r->f the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the c^ise against the manage- ment. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the r-quest of the representative of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned l\> the Ministry. Appropriate Government be informed. Chandiearh. 8-6-2001.

B. L. TATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 H.O. 1996.—In pursuance of the Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 Q4 of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute betwteen the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001.

[No. L-42012/l77/94-lR(DU)] KULDIP RA1 VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV. PRESIDING OFFI- CER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, C H \ N D I G A RH

I.D. No. 70 of 1995

Sh. Inder Singh S/o Sh. Chuni Lai, C/o Sh. Darshan Singh, President, Distt. Agriculture Workers Union, Gali No. 5, H. No. 123, JaWahar Nagar, Hissar.

.. .Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institut- for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana,

., . Management.

APPEARANCES ;

For the workman—Shri Darshan Singh, For the management—Shri R. K. Shatma,

Advoc.ik'.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001)

The Central Government vide Gazette Notifica|tion No. L-420l2/177/94-T.R.(D.U.) dated 4-8-95'has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of the Director, Central Institute for Research dn Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Sh. Tnder Singh S/o Sh. Chunni Lai ex- beldar is proper legal and justified ? Tf not, to what relief he is entitled and from what date ?"

2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the manage- ment. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the representative of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Government be informed.

Chandigarh,

8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 1997.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cen- tra] Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between tlw employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001.

[No. L-42O12|113|92-IR(DU)] KULDTP RAI VERMA, Oe,k Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRT B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFI- CER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 134/93

Sh. Mahabir, C/o President, Distt. Agriculture Workers Union, 123/5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar-125 001.

. . .Petitioner,

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . .Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the workman—Shri Darshan Singh.

For the management—Shri R. K. Shnrma, . . , . , Advocate

AWARD

(Passed on Sth Oi" June, 2001)

The Central Government vide Gazette Notification; No. L-42012/113/92-l.R.(D.U.), dated 20-10-93 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Sh. Mahabir w.e.f. 31-3-89 is justified? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to and from what date ?" 2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the manage- ment. The representative of the management has no objection. Tn view of the above, the request of the representative of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Government be informed.

Chandigarh, 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officci

410$ New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 1998.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby pub- lishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Chandigarh as shown in the Anncxure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Insti- tute for Research on Buffaloes, and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16 July, 2001.

(No. L-42012|135|91-IR(DU)] KULDIP RAT VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUS- TRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 122192

Miss Banti D|o. Sh. Harsa Ram, Tibba Danasher, Ward No. 11, Bharat Nagar, Hissar-125002. .. Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana. • • Management.

APPEARANCES :,

For the workman.—Shri Darshan Singh For the management.—-Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on Sth of June, 2001) The Central Govt. vide Gazette Notifica- tion No. L-42012lL35|91-I.R. (D.U.) dated 3-9-92 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :—

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Miss Banti w.e.f. 30-4-1991 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

2. The representative of the workman ap- peared. He intends to withdraw the case against the management. The representative ot the management has no objection. In view4104 THE dAZfeTtE OF JN£>lA : AUGUST 11, 200i/£feAVANA 20, 1923 tt>ARi II—SEC. 3(11)] of the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appro- priate Govt. be informed.

Chandigarh. 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 1999.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby pub- lishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexurc in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Insti- tute for Research on Buffaloes and their work- man, which was received by the Central Government on 16 July, 2001.

(No. L-42012|136|91-IR(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUS- TRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 89)92

Sh. Nadan Singh S[o. Sh. Ram Chandcr, Singh, H. No. 51, D.L.F. Colony, Near- Barwala Chungi, Hissar-125001. . . Petitioner.

Versus

Director,

Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana. . . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the workman.—Shri Darshan Singh.

For the management.—Shri R. K. Sharma Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001) The Central Govt. vide gazette notifica- tion No. L-42012|136|91-I.R.(D.U.) dated 14-8-1992 has referred the following dispute to tliis Tribunal for adjudication :—

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Sh. Nadan Singh w.e.f. March 86 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

2. The representative of the workman ap- peared. He intends to withdraw the case against the management. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the rep. ok the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed.

Chandigarh. 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 2000.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby pub- lishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh av rhown in the Annexurc in the Industrial Dispute between the emploveis in relation to the management of Central Insti- tute ior Research on Buffaloes and their work- man, which was received by the Central Government on 16 July, 2001.

[No. L-42O121137|91 IR(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUS- TRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 98)92

Sh. Devindcr Slo. Sh. Chandgi Ram, Clo. President, Distt. Agriculture Workers Union, 123|5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar,

Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana. - - Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the workman.—Shri Darshan Singh.

For the management.—Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001) The Central Govt. vide gazette notifica- cation No. L-42012|137|91-I.R.(D.U.) dated 14-8-1992 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :—

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Shri Devindcr vv.e.f. October 90 is justified ?" If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

2. The representative of the workman ap- peared. He intends to withdraw the case against the management. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed.

Chandigarh. 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer

4105 New Delhi, the 16di July, 2001 S.O. 2001.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby pub- lishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Insti- tute for Research on Buffaloes and their work- man which was received, by the Central Government on 16 July, 2001.

j[No. L42012|138|91-IR(DU)] KULDIP RAI. VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI ©. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDtJS^ TRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 97192

Sh. Indcr Singh Sjo Sh. Darya Singh, Vill. & Post Peeranwali, Distt. Hissar-125001. Petitioner.

Versus

Dii ector, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes Hissar, Haryana. Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the workman.—Shri Darshan Singh.

For the management.—Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001) The Central Govt. vide gazette notifica- tion No. L-42012|138|91-I.R.(D.U.) dated4106 THE GAZfiTTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] 14-8-92 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :—

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Shri Inder Singh w.e.f. Feb. 1991 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

2. The representative of the workman ap- peared. He intends to withdraw the case against the management. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed.

Chandigarh.

8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 2002.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby pub- lishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Chandigarh as shown in the Annexurc in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Insti- tute for Research on Buffaloes and their work- man, which was received by the Central Government on 16 July, 2001.

([No. L-42012ll39l9U.R.(DU)l KULDIP RAT VERMA, Desk Offccr ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUS- TRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT,, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 96|92

Sh. Ram Dass S|o Sh. Roop Chand, Vill. & Post Tandoor, Distt. Hissar, 12500J.

•• Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar. Haryana. . . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman.—Shri Da^shan Singh.

For the Management.—Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001) The Central Govt. vide gazette notifica- tion No. L-42012|139|9M.R.(D.U.) dated 14-8-1992 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :•—- "Whether the action of the management of Centr'al Institute for* Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Shri Ram Dass w.e.f. March 1990 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

2. The representative of the workman ap- peared. He intends to withdraw the case against the management. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. #ipprbpria'e Govt. be informed.

Chandigarh.

8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, Ihe 16ih July, 2001

S.O. 2003.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court Chandigarh, af shown in the Annexurc in the Industrial Dispute belween the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-42012| 140|91-TR(DU)] KULDIP RAL VERM A, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORF SHRI B. L. JA7AV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CLJM-LABOUR TOURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D No, U5 92

Sh. Diler Singh S'o Sh. fih.mi,het Singh Vill & Post Pteianwali, Dis!l. Hissar-125002.

.. Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For tht- Workman.—Shri Darshan Singli.

For the Management.—Shri R. K. Sharma Advoc3fc.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of J>me, 2001) The Central Government v de gazette notification No. L-42O12[14O!9M R.(D.U.) Dated 14-8-1992 has referred ibe following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication ;

"Whether the jiclion of fhc management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hr.-,ar in terminating the services of Shri Diler Singh w.e.f. I ebruary, 1991 is justi- fied ? If not, what relief the workman concerned is pnli.ied to ?"

2 The representative of the workman appeared. He intend-; to withdraw the ca^e against the mana- gement. The representative of the management has no objection Tn view of The above, the request of fhe representative of the wcrkman is accepted, and

4107 no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appro- priate Gmernnient be iiJonned.

Chandigaih,

Dt, 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer.

New Delhi, the J 6th July, 2001

S.O. 2004.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-42012]128|9MR(DU)l KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. !.. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I D. No. '16 92

Sh Dinesh Kumar S[o lnder Sirigh Vill. A Post Office, Bhugana, Distt. Hissir-125002.

. . Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on BuA'aloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman,—-Shri Darshan Singh.

For the Management.—Shri R. K. Sharma Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001)

The Central Government vide gazette notification No. L-42012|128|91 I R . ( D . Uj Dated 20-8-19924108 THE GAZETTE OF TNDTA • AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART IT--SEC. 3(ii)] Has referred the tullowing depute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Sh. Dincsh Kumar w.e.f. September, 1990 is justified ? If not, v/hat relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the mana- gement. The representative of the management has no objection In view of the above, the request of the representative of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appro- pi rate Government be informed.

Chandigarh

Dt. 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer.

New Delhi, the 16lh July, 2001'

S.O. 2005.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court Chandigarh, as shown in the Anncxure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the- management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-20QJ.

[No. L-42012|129|91-IR(DU)] KULDIP RAF VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

T.D. No. 117,92

Sh. Charan Singh S[o Sh. Indcr Singh Vill & P.O. Peeranwali, Teh. A Distt. Hissar-125001

. . Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Btrfralocs, Hissar, Haryana.

. . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman.—Shri Darshan Singh.

For the Management.—Shri R. K. Sharma Advocate.

AWARD

{Passed on 8th of Jure, 2001)

The Central Government vide gazette notification N.i. L-42O12'129I9M.R.(D.U.) Dated 20-8-1992 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Shri Charan Singh w.e.f. August, 1990 is justi- fied ? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

2, The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the mana- gement. The representative vt the management lias no objection Tn view of the above, the request of the representative of the wcrlman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appro- priate Government be informed.

Chandigarh

Dt. 8 6-2001

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001

S.O, 2006.—Tn pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947). the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management ol Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and theii workman, which wasi received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-42012|132|91-IR(DU)] KULDIP RA1 VERMA, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JAIAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL f RIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 92J92

Sh. EhaJ Singh C|o President, Distt. Agriculture Workers Union, 123j5, Jawahar Nugar,

Hissar.

. . Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Reseairh on Buft'aloeSj

Hissar, Havana.

. . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman.—Shri Darshan Singh.

For the Management.—Shri R. K. Shanna Advocate,

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001)

The Ccntial Government M6C gazette notification No. L-42012[132[91-J.R (D.U.) dated 14-8-1992 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management at Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Shri Bhal Singh w.e.f. July, 1990 is justified? Ti not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled lo ?"

2. The representative of (Le workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the care against the mana- gement. Tlie representative of the management has no objection Tn view of the above, the request of the representative of the wo krvmn is accepted, and no dispute award is returned lo the Ministry. Appro- priate Government be informed.

Chan-'ii^arh.

Dt 8-6-2001

B. L. JVTAV, Presiding Officer. 21+7 GI[2001—9

4109 New Delhi, the 16i> Ju'y, 2001

S.O. 2007.—In pursuance ol Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court Chandig?rh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7^2001.

[No. i^2012|133|91-IR(DU)] KULD1P RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JAfAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 91 [92

Sh. Charanji Lai S|o Sh. MurJi Tibba Dana Sher. Ward No. 11, Bharat Nagar, Hissar-125001. .. Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman.—Shri Darshan Singh.

For the Management.—Shri R. K. Shanm

Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed rn 8th of lunc, 2001)

The Central Government vide gazette notification No. L-42012|133i<_)l-I.P.(D.U,) Dated 14-8-1992 has referred the following cii'.putc to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management Gf Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Shri Charanji La] w.c.f. 31-7-1988 is justified? If not, what relief thi: workman concerned is entitled to ?"

2. The representative of rhe workman appeare'l. He intends to withdraw the case against the mana- gement The representative of the management has no objection In view of the above, the request of the representative of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is ldurned :o th^ Ministry, Appro- priate Government be informed.

Chandigarh.

Dt. S-b-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Office.

New Delhi, the !6lh July, 2001

S.O. 20O8\—In pursuance of Section 17 of the industrial Disputes Act, 1047 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cuin- Labour Court, Chandigarh, a; shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to' the management cf Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-v2012|134|91-TR(DU)J KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRT B. L. JATAV, FRF-SIDiNG OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRJBl INAl.-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 90 92

Sh. Arjun Singh S|o Sh. Khushi Ram C|o President, Distt. Agriculture Workers Union, 123|5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar.

. . Petitioner.

Versu;

director, Central Institute for Rese.irc.Ii on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman.--Shri Darshan Singh. For the Management.— Shri R. K. Sharm.i

Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2C0I) The Central Government vide Gazette notification No. L-420t2|134l9l-I.R.(D.U.) Dated 14-8-1992 has referr;d the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management bt Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes Hissar in terminating the services of Shri Arjun Singh w.c.f. 30-S-88 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?'•

2." t he representative of the workman appear^). He intends to withdraw the case against the mana- gement. The representative of the management h:is no objection. Tn view of the i-beve, the request nt the representative of the workman is accepted, anJ no dispute award is returned \o >'he Ministry. Appro- priate Government be informed.

Ciiandigaih,

Dt 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding OfTicrr.

New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001

S.O. 2009.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central 'Government hereby publishes the award of the Cen- tral Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between ihe employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-42012/l23/91-IR(DU)| KULDIP RAT VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRT B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDTGARH

I.D. No. l l l | 92

Sh. Ram Baran S|o Sit. Bhuru Ram C[o President Distt. Agricultural Workers Union. 123|5, Jawahar Nagar. Hissar .Petitioner

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana!

. . .Management APPEARANCES •

Fdr the workman : Shri Darshan Singh. For the management : Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD

(Parsed on Sth of .Tune 2001) The Central Government vide Gazette Notification No. L-42012/123/91-IR(D.U.) dated 20-8-1992 has 41 ii referred the following di&pute to this Tribunal for td- judicatiaon:

"Whether the i.ction ,of the maneigemeni or •Ceatrjil Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hiss,ur in terminating the services of Shii Ram Baran w.e.f, 31-3-91 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?"

2. The representative of the worl.man appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the manage- ment. The representative of the management has no objection. In vie-j" of ,the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed. Chandigarh. 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New -Delhi, the 16lh July, 2001 S.O. 2010.—Tn pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cen- tral Governrneut Jjereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh as .shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management ,of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was j-gcoived by the Central Government on 16-7-2ft01.

[No. L-42012|126|91-I-R(DU)] KULD1P RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHUT H. L. JATAV PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABQUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 114192

Sh. Sanjaiy Slo Sh. Harphool Singh. Vill & Dhani, Kurnbpur, Hansi ...Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. .Management.

APPEARANCES .

For the workman : Shii Darshan Singh. For the management . Shri R. K, Stjarma Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of J-yne 2001)

The Central Govt. vide Gazette notih'ofttion No. L- 42012| 126|91-I.R. (D.U) Datfc? 20-8-1992 has te ferred the following dispute \Q this Tribunal for adjudication:

"Whether the action of the management of Cen- tital Institute Car Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services at Sh. Sanjay w.e.f. July 1990 is justified ? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to?"

2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends .to withdraw the .case against ^the manage- ment. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, ,the request of the rep. of .the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed¹. Chandigarh. 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 201 l . ^ Jn pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Dispute Ace. 1947 (14 of 1947;, the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Cen- tral Government Industrial TribunaJ-cunj-Labour Court Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-42012|119]91-IR(DU)J KULDIP KA.T VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFiICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-OLABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

ID. Nc. 107|92

Sh. Kali Ram S|o Sh, Chhotu Ra>m C|o President, IJistt, Aericulture Workers Union, 123|5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar. . .Petitioner4li2 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/$RAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(li)] ANNEXURE Versus

Director, Central institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. .Management

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING) OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH APPEARANCES :

U>. No. 109 92 For the workina'i : Shri Darshan Singh. For the management : Shn R. K Sharma,

Advocate.

Sh. Partap Singh S|o Sh. Sher Singh C|o Fresident, llistt. Agriculture Workers Union, 51123, Jawahar Nagai, Hissar.

...Petitioner. AWARD

Versus

(Parsed on 8th of June, 2001)

Director, Central Institute tot Research on BufTajloes,, Hissar, Haryapa.

...Management. The Central Govt. vide gazette notification No. L- 42012|119|91-1.R.(O.U.) Dated 20-8-1992 has re- ferred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication:

APPEARANCES :

For the workman : Shri Darshan Singh.

For the management ; Shri R. K. Sharma, Ad- vocate.

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute foi Resarch on Buffaloes, Hissar m terminjting the services of Shri Kali Ram w.c.f. 30-4-90 is justified? If not, whit relief the workman concerned is entitled to⁹ '

AWARD

(Palssed on 8th of June, 2001)

The Central Govt. ride gazette notification No. L- 42012| 121 |91-I.R. iD.U.) Dated 20-8-1992 has re- ferred the following dispute to this Tribunal for ad¹- judication :

2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the manage- ment. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute awafrd is returned to the Ministry Appropriate Govt. be informed. Chandigarh. 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer

"Whether the action of the management of Central Tmtitule for Research on Buffaloes, Hissafr in terminating the services of Shri Fartnp Singh w.c.f. 29-6-90 is justified ? If not, what rehef the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

2. The representative uf the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw tfie case against the manage- ment. The re)piresenta,tive of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed.

Chandigarh.

8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV. Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001

S.O. 2012.—Tn pursuance oi Section 17 of the In- dustrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Cen- tral Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Centra] Institute for Research "ii buffaloes and their workman, which wais received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-42012|12l|91JR(DU)] KULD1P RAI VERMA, Desk Officer Aiii New Delhi, Ihe J6lh July, 2001

S.O. 2013.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Govrnment hereby publishes the award ot the Central Government Industrial Tnbunal-cum-Larxnir Court, Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Indus- trial Dispute between the employers ; I region to the management of Central Institute for Rc^aica on Buffaloes and their workman, which was leceived by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 [No. L-42012|113|91-IR(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JA1AV, PRESIDING

OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUS- TRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

S.O. 2014.—In pursuance oi Section 17 of the In- dustrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the ^ward of the Cental Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

I.D. No. 101|92

[No. L-42O12|114|91-1R(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer Sh. Munshi Ram S|o Sh. Bhagwan Dass C|o President, Distt. Agriculture Workers Union 123)5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar.

Petitioner.

ANNEXURE Versus

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING

OFFICER CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUS- TRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH Director, Central Institute for Reseaich on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

...Management.

I.D. No. 102192 APFEARANCES :

For the workman : Shri Darshan Singh. For the management : Shri R. K. Sharma

Sh. Ashok Kumar S|o Sh. Mangat Ram C|o President, Distt. Agriculture Worker Union, 5[12J, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar.

Petitioner.

Advocate.

AWARD

Versus

(Passed on 8lh of June 2001)

The Central Govl. vide gazette notification

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

.. .Mamagement.

No. L-42012|113|91-T.R. (0 U) Dated 20-8-1992 has referred¹ the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

APPEARANCES :

For the workman : Shri Darshan Singh, For the management Shri R. K. Sharma

Advocate.

W A RD "Whether the action of the management of Cen- tral Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the seivices of Shri Munshi Ram v.ci. 8-1-90 is justified? Tf not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?"

(Passed on 8th of June 2001)

award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed.

Chandigalrh.

8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001

S.O. 2015.—In. pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the awaid of the Cen- tial Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between (.he employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-42O12/116/91-1R(DU)1 KULD1P RAT VERMA, Desk OJTicer

ANNKX.URE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JA1AV, PRESIDING OFFI- CRR, CENTRAL CiOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL 1RIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDfGARH

I.D. No. 104|92

Shii Sher Singh S/o Shri Mohan Lai, Quarter No. 12, Ward ND. 11, Bharat Nagar, Hissar-125002.

. .Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Rtstyrch on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

.Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the workman : Shri Darshan Singh. For the management : Shri R. K. Sharma. Advo- cate.

AWARD

(Passed¹ on 8th of June 2001) The Central Government viri- Gizcttc notification No. L-42012/U6/91-1.R. fD.U.) dated 20-8-1992 lias refened the following t'isoule to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Cen- tral Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissai in terminating the services of Shri Sher Singh w.e.f. 30-5-1990 is justified? If not, what itlicf the workman concerned is entitl- ed t o ?"

2. The leprescntative

Chandigarh,

B. T. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 20011

S.O. 2019.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in Telation to the management in Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-42012|109|93-I.R.(DU)] KULDTP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer4118 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT. CHANDIGARH

l.D. No. 112|94

Ms. Vecna Rani D|o Sh. Lekh Raj Rjo 94-W, Model Town, Hissar.

. . Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman.— Shri Darshan Singh. •For the Management—Shri R. K. Sharma.

Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001) The Central Government vide Gazette Notification No. L-420l2|109j93-I.R.(D.U.) Dated 25-8-94 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in not giving the opportunity of re employment to Miss Veena Rani, Ex- cmployec, is justified ? If not, what relief she is entitled to and from what date ?" 2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the cftse against the mana- gement. The ieprecentaiive of the management has no objection. In view of Ihc above, the request of the representative of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry, Appro- priate Government be informed.

Chandigarh. Dt, 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 2020.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government heieby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management in Central Institute for Research on Bulfaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001.

[No. L-42012[lll|91-IR(DU)] KULD1P RA1 VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

T.D. No. 99|92

Sh. Balbir Singh S|o Sh. Banwari Lai R|o Vill. & P.O. Mauja Matrayam Distt. Hissar-125002.

. . Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman.—Shri Darshan Singh. For the Management—Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate,

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001)

The Central Government vide Gazette Notification No. L-42012|lll|91-I.R.(DU.) Dated 20-8-1992 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Sh. Balbir Singh-w.e.f. 30-11-1989 is justified? If not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?''

2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the mana- gement. The representative of the management has no objection Jn view of the above, the request of the representative of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appro- priate Government be informed.

Chandigarh, Dt. 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001

S.O. 2021.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Cenfral Government Industrial Tnbunal-cum- Labour Court Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexurc in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management in Central Institute for Research on Buftaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001.

[No. L-42012|lll|92-IR(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABQUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

ID. No. 131J93

Smt. Bhago C|o President, Distt. Agriculture Workers Union, 123|5, ,'awahar Nagar, Kissar.

. . Petitioner.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman.—chri Darshan Singh.

For the Management—Shn R. K. Sharma, ( Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001)

The Central Government vide Gazette Notification No. L-42012/111/92-I.R.(D.U.) dated 20-10-93 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether ihe action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Smt. Bhago w.c.f. March, 1990 is justified? If not, what relief ?hc is entitled to and from what date?"

2. The representative of the workman appeared. Hs intends to withdraw the case against the mana- gement. The leprcsentative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the representative of the workman is accepted, and

4119, no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appro- priate Government be irlormed.

Chandigarh.

Dt. 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 2022.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes ths award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001.

[No. L-42012/112/92-IR(DU)J KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFI- CER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT. CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 132/93

Shri Rameshwar, C/o President, Distt, Agriculture Workers Union, 123/5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar.

.Petitioner

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar, Haryana.

. . , Management APPEARANCES :

For the workman—Shri Darshan Singh. For the management—Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD (Passed on 8th of June, 2001)

The Central Government vide gazette notification No L-42012/112/92-I.R.(D.U.) dated 20-10-93 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Cen- tral Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Shri Rameshwar w.e.f. 1-9-91 is justified? If not, what relief the workman is entitled lo and from what date ?"

2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the man- agement. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Government be informed.

Chandigarh, 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 2023.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of J947). the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Cen- tral Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buflaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001

[No. L-42012/94/94-IR(DU)] KULD1P RAT VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFI- CER, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH I.D. No. 8/96

District President, District Agriculture Workers Union, 193/5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar, . Workman/ Union.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buflaloes, Hissar. Haryana. . . .Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the workman—Shri Darshan Singh.

For the management—Shn R. K. Sharma, Advocate

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001)

The Central Government vide gazette notification No. L-42012/94/94-IR(D.U.), dated 30-J-1996 has referred the following dispute tc this Tribunal for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the management of Cen- tral Institute for Research on Buflaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Shri Shamsher Singh son of Shri Matu Ram and employing some other in his place is justified and legal. If not, to what relief and fiom what date the workman is entitled to ?" 2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the manage- ment. The representative of 'he management has no objection. In view of the above, the request, of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Government be- informed.

Chandigarh. 8-6-2001.

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 2024.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Bangalore, as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Tungabhadra Board, T.B. Dam and their workman, which was received by the Cen- tral Government on 16-7-200 L.

[No. L-42O12/66/88-D.lI(B)J KULDTP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer ANNEXURE

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

Dated : 29th June, 200J

PRESENT :

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

CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Bangalore

4121 6. It is the further case of the first party union work- man that as per the revision of his pay scale was re- vised to Rs. 340—800 and the pay of the first party was fixed as Rs. 500 from 1-1-77. There was further revision of pay from 1-1-82 and his pay was fixed as Rs. 860. The next revision applicable from 1-1-87 at the scale of Rs. 870—1600 and the pay of the first party fixed at Rs. 1600.

C.R. No. 53/R9

I PARTY:

Shri R. Alagiri, Represented by the General Secretary, Tungabhadra Board Drivers and General Worker's Union, T.B. Dam, Hospet Taluk, Bellary District-583 101. (Advocate Shri M. C. Narasimhan)

II P A R T Y:

The Secretary, Tungabhadra Board, T.B. Dam, Hospet Taluk, Bellary District-583101. (Advocate—Shri B. G. Sndharan)

7. It is the further case of the first party workman that he was receiving salary accordingly. The Second Party in its office Memorandum dated 1-8-86 had re- fixed and reduced the salary of the first party in the scale of Rs. 280—500 from 1-1-77 and Rs. 300—700 from 22-1-80 and Rs. 450—860 from 1-1 -82 in super- seeding the earlier orders of pay fixation of the salary and the action of the management is not correct.

8. The salary of the Senior Driver is fixed at the scale of Rs. 1360—2065 in the State Transport Corporation. The recovery is illegal. First party union workman has prayed that the action of the manage- ment is not correct and prayed to pass order in its favour.

AWARD

The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section 2A of the Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has referred this dispute vide order No. L-42012/66/88- D-TT(B) dated 1st August, 1989 on the following schedule:

9. The case of the management is that the dispute raised is not maintainable. The workman has filed Writ Petition bearing W.P. No. 11112/88 and as per the interim order of the said Writ petition recovery has been stopped from May, 1990. It is said in an- other case filed by Sri S. Mahaboob against second party for reinstatement, it has been disposed of by the High Court of Kamataka with the direction to consider his case if he is eligible in the light of the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the Dharwad District, PWD, Literate Daily Wages Em- ployees Association and Ors Vs. State of Karnatuka etc. (ATR 1990 SC 883). The management for these reasons has prayed to reject the reference.

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the Tungabhadra Board, T.B. Dam, Hospet Taluk, Bellary District is justified in fixing Shri R. Alagiri, Driver >n the scale of Rs. 280 to Rs. 500 instead of Rs. 340 to Rs. 800 and deducting the ex- cess payment ? If not, to what relief is the workman entitled to ?"

2. First party union workman is working with the second party management. The management did not justify in fixiug him in the scale of Rs. "280 to Rs. 500 instead of Rs, 340 to Rs. 800 and deducted excess payment. Therefore, he raised the Industrial Dispute.

3. Parties appeared and filed Claim Statement and Objections.

4. The case of the first party in brief is as under :— 5. The first party joined as Driver with the Board in the year 1952 in a work-charged establishment. The board had been following the Government Order issued time to time with regard to revision of pay scales and the first party union Workman was getting salary accordingly. From 1-1-76 the first party union workman was given the time scale of Rs. 120 240 and his pay was fixed at Rs. 158.

10. It is seen from the records that this dispute is pending since 11 years and the parties have spent more time without any good progress. In the instant case workman got examined himself. On behalf of the management MW1 is examined.

11. It is seen from the records that the advocates on record went on changing. Parties have not adduc- ed any further evidence. So the matter was closed. The learned counsel for the first party has not advanc- ed any document. T have heard the learned counsel for the second party. T have closed the case because this is one of the oldest matter before this court and secondly we have the evidence of witnesses and all the documents.

12. I have perused all the documents carefully. T have read the evidence of workman and management witnesses. MW1 has stated in his evidence that the first party union workman was working as Driver with the Second Party and his pay was fixed in the year 1981 at Rs. 340—800.

13. He further states that the above scale was, fix- ed for the first party workmau though eligibility was in the pay scale of Rs. 300—700. His evidence is that pay w 4122 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART IT—SEC. 301)}

The evidence of MW1 is sufficient to prove that the action of the management is correct

Smt. Deelo Devi C|o Dharshan Singh, Distt. Agriculture Workers Union, 123|5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar.

. . Petitioner.

Versus

14. The learned counsel for the management has filed copy of oTder of the High Court of Karnataka in W.P. No, 11112/88 filed by the first party work- man.

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar. Haryana

. . Management

APPEARANCES :

For the workman : Shri Darshim Singh

For the management : Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate

AWARD

15. It is seen from the said order that the first party has withdrawn the Writ Petition. We have the evi- dence of WW1. This evidence is not sufficient to say that the action of the management is illegal. The evi- dence of first party workman will not help to prove that the action of the management js not correct. WW1 says in his cross examination that it is correct to say that he was fixed in the nay scale of Rs. 860 and it is not correct to say that the board has reduced his scale into Rs. 775. The evidence of first parly union workman is not clear to substantiate this dispute.

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001) 16. Considering all this I am of the opinion that there is, no merit in this reference. Accordingly I pro- ceed to pass the following order :

ORDER

The Central Govt. vide Gazette Notification No. L-42012|63|93-T.R.(DU) Dated 11-8-94 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudi- cation :

The reference is rejected. (Dictated to PA, transcribed by her, corrected and

signed by me on 29th June, 2001).

V. N. KULKARNI, Presiding Officer

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Smt. Deelo Devi, Ex-Daily paid Labour w.c.f. June, 1990 is justified? If not, what relief she is entitled to and from what date ?"

2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the manage- ment. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed.

Chandigarh,

8-6-2001

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001

S.O. 2025.—In pursuance of Section 17 of ihe Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publisher the award of the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunul-cunvLabour Court, Chandigarh as shown in the Anntxure in the Indus- trial Dispute between the employers in relation to tbe management of Central Tnstitule for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001.

[No. L-42012|63|93-IR(DU)]

KULDIP RAT VERMA, Desk Officer

New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHR1 B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT INDUSTRIAL TRTBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I. D. No. 92|94

S.O. 2026.—Tn pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes tru award of the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexur; in the Indus- trial Dispute between the employers in relation to he management of Central Listitut¹: for Rcseaich on Bull'aloes and their workman, which was received by the- Cenral Government on JOth July, 2001.

[No. L-42012|51|96-IR(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOLR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I. D. No. 131'97

Smt. Ora Pati, • C|o Distt. Agriculture Workers Union, 123|5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar.

4123 New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001

• • Petitioner

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar. Haryana

S.O, 2027.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Indus- trial Dispute between the employers in relation to Nthe management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001.

[No. L-42012|5l|93-lR(DU)]

. . Management

APPEARANCES :

For the workman : Shri Darshan Singh For the management : Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001) The Central Govt. vide Gazette Notification No. L-42012|5l|96-lR(DU) Dated 30-5-1997 lias referred the follqWing dispute to this Tribunal for adjudi- cation :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Smt. Om Pati and not giving opportunity for re-employmcnt is legal and justified ? Tf not, to what relief the workman is entitled to ?" .

2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the manage- ment. The representative of tbe management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed,

Chandigarh,

8-6-2001

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXtIRE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 89191

Sh. Ram Bhagat, S|o Sh. Banarasi Dass C|o President, Distt. Agriculture Workers Union, 123|5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar.

Petitioner

Versus

Director, Centra] Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar. Haryana

- Management APPEARANCES :

For the workman : Shri Darshan Singh

For the management : Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001) The Central Govt. vide Gazette Notification No. L-42012|51|93-TR(DU) Dated 11-8-94 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudi- cation :

"Whether the action of the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of the workman Shri Ram Bha^at w.e.f, 18-10-91 is legal and justified ? If not,4124 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—Stc. 3(ii)] what relief the vvoikman concerned is entitled to ?"

2. The representative of ihe workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the casu against the manage- ment. The representative o( the management has no objection. In view or. the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed.

Chandigarh,

8-6-2001

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001 S.O. 2028.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 ot 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Indus- trial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July, 2001,

[No. L-42O12|49|93-1R(DU)J KULD1P RAI VERM A, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B. L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. Noj 90 of 1994

Sh. Lakha Ram S|o Sh. Gurbachan Singh, H. No. 1408, 12 Quarter, Hissar.

. • Petitioner

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar. Haryana

. . Management APPEARANCES :

For the Workman : Shri Darshan Singh. For the Management : Shri R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001) The Central Govt. vide Gazette Notification No. L-42012|49|93-IR(DU) Dated 17-8-1994 has referred the following dispute to this Tribunal for adjudi- cation :

"Whether the action of this management of Central Institute for Research on Buflaloes, Hissar in terminating the services of Shrj Lakha Ram w e.f. Dec. 1989 is legal and justified ? It not, what relief the workman concerned is entitled to ?" 2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdraw the case against the manage- ment. The representative of the management has no objection. In view of the above, the request of the rep. of the workman is accepted, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be informed.

Chandigarh, 8-6-2001

B. L. JATAV, Piesiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001

S.O. 2029.—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-cum-Labour Court, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Tungnbhadra Board, T. B. Dam and their workman, which was received by the Cen- tral Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-42012/7/89-D-II(B)/IR(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE

Dated, 29 th June. 2001

PRESENT :

Hon'ble Shri V. N. Kulkorni. B.Co., LLB., Presiding Officer, CGTT-cum-Labour Court. Bangalore.

C. R. No. 54/89 4i :s I PARTY

S/Shri Mookanna and 21 others, The General Secretaiy, Tungabhadra Board Factory Workers and Civil Employees Union. T.B. Pam-583225, Bellary District, (Advocate Shri A. S. Mellabennur)

II PARTY

1. The Secretary,

Tungabhadra Board, T.B. Dam-583225. Bellary District.

2. The Executive rngiiieei.

Low Level Canal Division. Cantonment, Bcliary-583104.

(Advocate Shri A. K. Ehat)

AWARD

1. The Central Government by exercising the powers conferred by clause, (d) of sub-section 2A of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has refened this dispute vide ordei No. L-42012/7/89- D-H(B)/IR(DU) dated 2nd August, 1989 for adju- dication on the following schedule :

SCI rCDULE

-'Whether the action of the Tungabhadra Board, T. B. Darn. Rellaiy District in retrenching S/Shri MooJcanna, G Ravi K. Vcnkappa Setty, K. Vonnapp:,, V. G. Yerrappa, D. Nugabhuihanam, T. Mallikarjuna, Smt. Laxmi, S/Shri Er.mna, Snryababu, Fakir- appa, M. Rajesekar, Vcerashan, Ismail, Nai- la,nna, Rrmuilinga, (). Gangappa and Narasi- mhulu is justified .' If not, to what relief are the workmen entitled to ?"

2. Twenty Two workmen of first party union were wotting with the Second party management and diey were terminated therefore their union have raised this dispute.

3. Parties appeared and filed Claim Statement and , Counter respectively.

4. flu; case of these woikmen of the first part\ union is ;r. follows :

5 It is the case of the workmen that they were working with the Second part) on maintenance of Low Level Canal and they hrve put in continuous service of more than 240 dnys and their services were abruptly stopped frdm 27-7-1988 and 1-7-86 respec- tively without following any procedure. The action of the management is not correct.

f>. It is the further case of these workmen that many "f his junior were taken on regular basis but without following the. mandatory provision of Section 25F of the Industrial Dispute Act these workers were tcrrai- mAted The acrion of the maaagement is not correct jand they have prayed to pass award in their favour.

3347 Gl]2mi—it.

1. The case of the management is as follows :

8. That the dispute laised by the Union is not main- tainable. The main coiKeation of the management is lhat it is not an industry and the status of the board has been explained and it is clear that it is not an industry.

9. It is the further case of the management thai the allegations made by the first party are not correct and this tiibunal has no jurisdiction.

10. It is seen from the tecoidf. that this is a matter of 1J years old and the parties unnecessary spent all these days without piopeily conducting the case. Many adjournments vveie given to lead the evidence but except the evidence of WW1 there is no other evidence

I 1. First party union submitted that it has closed its evidence. Date wns given for the Second party to adduce evidence if any. There is no evidence on behalf of the management. I have heard the learned counsel for the second party T have perused all the documents and read the evidence of WW1 carefully. According to the evidence of WW1 he was working since 1984 as muster roll employee under the second party. He has also stated that other workmen were working with the second party. He has said that after July 1988 he was termianted along with others. No notice of termination was given. Termination benefits were not given. VVW1 in his cross examination says that they were engaged on daily wages. But payment was made once in a month. He also says in his cross examina- tion that their services were temporary. Admittedly there is nn appointment order for these workmen. There is not an iota of evidence to establish that these workmen have worked for more than 240 days. 12, It was submitted by the learned counsel for the management that the workmen being the casual work- ers are not entitled for any benefits. They have not vorled foi more than 240 days. He relied the deci- sions of ATR 1979 Supreme Court 1981 and AIR 1994 Supreme Court 163S. I have read the above deu.iions. From the records it is clear that these work- men wer^ only Casual Woiker There is no evidence that they have continuously worked for more than 240 days.

13. With this, and the principles held in the above decisions I am of the opinion that there is no merit in this reference. First partv has failed to prove that they had worked continuously for more than 240 days. Accordingly I piocecd to pass the following order :

ORDFR

The refei encc is rejected.

(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed by me on 29th June, ?001.)

V. N. KULKARNI, Presiding Officer4126 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA . AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] New Delhi, the l

S.O. 2030.—In pursuance ol Section 17 of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Cen- tial Government ludusiml Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Lucknow as shown in tht Annexure in the In- dustrial Dispute between ihe employee in relation to the management of Wild Lil'c Institute of India and (heir workman, which wai jeeeived by the Central Government on 16-7-2001

|No. L-42011/59/99-lR(DU)J KULDJP KAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE rue c I-:NI RAL GOVERNMEN r JNDUSTRIAL I RIBIJNAL-CUM-L ABOUR COURT, I.UCKNOW

Piesiding Officer : Rudresh Kumar,

AD INDICATION

l.D. No. 23/99

Ref. No.: L-42OI 1/5V>9/IR(DU) d:\lcd 19th

November, 1999

BLTWhbN

Piesidtnt, Wikl I ire Institute ol Irdia Employers L'nion. P.D. No. IK. Cmndcifuini, Dchu\,mn~24XO0l.

AND

1 he Duet-tor, Wild Life Institute of Inukt, Chnndrabaiv, Dehradun-24SOO 1.

AWARD

l)y lefcrcnct :,,\ L-420Jl/59/99/lR(DU) dated 19-11-99, the Central Government in the Ministry ol Labour, in exercise of powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-sc^Uon (1) and sub-section 2(A) of Section 10 I D. Act, 1947 (34 of J947), made over this industrial dispute between President, Wild Life Insti- tute of India Fmployees Union, Dehradun and the Director, Wild Life Institute or India, Dehradun foi i 'judication.

The refcrcne • is rmiJui^d ti-s under : '

"Whether the action of th',> management of WuJ Life Institute in denying the promoiion/s selection from amongst class IV employee* to the next higher cadre is legal and justi- fied ? If 'not, to what relief the workmen are entitled ?"

2. By claim statement dated 11-1-2000, the Wild Lite Institute of India LmpJoyecs Union sought J 00 per cent promotion to its class-IV employees in class-III lowest post in the technical and administra- tive cadre, by creating new posts in higher cadies, by amending jc-cruilment rules or making any other pioposal to the governing body ot Wild Life Institute tor their promotion. The management filed written ob- lection raising some preliminary issues; like 'wild Life Institute' is purely a research and turning institute and is not coveted within Xhz definition of 'industry' as defined into Section 2(3) oi l.D. Act, 1947. It is also pleaded thai, the relief claimed relates to policy matter which can not be adjudicated and is out side the perview of Anncxures II and III of the Act. 3. Duung pendency of the ca^e, the workman filed amendment application before the Government ot India, Ministry of Labour for amending the reference. lhc Government of India, niMcud of amending the reference, made a fresh retetenec which has been legistered at case No, 56/ 2001. The workman union filed an application on 27-6-2001, to return the present reference without any award on merit, in view ol fresh reference, 4. In view ol the amendment ot the reference by way of substituting a new one and the subject matter n( case No 56/2001 Iving the same, it is no longer necessary to discuss merit of various pleas advanced b} the inanagement. All such jieas may be taken tit ;ippropn,itc stage in the new case. The workmen avc no longer interested to pursue this case and have filed jii application to return ihe jefernce.

5. Vcordingly, the reference is returned unanswer- ed on merit,

Lucknow,

3-7-2001

RTIDRESH KUMAR, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 16th July, 2001

S O. 2031.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cemia! Government hereby publishes the award ot ihe Cen- tral Government Industrial Tribunal-cura-Laboui: Couit, Bangalore as shown in the Annexure in the IiuliLsrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the nrinagement ot Ruhbei Research Institute of liulij* and their woikman, which was itccived by the Central Government on 1O-7-20O1.

[No. I,42011/51/99-lR(DU)] KDLD1P RAX \ ERMA, Desk Ofllcer

ANNEXURE

[BEFORE THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, BANGALORE

Dated, 2nd July, 2001

PRESENT :

Hon'blc Shri V. N. Ku&arni. B.Com., LLB., Presiding Officer, CGlT-cum-Labour Couit, Bangaloic.

C.R. No. 121/99

I PARTY

I lie Hon. President, The Genera! Fmployecs Union, Sutiitkoppa, Kodagu-571237.

II PARTY

1 lie Officci-m-Charge, The Rubber Research Institute of India, fFcvtid Breeding Sub Station, Rubber Board, Neltana-574230

AWARD

1. I he Cential Goveinm nt by exeicismg the powers conferred by clause (d) of sub-section 2A of Section Jl> of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 has lefcrred this dispute vide ordci No. L-42011/51/99- TR(DU) dated 27-10-99 fn adjudication on the following schedule •

SCHEDULE

"Whether the action of the management of Hevea Breeding Sub Station, Netanna jn not imple- menting the wage sett'ements dated 6-1-99 •irrived at between th^ KFDC and ifs work- men stating that they tire not parties to the s ud settlement even though they were follow- ing such settlement¹; entered into between the KFDC und >ts woikraen in the years 1986, 1988. 1992 and J995 is (unified? If not, to what relief the workmen rt HBSS arc entitled ?"

2. First party union workmen were working with the second party management. Dispute was raised and the matter is leferred. When the notices were seat to the parties, the parties remained absent. Since begin- ning parties are absent.

3. In view of this, no purpose will be served if the mattpr is adjourned. According I proceed to pass the following order :

4117

ORDER

j lie reference is icjcctcd.

(Dictated to PA transcribed by her corrected and signed by me on 2nd July, 2001.)

V. N. KULKARNI. Presiding Oflicer New Delhi," the 16th July, 2001 S O. 2032.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the In- dustrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Cen- tral Government Industrial Tribuual-cum-Labour Court Chandicaih as shovn in the Anneyure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute tor Re- 'scarch on Buffaloes and then wojkinan, •which was received by the Central Government on 16-7-2001.

[No. L-42011|43|92-IR(DU)J KULDIP RAI VFRMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B L. JATAV. PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 24]94

President, Distt Acriculture Workers Union, 123/5, Jawahar Nagar, Hissar-125001. Petitioner.

Versus

D; rector, Central InVjtufe for Research on Buffaloes,

Hissar, Haryann

.Management APPEARANCES :

For the woikraen :— Shri Darshan Singh For the management '—Shri , R. K. Sharma, Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June, 2001)

The Central Govt. vide Gazette Notification No. E-42011/43/92-LR. (D.U.) dated, 31-1-1994-, has4128 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] APPEARANCES :

/referred me following dispute to "this Tribunal for adjudication :

For the workman : Shri S. P. Shah. For the management ; Shri N. D. Kalra.

AWARD

(Passed on 20-6-2001)

"Whether the action of the management of Cen- tral Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissar m not paying the wages to S]Shri Ranbir, Sadhu Ram, Suni, Ramesh S'o Shadi Ram, Hannman und Ramesh S|o Sh. Priitap, for the days they reported 1o their duties is justified? If not, what relief the workmen concerned arc entitled to ?"

iric Central Govl. vide gazcttec notification No. L- 42011 [28 |88-D-2(B) dated 2nd November 1989 has referred the jY>lluv\ine dispute to this Tnbnual for adjudication:

2. The repiesentativc of Ihe workman appeared

He intends to withdraw the case against the man^ige- ment The representative df Ihe management has no objection. In view of the abo\e, the iequ£st of the representative oi the woikman is accepted, and¹ no dispute awaid is returned to the MiiiKelry. Appro priate Govt. be informed.

"Whether the action of the BBMB in dtnying their regular field staff (Irrigation Wing) national ana festival holidays as are allowed to the State Govl. employees of Punjab is justified ? Tf not, to what relief the workrrun concerned arc entitled and from what date ?"

Chandigarh,

8-fi-2001

B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer

New Delhi, the 16th M y, 2001

4129

and maintainance of the power houses, transmission lines, maintainance of Dams and water regulation machinery and (B) office admn. staff. These aire two distinct and separate categories, with its different nature of duties.

forking in BBMB arc allowed 14 days national and festival holidays in consulta- tion with the recognised union. The same holidays aire allowed to other regular staff deployed in the field¹. They are uLo allowed addi- tional 8 days special causal leave to regular staff in lieu of their working for six days in a week. The pBMB has also allowed 14 field holidays at par with tegular employeesc to the regular employees conver- ted from work charged cadre. The demand of the Mnion is not lustided, keeping in view the nature and job requirement of its employees working in regular cadre and work charged cadre. Therefore, the claim of the union deserves to be dismissed with cost.

New Delhi, the lfith July, 2001 S.O. 2034.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industral Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Chandigarh as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Central Institute For Research on Buffaloes and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 16th July 2001.

[No. L-42O11|3|95-1R(DU)] KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

BEFORE SHRI B L. JATAV, PRESIDING OFFICER, CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT, CHANDIGARH

I.D. No. 32|96

President, District Agriculture Union, 123|S, Jawahar Nagar Hissar. ...Union|Workman.

Versus

Director, Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hi'ssar, Haryana.

. .Management.

APPEARANCES :

For the Workman : Shri Darshan Singh. For the Management : Shri R. K. Sfiarma Advocate.

AWARD

(Passed on 8th of June 2001) The Central Go'-t. vide cazette notification No. L- 42011 |3|95-TR(DU) Dated 27 3-1996 has referred the following dispute to this Tribnual for adjudication :

"Whether the action of the manacement of Cen- tral Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hissir in not regularising Ihe services of 22 workers ("Enclosed annexure) is legal and justified ? If not to what relief thp workers are entitled and from what date ?" 2. The representative of the workman appeared. He intends to withdrmv the case apainst the management.

The representative of the management has no object lion. In view of the above, the request of the iep. of the workman is accepted¹, and no dispute award is returned to the Ministry. Appropriate Govt. be in- formed.

Chandigarh.

8-6-2001. B. L. JATAV, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 20th July, 2001

S.O. 2035.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) the Central Government hereby publishes the award of the Industrial Tribunal_cum- Lubour Court Visakhapatnam as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of M/o Defence and their workman, which was received by the Central Government on 20-7-2001.

iNo. L-14025il6|2001-TR(DU)]

KULDIP RAT VERMA, Desk Officer

ANNEXURE

IN THE COURT OF INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM- LABOUR COURT, VISAKHAPATNAM PRESENT:

Sri K. Veerapu Naidu, B.Sc., B.L., Chairman and Pre- siding Officer.

Dated : 19th day of March, 2001

I.T.I.D. No. (C) 16199

Petition filed directly under Sec, 2A(2) of the I.D. Act

BETWEEN

Karri Panduranga Rao, D. No. 7-328, Hanumantbavuka, Visakhapatnarn-530040.

.. Workman.

AND

( 1) Eastern Naval Command, Reg. by Chief Staff Officer (P4A) Naval Base, Visakhapatnam. (2) Kastcrn Naval Command, Rep. by Commanding Officer, INS Circars, Naval Base, Visakhapatnam.

.. Management.

This dispute coming on for final hearinn before me in the presence of Sri B. V. Rao, authorised representative work- man and the Government Pleader, for management. Upon 4i M hearing the arguments of both sides and on pci using the entire material on record, the court passed the following :

AWARD

(1) This is an application filed under Sec. 2A(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 r]w 12-A of the A.P.I.D. Rules.

(2) The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Auto Driver in the 2nd respondent establishment which forms an integral part of the 1st respondent. He was ap- pointed in the month of February, 1991 but he was given appointment letter in the month of August, 1991 which was taken back by the authorities subsequently. He worked conti- nuously without any brteatk of service upto 25th. October, 1996. He was abruptly removed from service without assigning any reasons. He used to enjoy benefits like weekly day olt' and statutory bonus. His duties are to carry Naval Offi- cers from their Hostels to various duty area? and vice-versa, besides carryinn material etc. belonging to the Naval Officers. Thus, his duties ate continuous and perennial in nature. The respondent employed several auto drivers like him both seniors and juniors and suubsequenily all of them absorbed into regular pay scale. One U. Appala Raju, an auto driver who is junior to the petitioner have also been legularised. In spite of repeated request made by the petitioner, his ser- vices were not regularised. Hence this application,

(3) The case of the management is that they used to engage the petitioner to drive an auto purchased out of (he non-public funds, fiom Heb., 1991 to Aug., 1996 puiely on temporary basis also paid the honorarium to him out of the non-public funds. However, in 1996 the requirement of auto ceased to exist and therefore, the said individual was inform- ed about this and further engagement was discontinued The auto was auctioned and was purchased by the petitioner who was one of the bidder and the petitioner was specifically en- gaged for Russian personnel who were here for specific commitment which was over in 1996. Hence the services of the petitioner were dismissed. It is false to allege that the peti- tioner was appointed as Auto Driver after due process of selection. The auto was procured from Non-public funds for the purpose only and the driver was also engaged out of the non-public funds and when the requirement ceased to exist during August, 1996, the petitioner was informed well in time of the fact. It is further pleaded that no driver was en- gaged out of non-public funds have ever been absorbed into regular cadre, as no such provision or rules exists. It is false to allege that many drivers, both seniors and juniors have been absorbed in regular pay scales and one U. Appala Raju has been appointed through Civil Employment Exchange bv the competent authority through proper selection process. The specific requirement of the auto was over in the yeai 1996 and hence the petitioner driver was infoimed that the ser- vices are not required. The petitione, engagd on 'emporary busis and his services were being paid from non-public funds account generated from by the sales of commodities to Russians. The piofit accumulated will be utilised for main- tenance. The officer-in-charje of non-public fund account will be nominated by the Commanding Officer, INS Circars for smooth running of account. The public fund organisation is not an industry within the meaning of Industrial Deputes Act and the petitioner is not n workman at all. The petitioner is neither reported from employment exchange nor appoint- ed ngainst any vacancy, as such the petitioner can not claim even temporary restoration. Hence the petition is liable to be dismissed.

(4) On behalf of the workman, two witnesses are exa- mined and F.xs. W1 to W9 are marked, On behalf of Ihe management MWsl to 3 arc examined and Exs Ml to M14 I , lJr ' are marked.

(5) Heard both sides.

(6) The points that arise for consideration in this case

are :

f l) Whether the petitioner is entitled foi reinstatement

with back wages as prayed for?

(2) Whether the retrenchment of the petitioner is not

in accordance with Sec. 25F of the T.D. Act?

(7) The undisputed facts in this case are that the petitioner was appointed as Auto Dnver irom non-public fund in "the month of teb., 1991 in the Russians Hostel'maintained by Ihe respondents. While so. it is the case of the management that there used to be one nuloman for the Russians who used to stay in the Nava] Hostel, However, the requirement of the auto ceased to exist, the petitioner was disengaged and the services were discontinued and later the auto was sold to the petitioner. The management also filed Ex Ml dated 18-9-96 by the staff officer stating that the auto bearing No. AP31-B 4093 is handed over to the petitioner. Ex. M2 is the certificate of sale of the auto the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 20.000. Ex. M3 is no dues certificate issued to the peti- tioner. Ex M4 is the receipt of a sum of Rs. 300 salary for the month of September, iy96 for the final settlement of service. Ex. M5 is the no objection certificate for the transfer of the auto in the name of the petitioner. Ex. M6 is the undertaking certificate given by the petitioner for the repairs etc. to the auto. Ex. M7 is the renewal of the tem- porary passes of the petitioner. Ex. MS is the letter by the petitioner requesting for issuance of temporary card. E M. M9 and M10 are the xerox copies of the renewals of tem- porary pass of the petitioner. Ex. M il is the stamped receipt for a sum of Rs. 770 towards the salary for the month of August, 1996. Ex M12 is the page in cash book for Sept., 1996 showing the payment made on 26-9-96. Ex. M13 is tbe receipt of Rs, 850 towards the salary for the month of July, 1996. Ex. M14 is the copy of the extract from the cash book showing the amount of Rs. 20,000 towards the sale of auto and Rs. 300 towards the final recovery of festival advance Ex. Wl is the gate pass issued to the petitioner by Lr, Com- mander (SDS), Staff Officer (Soviet Estt), Ex, W2 is the renewal of the gate pass, Ex. W3 is entry gate pass issued to the workman. Ex. W4 is another pass issued by the respon- dent to the petitioner. While in service, Exs. W5 and W6 warn- ing letters are f;iven to the petitioner. Thus, the material and the evidence of these facts are not very much in dispute. The only thing is that because the services of the petitioner are not required and as such, he was disengaged in August, 1996 by the respondent. While so, it is the case of the workman that some of the juniors and seniors who are similarly placed with that of the petitioner are absorbed and the petitioner was not absorbed and his services were terminated without issuing any notice or paying any retrenchment compensation even though he served continuously for more than 5 years. (8) The learned counsel appearing for the management contends that the petitioner is not sponsored by the employ- ment exchange nor he WHS appointed in any regular post And that there is no Auto Drivers post so as to continue the petitioner in service and the services of the petitioner are no longer required The management examined MW1 an administrative officer-II, who deposed that the Eastern Naval Command is a Central Government Organisation, INS Cirkar is under the control of Eastern Naval Command, which do not have any control over the non-public funds and the officer, who was in charge, will control over the non-public fund and the petitioner was not employed by the respondent at any point of time and there h an employ- ment Pattern to the employees of Eastern Naval Command as it is Central Government Organisation and no employee will be appointed without following the procedurue as laid down. This witness admitted in the cross-examination that he cannot say thru the petitioner was serving as an auto driver in INS Cirkar as he came to Visakhapatnam on 31st Tuly, 2000, prior to that he did not serve in the Eastern Naval Command. He also admitted that INS Cirkar is a part and parcel of Eastern Naval Command However, he admitted that INS Cirkar will form an integral part of the Eastern Naval Command. He also admitted that he does not know the workman personally. The Officer Incharge Nava] Hostel is- examined as MW2 and he deposed that he was entrusted with the naval hostel for naval guest senior officers and W I Ps who stays in the Hostel and to ensure the collection of the payment of their stay in Ihe hostel, He also deposed that there are 13 employees work- in? m the hostel, thev are all eovernraent employees they are having simiiarlv situated and has been working in the hostel on pnrt time basis as wrll as reauirement basis He further deposed that whenever thev require the extra service thev used to enenpe some nnrt time employees. He admitted that the hostel premises belongs to the Government nnd it is beine m.iintainpd bv Military Enpinperini Service He also ndmintd in his rrosc-^timiriation thnt the ho^el is rw any vehicle and Nnvy Hostc] is- under the administrative (3) To what relief the workman is entitled to?

control of the commanding officers of INS Cucar prior to 1996 mostly Russians used to slay in their hostel and INS was uho not providing sufficient transport and as such some of them for peisonal transport of those Russians purchased one auto Tor tianiiportation to raatket purpose then one driver for that auto i.e. the petitioner was appointed by the Officer in charge of non-public fund. He also deposeu that they have not given any appointment order and he got the intoimation altei verifying the non-public fund cash account. Thus, the evidence of this witness sho\vs that the petitioner was appointed as an auto driver maintained by the hostel may be for the transpoitation of the Russians and Or other inmates in the hostel.

(9) It is the case of the management, that no appointment Older was given to the petitioner, whereas the case of the workman is that he was given the appointment and the same is taken back by the authorities. Whatever it may be there is no wiitten appointment order. In the absence of which, (he vcisiori given by the wotkman that he was appointed as an auto driver, is to be accepted and there is no contra mate- lial to show that the petitioner was appointed only for a specific purpose and for a particular period. In the absence of which the appointment of this pttitioner cannot be said that it is ft co-terminus with that of the requirement by the management nor for any specific period and it cannot also be accepted that the appointment of the petitioner was only on need basis as and when reciuiied

(10) Further, it is also admitted bv MW3 a bearer in Nava] Hostel that in the yeai 1996 the services of auto lifted prior to that some of them Russians used to stay in the hostel and further the hostel is running 2 autos and the petitioner worked as auto driver far 5 or 6 years and auto ^as sold to the petitioner, later the services of the petitioner was terminated. In the cross-exam inn tion he stated that his services were regularised. He also belongs to the petitioner's union. The people who have worked in the year 1991 in (he hostel were regularisd aned one U. Appala Raju nnd B. Raja Reddy are appointed bus drivers and their services are regularised as per the orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal. The petitioners in TTTD Nos. 16|99 and 21|99 and himself are bein<; paid same pay by the Officer of the Easttrn Naval Command. He denied a suggestion put to him that because some other emolovees like petitioner have approached the Central Administrative Tribunal for legulaii- saticin of their services and hence the services of the peti- tioner were terminated.

(11) Thus, here this is a case where the petitioner worked continuously for a period of 6 years and odd as an auto driver in the Naval Hostel being maintained bv the INS Circar which forms an integral part of the Eastern Navil Command, Tt is also admitted by the management that the services of the petitioner was disengaged as fhe auto was iold to him and his services were no longer required. But in view of the evidence spoken to by MW3 that the hostel is ruunning two autos and that some of the drivers who are worked along with the petitioners were regularised. There- fore, the termination of the services of the petitionr without issuing any notice nor paying any retrenchment compen.si- tion which certainly violates, the provisions under Sec. 25F of the I.D. Act, Theieforc, the termination of the peti- tioner is liable to be setaside. Even otherwise, the leason for discharging the services of the petitioner is only due to the absence of work or his services are no longer required but theie is no material placed by the management that there is no work for the petitioner nor the services of the peti- tioner are no lancer requiicd, when they are running two other autos, even if the auto was sold to the petitioner the workman canno be thrown out of the job without following the statutory requlrtment as provided under Sec. 25F of the I D. Act.

(12) Thus, the termination of the petitioner is against the statutory piovisions provided under Sec. 25F of the l.D. Act and also the principles Of natural justice. Therefore, the removal of the petitioner is aibitrary and liable to be set aside.

(13) Of coui.se, there is a delay of about 3 years in this case in approaching this Tribunal after the termination of the workman but that by itself is not a ground to reject 'he relief for which the petitioner is entitled and at the most the relief can be granted by refusing or reducing the back wages and directing the payment of a part of back wages as laid down in the Supreme Court decision reported in AIR 1999 (SC) 1351 between Ajaib Singh Vs. The Sirhind Co-operative Marketing'Cum-Processing Service Society Ltd. md another. The workman's representative also cited another decision for the same proposition reporttd in 2000(84) FLR 20 SC between Gurmail Singh Vs. Principal, Government College of Education and Ors, wherein it is held that the teimina- tion of service took place m the year 1981 and the dispute was raised in the year 1989. Their Loidships were pleased to hold that notwithstanding the delay, the dispute would still continue for adjudication, however he would be deprived of back wages for period of delay.

(14) Tlie workman's representative also contends that ihe Indian Naval Hostel is also an industry and that the peti- tioner is a workman and the Tribunal is competent to ad- judicate the industrial dispute between the workman and the lespondent. In support of his contention he placed reliance on a decision of Bombay High Court reported in 1986 (II) LLJ 154 between Indian Navy Sailors' Home Vs. Bombay Gymakhana Club Caterers and Allied Employees' Union and another wherein it is held uundcr Sec. 2 ( a ) ( l ), 2(j), 10 of the l.D. Act, 1947 at the Indian Navy Sailors' Home is an industry within the meaning of S. 2(1) of the l.D, Act. (15) As rightly contended by tho representative for the workman that the Indian Navy Hostel is being maintained by the INS Circar which is an integral part of Eastern Naval Command in as much as it is an industry and the petitioner is a workman in the said industry. Therefore, in the light of my aforesaid discussion, I hold that the termination cf the workman in this case is illegal and the same is liable to be set aside. Hence both points 1 ^nd 2 a,rt accordingly answered in favourt of the petitioner!woikman and against the respondent|manngement.

(16) Point No. 3 : In the result, the petition is allowed and an award is passed directing the respondents 1 and 2 to re- instate the workman forthwith with 50 per eent of back wages, and continuity of seivice. However, there is no order as to costs and each party is diic-rted to bear its own costs.

Dictated to steno transcribed by her given under my hand and seal of the court this the 19th day of March, 2001.

K. VEERAPU NA1DU, Presiding Officer APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED:

For Workman : For Management:

WW1 : K. Paiidnranga Rao MW1 : V. S. Tripathi, WW2 : Ncclapu Ganalla Rao MW2: Kolschandra Benra

MW3 : K. Venkata Sastry.

DOCUMENTS MARKED:

'For Workman :

Ex. Wl : Identity pass of woikmun.

Ex. W2 : 15-5-92 : Letter of management reg, renewal of tern, pass of workman.

4133 Ex. W3 : Entry pass of workmarj.

Ex. W4 : Entry pa!>s of woikman.

Ex. W5 : 30-7-91 : Warning letter to workman reg.

frequent absent to duty.

Ex. VV6 : 2-3-95 : Warning letter to workman leg.

absence from duty.

Ex. W7 : Xerox copy of form of driving licence.

New Delhi, the 20th July, 2001 Ex. W8 : Copy of judgment in OA No. 525|93 of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad bianch.

Iix. W9 : 13-10-95: Copy of order in OA 1390/94 of

CAT. Hyd.

DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR MANAGEMENT:

Ex. Ml : 18-9-96 : Letter to workman by management,

reg. handing over tne auto documents,

S.Q 2036.—In pursuance of Section 17 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), the Cen- tral Government hereby publishes the award of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court Bhubaneswar as shown in the Annexure in the Industrial Dispute between the employers in relation to the management of Doordarshari, Prasar Bharati and their workman, which was received by the Cen- tral Government on 20-7-2001.

Ex. M2 : 24-9-96 : Certificate issued by management

rcg. sale of auto to workman.

[No, L-42012|!35|2000-IR(DU)J KULDIP RAI VERMA, Desk Officer Ex. M3 : No due certificate issued by management to

ANNEXURE

workman.

Ex. M4 : Receipt for Rs. 300 towards the salary for

Sept., 1996.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRI~ BUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT: BHUBANESWAR

PRESENT :

Ex. M5 : 17-9-96 ; No objection certificate issued by management reg, transfer of the auto in the name of woslcman.

Ex. M6 : Certificnte of undertaking /jiven by workman

refi. responsible for repairs of any defects.

Shri S. K, Dhal, OSJS (Sr. Branch), Presiding Officer, C.G.l.T-cum- Labour Court, Bhubaneswar.

Ex. M7 : 17-8-92 : Letter of management reg. ienew.il

of the temporary pass.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE CASE NO. 28)2000

Dated, Bhubaneswar, tho 10th July, 2001 F,x, M8: 25-4-91 : Staff minute sheet reti, issue-

of temporary pass.

BETWEEN:

Ex. M9 : 19-8-93 : Letter of management reg. renewal

The Management of Asst. Engineer, of temporary pass,

T.V. Relay Centre Broadcasting, Ex. M10 : 17-11-92 : Letter of management icg. lenew-

Corporation of India,

al of temporary pass.

i

Berhampur. . . 1st Party-Management.

Ex, M il : Xerox copy of stamped receipt for Rs. 770

towards the salary of Ang, 1996.

(AND)

Their workman Shri Bhagwan Das, President, Ex. MI2 : Extract cash bill for the month of Sept., 1996 showing the payment of workman for the month of Sept., 1996.

SC Employees, Welfare Association, Ex, M13 : Xerox copy of receipt for Rs. 850 towards

Berhampur Sub-Divn. Br.

the salary of July, 1996,

Berhampur. . . 2nd Party-Workman.

APPEARANCES :

Ex. M14 : Extract of cash book showing the receipt amount of Rs. 20,000 from the petitioner towards the cost of auto (xerox copy).

Shri B. K. Chahataray, Asst, Engineer, T.V. Relay Centre . . For the 1st Party-mgt Shri Bhagwan Das. . , For Biniself-Wbrkman.

AWARD

The Government of India in the Ministry of Labour in exercise of Powers conferred by clause (d) of sub- section 2(A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) have referred the following' 4\U THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : AUGUST 11, 2001/SRAVANA 20, 1923 [PART II—SEC. 3(ii)] dispute for adjudication vide their Order No. L- 42012| 135|2000|IR(DU), dated 31-10-2000:—

"Whether the action of the Management by terminating the services of Shri flhagwan Das, Ex-Sweeper|Peon, who was engaged by the Management of Doordarsfun, Prasar Bharati, Berhampur for 12 years is jusfi- fied ? If not, to what relief the disputant is entitled" 7

2. While sending reference intimation was sent to the Asst. Engineer, T.V. Relay Centre, Broadcasting Corporation of India, Berhampur (here-in-after called as the 1st Party-Management) and to Shri Bhawa,n Das (hcre-in-after called as the Second Party-Work- man) to file their respective statements and domuments.

3. In pursuance to that direction the 2nd Party has filed his claim statement where in he has pleaded that he was engaged by the 1st Farty-Management as a labour on contract on monthly wages of Rs. 250 from the month of August 1985 for sweeping and cleaning the T.V. rela|y centre. He worked till April 2000 honestly but he was dis-engaged by the 1st Party-Management with effect from 2-5-2000 without assigning any reason. So he brought the dispute before the Labour Commissioner (Central). As the reconciliation failed the matter wals referred to the Government of India vtho subsequently have made reference to this Tribunal as stated above.

4. In the written statement the 1st Party-Manage- ment has averred that, the wdrkman-2nd Party was engaged on contract basis as no sweeper was recruited for the Post because there was no sanctioned post.

It was further averred that the 2nd Party was engaged for limited hours from August 1985 to April 2000.

As the service was not required he was served with an order on 3-4-2000. So according to the 1st Party- Management as the 2nd Party was a casual labourer and was engaged for limited hours with a consolida- ted amount, his dis-engagement docs not amount re- trenchment and so he is not entitled for any relief.

5. No oral evidence has been adduced by both the parties. Except order of dis-engagemcnt no docu- ments have been filed on behalf of the 2nd Party. The averments made by the 1st Fartj Management that there was no santcioned post for Sweeper and the services of the 2nd Party was utilised on casual basis has not rebutted by the 2nd Party either producing any oral evidence or by documents. When the post is a temporary one and the 2nd Party has worked on contract basis as admitted by him he cannot claim for regularisation and his dis-engagement does not amount retrenchment. As regards arrcar claims made by the 2nd Party it is submitted on behalf of the 1st Party-Management that the question of arrcar pay- ment does not come into picture as the 2nd Farty was working for limited hours with a consolidated amount to which he Was agreed to. I do not find any reason to dis-believe this averments made by the 1 st Party-Management.

6. As per the above discussion this Tribunal is of the opinion that the 2nd Party has failed to establish that he has got a caiuse of aciion against the 1st P'arty Management in the other words the action pf the Management by terminating the services of the 2nd Farty is not un-justificd and the 2nd Party also is not entitled for any relief.

7. The reference is answered accordingly. Dictated and corrected¹ by me.

S. K. DHAL, Presiding Officer New Delhi, the 23rd Tuly, 200V SO 2037—Whereas the Central Government having been satisfied that the public interest sd re- quired had, in puisuance of the provisions of sub- clause (vi) of the Clause (n) of Section 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), declared by the Notification of the Government of India in the Ministry of Labour S.O No 204 d1 of six months from the 25lh Januaiy, 2001 And whereas, the Central Government is of opinion tha(t Public interest requires the extension of the said period by 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 Dispute- Act, 1947, the Central Government hereby declares the said industry to be a public utility service foi the purposes of the said Act for a period of six nontns fiom the 25th July, 2001

[No. S-11017|ll|97-I]UPL)1

H C GUPTA. Under Secy

4135 New Delhi, the 1st August, 2001 S.O. 2038.—In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (3) of Section I of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34 of 1948) the Central Government hereby ap- points the 1st September, 2001 as the date on which the provisions of Chapter IV (except Section^ 44 and 45 which have already been bior^ht into force) arid Chapter V and VI i[except sub-section (i) of Section 76 and Sec- tions 77, 78- 79 and 81 which have already been brought into force] of the said Act shall come into force in the following areas in the State of Karnataka namely " -

"The areas comprising the revenue villages of Sinfiasjpcha and Chick- kathoffur in Hobli Begur falnk Bangalore South in the District of Bangalore"

i[No. S-380 H' 1512001-SS.n

M. C. MtTTAL, Dv. Secv.

New Delhi, the 1st August, 2001

been brought into force] of the said Act shall

come into force in the following areas in S.O. 2039.—In exercise of the powers

the State of West Bengal namely :—

conferred by sub-section (3) of Section 1 of

the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (34

"Areas comprising J. L. No. 24 of of 1948) the Central Government hereby ap-

Ranigunge Mouza under Ranigunge points the 1st September, 2001 as the date on

police Station in the District of which the provisions of Chapter IV (except

Burdwan."

Sections 44 and 45 which have already been

brought into force) and Chapter V and VI

l[No. S-38013JI6I2001-SS.I] (except sub-section (i) of Section 76 and Sec-

tions 77, 78, 79 and 81 which have already

M. C. MITTAL, Dy. Secy.

Printed by the Manager, Govt. of India Press, Ring Road, New Delhi-110064

and Published by the Controller of Publications. Delhi! 10054, 2001